I hate roleplaying


Gamer Life General Discussion

51 to 100 of 108 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Hama wrote:

Yes but there is a great difference between "I swing my sword at the goblin" and "AAARGH swings his sword at a goblin".

For me the first is the proper way and the second kills immersion very very quickly.

And playing an RPG is not like reading a book. The two have nothing in common.

different people have different preferences.

for me, first person makes it harder to divorce images of player from description of character

and for you, third person doesn't feel right

as long as you try not to force first person down my throat when i play at your table, i won't force third person down yours when you play at mine.

Sovereign Court

I won't force anything on you, i just probably couldn't play with you.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

A barbarian doesn't need speeches.

A barbarian needs one-liners.

Learn from the best.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

*blink*


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I tend to role play rather lazily when it comes to doing voices and dialects. Contemporary euphemisms and idioms are frequent in my games.

When I DM it's different, it is a lot easier to role play when you get to switch characters and do things purposely wrong or exaggerated.

For some reason I always tend to make racial stereotypes when I do actually role play my characters. The dwarves are always angry and talk with a terrible/fake scottish accent. Elves are always pretentious and talk all proper and whispery. Gnomes always sound like I just inhaled Helium.

I once played a black half-dragon lizardfolk named Fuquon-ix. I played him entirely in my Michael Clarke Duncan voice....


What is this nonsense?

You can play a stoic quite barbarian but you are still expected to narrate your actions. How do you scowl at the enemy? Do you issue a blood curdling roar after cleaving through five foes? Do you yell "AM SMASH" before a power attack?


Hama wrote:
I won't force anything on you, i just probably couldn't play with you.

i could probably play with you in an online group in first person if the following conditions are met.

Conditions:

1. nobody uses a microphone, so voice doesn't interfere with their character
2. nobody uses a real life picture as their avatar, any fictional medium is fine as long as it is neither real life nor cosplay
3. nobody uses their real name in the group
4. nobody brings up anybody's personal information, such as age, sex, location, personal history, real name or general appearance
5. people keep the OOC either to a minimum or on a separate chat medium
6. nobody asks for the above mentioned personal information
7. people try to keep track of character names and actually bother to pay attention to the game. no matter how silly or funny the name


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, down with the thespian tyranny!
I think being a thespian is just as bad as being a munchkin.
1 - It's time consuming. A thespian will usually want to do long speeches, talk with every NPC, describe every action. Dude, we only have a day a week, less than six hours to play, I don't want to spend half of it hearing you talk about the shopkeepers grandkids. At least talk with NPCs in a way that will further the plot instead of derailing it. You don't have to describe every swing of your sword and every spell, save it for when you crit or do something really cool. It's not my fault if I zone out when this guy keeps taking ten minutes every turn.
2 - It's egotistical. One thing you will notice in a thespian is that their concept is the only one in the group that matters and everyone else shoul sacrifice theirs to cater to him. They're the guy who thinks playing a suboptimal rogue or monk build helps roleplaying, but doesn't allow the other players to act in character and dump his ass in the nearest town to hire someone actually qualified to be an adventrer, just because they have PC stamped on their forehead. They're the ones that want to play a paladin in a party full of evil characters or an evil necromancer in a good aligned party that already has a paladin, and then blame the rest of the group for acting in character and turning against his caracter. They're the guy who chooses to play a jerk character that steals from the party and antagonizes friendly NPCs and then claims "I'm just playing in character" but doesn't accept that the other characters would not want to hang out with him much less get into danger to save him.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Snow_Tiger wrote:

Don't think of it like having to make speeches

Instead:
-develop a personality (add something to am barbarian hulk smash)
-take actions based on personality (this doesn't not have to be in combat or making dierolls , but it can be)
-have ur character be better friends w/ on character in the party, but not another maybe if fits personality
-make friends w/ npcs
-maybe barbarian wants to go hunting for deer just because, takes some npcs with him go hunting. Nothing mechanical, maybe u make "friends" with some npcs or something

It's more like investing your character in the story, rather than just rolling dice. Again, get over the "I have to make a speech" conundrum

And this here? Telling someone else how they should roleplay their own characters is just as bad as the guy that tells people to always use the same build because it has the best DPR or that you should change your build so it's more min-maxed.

Thespians can suck the fun out of a game just as much as munchkins.


i'm neither a thespian nor a munchkin, i'm like a balance between the two that doesn't go too far in either direction. i optimize a concept, and even pick the occasional exotic skill for a single rank or few

but i don't go hardcore thespian or hardcore munchkin

i also don't deviate too far from the party's ability to contribute and will pick my concepts based on the party's needs from a list.

i might have a dump stat or 7 or even 5, but i take both that and the characters boons into account

i don't let the stats make the character, i let the character make the stats.

i even tweak mechanical options or even homebrew to make characters workable with DM permission


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Hama wrote:
Roleplaying in 3rd person? A big no-no.

It would weird me out. I have never encountered any player who has ever done though.

But I would totally let Kanye the Giant in my game any time, YO!


Barbarian Dole: Barbarian Dole doesn't talk about Barbarian Dole in the third person. Barbarian Dole doesn't do that.


REX AM NOT TALK ABOUT REX THAT WAY! REX AM MONSTER! REX AM GOOD DOG! REX AM HUNGRY! REX AM TEAR AND EAT TINY ORC!

*the onispawn tiefling woman in rags, 8 feet in height, pummels the orc with her magic gauntlet in a dragon style flurry and proceeds to feast upon the green skinned man of 6 and a half feet like a ravenous dinosaur*


the roleplaying in a tabletop game is less like acting and more like collaborative storytelling with dice and rules thrown in. some people, will indeed go hardcore thespian, some will go hardcore munchkin, some will use first person, some third

but any time you narrate your characters actions, it is a third person narrative. there is no such thing as a first person narrative, because to get a first person perspective, you have to be the one viewing and experiencing the situation first hand as the target.

a narrative is always third person, no matter what pronouns you use. because of the way narratives work. a narrative is a description, a second hand visual, for it to be first person, you have to actually be there and actually be involved with the event, plus the event must still be active and ongoing. it must still affect you now.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I wouldn't be able to stand a game that didn't have a heavy roleplaying element. Back when I was playing regularly, we would sometimes go entire sessions without combat, or even rolling any dice. Elaborate court balls and diplomatic meetings were extremely fun.

Of course, we would also sometimes go entire sessions that were nothing BUT combat. And they were ALSO extremely fun.

But going entirely one way or entirely the other makes the game into something very boring, very fast.


As a GM that might have multiple NPCs present, I will often use 3rd person unless making direct statements in order to avoid confusion. It also helps to present the GM as separate from the NPCs (especially in the case of BBEG).


When Krom play RPG he like to Roleplay. Otherwise he is just playing G. Playing G is fun. But the RP is what make game RPG. This why Krom picked RPG and not G.

Krom like to get in mind of character. Examples include:

Not-Krom the Barbarian, Not-Krom the Barbarian very different from Krom the Barbarian. Not-Krom am not like kitties. Not like Krom who like kitties (very tasty!)
Not-Krom say things like: "I'm going to smash you with my axe."
Krom would say: "Krom smash you with him axe."
Not-Krom have much better diction than Krom. Him have higher intelligence score than Krom after all.

Krom's other character is Not-Krom II the Wizard. Him say things like: "Verily thou shalt be smoten with mine magic missiles."
Not-Krom II very clever indeed that's why him speak fancy common.


Umbriere Moonwhisper wrote:

the roleplaying in a tabletop game is less like acting and more like collaborative storytelling with dice and rules thrown in. some people, will indeed go hardcore thespian, some will go hardcore munchkin, some will use first person, some third

I approve this message.

IMHO some people suffer the misapprehension that Pnp RPGing is just like acting or that GMing is just like writing a story / novel, and expect everyone else to share these assumptions. To the detriment of those who know better ;) ;) ;)

EDIT: or that in-character speech always has to be over-the-top THIS IS WHAT MY CHARACTER IS LIKE GUYS GET IT??? instead of just casual speech. Present company excluded.


with Weekly William and a few of my other DMs, we adopt an infamy and prestige system as well as an organization founding and recruiting system. loosely inspired by kingdom building and downtime rules that are derived from a combination of third party systems

the idea, is the lowly PC adventurers can spread their reputations, invest resources, and found organizations, such as a mercenary company, an adventurer's guild, a pirate crew, or archaeologists society, depending on the focus of the campaign and the region it takes place in

the idea is without the organization, it takes a while to recruit new PCs, gain cohorts and purchase items. but the organization provides the following benefits

1. a pool of fodder with which to bring customized backup characters and custom tailored cohorts from. effectively making gaining cohorts easier
2. granting each PC (or other leading officer) the benefits of a leadership score and the ability to ignore standard leadership score penalties
3. granting a magic mart like benefit that allows PCs to commision the items they want without a diplomacy check by requesting it from their guild.
4. a means to make characters not regionally appropriate to the current enviroment
5. crews for such travel related things as campsites, ships that carry cargo or passengers
6. the ability to expand the organization
7. NPCs that can do the minor quests the PCs don't wish to deal with
8. possible representatives for meetings PCs don't wish to deal with
9. an accelerated rate of building reputation and prestige
10. an accelerated means to recruit allies
11. the ability to replace characters in faster and more convenient ways than spending time hunting towns or trade caravans
12. a means to acquire characters of exotic races not normally allowed
13. a means to acquire characters of classes not normally allowed
14. a means to generate revenue
15. a means to get custom items
16. a means to produce characters of homebrewed races
17. a means to get 3rd party or 3.5 content
18. a means to gain monstrous PCs
19. a means to get templated PCs
20. a means to bypass racial restrictions on certain character options

the idea is spending gold and making diplomacy checks to spread reputation and recruit allies, from a variety of places, or even spend capitol, allows PCs to gain especially unique benefits in massive quantities. fodder for backup characters is always awesome, though until an NPC is used as a cohort, used as a backup character or used as a key contributor, or sent on a dispatch quest they generally aren't statted.

essentially we combine roleplaying, gold expenditure and skill checks to make guild building possible. the cohort from leadership is in addition to the cohort for being a guild officer.

Grand Lodge

Hama wrote:
Roleplaying in 3rd person? A big no-no.

Telling people how to talk about their imaginary barbarian smashing a door is also a big no-no.

Dark Archive

Oncoming_Storm wrote:
Hama wrote:
Roleplaying in 3rd person? A big no-no.
Telling people how to talk about their imaginary barbarian smashing a door is also a big no-no.

Thailog am aggerr.. agrro.. ag.. Thailog am think you right!


VM mercenario wrote:
I think being a thespian is just as bad as being a munchkin.

I've never actually encountered a thespian in real play. Most of my play is local, so that may be why. I imagine thespians are more a problem in non face-to-face mediums where players are more willing to RP.


I just want a system that uses dice with the word "win" on every face but one, and "reroll" on the last face (for balance).


Umbriere Moonwhisper wrote:
Hama wrote:

Yes but there is a great difference between "I swing my sword at the goblin" and "AAARGH swings his sword at a goblin".

For me the first is the proper way and the second kills immersion very very quickly.

And playing an RPG is not like reading a book. The two have nothing in common.

different people have different preferences.

for me, first person makes it harder to divorce images of player from description of character

and for you, third person doesn't feel right

as long as you try not to force first person down my throat when i play at your table, i won't force third person down yours when you play at mine.

Honestly, I don't like first person in gaming all that much either, at least in the sense of describing actions. Usually my preferred is third person in describing what you do, and say what the character says.

Just like, stylistically, I find fiction written in the first person stylistically awkward. Personal preference I suppose.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

My comments appear to have been misconstrued as perhaps sarcasm or silliness. While there was a little snarkiness to them, its no less how I feel. Allow me to clarify: I want my games like an action movie or cartoon. Sometimes I daydream about epics with speeches, sometimes I play board games to pass the time, but when I play PF or a tabletop RPG I'd love it to look like an action film.

One liners, outrageous moves, clichéd drama. I want it all. I don't mind if it's first or third person. I just want it to be fun, exciting and for the players to play their characters, not just the game mechanics. If that's not for you, then fine; everyone plays differently.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The whole "I wouldn't game with you if you spoke in 3rd person" just reminds me of those stories of GMs that had rules like:

  • You can never speak out of character. "Hey can somebody hand me the erase?" "What is this 'eraser' you speak of, we have no such thing."
  • Can't leave the table for any reason, not even to go to the bathroom.

  • Sovereign Court

    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    So suddenly people can't have preferences?
    And it's not nearly the same.
    For me, playing in 3rd person MURDERS immersion completely.

    Two things you said, they're just completely silly.

    Shadow Lodge

    Hama wrote:
    So suddenly people can't have preferences?

    So suddenly people can't have opinions about your preferences?

    Not being allowed to RP in third person, that's just completely silly.

    Grand Lodge

    Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
    Ipslore the Red wrote:

    Why does everyone insist on my character giving a bloody speech every time he does something important? He's a barbarian, actions are more important than words. Why shouldn't I be able to do nothing but smash baddies, grab treasure, and bask in my rightfully-deserved adulation and wenches? It's perfectly "in-character", and video games work just fine with that model, after all. I'm a heroic fighter, not a wussy talker.

    I just feel that people shouldn't be able to try to ruin my fun by making me think about anything other than how to optimize AM BARBARIAN and which spells to sunder first.

    OMG people expect me to roleplay in a roleplaying game! What's next, Cats and Dogs living together?

    Shadow Lodge

    LazarX wrote:
    What's next, Cats and Dogs living together?

    Yep.

    Grand Lodge

    Ipslore the Red wrote:

    Why does everyone insist on my character giving a bloody speech every time he does something important? He's a barbarian, actions are more important than words. Why shouldn't I be able to do nothing but smash baddies, grab treasure, and bask in my rightfully-deserved adulation and wenches? It's perfectly "in-character", and video games work just fine with that model, after all. I'm a heroic fighter, not a wussy talker.

    I just feel that people shouldn't be able to try to ruin my fun by making me think about anything other than how to optimize AM BARBARIAN and which spells to sunder first.

    I just read this at work and it made me bust out laughing.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    LazarX wrote:
    Ipslore the Red wrote:

    Why does everyone insist on my character giving a bloody speech every time he does something important? He's a barbarian, actions are more important than words. Why shouldn't I be able to do nothing but smash baddies, grab treasure, and bask in my rightfully-deserved adulation and wenches? It's perfectly "in-character", and video games work just fine with that model, after all. I'm a heroic fighter, not a wussy talker.

    I just feel that people shouldn't be able to try to ruin my fun by making me think about anything other than how to optimize AM BARBARIAN and which spells to sunder first.

    OMG people expect me to roleplay in a roleplaying game! What's next, Cats and Dogs living together?

    Mass Hysteria!!!!!!


    Welp. Guess I'm going to be out of luck in PFS play, considering my character is going to be deaf and voluntarily mute.

    This should be fun :D

    Sovereign Court

    TOZ wrote:
    Hama wrote:
    So suddenly people can't have preferences?

    So suddenly people can't have opinions about your preferences?

    Not being allowed to RP in third person, that's just completely silly.

    Of course they can.


    Nice troll thread.


    D'aww, thanks!


    Ain't she sweet


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    Wait, THIS was trolling? GAWD I'm old! I didn't get that til just now! WTH man! Now get off my lawn while I hike my pants up to my chest over my black socks & sandals and put in my teeth!

    Grand Lodge

    For new players though, role playing can be very intimidating. I tried my first VTT game the other day and as soon as the gm finished the introduction text, everyone started role playing their character and I froze up and all I could muster is a "uh...I got nothing.."

    It seemed like everyone knew when to start talking on que. Has anyone written anything on what to expect in your first game as far as roll playing goes?


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Kayland wrote:
    Nice troll thread.

    It was meant as a joke, but if you want to be that broad, sure. I didn't actually expect anyone to take it seriously. Then I remembered Poe's Law.

    Dark Archive

    Me am not know what is troll. Me RP what am barbarian do to things am barbarian not know now; Smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash smash!

    Dark Archive

    Ipslore the Red wrote:
    Kayland wrote:
    Nice troll thread.
    It was meant as a joke, but if you want to be that broad, sure. I didn't actually expect anyone to take it seriously. Then I remembered Poe's Law.

    I like to say I'm surprised!

    P.S. Was there a +5 earthbreaker in the treasure

    Sczarni

    I prefer to talk after my Aldori blade is twisting in their intestines. It makes for short, direct, conversations and I definitely have their attention.


    Way back when (in 2nd Ed D&D) I had a bugbear as a character. Gurk the Humancleaver. When it came time for Gurk to speak I used the voices of the trolls and goblins from the RTS game Warcraft II.

    Shadow Lodge

    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    The Beard wrote:
    Hulk am smash puny goblin chef!

    Come at me bro. Do you even lift


    Tormsskull wrote:
    VM mercenario wrote:
    I think being a thespian is just as bad as being a munchkin.
    I've never actually encountered a thespian in real play. Most of my play is local, so that may be why. I imagine thespians are more a problem in non face-to-face mediums where players are more willing to RP.

    "Thespians", i find worse than "Munchkins"

    "Munchkin" "Power Gamer" "Minmaxer" are Derogatory Words used to insult a player whom "Optimizes" a given "Role" by "Prioritizing" Choices that benefit that "Role".

    i like players that "Prioritize", it makes something that is indeed quite realistic in that every "individual" has a task they "prioritize" and by prioritizing their focus towards that task, they become good at it. a "Prioritizer" often results in faster resolved combat encounters that buy players more time to roleplay during the session

    a "Thespian" generally does the opposite, rather than Prioritizing something that accelerates the pace of the game, they prioritize something that consumes game time and decelerates the game.

    some description is appreciated as a valuable tool

    but the "Thespian" hogs the spotlight, initiates long periods of conversation and dialogue with NPCs, drags down social encounters, and is so selfish with attention, that it seems only their PC matters. in fact, Thespians will often play suboptimal builds of the least contributing classes in the game, contribute the least in important encounters, hog all the diplomacy checks, and in a lot of cases, they think their descriptions should be worth a bigger bonus or sometimes, an automatic success.

    put two thespians in the same table, they will fight over the spotlight and interject each others

    even one thespian at a table is deterrent against shy players attempting to roleplay. in Weekly William's Group, we have a "Thespian" whom also "Optimizes his characters to absurdly high power levels." we call him Seth.

    he is the one Thespian i know that isn't useless with his character. a lot of Thespians are Weak in their builds.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Hama wrote:
    So suddenly people can't have preferences?

    Nobody is stopping anyone from having really silly preferences. If someone has a preference that anyone who plays a dwarf has to either have a beard or must wear a fake one or they won't game with them. They can have that preference. It doesn't make it not silly, but they can have it.

    Hama wrote:

    And it's not nearly the same.

    For me, playing in 3rd person MURDERS immersion completely.

    Two things you said, they're just completely silly.

    Yeah, they are silly. That is why they seem similar to me.

    51 to 100 of 108 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Gamer Life / General Discussion / I hate roleplaying All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.