Implied vs. Explicit

[EchoMan]

Assuming gravity is the force that keeps things "grounded" within the Cantr-verse. Can you gauge it? Can you measure it? No, you can make an assumption that the Cantr world works "similar" to ours. Which you can't really do as can't know without being actually there to witness and measure. Maybe, in the Cantr-verse, friction from the thick air is what keeps things, and people, from floating into imaginary Cantr-outer-space. The air is so thick that anyone who dies on a road is SHOVED back into town as that's where the air is less dense and allows for movement.

I'm assuming Jos based Cantr from his experience as an earthling. I have no idea where you come from, but if it was someplace else it would explain one or two things.

You really made my day with this topic...

[Piscator]

I wouldn't be surprised if the first thing Dudel does in the morning is drop a pencil. "Yep, still working. Used to work every day so far, but where does it say that god keeps paying the bills."

Just kidding.

[Rebma]

I wouldn't be surprised if the first thing Dudel does in the morning is drop a pencil. "Yep, still working. Used to work every day so far, but where does it say that god keeps paying the bills."

Just kidding.

LOL. ^ Made my day!

[Ryaga]

When Cantr says "man" or "woman" it only means "mostly male" or "mostly female". There are plenty of not human Cantrinians and it is allowed within the CR to do as such provided you don't go totally ape shit with it. Thus people can be canine, feline, reptilian or fish and as we can not know within the Cantrinian universe if "animal types" can feel, we're lacking. Cantrinians are CLEARLY not human. They are an odd group of beings with no genetics or history and can be almost anything within some "understandings". So, in short, Cantr states neither man nor beast... but Cantrinian. Which can not be understood by our 3rd party perspective of those in the Cantr world.

Cantr makes no notice of smell or touch/feelings beyond the RPed boundaries placed by RPers... and this can quickly become difficult based on player perception and ideals.

Cantr only states that you "see" and that you were hit. I have honestly seen people flat out ignore being hit for 50+ damage. So, clearly, its not a feel. Being gashed in your side as you sleep would clearly send you jolting up into the air if you FELT it or were honestly one of the human species. Your character sees that he/she failed to block the strike with his/her shield (if they even have one) and are now aware of how much damage which was taken as they look down at themselves and view exactly what has happened. A "real human" would not refer to him/herself as "30% dead". In fact, few Cantrinians make notice of pain when struck. It is an annoyance, something easy to ignore and mend.

The concept of time is STRICTLY an OOC concept for the players. There is no notice in the game of time, it is a PLAYER time stamp and could be argued that making mention of it is a breach of the CR on that very ground. Cantrinians might be aware of tick timings of in world events as a way to keep track of time but this has nothing to do with earth, sun, sky, stars or moon. No assumption can be made about the understanding of time based on the world beyond this.

The Cantr world is not like our Earth. There is no mention gravity/falling (unless RPed by the players and accepted by others), breathing (Guess the world is filled with nitrous oxide?), excrement or just about anything a normal human would be aware of. Within Cantr life you can honestly not make any assumptions based on "our Earth". Hell, the gravity implications ALONE would alter perception within the Cantr world. You can't make notice without being there to notice and as that is literally impossible, I make no mention of such things.

Then again....

Cantr mechanics also do NOT state there are NO grasshoppers. Cantr mechanics simply state they are not "visible to the naked-eye" or somehow "ignorable".

What Cantr leaves "blank" isn't a "No" but more of a "maybe" or "perhaps". The argument isn't "There is (not) a sky." The argument is "There may or may not be a sky, perhaps."

AGAIN, I'm a very explicit player.

Cantr says man. Not mostly man. I don't see a mostly male in his twenties. I see a man in his twenties. That is the only explicit mention to the anatomy of a character and therefore they are human unless stated otherwise. Show me where it's stated the anatomy unless in use of man or woman. Which implies humanity. I believe I just used Dudels own explicit argument against him.

[EchoMan]

That is the only explicit mention to the anatomy of a character and therefore they are human unless stated otherwise.

Actually, a lot of clothing have references to a human anatomy.

[Ryaga]

That is the only explicit mention to the anatomy of a character and therefore they are human unless stated otherwise.

Actually, a lot of clothing have references to a human anatomy.

That just reinforces my point. There is no tail, fin, or cat ears category in the clothing menu either.

[AlchemicRaker]

That is the only explicit mention to the anatomy of a character and therefore they are human unless stated otherwise.

Actually, a lot of clothing have references to a human anatomy.

Exactly what I thought as I go to look up my characters...

knees, waists, hands, wrists, skin, ankle, heel, eyes, hips, thigh, head, face, earlobe, neck, left and right shoulder, elbow, curves, feet, toes, right arm, neckline, torso, mid-thigh, low waist, mid calf, chest, groin, pelvic region

In case there was any problem explicitly stating that a Cantrian is endowed with any of these features, worry not!

Unless you want to try and convince me that Cantrians only gain these features while wearing clothes, in which case I'm going to ignore you

- Natso


edit: Also, the signup page notes "Cantr II is set in a fairly realistic world.". Given all the clues above, I don't think it's a terribly unsafe assumption to call the Cantrian a human.

[Ryaga]

And since we've established humanity there is also a sky and a sun.

Plants need a light source to survive. (Cantr doesn't say almost-corn either.)
Humans can't live in a vacuum, and the water in Cantr would boil because in a vacuum the boiling point of water is extremely low.

So yay for a sun and a sky.

[returner]

Let's just assume/accept Cantr is pseudo-real and move on.

[Doug R.]

Let's just assume/accept Cantr is pseudo-real and move on.

Dudel will never yield.

[EchoMan]

Let's just assume/accept Cantr is pseudo-real and move on.

Dudel will never yield.

Does he ever?

[Dudel]

Cantr doesn't say there "ARE" certain things but it does not also say that there are NOT certain things. This is, again, a player assumption.

You say there is gravity, as well as a sun and yet Cantr states neither. This means it is neither and both... there is gravity, a sun, sky, etc and at the same time there is not as Cantr mechanics DO NOT state that such things DO actually exist. Meaning its up to player ASSUMPTION these things are within the world at all. Items could be floating off the ground, how the HELL else do Cantrinians carry them? Hey, that could explain rot as nothing happens to the ground around you when items do actually rot. Stuff just floats off into space, thus no gravity... anything "large" is kept down on the Cantr world due to the heavy, heavy, HEAVY air.

Then again....

Cantr mechanics also do NOT state there are NO grasshoppers. Cantr mechanics simply state they are not "visible to the naked-eye" or somehow "ignorable".

What Cantr leaves "blank" isn't a "No" but more of a "maybe" or "perhaps". The argument isn't "There is (not) a sky." The argument is "There may or may not be a sky, perhaps."

Very simply put, if another player contradicts you within their own RP... all of a sudden gravity and the sun no longer exist. Your character says that the sun is out and someone else says that there is no sun only the six moons. One could jump from a tree and float to the ground like a butterfly or leap from the ground to the top of a building roof and its NOT against any Cantr rules or breaking any Cantr mechanics. No lie that this is absurd and would strike a forum riot over "the CRB" of it. Now cue Multi-Limbs and Portals.... I'm still okay with the multiple limbs, but not the portals.

Cantr states "man" but does NOT state "isn't beast"... as this can be "changed" with RP. And, again, multi-gender and genderless characters MUST have a sex regardless of if neither is technically correct. A genderless or duel gender character is NEITHER male NOR female, however the character might be "mostly male" with his features... etc. So until such characters are a breach of the CR, Cantr's mechanics CAN NOT mean anything other than "mostly", or rather, appears male/female. I'm gonna go with "appears" to be a man/woman in his/her <age bracket>. Yeah, I'm sticking with "appears", you can't argue with that one. They APPEAR to be "man" but might not actually be "man" at all.

Just because someone appears to be human, doesn't mean they are actually human. Your assumptions are dead in the water.

I win!

Let's just assume/accept Cantr is pseudo-real and move on.

Dudel will never yield.

Does he ever?

Yes, when I'm presented with a logical argument I can't argue against. But y'all are REALLY bad at that.

[Ryaga]

Actually Cantr says "Male" or "Female" on character creation. Which means I can assume "Man" and "Woman" imply gender. I don't see mostly-man, or almost-male, or almost-man. You can't argue with the single true/false fact that a Cantr character looks and is described like a man or woman. If it looks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck.

[Dudel]

Actually Cantr says "Male" or "Female" on character creation. Which means I can assume "Man" and "Woman" imply gender. I don't see mostly-man, or almost-male, or almost-man. You can't argue with the single true/false fact that a Cantr character looks and is described like a man or woman. If it looks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck.

But that logic doesn't actually work with Cantr.

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck it could honestly be a moose with the simple "Its a moose" comment stated by another player.

That logic, of yours, DOESN'T WORK with Cantr because the Cantr world IS NOT set in a stone world. The world is based on PLAYER ASSUMPTIONS which can be counteracted by other player assumptions.

You can, and I know, make a "male character" who isn't male and vise versa. This, ALONE, makes your argument a moot one... as he's NOT male. The character is neither male, nor female... regardless of how much quacking they do. This can be applied to beast traits as well as there ARE "cat people" within Cantr, as well as dogs and lizards. They are just few due to a similar, incorrect, mentality as yours Ryaga.

"The Ugly Duckling" walked and talked like a duck... but it turned out to be a swan.

[Ryaga]

Actually Cantr says "Male" or "Female" on character creation. Which means I can assume "Man" and "Woman" imply gender. I don't see mostly-man, or almost-male, or almost-man. You can't argue with the single true/false fact that a Cantr character looks and is described like a man or woman. If it looks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck.

But that logic doesn't actually work with Cantr.

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck it could honestly be a moose with the simple "Its a moose" comment stated by another player.

That logic, of yours, DOESN'T WORK with Cantr because the Cantr world IS NOT set in a stone world. The world is based on PLAYER ASSUMPTIONS which can be counteracted by other player assumptions.

You can, and I know, make a "male character" who isn't male and vise versa. This, ALONE, makes your argument a moot one... as he's NOT male. The character is neither male, nor female... regardless of how much quacking they do. This can be applied to beast traits as well as there ARE "cat people" within Cantr, as well as dogs and lizards. They are just few due to a similar, incorrect, mentality as yours Ryaga.

"The Ugly Duckling" walked and talked like a duck... but it turned out to be a swan.

So now we're taking what players emote over what's in the interface? I thought you were explicit about everything. Cantr only explicitly talks about humanity.

In fact I dare you to show me a place where anything non-human is mentioned.