+- Hydaelyn Role-Players (https://ffxiv-roleplayers.com/mybb18)
+-- Forum: Community (https://ffxiv-roleplayers.com/mybb18/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Forum: RP Discussion (https://ffxiv-roleplayers.com/mybb18/forumdisplay.php?fid=13)
+--- Thread: Defining RP (/showthread.php?tid=74)
Re: Defining RP - Smiling River - 03-22-2010
Yes, I think we can all agree that it's more of spectrum.
Re: Defining RP - Kylin - 03-22-2010
Maybe we should come up with another term to replace "hardcore." I think people are taking the casual/hardcore to the absolute extremes when they're actually not. For instance, I've always considered myself "hardcore" through all 5 years of RP in Vana'diel. I'll consider myself a hardcore RPer in Eorzea as well. Does that mean I RP 24/7? No. I basically just made whatever RP linkshell I was in my main shell, keeping it on at all times outside of dynamis/limbus. None of my characters were ever fully planned out either and sometimes I just added in character elements on the fly when I had to due to IC questions/interactions from others. Despite this, I still classified myself as "hardcore." I think that word may just come off as too derogatory to some for some reason.
Re: Defining RP - Kurenai - 03-22-2010
:scratch: In depth player? Purist? Immersive player? Full-time player?
Re: Defining RP - Aveline - 03-22-2010
I don't know about derogatory, but it seems like since this is an attempt for us to define roleplaying as it relates to our collective groups in FFXIV, we should have a comprehensive definition. This text is likely to be seen by many players who are new to roleplaying in MMOs, or who have heard of it or are curious.
If I was interested in trying something out--say a new hobby--and I went to a website for information and found reference to only two styles of participation: fluffy bunny or 24/7 immersion, I would be put off to say the least. While individually we might have different concepts of what it means to be hardcore, collectively we're putting together a general definition that gives interested players some idea of what this is all about. I think explaining 'casual' and 'hardcore' are important, but so is making it clear that those are by far not the only two ways in which the RP community interacts with each other.
Re: Defining RP - happybyday - 03-22-2010
Quote:Maybe we should come up with another term to replace "hardcore."
I don't know if it's about replacing hardcore as a term. Maybe it's more or less about saying "The range of play goes anywhere from casual, to full-immersion, and anything or everything in between" ... perhaps even indicating examples of balances in between.
If I at least knew it was normal to strike a balance (assuming I had never played before), that might be more of a comfort and encouragement.
Re: Defining RP - Guest - 03-22-2010
A scale from casual to full immersion definitely sounds best. I've found it's better to avoid a black-and-white mentality, and full immersion sounds more accurate than hardcore.
Re: Defining RP - Merri - 03-22-2010
Personally, I don't even really see the point in "Tagging" a roleplayer as Casual, or Hardcore, as was mentioned above by a few people. Having a list of different "Levels" of roleplaying could be a deterrent in it's own right. I believe the best description would simply be to make note on the two opposite ends of the spectrum, while mentioning all of the grey area inbetween. Simply because any "level" could have it's own tweaks based on the person in question. Perhaps they wish to roleplay every day, but they don't really want to get too deep into character development. Or perhaps they only wish to roleplay once in a blue moon, but when they do, they want to do so on a very deep level. There's really quite a few factors to tie in to be able to really nail down all of the different aspects of roleplay.
Again, that's just how I see it. Personal opinion.
But if I were to give rough definition of "core" levels?...
Light Roleplayer: A player who may enjoy a form of "No-strings-attached" roleplay. Tends to be out of character more than they are in-character, and generally do not participate in in-depth character development and/or Roleplay.
Casual Roleplayer: A light mix between being out of character, and in-character. They enjoy their out of character activities, but still enjoy engaging in roleplay on a regular (or somewhat regular) basis. They may or may not participate in deep character development and/or plotting.
Moderate Roleplayer: This player tends to lean more towards their roleplay, than their out of character goals. They enjoy engaging in deep character development, and prefer only a light amount of out-of-character conduct.
Heavy Roleplayer: Full on immersion. This player enjoys staying in character almost 24/7. They may still engage in out-of-character activities, though it is by no means a priority. They enjoy deep character development and plotlines.
Again, any of those are really impossible to nail down. Pretty much any part of those can fit in any of the levels. For example, a roleplayer might enjoy being in-character almost 24/7, and still participate in end-game content. I just don't really see an easy way to nail down anything. Only give a rough example of what different levels most people tend to fall into.
Re: Defining RP - happybyday - 03-22-2010
Promyvion Wrote:Light Roleplayer: A player who may enjoy a form of "No-strings-attached" roleplay. Tends to be out of character more than they are in-character, and generally do not participate in in-depth character development and/or Roleplay.
Casual Roleplayer: A light mix between being out of character, and in-character. They enjoy their out of character activities, but still enjoy engaging in roleplay on a regular (or somewhat regular) basis. They may or may not participate in deep character development and/or plotting.
Moderate Roleplayer: This player tends to lean more towards their roleplay, than their out of character goals. They enjoy engaging in deep character development, and prefer only a light amount of out-of-character conduct.
Heavy Roleplayer: Full on immersion. This player enjoys staying in character almost 24/7. They may still engage in out-of-character activities, though it is by no means a priority. They enjoy deep character development and plotlines.
Props on this, honestly. Very well done.
Myself, I'm still somewhere in between Casual and Moderate (I'd say I'm literally a 50/50 gal when it comes to role playing, though I may try to move more toward the 70/30 area in favor of RP), but these are very well defined on the spectrum and I think give a broader range of what's out there rather than simply leaving it at two extremes.
I think if we left it at something like this, and cited them as examples of what's out there on the spectrum of role play, that this would really be a great addition.
Re: Defining RP - Kylin - 03-22-2010
Okay, how about this:
Definition:
Role-play is defined as making a conscious effort to act out the role of a particular character. This is done through one’s language and behavior. A role-player also separates out of character behavior with their in character behavior to some degree. Spontaneous just for fun emotes do not constitute as RP unless such emotes are consistent with what the character would actually do. Role-play is basically writing and acting a believable role in a particular setting, much like characters from a movie or television show. Role-play is seeing the world through the eyes of your character rather than yourself.
When one is actively role-playing, they are considered in character (IC). When talking about real life, game mechanics, and so on, one is considered out of character (OOC).
Classes of RP:
Role-playing can be divided into four classes: light, casual, moderate, and heavy. These are by no means the full spectrum and many role-players fall somewhere in between certain categories.
Light Role-player: A player who may enjoy a form of "No-strings-attached" role-play. Tends to be out of character more than they are in-character, and generally do not participate in in-depth character development and/or Role-play. He/she may assume a spontaneous role with little planning.
Casual Role-player: A light mix between being out of character, and in-character. They enjoy their out of character activities, but still enjoy engaging in role-play on a semi-regular basis. They may or may not participate in deep character development and/or plotting.
Moderate Role-player: This player tends to lean more towards their role-play than their out of character goals. They enjoy engaging in deep character development and prefer only a light amount of out-of-character conduct. He/she typically has a good understanding of their character’s traits, habits, and other details.
Heavy Role-player: Full on immersion. This player enjoys staying in character as often as possible. They may still engage in out-of-character activities, though it is by no means a priority. They enjoy deep character development and plotlines, having an intimidate understanding and connection to their character.
Freelance role-players, while not a "class" of RP, deserve mentioning as well. The term "freelance" refers to the role-players not affiliated with a particular RP group.
======================
Should freelance RPing be included anywhere or should we just leave that to be a common sense phrase? It's not exactly a "class" of RP like the above are and all it means is not being affiliated to any RP group.
I also want to remind you all that there is a guild classification system when it comes to determining what type of RP group a guild is. RP guilds under the RPC will be required to choose a classification for themselves. This is because people looking for a guild want to know above all else what type of RP guild it is before joining. This is a major factor to deciding whether a RPer joins a guild or not. Currently, the classification system can be viewed here: <!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://ff14-rp.webs.com/guilds.htm">http://ff14-rp.webs.com/guilds.htm</a><!-- m -->
Should that classification system remain as is or be adapted to fit the above categories instead?
I'm hoping this will be ready to go up for official vote in the next couple days.
Re: Defining RP - Merri - 03-22-2010
As far as the definition / classes go, I think that's perfect.
On the subject of the guild classifications, though, perhaps if anything, just a simple re-wording would suffice. I tend to see "Hardcore" as a rather strong word. Where as Heavy implies the same thing, though in a less "agressive" (For lack of a better word) manner.
As far as Freelance RP is concerned, I believe it should at least be mentioned. So if anyone had the question of "If I want to Roleplay, do I have to join a guild?", they would at least have an answer right then and there.
Re: Defining RP - Nanapariri - 03-22-2010
Freelance should be included so people know they don't have to be in a guild to join.
Re: Defining RP - Klare - 03-22-2010
Yep I agree with Tsumi. Being a freelancer myself (with Klare at least for rp purposes) it be nice to know that us freelancers can still interact and rp with a guild even without being apart of it. Maybe we can make up a non-guildie type guild or hub out of game where all freelancers can hang out and swap idea's, info, or just talk.
Maybe even have both an IC page (A general bar for example) and an ooc page for both freelancers and guldies.
Then if say someone from a guild wanted to get in contact or rp with a freelancer person they can just find them on the fourms and
1) contact them to set up an rp in game or have a private rp outside of game.
2) invite whoever to an rp event.
3) roleplay and create character development between said characters.
4) can just chat.
Only problem I see to that is if there's going to be multiple servers (which more then likely there will be).
Re: Defining RP - Guest - 03-22-2010
Well if I'm not mistaken, pretty much the whole point of this forum is to attract the majority of RPers to one server, so that we're not spread out all over the place like we were in FFXI. That is, if SE doesn't designate an official RP server.
Re: Defining RP - Smiling River - 03-22-2010
Quote:Definition:
Role-play is defined as making a conscious effort to act out the role of a particular character. This is done through one’s language and behavior. A role-player also separates out of character behavior with their in character behavior to some degree. Spontaneous just for fun emotes do not constitute as RP unless such emotes are consistent with what the character would actually do. Role-play is basically writing and acting a believable role in a particular setting, much like characters from a movie or television show.
I think you can also say something like: Role-Play is seeing the world through the eyes of your character rather than yourself.
It doesn't all have to be "dictionary" like, although the terms you have there are needed. Also I would suggest taking out what is NOT RP from the definition. I'd put it in it's own little section, or just mention it else where. If anything it can be rephrased to describe RP (rather than describe the negative; what is not RP). For example: Emotes are a big part of Role-Play and how your character interacts physically with other characters and the environment.
Re: Defining RP - Kylin - 03-22-2010
Added a tiny mentioning of freelance RPers and added another sentence to the definition of RP.
I don't think it's a good idea making a separate section for what isn't RP. Then we might as well make a separate section for what isn't godmode or what isn't meta-gaming. I like how the emote phrase is worded personally since a lot of non-RPers have some preconceived notion that any and all emotes equate to RP. It'll help dissolve those beliefs.
Klare Wrote:Maybe we can make up a non-guildie type guild or hub out of game where all freelancers can hang out and swap idea's, info, or just talk. Maybe even have both an IC page (A general bar for example) and an ooc page for both freelancers and guldies.
As Laychield stated, this is kind of the entire purpose of this coalition
. The RPC is for ALL RPers, including freelancers. This topic doesn't seem to have a lot of interest overall anymore and I think most people just want to vote on it and move on at this point. So are we done with further suggestions or no?