Well *yay* It wasn't a man that did and secondly it's from The Office, so lighten up :-)
Role play isn't the opposite of roll play... it is a totally different skill.
I specifically don't include internal things in my definition for a reason; they can't be argued. Anything internal is pure opinion.
Char: "I go chat with the guards"
Jiggy: "You just lost your RP bonus!"
Char: "What?! Why?"
Jiggy: "Your character is the quiet type."
Char: "Not all the time! She needs information..."
Jiggy: "Sorry, that isn't role playing!"
Char: ...
Well *yay* It wasn't a man that did and secondly it's from The Office, so lighten up :-)
I was being light even if I had no idea where you were going with the joke... I have never seen The Office.
Excellent! Me too:-)
First four seasons of The Office are the best
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Role play isn't the opposite of roll play... it is a totally different skill.
I specifically don't include internal things in my definition for a reason; they can't be argued. Anything internal is pure opinion.
Char: "I go chat with the guards"
Jiggy: "You just lost your RP bonus!"
Char: "What?! Why?"
Jiggy: "Your character is the quiet type."
Char: "Not all the time! She needs information..."
Jiggy: "Sorry, that isn't role playing!"
Char: ...
How about you don't attach my name to b+$@%$%! I didn't say. You'll be less of a jerk that way.
All I was trying to say is that just because you're talking to an NPC without any dice-rolling going on doesn't mean you're roleplaying, and just because you're rolling dice and not acting out any speeches doesn't mean you're NOT roleplaying.
I don't even know what you think I was saying.
Um sorry, but not staying in character is a lack of role-play.
Such a shame that staying in character has such a wide range and is a major grey area.
Yeah, but "I ask the inkeep about horse racing" is not.
Are there horse races near the inn? Is it a popular local sport? Might be a good way for the friendly conversational bard to break the ice before asking about those disappearances that have been happening.
See, Gray area.
Hama, what are you talking about? in your first post of your last three you are clearly talking about roleplaying out of character, but you suddenly switch it to barebones roleplay.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
No, saying "I say:"Inkeep, is there a good place to lay some gold on a good racing horse in this town?"" Is a good example of role play. Just describing your action isn't.
That is 'speaking in character' or 'improvisational theatre'. Some people also refer it as role-play, but that tends to cause confusion since role-play has so many other meanings.
No, saying "I say:"Inkeep, is there a good place to lay some gold on a good racing horse in this town?"" Is a good example of role play. Just describing your action isn't.
Absolutism doesn't sit well with me.
To begin with there is context and method, and it all depends on what context and method that you use.
For example, a 7 foot half orc fighter "My character Morzadian, a towering monolith of muscle and steel looks down at Sheriff Hemlock; Hemlock is confronted by a face of inhuman and emotionless steel, a warrior's great helm, while his large armoured physique casts a shadow of determination and potential violence, which surrounds Hemlock as Morzadian's armoured right hand slowly edges closer towards his sheathed sword"
3rd person, no dialogue, yet it is still roleplaying.
I more often than not play martial characters and use body language rather than dialogue to role-play and frequently use the 3rd person perspective.
Wait, what was that middle thing again? About what roleplaying is?
Um sorry, but not staying in character is a lack of role-play.
Unless of course it IS role play.
Yeah, but "I ask the inkeep about horse racing" is not.
Actually any interaction as your character outside of the mechanical side of the game is role play... Just because someone is worse at it then someone else it doesn't stop it from being role play.
Just describing your action isn't.
Only if you are merely expressing a mechanical roll in flowery language... only... if however you are describing an interaction then yes it is role playing.
Example: <rolls dice> "I swing wildly at the Orc and connect leaving a bloody gash across his arm." Not role play.
"After wounding the Orc I warn him to stay away from this village... or else." IS role play.
|
Um sorry, but not staying in character is a lack of role-play.Unless of course it IS role play.
Yeah, but "I ask the inkeep about horse racing" is not.Actually any interaction as your character outside of the mechanical side of the game is role play... Just because someone is worse at it then someone else it doesn't stop it from being role play.
Just describing your action isn't.Only if you are merely expressing a mechanical roll in flowery language... only... if however you are describing an interaction then yes it is role playing.
Example: <rolls dice> "I swing wildly at the Orc and connect leaving a bloody gash across his arm." Not role play.
"After wounding the Orc I warn him to stay away from this village... or else." IS role play.
Sorry, describing interaction is not roleplay for me. But then, everyone has their preferences.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry, describing interaction is not roleplay for me. But then, everyone has their preferences.Um sorry, but not staying in character is a lack of role-play.Unless of course it IS role play.
Yeah, but "I ask the inkeep about horse racing" is not.Actually any interaction as your character outside of the mechanical side of the game is role play... Just because someone is worse at it then someone else it doesn't stop it from being role play.
Just describing your action isn't.Only if you are merely expressing a mechanical roll in flowery language... only... if however you are describing an interaction then yes it is role playing.
Example: <rolls dice> "I swing wildly at the Orc and connect leaving a bloody gash across his arm." Not role play.
"After wounding the Orc I warn him to stay away from this village... or else." IS role play.
So does that mean if I want to roleplay intimating a halfling I have to bring a nerfbat and a midget? Since describing interactiion is not roleplaying?
Remind me to not play an evil character until I can find someone with a prosthetic limb I can cut digits off.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like how everyone has strict, hard limits on what is or is not roleplay. And how they're all different.
I use the strict dictionary definition:
Roleplay (noun): a form of entertainment where you use randomly generated numbers to kill orcs.
I like how everyone has strict, hard limits on what is or is not roleplay. And how they're all different.
I use the strict dictionary definition:
Roleplay (noun): a form of entertainment where you use randomly generated numbers to kill orcs.
Here's how big a nerd I am: I just actually LOOKED UP the definition. The online oxford-English defines it as:
Noun
1. psychologythe acting out or performance of a particular role, either consciously (as a technique in psychotherapy or training) or unconsciously, in accordance with the perceived expectations of society with regard to a person's behavior in a particular context.
2. participation in a role-playing game.
So now I have to go apologize to all my old gamers. Apparently by definition just sitting at the table and rolling dice actually DOES = roleplaying.
Carry on.
|
|
Sorry, describing interaction is not roleplay for me. But then, everyone has their preferences.Um sorry, but not staying in character is a lack of role-play.Unless of course it IS role play.
Yeah, but "I ask the inkeep about horse racing" is not.Actually any interaction as your character outside of the mechanical side of the game is role play... Just because someone is worse at it then someone else it doesn't stop it from being role play.
Just describing your action isn't.Only if you are merely expressing a mechanical roll in flowery language... only... if however you are describing an interaction then yes it is role playing.
Example: <rolls dice> "I swing wildly at the Orc and connect leaving a bloody gash across his arm." Not role play.
"After wounding the Orc I warn him to stay away from this village... or else." IS role play.
So does that mean if I want to roleplay intimating a halfling I have to bring a nerfbat and a midget? Since describing interactiion is not roleplaying?
Remind me to not play an evil character until I can find someone with a prosthetic limb I can cut digits off.
No, it means that you have to actually roleplay your halfling intimidating. You can't just say "my halfling intimidates".
No, it means that you have to actually roleplay your halfling intimidating. You can't just say "my halfling intimidates".Sorry, describing interaction is not roleplay for me. But then, everyone has their preferences.Um sorry, but not staying in character is a lack of role-play.Unless of course it IS role play.
Yeah, but "I ask the inkeep about horse racing" is not.Actually any interaction as your character outside of the mechanical side of the game is role play... Just because someone is worse at it then someone else it doesn't stop it from being role play.
Just describing your action isn't.Only if you are merely expressing a mechanical roll in flowery language... only... if however you are describing an interaction then yes it is role playing.
Example: <rolls dice> "I swing wildly at the Orc and connect leaving a bloody gash across his arm." Not role play.
"After wounding the Orc I warn him to stay away from this village... or else." IS role play.
So does that mean if I want to roleplay intimating a halfling I have to bring a nerfbat and a midget? Since describing interactiion is not roleplaying?
Remind me to not play an evil character until I can find someone with a prosthetic limb I can cut digits off.
HOW does your Halfling intimidate?
If you say, "I roll a nine, which hits ... and causes nine points of damage," that is not role-play. It's an account of the mechanical result.
If you say, "Meklar swings his blade ... and connects!" that's role-play. It's bare bones and barely engaged role-play, but it's role-play.
In short, even describing a mechanical action in flowery language is role-play, because you could describe it in different flowery language, which means your statement is a choice to present the manner in which said mechanical action plays out in one's mind's eye and for other participants. Meklar, in the example above, could have thrust his sword and connected, instead of swinging it.
It may be role-play at its least interesting, but it's role-play.
I think the descriptive text needs at least some kind of exposition (communicating a sense of character) attached to it for it to be considered role-playing.
Rather than just generic text.
Meklar, never lets his guard down, unsheathes his sword with lightning speed, and swings his sword in a narrow accurate arc at his enemy. This explains to everyone Meklar is a controlled, cautious and efficient person. Rather get the job done quickly than show off to his friends.
Asking me?
Knee jerk reaction. When one of my players makes a statement like that I always ask them to describe it. Ex:
player My Halfling intimidates
me HOW does your Halfling Intimidate?
Player Umm... intimidatingly?
me What does he do/say that's so intimidating?
Player He shakes his fist and says "you better tell me what I want to know or else!"
Then they roll and I go on to add detail to the scene along with the reaction based on the roll. To me, describing what action(s) the PC took to accomplish their skill check is just as good as inhabiting the mind and voice of the character for roleplaying, but to each their own.
However just being present is RP, so I guess I should stop questioning people at the table. *Sad walking away music*
So according to some of us, you have to roleplay in order to roleplay, but according to the dictionary, you just have to play a role-playing game in order to roleplay. And the original poster wanted to know why so many people insisted on RP in their RPGs.
You know what a recursive definitions is? It's a definition that's recursive...
I think the descriptive text needs at least some kind of exposition (communicating a sense of character) attached to it for it to be considered role-playing.
Rather than just generic text.
Meklar, never lets his guard down, unsheathes his sword with lightning speed, and swings his sword in a narrow accurate arc at his enemy. This explains to everyone Meklar is a controlled, cautious and efficient person. Rather get the job done quickly than show off to his friends.
One man's eloquent narrative is another's bloviating yammer. One woman's bland, truncated description is another's perfectly Spartan account.
Neither of us is the arbiter of what constitutes "generic."
I happen to prefer your take on Meklar's action. But that doesn't invalidate a much less involved or immersive one. You've described your taste in role-playing, not made a distinction between what is and isn't.
Mark Hoover pointed out that participating in a role-playing game is now considered role-playing. I'd call that a technicality, but ... oh, well. It's in the dictionary.
Okay I see your point,
From my experience, optimisation or rather extreme optimisation can poison RPGs pretty quickly. And often contributes little to the social role-playing experience.
Not just optimising in character building but every choice and decision has to be optimal.
And when every decision HAS to be optimal, the 'role' has very little to do with role-playing games.
And if all is required is to describe technical actions, then what we have are table-top war-games with descriptive dialogue.
Yet participating in role-playing games could mean you are participating in roleplaying.
So according to some of us, you have to roleplay in order to roleplay, but according to the dictionary, you just have to play a role-playing game in order to roleplay. And the original poster wanted to know why so many people insisted on RP in their RPGs.
You know what a recursive definitions is? It's a definition that's recursive...
The creator of the first commercially available role-playing game didn't use mathematical logic to define role-playing games.
AD&D 1e:
As a role player, you become Falstaff the fighter. You know how strong, intelligent, wise, healthy, dexterous and, relatively speaking, how commanding a personality you have.
Details as to your appearance your body proportions, and your history can be produced by you or the Dungeon Master. You act out the game as this character, staying within your "god given abilities", and as molded by your philosophical and moral ethics (called alignment).
You interact with your fellow role players, not as Jim and Bob and Mary who work at the office together, but as Falstaff the fighter, Angore the cleric, and Filmar, the mistress of magic!
The Dungeon Master will act the parts of "everyone else", and will present to you a variety of new characters to talk with, drink with, gamble with, adventure with, and often fight with! Each of you will become an artful thespian as time goes by - and you will acquire gold, magic items, and great renown as you become Falstaff the Invincible!
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Here's a random anecdote to consider:
My favorite Pathfinder character that I ever played was Thomas the Tiefling Hero, my battle cleric of Iomedae who saved the world. He has a well-defined backstory, a clear personality, and so forth. He's rescued innocents, negotiated treaties, slain demon lords, and saved his comrades' lives countless times.
Now, here's something interesting about combat: I never spoke in-character during combat with Thomas. So whenever I was swinging a sword at a cultist or whatever, I just announced my actions and rolled the associated dice.
Why?
Because Thomas has strong moral views about violence. He doesn't enjoy it, so you'll never hear him yelling "WOO LET'S GET 'EM!" or whatever. He also doesn't believe that just because it's become necessary to use violence, that it somehow absolves him of the moral duty to be a decent person, so you'll never see him shouting the insults that others cry out in battle (like "DIE, SCUM!").
No, he sees violence as a grim necessity for protecting the innocent when all else has failed. He would always try to resolve things peacefully, but if violence became necessary, he would end threats swiftly, decisively, and seriously: just silently doing what needed to be done.
So when I was rolling Thomas' combat dice and not speaking any lines, it was on purpose, to represent my character's manner of silent, efficient duty.
Was I roleplaying?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This most recent recession into the "you aren't RPing if you aren't acting" inspired by Hama certainly reinforces my mute character idea...
Here's a random anecdote to consider:
My favorite Pathfinder character that I ever played was Thomas the Tiefling Hero, my battle cleric of Iomedae who saved the world. He has a well-defined backstory, a clear personality, and so forth. He's rescued innocents, negotiated treaties, slain demon lords, and saved his comrades' lives countless times.
Now, here's something interesting about combat: I never spoke in-character during combat with Thomas. So whenever I was swinging a sword at a cultist or whatever, I just announced my actions and rolled the associated dice.
Why?
Because Thomas has strong moral views about violence. He doesn't enjoy it, so you'll never hear him yelling "WOO LET'S GET 'EM!" or whatever. He also doesn't believe that just because it's become necessary to use violence, that it somehow absolves him of the moral duty to be a decent person, so you'll never see him shouting the insults that others cry out in battle (like "DIE, SCUM!").
No, he sees violence as a grim necessity for protecting the innocent when all else has failed. He would always try to resolve things peacefully, but if violence became necessary, he would end threats swiftly, decisively, and seriously: just silently doing what needed to be done.
So when I was rolling Thomas' combat dice and not speaking any lines, it was on purpose, to represent my character's manner of silent, efficient duty.
Was I roleplaying?
Yes, because self-editing and restraint is part of roleplaying.
But i would say the silent and efficient manner of this character needed to be described or explained or influenced actions in other ways as well. Support for the concept.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here's a random anecdote to consider:
My favorite Pathfinder character that I ever played was Thomas the Tiefling Hero, my battle cleric of Iomedae who saved the world. He has a well-defined backstory, a clear personality, and so forth. He's rescued innocents, negotiated treaties, slain demon lords, and saved his comrades' lives countless times.
Now, here's something interesting about combat: I never spoke in-character during combat with Thomas. So whenever I was swinging a sword at a cultist or whatever, I just announced my actions and rolled the associated dice.
Why?
Because Thomas has strong moral views about violence. He doesn't enjoy it, so you'll never hear him yelling "WOO LET'S GET 'EM!" or whatever. He also doesn't believe that just because it's become necessary to use violence, that it somehow absolves him of the moral duty to be a decent person, so you'll never see him shouting the insults that others cry out in battle (like "DIE, SCUM!").
No, he sees violence as a grim necessity for protecting the innocent when all else has failed. He would always try to resolve things peacefully, but if violence became necessary, he would end threats swiftly, decisively, and seriously: just silently doing what needed to be done.
So when I was rolling Thomas' combat dice and not speaking any lines, it was on purpose, to represent my character's manner of silent, efficient duty.
Was I roleplaying?
Ohhh I love this question. I had a character just like this many years back.
The short answer is no. And let me explain: all the rest of the players are unaware of the grim view of violence your character has. If all you do is simply roll dice quietly then you are not "playing" the role. You may be very solidly "in character" but if no one knows this but you it really is a non entity. As I said before to thejeff the internal doesn't count and can't be argued. If you want to "play" your role you are going to have to expose his raging thoughts on violence in as clear a way as you can to those around the table... 1st or 3rd person doesn't matter, description or in character speech doesn't matter, getting those elements of interaction communicated to the players and GM really does matter.
"Thomas quietly glares at the Orc with an expression of disgust after the Orc draws his blade and attacks" This is role playing.
"Thomas rolls initiative and readies his attack on the Orc" Not role play.
|
So according to some of us, you have to roleplay in order to roleplay, but according to the dictionary, you just have to play a role-playing game in order to roleplay. And the original poster wanted to know why so many people insisted on RP in their RPGs.
You know what a recursive definitions is? It's a definition that's recursive...
No the OP wanted to know why people insisted on 'acting out the scene' in their roleplay.
Roleplaying videogames have been around for dozens of years, and I'll be damned if I ever once did anything more than press buttons when playing them.
I guess hundreds of titles over dozens of years plate by millions of gamers were wrong, all this time...
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Roleplaying videogames have been around for dozens of years, and I'll be damned if I ever once did anything more than press buttons when playing them.
I guess hundreds of titles over dozens of years plate by millions of gamers were wrong, all this time...
The end of EarthBound can make grown men cry.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
To a large extent though, video game RPGs take the form of table top RPGs, but not the actual roleplaying part.
This is where there's a big difference between western RPGs and JRPGs.
In western RPGs, the protagonist is usually little more than an avatar for the player, an outlet through which the player can express themselves. In a sense, there isn't actually a character there for you to make decisions for, it's just the player. In these types of situations, roleplaying (in the sense I've talked about) would require the player to invent a personhood (much like in tabletop, but without any of the mechanics pushing you toward doing so).
In JRPGs, however, the protagonist (or group of protagonists) is a character who already exists in the narrative with their own motivations and quirks. At most, you get to pick their name, but the rest is already determined because it's part of an existing narrative.
The two styles are different enough that they really shouldn't even be considered the same genre.