20,783 reputation
371116
bio website
location Pierre, SD
age 30
visits member for 4 years
seen 13 mins ago

You can't do that! It's contrary to the specific levels of immersion and simulationism that I like!

ಠ_ಠ


21h
awarded  Good Answer
1d
answered Can a bard directly take the Improved Familiar feat?
Aug
19
awarded  Yearling
Aug
5
revised Can you cast dominate person on yourself?
Added brief mention of saving throw rules, as suggested by Foo Bar.
Aug
1
comment Star Wars D6 Skills and Advanced Skills
@Kilo You're welcome! If this answered your question, please accept it (check-mark shaped button in the upper-left of the question), so that others know your question was answered.
Jul
31
awarded  Enlightened
Jul
31
revised Star Wars D6 Skills and Advanced Skills
added 3 characters in body
Jul
31
revised Star Wars D6 Skills and Advanced Skills
added 124 characters in body
Jul
31
revised Star Wars D6 Skills and Advanced Skills
added 742 characters in body
Jul
31
answered Star Wars D6 Skills and Advanced Skills
Jul
31
revised Can you cast dominate person on yourself?
Fugue -> Will-less. Fugue is a cool word, but it implies more than intended.
Jul
31
awarded  Nice Answer
Jul
30
revised Can you cast dominate person on yourself?
added 1604 characters in body
Jul
30
answered Can you cast dominate person on yourself?
Jul
29
comment What is usually listed as evidence that RPGs are inherently a 2+ person activity?
@Keoma Adam Dray is a commentor on this thread who expresses the viewpoint the OP was asking about. And while I thank you for some interesting reading regarding Lumpley's principle, we seem to be at the point of talking past each other. I feel my answer stands as it is for this question as expressed. If you are interested in a more specific form of the question, feel free to ask a new one.
Jul
29
comment What is usually listed as evidence that RPGs are inherently a 2+ person activity?
@Keoma As to my arguments, they are not Tautological (self proving). Tautological would be "people define RPGs this way because people define RPGs this way." My statement is "Some people define RPGs this way because [reason varies too wildly to state succinctly, please clarify question]."
Jul
29
comment What is usually listed as evidence that RPGs are inherently a 2+ person activity?
@Keoma Who holds the belief is the easiest access to precisely what the belief is. We can look at Lumpley's writing to find out why he excludes solo RPGs (apparently mostly because he doesn't think they'd be fun without an external observer).
Jul
29
comment What is usually listed as evidence that RPGs are inherently a 2+ person activity?
@Keoma My answer, from the first paragraph to the last, lists one fundamental reason why role playing games must, by their very nature, be played in a group: Because "played in a group" is part of the definition (some people) use for the phrase "Role Playing Game." As to why they define it that way, Vincent Baker (Lumpley) likely had specific reasons for defining it that way. Those reasons are not necessarily the ones used by Adam Dray in his comment to "Do solo RPGs exist?", or others.
Jul
29
comment What is usually listed as evidence that RPGs are inherently a 2+ person activity?
@Keoma The question is not about the Lumpley Principle, the Lumpley Principle is one example of the phenomenon the question asks about. If the question was about the Lumpley Principle specifically, it would be a much better question with a much more precise answer. Likewise, this answer isn't about whether solo RPGs exist, but about why someone might say they do not... Which is what the question asks for.
Jul
28
revised What is usually listed as evidence that RPGs are inherently a 2+ person activity?
added 1682 characters in body