RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes

Caspar · **09-12-2015, 05:22 AM**

Hm, in the past and in general my rule has always been "play the character." However, there have been times when I felt constrained by my character's behavior into doing something that would clearly upset the players opposite me. Typically I just did it and apologized if they felt OOC upset about it, and that worked fine. I still feel that 9/10 times simply playing my character works because I can conceive of many choices they would make that could bring about fun RP. That being said, while I'd like to just say "if you don't like it, tough," and play the hardass, there is a particular episode in which I felt very, very bad for my character's actions IC, despite the fact that I felt not only were they reasonable, but the only reasonable way to react given the circumstances. It's because of this instance that given a choice between creating ill feeling and ruining an RP for someone, or playing the character exactly as I want them to be played, I'll take the former. Ideally this never needs to happen as I design characters to be flexible under such circumstances now, wherein all choices are appropriate IC and yet there is clearly one which will bother the other player the least.

Show Content

SpoilerI played an Exalted campaign in the past with a close friend of mine. For those of you who don't know, you play various demigods in a very high-powered fantasy setting. It's been a long time since I've played, but as I remember, normal humans in Creation are very weak and useless in the face of the spirits and champions commonly encountered in such a campaign. Like in a lot of White Wolf IP, internal party conflict is greatly encouraged by the proliferation of inimical factions among the Exalted. There are sub-factions as well within each group. Among the Lunar Exalted, who tend to be beast-transforming shamanistic types, who were once intended to be the allies and mates of the superhero-ish Solar Exalted, there is a philosophy which essentially is about making normal humans self-sufficient and free of Exalted influence. They acted as facilitators who infiltrated human society and manipulated the course of civilization, actions which the more individualistic Lunars resented, and the more elitist ones found pointless.

I played a doctor Lunar who believed fervently in this philosophy and taught conventional medicine to humans, who he felt closer to because of some bad blood between him and his fellow Exalts in the past. He felt that humans, who overcame disease on their own through ingenuity rather than superhuman constitution and the use of magical Essence, possessed "true" strength. He resented the Exalted, who made humans reliant on them through becoming saviors, but there was personal bias there as his initiation into his particular social circle of Lunars was very rushed due to reasons of expediency, and as such he felt used. All of this was very clear to the other players before the game started. I think though that perhaps they were under the impression that the Lunars were more akin to their portrayal in previous editions, which was considerably more barbaric. I actually found a lot of the other Lunar party members behaved in a lore-breaking manner, but I didn't call them on this because I felt it would injure their pride, given that this was my first game and they'd played characters in a years-long Exalted campaign.

It was probably a mistake to not consult with the other party members before making my character; the others healed plague-infested townsfolk and demanded worship and praise for it, using their supernatural Essence, and he opted for compounding medicine, expressing open contempt for them essentially forcing the townsfolk to praise them and their deities. From his perspective, he was essentially in a Lawful Evil group, making the humans sell their souls to obtain healing, which the doctor wanted to give for free in the form of knowledge. The other players, including the Storyteller, felt I was unnecessarily creating conflict, and though I apologized profusely for his crude words, they clearly were taking it very personally. When the ST felt stressed by the situation, she dissolved the campaign, and it sort of drove a wedge between us permanently.

While I felt that I was playing according to the lore and had kept the behavior out of OOC entirely, I'd have gladly made my character behave less hostile if it meant keeping the campaign together. I felt like the party was supposed to have philosophical conflict due to the mechanics being designed to reward it, and due to the lore of the setting, like every WW game. But my selfish decision to continue playing the character regardless of how bothered by it everyone else was really damaged the campaign. It would be great if we could all remain perfectly objective and never be hurt by IC conflict, but at the very least we should attempt to meet others halfway if the alternative is just not getting to play with them at all. (Assuming you do want to play with them, of course. If you don't care...)

That being said, I still do not think I was entirely in the wrong. My decision to play the character above all else was selfish and insensitive, and I regret it immensely. Yet at the same time, it was inappropriate for the other players to take the character's actions personally and guilt me for it deliberately OOC.

These days the only thing I feel guilty about is my character's stubbornness. It is not reasonable to expect a person who is as extreme as she is to change her ways overnight, but I still feel bad when Virara repeatedly relapses into familiar forms of behavior despite the efforts of others. I like for things to progress slowly and make small steps; but there is never a guarantee you will be able to see the end of a long series of RP, and that anxiety may make people want to rush the character development, I fear.

Do you ever feel bad about a decision?

RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes