Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'contentions?'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Categories

  • Whitelist Applications
    • Accepted
    • Denied

Categories

  • Groups
    • Nations
    • Settlements
    • Lairs
    • Defunct Groups
  • World
    • Races
    • Creatures
    • Plants
    • Metallurgy
    • Inventions
    • Alchemy
  • Mechanics
  • History
    • Realms
  • Magic
    • Voidal
    • Deity
    • Dark
    • Other
    • Discoveries
  • Deities
    • Aenguls
    • Daemons
    • Homes
    • Other
  • Utility
    • Index
    • Templates

Forums

  • Information
    • Announcements
    • Guidelines & Policies
    • Lore
    • Guides
  • Aevos
    • Human Realms & Culture
    • Elven Realms & Culture
    • Dwarven Realms & Culture
    • Orcish Realms & Culture
    • Other Realms
    • Miscellany
  • Off Topic
    • Personal
    • Media
    • Debate
    • Forum Roleplay
    • Looking for Group
    • Miscellany
  • Forms
    • Applications
    • Appeals
    • Reports
    • Staff Services
    • Technical Support
    • Feedback

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Discord


Minecraft Username


Skype


Website


Location


Interests


Location


Character Name


Character Race

Found 1 result

  1. Roleplay Conduct - MetaGaming v Convenience Introduction Greetings again,. I figured I’d pump these out consecutively to ensure no interest is lost when reading through them. Hopefully this one will retain the same kind of loose and lighthearted as the first post, so I’ll get right ahead to it. For this post, I’ll be covering the specifications regarding MetaGaming and it’s difference to Roleplay Convenience. I’ll go over the definitions and provide some examples. This post will be fairly extensive, so I’ll try to add a TL;DR at the bottom of each section I type up and I’ll bold some things as I go along to ensure that nothing is missed, and those with short attention spans receive the information necessary to understand the purpose of this post. As mentioned in the previous topic, many different people tend to hold differing opinions on Roleplay Conduct and Etiquette, and those differing opinions are what I hope to solve/unite. So what exactly is MetaGaming? Much alike my breakdown of conduct, I will now explain the fundamentals of MetaGaming. As per its definition, Roleplay is “a strategy, action or method used in a game which transcends a prescribed ruleset, uses external factors to affect the game, or goes beyond the supposed limits or environment set by the game. Another definition refers to the game universe outside of the game itself.” So what exactly does this mean? This means that your character is bound by a certain set of rules in regards to information and actions that that character currently knows. This can include information found Out-of-Character, certain skills which your character could not feasibly be aware of, or simply having information In-Character about something your character couldn’t possibly know. After communication with Server Staff and a host of players, it has been determined that whilst MetaGaming is technically a break in character, there can be some allowed exceptions to this rule. This will come under the convenience section. Instead, we defined MetaGaming as taking something which you couldn’t possibly know in an In-Character scenario which provides a negative impact on the scene. Examples of this are: The scenario: Player A tends to his family farm, having known no other life than the wheat he picks from the fields. A is about 15 years old, and works for his father. His Father wasn’t too interesting, he worked the farm like his father before him, and his father before him. They never really left the farm unless they needed to travel to the local village for supplies, never visiting any major city or interacting with anyone higher than that of a simple farmhand. Player B wanders along and asks Player A what the know a war which occurred 50 years ago. Because Player A, as a real life person, was present during this war that was played out, his character suddenly replies to Player B with intricate details in regards to the storyline of the war. The problem: Do you see a problem here? I hope so, because I do too. Player A’s 15 year old character has somehow accumulated knowledge on a war half a century past due to some strange symbiotic connection they have with the person playing the character. In reality, Player A’s character would shake his head and move on, as it is entirely likely that he wouldn’t even know who was fighting who in a war so distant in which his family played no part. The correction: Player A would feasibly know next to nothing of this conflict. “But what do I say, wouldn’t that limit conversational roleplay?” I hear you ask. Well, the answer is a mixture of both. Yes, it may limit the conversation to some extent. Okay, you know nothing of the war so you are unable to inform the person you’re speaking to about the things you may know Out-of-Character; however, as an opposition to this, you can continue and return the question to the person asking. Chances are, if they are asking about it, they know a thing or two about the scenario, and to continue the conversation and propel roleplay forward, you switch the focus of instigation to yourself. Have them tell you all about it. “And what if they don’t know either?” Then revel in that fact. You both know nothing of the war, so find something new to talk about. Or talk about how your character feels about being stuck on a farm, and being unable to learn all this information. How about another example? The scenario: Player A is raiding City 1 with a group of his friends, A.1, A.2 and A.3. They reach the settlement and find a large city, with many houses and many public buildings. They are looking forward to finding people to beat down and ravage for minas or valuables which they can later sell. Player B is in his house with his wife, B.1 and his son, B.2. This house is tucked away and near no public buildings. Player A’s sees the name tags of the three and walks straight up to that house. The A’s kick down the door and loot the house, beating the family and stealing their precious items. They then leave. The problem: City 1, as stated, was rather large with many houses and public buildings. Player A, even after seeing Player B and his family’s name tags, should not have walked straight towards that house. Player A’s character cannot see through walls, and name tags are not to be taken In-Character. “But Raiders could check every house and eventually find them!” I hear you cry; and you’re right. But not in the way you think. Player B, as stated, walked straight up to the house and kicked down the door, even though his character couldn’t have realistically known anyone inside. The correction: The correction to this is simple. Don’t think that because you can see their name tag, that you can take that In-Character. What should have occurred, was Player B and his group moving through the city to the public buildings and searching them for people. Upon realising no one was nearby, they would start on the houses. They’d start on those closest to the public buildings and work their way through the city, kicking down doors until they found someone. If at this point, after searching other houses and more likely buildings, they stumble across Player A and family, that’s completely fine and correct conduct. There is nothing wrong with this, as they searched each house for people and eventually found them. However, in contrast, it is very likely that Player A and family would hear the commotion outside and could use this as a chance to escape. In contradiction to that, the A group could only vacate when the raiders are close enough to the house that the sound of bursting doors would be heard, and not the moment they see names. Alright great, you just explained MetaGaming. So what about Convenience? This is where is gets somewhat tricky. It can often be said that Roleplay Convenience can be taken as partial Metagaming. It isn’t entirely different, and it isn’t too difficult to understand, however it must be noted there is a difference. While using information you have acquired Out-of-Character for negative purposes, such as spotting where someone is hiding, is called MetaGaming, using information you have acquired Out-of-Character for positive purposes and to better the entire roleplaying scenario is seen as Convenience and is often permitted to an extent. The tricky part of this is being able to determine whether using a piece of information you have garnered Out-of-Character will affect everyone in a neutral or positive way, and unfortunately no amount of writing will be able to teach you how to do that; however, what I can add, is that a general rule of thumb to adhere to is “If this was done towards me, how would I feel?” or “Does this interrupt the Roleplay experience in any way?” or lastly, “Is there any feasible way this could actually make sense In-Character?”. Once you have determined the answer to these three questions, you’re ready to start. Examples of how ‘MetaGaming’ can be used to enhance Roleplay are as follows: The scenario: Player A is roleplaying in City 1. Player A is lonely and is looking for people to roleplay with, so A contacts his Out-of-Character friend, Player B, in Private Message, or on any platform outside of roleplay, and asks them to come to City 1 to roleplay. Player B is in City 2, and technically has no reason at all to go to City 1 other than the Out-of-Character reasoning to entertain Player A. Player B ends up wandering over to City 1 to entertain Player A. The explanation: “Isn’t this technically MetaGaming?” You’re probably asking, and you’d be correct. Yes, it’s true, Player B had no reason whatsoever to go over to City 1 and entertain Player A other than Out-of-Character motives. But what was produced from this? Roleplay. The two likely had some fun and engaging conversational roleplay, which possibly escalated into some really interesting Character Development. The bottom line here is that Roleplay was provided. Good roleplay, roleplay that didn’t resort in anything necessarily negative coming from this. Player B didn’t gain an advantage from going to City 1, he didn’t manage to assert him/herself over Player A, he/her simply managed to provide enjoyment to both parties by doing so. How would the situation need to go for it to be MetaGaming?: Say for instance, Player A and his group, A.1, A.2 and A.3 are all beating down Player B in the middle of nowhere. Player B then messages Player C Out-of-Character and asks for help. Or maybe Player B hops onto Skype or Teamspeak and asks for assistance from his friends, D, E, F and G. They suddenly and miraculously appear out of nowhere and beat Player A and his group. While similar to the scenario above, this action is interpreted as MetaGaming as it is seen as a negative impact on one or all parties involved. In-Character reasoning: Alright, alright. I get the difference. MetaGaming provides a negative response, Convenience provides a positive one. So what could I use In-Character to explain this ‘convenience’? Simply put, it’s pretty much down to you. Carrier Pigeons are a thing, as are messengers. These can be used as an explanation, or you can simply make something up. As long as it makes sense, of course. You cannot say “I telepathically figured out you were here, friendo.”. So what’s your overarching point here? I aim for everyone to understand the difference between MetaGaming and Convenience Roleplay. The difference between conveniently appearing in a certain area which you wouldn’t normally be to provide a positive response, and ‘conveniently’ appearing to jump to someone's aid and provide a negative reaction for one or all parties involved like some kind of troubled minecraft social justice warrior. Not everyone understands this difference, and I’m hoping that this post will have cleared up a few contentions (there’s that word again. Eeee.) and helps those who are currently out of the loop understand what is expected of them. Roleplay is supposed to be fun for us all, and instigating and providing roleplay as an antagonist or protagonist in certain scenarios is fun, as long as you don’t overdo it. Be wary and cautious of all involved and take that into account before deciding whether to do anything listed above. Oh! Thomas, you forgot something. What about MetaGamed skills, can they be used in Convenience too? Hrrmm, urrr. No. They can’t, unfortunately. As much as it may provide a positive outcome for you to suddenly know first-aid or get over your squeamishness in a situation simply because your friend is dying out on the ground, it provides a negative outcome to the person who inflicted that on someone, and you simply cannot come up with an In-Character reason for it. New skills aren’t acquired, they are cultivated. A young sales merchant will likely not possess the required knowledge to stop the bleeding of a crossbow bolt to the shoulder blade, let alone holding the information needed to know to cut of the arrowhead and pull the shaft out first. Logic dictates all. Can your character logically or possibly know/do this? If the answer is yes, it’s probably convenience. If no, then it’s MetaGaming. Summary? Why do I make these things so ruddy long. Anyway, that should be all of it. As a closing summary: Information or Skills acquired Out-of-Character cannot transcend into In-Character unless they have any form of logical explanation for doing so. There is a difference between Convenience and MetaGaming, one is positive, one is negative. While it’s ‘technically’ MetaGaming, it’s permitted and often encouraged. Roleplay is what keeps the server moving and without it, the server would grind and jarr until it started moving again. Providing and instigating roleplay is great, and it keeps everyone interested and engaged. To do this, sometimes some things need to be used to enhance the experience, as long as it’s used in a positive way and all parties involved agree to it. That’s the most important part. Though this has gone on too long and I am super hungry for dinner, so woop woop. I hope you had fun reading, expect the next one tomorrow or on Friday 12th, I’m not too sure how busy I’ll be tomorrow. Love you bye. -Tahmas (Thomas) (once again feel free to ask questions on the thread about the up and coming discussions, or about the topic at hand. Or anything really. Go wild, go nuts..)
×
×
  • Create New...