Discussion And Role Play Within Ryzom

[gaspode1]

I was recently involved in what I think could be called a fairly controversial thread.

I felt I wanted to post something now, as my thinking has moved (dare I say improved) considerably as a result of reviewing everything that was said in that thread.

Any reference I make to that thread is only because that is what caused my change in thinking - not because I want to reopen any old wounds.

These are only my current opinions based on my current thinking and perhaps will evolve still further as a result of reaction to this thread.

I make no claims to original thought here; I'm just drawing together some points that others made (which I finally realised the importance of), saying them in my own way and, hopefully, arriving at a logical conclusion. Maybe what I say is already realised by 99.9% of role players but, if so, at least you will know I am now singing off the same song sheet.

I should next say that, although I felt comfortable with the arguement I expressed in the previous thread, I felt VERY UNcomfortable about the way I had to express it (at least, as I perceived things at that time).

The Damascene revelation I had was when I REALLY thought about the point that a veritable saint can role play a character filled with negative attributes. (I previously recognised the fact, but only in a general vague sort of way). The point finally really hit me that if (s)he plays the character well, then you can hate the character but still love the player.

From that I realised how vitally important it is to be clear about whether you are writing as a player (a human being) discussing things with other players OR are you speaking as a character in a game talking to other characters in a game.

The end result may be similar but I think it can take a lot of the sting out of an arguement if it is 'my character speaking to your character' rather than 'me speaking to you'.

I suppose it goes without saying that, looking at things in this way, it wouldn't make much sense for me as a person to (try and?) talk directly to a character in the game.

Separating things this way makes it clear that you cannot argue along the lines of 'I'm a nice person so, even if my character displays negative attributes, you have to consider him to be a nice character'. By extension 'I'm a character who does nice things such as x, y and z so, even if I do a negative thing, you MUST view me as a nice character'.

It is quite reasonable for a character to make a case for themselves by telling other characters of their positive attributes but the positive/negative will be weighed in the balance by other characters in drawing THEIR conclusions, which could go either way.

I then looked again at the structure that Nevrax has very kindly provided us all with and I thought, in particular, about the General Discussion forum (a place for people to discuss things) and the Roleplaying forum (a place for characters to discuss things). I now think that much of what I said in the previous thread should have been said by my character within the Roleplaying forum - a subtle but important difference.

Going forward I intend to try and make the player/character distinction clear by posting in the appropriate forum if I start a thread. Because I'm not sure how many people regularly check the Roleplaying forum I may have to make a second posting in General Discussion to point people towards the Roleplaying forum. For me it is worth that bit of extra effort.

An advantage of this approach, for me personally, is that Oneofone can argue a case with a lot more humour than I use, because HE is not afraid of being accused of being flippant over a serious topic.

Others may disagree, so when I read the General Discussion forum in future, I will try & think carefully about whether any comments made there are really the player or the character speaking (gets a little difficult if someone appears to speak as both within the same posting but I'll do my best). I could then make it clear, if I make a posting to their thread, whether I was speaking as Gaspode (a person) or as Oneofone (a character).

Oh well, I reckon I've rambled for long enough. Hope this all made sense and, if anyone has read this far, thanks for your patience

[vutescu]

I really should include this in my sig: I've quit playing the game but I like to read the forums and sometimes post replies. So if you don't like my point of view just remember I'm not a player here anymore so just ignore my words. Also try to remember that english is not my first language so grammar errors or bad phrase construction are common.

@ gastopode
- is/was an unwritten rule in gaming forums: if the person signs the post with an ingame name (in your case Oneforone) then the post should be taken as "in character". this rule is not respected anymore.
- also [ooc][/ooc] or [ic][/ic] tags can be used (are not "working tags", of course, just a way to mark your text)

Anyway, imho, is lack of seriozity to post "in character" replies.
Forums are meant to facilitate communication between the people who are behind the characters. Mixing "in character" and "out of character" replies is not helping this. Personally, I consider all the replies to a post as "out of character". So - if you ask me - all that crap with "I was posting what I tought my character would post" is just a pathetic escuse for a major lack of maturity or seriosity. If someone wants to play/role play "the village idiot", so be it. But please... keep that idiot in game. Don't bring it in forums.

[riveit]

I agree with Gaspode. Discussions such as what [insert name here] did in PR should be put in the RP forums and left in RP mode. The worst problem we have, in my opinion, is that discussions of PvP here quickly devolve into insults directed at the players which ignite the usual festival of flames.

Vutescu, the problem isn't that people can't tell IC from OOC, it is that no one is even trying to use IC. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think that if people could report attacks or grievances IC, that would let them vent their steam (e.g. a goo-maddened mage {name here} is loose in the Trench of Trials throwing acid at travelers ...). If the discussion is kept IC, then we hopefully wouldn't get the usual redundant rhetoric "I can because it's in the game", "if this happened in RL", "I hate all PvP because ...", "you just want to tell everyone how to play ...", etc.

As another benefit, it might liven up the roleplaying forum!

[vutescu]

Hmm... I think Gastopode was reffering at his thread about moral rights to enforce rules.

Anyway. IF a player would be "in character" 90% of time, I would accept the goo-madened... uhm... escuse. But as long as that character does not even know the story behind the game, as long he spends all the time power leveling, the role play escuse becomes veeeery thin.
I mean I like role play, but I just can't believe the suddenly role play desire that appears after you become powerfull.
I can accept pk / griefing / ganking from a role player. After all when I was in game I rp-ed "the xenophobic fyros miner". So I'll be at least a hypocrite to whine IF a RP-er is PK-ing me.
But if someone called... let's say D34Dly_sWoRD is hanging around TP near free PK zone (aka PR) and is nuking anyone who enters... well, escuse me, but I just can't buy the role-play.

Sorry for out of topic post Gastopode.

EDIT. I'm anti-pk, xenophobic miner role means: no other race rez, not buy from other race shops, spit on Jena every time you can, no other race guld members. all mess you can do to other race exept killing.

[gaspode1]

Just to be clear; I'm outlining how I intend to operate going forward and why. It's a general statement of principle that will apply to ALL situations.

I should have pointed out in the first post that I decided it was best to make the statement now. I wouldn't want to be accused of being inconsistent in my arguements or of 'moving the goalposts' just to suit myself.

[alyssah]

I got s far as the first 4 or 5 paragraphs. You were still discussing why you needed to post this thread. If you want to do a summary of the main thread topic, I will be happy to read it.

[riveit]

Originally Posted by vutescu

But if someone called... let's say D34Dly_sWoRD is hanging around TP near free PK zone (aka PR) and is nuking anyone who enters... well, excuse me, but I just can't buy the role-play.

True, I understand your point. My aim was more to improve the atmosphere of this forum. Some problems are insoluble in the present game format, you will never be able to control other player's actions. My advice is, when one enters PR, to arm oneself first with a self of humor.

[glipe]

Originally Posted by alyssah

I got s far as the first 4 or 5 paragraphs. You were still discussing why you needed to post this thread. If you want to do a summary of the main thread topic, I will be happy to read it.

He had a revelation while reading the previous, controversial thread. Character and player are two different things, not necessarily related. Nasty character could still have a nice player behind it. Much of what was said in the previous thread should have been said, in character, in the Roleplaying section, so as to avoid confusion.

That's a quick summary, please point out any flaws gaspode!

We've had similar topics to this one previously. In Character (IC) stuff sometimes gets confused with Out Of Character (OOC) stuff. I try to make it really, really obvious when I'm using either form. I also tend to keep that IC stuff in the RP section myself. So long as it's clear what's what, use whatever form you like!

[alyssah]

Thx. Appreciated both IC & OoC.

[basicart]

Originally Posted by glipe

He had a revelation while reading the previous, controversial thread. Character and player are two different things, not necessarily related. Nasty character could still have a nice player behind it. Much of what was said in the previous thread should have been said, in character, in the Roleplaying section, so as to avoid confusion.

That's a quick summary, please point out any flaws gaspode!

We've had similar topics to this one previously. In Character (IC) stuff sometimes gets confused with Out Of Character (OOC) stuff. I try to make it really, really obvious when I'm using either form. I also tend to keep that IC stuff in the RP section myself. So long as it's clear what's what, use whatever form you like!

If ya reread his thread ya can clearly see it wasnt ment to be posted IC at all cos hes saying things like

"What they are doing is clearly 'legal' within the Rules and CoC."

and

"However, I firmly believe that RP games have many unique features including a moral dimension."

If it was IC i dont think these OOC things would of been mentioned

If you have changed your mind on what you said then just say that or dont eather way but dont go saying ya ment it IC when clearly it wasnt.