|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To test things in my area I posted a 'looking for game/group' in a locate gamers forum. In the post I said I was not a heavy RPer and loved the story and combat more then Heavy RP. There have been 114 views of the post and not a single email to 'check me out' to see if I'd be compatible with their group/game. Even if only a third of the views were actually looking for people that still over 30 people.
So looks like heavy RP is there way the players in my area like it.
Oh well, we can always hope to find a compatible group sometime.
Dont get me wrong, I like some RP I just dont think it needs to be the most focused on thing of the game.
I agree with a previous post, it could have something to do with the description of what kind of role-playing games you are interested in.
It comes across as someone who is inexperienced (obviously you are not) and is interested in only combat. Maybe a bit more information and make it a bit more self-promoting.
Jacob, good luck
Thanks Morzadian.
Here's the post I did, let me know what changes you thing might make a difference.
'Hello, my name is Stephen and I'm looking for mid week (wed/thur) group to join. What is being played doesnt matter but the only game I've played in the last few years has been Pathfinder. I'm 52 yrs old and would perfer a mature group. I'm not that heavily into RP I like the story and combat over alot of RP.'
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Warning: these are my opinions. Here's the 3 styles of RP I tend to see at my table:
GM: 2 armed dwarves guard the gate. "Next!" one barks gruffly. "Oh, its one of you BEARDLESS types. Give me a good reason I should let you four in!"
Player: I use Diplomacy to talk him into letting us in. I got... 27
GM: 2 armed dwarves guard the gate. "Next!" one barks gruffly. "Oh, its one of you BEARDLESS types. Give me a good reason I should let you four in!"
Player: I use Diplomacy to talk him into letting us in. As part of the diplomacy I'll explain we're merchants, here to peddle goods obtained in the last adventure. I'll try to impress him with what we've done and plainly display the gear and weapons we took off the kobolds. Finally I'll explain financially the revenue the town will receive when our business is complete. I got... 27
GM: 2 armed dwarves guard the gate. "Next!" one barks gruffly. "Oh, its one of you BEARDLESS types. Give me a good reason I should let you four in!"
Player: *in character's voice and accent* "I am Nearon, a humble merchant by trade but also a devout of Abadar, the Lord in Stone. By virtue of his Holy Key I beseech you: let us pass. This day in your fine city my compatriots and I seek to do business in your market square. Recently we were ambushed by night; kobold brigands in yon forest in the vales below but we held our own. Our hunter companion, the grippli Niblix was able to find their track and follow it most of the next day, until we at last arrived at their lair. There we did battle with dozens of the reptilian pests. There the kobolds had enshrined graven images of their deity dragon, Mordalith and a tatzlwyrm of unusual size and cunning was being actively revered as an agent of this pagan patron. Our fight took us into the heart of a cluster of ruins enshrouded in dense thickets arranged like a temple complex but by Abadar's Bargain we were able to win the day against even the wyrm itself. Now we bear with us the spoils of our harrowing adventure. We wish to sell them here, in your town, and use our newfound wealth to purchase lodging, fresh supplies and pray even beg the dwarven smiths of such great renown as those in residence within these walls to improve upon the axe of our warrior, Fynna the Cleaver. I'd dare say your town would benefit mightily for admitting us; no sooner would our goods be sold than the coffers of your castle would be that much richer as we spend all we have earned right back again." I use Diplomacy to talk him into letting us in. I got... 27
None of the above is bad/wrong, nor are any better than another. They simply are. I suppose it really depends on how the table consensus goes of what works best for you.
For me I humbly request that each player at least skip #1 and play some measure of #2 or #3. My personal style is probably a blend of both, but I tend more towards #2 just out of time constraints.
Basically I'm a big fan of #2's. That probably didn't come out right...
Basically I'm a big fan of #2's. That probably didn't come out right...
Me too... me too.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Warning: these are my opinions. Here's the 3 styles of RP I tend to see at my table:
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **...
Uh, you excluded the best style, chucklehead.
Player: I attack. I presume they're Surprised? I rolled a 25 to hit and dealt thirty-seven damage, cleaving through to the next guy with the same to-hit and forty-two damage. If they're dead, I then stuff the bodies in my bag of holding and head inside. Gotta sell this stupid axe of the destined backstory I got saddled with.
TmegZ: I know your posts aren't real life but I like to think that in RL you use just as few words at the table as you do here
GM: the gate guards accost you. What do you do?
Tri guy: I use Intimidate to make them let us in
GM: How. Describe it.
Triple threat: I grin.
GM: *shudders* Ok ok, they let you in. Jeez... stop it man.
In point #3 I was exaggerating the speech but it owes to the point: the difference between #2 and #3 is theatrics. If you speak in character, however briefly or you are otherwise immersed IN your character and setting, you're a #3. If however you're in the 3rd person merely DESCRIBING the action, you're a #2.
Like The bald one and the Eternal Smirk above I drift between 2 and 3, but mostly 2.
Warning: these are my opinions. Here's the 3 styles of RP I tend to see at my table:
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **...
Uh, you excluded the best style, chucklehead.
** spoiler omitted **
LOL'd and spilled hot coffee. You win KC Masterpiece!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I do #2, unless the GM tries to make me so #3, in which case I do Kobold Cleaver's #4.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
TmegZ: I know your posts aren't real life but I like to think that in RL you use just as few words at the table as you do here
GM: the gate guards accost you. What do you do?
Tri guy: I use Intimidate to make them let us in
GM: How. Describe it.
Triple threat: I grin.
GM: *shudders* Ok ok, they let you in. Jeez... stop it man.
:D
:DDD
:DDDDD
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It involves costumes, possibly leather, safe words are a must!
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Skimming this thread has cemented my belief that most people who have strong opinions about what roleplaying is have no f~$&ing clue what roleplaying is.So elaborate. Tell us what real roleplaying is.
I'll start with the corny one-liner version: "Roleplaying" is when the "playing" is based on the "role".
To expand on this a bit, it basically comes down to decision points: whenever it comes time for the player to decide what to do, roleplaying is when that decision is based who the character is.
Roleplaying is not, as some seem to think, a synonym for "talking to NPCs".
Roleplaying is not the other side of the RPG coin from combat, or the part of the game that doesn't involve dice.
Roleplaying does not require acting anything out (though that can be fun in itself).
Roleplaying is when the player chooses to make the decision that the character would make.
Heck, depending on the situation, a combat could be more roleplay-heavy than a dialogue with an NPC: if you encounter a creepy NPC that the player knows the GM wants him to talk to but a real person in that position would do something else, then engaging in that dialogue would actually be a failure to roleplay. Meanwhile, if you're in a combat that has some depth of decision-making (instead of nothing to do but full-attacking whatever's in range) and those decisions are made based on what kind of person the PC is, then that's good roleplaying.
Every time the players encounter a decision that needs to be made, it's a chance to roleplay. Making a decision that's in line with the character's persona is roleplaying, while making a decision that's contrary to it is failing to roleplay. And that distinction is 100% independent of the presence or absence of die rolls, NPCs, silly voices, or combat. It is the simple act of making the choices that the character would make.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree, Jiggy, 100% with what you say roleplay is, and I don't mean to be a jerk, but doesn't it seem like pedantry to bring that up given the original post? The guy was clearly complaining about the colloquial reference to roleplay, not the literal, and 99% of the people commenting merely followed suit. Is there a better verb you'd choose to use to describe depth and clarity of in-character expression in a single word?
Furthermore, can't words have multiple meanings? Every single time someone points out what irony "really" is, for example, I want to pull out a dictionary and say "keep reading, buddy...If you scroll down there's more numbers than the first." The same could be said here.
Roleplay - 1) making decisions based upon character thought rather than meta-knowledge or personal inclination
2) The positive degree to which one expresses their character's actions in detail and clarity.
I'm not a dictionary writer, so I'm sure that could be put together better, but for the purpose of illustration I think the point makes sense.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I largely agree and suspected that's what you were talking about. I will say that roleplaying in this sense is generally helped by more immersive NPC interaction and hindered by too much, and especially too deadly, combat (or other "action").
Usually combat choices are more tactical in nature than anything else.
There's a whole tangent we could get on about what it means if a given system's combat (or other "action") mechanics are such that non-roleplaying decisions are incentivized. If more (and more deadly) combat/action is hindering your roleplay (presumably by requiring that you roleplay less in order to succeed/survive), then it might be worth considering whether the system being used is truly a "roleplaying game".
Talking options like "persuade the guard to let us in" don't really have a lot more opportunity.
Interestingly, this is a good example of the relationship between roleplaying and acting. If the game demands that you persuade the guard to let you in (especially if what the PC would really do is go home and think of another option, or whatever else), then you're not roleplaying. HOWEVER, if you choose to act out the scene, then you enable NEW opportunities to roleplay: you now have to make decisions about how you do your persuading (like whether to make an economic case as someone earlier suggested, or to make a personal plea, or some other angle). Those decisions are opportunities for roleplay, and were created by acting. Thus, acting can be a roleplay-enabler, even though it's not roleplaying in itself. :)
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I agree, Jiggy, 100% with what you say roleplay is, and I don't mean to be a jerk, but doesn't it seem like pedantry to bring that up given the original post?
It's important because, since this is a community of people who play "roleplaying games", whatever you label as "roleplay" is going to bring out all the "should"s and "ought"s. After all, you're supposed to roleplay in a roleplaying game, right?
Nobody's going to feel like they're allowed to say you shouldn't be required to roleplay in a roleplaying game. So whatever gets put under that term gets a sort of resistance to opposing viewpoints, and good discussion is short-circuited.
Whenever a term is obviously central to an idea, it becomes very important to define exactly what is and is not included under that term.
Touchė. A new term for the "other definition" should be coined. Something encompassing, short, and not insulting.
|
|
Lets use Mark Hoover's #3 example... Is this 'acting out a scene' or roleplaying? Or is it both?
GM: 2 armed dwarves guard the gate. "Next!" one barks gruffly. "Oh, its one of you BEARDLESS types. Give me a good reason I should let you four in!"
Player: *in character's voice and accent* "I am Nearon, a humble merchant by trade but also a devout of Abadar, the Lord in Stone. By virtue of his Holy Key I beseech you: let us pass. This day in your fine city my compatriots and I seek to do business in your market square. Recently we were ambushed by night; kobold brigands in yon forest in the vales below but we held our own. Our hunter companion, the grippli Niblix was able to find their track and follow it most of the next day, until we at last arrived at their lair. There we did battle with dozens of the reptilian pests. There the kobolds had enshrined graven images of their deity dragon, Mordalith and a tatzlwyrm of unusual size and cunning was being actively revered as an agent of this pagan patron. Our fight took us into the heart of a cluster of ruins enshrouded in dense thickets arranged like a temple complex but by Abadar's Bargain we were able to win the day against even the wyrm itself. Now we bear with us the spoils of our harrowing adventure. We wish to sell them here, in your town, and use our newfound wealth to purchase lodging, fresh supplies and pray even beg the dwarven smiths of such great renown as those in residence within these walls to improve upon the axe of our warrior, Fynna the Cleaver. I'd dare say your town would benefit mightily for admitting us; no sooner would our goods be sold than the coffers of your castle would be that much richer as we spend all we have earned right back again." I use Diplomacy to talk him into letting us in. I got... 27
My table usually hits 2/2.5 on the Roleplay scale for actual checks. We're on roll20 though, so all of our character's speech and actions are used with text rather than our voices.
It involves costumes, possibly leather, safe words are a must!
o3o
Player: Charge!
To test things in my area I posted a 'looking for game/group' in a locate gamers forum. In the post I said I was not a heavy RPer and loved the story and combat more then Heavy RP. There have been 114 views of the post and not a single email to 'check me out' to see if I'd be compatible with their group/game. Even if only a third of the views were actually looking for people that still over 30 people.
So looks like heavy RP is there way the players in my area like it.
Oh well, we can always hope to find a compatible group sometime.
Dont get me wrong, I like some RP I just dont think it needs to be the most focused on thing of the game.
I agree with a previous post, it could have something to do with the description of what kind of role-playing games you are interested in.
It comes across as someone who is inexperienced (obviously you are not) and is interested in only combat. Maybe a bit more information and make it a bit more self-promoting.
Jacob, good luck
Thanks Morzadian.
Here's the post I did, let me know what changes you thing might make a difference.
'Hello, my name is Stephen and I'm looking for mid week (wed/thur) group to join. What is being played doesnt matter but the only game I've played in the last few years has been Pathfinder. I'm 52 yrs old and would perfer a mature group. I'm not that heavily into RP I like the story and combat over alot of RP.'
There is nothing wrong with that. If you lived in Australia you could join our games (we play on the weekend though).
We role-play in combat, we combat role-play, you just have to watch the movie Fury Road to get an understanding how Australians play the Pathfinder game.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Lets use Mark Hoover's #3 example... Is this 'acting out a scene' or roleplaying? Or is it both?
The fact that he chose to speak a verbatim in-character monologue is an example of acting. His decision to mention certain details and work certain angles within that monologue may or may not have been roleplaying, depending on why he chose to mention those details instead of other details. That is, if those were things that the character would have thought most pertinent, then it's roleplaying. If instead those things were mentioned because the player thought that was the best play to make (or thought it was what the GM wanted him to say, or whatever else), then it's not roleplaying.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is nothing wrong with that. If you lived in Australia you could join our games (we play on the weekend though).
We role-play in combat, we combat role-play, you just have to watch the movie Fury Road to get an understanding how Australians play the Pathfinder game.
Thanks Morzadian. If I ever get a chance to go to Australia I'll let you know and we can meet and maybe play. Not that that is likely you understand but would be nice. For the record I live in San Diego CA.
I'm not repeating the joke, that's a "reference joke". It's funny because you've heard of it, too. God, these plebs.
Skimming this thread has cemented my belief that most people who have strong opinions about what roleplaying is have no f~$&ing clue what roleplaying is.So elaborate. Tell us what real roleplaying is.I'll start with the corny one-liner version: "Roleplaying" is when the "playing" is based on the "role".
To expand on this a bit, it basically comes down to decision points: whenever it comes time for the player to decide what to do, roleplaying is when that decision is based who the character is.
Roleplaying is not, as some seem to think, a synonym for "talking to NPCs".
Roleplaying is not the other side of the RPG coin from combat, or the part of the game that doesn't involve dice.
Roleplaying does not require acting anything out (though that can be fun in itself).Roleplaying is when the player chooses to make the decision that the character would make.
Heck, depending on the situation, a combat could be more roleplay-heavy than a dialogue with an NPC: if you encounter a creepy NPC that the player knows the GM wants him to talk to but a real person in that position would do something else, then engaging in that dialogue would actually be a failure to roleplay. Meanwhile, if you're in a combat that has some depth of decision-making (instead of nothing to do but full-attacking whatever's in range) and those decisions are made based on what kind of person the PC is, then that's good roleplaying.
Every time the players encounter a decision that needs to be made, it's a chance to roleplay. Making a decision that's in line with the character's persona is roleplaying, while making a decision that's contrary to it is failing to roleplay. And that distinction is 100% independent of the presence or absence of die rolls, NPCs, silly voices, or combat. It is the simple act of making the choices that the character would make.
Making choices the character would make is similar to #1 above. You're absolutely right Jigster; roleplaying is simply playing a role. I guess folks' confusion, mine included is we're crossing the act of roleplaying with the delivery of decisions.
I think Jiggy is mixing up the broad category of "role playing" with the subset of role play: "staying in character". Any sort of "interaction" with NPCs done right or wrong, as your character is role playing. And by interaction I mean outside of tossing dice. Can role play invade the mechanical heavy combat side? Yes it can, but it is never the mechanical side... it is the one liners and in character comments tossed around between the gears of the combat machine.
Let me emphasize this You DON'T have to be doing role play "right"/"staying in character" to be role playing. It is just more immersive an experience if you DO stay in character.
Roleplaying can be, as some seem to think, a synonym for "talking to NPCs". Although that is just one small subset of role play.
Roleplaying often is the other side of the RPG coin from combat, or the part of the game that doesn't involve dice. Although it isn't the only side that can not involve dice. And indeed dice can sometimes even invade the role play side through skill use.
Roleplaying does not require acting anything out (though that can be fun in itself).
Fixed that for you Jiggy.
I'm just going to start making mute characters to avoid the whole f***ing confusion.
My son's animal pirate is a Ratfolk Ninja with improved initiative, so he can ready his action and go last:-)
Those are the other definitions of roleplay. The ones Jiggy was objecting to. Role play, in this usage, is being in character - decisions made in character.
That can take place talking to NPCs or in combat. Or anywhere else really. Not just comments in combat either - actual meaningful choices - the impulsive character dashing in, attacking a personal rival instead of the best tactical choice, etc.But it's not just talking vs not-talking.
Let me correct you thejeff Role play is "interactions made as your character"
And you are right choices made while in combat (outside of the gears of the crunch machine) are indeed also a form of role play. It isn't just the comments but also certain choices you make. Going after a rival IS role play... rolling the dice to hit him isn't. Making a witty comment to your rival between blows IS role play... the impressive roll you made that inspired that comment isn't.
The difference here for those who might be confused is jiggy thinks if you don't act true to your character you aren't role playing... I don't agree at all. Bad role playing IS still role playing... it just is being done poorly.
I thought Bad Role Playing was when you forget the safe word...
Naughty naughty Terquem.
I thought Bad Role Playing was when you forget the safe word...
according to Michael Scott, it's when you pretend you don't hear the safe word, also probably not a good idea to record it and play it back to improve form :-)
I would never wink at a man who forgot the safe word.