Re: Lethality of events

Mere moments before death, John Morrow <morrow@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> hastily
scrawled:

>On Mon, 7 May 2007, Ed Chauvin IV wrote:
>> Granted, but that's a pretty big if.  The deeply immersive players
>> around here would argue vigorously that firewalling is certainly
>> possible.  And even if it isn't, that doesn't make the activity itself
>> any more immoral than acting in a play.
>
>As others have pointed out, the firewalling that most immersive players
do 
>is on behalf of the character, not the player.  I'm not aware of any 
>immersive player who claims that they firewall the player from the 
>character.  As an immersive player, I think that would probably cross the

>line into insanity.
>
>As for acting in a play, can you really not tell the difference between 
>acting and role-playing?

Not in this context.

>> By standing on the firewall bogeyman, you've backed yourself into a
>> corner here.  Either firewalling is impossible and you can't truly
>> "become" another character so you're really just playing a role and
>> not really committing these "evil" acts yourself, in which case
>> where's the immorality?  Or, firewalling this kind of thing is
>> possible and it's possible to assume a completely different identity
>> with a set of morals completely alien to your own, in which case
>> there's a complete disconnect between player and character morality.
>
>How does the player firewall themselves from their character?  What makes

>you think that players can't or don't choose which characters they want
to 
>spend their time ****traying?

I can't tell you the number of times I've read about players who were
surprised or even shocked by the actions of a character they were
****traying.  They didn't realize that the character in question would
do something that happened, but in retrospect it made perfect sense.
Now, maybe they've made a choice at the beginning to play a character
who had this potential and just didn't realize it, but it seems to me
that if you're shocked by something your character has done then it's
probably because you didn't deliberately choose to play a character
who would to that thing.

>> The question really is, if you're Playing a Role and that role is one
>> of an Evil Person, does that make you yourself Evil or can you really
>> just play make believe and pretend to be someone your not instead of
>> just you with a funny voice?
>
>No, playing an Evil role does not inherently make the player Evil, and 
>that's not really the point.  The question is whether indulging in 
>fantasies of Evil acts in any detail is harmless or not.

OK then, what's the harm?

>> Let's put it this way, if playing an Evil Person makes the player
>> Evil, what happens to a player who plays a homo***ual?
>
>Do you believe that people choose to be Evil?  Do you believe aht 
>homo***uals choose to be homo***ual?

How does it matter whether someone chooses or not to be either of
those things?  We're talking about player choices, and that's one of
the great freedoms of RPGs.  You can make choices about your character
that real people are usually not given.




-- 
DISCLAIMER : WARNING: RULE # 196 is X-rated in that to calculate L,
use X = [(C2/10)^2], and RULE # 193 which is NOT meant to be read by
kids, since RULE # 187 EXPLAINS homo***uality mathematically, using
modifier G @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 11.

"I always feel left out when someone *else* gets killfiled."
                           --Terry Austin