Conquest of the Horde

A Critique of Pure Roleplay

Why hullo there, ladies and gents. In the same vein as an older post, another little issue has crept up to my attention. This time, the subject in question is role-play, and this post attempts to take a gander at the notion of it, and the way it should both bring us together and keep us apart. Sounds paradoxical, doesn't it?

Competitive Role-playing

Now, we all encounter competitive role-play once in a while, or have at least once in our RP career. Competitive role-play pits player against player in order to achieve some goal. It's most commonly found in tournaments, when characters go toe to toe with each-other in order to get some grand prize, granted to the last (wo)man standing.

Competitive role-play is sometimes avoided because it has the tendency to cause drama. Generally, people don't want to lose. There are always exceptions - individuals who just go with the flow in order to further the storyline towards both good and bad ends, but most people don't like the character they've spent time and effort on to be crumpled and tossed off.

While everyone is free to take wins, losses and competitiveness in whichever way they like, my urge is towards being respectful. Both as a winner and as a loser. Take things with grace, and be willing to compromise. Try not to be ruthless in your wins, or utterly defeatist when it comes to losses. Life's like a rollercoaster. It has its ups and downs. Don't think in absolutes.

The usual way through which people resolve competitive situations is roll-fighting. It's pretty fair, seeing as luck is the only factor to it. You can spice things up with modifiers, but if you add too many, it becomes far too tedious, distracting from the actual role-playing rather than enhancing it. Then there's trust-fighting.

Trust-fighting is in essence a display of the very thing it's named after: Trust in your fellow player, but also in yourself. I've had problems with the latter myself, in that I simply don't trust myself not to overdo things. But that's beside the point. When you're comfortable with a player and their play-style, Trust-fighting can be a pretty enjoyable experience.

Now, while combat is quite in-depth when it comes to Trust, there's a bit of a damper when it comes to the ending: It's usually an already established fact as to who will win. The thrill that comes with the luck of the draw is absent here. It reads more like a book than playing like an RPG.

Whichever way you choose to settle your competitive role-playing sessions, be it through the luck of the draw, trust or some hybrid of the two, take your victories and losses with humility. Try not to gloat nor whine (OOC-ly. IC-ly, it's fine). And make sure you're comfortable with the competitive situation you're in before committing to it. You can always back out of something you're uncomfortable with - and keep in mind, not everyone might enjoy conflict in the same way you do.

Cooperative Role-playing

Here's where CoTH shines. Cooperative Role-playing has players work together, combining their forces to achieve a common goal. This is typically done in two ways. Events and storylines.

Events tend to be large-scale cooperative occurrences, in which a large amount of players tackle the same challenge, or series of challenges in the case of an event-line. Events tend to focus on what happens, and serve to propel the collective story of the group rather than the individual stories of its participants, and how they deal with each instance in which they find themselves.

Events tend to be open for anyone fitting to participate, and are a pretty good way to meet new people, should you be in need of such. Thankfully, CoTH has quite regular events, most of the time, for a variety of possible participants.

Storylines are usually small-scale cooperative role-play instances in which a small group of players seeks to achieve some goal in hopes of furthering a continuous story thread. Where Events are group-centric, Storylines tend to be character-centric, and focus on who the characters are, exploring their every facet, and placing them in diverse situations to make them react to various stimuli.

Storylines are usually personal adventures, meant for a small group akin to the traditional RPG Party, whereas an Event plays out more like an RTS(Or TBS), in gaming terms. Storylines can end up fairly closed-off or even isolationist due to their exclusive nature. It's not so much elitism as it is an attempt at preserving continuity, in a situation where introducing new people becomes unfeasible due to the usually large amount of occurrences that have already transpired.

That's not to say that one form of cooperative role-playing is better than the other. While Events are exceptionally open to participants, they tend to blend characters into anonymity, and don't really leave much room for expression - there's literally no time for elaborate, complex stuff when sixteen other people are waiting for their turn. Likewise, whilst Storylines allow you to delve very deeply into your character and write long, descriptive emotes in which you can describe and interact with the environment or other characters with great care, they end up pretty closed-off and can go off the deep end into isolationism.

The gist of the matter is to simply do what you like. No one will ever force you into one form of cooperative role-playing or another. You are a free role-player, and so long as you role-play, even with a single other person, you're contributing to the server as a whole. Be it in huge events, or one-on-one storylines, just role-play.

Only Sith Deal In Absolutes

This short section should be pretty self-explanatory. Cooperative and Competitive Role-playing are none too separate. Sure, situations can end up tailored to one form of RP or another - such as Events, but that can always change through IC interaction(Though it might peeve the DM if the adventuring party suddenly decides to fight among themselves).

No single form of role-playing is absolute, and they mix and meld more often than not. Some storyline might have you attacking your friends, and some brawling tournament might be interrupted by a surprise monster attack, in which the fighters have to work together to survive/win. Enjoy the 'crossover' moments while they last 'cause they can be quite fun and unexpected. Though again - be respectful towards players and the characters they may've worked their rears off to create(No Rocks Fall Everybody Dies moments, puh-lease).

The Controversial Bit
A.K.A. Separation Anxiety

Having come through all of that, we reach the deliciously creamy core of the issue. The separation between IC and OOC. Now, the problem's been talked about before - ever since a certain someone wrote an absolutely ancient General Discussion post about it near the start of CoTH(Yes, I do read threads that far back. They're interesting!) - so, rather than droning on about what's been said before, I'll try putting things in a new light.

Being a kiddo that's come into contact with a fair amount of philosophy and writing theory, I've encountered a bunch of things that fit into this issue perfectly. The first is a little excerpt from the Manifesto of one of the first literary critique magazines over here, namely Literary Dacia: "We will criticize the book, and not the author."

Sounds familiar, doesn't it? It's about the same as the theory behind Ad Hominem attacks - basically, when criticizing something, rather than referring to the work at hand, you attack the person who wrote or made it. It's quite unfair to damn written work just because you dislike the writer, and worse to attack the writer for their written work.

This translates exceptionally well to our situation. When giving criticism(Hopefully of the constructive variety) on players' characters, do so without making reference to the player themselves. If you comment on a Profile for instance(Since we all like doing that once in a while), provide criticism/advice for the Profile itself, not for the player, because the player does not factor into whether the Profile is good enough to be approved or not.

It applies to absolutely all arts, not just writing. Over here, our greatest poet went insane and died around thirty years of age. He's still regarded as our very best. In music, a bunch of artists take up bad habits. Does Elvis' lifestyle prevent him from being the King of Rock 'n Roll? Johnny Cash's addiction prevent his awesome songs from being awesome? In Physics, did Einstein's womanizing prevent him from being an awesome physicist?(Unimaginable, I know. I've just ruined your view of Einstein) No.

Who the person doing the work is, and what their habits are do not matter, so long as the work presented is good. Learn to separate a person's work from their actual being. The two have no bearing on each-other, when it comes to writing. In the same way, learn to separate a player's Characters/Profiles/Storylines from the actual Player and their habits.

If ya' really wanna help out, help people with the work presented to you by them. Don't go 'Ah, I don't think you'd be a very good fit for this, because you...', but rather 'I don't think your character/storyline/profile is a very good fit, and here's why and how to improve it...'.

I recall in the Rules something akin to the following: "Just because their character is harassing yours doesn't mean you might not like to sit down to lunch with the player." In the same vein, if you have something against a player or their habits, from general dislike to disapproval, that does not mean that their Storylines/Character/Profiles have any less value. It's a hard notion to come to terms with, I know. I've had... pretty big problems with it in the past, myself. But in the end, I've overcome them, I feel. And you can too.

Separate the IC and OOC, the Player and their work, and when you judge or give advice and criticism, do so fairly, refraining from ad-hominem attacks. And, try and be nice and give people chances, will ya'? Being stonewalled is not the most fun of experiences.

That's all I've gotta' say, for now. If something crops up or pops into my head, I'll let you know.

Oh, and Coff? I luff you.

Absolutely, and just to underline - The reverse of the medal should be, though, that people should not take critique of their content as being offensive to themselves. Avoid the "Gah, how can you play that?!" tone, as well as the "I'll play whatever, doesn't have to make sense to you, has to make sense to me, fel off!" tone.

I'd also extend the common advice of sleeping on it when it comes to criticizing someone. The nature of or the things done in RP might rile up some emotions. Let yourself cool down before trying to formulate your thoughts.

Very true. Also, the reverse applies, in that: Though for example, I'd count a random member of the community among my friends, I'd expect them not to slacken at any point, and treat my work(and criticize it) as though they'd never met me. Tabula Rasa.

That's the only way things are fair. (Also, sleep helps prevent a -lot- of bad decisions, in my experience.)

I can certainly agree with your view on criticism and critique. I've always been immersed in the bitter world of literary critique, and you can take quite a beating to your pride when someone tells you your work is garbage. However, if you trust them as a fellow writer, you need to go back and take a look at your work before you respond. Sometimes the story you've babied for a month needs to be taken behind the shed and shot. It happens. Criticism is a friendly service, a boon to writers everywhere, and when people stop doing that for you, you end up making mistakes like Star Wars Episode 1.

I liked Star Wars episode 1 though...

Jar Jar was hilarious.

Seriously. Totally underappreciated.


OT: I think you're wrong.

There's nothing controversial here.

;]

At the heart of this lies peoples' tendencies to not be able to separate emotion from fact. Just because a comment feels like a personal attack, doesn't mean it is, just as one shouldn't listen to their emotions when they become willing to sacrifice good group RP for to promote their character's personal interests.
I can't trust my emotions because of health stuff, and its made me spend a lot of my energy figuring out the truth of a situation, as well as notice the fact that, for some reason, "how you feel ≠what is going on" isn't a moral hammered into our heads form infancy. I mean, its hinted at sometimes, like "don't get carried away," but it isn't stated bluntly at all.

Yes I read children's books a lot and don't look at me like that theyre awesome bluh

Thank you for this post. The part about "Separation anxiety" is great. Not just here on CoTH, but all over the place... people have trouble losing their characters. I haven't even noticed this so much, till I read a crappy article slamming Bioware for not giving all the characters lovey-dovey peaceful endings where everyone is happy.

They brought up the fact that Harry Potter's writer ORIGINALLY wanted to kill off Harry, Ron, and Hermoine, but due to the response she received when merely suggesting it... she decided not to. Now... I understand growing attached to characters, I really do, but this isn't an actual person. If they die in a book, or in a movie, or.. in roleplay, they aren't -really- dead. Same goes for if they lose an arm, an eye, or if they get disfigured.

No-one should take the pain of an imaginary character seriously. If you do, there's some sort of disconnect, or rather a distortion of reality. Now, don't automatically assume I'm saying that if you like your character and want them to succeed that you're "insane and in need of help", what I -am- saying is that it shouldn't bother you to have your character take physical and mental damage into the fold of other traits they may have. If you're a good writer or roleplayer, you shouldn't have trouble making it an interesting part of the facade.

Before I derail slightly, I will extend a thank you for this thread.

Quote:No-one should take the pain of an imaginary character seriously. If you do, there's some sort of disconnect, or rather a distortion of reality. Now, don't automatically assume I'm saying that if you like your character and want them to succeed that you're "insane and in need of help", what I -am- saying is that it shouldn't bother you to have your character take physical and mental damage into the fold of other traits they may have. If you're a good writer or roleplayer, you shouldn't have trouble making it an interesting part of the facade.

I don't fully agree, here. I might be missing your point, and if so then disregard my response, but I don't think that empathising with the pain of a character - even one that isn't yours - is a bad thing. It isn't good when those feelings cause you to yank them out of the path of an oncoming train: That is downright shoddy. It's a mistake I've personally made as a writer, and one I won't ever make again because of how much I hated that I'd done it. Despite that, I don't regret that I felt pity towards my character - only that I spared them because of it. It might now be too little, too late, but I did retcon the decision I made and I feel more at ease for that amendment, even if it no longer even holds any weight or bearing but for the select few.

Stories make us laugh as much as they make us cry. The fact that the characters are imaginary doesn't mean their happiness, their sadness, their gain or loss is any less real. Those things came from the hearts of writers - humans, people - and thus are fully capable of being intimately poignant and stirring.

Quote:It isn't good when those feelings cause you to yank them out of the path of an oncoming train: That is downright shoddy.

That's basically what I was saying, yes, and I knew people would take it the other way, which is why I went further and elaborated what I was saying. However, there's a difference between feeling empathetic towards a character, and getting in a fuss because someone in a book "Died". Feeling sad that a writer wants to kill Chewbacca is normal.. sending him death threats is not.

Does that make more sense?

(03-24-2012, 06:02 PM)Rensin Wrote: [ -> ]Feeling sad that a writer wants to kill Chewbacca is normal.. sending him death threats is not.

... I stopped reading the Star Wars novels just after reading that book. Then again, I wasn't too impressed with the Bor-- err, Yuuzhan Vong.