Avatar of whizzball1
  • Last Seen: 5 yrs ago
  • Old Guild Username: whizzball1
  • Joined: 12 yrs ago
  • Posts: 15387 (3.39 / day)
  • VMs: 0
  • Username history
    1. whizzball1 12 yrs ago
  • Latest 10 profile visitors:

Status

User has no status, yet

Bio

User has no bio, yet

Most Recent Posts

<Snipped quote by whizzball1>

Perhaps in hindsight that was not the best RP to choose for this experiment. I was hoping you would explore your freedom more, but it looks like you put a lot of effort into this. I shall not ask you to redo it. So long as you are happy with the character and also realize they would never work in the RP I should be able to do my work. It might take some time, as I'm GMing an RP at a critical time right now. But I'll have something up within a few days.


I put a fair amount of effort into it, I suppose. I'm happy to redo it if you believe I missed something, but I gave myself as much freedom as I could without defying the logical limitation.
@whizzball1 A magical school RP? I see no reason why that wouldn't work. The magic system interests me as well. Now you just have to create a character that you find interesting, creative limitations be damned. Filling out the character sheet would probably be the easiest way to do this.


This should do. Unfortunately, the main limitation is that the description of magic and aeons in the roleplay implies magic can only be descended from one Aeon. If that particular limitation is discarded then the only real limitations are setting and the logical limitation (as I describe in my examinations), which encourage me to make powers that fit with the theme and not just something totally random. Additionally, if the characters didn't need to be human Spectre would be made entirely out of crystal. (Right now he's human but looks crystalline when using his magic.)

<Snipped quote by whizzball1>

I feel that in the human brain, creativity is a mixture of reasoning and creativity.


I don't know if we can say that with a level of certainty. All this time I've been going off the dictionary definition, but if we all agree to redefine creativity as imagination and ingenuity in equal measure then the argument takes on a completely different colour (and also I'd rewrite all of my examinations).
@BrokenPromise

Sounds like a fun challenge.
Freedom means that the easy choice is always available, and by limiting these choices you are creating a challenge for people. People work naturally with a challenge and will try to find ways around it, both creative and lazy ways.

I don't wanna say too much more cause I feel others will be able to explain better than me, but creativity is a direct result of having a limitation and it brings about the skill of problem solving.


I think that it's more that problem-solving is a direct result of having a limitation. One may have endless ideas up their sleeves, and writing and roleplaying give people a chance to use those ideas. But, on account of any limitations involved in a story or a roleplay, some ideas are lost, unusable. I'll make careful note that I don't consider that a bad thing right out, because problem-solving is another skill that's important to writing. The ideas that remain feasible may only be that way because you worked to make them feasible.

Ultimately, limitations restrict imagination but encourage reasoning. Another way to say it might be that limitations restrict the right brain but encourage the left brain. Whether that's a bad thing or not depends entirely on the context.
I think there's some confusion among terms. To have ideas limited by setting, plot etc. doesn't necessarily mean that creativity is limited. Also, do you equate creativity with ingenuity? When faced with a creative framework, an artist has to work harder to accomplish her goals. Does the situation therefore limit or encourage creativity? Or are limitations and lack of limitations two different kinds of stimuli that both engender creativity in different ways?


Knowing that I could possibly be misunderstood I just consolidated dictionary definitions of creativity and came to the conclusion that creativity is the use of original ideas. Ingenuity and inventiveness I do not equate with creativity, but I do believe that they work together with creativity. I don't think they foster creativity but use it instead, but I also think ingenuity can be used despite the lack of a framework. @LegendBegins seems to somewhat make this point—the unspoken limitations of skill and experience are much more freeing than other limitations but still encourage the inventive use of creativity; I can vouch for that from my own experience.

Given what I've said, I think the answer to your question is that they engender ingenuity in different ways, but that that is different from creativity.
@whizzball1 It was not necessary, but she would have fallen in with every other "let's roll a bunch of random crap together and see what we get" magical girls. The point was that I actually got to keep my original idea, which was a character that could stun on sight and fight with their hair. The limitation only made those aspects more interesting and make sense. Well, as far as magical girls go.

Another character for something entirely different was only allowed to have 1 element. So even though I wanted to make a character that could control temperature {heat and freeze things} I decided to stick with fire. I couldn't freeze the ground and skate on it, but I could turn it molten and slide on the liquid magma. etc. That character was one of the only ones that was able to use fire as a utility, versus everyone else who used fire as a purely offensive power.


That's why I don't contend with limitations that are made for the sake of consistency. But both of those sets of ideas came at the cost of others. It seems to me from your examples and others that a limitation always comes at the cost of a net loss of potential ideas, but also that limitations encourage variation of ideas.

Out of curiosity, can you say with certainty that the ideas you used in place of your old ones were more interesting? If you never got to use your old ones, can you really say that you would have been less entertained with the ideas you didn't get to use? What combinations could you have made if you had access to both melting and freezing? I acknowledge that that's a lot of what ifs and hypotheticals.

At the very least, you were entertained by your idea in the context of that roleplay's setting, but you lost the chance of another. Considering that you would have been entertained either way, the limitations were basically positive—but I wouldn't say that the idea you were forced to use was definitely more interesting than the idea you wanted to use in the first place.
EDIT: This is more of a rhetorical question: if you had been given a free choice between, say, your two magical girls, and you hadn't yet tried either, which would you have chosen? I'll go as far as to say you would have chosen the idea where you had all the backstory you wanted and the relationship between Medusa and the magical girl. You were entertained either way, but not necessarily more interested.
Speaking for myself, if you leave me with an empty slate in which I could create a complete world without any limitations or restrictions and with full resources to do whatever the hell I wanted...

...I would never finish.

Given a decent structure of limitations, I can have a theme to base off, and then adapt to an extent that the result is original. Yet what I created was based off something else. Perhaps it was a desire to improve upon the original image, or just a spike of creativity caused by looking at something else. But well chosen limitations do, in their own little ways, make me more inclined to follow through on creating things.


That's the point I made in the setting section. Logic, consistency, and a setting provide direction and, by preventing confusion, encourage creation. Like I said in my introduction, I don't paint restrictions in a negative light, because some of them are important and useful.
When people say "Limitations breed creativity," they are saying that people do more interesting things when they are presented with a barrier and aren't given excessive freedom. They will find a way around the barrier, or they will find a way to make their side of the barrier more palatable.

As an example, I once joined a magical girl roleplay. I didn't like it very much, but that's not really important. I wanted to make a medusa themed girl, with some pirate themes thrown in. Medusa traditionally dwelled on an island by the sea, so it wasn't a huge stretch. But the GM would have none of that, and said that the snake aspect of my character was too far outside the boundaries of what a pirate was. But I really liked her powers, particularly her paralyzing stare and how her hair could be used as a weapon. So instead I made her more of a pirate captain who drew influence from all the great pirates. She had burning wicks in her hair like black beard that could be used as weapons. She also had the intense gaze of a pirate captain, which often caused people to stop in their tracks. So while I didn't get to play as my medusa/pirate hybrid, I got to use all the powers I wanted to and made one of the most unique magical girls the RP saw. While it did ruin some of the backstory stuff between medusa and my character both having similer origins, she was definitely the most interesting pirate magical girl I'd ever seen. all because a GM told me I couldn't have a medusa pirate girl.

Limitations definitely make for more interesting stories.


Who's to say it wouldn't have been more interesting if you had the medusa/pirate hybrid?

But I can respect that limitation because it coheres with the setting. The GM was keeping his or her RP internally consistent (based on his or her vision of what the RP should involve). I think your original ideas--your creativity--were restricted on account of the need for logical consistency, but the limitation wasn't so strong as to restrict all of your ideas. Maybe it would have been more interesting to have a medusa/pirate magical girl, or maybe it wouldn't have been. But it wasn't necessarily all that it could have been (and you acknowledged that yourself).
© 2007-2026
BBCode Cheatsheet