Roleplaying? Yeah right!

[Fifth Element]

Anyone remember me ranting about the use of the word BadWrongFun a few weeks ago? I told you that people jump at the chance to try to use the word BadWrongFun.

You may not like the word, but it has meaning. I'm not jumping at the chance to use it; your post happened to be an excellent example of it.

Your problem is not that your players play the game wrong, as you seem to imply by arguing that it's not actually roleplaying. Your problem is that their preferred playstyle is different from yours. In attacking my use of the term BWF, you ignored the substantive comments in my post. (Or am I jumping at the chance to use the word playstyle now?)

Why does it matter if what the players are doing is "roleplaying"? If they enjoy it, good for them. However, the fact that you don't enjoy it is an issue that needs to be resolved. The drastic solution is to find a new group, but first have you tried discussing the issue frankly?

 

[Doug McCrae]

in most cases where I've heard folks in other groups use funny accents, I've considered a poor substitute for roleplaying, and think of it as a mask. Folks who think saying "Yar, I slay it with meh axe" in an Scottish brogue is roleplaying. It's not.

I love the funny accents. Love em. For me everything flows from the voice in terms of getting into character.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Oryan77, I'm very lucky. Everyone in my current gaming group is both a good roleplayer and a good powergamer. I've really been enjoying my stint at DMing for them. If I had a player like yours it would make me not want to run the game also. That bit about killing the guards being okay because he's chaotic good was the icing on a very nasty tasting cake.

For me the absolute minimum is that there has to be some sort of character concept and use of the first person voice. A distinctive accent or style of speech is desirable though not essential.

 

[Doug McCrae]

What do players think roleplaying is?

There are two definitions I'm aware of:

1) Everything that goes on while playing an rpg.
2) Acting.

Shouting 'Charge!' is roleplaying by definition (2). If it's all a player does then he's not doing much sense (2) roleplaying. But he is certainly doing some.

I sometimes use a third definition to distinguish roleplaying from gamism:

3) Any in-character act which is to the detriment of your playing piece or the mission.

With sense (3) roleplaying is not always a good thing. There can be such a thing as too much when a character's personality is so wacky or selfish that it hinders the party.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Some kinds of "Fun" really are Bad and Wrong.

You just lost the internet.

 

[Maldor]

I hoped he might try to make a more interesting and less powergamed character. But nope, he makes an even more powergamed PC. This new PC is even harder to threaten in combat and that's without any buffs.

man if you didn't see that coming your hopless by killing a "powergamers" character you are just telling the player that his charadter is not powerful to live though your gaming style and beleave me you can alway powergame more becuase with each new character you can corrwct the little weakness that you as a DM normaly don't see but the player becomes awear of.

Rather than comply and make different selections, he argued with me and said I'm "nerfing" his new PC. :\

you are nerfing his character

In an attempt to try and tone it down so he's more balanced with other PCs

this is nerf defined now wither the nerfing is a good or bad thing is between you and the player but saying its not nerfing is like making a gay slur then getting upset when you get called a biget

as for him seeing himself as roleplaying the character it sounds like he was a big bad MOE FOE that didn't take shitand enjoyed fighting if thats the case then yes he roleplayed it perfectly now we can't take your word on wither our not this is how the character was becuase your not the player and don't know you may have had what you thought how the character should have acted but truth is a character can't act out of character they may do something they don't normally do but how ever they acted is how they are.

 

[Flynn]

Good Morning, All:

I find that I get more involvement and roleplay in my games, in part due to my use of what I call "End Of Session" points.

At the end of each session, we take ten minutes or so to hand out a variety of points for certain things. Each person gets one vote, and it could be for themselves or another person, in each category. With a person gets two or more votes, they earn a point for that category. Each point is worth (10 x highest character level) XP, or 1% of what the highest level character needs to advance. It's small but makes a difference over the length of a campaign.

My "End Of Session" categories are simple:

* Learning Curve - List three things you learned about the campaign world this session. You cannot repeat anything anyone else has listed previously. This encourages players to pay attention to the game world and interact with NPCs. (I run games rich in backstory and world secrets, so this helps keep attention focused on them.)

* Alignment/Allegiance - List one solid example of an action your character did this session that supported your alignment/allegiance. This encourages the players to consider their character's alignment and try to act accordingly, keeping the focus on the character.

* Roleplay - Pick the person that made the game the most fun for you this evening, by whatever criteria you choose (in-character acting, best one-liner, whatever works for you), and tell us why. It encourages players to view the game as a form of entertainment, and hopefully allows them to work towards the group's enjoyment. It's also good feedback to hear that people like how you play your character, and hopefully re-inforces good practices.

* Heroism - Pick the person that put their characters at risk the most so that others might succeed. This encourages cinematic action and daring deeds, which in turn increases all of our enjoyment at the table.

I've found that these simple reminders work to encourage well-rounded play. The rewards are small but tangible, and over time, the better players will shine through their higher XP totals. These four categories are the areas of the game I want to reward, but you can do other categories if you so choose. Feel free to use this method in your own games, if you think it might help. It did for me.

Hope This Helps,
Flynn

 

[sniffles]

First, I have to say to all those who contend that the fault in lack of roleplaying lies with the D&D system: I play twice monthly in a D&D game that is almost entirely roleplaying. We frequently have sessions with no combat, and often can complete an entire session with virtually no dice-rolling. We do this because it's what we all want out of the game. We'd do the same thing no matter what system we chose to use, because our goal is to roleplay our characters. It's the players who make the game, not the system, IMHO.

Others here have already pointed out that the definition of roleplaying is different for different people. I think I commented in another of Oryan 77's threads that perhaps the so-called "powergamer" actually is roleplaying his character, by his own personal standards. Just because he isn't doing it the way Oryan 77 would like him to doesn't mean he's doing it wrong.

I've noticed, Oryan 77, that you've posted several threads recently about how dissatisfied you are with your current gaming experience. Perhaps it's time to step back and decide whether you'd like to take a break from GMing, look for a different group of players, or adjust your expectations of the game. If your game continues as it is, it sounds to me like you will soon become a burned-out GM, and that won't be fun for anyone.

 

[phindar]

Since he's the powergamed tank, it was difficult to kill him via straight tactical combat. So I took another approach...try killing him by roleplaying.

Long story a little shorter....after a long battle, the BBEG lied to the powergamer and told him if he gives up and removes his buffs & equipment, he will just be thrown into their prison cell until they figure out what to do with him. The player figured he may not have to die fighting and will live to see another day, so he gave up. After he was no longer a threat, the BBEG told his henchmen to slaughter him; which they did.

Then he has the balls to actually tell me that he roleplayed his last PC "so well that it got him killed". I'm still scratching my head about that one.

There's a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy here. The problem is that the pcs never negotiate, but when you get one to negotiate he dies because of it. Now, if nothing else, it seems like you've set it up so that another pc will never surrender to an npc.

Why would killing someone by roleplaying ever encourage anyone else (particularly that player) to roleplay in the future?

 

[DragonLancer]

Careful. Testament was not calling the OP's comments sickening and insulting, but Clavis' comments that there is absolutely certain types of fun that are wrong.

The OP has an issue with his players' playstyle differing from his own. Clavis was arguing that the players' playstyle is inherently wrong. See the difference?

I was aware of the difference, and I know what the OP was saying. My point is, with regards to both comments, is that different levels of roleplaying are fine. Not everyone is a amateur thespian. As I read the OP's post, he's saying that he wants a group that is more into the roleplaying (not just characterisation, but the thinking and teamwork, I guess), and he has one player who may or may not RP that way but has broken the game/playing level by min/maxing and thus affecting the game neagatively for himself and the other players.