| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ok since people don't seem to fully grasp what a rollplayer is or a roleplayer for that matter I can see why some people might be mislead into thinking it's an insult.
At it's heart it's a category. People want very different things from RPGs. While they ALL do all the activities, the real reason people love RPGs can be boiled down to a set a categories. There are MANY different category systems each looking at different things but for the sake of THIS thread we are examining just two 'rollplayer' and by contrast it's counterpart 'roleplayer'.
Rollplayer's are players who derive the greatest enjoyment from the game from it's MECHANICAL challenges. They rush back to the table to experience the next epic boss fight, to slay minions with their lovingly chosen mechanical abilities, to push the next skill challenge to even higher numbers, to achieve victory over anything the GM (or sometimes each other) throw at them. They are the vital force driving the party toward lofty goals and achievements.
If you view THIS as an insult then you are belittling one of the most active and engaging parts of the RPG experience.
The problem is, contextually speaking, there is almost always the subtext of "And you're an a**hole for liking that" attached to "rollplayer." For many people, the context of the word "rollplayer" will always involve that subtext. So take that context into consideration when you consider using it.
It's like, if I describe people who enjoy eating beef jerky as "jerkwads." I do so because most of the people I've seen enjoying eat beef jerky wad it up before eating it. I may not mean anything insulting when I call people that, but that's not going to matter since the subtext of the word "jerkwad" is pretty negative.
In 30 years of gaming I watched a large number of different players slowly develop. I have purposely kept a widely diverse group of personalities at the table when I could. Right brained, creative types and left brain, statistics oriented types have played hand-in-hand with one another and shown each other how to grow into a more complete players that blend together both aspects of the game. Those aspects being the creative storytelling and the hard math. It takes time, by that I mean years, for most players to develop the weaker side of their repertoire. Very few are naturals at birth. It is human to gravitate to and enjoy our strengths and avoid our weakness. It is no different at the table. Our math-savvy types tend to gravitate to combat and pushing the envelope with character builds while the my creative, literature and art lovers, tend toward more social interactions and story. However, together they learn from one another. I think both aspects are good. I see rollplayer vs. roleplayer as merely a journey down two roads that meet at the same destination.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I know people don't use it as a compliment I was saying they should. People either use it as a descriptor or as an insult. The key in understanding people is context.
And until you convince everyone to use it your way, you should understand our context of the word.
Ok since people don't seem to fully grasp what a rollplayer is or a roleplayer for that matter I can see why some people might be mislead into thinking it's an insult.
At it's heart it's a category. People want very different things from RPGs. While they ALL do all the activities, the real reason people love RPGs can be boiled down to a set a categories. There are MANY different category systems each looking at different things but for the sake of THIS thread we are examining just two 'rollplayer' and by contrast it's counterpart 'roleplayer'.
Rollplayer's are players who derive the greatest enjoyment from the game from it's MECHANICAL challenges. They rush back to the table to experience the next epic boss fight, to slay minions with their lovingly chosen mechanical abilities, to push the next skill challenge to even higher numbers, to achieve victory over anything the GM (or sometimes each other) throw at them. They are the vital force driving the party toward lofty goals and achievements.
If you view THIS as an insult then you are belittling one of the most active and engaging parts of the RPG experience.
Roleplayer's in contrast are players who derive the greatest enjoyment from the game from it's CHARACTER INTERACTION opportunities. They are glued to the game to experience epic social events, opportunities to interact with NPCs and PCs via in depth conversations and character moments, to feel like they actually LIVE in the game world, that they can stand on the Icy Peak of Crystal Mist Mountain and watch with unfolding horror as Mount Doom in the spectacular distance explodes sending lava and ash into the helpless villages below. They want to express that horror to their traveling companions to rush down to the devastation below and help(or take advantage of) the NPCs to interact with them on this momentous event. They are the beating heart of RPGs they give great depth and meaning to the make believe worlds they live in.
These categories are better viewed as compliments NOT insults if...
So if I love the social NPC interactions. But go and say, "I talk to the prince and want to convince him of X. Diplomacy 27." am I a roleplayer? according to your earlier example you said this guy would be classified as a rollplayer since he doesn't have any speech or talking in character. But he doesn't really enjoy the mechanics, he really like how he's able to interact with the world through his character's skills.
So it seems like your classification has changed, or is likely to miss-identify people.
Also, you're using your special snowflake definition and are confused why those using the majority definition don't understand that to you they aren't insults.
Irontruth you say you won't accept any other use of the word "until I see other people change how they use it". Well here is a girl using it a different way right in front of you. There are others using it in a different way too or this topic wouldn't still be raging. context is far more important than the word itself when literally ANY word can be used as an insult.
Do you strike down a girl who offers you flowers? Even if you don't like the flowers?
Are you telling my experiences are invalid?
I agree that you might not intend for the word to be offensive. Can you understand that I have history with the word and that it is offensive in my experiences?
If you can't admit and accept that my experiences with the word are valid, than there's nothing left to talk about, because you don't respect me.
Just out of curiosity, do you still use words like "retarded" when describing people?
Oh man, I missed the "Strike down a girl offering flowers" line.
If in a culture, the type of flower was often used as an insult, I would not "strike them down" but I certainly would not accept said flowers, and probably advise said girl to stop handing out said flowers if she doesn't want a terrible misunderstanding to happen.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Some do many don't CONTEXT is king. Don't react to an insult unless it really is one.It really doesn't matter what your personal definition is, Aranna. Or what my personal definition is, for that matter. The problem isn't in what it means, REALLY, it's in how people use the term.
And people use it offensively.
Most use it as an insult. The fact that some people don't use it as an insult doesn't change the fact that it usually is used as an insult, and that's what's important here.
Again, unless you don't see anything insulting about
"Looking for ROLEplayers not ROLLplayers" (and never, ever the reverse). Because yes, it is insulting when used in that manner.
Perfect example. Let's pull it apart. What this group is saying is two things; that they self identify as Role players and that they don't want Roll players to apply. NO motivation is given as to why they don't want roll players just that they don't want them. But a clue can be found in their self identification. They are the kind of group likely to spend 6 sessions in town interacting with NPCs while buying camping gear. We know that this sort of activity irritates roll players. So while we don't know for sure we can guess that they are seeking to isolate themselves from this irritation.
On the other side in order to see this as an insult two things have to be true first you have to self identify as a roll player AND you have to think Roll playing is lesser than Role playing. Because if you thought it was superior (and you should since you like it) then your response would be "good thing I don't have to game with those guys" OR if you didn't self identify as a Roll player then you wouldn't care whether they did or didn't want a Roll player.
So to sum up you have no idea whether the group intended an insult or not, but because you believe you are a lesser gamer you take it as one.
|
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Perfect example. Let's pull it apart. What this group is saying is two things; that they self identify as Role players and that they don't want Roll players to apply. NO motivation is given as to why they don't want roll players just that they don't want them. But a clue can be found in their self identification. They are the kind of group likely to spend 6 sessions in town interacting with NPCs while buying camping gear. We know that this sort of activity irritates roll players. So while we don't know for sure we can guess that they are seeking to isolate themselves from this irritation.
I'm a roleplayer and that activity irritates me.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
No, I don't identify as a "roll-player". People have used it against me though in an attempt to discredit the things I've been saying on a topic.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Alternatively, I can self-identify as neither in particular, and just find the unnecessary labeling and implied judgement annoying. I do find the conclusion that I simply must consider myself a lesser gamer baffling and actually a bit more offensive than the term "rollplaying" itself.
So surprise surprise, in defending an inaccurate, limited, and offensive word, you resort to inaccurate, limited, and offensive analysis of me.
Good to know where you stand, though.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A few posts ago, someone talked about how some words mean something negative to some people, but a different group sees it completely differently.
The term in discussion there means "a bundle of wood", and gets used in the UK for cigarette, and is a slur towards homosexuals in the US. The question was is he wrong for using a word he always has used, with a non-offensive meaning, in the US.
The answer should be: he says it a few times, and each time, people look shocked or annoyed. He asks why, and they explain what the word means here. They give him some leeway for being foreign, and he starts to use a different word out of respect.
Well, we now have a few people for whom ROLLplay is perfectly OK, talking to a chatroom of people saying "I do not like it" or "It is offensive" etc.
Maybe would should give people some slack, let them explain what they mean, but let them know why it is offensive, and see if their sense of pride can be won over by everyone else's concern :)
It can also be a bummer if you are mislabeled but I also remember a study that we look at in college that most racist do not think of them as such but in the eyes of almost everyone else they were.
So what are you saying Mark, that we're rollplayers and don't realize it?
Come out and say it if that's what you mean.
EDIT: I apologize for this post, Mark. It wasn't fair. I'm a little more irritated than normal this morning, mostly due to frustration at the topic but Aranna's logic didn't help things.
I think I'm going to take my leave of this topic. It isn't good for me, and it isn't good for the people I'm arguing with.
Feel free to talk more about GM styles though, that subplot was great!
|
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
@Aranna:
Do you self-identify as a rollplayer? Or think other people are likely to call you one? If not, you really shouldn't be talking like this.
The simple fact is that, if the people who the word is primarily used on identify it as a slur, then it is a slur. That's the only reasonable way to define what a slur is, because if people outside the group get to define it, then nothing is ever a slur (just ask all the racists).
And yet, slurs are real. Terms that it hurts to be called because you've heard them so often in the tones people would use when calling you worthless or vile. Some didn't start off their existence as slurs, but only became so in the context of how they were used. But that's how all language works, words are always and only defined by how they are used.
Rollplayer is obviously not nearly on the level of most slurs that are used for a race, gender, gender identity, religion, or sexual orientation...but that doesn't make it not a slur, or not offensive. Just on a way less severe scale.
I'm not saying its never used without ill intent. Not at all. I'm saying that using it upsets enough people and short circuits enough of what might otherwise be productive discussions, that you shouldn't use it.
No word is evil in and of itself, even slurs, the reason you don't use them is because using them hurts people emotionally and/or angers them greatly, and you should generally not engage in behavior that causes those things unless you have a compelling moral reason to do so. Using a particular word instead of finding an alternative is pretty much never a compelling moral reason.
And because the words we use shape how we think. If you talk about rollplayer and roleplayer as mutually exclusive terms, you'll think of them that way, too, and that's a deeply flawed and inaccurate way to look at the situation.
A few posts ago, someone talked about how some words mean something negative to some people, but a different group sees it completely differently.
The term in discussion there means "a bundle of wood", and gets used in the UK for cigarette, and is a slur towards homosexuals in the US. The question was is he wrong for using a word he always has used, with a non-offensive meaning, in the US.
The answer should be: he says it a few times, and each time, people look shocked or annoyed. He asks why, and they explain what the word means here. They give him some leeway for being foreign, and he starts to use a different word out of respect.
Well, we now have a few people for whom ROLLplay is perfectly OK, talking to a chatroom of people saying "I do not like it" or "It is offensive" etc.
Maybe would should give people some slack, let them explain what they mean, but let them know why it is offensive, and see if their sense of pride can be won over by everyone else's concern :)
I was under the impression the term was changed to refer to loud obnoxious bikers.
Here's the thing: the 'rollplayer' is actually a very rare animal. In order to have an actual 'rollplayer', ALL of the following have to be true:
- In-game actions by the player's character will often do surprising, even extraordinary amount of damage, sometimes using obscure language or particular 'tricks' to enhance their combat efficiency. This is the trait that most people tend to associate with 'rollplayers' - but it is not the ONLY trait, something that most people also forget. Combat efficiency, using tricks, or just being Ellen Mary Boorsen may cause people to think a particular person is a 'rollplayer', but unless that person possesses the other traits on this list, they're not - they're just tactical thinkers. The primary concern for a 'rollplayer' is for combat; spells, abilities, traits, etc. are overwhelmingly likely to be focused there, and character concept/backstory is liable to be a few sentences at best, and probably nonexistent.
- S/he is the one who not only builds an optimal character, but seeks out strange and unusual abilities, items, traits, feats, etc. to maximize the thrust of the character, no matter if the combination makes no thematic sense. This person might have a Tian Shu taking a class found only in Osirion, selecting a trait found only among the Tamiir-Quah of the Shoanti, and using an Irrisen-exclusive item because they all give a benefit to their skill or ability of choice.
- During the game, the individual will do their best to avoid attempts by the GM to get them to interact or describe what their character is actually doing, instead attempting to 'dice' or 'game' their way out of every situation. Key phrases/actions include 'I use (Skill/Ability/Spell)' and rolling the appropriate di(c)e when given a situation and asked 'what do you do?', as compared to 'I try to bluff him into leaving / hold my hand over my head and call light to it / cast Invisibility on myself and try to sneak down the side hall' or similar such minimal-but-still-there interactions.
- S/he also has a high tendency to treat characters - their own and others - as disposable, by which is meant 'it's only a game and that's only a piece of paper'. There is minimal connection by the player to the character as a character; the game is an exercise in numbers and wargaming, not an interactive piece of storytelling with elements of randomization.
- The player is also highly concerned with rules-as-written; house rules need to be written down for them as well. They will bear most, if not all, of the hallmarks of the 'rules lawyer'.
So ... just because someone likes playing a Mythic 10 / Level 20 Zen Archer Unchained Monk who can blow through Beastmass in one day and smite with terrible vengeance and righteous anger anything up to and including demon lords and solars ... does not make them a rollplayer.
An actual 'rollplayer' is a rare critter. Fortunately, if found by the right group, they can be coaxed into actual interaction; typically this requires some work on the social capabilities of the player themselves, which means lots of patience and interaction on the part of the group; most groups give such players the boot long before they reach that stage.
Otherwise it's pretty much just meant as an insult.
Rollplayer's are players who derive the greatest enjoyment from the game from it's MECHANICAL challenges. They rush back to the table to experience the next epic boss fight, to slay minions with their lovingly chosen mechanical abilities, to push the next skill challenge to even higher numbers, to achieve victory over anything the GM (or sometimes each other) throw at them. They are the vital force driving the party toward lofty goals and achievements.
this would be nice, if this was ever actually used as this and not as a term to describe someone playing the game wrong.
here's the point, it doesn't matter how you define rollplayer when society's definition is a whole lot worse.
That is kind of weird actually it made me think of the term Nerd which used to be negative and has been embraced. Its kind of like the nerd community took the word and made it theirs.
seems to be the real issue is people using it negatively maybe not the words themselves as much as the meaning we (as a society) put behind them.
I always think about battle star Galactica (the newest one) with their word Frack lets face it we all know what it was standing in for. we all know what it was suppose to mean. It was a way to get past censors but why did it get past censors when for ALL intents and purposes It still meant the F-bomb. words are symbols for meanings. frack was a symbol for The f-bomb like F is for its own meaning so why did it not receive censorship? Why give the symbol more power then the meaning?
I'm curious, how do you run an unprepped game?Jot down the high points you want to have done, make it up as you go at the table.I see. So it's not 100% unprepped. How do you do with encounters?
From there it's just a matter of flipping through bestiaries [even better sorting through digital content] keeping an eye open for interesting encounters while weaving what's going on in the world into a living breathing entity with thousands of wheels turning.I feel like this is enough for me to consider it prep work.
i feeeeeeeel like the distinction doesn't matter at this point.
i feeeeeeeel like the distinction doesn't matter at this point.I'm curious, how do you run an unprepped game?Jot down the high points you want to have done, make it up as you go at the table.I see. So it's not 100% unprepped. How do you do with encounters?
From there it's just a matter of flipping through bestiaries [even better sorting through digital content] keeping an eye open for interesting encounters while weaving what's going on in the world into a living breathing entity with thousands of wheels turning.I feel like this is enough for me to consider it prep work.
I mean really reading the book at all is prep work at that point.
to add to that I have ran some games with absolutely zero prep work (unless were counting reading the books at some point in time) as in they caught be on a day I wasn't intending to run. I made up encounters as I went along literally assigning random hp and ac based on what i felt they could handle and the story was mostly player driven (to be fair my group is good at motivating themselves)
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The key in understanding people is context.
In a perfect world, that would be great, if people could be trusted to treat everyone with the benefit of the doubt, and go looking for mitigating context within their whole statement.
But people don't; they react to trigger words, which stand out from the text, and it causes them to adopt a bad first impression.
That initial distaste doesn't encourage them to sift through what could be a long post, so no matter how well-nuanced the argument, it falls flat at that first hurdle.
Gorbacz recently got himself a three-day suspension, for using the N-word, even though he was using it in an example of 'things not to say'. We could laugh about it, but it illustrates how moderators don't have time or patience to sift for context in a flagged post or thread.
So, when there are better terms, which don't carry the baggage, it's better to defer to them.
If you really want to compliment one of your fellow players for being rules-mechanically knowledgeable, then do so.
"John, this is Jane. She's new to the game, played a pre-gen, but wants some help making her first character. You're the one with the best grasp of the rules, could you help her turn her idea into a legal and effective PC?"
"Sure, I'd be glad to help."
As opposed to;
"Jane, this is John, our resident rollplayer..."
"Whoah, hold on a minute. I roleplay just as much as anyone at this table, sometimes more."
"Oh, I didn't MEAN anything by that. Calm down."
well in an actual conversation you wouldn't tell the difference verbally, but I take your point.
I will say I don't think the term is particularly clever or descriptive of what its going for.
|
I think the whole debate is false. They are two sides to the same coin and you really can't have one without the other.
I'm not sure, if anyone commented on this, but I'd like to disagree wholeheartedly. I've run whole games without any single roll involved (in fact, there weren't even rules apart from some informal social contract we discussed beforehand).
Now while we used the Realms' Dalelands as a setting, we didn't play anything like D&D for sure. But it was still roleplaying.
This said, the distinction is still meaningless, because roleplaying by rolling the dice is still roleplaying, it's just that you use another mechanism to solve conflicts or tasks within the game.
I'm confused, most of the posts we're removed from today and yesterday, and I don't remember anything having to do with what you explained.
Sara Marie if you can put some extra time and see if you can unremove some posts that would be appreciated, as it is, i feel the discussion got snipped at the bud now. If not, that's fine too, I know your job can be a hassle.
The heck did I miss
Customer Service Manager
|
I'm confused, most of the posts we're removed from today and yesterday, and I don't remember anything having to do with what you explained.
Sara Marie if you can put some extra time and see if you can unremove some posts that would be appreciated, as it is, i feel the discussion got snipped at the bud now. If not, that's fine too, I know your job can be a hassle.
In this thread I have only removed one post.
|
I'll be fine with either roleplayers or rollplayers in my game, but I'd still make it abundantly clear that more then half of the game would not be combat heavy with stronger focus on social interaction, intrigue, and exploration.
Experience with not be derived from simply killing things and through combat but by overcoming the challenges or scenario before the characters, experience gained by the completion of the goals outlined or situations overcome during the session.
If a player doesn't think they'd enjoy such a campaign, they wouldn't have to join.
Whose post was removed?
When in doubt, assume it's one of mine.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'll be fine with either roleplayers or rollplayers in my game
*headdesk*
*headdesk**headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
In this thread I have only removed one post.I'm confused, most of the posts we're removed from today and yesterday, and I don't remember anything having to do with what you explained.
Sara Marie if you can put some extra time and see if you can unremove some posts that would be appreciated, as it is, i feel the discussion got snipped at the bud now. If not, that's fine too, I know your job can be a hassle.
ARGH, my mistake, for some reason my mind thought this was the same thread as the "15 PB does it appeal to you?" thread. my apologies.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll be fine with either roleplayers or rollplayers in my game*headdesk*
*headdesk**headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
Breathe deeply and let it flow through you and then your head will become like the desk and pass through to the other side, or just hit it harder.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I believe the issue is with "either". As that continues the line of thinking that they are opposites of each other and not just very different things.
if you had said, "I'll be fine with roleplayers and rollplayers in my game" You might have received less *headdesk*
if you had said, "I'll be fine with any kind of player in my game" You might have received no *headdesk*
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I used those words simple for the sake of this thread. If I label players I prefer other descriptors such as 'The Storyteller', 'The Specialist', 'The Power Gamer', 'The Method Actor', exc.*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk**headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
*headdesk*
Still not getting it. The idea that those have to be discrete contradictory labels is the problem with the thinking in the thread.