Character Information: Wiki or Mu*?

[Seraphim73]

@faraday I've mentioned this before, but I like my descs to say something about the character rather than just describing them. I don't always manage this, but for say... a swashbuckler, I might use more purple prose (while trying not to go overboard, because that definitely gets old fast), but a by-the-book pilot might have more of a just-the-facts description. Word choice is big for me here.

I also have problems where the PB is never -quite- right for what I picture in my head... maybe the character has facial hair that the PB doesn't, or they don't have facial hair that the PB does, or maybe they have a nasty facial scar that the PB doesn't have (and my 'shopping skills aren't advanced enough to add).

[ThatGuyThere]

@faraday said in Character Information: Wiki or Mu*?:

One other random thought... If we take a step back and ask ourselves what purpose does a desc serve?

For me, the purpose is to help others visualize my character. And frankly: "Jessica Chastain in a flight suit" helps a thousand percent more than anything I could ever write.

For me the purpose of a desc is to give me a rough idea what the character looks like. And that bit is a bad example because I have zero idea who Jessica Chastain is, I am sure I have seen her in things but I do not remember actors names for the most part.
This might be the one time I am on the immersion side of things if I don't have an idea in my head of the character I am interacting with I have a really hard time producing poses that are anything but bland because it feels like i am acting with a green screen. Putting it in the opening pose is alright but a lot of time that is just clothes not an actual physical description of the character.

[Thenomain]

@thatguythere said in Character Information: Wiki or Mu*?:

For me the purpose of a desc is to give me a rough idea what the character looks like. And that bit is a bad example because I have zero idea who Jessica Chastain is, I am sure I have seen her in things but I do not remember actors names for the most part.

So just copy the text and paste it into your web browser. It isn't that har—

(looks at the thread title)

Never mind. Carry on.

[ThatGuyThere]

@thenomain said in Character Information: Wiki or Mu*?:

So just copy the text and paste it into your web browser. It isn't that har—

That is what I do once the scene gives me a reason to care, though I will freely admit that does not always happen.

[faraday]

@thenomain said in Character Information: Wiki or Mu*?:

(looks at the thread title)

Right, it gets down to how much information is necessary to have in the game. For me? I'd rather have an actor name, even one I'd never heard of, whom I could google (or better yet - look up on your wiki page) and be like: "Oh, okay." That's far more effective for me than reading any desc ever.

Another reason I think descs have fallen out of favor is that the entire system is so dang clunky. You have to put in the static desc, create a bunch of outfits, remember to change your outfit based on the situation, then type 'look' at a whole bunch of people... just shoot me now. A never-changing "hair/build/age" type shortdesc in a room description plus a scene-set sentence about wardrobe and/or injuries is far more user-friendly. Again though - for me.

[Thenomain]

@thatguythere said in Character Information: Wiki or Mu*?:

@thenomain said in Character Information: Wiki or Mu*?:

So just copy the text and paste it into your web browser. It isn't that har—

That is what I do once the scene gives me a reason to care, though I will freely admit that does not always happen.

I was referencing earlier in this thread where a few people were against and a bunch of people were ambivalent at best when they have to leave the game window for some basic information.

"A cute brunette with cherub cheeks", for instance, is one million times more useful to me than "Felicity Jones in a uniform".

(edit, because I got ninja'd by Faraday): I consider at least a shortdesc like that to be critical.

I mean, yes, I should know who Felicity Jones is and be all fawning over her quirky Zooey Deschanel look, but I still had to look her up. Really, I had to look up every actress mentioned in this thread. "Cute brunette with cherub cheeks"? I could know more, but now I know a lot.

Tell me what you want me to know. That's what a desc is. But just like a pose, at least give me something.

--

@faraday said in Character Information: Wiki or Mu*?:

Another reason I think descs have fallen out of favor is that the entire system is so dang clunky. You have to put in the static desc, create a bunch of outfits

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Nobody ever made anyone else use a multidescer. A lot of people have tried, mind, back in the late 90s and early 00s, but I have been resolute even as a coder that if they wanted to they could knock themselves out, otherwise I'mma gonna do my static thing.

[ThatGuyThere]

@thenomain said in Character Information: Wiki or Mu*?:

"A cute brunette with cherub cheeks", for instance, is one million times more useful to me than "Felicity Jones in a uniform".

I agree with this sentiment 100%.

[faraday]

@thenomain said in Character Information: Wiki or Mu*?:

I consider at least a shortdesc like that to be critical.

"A cute brunette with cherub cheeks" is fine. But if you try to make me read two paragraphs about that same character? I'm just not going to read it. Full stop. And even if I did somehow get coerced into reading it? All I'm really going to glean from it is "a cute brunette with cherub cheeks". So the full desc offers no benefit over the short desc for me.

And yeah, I don't know who "Sean Teale" was at a glance either, but all it took was one photo on a wiki page and now the new guy on BSG is cemented in my brain as "that guy from Gifted". That is the power of wikis for me.

[Thenomain]

@faraday said in Character Information: Wiki or Mu*?:

"A cute brunette with cherub cheeks" is fine. But if you try to make me read two paragraphs about that same character? I'm just not going to read it. Full stop. And even if I did somehow get coerced into reading it? All I'm really going to glean from it is "a cute brunette with cherub cheeks". So the full desc offers no benefit over the short desc for me.

A short desc is still a desc, and there's nothing stopping anyone from making a one-line full desc. It's a pose. It's a finger attribute. It's there to serve an extremely specific purpose: To give people a rough idea of who they're dealing with.

I honestly don't care how the information gets across, as long as it does.

I've been yelled at before for not reading a log, posed snarkily at because I didn't see someone's character offer a handshake, I know more than most people without dyslexia about having difficulty reading things on the screen. The level at which I hate ANSI abuse comes directly from this. I've had people on this very forum laugh at me because of it. You are preaching to the choir.

But "Jessica Chastain in a flight suit" is not useful and may push people out of the client window just to know what you're talking about, and that I have objections about.

[faraday]

@thenomain said in Character Information: Wiki or Mu*?:

But "Jessica Chastain in a flight suit" is not useful and may push people out of the client window just to know what you're talking about, and that I have objections about.

That's fine. But I would have no problem if every single person on my game did their descs that way. I think, though, that a shortdesc that automatically shows up in the room description so you can see everybody immediately when you walk in is a reasonable compromise.

@Thenomain said:

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Nobody ever made anyone else use a multidescer...I'mma gonna do my static thing.

Wasn't part of the point of this whole thread the idea that people who don't read descs were missing some important bit about the changing parts of the character's desc? Whether they were in uniform? Injured? Whatever? Doesn't that imply that descs are inherently dynamic? I know on BSG everyone's always switching up which uniform they're in, though there's an easy shorthand to say: "Cate walks in, wearing her khaki fatigues..."

The point isn't that it's ideal for everyone. Nothing is going to please everyone. But it pleases some people, and the game can function this way.

[Thenomain]

@faraday said in Character Information: Wiki or Mu*?:

Wasn't part of the point of this whole thread the idea that people who don't read descs were missing some important bit about the changing parts of the character's desc?

I skipped a lot of the multidescer discussion because really, if you want to use it, use it, else don't. I'm pretty against making anyone pose in a certain way outside the basics: One pose should help give rise to the next. (edit to clarify: I'm riffing on my earlier idea that a desc is a static pose describing what you're looking at. Do it however you want, just participate!)

My thesis in this thread is that if I had to choose between information on a wiki (outside the game) and in the game, I want it in. I concede that there is information that can live 100% off the game, but I don't consider visual cues about a character to be one of them, for much the same reason that I would never play a game where the character name is listed under https://my.fun.game/w/dbref:13

Dbref: #13
Name: Thenomain

I know on BSG everyone's always switching up which uniform they're in, though there's an easy shorthand to say: "Cate walks in, wearing her khaki fatigues..."

And that's the way things have become here in our Mushlikes, and I'll be honest, I prefer it this way.

There was some back-and-forth whether or not this is what killed people looking at the long desc, but I didn't see anything more authoritarian about descs than that.

Unless you consider "don't make me hit the wiki for a desc" to be draconian? Maybe? No?

[Seraphim73]

@faraday said in Character Information: Wiki or Mu*?:

And yeah, I don't know who "Sean Teale" was at a glance either, but all it took was one photo on a wiki page and now the new guy on BSG is cemented in my brain as "that guy from Gifted". That is the power of wikis for me.

This is actually one of the major dangers (Major Danger salutes) of wikis for me. Because just because the new guy from BSG looks like "that guy from Gifted," does he have the same voice? The same accent? Some of the same personality quirks?

I've fallen into that trap myself when picking PBs at times, incorporating personality traits or quirks from some of the characters that actor has played--and I ended up disappointed with myself as I was playing Vin Diesel the Whitecloak, or Drew Boley (Diego Boneta's Rock of Ages character) the Space Rocker. I've noticed other people doing it too, and before PBs, it was a lot less common.

[faraday]

@seraphim73 said in Character Information: Wiki or Mu*?:

This is actually one of the major dangers (Major Danger salutes) of wikis for me. Because just because the new guy from BSG looks like "that guy from Gifted," does he have the same voice? The same accent? Some of the same personality quirks?

I don't really get how that's a "danger". It's pretty common knowledge that actors play characters and characters have different personalities and sometimes different accents. (ETA: That sounds snarkier in retrospect than I intended. I just meant... is that really a common problem?)

Sure, people may make faulty assumptions, but at the same time... does it really matter if I picture your Hugh Jackman with his Aussie accent and you intended him to be Hugh Jackman with his American accent? Does that fundamentally change my perception of your character in any sort of meaningful way? I'm thinking no.

Also I've known numerous people commenting about the benefits of having an actor to ground themselves on. Incorporating little quirks to make their RP richer. So it goes both ways.

[surreality]

@seraphim73 said in Character Information: Wiki or Mu*?:

@faraday I've mentioned this before, but I like my descs to say something about the character rather than just describing them. I don't always manage this, but for say... a swashbuckler, I might use more purple prose (while trying not to go overboard, because that definitely gets old fast), but a by-the-book pilot might have more of a just-the-facts description. Word choice is big for me here.

I studied costume design in college. It was, like... officially my thing. I so get this. I so get this. While it takes a bit of media-based translation... have I mentioned I so get this? Costume design's main focus isn't actually the historical bits and bobs, it's about conveying character and character traits.

You get a different impression from these, and it's directly related to character:

• she has a defined jawline

• she has a stubborn chin

• she wears a lot of jewelry

• it looks as if she's upended her entire jewelry box on herself

• she dresses like a goth, mostly in black

• she dresses like an escapee from Hot Topic Addicts Anonymous

...and so on. Each pair says the same thing in terms of a physical description, but one presents something about the character that people may be able to infer more clearly than a sterile description of appearance might, without losing the ability to visualize the character's appearance.

I kinda see the difference as being between 'you can visualize the character's appearance' and 'you can visualize the character', and I tend to think the latter is more helpful and engaging.

[Derp]

Wiki.

I don't read descs. I just don't. Unless there is some compelling reason to do so, say, fae shit that a PB cannot possibly capture.

Beyond that? I will read a short desc. I may skim a long one. But I will definitely wiki.

My two cents. Descs are redundant in the age of wiki.

[Seraphim73]

@surreality Yes, yes, yes. Good examples too.

[faraday]

@surreality said:

You get a different impression from these, and it's directly related to character:

You may get a different impression. @Seraphim73 may. Me? Nope. Those statements tell me exactly the same information about your character. And they say much less about your character to me than your mannerisms, actions and words. Jewelry girl could always be fiddling with one of her many pieces of bling to get the idea across. Goth girl would probably act goth, or her
poses could highlight how incongruous her manner is with her appearance.

I think I view descs more like a novel in that regard. I don’t want to pause a chapter midstream to read two paragraphs about what someone looks like. I want the initial summary to be short and pithy and the rest of the details to be worked in organically.

But again, that’s just preference. Not knocking anyone who likes it the other way.

[Bleys5]

@faraday Put everything essential to the game ON THE GAME. Wiki sites are nice to supplement, but aren't always easily accessible.

[Ghost]

@seraphim73 said in Character Information: Wiki or Mu*?:

@faraday said in Character Information: Wiki or Mu*?:

And yeah, I don't know who "Sean Teale" was at a glance either, but all it took was one photo on a wiki page and now the new guy on BSG is cemented in my brain as "that guy from Gifted". That is the power of wikis for me.

This is actually one of the major dangers (Major Danger salutes) of wikis for me. Because just because the new guy from BSG looks like "that guy from Gifted," does he have the same voice? The same accent? Some of the same personality quirks?

I've fallen into that trap myself when picking PBs at times, incorporating personality traits or quirks from some of the characters that actor has played--and I ended up disappointed with myself as I was playing Vin Diesel the Whitecloak, or Drew Boley (Diego Boneta's Rock of Ages character) the Space Rocker. I've noticed other people doing it too, and before PBs, it was a lot less common.

Agreed 100%.

See, the basis of these games is writing and describing. I love wikis for 3 things:

1. Logs
2. Organization of things like factions and an easier to read format (mouse use!) for theme and rule information
3. They make an easy way to sort of advertise your character to newcomers (hey, this character seems interesting, I'll nudge them for rp)

I've seen a decline away from the writing side of MUs over the years. Things like descs have been slowly replaced with PBs. PBs have turned largely into role playing the actor playing the character, which one one hand helps me understand the mannerisms of the character when they're acted out, but really it just seems like a shortcut crutch to me. Few seem to ever role play a character with Robert Downey Jr as a PB for visual purposes alone, but they role play Robert Downey Jr as...

More and more I think many people are using OOC information gleaned thru wikis and taking this information into their role play, rather than putting the focus on the IC play. While I approve of descing while playing, I tend to get a lot of image links rather than descriptive prose.

So, I guess all I'm saying is that the writing aspect of the hobby is important to me, and I'm getting tired of PBs and wiki pages of hot people. We have people who avoid role play because of PB selection or because this persons wiki makes them look like a TS whore so I'm going to avoid them (I've heard this personally), and the dreaded wikistalking.

I just think it's a gradual shift from writing and being descriptive, and I'd like to see more games focus on that. I'd rather see wikis focus less on PBs and more on images of things that represent the character in artistic ways.

[faraday]

@bleys5 said in Character Information: Wiki or Mu*?:

@faraday Put everything essential to the game ON THE GAME. Wiki sites are nice to supplement, but aren't always easily accessible.

I'm not sure what specifically you're referring to, but I've said several times that I support putting essential game information on the game. That's a no-brainer. But different people have different opinions about what constitutes "essential".

@ghost said in Character Information: Wiki or Mu*?:

Few seem to ever role play a character with Robert Downey Jr as a PB for visual purposes alone, but they role play Robert Downey Jr as...

People do it because people like that. They like to view MU*s as a TV show with actors playing roles. To them... to me, but I am not alone in this... that's part of the fun.

You don't like it, that's cool. I respect your opinion. But why can't we just acknowledge there are different playstyles and preferences? Why does one have to be labeled as the "decline" of the hobby?