(06-28-2015, 03:08 PM)Intaki Wrote:(06-28-2015, 03:01 PM)Addison Wrote: To put it plainly, because 'weak' characters aren't special snowflakes.I would beg to differ, but before going further down that path I'd first ask that you explicitly outline what constitutes a special snowflake.
(06-28-2015, 03:31 PM)Addison Wrote: My use of the term "special snowflake" was in no way derogatory nor was it elitist. But that's your opinion, and I'll respect it, the way I've always respected peoples' views on this topic.
I could spend all day arguing debating this topic, but I'll leave the thread with this quote:
"When everyone is super, then no one is."
I, too, was hoping for some sort of explanation of what makes a character a 'special snowflake'. Though, at this point, regardless of your intentions 'special snowflake' is already a derogatory term. A single person does not make the meaning, rather words are born and take shape from the community they spring up from.
I find it admirable that you respect others' views. If you'd like to use language and words that aren't seen as 'derogatory' and 'elitist' then I would recommend to anyone reading to coin a new term or phrase. Different words can end up meaning the same thing but they will always have different connotations. ' Special snowflake'in this case is a negative one and there's no way getting around it.
Though, we might be approaching a need for a new thread at this point. On the subject of special snowflakes though and how they relate to the thread--I suppose being powerful in RP is something of a commodity. It is easily a very desirable aspect to have in a RP character. Being a 'badass' is a trait that seemingly almost every RPer strives for in a character. We have gritty badasses, adorable badasses, unassuming badasses, femme fatale badasses, survival badasses.Â
As Addison notes, it's harder for people's characters to feel competent when everyone is quite capable. This reaches all the way back to the earliest instances of roleplaying: Chiefs and Indians. Or some other variation. Everyone wants to be a chief.
But then how do we get to decide who gets to be a chief? According to this thread, I guess you have to be high-level. Despite the fact that you face your first primal by the time you're level 20.
A desire for more every day characters is so high in demand but so few in number that even those who dislike special snowflakes hold powerful characters themselves. I wonder if the qualifications to be a 'special snowflake' are particularly high considering I've only run into a grand total of 2 completely normal characters in my entire year and a half on this server.
It's a competition amongst role players that seems to be born from mistrust. We've all had negative encounters to some degree and we don't want repeats of those. When I look back on this thread I feel like the need to attach roleplay with levels isn't done to keep OOC and IC mechanics together, but as an act of mistrust. We don't want to be burned again, essentially. That's just my impression anyway.
It's also a competition that I like to stay out of. Because it IS a competition and that's not what role-play should be about. My solution is to just never get into combat with other players' characters or to keep that number of RPer vs. RPer type RPs as low as possible. It's worked for me.
