ArenaSnow

The Crimson Rose and the White Moon​

@ArenaSnow

I wouldn't mind hosting a thread as a GM if I have some interest in the idea.

@Always Jeweles

Go for it.

Well hello there!

General Purrfecti!

Bazinga [Eye-Check]

<Snipped quote by ArenaSnow>

Un-burns

@rocketrobie2

burns you

Bazinga [Eye-Check]

<Snipped quote by ArenaSnow>

@rocketrobie2

Burns it. Ignores whatever it says. Literally just burns it.

Bazinga [Eye-Check]

<Snipped quote by ArenaSnow>

@rocketrobie2

tears card in half and uses the 'no u' side

Thoughts on pre-made characters/roles?

I think you've misunderstood a great deal of what I'm arguing, and what I merely believe to be possibilities. Possibilities which, to be perfectly clear, I don't identify with, as evident by my earlier commentary.

@tex

Then that is fine. I tried to cover as many bases as possible and didn't expect all or most of the comments to be applicable. Pick what makes sense, base the conversation around that and we'll be on our way to a decent conclusion.

To which your response has been, by-in-large, anecdotal. Which, if we're to treat this as a legitimate argument, and not a general discussion, makes all of our current points moot. The majority of your responses have been anecdotal, in actuality, as have most of my own comments.

@tex

And this is why I expect we'll end up at an agree to disagree point. Our experiences clearly differ. What we see and expect clearly differ. Without detailing every anecdote that we can possibly concieve, I don't think that can be reconciled in the end. It would be nice to get something established, but for this reason that you mention, I think we're just throwing out words because we've little better to do. And hey, that's fine too.

If there's any argument to be had here, it would reference contention on the point that I've quoted above. Although I've offered a fairly general anecdotal argument myself to begin with,

allow me to expand.

P1. Character creation is fun/fulfilling;
P2. Creating a character sheet is less difficult than creating multiple posts;

---

C1 ∴Character creation is relatively easy
P3. There are a myriad of examples on this website where people put a great deal of effort into their sheets, but drop out of role plays regardless;
P4. Lazier individuals are more prone to taking on easier tasks;
P5. Humans are generally self-serving
P6. There are hundreds of failed roleplays, but thousands of completed character sheets;

---

C2 ∴ Writers on this site are likely to be more invested in content that they create, than they are in content that others have created;

---

C3 ∴ Once an individual has completed the easiest self-invested task required to enter a role-play, further investment is not related to the initial character creation.
P7. Without further investment, people will abandon RPs.

---

C4 ∴ Due to the ease of character creation, and the comparative difficulty of writing posts consistently, players are more likely to create a plethora of characters, rather than remain dedicated to a single RP.

Now, from here, there are several points of contention.

If you agree with premises 1 & 2, as they are subjective, then you cannot realistically disagree with conclusion 1. The closest point of contention here, is what scope 'relatively' involves. This however, argues nothing but semantics. If we can agree that 'relatively' refers to the comparison between creating a character, and posting regularly with that character, we can move on from here. If not, then further premises are required to support the first conclusion.

No in regards to premise 3, my sample size is in fact, anecdotal and unclear. Unless I were to scan the entire forum, and bring up multiple citations, you can't take this statement at face value. However, if we can both agree that it is common for players to put effort into characters, and bail on role plays despite this, then I believe that's enough support to affirm this premise.

Premises 4, 5 & 6 are just statements of fact.

The second conclusion may be a major point of contention despite the dependent clauses offering a fair amount of support. This is where the discussion should be complicated, otherwise we'll just end up breaking off into uncoordinated tangents.

Conclusion 3 is, again, fully supported, I feel.

Premise 7 seems factual, but some people remain dedicated, even without investment. Still, I feel they are outliers.

Conclusion 4 is essentially my argument, in a nutshell.

@tex

Ah, the meat of the argument.

1 and 2 I can agree with in many circumstances, but not all. It's not always particularly fulfilling or fun, but it is more often than not. The effort in a CS can exceed the effort of multiple posts, but that depends on the roleplay and circumstances. For the sake of argument, I'll slap an easy 'yes' on both, and simply speak for myself to say that I consider character creation relatively easy.

P3 I'll attribute an easy 'sure', as it fits my experience as well. Note that at this stage, I think it's simplifying a large issue into a funnel. A huge part of the funnel that I think is missing is the element of interest. I make no argument that a minimal investment is a sure chance of success in a roleplay. I only consider it a small modifier that can result in more success than games that simply provide characters for you. There are no stats to back me up on this, and you'd probably disagree, so if that's where it ends, then I guess that is where this conversation can end. Otherwise, I'll move on, and say that I think what the true killer of roleplays is not preliminary investment, but in longer term interest. Simply put, I believe people join many roleplays, actually invest in few of them, realize that life catches up or that they have a new whim next week, and go off to pursue that thing.

In other words, I think people are just flat out whimsical when joining roleplays. That is the core reason I attribute to game failure. I believe that investment is partially an issue that can more often than not be remedied by people actually making something, but I also believe it's a small bean compared to the above. Moving on, P4, P5, P6 are obvious.

C2, in fact, I feel to be a perfectly reasonable and completely evident conclusion. It's exactly why I think making characters yourself is more viable of an investment than filling shoes already made for you. We have a huge logical breach between us somewhere if this semi-paragraph doesn't fit together.

C3 is reasonable, and yet, this is where I introduce the concept of lingering investment. It clearly doesn't work with everyone, and it is easily dismantled by interest apathy later on (as per the above), but I believe it is a small factor that is better present than not. There is not a need or a logical grounds for further investment here - it's just based on my own style of thinking that once you do something for something, it's a shame to simply leave it unused. If you make something, without using it, would there not be a sense of wasted time resulting from that investment actually going nowhere?

P7 is fair, except I don't think it's just about investment, it's also about interest in the core concepts involved, and ideally some sort of motivation to keep posting, be that momentum from the first posts (quite reliable at the start, until it starts to die because there's no push from anyone to keep it going and things slow to nothing) and/or activity OOC where people are given semi-frequent reminders that yes, the roleplay does exist - which, hopefully, might just tie into the idea of lingering investment that I mentioned above. The idea that you made something to do something, and you might as well continue. Of course not everyone will subscribe to it. I like to think in my own games, I try to avoid the people that totally dismiss it.

Despite ^, I do fully support C4. Interest burns red hot throughout the character creation stage most of the time. It often carries through the first page of posting. And then the momentum simply vanishes. Not all roleplays die right after character creation, by any means. They often die later, or at different points, when collective interest is lost from lack of motivation. So yes, there is a high chance of characters being created, and there is a low chance of lingering dedication. For the sake of continuing with your format, I will introduce P8, P9, and P10, which go towards C4, and my logic for treating investment as a small variable that is not disproved by the fact that roleplays fail despite it. By itself, it will assuredly fall. But that does not mean it can't help, and if I'm being bold, can't help more often than not.
P8: Player motivation is built on the obligation to continue (getting a ping, GM poking you, OOC chatter to jog your memory). It is slightly dependent on investment to keep it fueled, but in far greater part, it depends on interest.
P9: Interest, what I believe to be the most critical piece of roleplay success and failure, is something that is easily gained and easily lost. It is only reliable after reflecting for a while and making a thought out decision if you really want to do something in the long term (not a decision you can reasonably make on day 1, in my opinion). If such reflection isn't done (from what I see? It almost literally never is) then the interest is frequently proven to burn out, and the resulting lack of interest (the thing that built the roleplay's core in the first place) makes the rest of the variables collapse like a house of cards.
P10: Lingering investment, which I just brought up. It's situational to be sure, not everyone has it (and again, I try to avoid those that simply don't, because I think that makes people less dependable in general). Alongside motivation, it's the idea that you've just done something, and so you should ideally see it to the end. It's a very small factor, sure, but I think it's a relevant one to keep in mind.

Going back to the source argument, I think actually making a character results in a little bit of those minor factors being indulged (if interest is catered to as well is another thing entirely and so subjective that we probably shouldn't go there). Does the roleplay hinge on them? Not really. Can they help? I think so. Character sheets clearly don't determine if a roleplay can live or die, but if you play your cards right, I think they're a small bonus to a long journey as compared to having prebuilt characters that end up lacking in those little boosts. You could argue not having to write more is a boost of its own kind, but I'm going to abandon the pretense of good argument and just say that I don't like that kind of boost and I'd prefer not to indulge it in the first place.

Two things cannot be mutually exclusive and mutually inclusive at the same time. Unless I'm misunderstanding the terminology, which I'm fairly sure isn't the case, this seems redundant.

@tex

The main point I'm trying to drive at is that saying 'it's not mutually inclusive' is frivolous. I don't believe it's exclusive. You don't think it's inclusive. Ultimately, I think it sits in the middle. It's simply an element to consider.

While I do agree that being able to act as a writer, and write as an actor, are both very good assets, they are not necessary to perpetuate one another. Some people are better at writing than others simply because they understand the science of language and literature to a greater degree than others, and the same goes for those who act/role play. I can assert myself that having experience in both fields does not automatically translate to improved results. It depends on the individual.

@tex

It certainly does depend on the individual, but I find that having a minimal basis in acting as a writer for the sake of presenting information (your character) is an important baseline. If for nobody else, it is a baseline for me (although I personally do not demand character sheets from partners). Anything further than that I don't consider particularly relevant here.

The variance from person to person is exactly why I think the concept of pre-made characters has potential, in theory. I cannot possibly account for everyone who isn't me, so I don't. But, I also don't take that variance into account as a tool for argumentation, because it is worthless as evidence.

@tex

We'll have to digress. I am equally convinced that making your own character is something achievable in such a great number of people, with little cost and some benefit I've seen over time, is a boon over having a character just presented to you for you to fit into its shoes.

In regards to 1x1s in particular, I think that the similarity between pre-made characters and pre-made roles could act as support if structured in an argument for the effectiveness of pre-made characters.

@tex

I draw a line; a role is a guideline for creating a character, and a useful one at that. Once you actually make characters instead of roles to build characters into, the core of my argument comes into play at a personal level and what I perceive to be the case elsewhere.

Ah, I'm sorry for disregarding a great deal of your post. I feel that most of it was based on misconceptions of my beliefs, which is why I chose to clarify rather than address your individual points.

@tex

You disregarded irrelevant content. There's hardly an issue with doing that.

---

Apologies if I missed something you've corrected, just looked back in and saw you edited after I started typing. If that makes my reply to the point unnecessary, just toss it out.

Bazinga [Eye-Check]

<Snipped quote by ArenaSnow>

YOUR BANNED ASWELL

@rocketrobie2

_{no u}

Thoughts on pre-made characters/roles?

<Snipped quote by ArenaSnow>Or people could use their brain for critical thinking instead of being dependent on having every little detail given to them like free samples of crack.

@Burning Kitty

Once more into the loop. Or you could just cut the crud and articulate yourself properly without leaving room for people to easily misinterpret a bad sentence, and if you do it anyways, have a slightly less bitchy attitude about it.

Yeaaaaaa no.

In your first few paragraphs, you said yourself that you don't like playing other people's characters because there wasn't enough material to work with. If an RP is half over, you can't possibly expect anyone to care as much about the new guy as they do the character who's ceased activity a month ago into a year-running RP. Sure, the easy thing to do is to fade out characters with a generic death, generic get sick, generic dismemberment, what have you. But it's never that interesting. Because most of the time it's predictable.

That type of treatment can be done well, but I've found it's more interesting if I take control of the characters for a while. Sometimes they die right away, or sometimes they live until the end of the RP. the players don't roll their eyes every time an imminent ailment/death/quest splits up the party. And if I'm going to control them, why not let someone else do it?

Also, the really cool thing about characters is that they can change. Is the character too cheerful? The loss of a friend or a horrific accident can change them. Is a character too edgy for your liking? Try to reverse engineer that attitude by making them fall in love or otherwise replacing what was lost.

I don't run RPs to be hassle free, I run them to create memorable experiences.

@BrokenPromise

I can only throw opinions, and if that system works better for you, roam free. There are easily argued merits for either way you slice it that boil to preference in the end.

But I would contend that you'd need to put a good bit more effort into doing your way properly than having a roleplay conductive to easy ins and easy outs in the first place. If you can put that kind of investment in, and not see the game crash from logical errors, then more power to ya.

Hello!

Welcome :)

Thoughts on pre-made characters/roles?

<Snipped quote by ArenaSnow>

You are assuming things are read in the order you say. Now try the intelligent way.

Read the plot summary.
Find premade characters.
Decide if the plot is worth it.
If the plot is worth it, read the characters.

@Burning Kitty

If you want to talk about the intelligent way, convey yourself better in the first place.

It was this potential I had mentioned though; I do believe that if players join an RP while knowing they are limited to a specific set of characters to chose from, it's likely they may end up more invested. This idea assumes that people enjoy the act of role playing, more than the act of creating characters. Creating a character, when contrasted with actually acting that character out over a long period of time, is something easy and enjoyable that people can do. I would say that a great deal of people on this site enjoy creating characters much more than actually fleshing them out, or playing as them for long period of time.

@tex

Fundamentally, I think a discussion on this point will merely end at us agreeing to disagree on the merits of character sheets/building characters as a means of getting the muster of a player before the actual gameplay. At that point, an argument could easily be made that effectiveness boils down to the individuals involved, and from there the topic could only continue by discussing what course seems more likely to result in success over the other. I'll try and avoid that outcome and say that the act of creating a character, for me, is fundamentally built into the act of roleplaying. By having a character built that I can invest in, a character that I'm intimately familiar with as compared to a character where expectations of presentation are hoisted on me, I'm better able to do the act of actually conveying thoughts and proceeding with a story. But that - and indeed, the second part of what you quoted - is how I worked. The rest of the matter is me trying to project my experiences into getting a gist of how people in general work.

At a simplistic level, the first statement you quoted was my assumption that people will be more likely to invest in a roleplay by actually making something for it as compared to a 'pick up and go' which leaves players with virtually no background investment and thus little reason to think twice about going away. This changes by person, of course, but in my experience it is more likely for someone to stay if they do something that involves investment - in this case, making a character sheet - than if they simply do not play a part in the initial creation process. It's why I consider drop-in the most turbulant form of roleplaying as compared to something where you apply or otherwise prove yourself to enter. At the GM level, I think it actually helps vetting when a GM has a very basic idea of what the applicant is capable of at the design level as compared to someone just saying 'I want this character' and no other safeguards are put in place to indicate they can properly present the character.

You could circumvent this and say that perhaps a writing prompt, some piece of practical in character roleplay, would help. I would agree if that was your case. I'd follow by saying that it would still miss something at the design level, as I believe the sort of character people submit is telling for the person's intentions. It isn't foolproof, and sometimes it's totally inaccurate, but in light of no perfect solution to the vetting problem beyond finding people who you trust and just making a private group with them (I'm partial to that these days anyways), I figure you have to settle at something. Apologies for going on a GM tangent to all this.

I assert that it's for this reason - Character creation is fun and easy - that there's an endemic of people losing interest forum wide. The characters they create may be the only things that they're invested in, even if they're usually inspired by a particular RP. But since they have no hand in the functions of the universe they're role-playing in, they're far more likely to bail.

Now this might sound selfish...But that's because it is.

@tex

Character creation is only as fun and easy as you make it. I make it into a form of work by theorizing too long about how a character works. Some casually spend time thinking about what their character will do. Others are totally lazy arses that rip off a character that looked good in another thread. There's many ways to approach character creation in that sense.

Having prebuilt characters I do not see as a viable counter to the idea of making one's own characters in the context of what you're arguing. A character already built for you is even less investment than being obliged to make some sort of character in the first place.

At the end of the quoted paragraph, you mention having a hand in the 'verse being roleplayed in. I think that is honestly another discussion, but I'll word vomit on that point anyways. I think a hand in how the roleplay works is perfectly viable, and I think giving players an opportunity to contribute to that is a good way to stir up investment. I'd also say it's not really relevant to the issue of characters being built beyond players vs characters being built by GMs, beyond me saying - if players are given a hand in the creation of the roleplay's dymanics, why suddenly move to GM made characters instead of making your character on top of other things you've contributed to the roleplay?

This is also why 1x1's are so successful. They're more often than not, a collaborative effort in both character creation, and world-building. This is also why the idea of predetermined characters has some merit, as it retroactively weeds out those people who aren't actually all that interested in role playing, but rather, character creation.

@tex

You have me until the line about predetermined characters. I cannot connect how players are given vested interest in the character creation (ideally, the player proposes a character concept, and the partner says 'yeah, this looks cool, but I'd say this') and worldbuilding process, and then you saying predetermined characters having merit. Predetermined by who in 1x1s, exactly? And to what extent are we predetermining the characters, and not just their roles (ex, "we should play a knight and a princess because they fit this plot, the princess is a queen bitch and the knight is a gruff guy who's there to tame her"). In the example I quoted, I think you'd move beyond premade characters and instead go into premade roles. It stretches into personality, which I don't like to predefine, but at such general levels I do think it's fine. I don't see where a partner would take jurisdiction of both sets of characters played in a game and end up deciding more than that for both of the players, at which point it really does become an effort where predetermined characters are a thing.

On the matter of roleplaying vs character creation, I'll try to be short and just say this - character creation can be as simple as providing an outline of what you want to do, and then sticking to it. I don't believe that takes a great deal of investment, and I think there's a problem if a roleplayer is unable to do that much.

It's also worthy to note that Roleplaying and Writing are NOT mutually inclusive. Some people enjoy Writing more than they do Playing a Role.

@tex

Certainly, but neither are they mutually exclusive. It is a matter of balance. One who specializes in A should have a broad knowledge of B. a Roleplayer should be able to Write well enough to convey his creative concepts as far as a character goes. Again, this doesn't need to be complicated. To go on a bit of a tangent, a Writer should be able to Roleplay, just a bit, so that the characters are less obviously the construct of the same person with the same personality, and thus look like they're just the same thing bouncing off each other in an echo chamber.