Forum changes: Editing of posts has been turned off until further notice.
Started by Silmenume, August 02, 2005, 05:15:00 AM
Quote from: Nathan P. on August 02, 2005, 02:19:11 PMI was nodding at some of the stuff in your post, but I think a summary would make it easier to talk about.
Quote from: Nathan P. on August 02, 2005, 02:19:11 PMBricolage is the primary dynamic that is roleplay, and is present throughout all play. Roleplay can also include Story and Challenge, and often does - that is, all three are often present, though Bricolage is always present to some degree. Narrativism is Story on Purpose, and Gamism is Challenge on Purpose. Likewise, Simulationism is Bricolage on Purpose.How does that interface with your thoughts?
Quote from: Silmenume on August 03, 2005, 10:10:39 PMSo I see Bricolage, which is a process that purposefully creates meanings, yoked to Premise or Challenge concepts – that is Bricolage is employed by an Engineering mindset. This is not accidental but can only happen "on purpose." Hence Narrativism and Gamism can only be "meaningful" if they are "on purpose." It cannot happen passively, the players must be involved with the symbols sets in order to derive meaning from their interactions. They are trying to demonstrate/imply ideas.
Quote from: Justin A Hamilton on August 04, 2005, 01:30:12 AMPerhaps this is just me being the new guy and misinterpreting something here, but by this statement are you saying that everyone who roleplays by default falls into Simulationism because they are not actively participating in bricolage?
Quote from: Justin A Hamilton on August 04, 2005, 01:30:12 AMI suppose the issue I have with this statement is the "meaningful" part. Perhaps I have missed something, but what exactly do you mean when you say "Narrativism and Gamism can only be 'meaningful' if they are 'on purpose.'"?
Quote from: Ron Edwards on August 03, 2005, 12:23:10 PM"Conscious" is a terrible term. It focuses on introspection, deliberation, and "what I meant to do," staying locked up in the person's head.It's also fundamentally meaningless, if you want to get really critical. After all, am I "conscious" of my desire to publish a game? To play a game? To eat lunch? And so on. However, "mindful" is much more useful because it's social and has an "off" condition. I am mindful of your actions when I consider how they affect me and behave accordingly. I am mindful of my actions when I consider how they affect you and behave accordingly. You can see when I fail to be mindful of either of these, in how I talk, how I treat you, and what I do.
Quote from: Silmenume on August 03, 2005, 10:10:39 PMRole-play is the process of the creation of symbols (via meta-mechanics) whose interactions are informed/delimited by resolution mechanics so that they may be manipulated by the players to signify concepts/memes/ideas.[/list]
Quote from: Silmenume on August 03, 2005, 10:10:39 PM...I don't think it is possible that all three CA's all being present in a given player's play in a given night. First it would be difficult to diagnose and second given that all the symbols would have to be reinterpreted in their entirely when "switching" from one CA to another – that would be a monumental task. Now do that many times in a night. Then add in that as this is a social process all the other players would have to make the same reinterpretations of the symbols and all come to the same (or extremely similar) interpretations before play could start to be "meaningful" again.
Quote from: Ron Edwards on August 04, 2005, 08:34:18 AM1. Basic, required, communicative process underlying the activity, regardless of goal.Italicizing added
Quote from: Nathan P. on August 04, 2005, 12:51:51 PMAnyhow, my basic question to you is what do you think of the notion that a symbol can be consciously representative of an array of meanings, to be pared down through the actual events around the table and in play?
Quote from: Silmenume on August 08, 2005, 06:07:32 AMI apologize, but I'm not sure if you are looking for a response and if so what you are looking for from me.
Quote from: Silmenume on August 08, 2005, 06:07:32 AM If the symbol is already deeply "known" then there is little for the player to do. However if the symbol has the potential of "breaking the dream" then interpreting it in such a way as to account for it within the Dream then one has both understood and expanded the Dream because the player has made to work that which was previously not accounted for.
Quote from: Silmenume on August 03, 2005, 10:10:39 PMThus if one is “creating Story” or more specifically addressing Premise then one must view all the symbols in the “fact space” and their attendant “meanings” in a unified fashion. This is part of what “on purpose” means; at least to me thus far. Same goes for Gamism and Simulationism. This is why I don’t think it is possible that all three CA’s all being present in a given player’s play in a given night. First it would be difficult to diagnose and second given that all the symbols would have to be reinterpreted in their entirely when “switching” from one CA to another – that would be a monumental task.