Roleplaying: Character Motivations vs Player Motivations in Off Topic

ID:113578
 
May 22 2011, 12:01 pm (Edited on May 22 2011, 12:59 pm)
If you've ever played a game that enforces a roleplaying atmosphere, IE, one that requires you to play out a persona that isn't you, then what is more important to you?

In roleplaying, it is generally assumed that the player and the character are two seperate entities, meaning that the motivations that drive the character are totally different from the motivations that drive the person playing the character. It is this differentiation that many roleplaying games seem to overlook where roleplaying is the primary focus of the game over all of it's other mechanics.

Where roleplaying games differ from other games is that true roleplaying cannot be employed as a code enforced mechanic - it relies upon a mutual understanding between all players to know the limits and expectations of what they can and are expected to do.

This boils down to a few age old rules that I've encountered, which I will discuss to any other roleplaying fan:

You are not your character, your character is not you.

This is the golden rule and one of the primary foundations of roleplaying, and is very self explanatory. You, the player, the person behind the monitor, looking at the screen, typing on the keyboard, are not the same person as the character, the person in the game, the person who is experiencing first hand the fictitious world infront of them.

Yet this rule seems to be one of the most overlooked, because time and time again I see people acting upon the players own wishes and motivations, instead of their characters, and this seems to be because no attempt at differentiation was made in the first place: Make a character that is not yourself, and make sure their goals are their own, and do not make the goals of the character the goals of the player.

In Character Actions = In Character Consequences (ICA=ICC)

This one is also very important, but is not as well known as the former. It is also very self explanatory (Which is the nice thing about us roleplayers, we tend to be straight forward in our teachings) and means that what your character does in character will lead to consequences taken that are also in character. As an example, if someone kills your character in a fair, IC manner, then you are not supposed to get angry at them OOCly as a player, or take action against them OOCly. In character stays in character!

I'll probably do more of these posts, as it's one of my most favourite activities and something I enjoy passionately. Once again, thank you for reading, and feel free to share your own view via comments.
#1 May 22 2011, 12:34 pm
We need more people like you on BYOND.
#2 May 22 2011, 12:53 pm
Kaiochao wrote:
We need more people like you on BYOND.


She is one of a kind. =P
#3 May 22 2011, 3:16 pm
_> An intelligent RPer on BYOND?
And Female? (Presuming this isn't a trap)

...Tell me she's single. I'd kill over this! Never thought I'd see the day!
-Latoma
#4 May 22 2011, 3:17 pm
She is intelligent. She is a female. It probabaly isn't a trap. And idk if she be single :c
#5 May 22 2011, 3:25 pm
The entire point of roleplaying is to kill bad guys, get all of the powerful artifacts, and be the hero no matter what the cost. To roleplay is to win, and winning is all that matters.

trollface.jpg
#6 May 22 2011, 4:04 pm
Traitors and turn coats make for interesting characters, if done right. Gather the information needed, then backstab your so-called friends. Even when filled with regret, it makes for an excellent plot twist.

...it will never happen on BYOND without it being personal. Most people think of my characters as being an extension of me; that I am the character. If my little guy ever betrayed yours, then you'd cringe and think twice about ever playing with me again. Making the separation between character and player is just too difficult for some (most) people to grap on multiplayer games.
#7 May 22 2011, 4:17 pm
SqueakyReaper wrote:
Traitors and turn coats make for interesting characters, if done right. Gather the information needed, then backstab your so-called friends. Even when filled with regret, it makes for an excellent plot twist.

...it will never happen on BYOND without it being personal. Most people think of my characters as being an extension of me; that I am the character. If my little guy ever betrayed yours, then you'd cringe and think twice about ever playing with me again. Making the separation between character and player is just too difficult for some (most) people to grap on multiplayer games.

I know.

I don't give a damn about one of the 2 characters I play on a BYOND game. But he's insane (Insomniac, by game alignment) so he's fucking crazy for power to destroy the world simply cause he loves the sight of blood after killing a kid during a spar at school from the result of insomnia.

Wanna bet I get called a power gamer despite the fact he has every reason and intent to gain every damn piece of power he can get, and I'd rather just suicide him?


The other's a guardian, and would give his life to protect those near him. He's ironically viewed the most "Heroic" in the organization he's in. Ironically, I got called power gamer on him since he desires power only to protect. And not the other. Wut?

Smh.

-Latoma.
#8 May 22 2011, 4:28 pm
Every RP game I've ever played on BYOND had one ( or more ) of the following:

1. Too many people who were just there to grief ( Cow RP/ Cowed )

2. Power-abusing admins ( this is actually the case in 90% of BYOND games, not just the RP ones )

3. Elitists ( people that start criticizing your grammar or telling you that what you're doing is too powerful/unrealistic/not fair or not RPed well enough ). I logged into some server of RP Unlimited and I felt like I was in Chatters. That's how bad it was.
#9 May 22 2011, 4:31 pm
EmpirezTeam wrote:
3. Elitists ( people that start criticizing your grammar or telling you that what you're doing is too powerful/unrealistic/not fair or not RPed well enough ). I logged into some server of RP Unlimited and I felt like I was in Chatters. That's how bad it was.


To be fair, I understand their point of view on "unrealistic" or "Not RPed well enough".

The more realistic, the less "God moddish" it seems. And god modding is bad, period.

As for "Not RPed well enough". Well, I use the following argument I use ALL the time:

"You dodged? That's it?"
"Yep!"
"...Okay. So you "dodged" 1 CM to the left, as you're still "attempting" to dodge, but sadly 1 CM isn't enough for you to avoid my sledgehammer from breaking your face in."
"But I dodged!"
"Indeed you did. 1 CM."


The more detailed your posts, the less arguments, and the more quickly RP can continue along. It also makes the battles play out more cleanly in one's head when reviewed too, which is more fun for everyone.
#10 May 22 2011, 4:33 pm
...and takes more typing, and time to do. If someone's grammar and typing skills are subpar already, then being super descriptive isn't going to help much sadly. I think most people think better with dialogue than they do with actions; while watching Pokemon, for example, you just hear them say "DODGE, PIKACHU" rather than where or how to dodge. That might be part of the problem, so to speak.
#11 May 22 2011, 4:45 pm
SqueakyReaper wrote:
...and takes more typing, and time to do. If someone's grammar and typing skills are subpar already, then being super descriptive isn't going to help much sadly. I think most people think better with dialogue than they do with actions; while watching Pokemon, for example, you just hear them say "DODGE, PIKACHU" rather than where or how to dodge. That might be part of the problem, so to speak.

Well that's a person telling a Pokemon what to do. You're telling it to escape, so it knows to gtfo of there.

Here? You're saying you dodge. Problem? There's literally a Million ways to dodge, maybe half of which will not provide you any escape from the attack.

Your character is an idiot without your input. It is not a sentient being. YOu tell your character to duck, it can literally just go 1 Cm and that's it. Literally.

I agree on the grammar, but that's a different problem altogether. I mean do you really want to RP with "L0lz pikachu shootz thunder cheek from the!"
#12 May 22 2011, 4:54 pm
My grammar wasn't bad, it was the same as it was now.

When I first when in, it asked me to fill out some profile information about my character, so I whipped up a story and tried to fit into what was going on.

As soon as I type a sentence or two, some guy in OOC starts telling me how I need to RP. The usual "You can't do that" or "That didn't make sense". I was typing just as clear as everyone else. Then a few minutes later he tells me I can't RP until I send in an application and get "approved" to RP, then I ask him why he was being so difficult and he got the server host to ban me.

I should be able to RP without a person, or in some cases half the server, criticizing every sentence I type. The whole "You must prove yourself worthy to RP with us" stuff is idiotic.
#13 May 22 2011, 5:19 pm
Haha, thank you for the responses, I honestly didn't expect to get this many.

I think that the main problem lies with people's motivations being outside that of the IC realm. Actions that characters do ICly should be dealt with ICly as much as possible, and people are way too easy on starting the OOC shouting matches because something got on their nerves.

Roleplaying is a volatile environment simply because it can't be enforced by any objective entity - It is run by human players and and humans have emotions and feelings, which can get hurt.

The best thing is to teach yourself to become detached from the personas that you create. At the end of the day, the point of roleplaying is to create an atmosphere and an experience that is enjoyable for all, and that nothing happening is real.

All in all, roleplaying is a game that requires a person who can be objective and calm in their convictions. Any OOC arguing completely destroys the atmosphere of the roleplay at hand, and it takes maturity to be able to calm oneself down to a level where you are again able to think clearly and logically.
#14 May 22 2011, 8:00 pm
Most of the problems with roleplaying arise when combat becomes a question. No matter what happens, you're going to have people getting upset over combat, permanent death or not.

I must admit, mediating disputes between players gets to be a major pain in the ass. It's worst when it gets to be an OOC issue. :(
#15 May 22 2011, 8:05 pm
"But F0lak, he poked meeeeeee..."

I can't imagine how you handled Hazordhu. xD It was a shitstorm with Orcs.
#16 May 22 2011, 8:08 pm
SqueakyReaper wrote:
I can't imagine how you handled Hazordhu.

Nowadays it's not as much a problem as it used to be. As long as players emote something before they fight. As my playerbase right now is in its early teens, I can't expect them to be able to put out a nice well written blow by blow roleplay. As long as they throw off an emote describing their intent before they attack someone else, everyone gets along fine.
#17 May 23 2011, 1:35 am (Edited on May 23 2011, 1:42 am)
F0lak wrote:
Most of the problems with roleplaying arise when combat becomes a question. No matter what happens, you're going to have people getting upset over combat, permanent death or not.

I must admit, mediating disputes between players gets to be a major pain in the ass. It's worst when it gets to be an OOC issue. :(


I prefer the law of comparitive balance:

If human/roughly equal, leave character speeds to roughly equal and strengths. If someone clearly shows an upper hand in one area you can act superior in another. IE: Your opponent actually RPed and can confirm being a better jabber. You can have better footwork. If both worked on that area, you're even in every way again.

If both parties have powers, treat them as equals. If it comes down to a clash of techniques, they negate out, that simple, unless one is clearly meant to be a superior technique.

Fatigue should come into play roughly quickly the more activity a character puts in. A person moving a shield a couple inches and standing still will drain a lot less than the guy punching at him.

Honestly the more people are forced to explain HOW the technique would work the less likely people are to bitch. Sure, there'd be arguments like "where'd he get the energy to use that" but I'd rather that than "Zomg that's impossible!"
#18 May 23 2011, 10:06 am
Like I said, my players are too young for me to expect that depth from them, so we have a happy medium.
#19 May 23 2011, 1:59 pm
TH-Productions wrote:
F0lak wrote:
Most of the problems with roleplaying arise when combat becomes a question. No matter what happens, you're going to have people getting upset over combat, permanent death or not.

I must admit, mediating disputes between players gets to be a major pain in the ass. It's worst when it gets to be an OOC issue. :(


I prefer the law of comparitive balance:
...

The problem is that they have to represent a single character in the first place. The incentive changes from "make an interesting story" to "make my character cool", or, even worse, in D&D and the like, "make my character not lose a piece of equipment, or die".