> Surely the collective input is what distinguishes roleplaying from
> acting?
and re Storytelling approaches:
> You are still playign a role, and you are still playing a game, so I
> can't see how you can claim it's nolonger roleplaying. The collective
> storytelling approach is an extreme case. Games such as Amber can tend
> towards that extreme sometimes. Personaly I think the ideal is to find
> a ballance between the two.
IMO it stops being role play when you de-personalise.
> 2 examples from Babylon 5 snipped
> In what sense is this nolonger roleplaying?
They were both roleplaying, IMO.
Acting isn't roleplaying when you follow a script. Improvisation I think _is_ role play.
GMing is only role playing when the GM role plays an NPC (and even then this is often a _weak_ role play experience). The rest of the time they're providing the environment for other players to role play.
I believe collective story telling approaches are _less_ role play because they take the focus away from identifying with the individual. The players become more like GMs.
Role Play is, IMO:
"Let's pretend to be this person in that environment. How do I feel? What do I do?"
In order to be able to do this, first of all you need a clear understanding of both the person and the environment, then you _jump_ in.
Satisfactory long term role play means having a paradigm which creates an environment which is interesting and maintainable.
Assuming that HW maintains the personalising approach (so it's role play by my definition) but builds a different environment then, returning to my original post, it's taking me away from the approach I know so I need to understand how it's going to work.
Given the descriptions I have read so far:
Blow-by-blow simulation is the simplest way I know to convey a feel of ability and risk. HW is definately going a different route on this. I don't see why it shouldn't be able to do a perfectly good job of it (though I can imagine ways it could mess up).
I'm concerned about maintaining contrast between heros and normal people. I've always preferred an approach which builds you up to hero status (with a little bit of a head start) in much the same way that I think it's good for MDs/CEOs to have started as tea-boys, generals and majors to have started as privates. I think you have a much better appreciation of where you've got to and a respect for the world that got you there.
One minor gripe: I don't like the name "Hero Wars".
Richard
- --
Richard Develyn Tel: (UK)-1732-743591 Principal Architect / Development Manager Fax: (UK)-1732-743597 Network People International http://www.nwpeople.com ------------------------------
Powered by hypermail