Roleplaying writing styles
-
@Arkandel said in Roleplaying writing styles:
What's your favorite 'roleplaying writing style'? Do you have any biases either way? Do you consider yourself an elitist?
I like some hint at the PC's personality and world view in poses, which is often the most effective in meta. But meta is a tricky balance to strike and not everyone does it well. I have no idea if I do it well but I do go for the meta narrative.
I don't know if I consider myself elitist but I don't have a lot of patience for two types of posing:
The first:
Enormous fucking paragraphs that go on and on and on without line breaks. I don't know what it was about Dark Spires specifically that seemed to really be into this kind of pose style but there were multiple people there that would just go bananas with huge fucking paragraphs.
Like for real, I don't care if you're just told me the secret truth of all the universe - I am for real not going to waste my time having to read that because there's so much in there, I can't respond to. any. of. it.
On the contrary I've learned to associate brevity with subpar roleplay.
This is my second. There are people who are great at writing with effective brevity but often, this is not the case. And it tends to follow for me too that I also associate this with the other side of the bad RP coin. If the pose is super flat and too short, it tends to signal to me that the other person isn't paying attention/doesn't give a shit.
So, how do you like to pose? What's your preferred style in your partners?
I just want a little personality and hype in the words but that's so subjective sometimes. I struggle with RPing up against what feels like flat poses, where the writing feels kind of limp, lifeless, and ho hum.
-
@EMDA said in Roleplaying writing styles:
B) Carl approaches Rick, sidling around to stand between the other man and the nearest exit. Crossing his arms, he asks, "Where were you on the night Christy was murdered?"
I'd want to play with the Carl in B way more than the Carl in A.
While I somewhat agree on your point on pose style, in a scene I would have huge issues with pose B. The reason for this is the assumed success that impacts what my character can do, by getting between Rick and the exit. To me this is power posing, granted not a horrible example of it but still unless you are dropping dice on the athletics roll pose the attempt let the other PC pose weather it succeeds or not.
-
@ThatGuyThere said in Roleplaying writing styles:
@EMDA said in Roleplaying writing styles:
B) Carl approaches Rick, sidling around to stand between the other man and the nearest exit. Crossing his arms, he asks, "Where were you on the night Christy was murdered?"
I'd want to play with the Carl in B way more than the Carl in A.
While I somewhat agree on your point on pose style, in a scene I would have huge issues with pose B. The reason for this is the assumed success that impacts what my character can do, by getting between Rick and the exit. To me this is power posing, granted not a horrible example of it but still unless you are dropping dice on the athletics roll pose the attempt let the other PC pose weather it succeeds or not.
This is why, when I'm doing such in a scene, I'd write it as:
"Carl approaches Rick, sidling around in an attempt to stand between the other man and the nearest exit."
That way there's the opportunity for the other player to decide if successful or not and to what degree. But it clearly depicts the what/where.
-
@ThatGuyThere said in Roleplaying writing styles:
@EMDA said in Roleplaying writing styles:
B) Carl approaches Rick, sidling around to stand between the other man and the nearest exit. Crossing his arms, he asks, "Where were you on the night Christy was murdered?"
I'd want to play with the Carl in B way more than the Carl in A.
While I somewhat agree on your point on pose style, in a scene I would have huge issues with pose B. The reason for this is the assumed success that impacts what my character can do, by getting between Rick and the exit. To me this is power posing, granted not a horrible example of it but still unless you are dropping dice on the athletics roll pose the attempt let the other PC pose weather it succeeds or not.
Yeah, "closing" poses is one of the big no-nos of RP. Unless some accidentally there's never a good justification for it - and while I understand it's a pain in the ass to write in conditionals ("Bob attempts to stop Jane. If he's successful he'll try to put a hand on her shoulder if she lets him, else...") it still doesn't make it right.
The correct etiquette is to ask OOC, negotiate the sequence real quick and then get back into posing. Or at the worst case scenario, roll for it.
-
All I care about, is that someone gives me something to roleplay with.
Pose length doesn't matter, so long as the person is engaged in the scene and furthering RP.
Give me something to play off of and I am good. In the right situation someone shaking their head, or making a noncommital(sic) sound can still further RP.
But...
People can write huge poses that add nothing. They can write small poses that add nothing.
Both of these are equally frustrating.
Hello! Long time listener, first time caller...
-
@Arkandel said in Roleplaying writing styles:
. Or at the worst case scenario, roll for it.
Rolling is never the worst case, at least not for me, it tends to be the preferred way to settle things.
-
@Lithium said in Roleplaying writing styles:
All I care about, is that someone gives me something to roleplay with.
Pose length doesn't matter, so long as the person is engaged in the scene and furthering RP.
Give me something to play off of and I am good. In the right situation someone shaking their head, or making a noncommital(sic) sound can still further RP.
But...
People can write huge poses that add nothing. They can write small poses that add nothing.
Both of these are equally frustrating.
Those people are what I have referred to in other threads as 'furniture.' They are set dressing. They are there for their entertainment and no one else's.
RPing with them is upsetting because it is emotionally draining to carry an entire scene on your own. I know people who I really do like OOC, but I cannot be in a 1-on-1 scene with them because it will just wear me out to be the only one actively contributing.
Saying the quiet parts out loud since 1996.
-
@Auspice said in Roleplaying writing styles:
RPing with them is upsetting because it is emotionally draining to carry an entire scene on your own.
I'm so awesome that I'm always drained at the end of a scene. I have to carry everyone.
Actually, not really. I'm just blessed to get to play with really awesome folks often.
-
@ThatGuyThere said in Roleplaying writing styles:
@EMDA said in Roleplaying writing styles:
B) Carl approaches Rick, sidling around to stand between the other man and the nearest exit. Crossing his arms, he asks, "Where were you on the night Christy was murdered?"
I'd want to play with the Carl in B way more than the Carl in A.
While I somewhat agree on your point on pose style, in a scene I would have huge issues with pose B. The reason for this is the assumed success that impacts what my character can do, by getting between Rick and the exit.
Really? I didn't read it that way. It said "moving to stand..." which I interpreted as "in the process of moving with the intention to stand...
I see that sort of thing constantly in MU*s and have never regarded it as power-posing. It's not like the classical "Carl punches Rick in the face" example. If there's a problem with it, it's pretty easy to just pose back trying to out-maneuver him to keep an exit route open. Or throw out an OOC comment if it's really an issue.
At some level everything we write is just an attempt.
Jane attempts to sip her tea, providing Rick doesn't knock it out of her hand in mid-sip.
-
@faraday This is how I view it. I don't mind it; if I do mind it then I'll say something. The littler stuff I just roll with, and expect others to roll with as well. And if they don't wanna, then they're free not to, and I won't take offense. I generally don't see the point in dancing around every possible instance of something someone might consider a power-pose.
-
@lordbelh said in Roleplaying writing styles:
@faraday This is how I view it. I don't mind it; if I do mind it then I'll say something. The littler stuff I just roll with, and expect others to roll with as well. And if they don't wanna, then they're free not to, and I won't take offense. I generally don't see the point in dancing around every possible instance of something someone might consider a power-pose.
I honestly don't give af if someone poses something like 'Bob pats Auspice on the shoulder.'
Because if it's an issue, I can just as easily go 'Auspice shifts away before Bob can touch her.'
For me, powerposing is when it's shit like 'Dave stabs at Bill and Bill falls screaming to the floor.' and I like to think the people on the games I'm on have evolved past that.
-
@faraday said in Roleplaying writing styles:
Jane attempts to sip her tea, providing Rick doesn't knock it out of her hand in mid-sip.
The big difference I see is that in the vast majority of cases Rick wouldn't even consider knocking the tea out of her hand. However if Carl is maneuvering to block Rick from leaving then it could easily be seen as Rick having a reason to avoid being blocked in.
Now if the tea had been poisoned and Jane's drinking it could have a major impact then yes she should phrase it as an attempt. -
-
I haven't been on MU*s for nearly as long as most people here but from the first RP MUD to the first MUSH I ever played on, I learned huge amounts of what it means to RP from a large multitude of players who had been RPing for some time.
I found that typically I stick with the 3rd person, but found there are scenes or times where it makes more sense to use 2nd. It's something that boils down to who your RP partner is and how well the both of you understand the IC/OOC boundary line. Personally, I don't ever take you-posing to specifically mean /me/ the player. We're actors, acting. So the you must therefore refer to the character I am play-acting. That's how my head interprets you-posing as a default. Now, I have played on games where the intent of the other person using you-poses was to affect me the player, but typically I just 'play' along with it and keep myself separated from the actual events on the screen.
I would say that a pet peeve of mine is a lack of exploration into another character or follow through with an RP. I know each of us is RPing for his or her own characters' story, but we should also be RPing to uncover the stories of others. Characters need depth, and those that might have played with one of my characters will likely have lost a lot of that depth because of the way I write. I don't put meta information into an RP, ever, because it takes away from the exploration of that character from another character's standpoint.
Example of this would be a habit a character has, like one of my characters who had a habit of bolting from rooms with more than three people in it. He had a social anxiety, even though he was supposed to be a noble, but instead of posing some meta information about how others might notice he was bolting away like usual, I simply wrote the same way each time the group grew above my specified limit. It was a hook, albeit a subtle one.
That's where follow through comes in. I've played a large number of characters across several games and I typically find people that don't follow through with an RP. If there's an RL issue, that's fine just send me a quick +mail or something to let me know oocly that you can't follow up on something. We'll work it out. It's those times when a player disappears in the middle of a scene, doesn't return for hours/days/weeks/etc. and then does return and doesn't talk to you. They may have even forgotten they were RPing with you at all. -
I used to go with trying to be subtle. I felt it was fair, if I was posing whatever the same way every time, that I could expect other people to pick up on this and whatnot. Then I realized a few things.
- I am not as clever as I think I am
- I am really not as clever as I think I am
- If I can't remember the details of a scene last week clearly, how the hell do I expect anyone else to?
- Players are not characters, and stats like 'perception' and 'empathy' exist
What you think is a subtle explanation for something is likely just too obscure. They're not picking up on it because you are not actually making sense to anyone but yourself. You might think 'looking down' is a clear signal, but those two words in your entire pose have weight to you, not the people you're playing with. How do they know that they should be putting special emphasis on those words more than 'the table' or 'looks at the person who walks in' or whatever? In the example of the leaving the same way every time -- how do they know that isn't your go-to as a player for 'crap, I have to go OOC'? If you don't give the people you're playing with enough reason to suspect there is more there, they will never suspect it. It will not happen. You are entertaining yourself with how clever you are, but no one else.
I'm not actually saying you actually think you're particularly clever or anything, but it's an easy way to explain how seriously, people just don't do subtle in text very well. They don't write it well, they don't catch it well. When you try to play on subtle, you're shooting yourself in the foot. My RP has gotten so, so much more rewarding now that I straight up beat people over the head with things that might be 'subtle'.
While the character is what's important, the player has to at least understand the situation well enough to have their character react appropriately. Their character may not understand the situation as well as their player does, but for the player to be able to make that determination, they have to know that it's there for them to make.
-
This is where my personal "metaposing" comes into play. Because people may not get the cues just from describing physical action.
So using hint words / key words. '...sits with shoulders hunched, in a defensive pose..,' '...looks at him with a mild amusement, but also affection...'
Because these are things we'd "get" if we saw them IRL, but in just words it's a lot more difficult.
There is also the thing about how what is a glaring, obvious, neon sign of a clue to you as a writer... is just a tiny snippet of the whole picture. This goes mostly for STs. If you think you left a glaring clue and your players are just ignoring it or are 'too dense...' chances are it's not as obvious a clue as you think it is. I had an ST once tell me that a scene we had was "packed" with plot and I had to argue him into telling me what it was because I went back and read the log three times. It was all so vague that I just could not catch it.
This is something we get reminded about often in scriptwriting courses/feedback. That you, as the writer, have the whole picture, but you need to learn to step back and view it from your reader/viewer's perspective. Will that newspaper clipping truly be a big reveal like you think it is, or will it just appear as a confusing non sequitur?
Saying the quiet parts out loud since 1996.
-
Yes.
Okay, the party arrives in the high tech office building's meeting room. There's a newspaper on the table, several workstations without computers hooked up to them, and the table is clean.
Investigation happens, players decide there's nothing in this room and they move on to the next.
Later...
MAN. I was so clear, the clue was so obvious, but they didn't even LOOK at the newspaper. Why would there have been a newspaper in a high tech building?! Wouldn't they have realized everyone had a computer or whatever to look at the news???Like, what? Yeah, in this case the assumption itself was very obviously faulty, but even if it wasn't, you just do not know what knowledge/information the players are coming to the table with. They might not KNOW that in places like this, newspapers are rare, for all that you think it's common sense. It's not, and not because your players are dense, either.
-
@ThatGuyThere I see where you're coming from on that. It was a very simple example and I didn't put a lot of thought into the poses, although I wouldn't read B as power-posing. It's important not to force people into things without giving them a chance/coded opportunity/what have you but concessions have to be made for clarity in emotes, and I would much rather have someone say they're doing something relatively innocuous with the allowance that my character can skitter back, decline, etc, rather than read "in an effort to" or "should s/he allow it" or some variant after every single action taken in my general proximity.
Thinking about this, though, I realize I've got a pretty arbitrary line on what extent I'm okay with it. Like @Auspice said, if someone wrote about patting my character on the shoulder I'd be fine with ducking back a step, but I'd have issues with someone wrapping them in a hug without some kind of opt-out first, especially as that larger sort of action is more jarring to negate in a subsequent emote. The last character I played for any serious duration had issues with being touched by other people, and there were a lot of times I'd have to mention slipping back, etc, and a few where I had to accept that something happened that probably wouldn't have, and write about being stiff and uncomfortable instead.
-
@Auspice In part, you can also blame the asshole GM's of yesteryear for part of that. A lot of people that I know of, have learned to NOT chase down every little thing that seems 'out of place' or 'unusual', simply because of those sadistic fucks from the days of tabletop (and even earlier years of MUSHing) that would punish players for searching every nook and cranny for hidden clues/doorways/catches/etc. You learned quickly that if you 'wasted' the GM's time by investigating every little thing, you would suddenly incur the Wrath of Deus Ex Machina and find yourself facing some crazy shit like a Lich King in a dungeon full of kobolds and spiders.
-
Those GMS lost their shit.
I do like the idea of a Lich Spider. Like one of the cute little ones that do the cute dancing.
Meanwhile, either you play the game of Twenty (thousand) Questions legitimately, or you let them players have ratings at noticing unusual things and deciphering evidence. GUMSHOE made getting clues automatic, it left realizing what the clues all together meant up to the players. So no you didn't have to know Forensic Accounting, you just spent one ponit from your Forensic Accounting Pool. Then you had info about how clever they were hiding money being moved around from so many places, only to all vanish. However, it was all done in a way where it could be withdrawn from checks that aren't required to be reported to the banking system. Or whatever.
