Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Crimson Longinus" data-source="post: 9329888" data-attributes="member: 7025508">I play with people with whom just the basic act or roleplaying characters and NPCs is entertaining. And I think being able to do this is an essential skill for enjoyable roleplay. People need to inhabit and portray their characters, and do it so that it is engaging. And you don't need to be a professional actor to do that (though that probably helps!) Like I have said before, my tabletop RPG circles overlap with LARP circles quite a bit, and LARPs basically cannot function without this. So anything that characterises in-character roleplay as &quot;mere colour&quot; or &quot;pantomime&quot; etc is a huge red flag for me. It is not some optional spice, it is the main ingredient for me. But no one is saying that we would never test these things and there would never be conflict! That would be absurd. All I am saying that developing and portraying personalities and relationships of the characters and NPCs in relatively low-conflict roleplay deepens the pathos and immersion when the thing is eventually tested. Like when your friendship is tested it will feel way more impactful when you have firsts actually roleplayed camaraderie with that character/NPC, compared to just having checkmark on your playsheet &quot;X is my friend.&quot;I was not talking about the system as a whole, but the heavy focus on combat, which it shares with D&amp;D, albeit perhaps not quite the equal degree.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Crimson Longinus, post: 9329888, member: 7025508"] I play with people with whom just the basic act or roleplaying characters and NPCs is entertaining. And I think being able to do this is an essential skill for enjoyable roleplay. People need to inhabit and portray their characters, and do it so that it is engaging. And you don't need to be a professional actor to do that (though that probably helps!) Like I have said before, my tabletop RPG circles overlap with LARP circles quite a bit, and LARPs basically cannot function without this. So anything that characterises in-character roleplay as "mere colour" or "pantomime" etc is a huge red flag for me. It is not some optional spice, it is the main ingredient for me. But no one is saying that we would never test these things and there would never be conflict! That would be absurd. All I am saying that developing and portraying personalities and relationships of the characters and NPCs in relatively low-conflict roleplay deepens the pathos and immersion when the thing is eventually tested. Like when your friendship is tested it will feel way more impactful when you have firsts actually roleplayed camaraderie with that character/NPC, compared to just having checkmark on your playsheet "X is my friend." I was not talking about the system as a whole, but the heavy focus on combat, which it shares with D&D, albeit perhaps not quite the equal degree. [/QUOTE]

Verification