Different Games, Same Characters (split)
Catelf:
I want to show another way:
Even though i Always strive to play characters that is fictive versions of myself, i can easily adopt what may be needed, no matter if it is a Warrior, a Priest, a Mage, a Ninja, or any mix or combination thereof.
Of course, the Warrior don't attempt to Heal, or the Mage tries to go physical, as a rule: they aren't good at it, normally!
The "Me" is in how i portray each's reactions.
Ron Edwards:
The above post was split from Different Games, Same Characters: What are your experiences?, a thread over six years old.
This topic is perfectly valid, but please do not post to older threads. Catelf, the discussion may continue here, but only if you post a description of play which illustrates your point. It can be a brief and simple description.
Best, Ron
Catelf:
Hi, Ron.
As you know, i've decided not to start a new thread, until i know really where, and of what.
So, i never did have the intention to make a new thread of this, i only intended to comment on the original topic, even though it was old. As it is now, a seperate thread, the point of that reply has become unimportant, left in limbo, as it is.
Sadly, my comment was fully valid in the context of the old thread, but now, it seem to only take space.
Therefor, i do suggest that you remove this thread altogether, so it don't take up unneccesary space.
I think that would be the best thing during the circumstance.
Kindly, Catelf.
Ron Edwards:
Hello,
Please consider that I have a lot of experience moderating this forum. I will explain this instance of thread splitting.
First, that discussion has its historical place in the history of the Forge. It is long over and not current. Posting to it disrupts the chronological integrity of the site, and is generally not actually joining a discussion at all, since the participants are themselves in different states of mind now or not active here at all.
Second, that means that posting to it, indeed, is in fact beginning a new discussion. Here and now, with the people here and now. You are the principal and the leader of that discussion. Don't try to dodge that responsibility. You cared enough to post at all - that means that if you were honest with that post, you care enough to make it worth reading by others.
The older thread's topic is valid and interesting. Give an example of what you're talking about, from your own real experience of play, and you will probably find that others are interested in responding, if what you say has substance.
Best, Ron
Catelf:
[Ahem]
I was Not the leader of the original(or semi-original as it really were, i do think.. ) Thread, and i had no idea that commenting on it would lead to this. If i had known that i would be ever so slightly forced to "Pick up the torch" so to speak, i would not have done so.
Currently, this thread serves no purpose, unless as a warning example of what not to do:
Don't post to old Topics or threads unless you are ready to start them up again.
Also, my suggestion to remove this thread altogether was not any "dodging of responsibility" but just recognizing that this thread was currently not fulfilling its purpose!
So, saying that i'm dodging a responsibility i didn't ask for.... to me, that is insulting me.
But, as you didn't know that, i assume, it may be a ... what's it called... bygone?
However, i DO get the impression that you won't remove this thread, so i WILL see what i can do to make this thread valid again.
I'll start with a "fresh" Reply.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page