zen wrote:I suppose it's an ontological question to argue that it's possible to create a work of art completely separate from one's experience and beliefs, but your argument is sophistry. Obviously, nothing that humans create is created outside of human experience.
Touch». The "argument" may have been elementary, but the idea that art reflects life is still something which might help people bring their roleplaying into focus; see below.
But if you're saying that a person cannot create a character out of whole cloth and remain creative enough to live inside that character without going outside of the design parameters established for that character by the creator, you're absolutely wrong. In my view, that's what's meant by 'pure' role playing.
I'd worry more about the character falling in line with the parameters established for the world in which that character resides (I'm assuming you distinguished between character and world parameters: the parameters set for Tessa Malthus were not in line with game world parameters and thus violate my definition of "pure" roleplaying); personalities can and do shift quickly (which isn't to say that characters who change slowly are bad, only to say that characters who seem to "break character" with regard to their own personalities aren't implausible). Thus, I'll posit the following: "pure" roleplay reflects the game world in which the character (as opposed to the player) resides and the game world, in turn, reflects some (but not all
) aspects of the real world. Roleplaying is "impure" when it reflects elements of the real world not present in the game world. Part of the difficulty with Clan Lord, as people have mentioned, is that it's unclear which aspects of the real world are likely to exist in the game world. This is also elementary, but worth reflecting on every once in awhile if one is concerned with roleplay.
I guess that what troubled me was the use of the word "pure". It's an ideal; it only exists for a single moment, if that, and applying it to people is silly. Talking about "better" and "worse" roleplaying, given definitions of what's "good" and "bad" would be better. Talking about what's "desirable" and "undesirable" would please me even more.
All of this said, I don't care who, if anyone, moderates the "In Character" forum. By the way, all such forums are assumed to exist in the library, right? That place should really be larger. And where are the exiles getting all of these writing materials, anyway?
HWC for Valtrim
"If me knowing something makes CL less fun for you, then that makes you a cock." -- Michael