D&D General Styles of Roleplaying and Characters

[Xetheral]

Okay. This would fall strongly on the performative or expressive side of roleplaying with little to no interest in exploration of the character, yes?

Could you clarify your question please? I'm not sure what the word "this" is referring to in your question. (Normally I would assume it refers to the quoted post, but it's not clear to me how your new question connects to my reply to you.)

 

[Ovinomancer]

Could you clarify your question please? I'm not sure what the word "this" is referring to in your question. (Normally I would assume it refers to the quoted post, but it's not clear to me how your new question connects to my reply to you.)

Your preferences for absolute control over character choices. My ask is because I see no opportunity to explore the character, because any expansion of the character is just straight authorship by the player.

And there's nothing at all wrong with this. My current PC in the 5e game I'm playing in is exactly this. And I'd absolutely say I engage only in expression of character rather than exploration of character. I'm not playing to find out who Icepick is in any sense.

 

[Xetheral]

Your preferences for absolute control over character choices. My ask is because I see no opportunity to explore the character, because any expansion of the character is just straight authorship by the player.

And there's nothing at all wrong with this. My current PC in the 5e game I'm playing in is exactly this. And I'd absolutely say I engage only in expression of character rather than exploration of character. I'm not playing to find out who Icepick is in any sense.

Thanks for clarifying!

In this post @Bill Zebub astutely noted that I was framing my dislike for mechanics that change a character concept in terms of experiential roleplaying. In other words, my concern with such mechanics is that as a player they make my character feel more disjointed, superficial, and artificial to me.

However, even though this particular concern of my mine focuses on the experiential axis, my preferred RP style still has exploratory and performative elements to it. I do not consider my dislike of such mechanics to preclude exploratory roleplaying. Just as some authors talk about exploring or discovering their characters over the course of writing a book, I think it's easily possible to explore/discover one's PC even if one is making all the decisions regarding how that PC reacts to events.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Thanks for clarifying!

In this post @Bill Zebub astutely noted that I was framing my dislike for mechanics that change a character concept in terms of experiential roleplaying. In other words, my concern with such mechanics is that as a player they make my character feel more disjointed, superficial, and artificial to me.

However, even though this particular concern of my mine focuses on the experiential axis, my preferred RP style still has exploratory and performative elements to it. I do not consider my dislike of such mechanics to preclude exploratory roleplaying. Just as some authors talk about exploring or discovering their characters over the course of writing a book, I think it's easily possible to explore/discover one's PC even if one is making all the decisions regarding how that PC reacts to events.

I'm not sure I understand how you are getting to explore the character, though. Can you provide an example? Maybe a precipitating event that reveals something about the character to you? Because, given the insistence on absolute authority over the character, I don't follow that any change can happen to the character that isn't just you authoring it -- what are you exploring?

And, again, to be absolutely clear, I don't see how I can get to explore my characters when I retain absolute authority over them. And I enjoy 5e where I have this absolute authority. I mean, I can be posed a moral quandary or hard choice, but the result is still what I want it to be, so I'm not really exploring my character in these I'm just expressing the choice I've made. Where does having absolute authority over character result in being able to explore that character and discover things about them?

 

[Oofta]

I'm not sure I understand how you are getting to explore the character, though. Can you provide an example? Maybe a precipitating event that reveals something about the character to you? Because, given the insistence on absolute authority over the character, I don't follow that any change can happen to the character that isn't just you authoring it -- what are you exploring?

And, again, to be absolutely clear, I don't see how I can get to explore my characters when I retain absolute authority over them. And I enjoy 5e where I have this absolute authority. I mean, I can be posed a moral quandary or hard choice, but the result is still what I want it to be, so I'm not really exploring my character in these I'm just expressing the choice I've made. Where does having absolute authority over character result in being able to explore that character and discover things about them?

Conversely, I don't understand how being told my PC thinks or does something would be exploring my character. I would just shrug and say "I don't think Mr B would really do that".

On the other hand, in my current campaign Mr B is dealing with PTSD* by becoming a vengeance paladin (prob'ly not the best idea in the world). But in addition to the games, I'm also writing short stories. Things about his past, why he reacted the way he did during the session and so on. It makes me think more deeply about what someone in his position would feel like, what their thought process might be. It's prompted me to read some articles on PTSD.

Is that "exploring" my character? I don't really know. I feel like it may have made me more empathetic to someone who has been in a traumatic situation, even if I can't really understand what it's like. At a certain point, I'm not certain the terminology matters. What matters to me is that I'm doing my best to walk a mile in someone else's shoes within the limitations of my imagination, knowledge and the fact that I'm playing a game about flying reptiles that breath fire.

But different strokes for different folks is perfectly okay and par for the course.

*Note: PTSD is a very serious subject and not something I take lightly, it's just the easiest way to give context to my character concept.

 

[Hussar]

/snip
But without in-character roleplaying to tie it together, what's the point of calling it an RPG?

Funny how you can say this and no one seems to argue the point, but, I say it and it's badwrongfun and totally wrong.

 

[Hussar]

Conversely, I don't understand how being told my PC thinks or does something would be exploring my character. I would just shrug and say "I don't think Mr B would really do that".

Do you react similarly to combat?

After all, the DM is telling you that you have lost HP. You have lost conciousness. Hell, you might even be dead, with zero input from you. Do you have a similar level of "I don't think Mr. B would really do that?"

The point of the exploration of character is that the mechanics give you a new avenue to explore that wasn't there before. Do you similarly react so strongly to Sanity rules? Or Piety scores? Both of those are mechanics that tell you what your character thinks. What's the cutoff here @Oofta? Any and all mechanics related to how your character acts? So, we're not allowed to have any alignment rules, no traits or flaws?

You keep making very strong statements but, I don't think you've really thought about the implications of just how many mechanical influences there are in what your character thinks.

 

[pemerton]

Middle Earth is an RPG, even if it does use a map. The other two games create their boards as you play, so while they don't have a fold out board like Monopoly, they do still count as board games.

Mystic Wood sounds like a lot of fun(I like Talisman), but I'm not sure I want to spend $100+ to get it.

I was not talking about the MERP RPG. I was talking about the ME:TW CCG, which is in fact (in its play) really a board game.

 

[Oofta]

Do you react similarly to combat?

After all, the DM is telling you that you have lost HP. You have lost conciousness. Hell, you might even be dead, with zero input from you. Do you have a similar level of "I don't think Mr. B would really do that?"

The point of the exploration of character is that the mechanics give you a new avenue to explore that wasn't there before. Do you similarly react so strongly to Sanity rules? Or Piety scores? Both of those are mechanics that tell you what your character thinks. What's the cutoff here @Oofta? Any and all mechanics related to how your character acts? So, we're not allowed to have any alignment rules, no traits or flaws?

You keep making very strong statements but, I don't think you've really thought about the implications of just how many mechanical influences there are in what your character thinks.

The DM never tells me what attack to use, what spell to cast, when my PC will run away. Apples to oranges.

As far as sanity rules go, they're optional rules that I don't use.

Beyond that, do you have a point?

 

[Xetheral]

I'm not sure I understand how you are getting to explore the character, though. Can you provide an example? Maybe a precipitating event that reveals something about the character to you? Because, given the insistence on absolute authority over the character, I don't follow that any change can happen to the character that isn't just you authoring it -- what are you exploring?

And, again, to be absolutely clear, I don't see how I can get to explore my characters when I retain absolute authority over them. And I enjoy 5e where I have this absolute authority. I mean, I can be posed a moral quandary or hard choice, but the result is still what I want it to be, so I'm not really exploring my character in these I'm just expressing the choice I've made. Where does having absolute authority over character result in being able to explore that character and discover things about them?

When I make a character I don't have a plan for what direction they're going to develop. I make decisions as the character in the moment based on the IC situation. Particularly if I'm strongly immersed, I can be surprised by the decisions I make for the character (especially upon reflection once I'm out of the character's headspace.)

Similarly, when I design a character I may expect to emphasize certain characteristics, mannerisms, or personality traits, but then find that in actual play I express the character differently.

By contrast, I personally don't see having a mechanic that simply tells you about changes to your character as more exploratory--you're not finding anything out for yourself through experiencing it, you're just being told. I see it as sort of like the difference between experiencing a plot twist while immersed in a good movie or book, versus being told about that plot twist by a friend. The former I would consider to be discovery, the latter not so much.