Is it roleplaying or is it story telling?

[Shade_XY]

Try being less specific when you're talking about your problems in roleplaying. The people in that roleplay do read the General Forum every so often.

Edit: We're not even on the third page of that RP and you've done nothing but try to force characters who awoke with literally NO MEMORY to move forward along one path or the other. You stated specifically it's about 'character development', yet we barely got two posts in each before it was 'k lets go'.

@Roose Hurro , @Kaddoc ? Can I get ya'lls thoughts on this as well since we're in this together?

I just saw this.

I should be less specific? That would mean that I would not be talking about the problem and instead talking about something else, wouldn't it?

Did I force you to move your characters forward? How did I do that? Did I do it by making a deer appear? Maybe I did. I need to read back all the OOC posts that I made and read all the IC post that I made as well.

I am just sharing my thoughts here. Don't take this as a personal attack towards you or any other roleplayers, @Windsong. I actually like how you and other players in the roleplay I manage roleplayed. The part about the deciding the outcome was a slight problem but I did state that in the posts. I was waiting for a respond but if you decide not to comment and lash out here, then do your thing.

 

[Windsong]

I just saw this.

I should be less specific? That would mean that I would not be talking about the problem and instead talking about something else, wouldn't it?

No, because I'm fairly sure it's against the rules to talk about this sort of thing when you're clearly talking about a specific set of people.

 

[Jorick]

The problems you're describing have nothing to do with roleplaying versus storytelling. Roleplaying in this written form and in tabletop game form are both just collaborative types of storytelling.

You seem to be describing rules-heavy roleplaying (in which tabletop games like D&D are the heaviest with rules) and freeform roleplaying, with a healthy splash of plain old bad roleplaying added in. You like rules and structure, the people you're talking about seem to prefer freeform. Things like controlling characters that aren't yours to control and deciding the outcome of your character's actions are considered rude and poor roleplaying in all but the most freeform of roleplays. Go take a look at rules lists for group roleplays around the site and take note of how often GMs prohibit things like hijacking and autohitting and godmodding to see what I mean. These are things most roleplayers dislike, you've just framed the question in a very odd and round about way.

 

[Rare]

I have no clue what you're trying to say. Give details, explain clearer, etc.

 

[☆Luna☆]

And so, I created roleplays stating that I will be the dungeon master to control the environment and determine if their character's actions would succeed or fail. People joined, but then they wrote their own outcome of their character's actions. When I rewrote the outcome for their character, they complained. They enforced that their actions must succeed. And then there are these players who insist on controlling the NPC, giving them godly items for a penny when I clearly said that I will play as the NPC.

If I read this correctly, your real issue is that you've likely committed an error as a GM that is extremely common. Don't expect players to actually read/retain anything you put in the OP. If you want to make an RP in which you have strong rules that are critical to the way it functions, make it abundantly clear that is the case with big obnoxious disclaimers, and even then check to make sure they actually understand. I can't tell you how many times I've made an RP in which people made characters without reading the rules or violated the rules within their fifth post. Taking note of the people you let into your RP is half the battle in getting the thing off the ground and in the right direction.

 

[Shade_XY]

No, because I'm fairly sure it's against the rules to talk about this sort of thing when you're clearly talking about a specific set of people.

Its against the rules to talk about these kinds of things? How is it against the rules to talk about specific kinds of people? -_-; I didn't drag you into this conversation.

The problems you're describing have nothing to do with roleplaying versus storytelling. Roleplaying in this written form and in tabletop game form are both just collaborative types of storytelling.

You seem to be describing rules-heavy roleplaying (in which tabletop games like D&D are the heaviest with rules) and freeform roleplaying, with a healthy splash of plain old bad roleplaying added in. You like rules and structure, the people you're talking about seem to prefer freeform. Things like controlling characters that aren't yours to control and deciding the outcome of your character's actions are considered rude and poor roleplaying in all but the most freeform of roleplays. Go take a look at rules lists for group roleplays around the site and take note of how often GMs prohibit things like hijacking and autohitting and godmodding to see what I mean. These are things most roleplayers dislike, you've just framed the question in a very odd and round about way.

I am not describing roleplaying versus story telling. I am just speaking my mind of what I think. And I think that role-playing supposed to be controlling one own character and not what happens to him. Just like an actor on stage. They act as the character they are in. They do not act as the actor they are acting with. In real life, you are roleplaying as yourself, but not what happens to you. If a fast car was heading towards you, you see it and you try to lunge away. Whether the car hits you or not is not entirely up to you at that point. Once again, this is just my opinion. When you read a novel, the writer isn't acting as the characters. The writer is telling the character's story by controlling everything that happens in the book. To me, this is similar to the way writing roleplay is done today. Therefore, I titled this thread "is it roleplaying or is it story telling."

I know that different individual have their own way of roleplaying and that every individual have their own preference in roleplaying. There are many kind of way to roleplay. I am not saying that different kind of roleplaying from mine is wrong and should be burned to death. I am just stating what is on my mind to release some pent up frustration about the writing roleplaying world. But this seems to upset some other people. -.-; I would gladly discuss about somethings if anyone would be willing as well.

This is might have derive away from the title. - As for rules, when a creator of a roleplay stated that he will post the outcome for player's actions in the first post he made, it is still rude and poor of him to post the outcome as he said he would?

I have no clue what you're trying to say. Give details, explain clearer, etc.

What? -.-; I don't know if I can.

 

[Brovo]

When you read a novel, the writer isn't acting as the characters. The writer is telling the character's story by controlling everything that happens in the book. To me, this is similar to the way writing roleplay is done today. Therefore, I titled this thread "is it roleplaying or is it story telling."

Except the reason this is confusing people is because the definition of storytelling fits whether you have totalitarian control over the narrative or not. Whether you possess absolute control over a character or not, or whether that character is bound to a set of mechanical rules or not, still doesn't preclude it from being story telling. It's a false dichotomy to put it that way, despite the fact that I get what you're saying and actually agree with it: Absolute control over one's characters is generally an uninteresting poison that leaves me to question why that person didn't just go and write a novel where they could have complete control.

Even a person who plays a video game like Mass Effect and then regales people afterwards with tales of their choices is a storyteller, despite not possessing any control over the story which the developer created for them. Just saying that your definition of storytelling is wrong, not you, and that's what is confusing people.

Anyway...

And I think that role-playing supposed to be controlling one own character and not what happens to him.

I absolutely agree with this sentiment. I think it's boring when people create characters and then tell GM's that only they can decide if their characters are injured. I go out of my way to write rules as a GM that state that if you join my RP's, I reserve the right to injure your characters, and even this doesn't stop some people. The adventure feels static and boring if there's no real risk. Characters should have real consequences attached in a role play's story for taking risky decisions, and the only person that can truly deliver on that kind of tension is a GM--not the player controlling said character. There is absolutely no tension if the person taking the risk is the one that decides if they succeed or not, so, I absolutely agree with your sentiment. Just not the improper terminology.

 

[Shade_XY]

Ta

Except the reason this is confusing people is because the definition of storytelling fits whether you have totalitarian control over the narrative or not. Whether you possess absolute control over a character or not, or whether that character is bound to a set of mechanical rules or not, still doesn't preclude it from being story telling. It's a false dichotomy to put it that way, despite the fact that I get what you're saying and actually agree with it: Absolute control over one's characters is generally an uninteresting poison that leaves me to question why that person didn't just go and write a novel where they could have complete control.

Even a person who plays a video game like Mass Effect and then regales people afterwards with tales of their choices is a storyteller, despite not possessing any control over the story which the developer created for them. Just saying that your definition of storytelling is wrong, not you, and that's what is confusing people.

Anyway...

I absolutely agree with this sentiment. I think it's boring when people create characters and then tell GM's that only they can decide if their characters are injured. I go out of my way to write rules as a GM that state that if you join my RP's, I reserve the right to injure your characters, and even this doesn't stop some people. The adventure feels static and boring if there's no real risk. Characters should have real consequences attached in a role play's story for taking risky decisions, and the only person that can truly deliver on that kind of tension is a GM--not the player controlling said character. There is absolutely no tension if the person taking the risk is the one that decides if they succeed or not, so, I absolutely agree with your sentiment. Just not the improper terminology.

Thank you.

 

[Jorick]

I am not describing roleplaying versus story telling. I am just speaking my mind of what I think. And I think that role-playing supposed to be controlling one own character and not what happens to him. Just like an actor on stage. They act as the character they are in. They do not act as the actor they are acting with. In real life, you are roleplaying as yourself, but not what happens to you. If a fast car was heading towards you, you see it and you try to lunge away. Whether the car hits you or not is not entirely up to you at that point. Once again, this is just my opinion. When you read a novel, the writer isn't acting as the characters. The writer is telling the character's story by controlling everything that happens in the book. To me, this is similar to the way writing roleplay is done today. Therefore, I titled this thread "is it roleplaying or is it story telling."

I know that different individual have their own way of roleplaying and that every individual have their own preference in roleplaying. There are many kind of way to roleplay. I am not saying that different kind of roleplaying from mine is wrong and should be burned to death. I am just stating what is on my mind to release some pent up frustration about the writing roleplaying world. But this seems to upset some other people. -.-; I would gladly discuss about somethings if anyone would be willing as well.

This is might have derive away from the title. - As for rules, when a creator of a roleplay stated that he will post the outcome for player's actions in the first post he made, it is still rude and poor of him to post the outcome as he said he would?

Not talking about versus? Well, when you ask "is it one or the other" you're evoking a direct contrast, to which the word 'versus' absolutely applies thanks to its secondary meaning. The English language is fun like that. :D

Anyway, yeah, I get that it's your opinion, it's just that the way you phrased it is strange and that's what caused so many confused and negative responses. I now understand your reasoning and why you decided to name the thread like that, but without that explanation you just gave me it sounded like you were evoking a contrast between roleplaying and story telling, as if a story could not be told through roleplay. These kind of misunderstandings happen, not a big deal, I was just trying to get you to understand why people were confused.

As for the rules thing, nah, a GM enforcing their own rules after someone tried to bypass them is not rude. It should be preceded with a message to the player along the lines of "hey, you're hijacking/godmodding/autohitting/metagaming/whatever and that's not okay, can you edit your post to remove <rule breaking bit here>?" If they do it, cool, problem solved and hopefully they'll understand in the future that such action is not allowed. If they don't, enforce the rule anyway by employing retroactive continuity to say your GM version of events happened instead of what they posted, and if they don't like it that's too damned bad. Should someone be unable or unwilling to follow the rules of your roleplay, and you are unable or unwilling to change them in order to accommodate them, then it's time for that player to be removed. The GM's word is law in their own roleplay, and anyone who doesn't follow the law doesn't get to stay and play.

 

[Ms.Wrong]

Try chat rps... theyre still fun and pure. :3 well long as you stay away from that bar or bordello... thats not pure :3

 

[Roose Hurro]

This is might have derive away from the title. - As for rules, when a creator of a roleplay stated that he will post the outcome for player's actions in the first post he made, it is still rude and poor of him to post the outcome as he said he would?

Shade, as I explained in the OOC, it is one thing to post an outcome if my character is interacting with the elements you control (environment/NPCs), but quite another when you try to determine my character's personal and inter-relational actions. To be blunt, when my character started licking himself, it was not up to you to decide that he'd finished the job. Whether he finished or not was up to me. If my character was to personally interact with another player's character, it is also up to that other player to control what happens, in that instance. If I were to go up to another player's character, as a for instance, and attempt to bite them, then it is up to them to react, to determine whether they get bitten, or whether they defend themselves. And so on. Now, if my character was to dig a hole, then it would be up to you to determine what he found while digging. Or you could have sent in an NPC for me to interact with, where you would have had some control in where things could potentially go, like you did when Kaddoc, Windsong and I bowed out.

This is where things went wrong in that RP.

Try being less specific when you're talking about your problems in roleplaying. The people in that roleplay do read the General Forum every so often.

Edit: We're not even on the third page of that RP and you've done nothing but try to force characters who awoke with literally NO MEMORY to move forward along one path or the other. You stated specifically it's about 'character development', yet we barely got two posts in each before it was 'k lets go'.

@Roose Hurro , @Kaddoc ? Can I get ya'lls thoughts on this as well since we're in this together?

Sorry to be late to the picture, my thoughts are above. All I can think to add at this point is, well, Shade simply didn't trust us to follow proper RP etiquette, or so it would seem. Didn't trust us to move the story along... impatient, as you noted. Push push, shove shove, and all that, when our characters hadn't barely time to interact and build a potential team. To me, rules are fine, but rules can't be so... tight, creative freedom is quashed. Really, it came down to me not trusting that Shade wouldn't try to tell me when and where my character could pee. Simple as that.

I just didn't realize Shade wanted such "fine" control of our characters. Because that was not the initial perception I got from his OP.

 

[Gwazi Magnum]

All forms of Roleplaying are story telling.

This just seems to be a comparison between Mechanic heavy and mechanic light RPs, players preference of style and a poor combination of player types.
You will find a lot of varying forum RP styles, those where they actually homebrew systems with classes, leveling and all, and others that are really relaxed and follow a "Post what you want" mentality, and everything in between.
To simply say "Table top is like X and forums are like Y" is generalizing a diverse thing by a ton.

Hell even table tops vary a lot depending on the system being used and the person DMing the campaign.

 

[Brovo]

All forms of Roleplaying are story telling.

 

[Gwazi Magnum]

No, I saw.
I just don't see the logic in someone not stating their opinion if it's been shared already.
It shows that more people follow/believe said thing, and it's not just one individuals thoughts. :P

 

[Brovo]

No, I saw.
I just don't see the logic in someone not stating their opinion if it's been shared already.
It shows that more people follow/believe said thing, and it's not just one individuals thoughts. :P

Or, instead of continuing to beat the dead horse into a fine, pasty glue with which you can use to repair the bat you snapped in two, you could just... Click the upvote button and be done with it. If there's nothing more to contribute, than making a chorus actually doesn't really add anything. Nor does bumping a resolved thread.

 

[Gwazi Magnum]

Or, instead of continuing to beat the dead horse into a fine, pasty glue with which you can use to repair the bat you snapped in two, you could just... Click the upvote button and be done with it. If there's nothing more to contribute, than making a chorus actually doesn't really add anything. Nor does bumping a resolved thread.

I'm not going to argue this.

I'm just going to respectfully ask that you not berate people for posting their own thoughts on a thread.
If you're done with a thread that's fine, but don't suddenly annoy others because they still feel like taking part.

 

[Shade_XY]

Shade, as I explained in the OOC, it is one thing to post an outcome if my character is interacting with the elements you control (environment/NPCs), but quite another when you try to determine my character's personal and inter-relational actions. To be blunt, when my character started licking himself, it was not up to you to decide that he'd finished the job. Whether he finished or not was up to me. If my character was to personally interact with another player's character, it is also up to that other player to control what happens, in that instance. If I were to go up to another player's character, as a for instance, and attempt to bite them, then it is up to them to react, to determine whether they get bitten, or whether they defend themselves. And so on. Now, if my character was to dig a hole, then it would be up to you to determine what he found while digging. Or you could have sent in an NPC for me to interact with, where you would have had some control in where things could potentially go, like you did when Kaddoc, Windsong and I bowed out.

This is where things went wrong in that RP.



Sorry to be late to the picture, my thoughts are above. All I can think to add at this point is, well, Shade simply didn't trust us to follow proper RP etiquette, or so it would seem. Didn't trust us to move the story along... impatient, as you noted. Push push, shove shove, and all that, when our characters hadn't barely time to interact and build a potential team. To me, rules are fine, but rules can't be so... tight, creative freedom is quashed. Really, it came down to me not trusting that Shade wouldn't try to tell me when and where my character could pee. Simple as that.

I just didn't realize Shade wanted such "fine" control of our characters. Because that was not the initial perception I got from his OP.

@Roose Hurro

I think this is my fault. To be honest, I did create the roleplay for me not be able to touch your characters freely, but I got the roleplay mixed up with my other roleplays. I apologize for that and I already stated that change and focused that in the OOC.

When your character licked the slime of your body, I posted to inform you that the slime tasted sweet. If I didn't post that information, you wouldn't have known how the slime would have tasted. And I felt that I needed to post about the slime coming off once it was licked or soaked with water. It was after all a mysterious substance. It could have not came off if it was water resistant. You wouldn't have known unless you interacted with it and you wouldn't have known it if I did not posted that for you. I posted what I posted to give you information about the thing you are interacting with. I guess I was at fault because my way of describing things is not great.

But as for the pushing the players to move the story forward, I don't see where in the OOC as well as in the IC I ever did that. I did suggest for the constant posting players to move their characters to other areas so that they did not have to wait for the late posters to post. And I did manifest a deer in IC which accessed the player characters and then moved away. But does that two actions counts as me constantly pushing your character to move move move? If it did felt that way for you, then I am sorry. I really really didn't know those two actions would stress all of you to the point of quitting.

 

[Roose Hurro]

When your character licked the slime of your body, I posted to inform you that the slime tasted sweet. If I didn't post that information, you wouldn't have known how the slime would have tasted. And I felt that I needed to post about the slime coming off once it was licked or soaked with water.

Indeed you did, Shade. But let me continue:

The slime tasted sweet, but different from sugar. In no time, all the slimes were off of his skin and into his stomach.

The bolded part is where you bunnied my character. Yes, I appreciated knowing what the slime tasted like... that was information I needed. All I needed. FOR ME to move my own character along. The fact I'd had no intention of him licking "all the slimes" off his body meant I had to ignore that part of your post, because it interfered with my character development efforts. And you made it quite clear in your OP in the OOC that this RP would focus on character development. I know you read what I wrote after you posted the above, so what I'm saying should be clear. Tell me what the slime tasted like... tell me if said slime would/could either upset my character's stomach, or perhaps even make him intoxicated. DON'T tell me that my character finished licking himself. DON'T develop my character for me. DON'T control my character. RPG rules state: "Don't control another persons character." That's a big no-no. I allowed it to go that once.

And yes, you did state the change, but by that time, the two people/characters I'd been playing/interacting with had already quit, rendering all my efforts with them moot. So I had nothing to go on. I was "dead in the water"... and the excitement was gone, replaced with "worry." I don't know you. Your RP was the first I'd joined since I'd come here, so I had no idea what your "history" was. Like I said, trust had been broken, and I no longer felt creatively free. Didn't know if I could get over that feeling. So, I just couldn't continue. Sorry it came to that. Like I said, short of a reboot, short of regaining trust, I had to bow out.

 

[Brovo]

This is probably a discussion better had over PM's...

 

[Shade_XY]

This is probably a discussion better had over PM's...

IKR