Tale

That's okay, I didn't read any of your links, either.

D&D was the first roleplaying game in that it was the first codified (I use this word, possibly improperly, to specify it had rules) game. Kids have been roleplaying cops & robbers, cowboys & indians for ages. But that doesn't mean D&D was always a roleplaying game. Being the first something doesn't mean you were always something. A roleplaying game, especially in an open environment like PnP, literally by definition includes roleplaying.

In other words, D&D was not originally a RPG, but evolved into an RPG later. And arguably only for some. Okay, so what? I know Spider said he was arguing with my origin of the term roleplay. However, he never specified that D&D was an RPG or what made it an RPG at this time. It is popularly known as an RPG now. It is popularly used for actual roleplaying now, as well. It was originally a wargame. Then after that it was a fantasy tactics game. Eventually it became a roleplaying game and had roleplaying. People got together for fantasy tactics games to bash monsters. They got together for roleplaying games to roleplay. At some point people got together for the same game for two different reasons, played it two different ways, but said how they were playing was the same way. And hence the need for classification.

I modded that crap out of my game years ago. It made Keldorn look like a fool for attacking someone for what they were rather than for what they were doing (not unlike many bigots in our world). He allowed mere words to be his undoing (pathetically weak), leading him to behave worse than she was behaving. Nobody enters a party of which I am leader and then proceeds to attack a fellow party member, ever! You know the solution to that! Kill Keldorn.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fishing

Why can't we? I don't see why it would be. It's not a single person task. It's a task for panels (yes, plural) of those with extensive experience and knowledge in the fields.

Apparently you can. I'm sure there are weirder fetishes out there. And I don't want to find out. There are fetishes for being eaten alive. I had someone argue with me over whether it is a mental illness when you act out on it. I made that point that "imitation play" isn't inherently destructive and as long as the person does not feel distressed by it, then it would be okay. But no... this person wasn't talking about imitation play. And now that I've told you about a weirder fetish, I'm going to compound my crimes by stealing some of your images and sigs. FEAR ME!

This gets to the overall point I'm trying to make. It's not "pretty much that." There are people who think people with dissociative disorders are schizophrenic. But, that's not the case. The difference? Psychiatry has an official classification handbook, the DSM. Entertainment software/interactive sciences does not. It's a model that they could one day follow. That I'd like to see them one day follow. The building of a classification guide to aide in communication, as that's the entire purpose of classification.

http://www.shiner.com/beers/beers-hefe.html Bought a 12 pack of bottles yesterday. Had 2 of them. Straight out of the bottle it's not that good, but if you follow the instructions the taste is surprising.

It doesn't help that your right buttock is made of iron.

You get hungry just going down the street? Pack a sandwich. Eat a granola bar before you head out. There's nothing wrong with a burrito, so long as it's not frozen and it is bean and cheese.

So, what you're saying is that first there were miniature wargames. Then there were RPGs, that featured no roleplaying, that were created with no intention of RP, but resulted coincidentally in roleplay later on? It seems kind of a silly concept, but that is what it looks like you're trying to present. Otherwise, you're saying D&D was not originally a roleplaying game. 1) How does Adventure RPG sound to you? 2) You still haven't come up with anyway of discrimination for the classification. Simply naming off games that you want to fit into a genre does not do this. Criteria for classification comes first, then you start classifying games into it. You don't classify by thinking of the titles you want to be RPGs first and then saying simply "these are RPGs" or "this is how it is used." That is arbitrary.

Why the frozen burrito?

Unless they're in to that kind of thing.

Diablo is officially classified as an Action RPG. The origin of it wasn't just people getting together to bash monsters, the origin of it was people getting together to act out fantasy characters. This included bashing monsters in so much as that is a major concept of fantasy. To say "RPG is bashing monsters" is to essentially say "RPG is fantasy" which is a confusion of RPG with a commonly used style of setting. This is what seperated the RPGs from the miniature wargames. This is STILL (part of) what seperates modern ones like Warhammer from Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay. RPGs have been played in "adult" settings for ages with not a monster bashed. Well, I shouldn't say "not a monster bashed," some people might get kinky like that. Cops and robbers is roleplaying by kids. These aren't typically a codified "game," however. You say classification is a good thing. To simply say that people who arbitrarily classify a game an RPG because people on different continents have a culture gap is not being a fan of classification. It is not classification without specific, discriminatory, criteria. Bashing monsters is not specific discriminatory criteria. Nearly every game features either the bashing of humanoids or the bashing of monstrous creatures. Which means you only have two genres according to your criteria. In Atom's definition, playing a role (using the broad sense of playing a character at all) isn't discriminatory in the least. And the depth of the character and the potential to learn about them is more about the quality of the story than the genre of the game. It's discriminatory, if potentially subjective, but I feel genre classifications should at least significant mechanical discrimination. Though, Atom's criteria does automatically rule out Diablo I & II and Elder Scrolls III & IV.

How can you play without me, screw the Donwhatever? I can grace your presence between 7-11 central. Other arrangements might be possible by appointment.

I remember those nice fights that group members got into that would result in them killing each other in BGI. Oh, if only that could happen to Aerie. Now, if only I'd known Xzar was MEGATRON, then I might have used him more. Maybe next time when I play ultra evil ****. WHY WAS I NEVER TOLD THAT XZAR WAS MEGA****INGTRON?

Are you telling me to forgo Edwin for Aerie? Edit: I really should do a playthrough where I don't care about such things and I just pick characters as I wander by flipping coins or something.

The only thing I don't like about Imoen being a Mage is that in my new playthrough, it will have me with 3 mages when I get around to BGII. I won't give up Edwin! Edit: Aaaaaaactually, with my new playthrough maybe I can give up Imoen! But then I won't have the cute Imoen-Sarevok banter in Throne of Bhaal. I know! I'll give up Edwin for Korgan! I like evil characters, they're silly. Good characters take things too seriously.

Quote me where I said it did. And you see the difference! Never once did I say choice. I said contribution. The ability to differentiate my character from another's character on a meaningful level. Because actors are not robots and they are not programmed to perform exactly in a specific manner, even if they have a script they have to be close to, their performances still differ. My Cloud Strife, however, is no different from your Cloud Strife. Because of that, I am not his actor. The acting, which defines it as a role, comes from having a contribution. This is easier done through choice, but to speak of it literally it is not exclusive to choice. No two actors, even under the same director, should be identical. It is practically by definition. Reading a book is in no way roleplaying. Final Fantasy and Xenogears aren't even simply a director being very strict about how it should be acted. They are, quite literally, the director jumping up on the stage and acting it out in your stead.

I need to make a NWN2 mod that lowers Halfling intelligence, wisdom, and charisma by 2-4 points each to put into any other mod I may make. Y'know, for authenticity.

I think it's important to take origin of the term into account. What you are doing, Atom, seems to me just taking every game you like that calls itself an RPG and building a definition around that. Your definition of role and roleplay is manufactured after you have determined what you want to fit into it. I disagree with that because these terms are even older than computer games. Role is taken from theatre, where it refers to the part played by an actor or actress. This converts over quite directly to roleplay, since role is by definition played. People in traditional PnP RPGs are acting a theatrical part (albeit with a limited audience). Games like Xenogears and Final Fantasy I cannot accept into it because there is no character in those games that I would consider myself acting as. The characters do a fine job of acting themselves out, saying their own words, sometimes in their own voices. While actors in theatre often have specific words they are to say, when they say them they contribute to them, as well as the character itself, which is what distinguishes acting from reading aloud. And that's where I build my criteria. RPG comes from the ability to interact. Inter-act, literally, to act together. In multiplayer computer RPGs, this is easy because of multiple actors to interact with with much improv opportunity. In single player RPGs, it is harder because you are the sole actor and improv is limited. So, I have to use a slightly different metric. The developers have to make at least a visible attempt to allow me to be an actor, to allow me to contribute to the character in a more meaningful way than choosing stats or class.

There are a few different perspectives. Genetically you are a man. Medically you can be a post-op transsexual female. Socially, they can follow one of the other two models or consider you a female as an alternative. Personally, you would probably consider yourself female as well. But again, the models each often have standards such as the genetic and medical. I'm not sure I grasp your claim that people differentiate to insult a game they dislike. Does calling Diablo an Action RPG somehow demean it? Does calling Final Fantasy a JRPG demean that? How are these insults? We can either say "well, they all call themselves RPGs or ___RPGs and that's just swell, they're all RPGs" or we can develop a standard of some sort to better facilitate communication.

Anyone who played Descent to Undermountain knows how terrible D&D can be. I see what you did there! I think...

What if it lets you play as a Sanrio kitty that rides horses with no fighting of monsters? Why is D&D about roleplaying and fighting monsters? Who's to judge? The point I'm getting at here is it seems the argument you were trying to put forth exists solely to play off doubt.