What is UP with all of the passive characters/play

[Kagayours]

This is actually why I usually have a rule in my RP's that tells players that, in every post, they need to write something that others can react to. You can't just sit back and restate everything you just watched happen -- you need to say or do something new.

Granted, I play in group RP's where it's a bit less of a problem, but, it's still annoying to deal with. Maybe trying to enforce the above rule might help; explain from the beginning that even submissive characters can't just sit back and do nothing all the time.

 

[chainedfiction]

*refers to Ozzie's "Ten Reasons Why Your Sex Scenes Are Terrible" in kind*

 

[ERode]

Well, I don't know about libertine, because that's probably their fetish, but...

Maybe the RPers are passive because they don't want to piss off the GM by taking control of the plot? I know a...few RPers that would not do anything if the GM doesn't tell them to, because they have no idea what the boundaries are in the IC-world (or they think that they need to do something specific, because they're too afraid of doing the wrong thing). Alternatively, they want to be entertained cheaply, without having to think too hard about entertaining the other person, or they fuck up terribly by RPing a loner-type character TOO well.

And I don't think anime has anything to do with this whole passive/submissive thing. Unimaginative people are going to be unimaginative, regardless of whether or not they watch harem anime featuring indecisive male characters. Pretty sure you could watch nature documentaries or sitcoms or blockbuster movies or literally anything else and still be a passive RPer.

 

[Crow]

Maybe the RPers are passive because they don't want to piss off the GM by taking control of the plot? I know a...few RPers that would not do anything if the GM doesn't tell them to, because they have no idea what the boundaries are in the IC-world (or they think that they need to do something specific, because they're too afraid of doing the wrong thing). Alternatively, they want to be entertained cheaply, without having to think too hard about entertaining the other person, or they fuck up terribly by RPing a loner-type character TOO well.

Basically this. It gets a little dull when it's one guy rolling the going, and the other person's all 'hmm. ok. cool.'.

 

[Kes]

I guess so. I hosted several RPs on Rpnation and most of the players were exremely passive to the point where I'd quit since they didn't contributed anything. I don't know about Iwaku, too little experience to form an opinion yet.

 

[Brovo]

I teach submissive players to be more active. If they refuse, they'll probably get killed, because I have a death rule. So if you wait for the enemy to charge into you, you're probably going to die.

In all seriousness though? Yes. There's an absurd amount of submissive players a lot of it has to do with people just not desiring--or knowing how--to take charge of a situation.

 

[Diana]

Passive players is not a new thing or unique to Iwaku. O__O It just means your roleplaying skills have grown to a point where you notice the difference now. (YAY!)


I too hate playing with passive players. >< I am an aggressive player myself and I get frustrated when a partner doesn't help me move a scene forward.

I think it's because a lot of people just don't know HOW. They get a cool idea for a character, but they have no clue how to accomplish their ideas. >>

 

[Kes]

I teach submissive players to be more active. If they refuse, they'll probably get killed, because I have a death rule. So if you wait for the enemy to charge into you, you're probably going to die.

In all seriousness though? Yes. There's an absurd amount of submissive players a lot of it has to do with people just not desiring--or knowing how--to take charge of a situation.

To be fair I think this discussion is from the perspective of the GM instead of the roleplayers themselves. With that in mind passive characters =/= bad characters. It's about the execution and justification for their character traits. Which goes back at how well roleplayers write their characters.

 

[Brovo]

To be fair I think this discussion is from the perspective of the GM instead of the roleplayers themselves.

If they refuse, they'll probably get killed, because I have a death rule.

This is from the perspective of a GM. Unless, somehow, as a player, I would circumvent the GM's authority to start murdering his NPC's without his permission. Pretty sure that's a surefire way to destroy a plot.

passive characters =/= bad characters.

I teach submissive players

There's an absurd amount of submissive players

You're completely right. Characters come in all shapes and sizes--some are more naturally prone to the spotlight than others. This is perfectly fine: I have characters that range from outgoing lotharios to reclusive wallflowers, from machines that have no sense of individuality, to the most selfishly minded and greedy bards. The issue isn't the characters, the issue is the players. I've seen character sheets that declare a character to be an outgoing, charming sort of fellow, but when put into action, said character doesn't interact with anyone, doesn't engage in conversation, and largely isolates themselves.

To make a character function, they need to oblige three simple requests.

• Who am I?
  • Reclusive? Outgoing? Brave? Cowardly? Honest? Deceitful? Loyal? Treacherous? Et cetera.
• Why am I here?
  • Read the plot and give your character reason(s) to wish to see it resolved. If you're in high school, give your character a motive to desire to pass the classes, form friendships, et cetera. Give them objectives. The more, the better.
• What can I do?
  • If you're in a fantasy RP, can you wield magic? Healing? Sword and shield? Bow and arrows? Can you fight? Can you bribe? Wield skill sets to accomplish aforementioned objectives, or give your character the capacity to quickly gain the skills necessary to accomplish said aforementioned objectives.

An active player can create a passive character (who am I?), who, because of their past, must accomplish an objective related to the plot (why am I here?), which forces them to occasionally broach others. Through this, you can form relationships ("I can accomplish things better with others than alone!") and cause the plot to progress by committing to actions due to their motivations.

In essence: A well written passive character can force themselves to break passivity if necessary to accomplish objectives, or the writer will thrust their passive character into situations that forces them to adjust and change reflective of the environment around them. Compare to a submissive player who requires others to force them to move, who doesn't push a plot forward themselves, who requires others to drag them, often kicking and screaming, towards objectives.

Ergo why I teach players, not characters. If a player is submissive, and doesn't know how to act to push a story forward, I'll offer them suggestions. I'll collaborate with them and lead by example, show various ideas they could wield to their advantage to get things done. Passive characters in an environment inherently requiring cooperation to progress are intrinsically difficult to represent effectively by their own nature, and I don't mind helping people learn how to wield them effectively. However, if you want to role play... You have to learn how to cooperate with others and pursue objectives on your own. If you can't do this, you're going to force others to drag you like a dead weight, and that's not fun for anyone involved: It makes the submissive player feel useless, and the active player feel stressful.

 

[Kes]

You're completely right. Characters come in all shapes and sizes--some are more naturally prone to the spotlight than others. This is perfectly fine: I have characters that range from outgoing lotharios to reclusive wallflowers, from machines that have no sense of individuality, to the most selfishly minded and greedy bards. The issue isn't the characters, the issue is the players. I've seen character sheets that declare a character to be an outgoing, charming sort of fellow, but when put into action, said character doesn't interact with anyone, doesn't engage in conversation, and largely isolates themselves.

Ah, alright that makes sense. If the player is not being consistent with the character that they're roleplaying then there's a problem. You also have to account for the enviorment you put the character in which is the GM's responsiblity. If you do not encourage conversations, character interacts, etc then roleplayers don't have much space to well, roleplay their own characters. So again, it's not necessarily the roleplayers fault if they struggle with roleplaying their characters overall. I think we should avoid generalizing passive players as just being lazy or unhelpful. Because there's different factors involved with roleplaying. Which the GM has a considerable amount of control in.

You seem to understand that:

Ergo why I teach players, not characters. If a player is submissive, and doesn't know how to act to push a story forward, I'll offer them suggestions. I'll collaborate with them and lead by example, show various ideas they could wield to their advantage to get things done. Passive characters in an environment inherently requiring cooperation to progress are intrinsically difficult to represent effectively by their own nature, and I don't mind helping people learn how to wield them effectively. However, if you want to role play... You have to learn how to cooperate with others and pursue objectives on your own. If you can't do this, you're going to force others to drag you like a dead weight, and that's not fun for anyone involved: It makes the submissive player feel useless, and the active player feel stressful.

So the issue again involves both the GM and the Roleplayers. Not just the roleplayers being "active."

 

[Kagayours]

Ah, alright that makes sense. If the player is not being consistent with the character that they're roleplaying then there's a problem. You also have to account for the enviorment you put the character in which is the GM's responsiblity. If you do not encourage conversations, character interacts, etc then roleplayers don't have much space to well, roleplay their own characters. So again, it's not necessarily the roleplayers fault if they struggle with roleplaying their characters overall. I think we should avoid generalizing passive players as just being lazy or unhelpful. Because there's different factors involved with roleplaying. Which the GM has a considerable amount of control in.

You seem to understand that:



So the issue again involves both the GM and the Roleplayers. Not just the roleplayers being "active."

As a GM, I try to encourage interaction between players as much as possible. If someone's off on their own, I try to make it easy for them to interact with another character. If they seem like they don't really know what to do, I offer to brainstorm ideas with them. However, there's only so much I can do. Some players, no matter how much I try to help them, will continue to play passively and never do anything unless I drag them into a particular situation and practically tell them exactly what to do.

 

[Kes]

As a GM, I try to encourage interaction between players as much as possible. If someone's off on their own, I try to make it easy for them to interact with another character. If they seem like they don't really know what to do, I offer to brainstorm ideas with them. However, there's only so much I can do. Some players, no matter how much I try to help them, will continue to play passively and never do anything unless I drag them into a particular situation and practically tell them exactly what to do.

Then that's fine to deal with them if they are not cooperating with the GMs. I just think it's unfair to generalize all passive players as lazy-roleplayers or unhelpful. Which seemed to be the main view of this discussion.

 

[Brovo]

Then that's fine to deal with them if they are not cooperating with the GMs. I just think it's unfair to generalize all passive players as lazy-roleplayers or unhelpful. Which seemed to be the main view of this discussion.

Whether or not they're lazy, they're often self-defeating. If others have to drag you along, you aren't contributing. If you don't contribute to a cooperative experience, and it dies as a result, you only have yourself to blame... And most go and blame others instead.

That, and it's easier to pin the blame on others, especially faceless groups (ex: "passive role players") than to own up and go "alright, so, I could have done some of this stuff better myself."

 

[Kes]

Whether or not they're lazy, they're often self-defeating. If others have to drag you along, you aren't contributing. If you don't contribute to a cooperative experience, and it dies as a result, you only have yourself to blame... And most go and blame others instead.

That, and it's easier to pin the blame on others, especially faceless groups (ex: "passive role players") than to own up and go "alright, so, I could have done some of this stuff better myself."

Did you miss the point I was making? If the roleplay isn't handled well, the roleplayers will have a harder time moving the plot on. The GM also has responsiblity to create a viable roleplay.

 

[Brovo]

Did you miss the point I was making? If the roleplay isn't handled well, the roleplayers will have a harder time moving the plot on. The GM also has responsiblity to create a viable roleplay.

This thread is about passive characters, not about GM's. If the topic is about GM's, I will go and talk about GM's instead. I'll also happily answer GM-related questions, as that is a role I've done for years successfully, such as with the sequel to an RP that lasted four years: Legend of Renalta 2.

So if you'd like to talk about GM's, I encourage you to create a thread for it! Rather than derailing this one, which is about passive/submissive characters.

Plus, as I've mentioned already...

If others have to drag you along, you aren't contributing.

A GM cannot control your behaviour, nor can you control a GM's behaviour. If a GM isn't doing their job properly, that's their fault--but that doesn't then absolve the fault of a passive role player who doesn't contribute anything meaningful to the story because of their passivity. The only person you can take responsibility for is yourself: If your actions are harming role plays you're in, you can only improve yourself. If others do things in manners you dislike, leave their RP's. If no RP's run the way you like them to be run, make your own.

That is the logical thing to do.

 

[Kes]

This thread is about passive characters, not about GM's. If the topic is about GM's, I will go and talk about GM's instead. I'll also happily answer GM-related questions, as that is a role I've done for years successfully, such as with the sequel to an RP that lasted four years: Legend of Renalta 2.

So if you'd like to talk about GM's, I encourage you to create a thread for it! Rather than derailing this one, which is about passive/submissive characters.

A. How am I derailing the conversation by having a desenting opinion?

B. So talking about some of the reasons WHY passive roleplayers don't carry story and account the actions of GMs isn't relevant right? Let's look at only the results instead of the causes that's a productive way to think.

C. Strawman, I never adovocated for GMs to change roleplayers behaviors. I don't know where you got that from. I said that GMs management of a roleplay is a relevant factor that must be accounted for when talking about this issue.

 

[unanun]

Most of these points are adequately addressed in the ilium code of conduct, which was iwaku's, arguably, first attempt at purging bad habits from roleplayers. Every person who wrote for ilium can attest that it opened up new perspectives to them.

Besides just wanting to make passive characters a-la anime-boy-milquetoasts, many players, upon closer examination, are afraid of posting in a RP simply because they don't know what the GM wants. That is usually alleviated by appropriate disclosure of plot outline, and some PMing if necessary.

 

[redblood]

At times it could be because people are new to a genre or just roleplaying in general and aren't sure how to be an aggressive player. They might be insecure and think if they do anything aggressive, their partner or the group might think they've done something wrong. Some might think their ideas might not be good enough, thus they don't throw in anything new. When it comes to a genre they're not used to they might take a more passive role so that they can observe and learn.

Other times it might be because they want to be part of a story, they want to follow it close by, but they don't want to be in charge for it. They just want to observe an adventure, but not do much in it because they'd rather be surprised and see where the other person/people takes it. And when it comes to more sexual roleplays, well BDSM is a thing and some people just like having someone controlling them, (or in this case their characters.) Sometimes the submissiveness stays in bed, and sometimes (as often is the case in genres like yaoi) the character is submissive all the time so that the stronger alpha will have an excuse to get jealous, over protective and stare at their beloved/sex slave when they sleep.... It happens.

Though as people have said, not all submissive characters are submissive all the time. I've played a lot of passive/submissive characters (just as I've played lots of more aggressive characters), but most of them, even those who are passive in the sense that they let other people do most things while they sit back and waits for the problem to be solved, has done something to help the plot move forward. Usually when I make passive characters, they are meant to grow during the RP. Start as a very submissive, passive, shy person who doesn't know anything about the cruel world, and by the end they might be a strong warrior who saves people's lives, or at the very least they're a person who can defend themselves and stand up for themselves.

Then it's important to know that just because someone only plays as ridiculously submissive character, it doesn't mean that they don't help with the story. When it comes to one x one roleplays, many people discusses things in PMs, so they might be talking ideas and plot twist all the times, and the one with the submissive character might give lots of their ideas, which are then used by the aggressive player. So just because the character is passive, doesn't mean the player is the same.

I think I'm done now. Geez, why is it so hard to say things in just a couple of paragraphs? D:

 

[Wolfsbane706]

Seriously, man. Why is passive play considered offensive?

 

[Halo]

the fuck is passive play?