What Part Does the Role Play in the Role-Playing Game?

[Crimson Longinus]

If by recent you mean 30-40 years ago, sure.

No, recent like people still debate it on these forums. Yes, some people have always questioned it, but it has been pretty much a normal part of the game for the whole lifespan of it. They have finally started to make active attempts to change it during the 5e, when people reacted negatively to earlier stuff like Volo's.

 

[Emberashh]

Fair. Separating off your views and preferences from the model you have of your character and not letting the first effect the second. You can argue the first is going to somewhat influence your choice of character, but I've played characters pretty radically different from me in their wants and perspectives.

Problem is, that's not really how it works. As i explained earlier, your capability to do that still reflects on you and in the character.

This is why different actors can't actually deliver identical performances even with the same character, plot, etc. While roleplaying doesn't always get to that high level of performance art, it is rooted in the same fundamental activity, and this effect actually becomes much more pronounced because we're talking improv rather than something prewritten.

Its not something you can avoid, because the harder you try to not be yourself the more your take on that character becomes unique to you, and that uniqueness is always rooted in your personality.

 

[soviet]

Roleplaying is all about emoting while staying within the anticipated lines of the module and having the outcome of your actions and dice rolls subject to a veto by the GM.

 

[pemerton]

Roleplaying is all about emoting while staying within the anticipated lines of the module and having the outcome of your actions and dice rolls subject to a veto by the GM.

Fighting words!

 

[Umbran]

That's still you though. When you're the one making the decision, your personality is being reflected in the choices of the character even if they're superficially contradictory;

In the sense that the art always reflects the artist, sure. But that's also in a nearly trivial sense, and a sense that trivializes the action of human imagination and ability to empathize.

 

[Emberashh]

In the sense that the art always reflects the artist, sure. But that's also in a nearly trivial sense, and a sense that trivializes the action of human imagination and ability to empathize.

I disagree, because the two ideas aren't in conflict. Recognizing that the character is never going to be truly separate from your personality isn't in conflict or contradictory to the idea that one is choosing actions in deliberate counter to their own sensibilities.

And given I noted that being able to do this at all is a clear reflection of ones capacity for empathy, its a little strange to then claim I'm discounting empathy as a factor.

 

[Thomas Shey]

When was the last time Gygax had a direct influence on D&D?

And even then, there was a fair bit of "That's nice, Gary" even from some people producing modules and other products for TSR.

 

[Thomas Shey]

No, recent like people still debate it on these forums. Yes, some people have always questioned it, but it has been pretty much a normal part of the game for the whole lifespan of it. They have finally started to make active attempts to change it during the 5e, when people reacted negatively to earlier stuff like Volo's.

"Normal" might be an overstatement. The "execute orc babies" part was controversial even a long, long time ago and generally elided over.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Problem is, that's not really how it works. As i explained earlier, your capability to do that still reflects on you and in the character.

This is why different actors can't actually deliver identical performances even with the same character, plot, etc. While roleplaying doesn't always get to that high level of performance art, it is rooted in the same fundamental activity, and this effect actually becomes much more pronounced because we're talking improv rather than something prewritten.

Its not something you can avoid, because the harder you try to not be yourself the more your take on that character becomes unique to you, and that uniqueness is always rooted in your personality.

I think that's still far different than saying there's no difference between playing yourself and playing a character you've designed with a different set of premises.

 

[Emberashh]

I think that's still far different than saying there's no difference between playing yourself and playing a character you've designed with a different set of premises.

Good thing I never said that.

Words do matter, and I wasn't being loose in how I said what I said. Saying player and character aren't separate is not the same thing as saying they're the same.