It really depends on the person I am playing with.
I've used to go with a very story-driven narrative most times, where players really knew where each of their characters stood in terms of intelligence, raw power, probability of winning against another, etc. You could say we knew beforehand how a fight would look, and what the probability of a win/loss was. Moreso, we tended to only let those fights ensue if there was some valid, story rich return for it (We tended to thrown at the common assassin x120912 who just randomly showed up to 'kill someone', same for mass murderers etc).
That requires however people that are all on the same page, so most times that is only possible in a RP circle that stayed with eachother for an extended period of time. Nonethenless, most times we went with a Text, turn-based system to play out fights, omitting rolls and the likes for their degree of chance involved (Dice rolling imho only works if you go spreadsheet aswell, since that atleast puts chance together with a set of variables in favor/against your favor depending what your character is good/bad at)
Simple chance rolling without taking character specific traits into account tends to be too much of a wild-card for me to 'realistically' simulate a bout between two characters.
Many fights however often take place outside eachothers comfort group, and are initiated under 'emotionally loaded' circumstance. Especially if it is two players that do not know eachother well yet, no matter how good they are, you'll have a hard time convincing one another that character A or B should have a higher chance of winning (Even if it is that way realistically). You also have to factor in World-Realism. For example, many people believe, because their character has invested alot of time into sword-play, that their character can be at equal grounds with a mighty Thaumaturge. I'll play devils advocate here and simply say: It isn't so. There's a margin where intelligence and strategy has a foot-hold, but swinging a piece of metal will never out-weigh the ability to conjure up walls of fire or ice. Nonethenless, the Idea that their character might, infact, be inferior when it comes to fighting will unsettle many characters, and thus they will deny, even if the Roleplay environment would dictate otherwise.
So usually, you find yourself at an argument about 'Roleplay balance' against 'Roleplay Realism'. The former demands that, no matter the difference between two characters, they always stand nigh-equal chance of winning, the latter dictates that the one who, ICly has the better skills/better strategy-intelligence will win.
At last, there's even one more issue. When you enter a RP fight, you have no viable way to check if the character you fight against has actually any limits at all. Given roleplay on MMO's is not approval based (Meaning you don't have an admin to turn to, or a forum to see what kind of abilities a character is approved for), you end up having to trust the other person. Sometimes, that leads to people quite literally pulling random abilities out of their butt because 'lolmage', In order to get the upper hand, even if they sacrifice their characters integrity through it. You have no way to ascertain if he truly did invest time to achieve his abilities, or if he pulled them out of his rear, and likewise, neither does he in regards to you (unless you went the route and meticulously explained all the abilities your character has [Including skills] and their limitations).
That, in the end, puts me personally at the conclusion that the safest route to go with is to try and find a common ground before the fight starts (As in, pre-determination of the outcome), reserving actual Text-RP fights to people whom you truly trust, and where you know said characters abilities and limitations.
Rolling Dices only favors chance, never roleplay realism.
I've used to go with a very story-driven narrative most times, where players really knew where each of their characters stood in terms of intelligence, raw power, probability of winning against another, etc. You could say we knew beforehand how a fight would look, and what the probability of a win/loss was. Moreso, we tended to only let those fights ensue if there was some valid, story rich return for it (We tended to thrown at the common assassin x120912 who just randomly showed up to 'kill someone', same for mass murderers etc).
That requires however people that are all on the same page, so most times that is only possible in a RP circle that stayed with eachother for an extended period of time. Nonethenless, most times we went with a Text, turn-based system to play out fights, omitting rolls and the likes for their degree of chance involved (Dice rolling imho only works if you go spreadsheet aswell, since that atleast puts chance together with a set of variables in favor/against your favor depending what your character is good/bad at)
Simple chance rolling without taking character specific traits into account tends to be too much of a wild-card for me to 'realistically' simulate a bout between two characters.
Many fights however often take place outside eachothers comfort group, and are initiated under 'emotionally loaded' circumstance. Especially if it is two players that do not know eachother well yet, no matter how good they are, you'll have a hard time convincing one another that character A or B should have a higher chance of winning (Even if it is that way realistically). You also have to factor in World-Realism. For example, many people believe, because their character has invested alot of time into sword-play, that their character can be at equal grounds with a mighty Thaumaturge. I'll play devils advocate here and simply say: It isn't so. There's a margin where intelligence and strategy has a foot-hold, but swinging a piece of metal will never out-weigh the ability to conjure up walls of fire or ice. Nonethenless, the Idea that their character might, infact, be inferior when it comes to fighting will unsettle many characters, and thus they will deny, even if the Roleplay environment would dictate otherwise.
So usually, you find yourself at an argument about 'Roleplay balance' against 'Roleplay Realism'. The former demands that, no matter the difference between two characters, they always stand nigh-equal chance of winning, the latter dictates that the one who, ICly has the better skills/better strategy-intelligence will win.
At last, there's even one more issue. When you enter a RP fight, you have no viable way to check if the character you fight against has actually any limits at all. Given roleplay on MMO's is not approval based (Meaning you don't have an admin to turn to, or a forum to see what kind of abilities a character is approved for), you end up having to trust the other person. Sometimes, that leads to people quite literally pulling random abilities out of their butt because 'lolmage', In order to get the upper hand, even if they sacrifice their characters integrity through it. You have no way to ascertain if he truly did invest time to achieve his abilities, or if he pulled them out of his rear, and likewise, neither does he in regards to you (unless you went the route and meticulously explained all the abilities your character has [Including skills] and their limitations).
That, in the end, puts me personally at the conclusion that the safest route to go with is to try and find a common ground before the fight starts (As in, pre-determination of the outcome), reserving actual Text-RP fights to people whom you truly trust, and where you know said characters abilities and limitations.
Rolling Dices only favors chance, never roleplay realism.
![[Image: afvXOt2.png]](http://i.imgur.com/afvXOt2.png)
