(09-21-2015, 07:56 AM)Kage Wrote:(09-21-2015, 07:48 AM)Aaron Wrote: So people dont accuse you of godmodding for.. No reason other than to just be difficult.
Future tense leaves the other person open to react however they please rather than taking what you did because you used present or past tense.
(09-21-2015, 07:53 AM)Gegenji Wrote: That's how I've always seen this being used as well. It's saying that - if the other person in the RP allows it - this is what would happen. If not blocked or dodged, this punch would strike them in the jaw. He would move to wrap his arm arm around her waist. Implying intent of action without flat-out stating it is what happens in order to give the other person more agency in said action.
I've already addressed this in the opening post, as some people do it outside of just making sure that they're not taking away the other roleplayers' agency. They use it for everything.
These are cases were someone is going to do it. There's no ifs, ands or buts. There's no other person that would be there to say "NO YOU CAN'T WALK DOWN THIS STREET I HAVE AGENCY OVER THIS."
It's just seeing... "She would go to the store and see if there were apples in stock."
She's going to go to the store.
Except that she might not go to the store if someone in the alley grabbed her and pulled her away into the shadows never to be seen again.
Using future tense leaves an opening for more to happen. Adventurous RPers that are open to random encounters and unexpected things happening often use future tense in actions that could well be interrupted because they see the opportunity for the RP to be more than just apples.
Another alternative is that you grab her arm and tell her to stay with you longer. She WOULD go to the store IF nothing prevents her from doing it right now.
Future tense is used as a courtesy to others around that opens up the possibility of a change.
Present tense uses a lot of absolutes:
"She eats the apple." cannot be interrupted, because the moment you post it, the action is finished. You cannot interrupt the eating of the apple because she ate it.
"She is eating the apple" is better, because the action can be changed, but you cannot change that she was eating it.
"She ate the apple" is self explanatory. There is not a whole lot of difference between past tense and present absolute.
"She would eat the apple" can be allowed, prevented, or altered. Future tense creates the most opportunity for diversion.
