Prince

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

Brovo said "Brevity is the soul of wit." -William Shakespeare.

Only an excerpt from:

"Polonius:
My liege, and madam, to expostulate
What majesty should be, what duty is,
What day is day, night night, and time is time,
Were nothing but to waste night, day, and time;
Therefore, since brevity is the soul of wit,
And tediousness the limbs and outward flourishes,
I will be brief. Your noble son is mad. . . ." which is just one line of Hamlet, specifically Act 2, scene 2, 86–92

You're real bad about taking an excerpt to make a point out of context. You ought to work on that before being taken seriously

Fact

inb4 ur a hypocrite. Intentional Irony.

---

: When someone confuses quantity for quality. No I don't care that you needed to spend three paragraphs to describe how a brush moved in the wind as you gently caressed your dead lover's locket: Unless that brush is coming up again in the future, it's merely an unfired Chekhov's Gun, and you are wasting the time of everyone reading it.

Detail has its place in fiction and is dependent on the scene, which is in turn dictated by the author. Isaac Asimov is as wordy as he is because he has to describe fantastical inventions that nobody could really grasp with a one liner description. He used his descriptions to suck you into worlds typically full of vacuum tubes and magnetic technologies. On the other hand, take world of warcraft role playing: The entire world is painted out in great detail for you. Having massive expository dialogue would be a waste of time there, the only thing you should be focusing on are subtle actions and dialogue. Same goes for movies: The rule is show, don't tell.

There comes a time for detail and exposition. Think of it like... Food, and your story is your child. If you stuff your child nonstop with food, especially sugary purple prose, your child will inflate until they have coronary heart failure and need to be moved with a bulldozer into their grave. At the same time, if you don't feed them enough, they become anorexic, without detail or substance or flavour, and they die.

tl;dr: Posts are children. Feed them a good diet please, it's hard enough to take care of our own children, leave alone when your 300 pound scooter riding fuck gets stuck in the door so nobody can get past it.

Although this lacked any brevity in itself, I do have to admit that I agree with it. I have ALWAYS hated the people who write and write and write then go back and edit then just one final run through to add whatever superfluous detail they can to a post. It's annoying, pointless fluff work that doesn't add to the plot or interaction. There are few exceptions, such as an exposition to set an atmosphere or a post to set the atmosphere in general. I do believe that flowery words and overzealous literary techniques used in the correct (and honestly, where skipping would not hurt the roleplay or interaction) places. The fact here is it definitely shouldn't be consistent. If you don't give your children a desert every now and then, what kind of parent are you?

"Anorexic" is defined as either a state of poor diet or a state of "anorexia nervosa" which is an eating disorder associated with intentional food restriction, poor eating habits and an obsession with having a thin figure. I would say it is a poor analogy in this case, as it to be"anorexic" has little correlation with actually being fed enough. Anorexia is a behavioral thing. I do digress, however (but found it slightly appalling that someone would compare a severe eating disorder to the concept of a roleplay being 'skinny'), and move on to say that each roleplay will most likely be different with different needs, themes, roleplayers, so on and so forth all with different expectations. And, to top off all of that, there are vastly different preferences that can shape the needs of a roleplay. What makes a roleplay healthy is not necessarily universal.

Addition

-Not sure if this has already been said but i dislike the type of people who create a new character to change the fate of their already existing character when the fate is what it is suppose to be because the GM said so >>. Not sure if that is considered God modding but it sure is close

That is an attempt at a Dues Ex Machina, which not only is considered a diluted literary technique (even though it is still highly used and highly effective) but is dull and normally the mark of a desperate writer. They are annoying as fuck and a roleplayer trying to get around 'fate' itself is just as annoying, as long as such is reasonable, well-plotted and fitting. Nothing should be set in stone, but there are a myriad of players that do this, and it is annoying to an antagonizing level.

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

The entire point here was that someone insinuated my specific style of wordplay was too much, and I disagree. It is nowhere near the top line of acceptable and hardly hurts interaction. The onlu conflict here came from some time ago when someone had no method of combating the content of my statements, so they attacked my method of communication.

Edit: I'm actually home now and on a computer instead of my phone.

You called something a valid point of criticism, and I'll reference it. "I'd argue that because an RP is primarily interactive, making sure people can easily pick up on the interactive elements in your posts is beneficial for all parties" is the exact line and it is most accurately in reference to a line of mine: " Recently, I have been scrutinized for my flowery writing style. So what? I'm still grammatically correct and there is a huge crowd that would rather read well-constructed, flowery sentences than dull, neutral descriptions or statements." The direct connection would be if my flowery writing style was a detriment to the communicated interaction within my [IC] posts, but that was never the topic at hand. The topic, most accurately, was on criticism itself, most specifically when criticism is acceptable, when it is rude and the etiquette involved. Never has anyone criticized my [IC] posts as too flowery, lengthy or otherwise overly wrote-out, thus your argument is (a) true in some cases and (b) inapplicable in mine. I was not using an [IC] critique as an example of a rude, unneeded and/or unwanted one; I was using one made in regards to my debate style, which is an entirely different topic. I believe that firmly is the conflict we are having.

Additionally, my point that this is all about preference is solely that some people prefer to have their obvious level of interaction, then go on superfluously writing for their character, actions, surrounding events, etc. because they find such enjoyable. It is, technically, unneeded information and at times can be a detriment to most normal roleplay, but I again emphasize the preference here. I also know roleplayers that swear by one-line roleplay on World of Warcraft, playing SotDRP and Vuen's DnD on Warcraft III, similar roleplaying on Neverwinter Knights, so on and so forth. Any time that wordplay is made a part of roleplay, those who choose to partake in such over other forms do so because they enjoy it more and it really is fairly ignorant to deny that one-liners in an MMORPG are devoid of their literary value. If the low-ends of literary architecture can have their niche, so can the high-ends for the sake of fairness; I at times find myself capable of enjoying either end of such spectrum. Thus, I reiterate that there is a large diversity of roleplaying preferences and even those here that might consider themselves experts are most likely novices in another field.

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

There was no actual given context. Not everyone enjoys Shakespearean literature, nor even understand it, but that doesn't lower its quality. It is preference. In roleplay, there is a juggling act for literary elements and roleplay elements, but personal preference still exists.

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

I'm at work, so Ill make this one short. Just like low standards can dilute a roleplay, overzealous literary techniques can, too. This I agree with. But that line is personal preference and even more so (in my case) is often different from my communication style. The primary "difference" between solo writing and roleplay is interaction, but obviously all one-liners isn't the highest quality. Obstruction and distaste or laziness are not the same.

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

I respect your comment, but I'd like to address this. Constructive criticism is perfectly fine. Only destructive or constant criticism is truly rude. Another thing is, society considers it only acceptable to judge someone or something when they ask for it, or when they deserve it, which is a decent thing to believe.

Criticism, be it constructive or not, can still be rude. Additionally, there is a point when an opinion or even the opinion of several are still based on preference. Recently, I have been scrutinized for my flowery writing style. So what? I'm still grammatically correct and there is a huge crowd that would rather read well-constructed, flowery sentences than dull, neutral descriptions or statements. That is preference, collective or not, and it is rude to push your preferences onto others. Before making any criticism, you should be aware if you are criticizing an actual, detrimental issue or just a personal one that doesn't need addressed whatsoever. Also, the purpose of asking permission is for etiquette. Not only is criticism on any level an often sensitive issue, using a polite, well-mannered attitude is the best way for toning down the negative issues with it and reaching the desire goal.

Oh, and to anyone who attempts to be judgmental or criticize you in their very first message toward you can fuck off. That's rude as fuck. Saying "you show potential if..." or "if you improved this" really just merits you a whole bunch of social animosity that you generally deserve.

A lot of people don't come here to 'improve' their writing, but rather to play a game or indulge in escapism. It's kinda like you're having fun playing casually Sonic and exploring the level, then someone walks into the room and starts telling you how you could have gotten a better time. That's still unwanted criticism.

Also take note a lot of people don't take criticism very well and another lot of people doesn't give criticism very well.

That's another excellent point. Some people just plain don't give a fuck, and kudos to them! There is no point in criticizing someone whom doesn't want nor appreciate the gesture. That, as a matter of fact, is when it becomes rude.

Resolving Character Conflict: A look into non-tabletop engagement

Simple fact:

If both parties want to win, the scenario ending with everyone happy is slim-to-none.

Plenty of solutions have been presented, and most of them are effective in minimizing collateral damage.

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

On Topic

• People that don't realize their word use and sentence structure are enough to alter the meaning or delivery of their message.


• People that disregard the artistic aspect of anything. Things are so much more beautiful as art.


• Lack of at least one eloquently-worded introduction. A description should always be present in a roleplay; it should be short, concise and informative. An exposition should be well-written and able to repeatedly remind readers of the atmosphere of the roleplay.


• People who critique without asking permission. It's rude as fuck to just go around judging people. There is a time and place for everything.


• Any GM that thinks they cannot be corrected. As a GM and seeing other GM's, I find it insulting and weak if a GM cannot make a mistake and compromise for it. We're all human.


• The concept of 'my word is law'; that's not healthy for anything. Everything around us is fiction and everyone is human. We make mistakes and even those in power should make up for them apologetically.


• Anyone who forgets the basic notion we're all human. This is a recurring theme of mine, especially with GM's. It is natural to apologize and compromise with anyone.

Addition

• I absolutely hate those whom would use the ignorance of others, especially when only providing select excerpts, in an attempt to justify themselves. I find it weak, disgusting and nothing less than absolutely immature. Doing so is nothing less than toxic and I'd go far enough to claim it is cancerous to a community.

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

I think I'll let the beast return to its shackles after the last thread. I see no reason in provoking Brovo, as I'm sure he would love a 'bout with the Gentlemen Beast. He can be president, anyway. Princes have far more fun. ;)

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

T'is a sad day when beasts must be unchained to fix the folly of man.

I'm Prince. If you don't know me, that's probably for the better. If you do know me, you know this is about to get fun. You're either going to absolutely hate me or applaud for me by the end of this post, and I'm telling you now that I firmly believe the former of those two is the more interesting one. I thrive off of rage, frustration, discomfort; all of those things are, for better or worse, no more than another form of passion that the edified can use to fuel their personal abilities. Allow me to elaborate using a tangible example:

First and foremost, anyone whom believes that no one can write a canon character effectively is, in my opinion, a fucking idiot. I'm going to use logic so basic here that even Mr. Torn is going to appear ignorant in its shadow. It has nothing to do with fan fiction or personal opinion. It has to do with fact. Prior to this post, someone brought up the fact Wolverine has been around for forty some-odd years, and spoiler alert he's destined to die permanently in September in mainstream canon due to losing his healing factor. Shocker, right? Moving on. Wolverine started out as an off-villain for the Hulk and evolved into the character he is today; as a matter of fact, he was supposed to be a mutant Wolverine that turned sentient and humanoid. Fun facts, but again I do digress. There have literally been dozens and dozens of writers for Wolverine in hundreds if not thousands of plotlines, stories, comics, etc. that have all considered those Wolverine variants canon. Canon is a hard concept to pin down, as a matter of fact. Is Earth Prime or Earth-616 canon? Is it what is the most mainstream? Are you going to disregard stories of the Wolverine variants that are so greatly varied from the more mainstream concepts as 'poor interpretations' because you disagree with them? The answer is yes, but it should be no. Wolverine is a character that has been rewrote and retconned (retroactive continuity, for anyone whom actually doesn't know the term; it originates in comics) so many times that he is a concept with little static or concrete information about him. Any player that knows enough about Wolverine and comics knows that two different, yet VERY talented comic writers for Marvel might have Wolverine do completely different things in the same situation. One writer might push individual character development and another may push the collaborative story-telling aspect of every character in terms of a story. These are personal preferences by writers that are in my opinion far superior to us that make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in profit due to their prolific writing styles, and that alone gives them claim to superiority. Fact is, there are dozens of people that have partaken in 'creating' Wolverine through his actual creation and integrating him into the world that became that of The Uncanny X-Men. The ability to play as him effectively is in fact one of skill and personal preference. I could do so, I'm sure, but I choose not to because I don't enjoy playing canon characters; that has nothing to do with skill, that is personal preference.

But, I will move on from that alone. I'm going to bring up to entirely valid points that will later become far more profound. The first is the sheer essence of roleplaying. I've read a majority of the posts here and came to the conclusion that a lot of roleplayers don't understand that the entire point of roleplay is to interact. I have some strict definitions of roleplaying I use when I teach, but I'll skip the lecture and simply state that one has to interact to roleplay. Elsewise, you're solo writing. Roleplaying has recently become somewhat of a derogatory term so much to the degree that myself and a few other roleplayers I know of higher stature refer to the act of roleplay as 'collaborative writing' because it tosses off the shackles of distaste given to us by sex-fueled kids and those punks on facebook with thousands of fake accounts and far too much free time. The second point I want to make is that maturity is a pointless measure as it can only refer to one of two things: physiological and psychological development. Regardless of what model you use, psychological development can happen in stages and be skipped, but any educated individual knows that a majority of what we call common sense or mature actions are actually those that are in line with societal and personal beliefs. Anyone who judges another are physiological development goes into a debate so deep it would requite a novel for me to retort to.

Those two facts are important. All roleplay centers around interaction, but what some people neglect is that there is so much personal preference and influence from individual roleplaying styles that it is sheer ignorance to believe one way is a way it should be. I personally change my outlook at times mid-roleplay just to spice it up, but sometimes you must focus on the plot and disregard finite details about the characters. At other times, one must stretch the setting and plot and even create formerly non-existent events to make a character fit in. There are points in a healthy roleplay when that can happen and when it can't, and it's normally up to a good GM or at least an observant roleplayer to decide those times. The future cannot be planned out, but it can be prepared for. That said, I've read through plenty of opinions, valid points and well-structured statements in this thread that tell me that some people have their opinions and respectfully allow them to clash or mingle with others while some people are just fucking assholes that believe the world is black and white. I do sound hypocritical saying that after I boldly went so far as to claim that anyone whom thinks a canon character cannot be roleplayed effectively is an idiot, but let me addend that:

At times, canon is clear. The actions of a character are determined in short increments and are always evolving. The fact is, there is often not enough information presented in real canon to make a justifiable decision as to what level of psychological development would proceed. Examples of this are Avatar: The Last Airbender. We don't know how Aang grew up or how his personality shifted or changed when he united the world and made Republic City, and no roleplayer has enough source material to truly make an Aang that is justified. Batman, however, is a different story. So is Green Lantern, Superman, Wolvernie, Charles Xavier, so on and so forth. Canon characters are not cut and dry and the fact you face is that sometimes comic writers use the same techniques of on-the-spot creation that we do, simply far better. Some characters do not exist to be fleshed out or roleplayed and using them in a fan fiction or roleplaying deeply as them intrinsically defeats that initial purpose. The best example for this are the dozens of spin off Spiderman comics that show Peter Parker, whom was always interpreted as the 'boy overcoming struggle and adversity' maturing into an adult and how he would act, how his parents, Mary Jane, Uncle Ben and even his Aunt still affect his persona as a man, yet do so differently. Spoiler, Peter Parker dies them is seemingly coming right the fuck back! Mainstream comics don't show that level of maturity, but these brilliant writers still try. The fact there is that even if you act against the nature of a character, you can still do them justice, but that does NOT mean you are roleplaying them. You aren't roleplaying Wolverine or Spiderman or anyone else; you're roleplaying that character AS PERCEIVED BY YOU and it simply won't be the same. That doesn't dilute quality, but that doesn't mean you're always going to do them justice or abide by canon either. This is a conflict every comic writer has to get over and a conflict every writer should just understand is neither good nor bad, like some of the members of this conversation seem to insist. It's not about maturity or development, it is personal preference yet again.

So, what have I seen through all these opinions and arguments? A whole lot of ignorance and intolerance to poor writing, but that's fine. Every writer takes time to develop and if you don't feel someone is on your level, move on or help them. This entire post was about bitching, so let me take a turn? You know what pisses me off? People who think their ability to structure out arguments make them better. I've been bested by people with one-liners and simple replies because they just plain knew what they were talking about. I'll admit it. You don't need grammar or witty comebacks to be impressive or knowledgeable and I think it's stupid as fuck that someone tried. That same someone even tried to claim that people were ignoring the 'content' of his arguments and if I were so volatile to point them out, I'd tell them that I read every fucking word and I'm here to tell him half the shit he says is nothing but a pointless ego trip he thought he'd get away with and won't. A majority of it was just fluff to fill in a few insults and string along a concept as vague as the replies made to him. I've seen it a million times from people who bring up "veterans of roleplay" or "I've been roleplaying x amount of years"; so fucking what. You're still a pretentious dick and no amount of flowery language or literary technique is going to fix that shit. Fuck off.

Sincerely,
The Gentlemen Beast