Jig

A Universal Guide

I tend to be in advanced more often than any other forum. I don't have any major specialisms but I guess I'm interested in RP 'theory'. I've mentioned in the B!tching thread how I have a preference for players to be aware of OoC knowledge in order to better prepare plot developments and work out character arcs. While I don't say this is a better way of doing it necessarily (if I remember, you were a proponent of being truer to character and reacting to events as they unfold), it might be interesting to discuss different interpretations of 'how to' for players and GM's.

I also, on an old account I can't access any more, wrote this which I've been meaning to update a little bit, but I think is, on the whole, a decent guide. I'd be quite happy to have its content included in this project when I get round to updating it.

A couple of questions:
1) the simple one - what is a wikidot? Does it actually look like a wikipedia page?
2) the harder one - how do you vet content admission? If somebody ventures an opinion that is almost universally accepted as 'wrong' ("It's always easier to just control other player's characters if they don't do what you you want them to," for example), does that opinion get into the universal guide?

Let's B!tch. I feel it's a healthy release for our roleplay annoyances 2.0

Brovo said
Except it affect how people see psychotics, and if you don't believe me, look at the general media. Look at the next time they see a psychotic killer. Are they going to focus on what was likely an abhorrent life? Nope. The warning signs that he or she was about to snap, likely shown for multiple ? Nope, maybe a footnote. The fact that they're psychotic and all psychotics are monsters and you should look for X, Y, and Z warning signs to keep yourself safe? Yup.The way society looks at the mentally unstable is absolutely contributing to the loneliness and desperation that many of them feel. Hollywood and the general news media are not helping in this regard, they're generally making it worse by constantly pumping this stereotypical crap into people's heads.

It's hard for me to disagree with somebody blaming Hollywood. You are probably right here, but I guess my response is:

Does it still disturb me when people make these types of monster characters thinking that's a real, accurate representation?

Professional storytellers shouldn't really be excused in the same way, but to lament RPers over-simplification of psychotically villainous characters I think over-estimates what the bulk of RPers are here to do and, in many cases, their ability to do it. From what I've seen from RPers in general is a lack of real thought into their characters, and how they fit thematically into a given RP and their role in terms of its conflict. To imagine the average RPer researching anything about their characters apart from a nice photo, let alone looking into the complex causes and symptoms of psychological disorders and mental illnesses (or whatever other umbrella term has psychopathy within it) that might underpin their character's behaviour. I don't think they're remotely thinking about the accuracy of their portrayal one way or another. Psychopaths are awesome in films and therefore their psychotic RP character is awesome. That's all that counts (, right?).

It's patronising, but I still think RPing is largely about wish fulfilment for a lot of players (I'd wager half to three quarters). As the projection is typically for something the player doesn't have (even if it's simply an adventurous lifestyle available to most fictional characters), it stands to reason their specific subject knowledge may well be superficial without the research they don't have commitment to do. Inaccuracies are inevitable. It's not necessarily that psychopathy is over-simplified in RP-land: everything is, and you, as somebody that seems to be more enlightened on the subject that most, pick up on those inaccuracies.

I remember having been in a Harry Potter RP (or, one set in that world), and, being a bit of a buff, I could see players making lore-inaccuracies all over the shop from smaller fuck-ups to conjuring food (straight-up impossible in HP lore and a legit if small plot-point). At first I tried to hint that maybe inaccuracies had possibly been perhaps made, but nobody cared in the slightest. Even when politely directed to a clear source of canon information, no attempts were made to try to fit the canon. The consensus wasn't interested in its realism (in this case, realistic means 'a credible part of the HP world'); they just wanted to tangentially experience being special and having the magic powers to do whatever they wanted. Psychopath characters are basically the same, as far as I can see.

It's just the same old traits* of RPing (simplification, amateurism and wish-fulfilment), really, but I can see how they perpetuate societal misunderstandings and why people interested in those things being misunderstood may be concerned. I don't think RPing is itself the problem, though, and more the symptom of what the players see in the media and attempt to artistically replicate - not that they won't cut out the fiddly bits and concentrate on the awesome and badass parts anyway.

Frankly, I think we're getting distracted by the psychopaths and should be concentrating on the existential plight of inexplicably-transfigured food.

Thicker Than Water

Honestly, I'd prefer different characters' posts to be in separate posts anyway, so I'd say to just separate them. :)

Woll Manor

Nice job, Cat. :)
I keep feeling that I should devote my compulsory resting-time to something artistic but then I keep remembering I don't have an artistic bone in my body. :3

Let's B!tch. I feel it's a healthy release for our roleplay annoyances 2.0

I'll target the bits where we dispute.

Brovo said Except Pikachu isn't real. This would be like if I wrote that all Chinese people want to eat babies and murder Americans and . See how that might be offensive?

A single fictional not-very-accurately-written psychopath isn't real either. They're fictional. I don't really follow your point. An individual representation of a particular demographic does not constitute stereotyping that entire demographic.

My offense, my feelings on something, are not justifiable means for which to call others to stop doing it altogether. If that's what gets your plot rolling, and you enjoy it, fantastic, but I won't enjoy it.

Honestly? I think it's lazy and a cop-out. I discovered it when studying Othello in sixth form and realised Iago was basically Shakespeare going "Gotta write a play somehow" and invented a character just to fuck with the others. But let's be academic. :)

Ironically, you mention Halloween. A film where the main antagonist has a back story.

D'you know, I watch the Hallowe'en films like, every, well, Hallowe'en because they're always on the telly (for some reason) and I've never actually picked up on that. This is both perhaps a bit embarrassing and also maybe is a nice example of my point: for some things, the audience really doesn't care. A better example might be natural disaster films, where the antagonist is not even personified. Nobody asks the sharks their opinion in Sharknado. It's taken for granted that sharks are assholes, and they're assholes when they can sort-of fly, too.

Anything that is generic is stereotypical. Anything that is stereotypical is generally overdone and boring. You at least want to put a unique twist to something, to make it yours, or just to make it different. You can use generic for unimportant things, but for something as important as a main antagonist? You better give them a personality, a history, a face--something.

When I say 'generic', I mean 'antagonist by design', which is my fault for not being clear - I meant those antagonists whose motives aren't really relevant, or boil down to the woolly "Just because".

And you're right, being creative and original with a Just Because villain really is necessary, or there simply is no content there. I think the Joker from The Dark Knight is probably the ultimate example of a Just Because villain done right: he's quirky and funny, and almost literally shallow. I'm pretty sure he never takes his make-up off and that we find out nothing about him as a character. What people will remember about the Joker will be his funniness, destructiveness, and lines like "Some people just want to watch the world burn".

Thicker Than Water

The transfer from the country to the city had been difficult for Alexander and meneer Ogthoven. Both were accustomed to the silence of rural isolation and the trappings of a large mansion. Admittedly, many areas of the tuinhuis van Ogthoven were dilapidated and in urgent need of repair, but those areas suitable for habitation remained spacious and lavish. Alexander had spent the best part two decades exclusively within its walls and grounds, and, though meneer Ogthoven had spent more and more time in Amsterdam as the Age of the Vampire had drawn in ever closer, those visits had retained for him a sense of ambassadorial grandeur and novelty. However, as meneer Ogthoven's interests in the city grew and the manor's state of collapse worsened, it became inevitable that they would have to move.

They had moved into the flat above The Burlesque perhaps fifteen years ago; Alexander no longer had any meaningful grasp of time, being simultaneously over fifty years old and looking just twenty. Back in the tuinhuis van Ogthoven there had been no means of or reason for measuring the passing time: occasionally meneer Ogthoven would bring a newspaper back from the town with him, but Alexander's grasp of Dutch was poor and his interest in current affairs nonexistent, so, apart from the changing seasons, years had begun to mean nothing to him.

The flat was a small one, with bulk of the building devoted to the running of The Burlesque. Of four stories, the flat took up just one, with two floors kept vacant for paying guests and, of course, the main lounge was one storey of its own. The space didn't really bother Alexander, but meneer Ogthoven's temper was its own concern, and, when they had first moved in, his sire had felt cramped to say the least, and become proportionately irate. Since then, they had settled into their new lives somewhat; meneer Ogthoven had hired managers for his various businesses, leaving him more time for politics and to take occasional trips back to the manor to oversee its refurbishment and, for his own part, Alexander had taken on some shifts in The Burlesque, on meneer Ogthoven's instruction, which kept him busy while his sire was unable to occupy him. He had slowly become accustomed to the disruptions of urban life and the people and noise from downstairs came to bother him less.

He lay on his bed in his room. Officially it was the flat's guest room, though Alexander probably no longer qualified as a guest, having slept in it almost every night for fifteen years. It was a tiny room, only a few metres across in either direction, and almost entirely featureless - it comprised a chest of drawers, a wardrobe and a single bed with plain sheets. Its sole decoration was a single Sex Pistols poster neatly taped to the wall, its four sides perfectly parallel with the other lines in the room. Alexander no longer listened to music, and much less punk - meneer Ogthoven had bought it for him to encourage him to personalise his living space, but Alexander had only put the thing up out of politeness.

He had been lying on his bed from the moment meneer Ogthoven had headed back down to the lounge, his eyes wide open. Really, he was trying to stare at the ceiling, but his gaze kept being captured by the half-glass of blood on the chest of drawers - not that he had any desire to drink it. His overriding desire was to wash up the glass. It was cluttering up the room, but he shouldn't waste it.

Meneer Ogthoven had invited him downstairs, and so Alexander, who'd already made sure he was presentable before meneer Ogthoven returned, had put on his shoes ready. "Only if you want to," meneer Ogthoven had said. Alexander rubbed his face with his forearm and rolled over, careful that the soles of his shoes didn't touch the clean linen of the bed. Perhaps he ought to go; Meneer Ogthoven wouldn't have asked him to unless he wanted him there. And there was nothing to do up here; with his sire out of town, Alexander had exhausted all possible tasks and chores that might keep him busy during the days, having cleaned the flat to within an inch of its life and all of the laundry had been done. If meneer Ogthoven had changed his shoes, he'd have something to polish - but he hadn't.

There was no putting it off any longer. He took a deep breath in, a trick he'd learned from his sire that was biologically pointless but useful for calming oneself down. With one hand on the bannister, he headed down the stairs.

Thicker Than Water

Looking forward to the promised posts :)

Woll Manor

Biggie is next to post, even if it's just a placeholder, and then everybody's order is listed in Bliss's muahahahaaI'vedruggedyouall post.

Let's B!tch. I feel it's a healthy release for our roleplay annoyances 2.0

Brovo said But nobody does that they do generic psychotic monster people that show just how little they understand about this stuff. x.x

You are right in that most people know nothing about it and b!tching about a societal ignorance is fair game, but complaining that people don't always write psychologically accurate characters is a bit like complaining that Pikachu isn't biologically viable.

When you say generic psychotic monster, I think you're hitting the nail on the head with the word monster. These characters are destructive to the world around them in a way that reminds me of slasher movie monster/villain - they are armed with the designated role of villain that both automatically justifies their violence (in an RP, this may be social violence rather than literal) and makes a contract with the audience that they will perform with that violence in ways that allow them to be just slightly more powerful than their victims. When you go see Hallowe'en, you expect Michael Meyers to do some stab-stab-stabbing.

For me, what makes this fail as a concept is that the 'villain character' is usually the player's input. In those works where you can get away with having an almost two-dimensionally psychotic (forgive the use of the word; you know what I mean) character, the character is basically a plot device to give the real characters something to overcome or be destroyed by. Unless an RP has been founded around that antagonist (or had the antagonist tied into it), the antagonist has no role; the conflict is already there. Therefore, the antagonist's primary role reduced to being pointlessly belligerent in a way that typically seems out of place and usually obnoxious.

The great and massively under-celebrated thing about RPing is that it's one story told from every character's perspective. Because of this, a character (like the antagonistic-by-design ones) that is not deep or developed feels egregiously empty. With all the space there for exploration, why isn't there any?

I don't think it's that a 'generic antagonist' is a bad thing by design: I just feel they typically feel out of place in RPs.

Also: I recommend the British series Utopia to you. It's full of people getting slightly too comfortable with fighting against a government conspiracy and being able to break into houses, torture and kill people. That and the colours and soundtrack are beguilingly bizarre as well. The plot's a kind of generic government conspiracy one, but it's done with aplomb.

Let's B!tch. I feel it's a healthy release for our roleplay annoyances 2.0

Isn't it kind of sinister, though, when a multi-genocidal serial rapist puppy-kicking total bastard is able to, you know, function normally and generally come across as an affable, polite individual? It's not realistic, but it's done, as you note, even in Hollywood. There's a reason for that: the juxtaposition is really effective.

That doesn't mean, of course, that everybody can do it or do it well. I have experienced truly awful 'evil' characters and find the female ones in particular tend to talk like dominatrixes. It comes across, to me, as more comically naff rather than threatening.