So, I'm a new player, but I'm spending lots of time researching and learning about mechanics of the game, and during combat and ruling questions, I have as much knowledge as some of the 'old hands' in our group. Our total mixed party is 7 people, two have been playing off and on for 2 years, the rest are new.
I have current thtee campaigns going, each with a different DM. One is currently one hold because a DM is sick with mono, but our schedule is DM 1 has a short 2-3 hour session on aaturday, DM 2 and DM 3 take alternating Sundays, with a longer 5-6 session.
For these games, I am playing "Jack" a LG constant class changing character with DM1. I have a Chosen One archetype of Paladin for DM 2 and a LG Warder (Path of War) for DM 3. I'm trying to play the ward a little bit more on the NG side of things.
I realize I have three very smiliar characters, but I am having trouble coming from a very video game perpestive. I enjoy combat and engage with tactics and each character has a slight quirk with battle tactics to try and RP a little, but I don't find my self role playing when we start talking to shopkeeps. I don't stay in character when talking with NPC. Players have joking asked my INT scores to be lowered in one campaign because of some of the things I have said.
In DM 2s campagin, I have started a little. A have a familiar with my Paladin, and I usually hold my turn/spend the round 'consulting' the familiar, and sing a lyric or two when smiting enemies, even joining a band (we have a baRd and mone drummer if you sa my.other thread). But the second we talked to an NPC, that was gone. My familiar was a part of me, it was locked in its cage. I was a heavy metal singing paladin. I just become generic helpful LG/NG adventurer #2385. I don't mean to lose out on role playing out of combat, but it partially just escapes from me.
I'm trying to RP, creating a personality for each. I've written a bit more about backstory and traits for all three of my characters, but I find myself still being gerenic. We just started our first session of GM1S campaign. Our group consists of 'Jorgon von Straggle' the Oracle of Fightness, Andre the half-giant psychic warrior body guard of Jorgon, Q the kitsune rogue that took on its human appearance as me, and me as Jack of all trades that has a fetish for tea, spent the day in a town searching for the one trader that had tea, and did nothing else.
Jack is going to take a more "why is the tea always gone" Jack Sparrow twist, but how do you stay in character? What helps you stay in your character rather than playing this out like a generic adventurer?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
First off, there really isn't anything inherently wrong or bad about optimizing your characters. It doesn't prohibit roleplaying at all, so if you enjoy doing that, just keep doing it!
Now to actually get to the advice portion you're looking for. Its obvious to me that we have different styles of play as I find your concepts rather zany for my tastes. Nothing wrong with that either! Just stating it up front because it might affect the usefulness of my advice.
I'd start off by asking your fellow players to cut you some slack and tone down the comments regarding your roleplaying because you're still trying to get the hang of it and such comments aren't really supportive of that goal. I'm all for a good ribbin' but not when it undermines a genuine effort to improve upon an area you're insecure about.
I like to think of my characters as actual people, albeit in a crazy world, with crazy events, doing crazy things. Don't focus too much on the collection of odd obsessions, behavioral quirks and extreme reactions but rather on the more mundane side of things. I find that gets rather stale pretty fast anyway, but hey, different strokes.
If it helps, try modelling your characters' personalities after people you know at first before trying to create a personality out of whole cloth.
Try formulating a couple of 'yes/no' or 'pick one' questions regarding your characters' reactions in certain common situations. Thinking about such things in advance can really help me to flesh out a character's personality.
I also find that the more you understand a character's motivations, beliefs and history the more likely it is you can stay in character and respond sincerely in a timely fashion.
There's probably a lot more I can say but I'm drawing a blank at the moment. I hope this was helpful so far. Regardless, don't put too much pressure on yourself to perform, be aware that its a learningprocess and allow yourself to be ok making the inevitable mistakes that come along the way.
P.S. Kudos for admitting a weakness and stepping up to improve upon it.
Quick and dirty advice: pick a movie character that you want your character to be like. When confronted with a new situation ask yourself "what would this character do?" and do that.
Longer version:
You're running into a literary issue here: you want to make an interesting character. You're trying to solve it by adding wacky quirks. The problem is that quirks make a character memorable but not necessarily interesting.
An interesting character is a character that when you read about them or watch them you are curious about what they are thinking. You wonder what choice they will make. You speculate about what they would do in a hypothetical situation. What would Conan the Barbarian do if he was dropped into the fighting pits of Meereen with nothing but the sword on his back? I don't know but I'd sure watch to find out.
Making a character interesting is a deep and challenging topic. Typically character is revealed by choices. Unfortunately, Pathfinder won't set up like a novel in perfectly providing choices to reveal your particular character. You're not going to get a setup like Mattie Ross in True Grit trying to decide which marshal to hire to track down her father's killer:
"Who's the best marshal?"
"Hmm, I'd have to think on that. Bill Waters is the best tracker. He's part Comanche; it is a pure joy to watch him cut for sign. The meanest is Rooster Cogburn; a pitiless man, double tough. Fear don't enter into his thinking. I'd have to say the fairest is L.T. Quinn; he always brings in his prisoners alive. Now, he might let one slip by evry now and then, but-"
"Where would I find this Rooster?"
Also, you don't want to have to provide novel-quality writing to have fun in the game. So, let's use the screenwriting guide to likable characters:
Pick at least five of the following:
(1) Courage
(2) Unfair injury
(3) Skill
(4) Funny
(5) Just Plain Nice
(6) In Danger
(7) Loved by Friends and Family
(8) Hard Working
(9) Obsessed
(example: Inigo Montoya hits eight or nine out of nine)
Put them in your background and keep them in mind while you're playing. Behave consistent with the background and I think you'll find you're portraying characters that are fun for you and others to interact with.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa."
In theory there shouldnt be a problem between role-playing and gaming. A problem is when you try to make something "interesting" but not actually good in terms of gameplay.
You could easily make an underwhelming character, and that should be reflected in your roleplaying. Maybe the other characters dont like the self-righteous Paladin/goofball.
Write down three things that are important to each character. One of those three things should be a negative.
-My Mother
-Gold
-Hates Goblins
Then write down some kind of a visual quirk like "Always chewing on a toothpick"
That is usually what I use for a starting point. It's just a couple of hooks get me going and the rest kind of builds up from there. You don't even need to say Why those things are important right away, just work your way towards it as you play.
Having those initial hooks and then mixing them with your alignment is usually enough to get me going.
Edit:
Oh and avoid the obvious things like My Paladin likes his god and hates evil. you want more personaly sort of things.
The negative INT thing was semi warranted. I ask guards in a foreign town about an army moving through while using some military words in full military gear. Luckily I ended up bluffing/diplomacying my way out of it, but yeah.
I didn't mean to say optimizing a character was a bad thing, just that I'm trying to put in work for the game and don't mind spending time to improve myself for this game.
Thanks for the advice on so far. I'll make sure to write down something from the screenwriting guide and some of their that are important.
|
Unfortunately to a large degree the answer to the question "How do I roleplay better?" has a very similar answer to the question "How do I write an award winning novel?"
First off; this doesn't mean you have to be an award winning novelist to roleplay well, but it does mean they use similar skills. You become better at making and understand you own characters the more you immerse yourself in them; think about what they want, their feelings and desires, their backstory and moods, their strengths and weaknesses. You get better at this kind of this the more you do it, the more you're around other people who do it, and the more who read/watch books/films that feature the kind of characters you want to play. It is not, unfortunately, an easy skill to learn, and it's much much harder to roleplay than to make powerful characters, which is why the "Rollplay vs. roleplay" thing is such a big deal. Ultimately, you may not be very good at it, but you're clearly TRYING, and that's all that really matters. You'll get better at it the more you do it, all you need to do is have fun with your characters and don't be too hard on yourself. To be honest, playing a "generic" character isn't a bad thing. Just because you're a classic Paladin doesn't mean you're a boring character. Previous posters have stated that you shouldn't focus to much on wierd "quirks" as they don't make most of a person; but IMHO that's not really a bad place to start. You're character might start out as an Enlglish tea drinking Jack Sparrow who's generally helpful but often goes hunting for tea for hours on end, but keep working on him, slowly fill him out. Eventually you'll have a whole pile of adventures you've play with him and you'll start to get to know him a bit better. It may be slowly, but so long as you're trying you'll eventually get it.
|
One thing I keep in mind is how the character fights/sneaks/etcetera. That sort of training takes years of dedication, so it's clearly something they care about doing well.
For instance: due to a collecton of feats, a character's combat style is most effective when they're attacked first. This sort of specialization implies someone who doesn't enjoy throwing the first punch, or at least wants a "he started it" excuse.
Let me add my voice to the chorus of "hey, at least you're trying, which means you will eventually get good at it."
Picking a character from fiction is one of my oft-recommended tricks; I'm in a game right now where two of the characters are Nymphadora Tonks (from Harry Potter) and Baldrick (from "Blackadder").
Just as a little mental exercise,.... look at this scene, where the Fellowship enters Moria, roughly one minute in, when they realize they're in trouble.
Now ask yourself these questions:
* How would Harry Potter react if he were part of that group? What would he say?
* How would Ron Weasley react if he were part of that group? What would he say?
* How would Hermione Granger react if she were part of that group? What would she say?
* How would Draco Malfoy react if he were part of that group? What would he say?
You have well-developed characters (and understand them well) if the answers to those questions are different.
(In this regard, this is rather similar to a test of artistic ability I saw some years ago. You are a good artist if you can draw a caricature of Mark Twain and of Albert Einstein and they look recognizable and different.)
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you're familiar/comfortable with video games and want to get more exposure/experience with roleplay and character motivations, go play Undertale. It's a mere $10 on Steam, will only take you a casual weekend to finish, and it has a more immersive world and more memorable cast of characters than any D&D/Pathfinder game I've ever so much as heard of, let alone played in. It will really get you thinking about character motivations and personality (especially if you don't skimp on exploring the world, so you get the proper context for understanding characters' actions).
In fact, I'd not only recommend Undertale to the OP, but to anyone who envisions "video game style" and "roleplaying" as different ends of a spectrum.
Well, I did put a lot of effort into the backstory of my latest PC and he had so many hooks for RP. So I expected him to be a blast at RPing from the beginning. He wasn't. Because:
a) You have to grow into playing all these facets first. The PC can be quite different from you, so you have to surpress your natural reaction and realize how 'they' would act.
b) RP often involves other people - players, GM or both sides. You have only limited influence on the course of RP, so you can easily end up in situations you never considered when planning your RP identity.
So it seems to be better to start with a basic concept and allow your PC to grow. Yes, they might feel a bit flat at the beginning, but this also means adaptability.
A fetish for tea is a nice start. Depending on the sessions, you might be able to build on that - and add further facets.
The first thing I'll say or echo, is don't be hard on yourself for not getting into rp immediately. Like others say, at least you're trying and seem to want to, that's more than some of the gamers I play with want to do. So kudos there.
You seem to have a decent start actually. Quirks and such can be very good to have and can help make rping a character fun. I saw that you've made some backstory, but since I don't know what they are, I'll say this. When it comes to quirks and the like, make sure to write up a good reason why the quirk is there. For your tea character, why does he like tea to such an extreme degree? Try to move past the "cause he does" mentality, and give it some extra thought. Maybe it's something he and a loved one used to do before they were split up for whatever reason and he holds onto that, because it reminds him of those moments and makes him feel good, at peace, happy.
Finding the characters true motivations is important. Again, this goes back to goals, why he has those goals and how the events that formed these goals influence his or her decisions. Solid and interesting motivations can help in quieter non combat moments, by informing you what this character might do, say, how they do it and how they say it.
Anyways, let's get to the problem you're talking about specifically. Not rping during quiet, non combat moments. My first question is, and I hate to ask it really, why do you think you don't rp in these situations. Is it because they don't actually interest you? You don't feel comfortable enough with these other players to just let loose? Maybe you're a bit busy taking in the rp of the other characters and forget to join in.
We might be able to help you (even) more if we can figure out why you happen not to rp during those moments.
Something that helps me is before play I re-read my character's background, codes, and go back through whatever group or individual notes that have been taken about the adventure so far. I'm playing a paladin and also keep Inner Sea Gods with me. In slow times during a session I scan passages here and there.
This all just helps keep the game world loaded in my head becuase, no, I'm not a badass chick who can wield the power of her goddess against undead monstrosities. I'm a dude sitting around a table with other dudes drinking beer. There's also group chats that happen between games. This doesn't let me completely unload the game either.
Also, don't just let dice do the talking. Learn to reason through actions in game world terms. Certainly don't let dice be a stand-in or let you "exist stage left" to the next action sequence. Go around towns, explore areas, engage NPCs like you would normally talk to someone albeit through the eyes, mouth, and ears of your character. Touch things as well; ask for details about seemingly unimportant and random things. The idea here is to ground yourself in the game and get that immersive dynamic going where you kinda actually suspend your disbelief a bit.
If you're familiar/comfortable with video games and want to get more exposure/experience with roleplay and character motivations, go play Undertale. It's a mere $10 on Steam, will only take you a casual weekend to finish, and it has a more immersive world and more memorable cast of characters than any D&D/Pathfinder game I've ever so much as heard of, let alone played in. It will really get you thinking about character motivations and personality (especially if you don't skimp on exploring the world, so you get the proper context for understanding characters' actions).
In fact, I'd not only recommend Undertale to the OP, but to anyone who envisions "video game style" and "roleplaying" as different ends of a spectrum.
I find Telltale games do this for me as well. It's interesting when a video game sparks genuine emotional response and anxiety.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I find Telltale games do this for me as well. It's interesting when a video game sparks genuine emotional response and anxiety.If you're familiar/comfortable with video games and want to get more exposure/experience with roleplay and character motivations, go play Undertale. It's a mere $10 on Steam, will only take you a casual weekend to finish, and it has a more immersive world and more memorable cast of characters than any D&D/Pathfinder game I've ever so much as heard of, let alone played in. It will really get you thinking about character motivations and personality (especially if you don't skimp on exploring the world, so you get the proper context for understanding characters' actions).
In fact, I'd not only recommend Undertale to the OP, but to anyone who envisions "video game style" and "roleplaying" as different ends of a spectrum.
I've watched several different "Let's Play"-style videos of Undertale, and it's always fun to see when people suddenly stop silent in the middle of their reading aloud of the dialogue, or start screaming at certain characters, or start crying when [REDACTED]. But what was really interesting was when I was watching such a video on YouTube and one of the characters in Undertale said something to the player about me, the viewer. *shudder*
First off, great thinking on the familiar! Having two viewpoints to consider helps push you, since that means coming up with opposing reasoning on a subject sometimes.
I find having an iconic scene or two for the character to be very helpful- a mental movie clip that captures some aspect of the character. For you, it might be your character awkwardly deflecting thanks because he knows it's more due to the powers conferred on him and his familiar's guidance than anything he did himself. Or it could be something else! But keeping that playing in your head will help you to reply in character.
Coming up with in-character reasons for what you can manage is also a nice stepping stone while you practice. If you have trouble talking to NPCs, why would your character be like that? If you revert to Generic Paladin #2385, does your character feel the need to pretend to be a "real" Paladin, one who earned their abilities through devotion and training instead of being "chosen"?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One thing that I sometimes do as a DM to help people get into character is prepare random short questions for each player to pick and then answer from their characters persective. Things like:
Tell about your first love.
Describe a recurring nightmare your character has.
What is your greatest fear.
If an enemy badly harmed you in some way, how would you treat them after they fell into your power.
The basic concept is that these are things the players share with the other players, but they are also things that the characters share with each other during the 'down time' that we don't roleplay out, sitting around the fire after dinner, in the bar after an adventure is completed, stuff like that. I find having each player answer one question each session really helps them develop their characters as well as helping them get into character for that session. You might see if you GM is interested in doing something similar.
Another thing that can help is taking time to have in-game PC to PC interactions. This is something that some groups aren't interested in, preferring to just get down to the adventuring, and that is fine, but if your group is willing, just taking some time for the PCs to talk about things with each other, even unimportant things, can help flesh out characters and personalities. If the only people your PC ever talks to in character are the NPCs, that means the only person you are roleplaying off of is the GM. Being able to talk with other people can help you get a feeling for your character, as well as getting a better feeling for theirs.
Finally, something you can do on your own is keep a character diary. It doesn't have to be long, but if you jot down your characters thoughts from their perspective (first person usually works best) about what happened after a session is over and then review it before the next session, not only will it help you remember everything that happened, but it will also help you develop your characters mindset and personality.
|
|
Awesome Job wanting to Improve. I hope you stick with it.
Lots of Good advice here already.
I tend to focus more on the Mechanical when I play in most groups but I am in 1 particular group that is heavier RP and the campaign is tailored to the heavier RP style. (Combats are not optimized or geared towards high end optimization levels so more well rounded characters can shine.)
Took me a while to get into the character but now I'm loving RPing the personality of my character in that Campaign.
Originally written she can't sleep alone and would not refresh her spells/abilities without the restful nights sleep. I wanted it to be a reason to form close bonds with each other PCs, and force interaction between PCs on a deep RP level. She also heavily believes it improves spiritual/mental health to cuddle. (Healer that cares about Mind, Body, and Spirit of her friends)
It started as she would sneak into a party member's tent/room so she wouldn't have to sleep alone, but since the beginning she has gotten 4/5 of the Party members and 3 NPCs on the "Cuddle Seshs" as she calls it. Now most the group has embraced a shelynite/hippie like lifestyle, as well as a few NPCs. Now everyone sleeps in 1 big tent/bed together cuddling. Which was a complete 180 from Separate rooms/tents and people awkwardly waking up finding her passed out next to them.
What I'm trying to say is that even if it seems weird (It did for me), just stick with your character concept and let it build the more sessions you plays out. You may be more surprised with the end results than you are expecting now. I was never expecting where the group has ended up. I thought I was going to have to keep sneaking into beds until end of the campaign.
I do think you need a little more than a "why is the tea always gone" life style quote. Perhaps flesh out just a few more personality traits/core beliefs...but Do not go overboard. Just a Paragraph or two is enough to work around while playing and getting a feel for the character.
Wish you the best in your en devours.
-cheers
Again, thanks for the help. I think I get lost during down time because the DMs (2 and 3 are the 'old hands') have an excellent time expanding the world. When one of them is playing their character, they add so much to our adventure. DM 1 is new, but doing well. His adventure is 'dungeon of the week', which I don't mind, but when he plays his character in the other campaigns, he brings so much life to his character.
I like the idea of a journey, and will write things down in it. Also my character may have to borrow that sleeping bit, it's a wonderful idea. The backstory of the campaign is that we are assaulting a foreign holy city, and our 'elite' group tried to plane shift into the city. It didn't end so well. As part of baclstory, I picked up two character drawbacks, no wing the DM would let me functionally use one. Jack has 'doubt', since he grew up, he never was really good at one thing (master of none, jack of all trades) growing up, becoming military as sort of a last option. He also has 'Foul Brand', which the holy city uses the symbol of Ra, so I have an image bruned into my hand of a Spear with a Sundisk behind it, combing pathfinder Ra's favorite weapon and Ra's image. We are on a smaller border town, mainly traders and travelers that are making a journey to the Holy city. The Oracle of Fitness and his Bodyguard already sleep together for obvious, the first and second night we were at an inn and we slept together to save money. The third night, due to exhaustion after battle, I asked to sleep in the Bodyguards tent, him only agreeing for a small fee to get a large tent that fit him better.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is a pretty sweet thread. Good job all around.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you have any ideas at all, even something as simple as the question "Why is the tea always gone?", run with it and see where it takes you. You can usually construct some chain of logic leading up to it.
Why is the character a tea connoisseur? Why does he wonder why the tea is always gone? One potential answer is that he is used to a life of luxury. Well then, why is he doing something as grueling and dangerous as adventuring? Maybe he lost his fortune somehow, maybe he was disowned by his wealthy family, or maybe he just got bored of the easy life.
One other bit of advice, keep the Plinkett Test in mind.
My recommendation is always...
1) Know your character. Who is he, what does he like, what does he hate, what was his family like? Why/how did he get introduced to his class? You should be able to do this with any character, in any game, in any system. Role-playing is essentially playing a character from a story or play... Read the play, find your motivation...
Then... and this is the tougher one.
2) know your world. There are a LOT of books out there detailing Golarion. Setting guides, novels, comics, whatever you're interested in. If you're a character from Varisia, get to know varisian customs and attitudes and major cities. If you're an elf.... read about the elves. what are their customs? what are common atttudes? Does your character worship a deity? Read about the diety.
It's not necessary to learn about the WHOLE world... and of course be careful with some books if they are more 'DM spoiler' type books. But if you're a character in Absalom and never heard of the Pathfinders swarming the place or never heard about the Starstone... then you're going to feel like a tourist. It would be like an American who doesn't know who the president is or never heard of California...
That is always difficult when starting a new setting... and REALLY hard if it's a homebrew world the DM made up... In which case you really need to sit down and get some of the general knowledge about the area.
Example:
My latest character? He's a dhampir inquisitor... he comes from Ustalev where undead fighters are kinda common. He's 120 years old, so he's got a lot of years to fill. I pointed at the world map, and decided he was chased out after losing a fight (can't make him too awesome when I start at level 1), He traveled south to Kyonin... but they don't let non-elves past their harbor city... so after a few more decades he left with some friends to go to Osirion... He took that river south again into the Inner sea... shipwrecked off Qadira. Hoped his friends survived and went to Osirion to meet them. Doesn't look like they survived. After a few decades there, He went to Absalom and joined the Pathfinders...
Filled up all his years, I've got friends and allies he's met along the way. He has motivations to learn about specific undead things that lead him to Osirion... and when that came up empty he went to the Pathfinders to gain access to their stuff. He's seen shares of prejudice, he's seen acceptance, He has no particular love for ships anymore... One of his new party members HATES goblins as Vermin... Ustalev has their own undead plagues... goblin attacks don't really seem that important to him.
There are a lot of quirks and character traits that came naturally from his backstory. I know where his starting skills and languages came from. When presented with a situation, I'll know how HE would act... not necessarily how "I" would act. FYI, I played a paladin before this, and am astonished just how different they react to a lot of the same stimuli.
'play like a video game'? I'm not really sure what that really means... Most video games I've played have preprogrammed responses... and the combat is just reflexive.
Out of combat, I never see any similarity with a video game. The responses and conversation comes from the character motivations... the IN combat stuff? That isn't that different from a video game really. Grab the best weapon you have for the situation and go to town. ;)
The biggest trap I find that makes people play "like a video game" is when they think about characters, actions, and the world in terms of their mechanics and not their context. There's no reason not to do this in a video game, since exactly how everything works can be fully understood by the player who can then manipulate these mechanics to the desired effect. The thing is, if you put yourself in the shoes of your character, you don't know how the rules of the game work, you're just a person with a certain set of experiences that shape a certain set of opinions and values. So focus on that, consider how your character got where they are and how that has influenced how they view the world.
A character who has escaped from slavery by pirates and a character who grew up in luxury only to have their family's riches taken away by malefactors are going to have a very different view of things even if they have the same gender, race, class, and specializations. You'll find a lot of old hands at this sort of thing write really long and detailed backstories, and that's not entirely because it's a creative outlet, it's because it helps us ground and comprehend who this person is, what they think, and what they want. If you have trouble coming up with a backstory, a lot of RPG books have a set of questions to answer to guide this sort of thing.
This is a big difference between video and tabletop games: in the former your backstory is generally set by the developers, so your ability to control the identity of the player character is reigned in by those bounds; in tabletop though your backstory is reigned in solely by "whatever the GM will approve" (and "canon" but that's fairly flexible in practice), so have fun with it.
You seem to have made a good start of it, and there is a ton of good advice here. Most important, you seem to be in a game that supports roleplaying, which is huge. I will reinforce a few themes. Try not to build your character to be so specialized that you narrow your options. Roleplay stops happening when your skill set takes over your actions.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
The biggest trap I find that makes people play "like a video game" is when they think about characters, actions, and the world in terms of their mechanics and not their context. There's no reason not to do this in a video game, since exactly how everything works can be fully understood by the player who can then manipulate these mechanics to the desired effect. The thing is, if you put yourself in the shoes of your character, you don't know how the rules of the game work, you're just a person with a certain set of experiences that shape a certain set of opinions and values. So focus on that, consider how your character got where they are and how that has influenced how they view the world.
A character who has escaped from slavery by pirates and a character who grew up in luxury only to have their family's riches taken away by malefactors are going to have a very different view of things even if they have the same gender, race, class, and specializations. You'll find a lot of old hands at this sort of thing write really long and detailed backstories, and that's not entirely because it's a creative outlet, it's because it helps us ground and comprehend who this person is, what they think, and what they want. If you have trouble coming up with a backstory, a lot of RPG books have a set of questions to answer to guide this sort of thing.
This is a big difference between video and tabletop games: in the former your backstory is generally set by the developers, so your ability to control the identity of the player character is reigned in by those bounds; in tabletop though your backstory is reigned in solely by "whatever the GM will approve" (and "canon" but that's fairly flexible in practice), so have fun with it.
Ehh... There's some holes in your ideas.
For one thing, a lot of video games don't force a pre-made backstory on you (beyond the recent events that started your adventure), instead leaving a blank slate for you to imagine whatever you want. You could get into designing your game character's look, be reminded of some trope you like, and decide now you know who this person is and start roleplaying them appropriately. Alternatively, you could approach the game with a character idea in mind (just like you would a tabletop RPG), come up with a backstory, and play out believable actions just like you would with pen and paper.
On the other hand, even for games whose player characters do have a defined backstory, what's that got to do with your ability to roleplay them? If your player character is a gifted farmboy who traveled the world and turned adversity into opportunity until he was a full-blown pirate captain before embarking on his real adventure to rescue his lost love*, what does it matter whether you invented that yourself or had it written for you? The ease (or difficulty) of getting into that character's head and behaving accordingly (which is what roleplay is) is going to be the same regardless of who wrote that backstory.
Because of both of the above points, there are plenty of video games where your original assertion (of seeing the character/world in terms of mechanics rather than context) is completely wrong. In fact, I'd venture a speculation that, within the genre of RPGs, most video games fail to fit your mold, and have plenty of opportunity for seeing the characters in the contexts of their worlds.
(And then there's the whole topic of how many of the "mechanics" that you set up as being the opposite of the setting are, in fact, the Laws of Physics of the setting itself, making the distinction between "mechanics" and "context"/"setting" a lot messier than you suggest.)
All in all, you sound like someone who really needs to go play Undertale. ;)
*Bonus question: Know who that is?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You seem to have made a good start of it, and there is a ton of good advice here. Most important, you seem to be in a game that supports roleplaying, which is huge. I will reinforce a few themes. Try not to build your character to be so specialized that you narrow your options. Roleplay stops happening when your skill set takes over your actions.
Or use your skill set to inform your actions, they aren't exclusive. Larry doesn't like water because he has the swim check of a sack of rocks for instance.
I love seeing threads like this so full of helpful advice. My little contribution; check out some of the different reading selections they recommend in the back of the Core book. Might give you some more inspiration for characters as well.
The difficult part is then using that to help act like a different character. You show a lot of enthusiasm and seem to have a supportive environment.
Good luck buddy!
I think what I meant to say is that video games are designed with the idea in mind that only a small percentage of players are going to actually participate in roleplaying (even in "RPGs") and that a lot of the time players are going to do the thing they're supposed to do next because "it's the thing that you're supposed to do next", without any sort of internal justification. These things are naturally designed to guide non-self-directed players to map waypoints and villagers with exclamation points over their head, and just going from one to the other is designed to give a satisfying experience that way, so playing this way is neither wrong nor bad. Some people might find a richer and more rewarding experience if they were to consider the context of the world rather than the context of the game, but that's not required to have a good time. So you can plow through most video games (even RPGs) without ever thinking about the context of the world, just completing a sequence of tasks.
This is not something you can really do in tabletop games, and a lot of people have a "connect the dots" instinct developed by video games that is the opposite of helpful in this sort of thing. You could explain the difference, for instance, by saying that "the rules of the game determine the extent of what you can do" in a computer adjudicated game whereas "the rules of the game determine merely the extent of what you can't do, and that anything not explicitly prohibited by the rules is theoretically available" in a human adjudicated game. After all, computers are incapable of ad lib.
(as an aside, certainly the mechanics of the game determine the laws of the universe within the game, but while the player might well understand these laws entirely, the character probably should not understand things like "what level of skill I would need to complete this task", merely something like "I can do this easily" or "this will be hard" or "this is beyond me".)
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I think what I meant to say is that video games are designed with the idea in mind that only a small percentage of players are going to actually participate in roleplaying (even in "RPGs") and that a lot of the time players are going to do the thing they're supposed to do next because "it's the thing that you're supposed to do next", without any sort of internal justification.
I'm going to once again assert that you should really go play Undertale, though I recommend it now for a subtly different reason than I did a minute ago. :D
These things are naturally designed to guide non-self-directed players to map waypoints and villagers with exclamation points over their head, and just going from one to the other is designed to give a satisfying experience that way, so playing this way is neither wrong nor bad. Some people might find a richer and more rewarding experience if they were to consider the context of the world rather than the context of the game, but that's not required to have a good time. So you can plow through most video games (even RPGs) without ever thinking about the context of the world, just completing a sequence of tasks.
You're pretty much just describing MMOs. Those do not constitute "most" RPGs. In fact, probably the biggest subgroup of video game RPGs would be JRPGs, which (by definition of the genre) are very plot- and narrative-focused. Your descriptions don't apply. Even out of the RPGs that aren't JRPGs (which may well be less than half of the RPG genre), a good portion of what's left still aren't what you're talking about.
Seems to me that there's a great big world of narrative-oriented gaming experiences out there that you're missing out on because of outdated and underinformed ideas of what video games are like.
This is not something you can really do in tabletop games, and a lot of people have a "connect the dots" instinct developed by video games that is the opposite of helpful in this sort of thing.
Most tabletop RPGs have clear goals set forth, with longer campaigns having a series of them. Having clear "dots" to "connect" is not "the opposite of helpful", it's necessary. A tabletop RPG that's longer than a single dungeon/goal is either going to have dots to connect (such as following up one goal with another, or scattered across the region for a "sandbox") or it's going to implode because nobody knows what to do. That's not an unhelpful video game instinct, it's good adventure design and predates most video games.
You could explain the difference, for instance, by saying that "the rules of the game determine the extent of what you can do" in a computer adjudicated game whereas "the rules of the game determine merely the extent of what you can't do, and that anything not explicitly prohibited by the rules is theoretically available" in a human adjudicated game. After all, computers are incapable of ad lib.
Strictly speaking, I agree with this. But you seem to have extrapolated it into a whole lot of wrong impressions about video games and tabletop games.
(as an aside, certainly the mechanics of the game determine the laws of the universe within the game, but while the player might well understand these laws entirely, the character probably should not understand things like "what level of skill I would need to complete this task", merely something like "I can do this easily" or "this will be hard" or "this is beyond me".)
It's funny that you make that distinction, considering it's actually in tabletop RPGs that you can have the fullest understanding of mechanics, while in video game RPGs the exact functions of your stats are typically "under the hood" and unobservable, leaving players to figure out their limits just like a real person would.
For example, in Pathfinder I can look up exactly what the DC is to soften a fall with Acrobatics, and I can control my bonus completely, so that I know exactly when I have a big enough bonus to auto-succeed even if I've never jumped off a ledge in that whole campaign. I can similarly look up the exact effect of my STR modifier on damage, and what a given magic item does. Meanwhile, even in a game as simple as Pixel Dungeon, I'm told that my excess STR increases my damage, but not by how much; I don't know how long a potion of invisibility lasts; and I don't even get to know how certain armor enchantments work. I have to figure it all out experientially. And that's faaaaar from the only example of unknown mechanisms in video games. In fact, I can't even think of a video game where the mechanics are as knowable as they are in Pathfinder.
You're pretty much just describing MMOs. Those do not constitute "most" RPGs. In fact, probably the biggest subgroup of video game RPGs would be JRPGs, which (by definition of the genre) are very plot- and narrative-focused. Your descriptions don't apply. Even out of the RPGs that aren't JRPGs (which may well be less than half of the RPG genre), a good portion of what's left still aren't what you're talking about.
I mean, you can play Fallout 2 or Planescape: Torment like this, you won't get as much out of it as someone who RPs, but you'll get something out of it. What I'm describing is probably the preferred way to play Fallout 4, sadly, because there's not much to do than "go to place, talk to everyone, do what they want, move on." It's in a sense efficient design, and it reaches the most players, but it doesn't require roleplaying, which is good because most people won't roleplay characters beyond "helpful acquisitive badass."
Most tabletop RPGs have clear goals set forth, with longer campaigns having a series of them. Having clear "dots" to "connect" is not "the opposite of helpful", it's necessary. A tabletop RPG that's longer than a single dungeon/goal is either going to have dots to connect (such as following up one goal with another, or scattered across the region for a "sandbox") or it's going to implode because nobody knows what to do. That's not an unhelpful video game instinct, it's good adventure design and predates most video games.
I think there's a useful distinction to be made here between "goals" and "objectives." To clarify terms, I mean goals should be something abstract like "gain renown" or "get revenge" or "save the city" whereas objectives are something concrete and immediately achievable like "find the missing child" or "kill the rats in the cellar" or "stop the robbery." Since singleplayer games don't have a group dynamic where you can talk things out with your friends and the climate of video games is antithetical to "getting stuck, taking a break, and figuring out what to do next" (which was an essential part of say, LucasArts graphical adventure games) you pretty much have to structure your game in a way where you can get to where you need to go by completing one objective after another. Tabletop games can function perfectly well when you give the players goals, but not objectives. If the players need a big pile of gold to fund an expedition, they can turn to banditry, work a day job, loot a dungeon, pull a heist, found a stock exchange and invent the limited liability company, or any other thing the players find interesting. The point I'm making is that you ought to have a clear picture of what your character finds interesting or worthy (and correspondingly abhorrent or beneath him or her) and that's how you keep the game from imploding. You can offer specific tasks the players *can* complete to raise funds, but it shouldn't be the extent of what they're able to do.
It's funny that you make that distinction, considering it's actually in tabletop RPGs that you can have the fullest understanding of mechanics, while in video game RPGs the exact functions of your stats are typically "under the hood" and unobservable, leaving players to figure out their limits just like a real person would.
I think the major difference is that video game sequences are something you're able to iterate (since the only person's time you're consuming by replaying something is your own), and thereby know exactly the outcome of a certain choice, which isn't really an option available when you're sharing an table with other people. You can know in a video game, with full certainty, whether it's safe to rob these people, spare that person, take revenge on this family, drink that magic potion or not. In a tabletop game, even if you're playing a canned adventure that you've read (naughty, naughty) you can never be certain that the GM isn't going to go off script, nor are they unjustified in doing so.
OK, video games, to include undertales, have limitations to interactions, they are more impressive than they were, but they are limited by the interaction algorithms.
Saying that hiding the mechanics in a black box is superior to FtF roleplay because the rule books are not hidden sort of misses the point on what roleplay IS. Roleplay is going beyond the rules.
I understand that this is anathema to PFS play, and wargaming approches, and irrelevant to video gaming because it takes control away from a strict set of predictable rules, and could very easily be construed as unfair at best.
I think the OP gets that. His is likely a decision of preference, to assume he is merely ignorant is impolite.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
OK, video games, to include undertales, have limitations to interactions, they are more impressive than they were, but they are limited by the interaction algorithms.
Nobody's said otherwise, that I'm aware of.
Saying that hiding the mechanics in a black box is superior to FtF roleplay
This is a pretty gross misrepresentation of what was said. PossibleCabbage brought up the gap in mechanics awareness, and all I did was point out that he had it backwards: you'll know the mechanics better in Pathfinder than in most (all?) video games. Don't put words in my mouth.
Roleplay is going beyond the rules.
Roleplay is making decisions from the character's perspective rather than the player's. That's literally what it means to play a role. Sometimes this will happen outside the rules, sometimes it's supported by the rules, and sometimes it clashes with the rules (which typically means the rules are poorly-made). But roleplay doesn't mean "going beyond the rules". The amount of rule involvement and the question of whether you're roleplaying or not are pretty much independent of each other.
I understand that this is anathema to PFS play, and wargaming approches, and irrelevant to video gaming because it takes control away from a strict set of predictable rules, and could very easily be construed as unfair at best.
This statement is kind of nullified by the fact that it's based on your misunderstanding of what "roleplay" is. (Unless this wasn't supposed to be connected to your previous paragraph; your flow is a bit unclear.)
I think the OP gets that. His is likely a decision of preference, to assume he is merely ignorant is impolite.
Speaking of a lack of clarity, what's this about? Who are you even talking to? Your post started out pretty clearly addressing me, but this seems like it's just coming out of the blue. Did you switch audiences or something?
Jiggy,
OP stated he wanted advice on roleplaying in a non-video game approach, hence the title of the thread.
Your response was that he is just playing the wrong video game.
Your attack on my knowledge and experience in roleplay is irrelevant, even with your credentials. I accept that we are not likely to come to a meeting of the minds on this.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Jiggy,
OP stated he wanted advice on roleplaying in a non-video game approach, hence the title of the thread.
Your response was that he is just playing the wrong video game.
Here you go again with the misrepresenting.
My response to the OP was that a particular game could be a good bridge from his existing familiarity with video games to his goal of comfort with roleplaying. I said nothing that could even be remotely construed as saying the OP is just playing the wrong video game.
The only place in this entire thread where I posted anything even vaguely similar to what you're accusing me of was when I suggested that someone else entirely, not the OP, had an outdated understanding of what exists among video games.
So what are you doing? Are you looking at my reply to the OP and claiming I said something I didn't? Or are you looking at my reply to someone else and claiming it was aimed at the OP (and also twisting my words merely a little bit)?
Your attack on my knowledge and experience in roleplay is irrelevant
Pointing out that you're incorrect about what a word means is not an "attack". (It also doesn't threaten your experience in any way, so there's no need to defend yourself there.)
I accept that we are not likely to come to a meeting of the minds on this.
We could if you'd approach the discussion in good faith. If you made even one post in which you explained your ideas without misrepresenting any of mine, progress would be made. If you kept it up and kept on posting dialogue free from misrepresentations, consistently, we could really get somewhere.
I'm here and open. It's up to you and what you'll choose to do.