Gaspard

I've always said, and also believe that bleed-through is something that 'cannot' be stopped in roleplay, in no fashion whatsoever. Our emotions aren't as simple as that we can file them into Out-of-character and In-Character. If what we roleplay invokes emotional responses from us, they 'will' impact us. And it should. Even if someone has such a distant view as seeing roleplay as a 'writing exercise', if it doesn't invoke emotions in you you're not really comitting to it. Think of it this way; If you can't feel emotionally touched or impacted by your own play, how do you expect others to be? The trick to it all is to be aware that it is inevitable, even necessary in some parts and still be able to deal and enjoy the various emotions you get from it, without allowing it to impact your realistical portray of the your character as you've envisioned him, or allowing it to be the festering grounds for OOC drama. Up to this day, my fondest memories of Roleplay are those that invoked a degree of fear and misery in me, or sometimes happiness and accomplishment. Or put simply ; Roleplayers play roles, and therein aren't writers solely, they're actors. And every Role, every Character comes with his own emotions, state of mind and so on. The more indepth you get, the blurrier everything gets. For a more profound example ; See the difference between traditional acting and method acting. Method actors often times deliver the most stunning performances, but also suffer form a bleed of their own. Probably the most prominent example of our current age would be Heath Ledger. So the trick to it all is basically ; Go as deep as you can aslong you're comfortable with the depth of bleed through you allow, and make sure to solely restrict this OOC/IC bleeding/blending to your character. If it does get to you on a personal level, out of that, and stands in danger of coloring your OOC life or OOC actions, take a step back, and sort it out.

While I agree with most of what you said, one question remains for me; How do you define intelligence? Obviously you seem to have a standard you're comparing these examples to that they need to reach to be considered intelligent, wise or witty.

base screenshot: Sketch: Color:

Alright so, beyond a few other things I decided I 'want to be able' to draw (Cause I think we all have something we aspire forward to) One major one was being able to sketch/draw in a similar style to tetsuya nomura. I think, after a shitload of practice and research, i'm finally getting there;

My biggest gripe with people (Including myself) is that we often chase happiness and status and greatness, Yet forget to be grateful for what we have already, and in turn make ourselves (and those around us) miserable. We cry, complain, shout, struggle against things, places. Greed has the majority of us by the balls, since we either want more money, more personality, more intelligence, more skill, more anything.. and too often forget to appreciate that; hey, you've got food, a home, a few people you can really trust, a warm bed, clothes, and such a massive overabundance of media and pass times to indulge in that 'boredom' has become virtually impossible. Basically ; Biggest point of the Rant; I hate it that we all make ourselves miserable by not appreciating what we have. Fuck, I used to live off 10 EUR a week for over half a year, and have made it to live a stable life with above minimum wage earnings, got a dog, got a job that supplies me with 240 Hours of work (Which I do gladly cause fuck yeah money), I can afford to eat properly, go out to restaurants once or twice a month (the really good ones) and I still find reasons to complain, push, grind and make myself miserable because it's not enough. And I see this in almost 'every' person.

There's a plethora of things that happened that would've seen Constantine.. end up very differently if they hadn't taken place. Depending how far you rewind, and 'un-screw' certain scenarios, He may've been a morally astude, fair and very 'for the people' kind of person. Probably someone in a medium level management position with his employees best at mind. Your general 'Local Hero' type of vybe. The guy you could go to if you had problems, needed something fixed, or needed a contact here and there to help you out. And he would've never fostered greater allures of power, success or anything akin to it either. Just a regular, 'good guy' type of person.

You're making a logical mistake in your example, and your raised question in regards to roleplay; The example of death you've quoted from the Wire was so that the story had something to feed on. a key moment to move the story forward. That was a decision a director made pertaining to a figure from literature. See the boy die (Even with his personal implication of liking the character), so that the story gets the necessary panache (Because the story goes first). So far so good. So you have the director sacrifice a character for the progress of the story. ergo; A singular Writer/Director kills of a Character in the singular narrative that he writes/oversees. Now, In roleplay, you do not have a singular narrative. There's no singular story to follow. Infact, in Roleplay you're not the Director, you are more of an Actor. Every single player follows his own characters narrative UNTIL you decide to switch from organic/open RP (actions/consequences entirely free and unrestrained) and switch towards Story writing RP (Actions/consequences are shaped to adhere your character but also to enable the progress of the desired Narrative that includes others). Another big kicker is that Roleplayers often do not only seek to own their Character, but also their Characters Story. The distinction is important for the following reason; If a person just focuses on maintaining character, you can literally throw his character at anything. Alien invasion, Zombie Moogles, A trip to hell, or grocery shopping with Ul'dahs prom Queen. Maintaining Character simply means that the character IN that scenario will undoubtly react how he should react to it, yet he sees no claim to where his character would end up in, or what he would face. If he'll be encountered with a lethal force he'll roleplay out dying, if he'll encounter poisonous gas he'll roleplay out dying form that slowly, if he'll encounter a rock-slide burrying him he'll get squished. The point is, to maintain character, you needn't control over narrative. But that's not how most people roleplay. We don't just remain in character, and react. We also own our characters story, and therein, the narrative and actions of our characters. So, to answer your initial question ; I'll address this portion by portion; First, and this should be almost biblical law to every roleplayer; NEVER break Character. While others can never tell you if you do or do not break Character, you yourself will know. There's alot of immersion for yourself that you will ruin if you have your character wash up / apart in order to satisfy someone else, and more importantly, this dis-satisfaction WILL wash over into your play, therein making your portrayal of your character the way you want to portray him skewed. Think like an Actor; You want to deliver the best performance you can. However; That doesn't translate into "Never cooperate". While you should never break character, you can, and should BEND and SHARE narrative. If you're imaginative enough, you can have your most vile enemies work together if both parties do the right things with the narrative. Take for example X-men Comics. They constantly toss their characters at almost ridiculous scenarios, but seldomnly is character broken in any of those. All it takes is a NPC here, a vile action there, a bit of drafting on both sides to make almost anything possible without anyone ever having to break character. Which leads me to my last point ; Your initial post kind of tackled a massive amount of points, such as ; consequence, narrative, character integrity, story progress, IC/OOC seperation, and so on. I could keep writing on this for days on end, and still not give you a satisfying answer. I guess what it all boils down to is the following ; Make the quality of your Roleplay your personal responsibility. That is the only way you'll get the specific Quality of Roleplay out of it that you seek.

Given Constantine isn't the peachiest of guys..and that what he does puts people off alot (and through alot), it can be summed up by; For standard; If someone catches his interest it goes; Followed eventually by this; And in some rare circumstances.. If they end up close to him and fitting;

Jedi Knight, Jedi Academy. From Thereon out I've switched Mediums, games and methods to RP more times then I can count. Star wars based games, Forums, several MMO's, Text RP, Chat RP. You name it. Eventually that all led me to FFXIV

I probably stand in stark contrast. I exclusively play male characters, always. Not so much out of an unwillingness or incapability to assume a more 'female' Role, but simply because it doesn't sit too well with me. I think it mostly originates from the fact that I strongly believe that, while Men and Women are ofcourse very alike, there 'are' a few, but very profound differences that make it simply impossible for me to portray a woman realistically. Just like I'm sure it's the same for women in regards to men. I'm not talking specifically in a 'writing-only' fashion. But it is something even famous writers struggle with. the POV of the opposite sex isn't as easy to assume realistically as most would like to believe it. Now, I'm not talking out of stereotypes or 'gender perceptions' that society dictates. I'm talking about those very profound, nuanced differences we all can spot in behavior between men and women, but can hardly put into words. As for the ratio in general ; I think FFXIV is very pro-female oriented in its variety of outfits, options and even appearance customization. And from a purely subjective point of view, I believe the female models/options look more appealing compared to the males. We suffer from a serious lack of good looking hairstyles, body options and outfits. Almost every outfit out there has some effeminate traits to it aswell. I.E, the battlemage outfit with it's cleavage cut, Vanya Robes with their flowers, leather pants so tight you'd expect David Bowie to quirk a brow, etc etc. Again, that part is purely subjective and my personal opinion, not really saying that everyone perceives it as such.

Usually I just use whichever god I can pick (Thal, Nophica, Rhalgr, etc) smack it up with a few cuss words and move on. Combinations are endless, really. Inbred Chocobo, By Nophicas tits, By thals balls, etc etc. Get creative, refference IC-relevant material and you got your insults

This. Exactly this. There's nothing inherent about a "hero" or "villain" that says that they MUST be disconnected from society in some way. If anything, that just makes for a more boring story, as you lose any attachment to their 'human' (re: relatable) side. They may be extraordinary people, but they are still people. I never questioned that overpowered and extraordinary people aren't people, and ofcourse they'll be able to kick back once every now and then. And yes, not every hero/villain MUST be disconnected from society. However, there 'are' class differences. You can compare it to Actors/Celebrities/CEO's of large companies, Sports Stars and what not. They, within their branch are in an upper echelon that they usually reside and surround themselves in. Do they branch out into other fields? sure, for an hour a week perhaps. Sometimes a bit more. But the majority of their time is in their field, in their craft, honing their skill or making use of it. Chances are that you, as a common person, will 'never' just stumble over President Obama and your Local Wal Mart, Will never shout at Oprah for cutting of your parking space, and so on. Characters of an elite proficiency usually are restrained towards the social circle that goes with it, unless they've fallen from that circle (and are, therein, drifters). Anyway, whichever way you twist and turn it, my point in regards to 'social isolation' with power was aimed specifically at the extreme example. The overpowered chosen one, the Hydealyn Atom bomb, the one-hit-kill wonder. Those are figures that, while they don't 'have' to be socially isolated, it still makes little to no sense for them to just 'hang around a bar' for consecutive days on end because they're 'bored'.

I do not play ingame and I am not available on forum messages and/or Skype. Do not contact me if you have questions. -lewink-

nomura, take two

Working on my freeform skills. Still far from where I want them at though >.<

Black Turbo. And I'm dead serious about this.

If my character would stay with me for a few days, two things could happen; I'd be set on my glorious journey to become the equivalent of what every conspiracy theorist dreads about in regards to the Illumanit/freemasonry/satanism/occultism; or; I'd find my untimely demise. Violently. Hannibal / Red Dragon style.

[align=center]cyka[/align] mudak Now that's not very nice. успока́ивать

I think that, in the debate of OP/Underpowered characters it heavily depends what you're basing your perception of Overpowered on. In itself, Overpowered is more of a term that could apply to a game rather then storytelling. being 'above the common level', to the point it seems rigged. In RP terms, this only because valid or important if these characters carry a degree of 'power' they can exert over your character Icly. It implies a degree of 'unfairness' towards other players. 'That dude is OP' or 'That character is OP'. Most times it reffers to a singular characters proficiency, or ability to inflict damage upon another character/exert control over another character. That being said, since an Open RP setting doesn't have a common 'power roof', or a limit a character can reach, there's no 'bar' one can pass to be officially labelled op (ATK skill over 50, a limit how much your character can own in terms of NPC's / subjects), therein, OP is a purely subjective term. Another interesting point ; There's also another degree of OP, and that is when your characters status / setting makes him, compared to his conflicting party, untouchable. Syndicate members come to mind. Compared to a street-thug a Syndicate member can be entirely OP, as he can recruit the help of everyone in the Syndicate (NPC's etc) to shank you, or ruin your business on the basis that the Syndicate own the market you're in. Then there's ofcourse the 'snowflake' argument. The Sephiroth esque sub-troupe in which your character is imbued with the immortal power of seven dragon souls and twenty echo's simply to 'appear' untouchable should he end up in conflict. It's an indirect attempt to enable god-modding on your behalf, and I treat it as such. Peronoally, I've always maintained one stance in this regard when it comes to 'Overpowered characters' ; You need to keep in mind that, if you wish to help create a nice story, or RP world, your character from a certain level/proficiency onward has no place amongst common folk. And I believe this is the core issue. There's nothing wrong with playing an almost demigod, but you need to keep in mind that such figures don't just mingle with the common, 'lower' folk. For a real life example ; You probably wont meet Bill gates hanging out in a pub in Africa. If he will be there for some ungodly reason, he will certainly be there for perhaps a day, and then return to his ivory tower of Microsoft. For a relevant RP example ; Your created demigod wont sit around the quicksand and throw back whiskeys. He should/will probably be entirely absorbed in using the power he acquired for what he needed it for in the first place. The Hero you play in the MSQ is busy traveling the entire world and saving it from evil and it's impeeding demise, he wont have time to chill out at a FC house and throw back whiskey shots and pester your common trader with his powers. Infact, even the sadistic, mean spirited evil figures usually wont give two bits about 'peasants' so to speak, they will focus their Ire on those that have slighted them in their personal past or bigger behemoths they seek to conquer. My point in the end is ; Playing powerful characters is not wrong, but you need to keep in mind that, the higher you push this bar, the further you isolate yourself, because your perceived place amongst the 'common' folk dissappears. That's why Powerful characters make for amazing driving forces in plots (The Hero to lead the Party, the Villain to destroy a city, The Rival to overcome), but they have absolutely no place amongst the common folk. Now again, this 'middle-ground' where one starts crossing into this or that territory is entirely subjective. Personally, given the setting, I believe there's little we could consider OP. Aslong you create a character, truly stick to his core root and ensure that there's OOC communication between those involved, no one will ever be forced to suffer the 'OPness' of another character in a confrontational situation. Now, if you're upset/annoyed over the fact that some people play characters in a goofy, snowflake way; Always keep in mind that other people can't 'force' their characters upon you. in an Open-RP setting you do have more or less the liberty who to involve yourself with, who to play with, and so on. I personally stopped entering 'Out of the blue' confrontations, and much rather discuss such things beforehand. Now..I've written almost a sermon on the topic of OP here, but to approach the Openings post initial point; What you're essentially raising as a question isn't about 'Overpowered / Underpowered' But in the quality of writing. You wrote the initial 'Overpowered' example as if it was executed by an 11 year old who just started roleplaying, replying in illogical one liners and when asked who he is will reply 'Demigod and Ifrit slayer.' In regards of what is more 'fun' to play; entirely subjective, people preffer their own tropes. Some like to have a 'badass' vybe to their characters, others enjoy the sense of playing a 'calm, calculating figure'. It really depends on the individual.

Romanian / Russian for Constantine

Very subjective examples. The Mother and Kids could be at a simple store with people discussing something of unsavvory nature, or in public transportation. Linkshell/FC/Forums have therefore Rules in them. The easiest, almost mind-numbing way to solve such issues is to create steadfast rules and enforce them. May that be in your Linkshell, FC, or Forums. Just add a 'Discussing lore is A-okay and will not be reprimanded' to the LS/FC/Forum rules and you have your results. That way, you can check the LS/FC/Forum, agree to the rules PRIOR to joining, and therein understand that, no matter your personal opinion, you saw the rules, you're therefore oblidged to adhere to them as long as you wish to stay part of the LS/FC/Forum. If either of these do not provide such rules the resulting ambiguity is the perfect breeding pit for scenarios like these.

Calling a FC a clique is a bit underhanded in my opinion, given that we're not very exclusive and do welcome any interest with open arms. As for I 'can't mean it, I do entirely mean it. This FC here is something that I've created throughout the span of a week (Which is roughly the period of time since I returned) Nigh everyone except for two people are entirely fresh, new people to me that I've met through initiating OOC contact and so on. Infact, if at all, me having made this FC / Linkshell and RP group 'exactly' during this time is the complete anti-thesis to the point raised in this topic ; that it's hard to find RP here. Infact, I am quite sure I would even have far more Roleplay if I simply opted to choose one of the bigger RP-FC's currently out there recruiting. And there are plenty.

[snip] I guess, you could say the moral of my post is; You cannot assume a position of victimization and saying that 'the others are at fault' for not including you, If they have roleplay wherein you have none. They're clearly doing something right, something you're missing. Now you have a thread full of truly helpful input that could, if you took it as such, help you find exactly what you are looking for, yet you deny this as help, infact, you slam it as criticism. Neither myself nor Presidio are new to RP. I've run successful communities before for other games, which is part of what another here said about 'culture shock' and adapting. If I'm having issues as someone who has done well for themselves before, I can't imagine what completely new RPers are feeling if they're struggling, too. That should be a red flag, not a cue to yell 'bootstrap it harder, everyone else is doing it right and you're wrong'. I guess that's the part of your post that really stands out to me in a very, very negative way. Boiling it down to "just take the advice and you'll get what you want" and "stop being a victim" isn't just ignorant of the conversation that's been happening, it's frankly incorrect based on the experience I've written about in this thread, as well as being kind of rude/dismissive, even if you don't intend it to be. I've taken much of the advice that's been offered and I still came in to make this post to hopefully start a conversation on why it's still happening and try to target any possibilities of doing better. By nature, that shows that your own advice is moot. I really hope you reconsider what you're saying. I wouldn't truly call it ignorant on my behalf, at most I may've missinterpreted your words. To me, it sounded akin to a refusal to take said advice, based on the sense that it puts the 'onus' as if you've reffered to it on the struggling person, akin to as if one was to be blamed for such predicament. (Which 'is' a general theme recurring in this topic. That Roleplayers that are in a Roleplay 'must' include others least the risk appearing as jerks, even if the RP, scenery, or the likes don't fit it). Moreso, my post was infact a generalized reply to those that took such stance, not to you specifically posing as a victim. Atleast that what it was meant for. So yes, in that regard, I may've indeed worded it wrong. And a good part of said points are invalid if indeed you did take said suggestions into consideration and tried them, to no avail. However, IF that is true, then I'm truly at a loss how such thing is possible actually. Following what others wrote here as suggestions, and doing what I do (and described in my post), I find myself currently drowning in roleplay. So perhaps I simply can't see / don't see this struggle, or don't understand how it can be as dire as described.

Why should anyone have to do something so obtuse over 2-3 people that can't be bothered to back off before things turn sour? This was the whole point of my first post: have consideration for your fellow players. It really isn't that hard, folks. In all fairness, consideration goes both ways not just one. More often than not you'll see one person branded as confrontational in a heated debate when the reality is multiple people usually get involved and egg it on from both sides. Besides, quite a lot of people in the community are more than willing to compromise or agree to disagree. The main issue is that they're so rarely given the benefit of the doubt or even approached for dialogue because the common reaction from many is to gossip and brand someone eager for debate as a bit of a prick. Which doesn't help anybody. Now, I've said this before but I think it's well worth repeating again: just because someone happens to be pretty blunt and direct it doesn't make them a bad person. Some of the more direct posters on this very site have turned out to be incredibly friendly and wonderful people whilst those who desperately lace their every word with sugar and claim to be friendly and approachable are, in fact, some of the most vile and manipulative individuals I've ever had the displeasure of encountering. Sweeping judgements are rather silly, in other words. Please don't take this too seriously but, this is essentially what popped into my mind reading that; People like me are cool, and I like people like me. But some people think we're dicks. that makes them even biggers dicks.

One up for sarcasm