 Rollplaying defended, gender examined, REAL MEN ROLL PLAY! RAARRHHH! |
  |
 Mar 7 2006, 05:38 AM
Post
#126
|
|||
|
Great Dragon  Group: Members Posts: 6,640 Joined: 6-June 04 Member No.: 6,383  |
Well, I personally haven't experienced that extreme, although I've experienced less extreme things in the same vein. I can certainly see that happening in a gaming situation. |
||
 |
 
|
||
|
Mar 7 2006, 05:43 AM
Post
#127
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 7,116 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,449 |
There's nothing wrong with identifying with your character, or roleplaying to do things you couldn't do in the real world (heck, that's probably why most people do roleplay).
However, you run into problems when you try to run your character like a Mary Sue. In a roleplaying game, a bit of emotional distance from the character can be a good thing. Because you don't control everything that happens in the game. When you make a character, you should keep in mind that this character could roll to hit and wind up tripping over his own feet instead. The other characters could all laugh at your "cool" street name. Your character could DIE. So be cool with that. If you need an outlet for fantasies where your character never fails and is admired by everyone, just write a self-insertion Ranma fanfic where you score with half of the cast. But don't try it at the gaming table. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 7 2006, 05:55 AM
Post
#128
|
|||
|
Shadowrun Setting Nerd Group: Banned Posts: 3,632 Joined: 28-June 05 From: Pissing on pedestrians from my electronic ivory tower. Member No.: 7,473 |
Not exactly, since a lot of game play is "downtime" stuff. It's just that, mayeb it's me since I have a habit of playing characters who are more than usually professional through training, habit, or experience born from the lack thereof kicking them in the ass "back in the day." At this point it's mostly relegated to backstory and fiction, but only because I have been busy with other things to ask anyone, and no one has offered. Especially since RPing out certain interpersonal issues with *gasp* another person would take forever. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 7 2006, 05:58 AM
Post
#129
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
no kidding. it takes us a month to roll out one round of combat. putting on a condom, on SL, would take decades.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 7 2006, 09:44 PM
Post
#130
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 6,640 Joined: 6-June 04 Member No.: 6,383 |
Lem0w3d! Yeah, I agree. Nothing messes up a game more than someone being too attached to their character. A *game*, by the nature of being a game, includes the possibility of failure. If there is never a reasonably threatening possibility of failure which the players must apply themselves to overcome or minimize then it's no longer a game. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 7 2006, 10:11 PM
Post
#131
|
|||||
|
Bushido Cowgirl Group: Members Posts: 5,782 Joined: 8-July 05 From: On the Double K Ranch a half day's ride out of Phlogiston Flats Member No.: 7,490 |
Well I kinda did at one time. Seems that a number of the points I was going to bring up, including cross-gender playing, have already been addressed rather thuroughly As to the whole sexual thing in RPGs, that is a very fine line. If handled well by both the GM and player(s) in question, it can be good for character development. only as long as it does not take centre stage away from a session. For most, if not all my characters, the mission at hand comes first. Their personal life is background. While it affects their outlook and behavior, it is not the sole driving force behind all their actions. The key is balance. Balance between having a well thought out and colourful character that also is able to contribute to the team's success, be it combat, legwork, technical social, or magical. Well, gotta go for now, my chime in later. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Mar 7 2006, 10:17 PM
Post
#132
|
|||||
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,901 Joined: 19-June 03 Member No.: 4,775 |
I don't mind attachment to character. Hell, I prefer games in which people are attached to characters (as opposed to either hard simulationist games or slashfests), and I prefer games that are a bit freeform, in which the GM may occasionally mess with roll results if he feels the game, the story, and any plans he may have for theme or narrative or anything else may be better served by it. But the crucial difference is between players being attached to their characters, which is usually a very good thing, and players using their characters as wish fulfilment fantasies through which they vicariously and temporarily conquer their insecurities, inadequacies, and personal failings. When that happens, you're fucked. It has nothing to do with balance. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Mar 7 2006, 11:24 PM
Post
#133
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 6,640 Joined: 6-June 04 Member No.: 6,383 |
See, but the problem is that as soon as you deviate from a strict and consistient application of the rules in the same way each way then you create an environment where there's room for endless complaining if peoples' PCs die. Once you've fudged once or spared someone once you never have a particular reason not to do it again. Combine this with people being attached to their characters and then having someone die just becomes a sticky business. I guess it depends on what you mean by "attached"; perhaps we're thinking of the word in different ways. Like, when I read "attached", I imagine someone who has thought of a lot of details about their character and basically dosen't want anything really bad to happen to that character because it would either make the character unplayable or mess up their concept of that character. Like, I remember someone who was really POed when his character SURGED because having a tail or whatever messed with the character concept. There's attachment, right there, but it makes the GM's job harder when there's situations where the rules say that something bad should happen to someone. On the other hand, if someone thinks of a pretty detailed background for a character but absolutely dosen't care if the character dies, I don't consider that "attachment", since there's no element of trying to hold on to anything. This is how I characterize myself because I believe that for a fiction character death is just as much a part of the story as life. There's a lot of humor, strategy, and character interaction to be had by a game. But I think that you really have to distance yourself and not care per se about the *character*, but rather approach it all with a "simulationist" mentality. I can role play thinking, "OK, my character's background and personality is this, so how will he react to this", but I can't role play properly if I think, "NOOO, my character's in a bad situation he's unable to negotiate out of, STRESS STRESS". I think that you're only free to really represent a character when ultimately you're willing to sacrifice that character at the snap of a finger because it means you can follow your character concept to any conclusion at any time. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 8 2006, 12:05 AM
Post
#134
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,901 Joined: 19-June 03 Member No.: 4,775 |
SURGE is a terrible example, honestly. It was a shitty idea, and I think just about everyone had a right to be pissed when their characters grew tails and bunny ears. It simply should never have happened.
When I say attached, I mean personally empathizing with the character, or at least extremely interested in that character developing interestingly. I don't have a problem with people being bothered when bad things happen to a character they care about. I'd be unhappy too if a good character died randomly and ingloriously in the middle of a fight. And I would actually prefer that the GM mess with rolls (behind the scenes and without anyone's knowledge, I should specify) if that death would not really result in an interesting game, or at least in the game going in places he isn't interested in taking it. The difference is that with characters that function as wish fulfilment for their players, they aren't attached to the character as I mean. They are the character. When that character succeeds, it validates them. It is a vicarious life. And when that character fails, which is basically guaranteed to happen considering the type of person who needs to do this, they become immediately defensive and angry. We're not talking about "my character took a fluke burst to the head; I am unhappy." This is a pretty reasonable reaction, and, as I said, if the game is worse for it, it might be worth it to not let the character die without the player's knowledge. What we are talking about is basically this: "WHAT DO YOU MEAN I'M GOING TO DIE. I THOUGHT THAT WAS A GREAT IDEA. WELL MY CHARACTER HAS A 6 INTELLIGENCE. HE NEVER WOULD HAVE DONE THAT." If you have never experienced this, you are enourmously lucky. Whether the insane decision is to buy expensive chocolate for the Johnson right before a mission or to try and track down a Johnson all alone because I AM THE HERO or to try and molest a Stuffer Shack attendant because I AM THE LESBIAN, it doesn't matter. These aren't real characters. They don't develop. They don't change. They're basically pornographic wish fulfilment avatars. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 8 2006, 03:27 AM
Post
#135
|
|
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,589 Joined: 28-November 05 Member No.: 8,019 |
Does character detail qualify as mary sue type characters? Like the cynical Nietzchean mage dude I proposed. Would he be be classified as such? Because I like to micromanage every detail of his life, but not in a way that makes him OMGCOOL.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 8 2006, 04:20 AM
Post
#136
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 7,116 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,449 |
Not really. Mary Sues are characters who are perfect in every way and liked by everyone. They also tend to be similar to their creators in many ways. They are basically the author inserting himself/herself into the story as a protagonist who relegates everyone else to a secondary role. There are other types of self-insertion characters - all-powerful godboys, brooding angsters, and so on, but they all are basically avatars of the author. From reading about your character, I don't think he sounds like a Mary Sue. You were pretty open to changes to the character, and didn't have a problem trying something else when you realized that a previous idea had problems. But if you are worried, simply ask yourself some questions about how you would play this character. If some other character took issue with your character's philosopy, would you take it personally? If the focus of the story shifted to one of the other characters for awhile, would you be impatient to get the focus back on your own character? Would you sulk every time that a plan of yours failed, a social skill didn't work, or a spell failed? If the answers are mostly negative to those questions, then I don't think you have to worry about being a Mary Sue. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 8 2006, 04:40 AM
Post
#137
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 6,640 Joined: 6-June 04 Member No.: 6,383 |
So, like a Knights of the Dinner Table character? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 8 2006, 05:04 AM
Post
#138
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,901 Joined: 19-June 03 Member No.: 4,775 |
I didn't know what that was until I just googled it, so I can't really say.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 9 2006, 10:04 PM
Post
#139
|
|||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 6,640 Joined: 6-June 04 Member No.: 6,383 |
Well, no discussion about gender and society in role playing games would be complete without a link to Nisarg's blog. Below is actually a comment someone made on one of his entries. I was actually pretty weirded out by this comment, as I've never seen anything (in my personal experience) to corroborate it. Is the commentator totally delusional, or am I just living in a bubble?
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 9 2006, 10:58 PM
Post
#140
|
|
|
Shadowrun Setting Nerd Group: Banned Posts: 3,632 Joined: 28-June 05 From: Pissing on pedestrians from my electronic ivory tower. Member No.: 7,473 |
...
Wow. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 9 2006, 11:03 PM
Post
#141
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,901 Joined: 19-June 03 Member No.: 4,775 |
Um.
This is by far some of the most breathlessly vapid garbage I've ever seen stumble out of a blog. Whiskey, tango, foxtrot, over. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 9 2006, 11:24 PM
Post
#142
|
|
|
Runner Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,020 Joined: 11-March 02 From: The MSP 'Plex Member No.: 2,326 |
Ok, I'll give them that some women are refusing to "ape" male behaviour...
I refuse to scratch my non-existant nuts just to "fit in" :D |
|
|
|
|
Mar 10 2006, 12:04 AM
Post
#143
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 775 Joined: 31-March 05 From: florida Member No.: 7,273 |
ROTFLMAO
:rotfl: that person has been banned, fought and exiled from so many D20 forums it isnt funny. He is a troll, he does things for the point of getting attention, and enjoys picking fights particularly in the "Blue Rose" forums. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 10 2006, 03:17 AM
Post
#144
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
you gotta watch them women. they'll use wiles on you at the drop of a hat.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 10 2006, 03:18 AM
Post
#145
|
|
|
Dragon Group: Members Posts: 4,589 Joined: 28-November 05 Member No.: 8,019 |
The only female gamers I've seen have either been very practical, intelligent, or, in a single, isolated, newby case, completely incapable of understanding the rules. The last case is probably not indicative of about 99% of female gamers.
A girl at my college is running two Shadowrun games; one is puzzle-oriented, with mostly girls, and another is fighting oriented, with mostly dudes. She is obviously more than capable of running both kinds. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 10 2006, 03:36 AM
Post
#146
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,901 Joined: 19-June 03 Member No.: 4,775 |
I'm plenty civilized. You're using wiles on me.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 10 2006, 04:02 AM
Post
#147
|
|||
|
Runner Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,020 Joined: 11-March 02 From: The MSP 'Plex Member No.: 2,326 |
And if the wiles don't work.. we resort to b00bies. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 10 2006, 04:17 AM
Post
#148
|
|
|
Midnight Toker Group: Members Posts: 7,686 Joined: 4-July 04 From: Zombie Drop Bear Santa's Workshop Member No.: 6,456 |
b00bies....they're like nuclear weapons only deadlier.
It is true that males and females of the species, particularly when associating in packs, tend to handle conflict in different ways but always towards the same end. Generally, packs of adolescent boys observed in their natural habitat attack their prey directly. On the other hand, groups of girls in their natural habitat are more likely to take an indirect and subtle aproach that involves social attacks. However, it must be noted that these observations apply primarilary to adolescents in single-gender packs and do not apply to adults, adolecents alone, or adolecents in mixed gendered packs or mating groups. So, in short, while Nisarg's opinion may have some merit in some situations, when the statement is taken as a whole and in general it becomes clear that this poster has been smoking something. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 10 2006, 04:32 AM
Post
#149
|
|||
|
Bushido Cowgirl Group: Members Posts: 5,782 Joined: 8-July 05 From: On the Double K Ranch a half day's ride out of Phlogiston Flats Member No.: 7,490 |
The "puzzle" game definitely sounds like my kind of campaign. Pretty much the way I like to write my adventure scenarios. Lots of subtle clues to pick up on which can be a help "down the road". (ohh, that's what that abbreviation on the matchbook meant...!) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 10 2006, 05:15 AM
Post
#150
|
|||||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 6,640 Joined: 6-June 04 Member No.: 6,383 |
I laughed when I read this post because in my experience I have *never* had any player, regardless of gender, ever pick up on any sort of clues or anything like that. Years ago I learned that clues don't work; I must spell everything out. Stuff that seems like it can be puzzled out in the mind of the GM just dosen't seem to work with people who aren't the GM. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 24th November 2024 - 03:35 AM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.