thread: 2005-05-20 : Things on Character Sheets

On 2005-05-20, Emily Care wrote:

Hey Vincent, if we can't call it representation, what the heck do we say?  I wanna say "the representation of characters in Over the Edge and Primetime Adventures" shows that all you need is about as much info as V. wrote above to have a playable character" but I can't. Guess I'll go with "written cues for".

Hey Matthijs!  Re: Tools
I'm talking about the way that character resources have been traditionally used as the parameters for player contribution to the SIS. This may be a bit of a tangent.

MJ posted recently on the Forge about the stances (actor, author, director) as ways to distribute credibility, or the authority that a player has to make stuff up et al.  With Actor stance, the lines are restricted to in character materials. The creative resources available to you are those that draw legitimacy from their connection with the character. Hence the myth Vincent is poking holes in here that the written cues of a character sheet represent the character. Director stance broadens the area of input to include setting, system etc.

So what I'm seeing is that the character has become a short hand for the creative purview of the player. What I meant by other tools is that if we disengage the idea of the character from player contribution, you suddenly have access to activities & powers that were off the map before.  All the positioning mechanics (Spite & playing the Gods in Great Ork Gods, Trust in the Mountain Witch, Fanmail) have nothing to do with "your" character.  They are pure player to player feedback, and they each give whole new dimensions to play.  And that's just one new sort of approach people have happened upon of recent. Lots more out there.


This makes...
short response
optional explanation (be brief!):

if you're human, not a spambot, type "human":