What to NOT do when roleplaying...

[Kraehenfeder]

... or the ultimate guide on How To Annoy Your Storyteller.

 

I haven't found this on the board yet, so I though to post them. If you have about 50 minutes time and like a good laugh watch The Gamers. The second part takes about 90 minutes, if you want to watch that too.

 

Someone posted it up on youtube with a playlist. However, since I am not sure how green Dead Gentlemen Productions is with their stuff being on youtube (you can as well order it on DVD) I am a little hesitant about linking directly to it.

Either way, I strongly recommend to watch it and I had a ton of fun with both movies.

 

In this sense:

 

ALL HAIL THE BANDIT KING!!!

[Therese]

In a similar vein, there's also...

 

The 1825 things Mr. Welch (aka. the Loony) can no longer do during an RPG.

 

Here's a sample:

#9: My monk's lips must be in sync.

#106: I do not have weapon proficiency in cat.

#391: A starting paladin has no conceivable use for industrial lubricant.

#1002: Foam Finger of Death is not a real spell.

#1500: I will not convince the dragon to eat the elf instead because he's organically grown.

 

Oooh yeah. =|b

[Alaiac]

"Florescent."

[DAISHI]

Don't emote your thoughts. That's meta behavior.

[Satisiun]

Don't emote your thoughts. That's meta behavior.

 

 

 

 

You can't blame the writer for what the other person decides to drag from writer narration or inner monologue to knowing and responding to verbally. That's just ten degrees of Cheet-o's Brand Cheesy. :?

 

Then again, some people look at what they write more in the scope of writing a book (albeit as a team project, it being RP and all). And last I checked, books are chock full of writers narrating what a character is thinking, or adding flavor beyond just their physical actions and verbalized words.

[DAISHI]

Don't emote your thoughts. That's meta behavior.

 

 

 

 

You can't blame the writer for what the other person decides to drag from writer narration or inner monologue to knowing and responding to verbally. That's just ten degrees of Cheet-o's Brand Cheesy. :?

 

Then again, some people look at what they write more in the scope of writing a book (albeit as a team project, it being RP and all). And last I checked, books are chock full of writers narrating what a character is thinking, or adding flavor beyond just their physical actions and verbalized words.

 

If you have a thought, and you want others to know it, you speak it. If you emote what you're thinking, I have to treat it like I never even saw it.

[Chveya]

Different RP styles are different.

[Satisiun]

If you have a thought' date=' and you want others to know it, you speak it. If you emote what you're thinking, I have to treat it like I never even saw it.[/quote']

 

That is so black and white, though. Are you telling me that ... hold on, here's something from an RP I was taking part in earlier:

 

(Satisiun Desain) had by this point given up on keeping track of how many unusual remembrances of

(Satisiun Desain) things kept cropping up, though he felt a similar pang of memory as he looked at the water

(Satisiun Desain) mill. "Aye. Anyway, let me show you one of the little alcoves nearby. 'tis nice."

 

... so you're telling me that I should not have expressed any sort of hint at what he was thinking in this? That just seems silly, and cuts down on what I believe is good additional depth of description or narration ongoing in the scene.

 

The posted example is out of context, I admit, but it should be enough of an example.

[DAISHI]

If you have a thought' date=' and you want others to know it, you speak it. If you emote what you're thinking, I have to treat it like I never even saw it.[/quote']

 

That is so black and white, though. Are you telling me that ... hold on, here's something from an RP I was taking part in earlier:

 

(Satisiun Desain) had by this point given up on keeping track of how many unusual remembrances of

(Satisiun Desain) things kept cropping up, though he felt a similar pang of memory as he looked at the water

(Satisiun Desain) mill. "Aye. Anyway, let me show you one of the little alcoves nearby. 'tis nice."

 

... so you're telling me that I should not have expressed any sort of hint at what he was thinking in this? That just seems silly, and cuts down on what I believe is good additional depth of description or narration ongoing in the scene.

 

The posted example is out of context, I admit, but it should be enough of an example.

 

If you're writing a book that's fine. If you're RPing, then the only thing my char got was what you actually said.

[Satisiun]

If you're writing a book that's fine. If you're RPing' date=' then the only thing my char got was what you actually said.[/quote']

 

Listen, DAISHI. I think you're a cool bro, and we'll always have our fond, wonderful, loving memories of playing a little "YOU CAN'T GET YE FLASK" on the announcement board (and being chewed out for it, too :lol: )...

 

... but the thing is, that perspective seems very me-centric, and a little short-sighted, in the "I can't react to it, so it's worthless" sort of way. Yes, your character can't see or mind read any of that. But narration is there for a reason. Inner dialogue is there for a reason. It adds to the experience for the people playing, even if the characters themselves can't do much about it.

[DAISHI]

If you're writing a book that's fine. If you're RPing' date=' then the only thing my char got was what you actually said.[/quote']

 

Listen, DAISHI. I think you're a cool bro, and we'll always have our fond, wonderful, loving memories of playing a little "YOU CAN'T GET YE FLASK" on the announcement board (and being chewed out for it, too :lol: )...

 

... but the thing is, that perspective seems very me-centric, and a little short-sighted, in the "I can't react to it, so it's worthless" sort of way. Yes, your character can't see or mind read any of that. But narration is there for a reason. Inner dialogue is there for a reason. It adds to the experience for the people playing, even if the characters themselves can't do much about it.

 

That's fine, it's just a difference of opinion on what roleplaying should be.

[Therese]

Knowing the thoughts can also paint how emoticons and actions are done.

 

(Seville Meville) raised his eyebrows thinking, "What the hell is wrong with this girl?"

(Seville Meville) waved up his hand dismissively at Waka Malakala.

 

(Seville Meville) raised his eyebrows thinking, "S-She's interested in me?"

(Seville Meville) waved up his hand dismissively at Waka Malakala.

 

Two entirely similar actions but the significance, type, and how it's performed is entirely different depending on what an "unspoken" thought that Seville Meville was thinking. =)

[Satisiun]

You know, actually. Let me just toss in something after chewing on this, and also talking to a fellow RP friend on this.

 

It should be noted that such description or narrative doesn't work in all settings or scenes. Group events, for example. Situations in which there may be a certain number of players at the same time. You can't waste time just droning on and on about how your character is thinking about kittens, while never adding anything to the scene itself that other people can respond to. It's rude, boorish, self-centric, and annoying.

 

Also, it really depends on how you do it, too. Bleating out blunt things in the emotive/narrative parts of an entry such as "He is lying" or "He lied" before or after a character says something is just asking for trouble. Like many things, it involves a subtle touch. It involves adding something without making the other player feel as if they are obligated to respond to it, but still adds some depth to the scenario.

 

Having said that.

 

Having said that, when you are "trolling" for someone to play with (so long as you don't go and inundate the entire damn chat window). Or when you are with just one other person, or even two other people who you are able to bounce stuff off of with ease despite being a "group" per se, that is a different story. You're able to spend more time fleshing out the narrative, without having to worry about either being left behind while everyone else gets in two, three, four inserts in to what is happening, and in turn finding yourself interrupted over and over.

 

And that's all I got.

[Hayden]

 

....narration is there for a reason. Inner dialogue is there for a reason. It adds to the experience for the people playing, even if the characters themselves can't do much about it.

 

I agree completly.

[blueblacksky]

The problem is that the people behind the keyboard tend to cherry pick what their character will pick up on when another role-player uses thought-emotes to get a point across.

 

Another reason I dislike thought-emoting is that people can't be misunderstood if you can read their thoughts, misunderstandings make things more true to life, at least to me.

 

Finally, the 80~ish character limit really discourages being overly wordy. That might change in the future though.

 

It's fine if you use them, but unless you include some qualifier about a character making an expression that blatantly gives away what they are thinking I have my character completely ignore thought emotes.

[Kashemia]

I personally prefer to try to portray my characters thoughts through how she's acting, rather than telling people outright. As someone said, it allows for misunderstandings and I find that more interesting.

 

I have no problem with people writing our their thoughts, I just prefer not knowing, as I find it create more interesting dynamics and posibilities.

Rather that saying:

"Tommy felt sort of nervous when he looked at the girl, he didn't know what to say", you could say

"Tommy glanced briefly at the girl, but looked down with a blush when she met his eyes. He opened his mouth, as if to say something, but then closed it again."

 

There's nothing wrong with the first one, I just find the second one more interesting. The example is pretty simple to read what Tommy might be thinking, there could be others where it's more abstract.

 

Anyway, that's just my thoughts. I agree that there's a different between what you would write in a book, and in roleplay. I don't think there is a right or a wrong way to roleplay, if you prefer putting your characters thoughts into the roleplay, that's fine, it's your choice I just prefer portraying it in different ways.

[Freyar]

I've gotten into a bit of trouble with my Linkshell once or twice over this. I do emote thoughts on occasions, feelings as well since they definitely inflect a body stance or (as said before) an inflection that otherwise would be nearly impossible to put into words without delving into a massive amount of mathematics.

 

The character limit does indeed put a stop to a lot of my attempts to add these to my character's actions, but without the inflected feelings behind the actions and words, the character falls flat and is about as two-dimensional as a character's actual dimensions in Paper Mario.

 

Is it meta-gaming? Not really, so long as it isn't taken for granted.

[Therese]

That's all fair points on both ends, really. To be fair, I generally don't express thoughts and preconceptions to others ic-ly (thought I sometimes do oocly). Probably more than anything my objection was more to respond to the idea that "you absolutely should not do this ever period," when in the grand scheme of infractions, that is usually not the worst one.

 

Really it depends on the circumstances and your audience. Though after reading people's objections here I'll definitely make a point to not share my thoughts of my character quite as easily as I would in the past. >.>

[Satisiun]

Is it meta-gaming? Not really' date=' so long as it isn't taken for granted.[/quote']

 

That, actually, is why I think I took a little more umbrage than normal about it. It's like, "gee, um, so I'm a metagamer now because I'll toss in a smattering of contemplation or narrative which isn't able to be responded to? Uh. Thanks?"

[DAISHI]

Sorry, wasn't trying to be surly It's entirely obvious to the entire community when I get surly

[Kraehenfeder]

Those are all very deep thoughts and most certainly fit to the headline, but didn't it run off-topic a little?

 

I just felt to inform everyone about the wonderful art piece the Dead Gentlemen created since there were no hits for it when I searched for The Gamers. :geek:

 

 

And to the topic of the off-topic topic:

 

I myself try to keep it with actions as well. Not stay inside the skin of my character but rather look at him from a movie camera or a theater's audience point of view.

[Asytra]

The Gamers was good but I preferred the much more polished (and funny) sequel The Gamers: Dorkness Rising.

 

I saw it on Netflix instant streaming too, but it's also worth a purchase. Hopefully they will make a third movie.

[DAISHI]

errrr lol. I think we went off the phrase "What to not do when roleplaying"

 

[Kraehenfeder]

The Gamers was good but I preferred the much more polished (and funny) sequel The Gamers: Dorkness Rising.

 

Of course the second part is way better ^^

The first one was made as an art project in their school, the second one was made with them already being a small company. The first part is more or less a blended mix of generic things that -do- go wrong in the average campaign e.g. the natural 20 or insisting on the ambush roll or stuff like that.

[Therese]

If I'm reading this right, the original topic was about a video that was funny, which sort of took a serious bend.

 

It's one big muck-a-muck now, and it's kinda interesting to see where the topic flies off to next. x3