Who cares?

[lumpley]

I think that this of Pete's:

The character is the mental model of a person under the nominal control of a player, as expressed through play.

is groovy goodness.

When we talk about "the character" we miss the fact that the character exists in our own personal heads, in the heads of our fellow players, and in the actual narrative, all in different forms.  There's not a "the" character.

I contend that the sense of real live honest-to-goodness living breathing life we get from our characters sometimes, where they surprise us by doing the absolute yet unexpected right thing -- I contend that it comes at least partly out of collaboration.  Our characters in play aren't our own, they're co-owned.  That's what happens when we bring them to actual play, inevitably.  (And incidentally that's what "my guy" statements are a reaction to.)

In other words, even though Acanthus is "my character," Emily Care and Meguey both have enormous input into who he is and what he does.  I'm not talking about Universalis-level character sharing, or some weird way me and Meg and Em play, I'm talking about the subtle emotional feedback they give me when I play him.  Same as your friends give you when you play your character.  The feedback of our fellow players, even if it's unspoken and not consciously noticed, influences our thinking about and portrayals of our characters.

It's not surprising that it seems like our characters have life and personality beyond our own - they do.  It emerges from the attention of our fellow players.

I think Marco was moving toward this when he talked about System too.

-Vincent

[MachMoth]

I'm talking about the subtle emotional feedback they give me when I play him.  Same as your friends give you when you play your character.  The feedback of our fellow players, even if it's unspoken and not consciously noticed, influences our thinking about and portrayals of our characters.-Vincent

This is kind of relates to what I was saying.  Our "character" changes as the environment/rules change.  Just as you wouldn't jump on the table and pull down your pants at a tea party (otherwise, I want to see your tea parties), because of the feedback from those around you, you play your character differently in different company.  The company you spend is just as important an influence on your "character" as the rules of the environment, and could even be considered part of them.  I suppose there is a term for this, but it's lost on me.  

Ron, I believe that's your cue to insert some baseline, GNS compatable, wisdom into my otherwise jumbled mess of incoherent babbling.

[Ron Edwards]

Hello hello,

Pretty much all I'm saying about this topic can be found in the new thread And now, Plato.

I suggest that it's time that any further discussion proceed to new threads; for instance, Vincent's post about the social and dynamic context for playing one's character really is a new topic.

Best,
Ron