View Single Post
Old 05-02-2008, 08:22 AM   #34
prof1515
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Illinois
Posts: 791
prof1515 will become famous soon enoughprof1515 will become famous soon enough
Send a message via AIM to prof1515 Send a message via Yahoo to prof1515
Re: Determining the Origin and Meaning of RPI

Because when the term was invented it referred to a very small group of MUDs. While no one set out a clear definition of exactly what constituted RPI, it served a purpose by assisting those who coined and used it to reference the specific type of MUD design and philosophy they were referring to and seeking. As used today, it serves little to no purpose because there's no standard definition and is used to describe pretty much the same thing as several other terms.

Think of the term "monkey". People use it to describe a lot of creatures including gorillas, chimpanzees, and the other apes as well as some types of prosimians. But apes and prosimians are not monkeys. Many people can't tell the difference and use the word in such a generic sense but to someone who knows the difference, it's quite clear. The term "monkey" has a definite meaning and refer to specific types of primates, even if the general public couldn't tell a bonobo from a baboon. The same is true of the term RPI. Six or seven years ago if you said you were looking for a RPI, the people using the term knew what you were talking about even if there wasn't a concise definition of the characteristics written down.

The same set of characteristics is still referred to as RPI. The only difference is that a lot of people started using the term but without any clear understanding of it, many based on a linguistic misunderstanding and in a manner to refer to subjective characteristics that can't be quantified ("intense role-play" means different things to different people after all). But just as a lot of people call a gorilla a monkey, it's not nor does their misuse of the term mean that the term RPI means any MUD any more than monkey is an acceptable word to describe a gorilla. Yes, "monkey" has other definitions but they refer to completely different uses such as addiction ("monkey on your back") or to a foolish person ("those monkeys at the tavern") but those are completely different uses, not misuses.

The problem facing use of the term RPI to describe anything but those games to which it originally referred is that there's no standard definition. The games to which it was first applied shared certain characteristics, characteristics which have been present now in over two dozens different games over a period of more than a decade and a half. No such set of characteristics is present in the other games as the term has been used by everything from role-play enforced games to role-play accepted H&S games. Look at Armageddon and you see those 19 characteristics mentioned at the beginning of this thread. Look at Harshlands and you see the same 19 of 19. Look at Shadows of Isildur and you see 19 of 19 as well. Look at any of the other two dozen or so games that are clearly identified as RPI and all 19 are present there too. A clear definition can be formed as to what kind of game the term is referring to. Now look at some of the games over which use of the term is contested and you see 15 of 19, 13 of 19, or 6 of 19 and in some cases the 6 on one game are not included in the 13 on another. There's no consistency.

Thus there really isn't another definition for the word, merely a lack of understanding of the existing definition. Therefore, has the definition really changed or does it just mean people don't know the definition and simply use it improperly. The purpose of this thread is to aid in clarifying what was meant and dispelling linguistic misinterpretations (such as the grammatically incorrect reading of the term as "intense role-play") which have clouded the context of the original definition. Just as the term monkey doesn't mean gorillas and chimpazees regardless of its misuse by some in reference to these creatures, so too does RPI not mean other MUDs just because of misunderstanding. The definition hasn't really changed, it's just misused since there doesn't seem to be any real definition to replace it. It's just, to quote more than one person in earlier discussions, "what people want it to mean". That's not a definition though.

There seems to be some question as to "what difference does it make" if the term is used in such a general sense. For those seeking the type of games that the term originally applied, it serves the important purpose of distinguishing such games from the hundreds of other MUDs out there, just as it did when the term was coined. But what of the opposite? What difference does it make if the term is only used in its original context? Role-play MUD is a term that equally serves the purpose that such a general use does without an original meaning that can lend an alternative earlier definition. If some feel that all that is required to be RPI is the presence of role-play and not even an enforced role-play policy, is that not simply a role-play MUD? RPI has a specific meaning which has existed as long as the term itself. Other uses lack any clear similarity of characteristics beyond that which is already denoted by the term role-play MUD (or if one need be more specific, role-play encouraged or role-play enforced MUD).

Take care,

Jason

Last edited by prof1515 : 05-02-2008 at 08:27 AM.
prof1515 is offline   Reply With Quote