Posted by The_Meehan on May 15, 2002 at 20:29:29:
In Reply to: Re: Hunters and Supernatural Friends posted by The Goat on May 14, 2002 at 06:08:28:
: So, what you are saying, if I understand you correctly, is that none of us would be candidates for the imbuing?
No, not quite. I firmly believe that the Messengers *would* Imbue people like me, or you, or any other poster, *if* we otherwise met their requirements. My point was that overall, such Imbued characters would be *rare*, and that if we were to play strictly to what we know, the game's premise would be distorted.
: But...I dislike the implication that, according to H:tR, some humans are more human than other humans, and that this evaluation is made according to interest and profession.
No, not "more human", but "more common"; as I said, there probably *is* a Navy Seal Imbued. Maybe even more. But *certainly* not as many as the Munchkins would like. I a situation without a central character approval authority, our only real option is to forbid the rare, to keep the focus on the common.
: Real people do these things. They do them all the time. If one doesn't think they do, one is leading an incredibly sheltered life.
Yep. Agreed. On the other hand, when you're fully immersed in a sub-culture, it's easy to forget *how* small it is. And if we're to stay true to the "common man" theme, it's not something to forget. Heck, if *every* Hunter character started showing up with neon hair and enough tattoos for a circus, I'd jump on that too. I don't have *any* problem with people playing the full human range, but with them distorting it.
: And, I would hardly consider someone making me a burger at McDonald's to be an intrusion.
Yeah, I know, poor word choice, but I couldn't think of better. It's "intrusion" in the jargon sense - not anything else. The point I was making (with me as an example) is that everyone has experiences, and encounters, that fall within the Human Experience, but outside theirs. And that we all need to be aware of where those breaking points are for ourselves.
: Then, I would suggest, with respect to you, that you do not live a normal life.
Yeah, that *was* kind of my point - I *don't* lead a normal life (in the statistical sense). Makes it hard to play a game about normal life, doesn't it? :) For other posters, the divergence may not be as sharp, but we're probably all a biased sample, and we should be aware of it.