
(09-14-2015, 12:58 PM)Verad Wrote:(09-14-2015, 09:47 AM)LadyRochester Wrote: That's like me saying "Sasha Rochester is the ugliest, bitchiest, stupidest person in Eorzea! She also smells!" I can say it all I want, but if I gent angry when other roleplyers don't agree, I'm probably a bloody idiot. After all, roleplay is more about "show, don't tell." and being so vague with description makes your roleplay seem flat and boring.
The thing is, you do that. Your RPC description makes it clear that players are meant to find Sasha Rochester both intelligent and physically attractive. Phrases like "blessed with a chest size and hips she adores to flaunt" make it clear that you believe your character to be, to put it academically, stacked like a brickhouse and attractive for it, and if people started reacting to your description as if she were flat as a board both ways and making a fool of herself for acting otherwise, I think you would be rather cross about it. Unless "blessed" is meant to suggest flatness is the attractive trait in Eorzea? The description is quite vague that way.
Likewise, acting as if there are wildly different definitions of attractiveness within the general body of roleplayers, such that one can't use vague descriptors like "beautiful" and not give people a pretty clear idea of what is going on with your character's looks, feels willfully obtuse rather than spiteful, as if you are ignoring that while there can be very broad ranges of difference in how people view certain appearances, there is still generally some common ground because of culturally received definitions of beauty. It's not as if players have such wildly divergent definitions of beauty that no one person can really understand what the other's is, with one player demanding nipples all over the face and the other demanding hair of cheese in order for looks to matter. But you're right - sometimes it's not spiteful, sometimes it's just dense.
Anyway, speaking of "show don't tell," you will find if you look through your description that about half of it contains adjectives that rely on culturally received definitions of what your character might look like - "elegant," "feminine," "provocatively," so forth. It's all pretty telly, and I'd like to see a more objective description provided before you go making aspersions about vague characterization. Speck in the eye and plank in one's own and such.
I have not edited her physical description in months, all I have worked on are relationships, but now that you point it out, I can perfectly change it. By "elegant" I mean generally expensive, richly colored, well-fitted and almost aristocratic clothing. It's not difficult for people to comprehend that. Now, by "Femenine" I mean classically femenine traits, in Eorzea there has never been any implication that they differed culturally as to what they considered feminine to what we do in this world ("Girly" clothing such as skirts, dresses, sparkling accessories and the like). "Provocative" implies clothing that is somewhat revealing, something that does not really vary unless the concept of "provocative" to some is showing ankles.
You can claim femininity, provocativeness, and elegance are subjective, but they really are not when it comes to building an idea based on Japanese/Western norms, which truthfully don't vary much. "Beautiful" or "Ugly" deal with a wider spectrum. You can't deny that.
People might find "Elegance", "femininity", and "Provocative" clothing unattractive, as they signify more specific traits than simply "Beautiful". I had people roleplay as if my character looked like a horse, and while I might disagree OOC, I'm not going to cry about it, and I am not going to force their character to find mine beautiful because I disagree. It's their choice, their taste, it's up to them.
I can mention that she's "generously endowed", but that implies she has gigantic breasts, which she does not, and mentioning her cup size and her exact measurements seems like something someone would do to attract the wrong kind of roleplayers.