Let's talk Godmoding

[Warren Castille]

This got touched on in a Thread That Shan't Be Named and I wanted to see if we can flesh this out a little bit. Specifically, this line of dialogue:

 

I see that, personally, as imprinting one's own subjective suspension of disbelief onto someone else's character. That's godmodding.

 

That's a two-way street, though. Two people are fighting one another. One is super over the top, complete with Tekken-style air juggling. The other is a gritty, super-duper-realism fighter. Who should be deferring to who, exactly? There's two suspensions of disbelief going on here: The air-fighter believes that they're capable of flying combat, and the gritty person believes that's absurd.

 

So if the over-the-top style attempts to uppercut the gritty style into the sun, which result should be permitted? Does the gritty person godmode a result by only allowing themselves to be hit and nothing else? Does the over-the-top person godmode by forcing the other person to deal with cartoon physics?

 

Second point/question: If dice are involved, and these two go through the same thing, what should happen? If the over-the-top person wins the roll, is it godmoding to have the gritty person take the hit but not accentuate the giant reaction? If the gritty person wins the defense and choose to block, is it unfair of them to not go flying from the force of things?

 

Opinions? Thoughts? Work-arounds?

[Blue]

I think the general etiquette when such incompatible forms of RP come to clash is to not try make one's point of view win over the other, and instead walk out, or just do one roll for who wins/who loses and then skip to the "after battle" part of RP.

 

Then again, it's something that has never happened to me.

[Gone.]

Start with plausibility, then attempt to meet your RP partner somewhere in the middle.

 

If that isn't possible, then split on amiable terms. Not everyone's style is going to mesh with the person next to them, you know?

[That_NPC]

This right here seems to be one of the most difficult factors of walk up RP.

 

Idea

Differ to the person's being challenged's rules.  At that point if you don't like how they fight, don't fight them.  And if its that big of a deal, you probably don't want to RP much with them anyway.

 

Alternatively the winner of the dice roll gets to factor in the physics of things, part of the risk you run with RP over the internet with randoms is dealing with people with different reality views. 

 

Worst case scenario, agree to disagree and walk away.  If you were involved in a story which caused the conflict, use it as a lesson for what should be communicated beforehand,

[-no longer matters-]

This got touched on in a Thread That Shan't Be Named and I wanted to see if we can flesh this out a little bit. Specifically, this line of dialogue:

 

I see that, personally, as imprinting one's own subjective suspension of disbelief onto someone else's character. That's godmodding.

 

That's a two-way street, though. Two people are fighting one another. One is super over the top, complete with Tekken-style air juggling. The other is a gritty, super-duper-realism fighter. Who should be deferring to who, exactly? There's two suspensions of disbelief going on here: The air-fighter believes that they're capable of flying combat, and the gritty person believes that's absurd.

 

So if the over-the-top style attempts to uppercut the gritty style into the sun, which result should be permitted? Does the gritty person godmode a result by only allowing themselves to be hit and nothing else? Does the over-the-top person godmode by forcing the other person to deal with cartoon physics?

 

Second point/question: If dice are involved, and these two go through the same thing, what should happen? If the over-the-top person wins the roll, is it godmoding to have the gritty person take the hit but not accentuate the giant reaction? If the gritty person wins the defense and choose to block, is it unfair of them to not go flying from the force of things?

 

Opinions? Thoughts? Work-arounds?

Are we talking strictly combat? I think the best work around is not fighting anyone until you've at least gotten to know them a little bit. There's nothing wrong with backing down from confrontation until you see if it's worth your time.

 

If the matter comes into tournament combat, then it's up to the host to lay ground rules.

 

In any other area's really my first answer also applies.

[Spethah]

Start with plausibility, then attempt to meet your RP partner somewhere in the middle.

 

That's my approach to these kind of things. Kinda keeps things in the realm of not-over-the-top.

[Sig]

This got touched on in a Thread That Shan't Be Named and I wanted to see if we can flesh this out a little bit. Specifically, this line of dialogue:

 

I see that, personally, as imprinting one's own subjective suspension of disbelief onto someone else's character. That's godmodding.

 

That's a two-way street, though. Two people are fighting one another. One is super over the top, complete with Tekken-style air juggling. The other is a gritty, super-duper-realism fighter. Who should be deferring to who, exactly? There's two suspensions of disbelief going on here: The air-fighter believes that they're capable of flying combat, and the gritty person believes that's absurd.

 

So if the over-the-top style attempts to uppercut the gritty style into the sun, which result should be permitted? Does the gritty person godmode a result by only allowing themselves to be hit and nothing else? Does the over-the-top person godmode by forcing the other person to deal with cartoon physics?

 

Second point/question: If dice are involved, and these two go through the same thing, what should happen? If the over-the-top person wins the roll, is it godmoding to have the gritty person take the hit but not accentuate the giant reaction? If the gritty person wins the defense and choose to block, is it unfair of them to not go flying from the force of things?

 

Opinions? Thoughts? Work-arounds?

 

The fundamental problem here is that this type of god-modding is relative to the style of RP at hand.  You're basically thrust into a dilemma where someone -has- to godmode to retain continuity with their character's roleplay norms and styles.  This is sad because OOC disposition has clearly impacted the RP by this point.   

 

If the roleplayers are skilled (and polite), they should recognize the dilemma and react accordingly by meeting somewhere in the middle.  It is the least of all evils. SSJ 40K Goku should probably find some sort of plot device or motivation to tone his attacks down to a palatable level.  Ser Gritty-Mc'ParryaLot should realize that he is fighting an agile, bouncy opponent and react accordingly by upping the intensity or turtleling to an appropriate level.  The RP'ers must meet in the middle - or it's just going to be a lop-sided, boring e-peen fest, flopping between various levels of toxic denial. This applies with and without dice. 

 

Ideally, RP'ers should not find themselves forced into this dilemma before a fight breaks out. Basic physics and assumptions should be plain and understood on the front end.

[Virella]

I generally don't do combat with people I do not know. Else, Virella, heck, she's a mage, a teleport IC far away from whoever is pestering her is easy enough

[Hammersmith]

When I have to write a post that might be contested by a reaction? 

 

I write it framed with what I'd like to happen, as well as an obvious out "If it happened it would X" or "If he got hands around Y, it wouldn't end well"

 

Keeps me from having to dictate how things are going to go for the other person while letting them take the direction I was aiming for if they feel so inclined, or to even work and twist with it.

 

I feel like the idea is to make the other person look good on a success, and to make the failure still have impact if they lose the roll, roll with consequences.

 

This doesn't work with a Bad Player, who tend to God Mod without Talking About It First.

[Nebbs]

As each player is bringing different versions of un-reality with them, they can just as easily take away different views on the outcomes.

 

This works when the outcomes are just different interpretations of the same thing. One sees their opponent punched to the moon, the other just sees them self knocked down.

 

If they disagree on the essence of the outcome then that is simply a disagreement.

 

If you want 3rd parties to interpret things.. then they get to decide on their own version of un-reality.

 

 

The only truth here is that there are as many truths as there are people involved.

[Dravus]

I've never felt the urge to engage in combat role-play unless I know and trust the other individual(s) involved. I feel like it's the best compromise - since two role-players with vastly different role-playing styles and the urge to both 'win' are very rarely going to get along.

 

I've become very good at identifying which role-players I'll click with and which I won't based on gut instinct alone. I imagine I'm not alone in that regard - and it's precisely why I avoid the route of role-playing with anyone and everybody that stumbles across my path.

[Tumensuns]

If it's in a tournament, it's up to the host to lay down ground rules before hand. If this is random RP, I'd more than likely dissolve the session and leave because I ground roleplay on the basis of reality as per the universe the roleplay is taking place in. I'm not going to give up my values on this to appease anybody, and my experiences with this is the person who believes they can punch me into the sun tends to not want to talk it over, so it's not really worth the effort and time.

 

If this was a Dragonball Z MMO, then being thrown into the sun is possible, but this is Eorzea, and that level of super strength has not been seen or recorded by the games lore standards. If they want to call me a godmoder because I don't believe in their denial of the reality of the universe, then I have no problem calling them a godmoder for breaking it, but it's all very moot because I simply leave them be so they can continue doing whatever they want, but it doesn't have to involve me.

[Warren Castille]

If it's in a tournament, it's up to the host to lay down ground rules before hand. If this is random RP, I'd more than likely dissolve the session and leave because I ground roleplay on the basis of reality as per the universe the roleplay is taking place in. I'm not going to give up my values on this to appease anybody, and my experiences with this is the person who believes they can punch me into the sun tends to not want to talk it over, so it's not really worth the effort and time.

 

If this was a Dragonball Z MMO, then being thrown into the sun is possible, but this is Eorzea, and that level of super strength has not been seen or recorded by the games lore standards. If they want to call me a godmoder because I don't believe in their denial of the reality of the universe, then I have no problem calling them a godmoder for breaking it, but it's all very moot because I simply leave them be so they can continue doing whatever they want, but it doesn't have to involve me.

 

The trouble with XIV, though, is that we DO have some examples of this sort of thing. 2.55 ending cutscenes feature full-on environmental destruction, and the Hildebrand questline features a number of superhuman feats.

 

Not that I don't feel the same way as you do, but these are frequently the counterpoint to "realism" being invoked.

[Verad]

As each player is bringing different versions of un-reality with them, they can just as easily take away different views on the outcomes.

 

This works when the outcomes are just different interpretations of the same thing. One sees their opponent punched to the moon, the other just sees them self knocked down.

 

If they disagree on the essence of the outcome then that is simply a disagreement.

 

If you want 3rd parties to interpret things.. then they get to decide on their own version of un-reality.

 

 

The only truth here is that there are as many truths as there are people involved.

 

This works only insofar as actions occur within a vacuum, affecting only the two parties involved. As soon as the actions are implied to have a larger impact on the setting, it becomes more difficult to justify.

 

It's also really bog-standard criticisms of early empiricism mixed with a bit of solipsism, and feels a bit Philosophy 101. How do we really know our actions have an impact, you know? Man?

[Nebbs]

As each player is bringing different versions of un-reality with them, they can just as easily take away different views on the outcomes.

 

This works when the outcomes are just different interpretations of the same thing. One sees their opponent punched to the moon, the other just sees them self knocked down.

 

If they disagree on the essence of the outcome then that is simply a disagreement.

 

If you want 3rd parties to interpret things.. then they get to decide on their own version of un-reality.

 

 

The only truth here is that there are as many truths as there are people involved.

 

This works only insofar as actions occur within a vacuum, affecting only the two parties involved. As soon as the actions are implied to have a larger impact on the setting, it becomes more difficult to justify.

 

It's also really bog-standard criticisms of early empiricism mixed with a bit of solipsism, and feels a bit Philosophy 101. How do we really know our actions have an impact, you know? Man?

 

Nod..nod. Yep, that's muchly what I said. 

 

It seems to me that if you want consensus not starting with realism vs godmodding would seem sensible. You need to have some common ground that all will accept and that would bound the validity of interactions. The closer the RP styles the larger this common ground can be, and will hold until someone does something the other(s) can't accept.

[Tumensuns]

If it's in a tournament, it's up to the host to lay down ground rules before hand. If this is random RP, I'd more than likely dissolve the session and leave because I ground roleplay on the basis of reality as per the universe the roleplay is taking place in. I'm not going to give up my values on this to appease anybody, and my experiences with this is the person who believes they can punch me into the sun tends to not want to talk it over, so it's not really worth the effort and time.

 

If this was a Dragonball Z MMO, then being thrown into the sun is possible, but this is Eorzea, and that level of super strength has not been seen or recorded by the games lore standards. If they want to call me a godmoder because I don't believe in their denial of the reality of the universe, then I have no problem calling them a godmoder for breaking it, but it's all very moot because I simply leave them be so they can continue doing whatever they want, but it doesn't have to involve me.

 

The trouble with XIV, though, is that we DO have some examples of this sort of thing. 2.55 ending cutscenes feature full-on environmental destruction, and the Hildebrand questline features a number of superhuman feats.

 

Not that I don't feel the same way as you do, but these are frequently the counterpoint to "realism" being invoked.

 

What Raubahn can do is considerable, yes, and as a scapegoat we can blow it on intense rage fueled by his emotions and adrenaline, but for anyone short of Raubahn being able to do the same feat no problem is a bit... disarming. heh

 

As for Godbert. He's a God. 'nuff said.

[Kage]

If it's in a tournament, it's up to the host to lay down ground rules before hand. If this is random RP, I'd more than likely dissolve the session and leave because I ground roleplay on the basis of reality as per the universe the roleplay is taking place in. I'm not going to give up my values on this to appease anybody, and my experiences with this is the person who believes they can punch me into the sun tends to not want to talk it over, so it's not really worth the effort and time.

 

If this was a Dragonball Z MMO, then being thrown into the sun is possible, but this is Eorzea, and that level of super strength has not been seen or recorded by the games lore standards. If they want to call me a godmoder because I don't believe in their denial of the reality of the universe, then I have no problem calling them a godmoder for breaking it, but it's all very moot because I simply leave them be so they can continue doing whatever they want, but it doesn't have to involve me.

 

The trouble with XIV, though, is that we DO have some examples of this sort of thing. 2.55 ending cutscenes feature full-on environmental destruction, and the Hildebrand questline features a number of superhuman feats.

 

Not that I don't feel the same way as you do, but these are frequently the counterpoint to "realism" being invoked.

 

What Raubahn can do is considerable, yes, and as a scapegoat we can blow it on intense rage fueled by his emotions and adrenaline, but for anyone short of Raubahn being able to do the same feat no problem is a bit... disarming. heh

 

As for Godbert. He's a God. 'nuff said.

The fight wasn't just Raubahn though or are you saying Raubahn had to be met through a etheric means by thatoneguyiforgothowtospell?

[Aaron]

If it's in a tournament, it's up to the host to lay down ground rules before hand. If this is random RP, I'd more than likely dissolve the session and leave because I ground roleplay on the basis of reality as per the universe the roleplay is taking place in. I'm not going to give up my values on this to appease anybody, and my experiences with this is the person who believes they can punch me into the sun tends to not want to talk it over, so it's not really worth the effort and time.

 

If this was a Dragonball Z MMO, then being thrown into the sun is possible, but this is Eorzea, and that level of super strength has not been seen or recorded by the games lore standards. If they want to call me a godmoder because I don't believe in their denial of the reality of the universe, then I have no problem calling them a godmoder for breaking it, but it's all very moot because I simply leave them be so they can continue doing whatever they want, but it doesn't have to involve me.

 

The trouble with XIV, though, is that we DO have some examples of this sort of thing. 2.55 ending cutscenes feature full-on environmental destruction, and the Hildebrand questline features a number of superhuman feats.

 

Not that I don't feel the same way as you do, but these are frequently the counterpoint to "realism" being invoked.

 

What Raubahn can do is considerable, yes, and as a scapegoat we can blow it on intense rage fueled by his emotions and adrenaline, but for anyone short of Raubahn being able to do the same feat no problem is a bit... disarming. heh

 

As for Godbert. He's a God. 'nuff said.

The fight wasn't just Raubahn though or are you saying Raubahn had to be met through a etheric means by thatoneguyiforgothowtospell?

Theres plenty more example of people having superhuman feats all throughout the game.

 

You have lalafell being war generals and dealing with beastmen like Amaal. I doubt they got to that point just by being cute.

 

Same for DRG leaping high in the air, or Cartaneau with people dodging bullets.

 

Sure you could tone it down, but you gotta realize this worlds not realistic enough to the point everything has to have a realistic basis. There's a thing called taking it too far sure, but its not ridiculous to see a person kick another person so hard they fly back slamming into a tree.

 

Edit - dammit quoted wrong person

[Sounsyy]

Two people are fighting one another. One is super over the top, complete with Tekken-style air juggling. The other is a gritty, super-duper-realism fighter.

 

So if the over-the-top style attempts to uppercut the gritty style into the sun, which result should be permitted? Does the gritty person godmode a result by only allowing themselves to be hit and nothing else? Does the over-the-top person godmode by forcing the other person to deal with cartoon physics?

 

As one of those "gritty" fighters who has (on multiple occasions) been subjected to Crouching Tiger physics, I can say first hand that compromises are necessary to make the experience not awkward for both parties.

 

Sounsyy's entire character concept is designed to be a rather grounded person in most aspects. This includes fighting. She's weak aetherically, she gets fatigued, she can't jump to save her life - let alone do acrobatics. She's not a gymnast. But I recognize this isn't a concept that everyone will adopt. In the setting, there are extraordinary figures and there are the Red Shirt guys, often in the same cutscene. Roleplayers fall into many places on this spectrum. Eventually (if you're doing tournament style fighting like Grindstone) you're going to come across someone who's physics settings are wildly outside your own.

 

The only thing I know to do in that situation is to discuss it with your partner if it's so left field from what you're willing to expose your character to. (I might expect to be flung 20 yalms if Sounsyy was struck by Leviathan's tail or something, not by a Midlander's right hook.) If the attack is more vague on what exactly its intention is, I don't see the problem in warping the effects to something more middle-ground. For instance, I (personally) find it hard to believe a Highlander could do a front flip onto Sounsyy's sword and land there anime style. More improbable is that Sounsyy... could hold that. So, if they win the roll, they will land on Sounsyy's blade... and Sounsyy will drop them.

[Caspar]

Two people are fighting one another. One is super over the top, complete with Tekken-style air juggling. The other is a gritty, super-duper-realism fighter.

 

So if the over-the-top style attempts to uppercut the gritty style into the sun, which result should be permitted? Does the gritty person godmode a result by only allowing themselves to be hit and nothing else? Does the over-the-top person godmode by forcing the other person to deal with cartoon physics?

 

As one of those "gritty" fighters who has (on multiple occasions) been subjected to Crouching Tiger physics, I can say first hand that compromises are necessary to make the experience not awkward for both parties.

 

Sounsyy's entire character concept is designed to be a rather grounded person in most aspects. This includes fighting. She's weak aetherically, she gets fatigued, she can't jump to save her life - let alone do acrobatics. She's not a gymnast. But I recognize this isn't a concept that everyone will adopt. In the setting, there are extraordinary figures and there are the Red Shirt guys, often in the same cutscene. Roleplayers fall into many places on this spectrum. Eventually (if you're doing tournament style fighting like Grindstone) you're going to come across someone who's physics settings are wildly outside your own.

 

The only thing I know to do in that situation is to discuss it with your partner if it's so left field from what you're willing to expose your character to. (I might expect to be flung 20 yalms if Sounsyy was struck by Leviathan's tail or something, not by a Midlander's right hook.) If the attack is more vague on what exactly its intention is, I don't see the problem in warping the effects to something more middle-ground. For instance, I (personally) find it hard to believe a Highlander could do a front flip onto Sounsyy's sword and land there anime style. More improbable is that Sounsyy... could hold that. So, if they win the roll, they will land on Sounsyy's blade... and Sounsyy will drop them.

I agree with this. Nothing wrong with being a non-powered fighter, but you have a strong grasp of the setting as everyone knows, and are aware that the gritty approach is not the dominant paradigm by any means. You're ready for it to happen, and react to it in the most realistic way, while at the same time not giving in too much to their demands. Organically adjusting character strength on the go is the smartest way to do things, not enforcing a view of what is possible and what is not. Fight scenes in the end, after all, are not a competition but rather cooperative choreography, with potentially a random element thrown in if rolls are used.

 

I still think a big problem that constantly occurs is the matter of what is realistic and what is believable. Little of what happens in the setting gameplay wise and story wise can be considered realistic and a lot flies in the face of physics, and what is believable depends on the player in question. Thus the only way a fight scene can be resolved in a way that is in any sense satisfactory to both parties is if they are willing to meet halfway like you said. As there are supernaturally empowered fighters, their advantages do not necessarily translate to being immune to basic combat tactics. You can't stand if your balance is ruined. You can't chant a spell if muzzled. All these things translate to reasonable narrative hooks to make a seemingly underdog non-powered character (really effectively equal for all ooc intents and purposes) a legitimate chance to win. I wrote into a situation like this with Sounssy once too. If you can write it well and sell it, any method can work, but that assumes a certain level of cooperation that I feel isn't normally present in competitive events, especially when pairing strangers.

[Thorgar]

the ones i hate:

 

*i wave my hand and stop your attack with my god like magic power"

 

actually had a chump do this in City of Heroes.  its the only response he posted, every time, i think he had it on a macro. here was my counter.

 

"I just discovered a god has given you a lethal virus and you will die in 5 seconds if i don't save you" *attempts to inject you with the cure*

 

of course hes response was *i wave my hand and stop your attack with my god like magic power" when we pointed out what had happened he got pissed and logged, didnt see him for months it was wonderful lol.

 

 

it makes things far easier to just sit down and talk oocly before engaging in any RP combat.

[Alaire]

If it's in a tournament, it's up to the host to lay down ground rules before hand. If this is random RP, I'd more than likely dissolve the session and leave because I ground roleplay on the basis of reality as per the universe the roleplay is taking place in. I'm not going to give up my values on this to appease anybody, and my experiences with this is the person who believes they can punch me into the sun tends to not want to talk it over, so it's not really worth the effort and time.

 

If this was a Dragonball Z MMO, then being thrown into the sun is possible, but this is Eorzea, and that level of super strength has not been seen or recorded by the games lore standards. If they want to call me a godmoder because I don't believe in their denial of the reality of the universe, then I have no problem calling them a godmoder for breaking it, but it's all very moot because I simply leave them be so they can continue doing whatever they want, but it doesn't have to involve me.

 

The trouble with XIV, though, is that we DO have some examples of this sort of thing. 2.55 ending cutscenes feature full-on environmental destruction, and the Hildebrand questline features a number of superhuman feats.

 

Not that I don't feel the same way as you do, but these are frequently the counterpoint to "realism" being invoked.

 

What Raubahn can do is considerable, yes, and as a scapegoat we can blow it on intense rage fueled by his emotions and adrenaline, but for anyone short of Raubahn being able to do the same feat no problem is a bit... disarming. heh

 

As for Godbert. He's a God. 'nuff said.

The fight wasn't just Raubahn though or are you saying Raubahn had to be met through a etheric means by thatoneguyiforgothowtospell?

It's not complete unreasonable but I've had a good deal of balance-breaking interactions with people via combat/random rolling rp in xiv. Being extremely powerful in this universe is a thing but I think what I've had a far greater issue with in these type of situations is magical or aetheric abilities that go above and beyond what would be standard than simply super amazing at combat folks. Especially when this type of thing isn't mentioned oocly/explained it can be a bit redic and jarring.

 

Everyone rps differently, is the thing to remember. And tbh it's final fantasy - I've come to expect an element of 'over the top'. Yet, as said above it's a bit disarming when your run of the mill adventurer who is able to do almost godly combat.

 

I wouldn't necessarily call this type of thing godmodding, I guess, so much as over the top and broken. I wouldn't really call someone out as a godmodder if they're playing in the confines of the rolls, but ultimately I'm gonna give those folks who are mega overthetop a bit wider girth and not really rp with them much.

[Dravus]

Ultimately it's a matter of being able to give and take in healthy doses. Even if a book, movie or game has a main character the story would become very dull and tiresome if only the main character ended up being relevant and successful.

 

This is no different within role-play. Everybody's character is their 'main character' and the primary focus of the story they want to tell. Ideally, though, they're not going to be super powerful and able to overcome any obstacle set before them. Sometimes they'll fail, experience unexpected losses and setbacks. They'll have their triumphs, of course - but not constantly.

 

People are free to have their character be the perpetual hero, of course, but if they're really only looking to treat everybody else's character as destined to lose then one has to wonder why they've invested in a group activity and won't just go off to create fan-fiction to detail how amazing their character supposedly is instead.

[Caspar]

Ultimately it's a matter of being able to give and take in healthy doses. Even if a book, movie or game has a main character the story would become very dull and tiresome if only the main character ended up being relevant and successful.

 

This is no different within role-play. Everybody's character is their 'main character' and the primary focus of the story they want to tell. Ideally, though, they're not going to be super powerful and able to overcome any obstacle set before them. Sometimes they'll fail, experience unexpected losses and setbacks. They'll have their triumphs, of course - but not constantly.

 

People are free to have their character be the perpetual hero, of course, but if they're really only looking to treat everybody else's character as destined to lose then one has to wonder why they've invested in a group activity and won't just go off to create fan-fiction to detail how amazing their character supposedly is instead.

It can be more interesting to lose too.

I made my character to specifically lose repeatedly at certain points. Granted, that was assuming she'd win at least once in a while to build credibility haha.

But it was a deliberate part of the character development. When strong, show an area in which they are weak. Sometimes I even prefer to take the opposite approach to characters than most people on here: I make an extremely powerful character and wear them away until they can hardly fight by the end, as it tends to have a deleterious effect on your health over the years. Or they are very strong, but the situations that get thrown at them can't be solved with brute force and they inevitably fail.

[Momo]

I agree with Graeham on most of his points, this is as normal an occurrence as in any other kind of RP, style and approach of the person on the other side of this relationship matters.  Know thy enemy if you wish to face them in a fight that you hope has a more realistic edge, perhaps have a general few questions asked of the other RPer to generate their opinion on the kinds of things you do or do not like to see?

 

When something you deem as unrealistic or not in good standing with how you RP happen, this is not an act of all RPers in battle, as usual, it is of that single person who may or may not be a decent RPer and/or care one way or the other what your style of RP is.  That kind of a person is someone I would be better to simply walk away from, than negotiate with or take verbal issue with.  Case by case basis is how I normally RP, and when entering into a situation as delicate as battle can be, that is a case in which I would prefer to know all the angles beforehand lest I lose my favorite character to mortal wounds, or need to regress back to the point before the battle, thus having wasted time I could have spent doing better suited things.