Only if mechanical advantage was the only reason they were "roleplaying" in the first place. But if you surveyed them and that was something they enjoyed, then either they lied on your survey or they're not going to stop "roleplaying" just because it doesn't give them a leg up on the other guy.
I think a lot of it has to do with focus. We game every other week, and with real life occasions popping up, that often turns into once/month. As such, there's sort of a crunch on the amount of time in each session, and the desire to get as much play out of the session as possible.
A lengthy dialogue between a PC and an NPC before a diplomacy skill check may be viewed as quality time to me and one or two others, but the player not interested in such things views it as taking time away from exploring, fighting, and acquiring new gear.
By adding a mechanical incentive to some dialogue before a roll, the player not interested in dialogue "gets it." In other words, because the dialogue provides a mechanical benefit, it makes sense to spend time on it, to him. Hope that makes sense.
This is why I wish we could have these discussions with a ban on the word "roleplay".
I didn't realize the term was so ambiguous. I guess I'm stubborn, but when someone says they're roleplaying, but there actually not engaging in any dialogue at all in-character, then I say "No you're not."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Because the term is all-encompassing. It's the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game. The entire game, combat, character building, dialogue, story-building, campaigns, treasure, magic, etc... it's all aspects of the game. It is Paizo's version of what a roleplaying game is and so defining the term as something less than the entirety of the game means you're leaving something out.
Roleplaying is a much fought over word, if you like I'm sure I can find multi-page threads with people vehemently disagreeing on rpg.net, forge, story-games, gitp, and of course these forums as well.
It's also something that varies from game to game. Pathfinder treats it differently than Amber, which treats it differently than Fate, which is different from Dread, which is different from Dungeon World, which is different from Fiasco, etc.
A game I love to run, called Mythender, is very intense creatively. I feel there's a lot of roleplaying going, but there isn't much dialogue (1st or 3rd). In a 4 hour session, there's about 15-30 minutes of dialogue somewhere in the middle with how I run it and a few lines spaced out in the rest of it. It has to do with the nature of the game and the story it tells and what part of the story I focus on as GM of that game. I know it's creatively intense, because after a 4 hour session I'm often in a bit of a daze as I've expended massive amounts of mental and emotional energy.
It's also challenging enough that I don't run it for people who aren't experienced roleplayers. I've tried it with people as their first experience, or who have limited experience, and even if they're creative people, the well runs dry very quickly.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
This is why I wish we could have these discussions with a ban on the word "roleplay".I didn't realize the term was so ambiguous. I guess I'm stubborn, but when someone says they're roleplaying, but there actually not engaging in any dialogue at all in-character, then I say "No you're not."
Good for you, but that's irrelevant to my point. It doesn't matter how convinced you are of your definition, or even how right you might be. If a significant portion of your audience thinks the word means something else, then you communicate a very different message than you think you communicate, and they'll reply to the message that came across, possibly without either of you realizing it was a different message than intended.
Suppose you cross the Atlantic and say "Let's play football" and someone brings out a differently-shaped ball than you were expecting, and you respond by saying "I guess I'm stubborn, but when someone says they're playing football, but they're not using such-and-such a type of ball, then I say 'No you're not'." Does that reply even make sense? Because that was basically your comment above.
Good for you, but that's irrelevant to my point. It doesn't matter how convinced you are of your definition, or even how right you might be. If a significant portion of your audience thinks the word means something else, then you communicate a very different message than you think you communicate, and they'll reply to the message that came across, possibly without either of you realizing it was a different message than intended.
Right, so we should keep changing the definition so that it loses any meaning?
Role playing means something specific. If we stop using the term in these discussions, as you suggest, then we'll need a different word or term to communicate the same idea. Without a doubt, there will be some that don't have the same definition of the new word or term either.
The term role playing has existed for some time, is used in the hobby, in team building techniques, in psychology, etc. If someone is unclear on what the term means, I suggest looking it up rather than making up their own definition and expecting other people to accept it.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Someone needs to make a song about table variance and how people do things differently from you so I can link it in these forums.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Good for you, but that's irrelevant to my point. It doesn't matter how convinced you are of your definition, or even how right you might be. If a significant portion of your audience thinks the word means something else, then you communicate a very different message than you think you communicate, and they'll reply to the message that came across, possibly without either of you realizing it was a different message than intended.Right, so we should keep changing the definition so that it loses any meaning?
How in the world does that follow from what I said? Are you suggesting that when someone has a different understanding of a word than you, the only two options are to conform to yours or to "keep changing the definition"? Do you see no other options?
Role playing means something specific. If we stop using the term in these discussions, as you suggest, then we'll need a different word or term to communicate the same idea. Without a doubt, there will be some that don't have the same definition of the new word or term either.
Who said anything about using a different word in its place? I was picturing people having to describe what they're actually talking about so that others could understand them better.
The term role playing has existed for some time, is used in the hobby, in team building techniques, in psychology, etc. If someone is unclear on what the term means, I suggest looking it up rather than making up their own definition and expecting other people to accept it.
Well, okay:
1.
to assume the attitudes, actions, and discourse of (another), especially in a make-believe situation in an effort to understand a differing point of view or social interaction:2.
to experiment with or experience (a situation or viewpoint) by playing a role
Now, for comparison, here's yours:
...someone says they're roleplaying, but there actually not engaging in any dialogue at all in-character...
That looks pretty different to me. After all, someone can engage in dialogue in-character while utterly failing to assume the attitudes, actions or discourse of another person, and someone can assume the attitudes, actions, and discourse of another person by means other than first-person speech.
So, what was that you were saying about how people shouldn't make up their own definition and expect other people to accept it?
Who said anything about using a different word in its place? I was picturing people having to describe what they're actually talking about so that others could understand them better.
That's how communication works. We use words to express ideas. Expecting everyone to fully define the words they're using in every post is unrealistic.
Well, okay:
1.
to assume the attitudes, actions, and discourse of (another), especially in a make-believe situation in an effort to understand a differing point of view or social interaction:
2.
to experiment with or experience (a situation or viewpoint) by playing a role
Okay, and do you know what the definition of discourse is?
noun
1.
communication of thought by words; talk; conversation:
earnest and intelligent discourse.
That looks pretty different to me. After all, someone can engage in dialogue in-character while utterly failing to assume the attitudes, actions or discourse of another person, and someone can assume the attitudes, actions, and discourse of another person by means other than first-person speech.
In the context of a role playing game, someone is role playing a character that they them self created. How do you suppose that a player would fail to assume the attitude, action, or discourse of an individual that they created?
Do you truly believe that the term "role playing" means something other than playing a role? And when a person plays a role, don't they typically speak?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Who said anything about using a different word in its place? I was picturing people having to describe what they're actually talking about so that others could understand them better.That's how communication works. We use words to express ideas. Expecting everyone to fully define the words they're using in every post is unrealistic.
Well, okay:
1.
to assume the attitudes, actions, and discourse of (another), especially in a make-believe situation in an effort to understand a differing point of view or social interaction:
2.
to experiment with or experience (a situation or viewpoint) by playing a role
Okay, and do you know what the definition of discourse is?
noun
1.
communication of thought by words; talk; conversation:
earnest and intelligent discourse.That looks pretty different to me. After all, someone can engage in dialogue in-character while utterly failing to assume the attitudes, actions or discourse of another person, and someone can assume the attitudes, actions, and discourse of another person by means other than first-person speech.In the context of a role playing game, someone is role playing a character that they them self created. How do you suppose that a player would fail to assume the attitude, action, or discourse of an individual that they created?
Do you truly believe that the term "role playing" means something other than playing a role? And when a person plays a role, don't they typically speak?
That definition not only mentions discourse, but also actions. Does that mean that when you are roleplaying you need to act out swinging a sword or chanting an incantation? Acting it out in first person, if you will.
Or can you simply describe you character doing so? Just like you could describe your character speaking, instead of speaking in first person.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm willing to move on as well, as long you stop explaining to us that RPG's require talking and imagination.
Embarrassing as it is, I just realized the irony—You repeatedly accuse me of "inventing" opposing viewpoints, then go on to repeatedly accuse me of making an argument I never made. Actually kinda funny, really. I feel goofy for not noticing it before. :P
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
How do you suppose that a player would fail to assume the attitude, action, or discourse of an individual that they created?
By making a character with a -2 Diplomacy and giving an eloquent and enchanting speech in first-person.
By making a wise old sensei and then repeatedly demonstrating impulse control issues.
By making a druid (allegedly reveres nature) and constantly abusing animals and plants for convenience (like summoning animals onto suspected trap locations).
By making a paladin and acting like something other than a decent person.
By making a chaotic barbarian and constantly trying to get other people to follow the rules.
By playing a Sarenite and having no issue with creating undead.
Etc, etc, etc. How many examples do you need? I can keep going.
Do you truly believe that the term "role playing" means something other than playing a role?
I never said nor even implied any such thing. Roleplaying does not mean something other than playing a role, but roleplaying can mean something other than speaking in first-person.
And when a person plays a role, don't they typically speak?
Sometimes. But (as one could also infer from the failed-roleplay examples I listed above) not every act of roleplaying involves speech, and not all first-person speech is roleplaying. Ergo, they are not one and the same. They can easily overlap, but are not one and the same.
When a character whose goal is to become the world's greatest swordsman bends over backwards to have ways to reach distant opponents with his sword instead of having to use ranged weapons, that's roleplaying , even though it won't always involve speaking in the character's voice.
When the player of an all-mentals-at-7 brute stands up at the table and delivers an inspiring and eloquent speech, he has absolutely failed to roleplay in spite of the fact that he spoke in his character's voice.
I think those last two paragraphs prove that it's possible to roleplay without speech and to speak without roleplaying. (If you would dispute that point, I'd be happy to listen, just as long as you actually refute it, rather than just repeating your assertion of its falsehood, like many forumites tend to do.)
So if you can be so convinced of a definition of roleplaying that turns out to be provably wrong, then maybe that's a term that's worth defining at the start of a discussion, yes?
*snip examples*
These all seem to be examples of someone not playing the role that they created. The assumption of someone talking in-character is that they're actually talking in that character, not some random other character.
If I'm understanding you correctly, you're trying to say that someone that isn't adhering to the role they created isn't role playing, while I would say they are, there just playing a different role than the one that they previously created.
Roleplaying does not mean something other than playing a role, but roleplaying can mean something other than speaking in first-person.
Right, role playing is the combination of attitude, actions, and discourse of another, as you previously provided. You seem to be implying that to qualify as role playing, you only need one of the three, not all three.
When a character whose goal is to become the world's greatest swordsman bends over backwards to have ways to reach distant opponents with his sword instead of having to use ranged weapons, that's roleplaying , even though it won't always involve speaking in the character's voice.
I noticed that you changed the definition now from "attitude, actions, AND discourse" to "attitude, actions OR discourse." As that seems to be at the heart of our disagreement, I wonder if that was a misunderstanding on your part or just an oversight?
Roleplaying means taking on the role of your character, which includes any and all decisions you make when you put yourself in the character's shoes, which includes things like combat, selecting feats and dialogue.
What falls within the purview of the term roleplaying is defined by the scope and focus of the game.
This thread is mostly concerned with actions related to social situations that take place in the story.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Roleplaying does not mean something other than playing a role, but roleplaying can mean something other than speaking in first-person.Right, role playing is the combination of attitude, actions, and discourse of another, as you previously provided. You seem to be implying that to qualify as role playing, you only need one of the three, not all three.
Hm, I can see where my post could look like that. Sorry, communication fail on my part. Lemme try a different angle.
Okay, so roleplaying is taking on the attitude, actions, and discourse of another, right?
Attitude: So, what does it look like at the table when you take on the attitude of your character? Suppose something happens that would severely anger your character. In order to roleplay that attitude, do you need to act it out in first-person by reddening your real-life face, making veins pop out of your foreheard, and maybe throw your dice or something? Or can that attitude be roleplayed in the third person, such as by describing your character's clenched fists and gritted teeth?
Actions: What does it look like at the table when you take on the actions of your character? Suppose it comes time to climb a rope. In order to roleplay that action, do you need to act it out in first-person by actually climbing a real-life rope? Or can that action be roleplayed in the third person, such as by describing your character's climb?
Discourse: What does it look like at the table when you take on the discourse of your character? Suppose your character needs to convince an NPC of something. It order to roleplay that discourse, do you need to act it out in first-person by speaking in your character's voice? Or can that discourse be roleplayed in the third person, such as by describing what subjects your character is covering and what angle he's working?
As you noted, to roleplay is to assume the "attitude, actions, AND discourse," not "attitude, actions OR discourse." Since, as you noted, those three items are all part of the same "and" list, then to "assume" means the same thing for all three.
So, does "assume the X of another person" mean in first person, or third person? Since the definition we're looking at uses an "and" list, it doesn't matter which of the three things is "X", as they're all part of the same clause. They'll all use the same meaning of "assume".
If you're anything like most people I've gamed with, you treat "assuming the attitudes" and "assuming the actions" as something that can be done in third person, via description. If that is the case, and if (as you've been saying thus far) the discourse must by contrast be done in the first person to be considered roleplaying, then you've changed the nature of the definition, separating the three points of the "and" list into two separate lists, of which only one is "assumed" by the roleplayer.
So if you're going to stick to this definition of roleplaying, you have to treat all three things the same; otherwise, you're throwing out the definition of roleplaying and inventing your own, which is exactly what you said you didn't want people doing.
So when you "assume the X, Y and Z of another", does it have to be in the first person, or can it be third person?
Roleplaying means taking on the role of your character, which includes any and all decisions you make when you put yourself in the character's shoes, which includes things like combat, selecting feats and dialogue.
Based on that definition, almost all games would be role playing games. Is Pac Man a role playing game because I'm playing the role of Pac Man and making decisions on what he does? Is Mario Brothers a role playing game because I'm playing the role of Mario and deciding which enemies to jump on, and which ones to shoot fireballs at?
If that is how you're using the term, then "role playing" loses its meaning.
Hm, I can see where my post could look like that. Sorry, communication fail on my part. Lemme try a different angle.
No problem - trying to be clear in text-only communication is difficult. I imagine if we were talking via phone or in person, we would have had this resolved in 5-10 minutes.
If you're anything like most people I've gamed with, you treat "assuming the attitudes" and "assuming the actions" as something that can be done in third person, via description. If that is the case, and if (as you've been saying thus far) the discourse must by contrast be done in the first person to be considered roleplaying, then you've changed the nature of the definition, separating the three points of the "and" list into two separate lists, of which only one is "assumed" by the roleplayer.
I hate to pick nits here, but I never said first-person, I said in-character.
I definitely prefer first-person communication, but as I mentioned earlier when discussing diplomacy checks, I would accept someone describing how their character says things.
As far as assuming the attitudes and actions of another, you seem to be conflating that with physically manifesting the attitude and actions of another.
While I personally would never threaten a king, I can role play a character who would (by assuming the attitude of this created character.)
While I personally would never charge a fire-breathing dragon, I can role play a character who would (by assuming the actions of a character.) And so on.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I hate to pick nits here, but I never said first-person, I said in-character.
I definitely prefer first-person communication, but as I mentioned earlier when discussing diplomacy checks, I would accept someone describing how their character says things.
Waitwaitwaitwait, I must have missed something.
Are you now saying that earlier, when you said that roleplaying required "engaging in dialogue in-character", that would include something like "I try to convince him of X by explaining Y"?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Roleplaying means taking on the role of your character, which includes any and all decisions you make when you put yourself in the character's shoes, which includes things like combat, selecting feats and dialogue.Based on that definition, almost all games would be role playing games. Is Pac Man a role playing game because I'm playing the role of Pac Man and making decisions on what he does? Is Mario Brothers a role playing game because I'm playing the role of Mario and deciding which enemies to jump on, and which ones to shoot fireballs at?
If that is how you're using the term, then "role playing" loses its meaning.
I was really hoping we could get past ridiculous hyperbole. Guess not.
I was really hoping we could get past ridiculous hyperbole. Guess not.Roleplaying means taking on the role of your character, which includes any and all decisions you make when you put yourself in the character's shoes, which includes things like combat, selecting feats and dialogue.Based on that definition, almost all games would be role playing games. Is Pac Man a role playing game because I'm playing the role of Pac Man and making decisions on what he does? Is Mario Brothers a role playing game because I'm playing the role of Mario and deciding which enemies to jump on, and which ones to shoot fireballs at?
If that is how you're using the term, then "role playing" loses its meaning.
If your definition includes what you consider to be hyperbolically opposed to the meaning, then you should come up with a better definition.
Waitwaitwaitwait, I must have missed something.
Are you now saying that earlier, when you said that roleplaying required "engaging in dialogue in-character", that would include something like "I try to convince him of X by explaining Y"?
"I try to convince him of X by explaining Y" sounds like out of character speech to me.
If it was "Grog will try to convince the bandit chief that harassing travelers on this road is a bad idea, while gripping the hilt of his sword," then while it is not my preference, it would qualify as role playing.
I was really hoping we could get past ridiculous hyperbole. Guess not.
You said:
Roleplaying means taking on the role of your character, which includes any and all decisions you make when you put yourself in the character's shoes, which includes things like combat, selecting feats and dialogue.
That means any decision I make on behalf of a character I am in control of constitutes role playing. Which would validate my examples. If I'm misunderstanding you, please clarify.
I was really hoping we could get past ridiculous hyperbole. Guess not.You said:
Roleplaying means taking on the role of your character, which includes any and all decisions you make when you put yourself in the character's shoes, which includes things like combat, selecting feats and dialogue.That means any decision I make on behalf of a character I am in control of constitutes role playing. Which would validate my examples. If I'm misunderstanding you, please clarify.
For one, you've removed the context of my sentence.
Have I once mentioned video games in this thread?
If you want to talk about video games and their relationship to TTRPGs (or lack thereof), start a new thread.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Waitwaitwaitwait, I must have missed something.
Are you now saying that earlier, when you said that roleplaying required "engaging in dialogue in-character", that would include something like "I try to convince him of X by explaining Y"?
"I try to convince him of X by explaining Y" sounds like out of character speech to me.
If it was "Grog will try to convince the bandit chief that harassing travelers on this road is a bad idea, while gripping the hilt of his sword," then while it is not my preference, it would qualify as role playing.
So, if "him" = "the bandit chief", and "X" = "that harassing travelers on this road is a bad idea", and "by explaining Y" = insinuating a threat by "gripping the hilt of his sword", then our examples are the same.
Your example follows the same structure as the statement against which you were trying to provide a counterexample.
Anyway, I originally took your earlier statement about "speaking in character" to mean in the first person, speaking verbatim the words the character would speak. Our entire dialogue up to this point has been based on my thinking that's what you meant. (I bet you'd have a laugh if you went back and re-read the whole thing with that in mind, too!)
So, perhaps this proves (in a roundabout, accidental sort of way) my point that clarifying certain select terms can aid in communication and prevent wasted time? ;)
I was really hoping we could get past ridiculous hyperbole. Guess not.You said:
Roleplaying means taking on the role of your character, which includes any and all decisions you make when you put yourself in the character's shoes, which includes things like combat, selecting feats and dialogue.That means any decision I make on behalf of a character I am in control of constitutes role playing. Which would validate my examples. If I'm misunderstanding you, please clarify.For one, you've removed the context of my sentence.
Have I once mentioned video games in this thread?
If you want to talk about video games and their relationship to TTRPGs (or lack thereof), start a new thread.
I've been teaching some students about hyperbole this week. I really should send them to some of these threads...
I've been teaching some students about hyperbole this week. I really should send them to some of these threads...
LOL
I've been teaching some students about hyperbole this week. I really should send them to some of these threads...I was really hoping we could get past ridiculous hyperbole. Guess not.You said:
Roleplaying means taking on the role of your character, which includes any and all decisions you make when you put yourself in the character's shoes, which includes things like combat, selecting feats and dialogue.That means any decision I make on behalf of a character I am in control of constitutes role playing. Which would validate my examples. If I'm misunderstanding you, please clarify.For one, you've removed the context of my sentence.
Have I once mentioned video games in this thread?
If you want to talk about video games and their relationship to TTRPGs (or lack thereof), start a new thread.
You're right. I used a word wrong.
I concede the thread.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Our long national nightmare is over.
For one, you've removed the context of my sentence.
Have I once mentioned video games in this thread?
If you want to talk about video games and their relationship to TTRPGs (or lack thereof), start a new thread.
I was simply using an analogy to try to show you how your definition is imprecise. It would lead to cases that we don't typically associate with role playing to be defined as such.
As you don't seem to want to clarify your statement, and I don't want to badger you, we can let it drop.
So, if "him" = "the bandit chief", and "X" = "that harassing travelers on this road is a bad idea", and "by explaining Y" = insinuating a threat by "gripping the hilt of his sword", then our examples are the same.
I think the "I" in your statement is the difference. If you want to talk out of character, you use I. If you want to talk first person in-character, you use I. But if you want to talk 3rd person in-character, you can't use I (or at least you shouldn't, as it is very confusing.)
Anyway, I originally took your earlier statement about "speaking in character" to mean in the first person, speaking verbatim the words the character would speak.
That is my preference, but I was trying to make a distinction between in-character and out-of-character speech when I said that (such as "I use diplomacy on him" without any other explanation.)
So, perhaps this proves (in a roundabout, accidental sort of way) my point that clarifying certain select terms can aid in communication and prevent wasted time? ;)
I don't doubt it would, but it is not practical. At a bare minimum, however, I will keep in mind going forward that some people have a very different definition of role playing than I am used to.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
In most of my campaigns, one either says "out-of-character" before speaking, unless it's so obvious it doesn't require labeling (like, "I wonder where our pizza is?")
Wait, your characters aren't all hopeless pizza addicts?
Um, yeah, neither are mine, because... that would be silly!
Ha...
ha...
ha?
I know what TMNT is, I just... is there actually a tabletop RPG of it?
Since 1985 from your friends at Palladium
I know what TMNT is, I just... is there actually a tabletop RPG of it?
Of course it's even funner if you play it with the Ninja's and Superspies game and it's extensive martial arts selection.
I know what TMNT is, I just... is there actually a tabletop RPG of it?
eyup. It was my first RPG
Go on vacation come back to turtles........Pizza for dinner it is.