thread: 2009-06-17 : Secrets
On 2009-06-19, valamir wrote:
Thanks for post 33 Vincent. That sheds some much needed light on the angle you're approaching this from.
It probably won't surpise you based on my other posts that I don't agree at all with you. In fact, my position is the exact reversal of yours. The individual fiction that goes on in an individual player's mind is the central act, primary act, and vastly the most important act of roleplaying. The shared fiction is only necessary to the extent that common touch points are required to keep the players at the table able to communicate in a meaningful manner about the fiction that's being created. If the individual fictions get so seperated that we can no longer communicate about what's going on, then not enough has been shared. But if enough has been shared to allow us to do that...nothing more than that minimum needs to be shared because the individual fictions will be far richer, more detailed, and more complete than any shared fiction could ever be. The power of the dreaming brain to experience something is far superior than the power of language to communicate that experience.
I believe that 80% (there goes those made up percentages again) of all fiction created at a roleplay table is never ever shared and exists only in one player's head. And its that 80% where the majority of many (I suspect most but I don't know how you'd even begin to study it) people's enjoyment is found.
This is also the root of our disagreement on the desireability of rules to adjudicate who's vision gets to happen. You don't see it as necessary because to you the unshared vision has no gravity or importance. I see it as vital because to me the unshared vision is often vastly more important than what's been shared so far. You'll say things like "until its in the shared fiction it doesn't count". I say things like "bullshit, what's in my head is often far more important to me than anything that's entered the shared fiction so far." And when that happens there'd better be a smooth way of reaching a decision about whose cuisine reigns supreme.
This is also the root of our disagreement about "playing above the character" which some of your recent comments indicate you think is a less desireable way to play. I've always held that its just as effective and in many cases MORE effective than play from inside the character. Because the fiction going on inside my head looks like a movie...so playing above the characters is just another camera angle for me.
This is also the root of our disagreement on the I—E example where we skip from Intent to Execution and never see the bits in between. You want to see those bits because unless those bits are in the shared fiction they have no value for you. I'm completely indifferent to those bits because I'm going to see them anyway whether they're shared or not and I value seeing the bits inside my head just as highly as I value the bits that are shared. In some cases I PREFER to skip those bits because when those bits aren't shared I can see whatever I want whereas if they are shared what I see has to conform to the shared vision.
So yeah...a whole lot of me scratching my head and trying to figure out where the hell you're coming from has just been answered. I don't at all share your priority, but at least I now get it. So thanks again for post 33.
