Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 6793208" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Yes.Yes.No? What does the scripted nature of bosses or shopkeepers have to do with it? It's not like D&D bosses and shopkeepers are radically different most of the time. I can count the number of actual D&D "bosses" I've been able to meaningfully negotiate with on one hand. And that was specifically because the DM in question likes worlds that get you to challenge preconceived notions. (But even his worlds have ancient vampires and goblin-slaver warchiefs who don't negotiate.) (Also, I very rarely did raids--though sometimes we wove our own stories around raids or, more commonly, instances).First: Get the frak off your high horse. Second: Let me get this straight. Being able to have a two-way conversation with a shopkeeper or BBEG is roleplaying, but talking in character isn't roleplaying. WTF? Really? So 99% of the tabletop gaming I've done isn't roleplaying either. Because I spend way more time interacting with the other people at my table (well, electronic table) than I do killing baddies or trading.We had a guild. All guild meetings were conducted in-character. OOC comments were held for the period after (or posted in the appropriate place on the website). We arranged interactions with other guilds--both Alliance and Horde--to have "live" allies and opponents as well as computer-operated ones. We would arrange times to do content, not because it had any mechanical value, but because adventuring through a particular area gave the right background for the story we wanted to tell. Sometimes, a story would come to us, that we'd play out in a particular instance--and sometimes, as we had our characters react to the world around them even in an instance we were doing for the loot, a story would evolve out of it anyway.Not within the client, no. That's why you strike a balance between what you can do "live," within the game client, and what you can do in stories, where the limitations of the client are relaxed (though some limitations remain--as limitations remain in almost all campaigns, tabletop or otherwise). But in our stories, we could interact with these forces (though not always negotiate--Arthas, much like Demogorgon or Graz'zt, or the aforementioned slaver goblins and vampire ancient, has little need or desire to "negotiate" with anyone). We could do things that aren't possible in the client alone. And with the right addons, it's possible to communicate much of this "layered on top" story.See above: given your statements, I'm really confused about what you do consider roleplaying. Interacting with your party members doesn't count, but haggling with a shopkeeper does?Sure, if you consider the only parts of the game world to be the monsters, baddies, and shopkeepers in it, and completely neglect the players and their ability to interact with each other, as well as the built-in factions, variety of cultures, petty political squabbles with minimal grand impact, or potential to tell your own story of how a particular enemy was defeated--or not defeated!--mechanics be damned. But, as I've said above, if you ignore any and all contributions from your fellow-players in a TTRPG, you're going to have a pretty damn spare "roleplay" experience anyway.</blockquote>

Verification