Aww, Illy , are you trying to make me log on again?

Fyyyyrrrrrrrrre!

This art makes stalking the forums totally worth it.

Thanks for drawing Fyrre with level 10 Intelligence, Dannae!

Quote from: Mariana Xiechai on August 16, 2015, 12:02:25 pm

FYRRE!

* Mariana Xiechai FANGIRL SQUEALS!

Weird, I didn't know she had a fan.

REAL FYRRE!

It is very tempting to put yourself in your character's shoes.

I would honestly say....Hmm.

Honestly, it's best to create a character that can be as far away from you, or that does things that you would most DEFINITELY not do.

Like for real. So you're straight, tried and true? Be someone who's crooked, rotten to the core.

So you struggle with a lot of things? Idk, be a paladin, a champion of good.

RolePlay someone who does NOT have your tendencies, does NOT think like you, and if you met, you might dislike.

Or not. It's your call.

But here's what happens (And happens in this game): A lot of 'mini-me's' get created, each with your own character traits. Than when they get slighted or insulted because of how they are, you take it personally. Why? Because someone just insulted something you do. It's all too natural to get offended. So you're a murderer who dislikes peace? Maybe now's the time to create a Xiosian peace lover, because otherwise all the peace loving tree freaks in Hydlaa will begin to tick you off. Not your character. You.

It's easy to say, "well separate yourself". We all know that a lot of issues in the past of this game have been caused from people getting way too attached to their characters because they in essence are their characters. Idk.

Just sayin' that if you make someone like you, you had better have a strong head on your shoulders and know what you're doing (and there are players here who are quite successful at that )

On the other hand, it can be very dangerous to create a character that you have nothing in common with. If you share nothing with your character you're going to end up hating them. I've always found that when writing, or playing any character, you need to find the traits in them that you identify with. This doesn't mean playing yourself all the time, it just means picking out the parts of someone that you agree with. Roleplaying, or any sort of acting/writing isn't about becoming someone completely new, it's about adjusting the dials on yourself, and taking new perspectives. Whether we want to or not, it's impossible not to carry our own life experiences into our work. What we can do though, is take what we know and skew it a little. Find the bits of our lives that make us excited, scared, or angry, and use those to connect ourselves to our characters in a way where you still there, but the ego is not. You are not your character, and your character is not you, but you are still tied together by invisible strings.

That's not to say that you should put too much of yourself into your characters. You should take care of your own emotional safety. You should be able to understand why your character does something, but you don't necessarily have to agree with what they're doing. You might be playing a character who murders someone else. Of course you'd be able to see why killing people is wrong, and you know you are separate from your character in that sense, but you should also be able to empathize with their reasoning. Maybe they thought they were protecting themselves, or maybe they were wronged in the past. Maybe they feel trapped, and think that robbing and murdering someone is they're only escape. These moments of separate, but empathetic connections turn an otherwise flat character into someone who is dynamic, and well rounded. It makes a hero's seem heroic, and villains seem so much more sinister. I'd say instead of cutting yourself off, twist yourself into something new.

The danger only comes when you're too connected to your character. You should ask yourself, "How would I feel if I put my character through a living hell right now? Would I be excited to see them tested, and changed? Or would I feel afraid and angry because I'm so close to my character?" If the answer is the latter, you may have to take a step back, and do some real critical thinking.

You're aiming for that goldilocks zone, where you're not invested to the point of emotional harm, while still feeling close enough to enjoy your character, and enjoy what they do. There are a few ways to go about finding what works for you, and it's really different for everyone. You can try and write a character who you know just enough about to play, and just wing it as you go along, and let your character evolve in game. This is how Zalya came to be. I think that this method is filled with flaws though. Most notably the length of time it takes to actually find yourself in a place that you are happy with. As I've grown as a roleplayer, I've found that I like to write, and rewrite backstories until my character feels whole. I'll write a story about them, list major life events, think about what kind of music they like, and write about their family and upbringing. Then I'll look back, and if anything doesn't sit well with me, I'll rewrite it until the entire backstory makes me feel giddy. This process takes some work, but I always feel like I'm able to hit the ground running in game, and I can skip a lot of awkwardness. There is instant flow, and I can really shape there growth more accurately, and respond to conflict with far more distinction.

Here's another thought: character dynamism. The world should not only effect your character but HAVE an effect upon them. Interactions with other characters that are especially noteworthy should have a chance of altering the way they think, and so forth. There's nothing I like better than a good debate between characters. It can be a world of fun when my own finds him/herself reevaluating their thoughts on a subject.

This is so important.

If a character does not change through the course of a roleplay, then you have not succeeded as a roleplayer. This may sound harsh, but having a character that reacts, and responds to roleplay both inwardly and outwardly is essential. Think about how your favorite fiction pieces would be if none of the characters evolved. What would Star Wars be if Luke Skywalker stayed a moisture farmer all his life? Who would Batman be if he wasn't affected by the death of his parents? What would Les Miserables look like if Jean Valjean never had a change of heart? I can tell you what the audience would look like; Miserables. I've seen characters that remain static through tons of engaging, heartfelt roleplay, and it's like roleplaying with a wall. If you've been playing a character for years who hasn't changed at all, then you are doing a disservice to yourself, and to others.

Fortunately most character evolution comes naturally. Sometimes, you as a player won't even realize it until after it's happened. The only time it doesn't happen, is when the evolution is stifled because the player doesn't want to change. Please don't do this. You are denying the best part about roleplay; the ability to interact, and to be interacted with. Let your good guy slide down the path of evil into the realm of moral ambiguity when her wife is killed. Let your peace loving xiosian freak the hell out when he has to fight and kill the local villain. Let your brooding kran scholar brighten up when kra is surrounded by new friends. These are the moments of unpredictability that make roleplaying such an absolutely fantastic pastime.

Which brings us back to the original quote.

"We cannot control extenuating circumstances. All we control is our reaction to it."

The first time I read this, I thought it was rather limiting, but the more thought I gave it, I realized the truth to it. What this means to me is that as a roleplayer, you are not living in a world alone. You are part of a collaborative environment. If you try to roleplay in the same way that you would play a single player game, or write a single authored story, you will come off looking like a jerk wad. If you let yourself carefully sink into the world as a whole, and let your character be bumped around by the other's in that world, then you will have a truly dynamic, and deeply complex experience. It's that experience that keeps dragging back online.

Let's try another topic:

Some things are considered "must-ask" such as true death, and whatnot.

There are some who would argue that NOT letting other players inflict things on you without asking is OOC. Thoughts? I think this one is obvious, but there was once a school of thought that was very much for this.

I played an intense cyberpunk MOO, where almost all out of character contact was considered taboo. I couldn't stand that aspect. There are some people who enjoy giving up the control that comes with OOC knowledge, but I think that at least a little bit of OOC knowledge and chatter is absolutely necessary for keeping the conflict IC, and keeping the roleplay running smoothly. At it's heart, roleplaying is about consent. Every action you take is a declaration of intent, and every reaction you have can be boiled down to a yes or a no. You need to be able to trust the people you are roleplaying with to respect that, and you need to let them trust you. If another character's actions deeply concern you as a player, you need to be able to stop the game and talk about it, or else the problem will build, and an IC conflict will move into real life, feelings will get hurt, and the roleplay will cease to be fun.

The amount of OOC warning you give someone is based entirely on player preferences. Most situations can be handled IC with no problems. Like Riggy said, as long as you are not forcing an option onto someone, the peace should be kept. OOC chat should only occur when it is helping smooth the RP along. If there is a concern, talk about it, come to a compromise, and then get on with the action. If the RP isn't going to work in the long run, call it off. I hate doing it, but if there's a major problem with the RP then you have the option to walk away. Roleplaying should be fun, engaging, and cathartic. If an RP is bringing you down, and both you, and the other players you're with can't fix it, then it's time to cut your losses. A lot of it comes down to what people are comfortable with. If you are going to be pushing the boundaries a little, then the people you're playing with should know that going into the RP.

Gosh I'm sorry  , feeding this thread in my mind is just feeding the trolls ( no disrespect to  the others), but hey were in troubled times, any moment the bronze doors could be kicked in and everyone will have to stand and fight. seems to me at these troubled times it'd be encouraged to have children, for the futures safety, I've nothing against the whole "gay" thing, but i'd makes more sense to me settings wise, as this is the way the dome would go.

Settings wise this is shaky premise. As Riggy mentioned, no one just becomes straight because the world needs lots of babies. Even if that were the case though, the threat from the bronze doors isn't as immanent and looming as you make it sound. According to in game books at the library, the Bronze Doors are kept slightly open most of the time to allow for travel, trade, and exploration of the Stone Labyrinths. The Sunshine, and Shadow squadrons are enough to keep the creatures and raiders of the labyrinths away most of the time. If they can't handle an invasion, the doors are closed. In the interior of the dome though, especially in the cities, things are much safer. Yes there are creatures, and bandits and so on, but to my knowledge there has been no major conflict since the end of the ylian-enki war hundreds of years ago. Even the architecture of the cities, and the fact that the people of Ylikum have been able to build monuments as massive as the Iron Temple, or the winches suggest that there is no shortage of a population tp be used as laborers.

Suggesting that only child producing couples are valued societally leads us down a very dark path. Does this mean that relationships between anyone who cannot have children for whatever reason are looked down upon? Not only are some people born without the ability to produce offspring in real life, it also has in-game racist connotations between interracial couples who would not normally be able to reproduce naturally with other races, such as the Klyros. Are these unions also looked down upon? Not to mention that there are still trans and intersex people out there who might also have trouble having children. Are we also to say that their experiences don't matter?

OOCly, PS is first and foremost a fantasy world. The writers and setting devs have the ability create a world entirely unlike our own. This creative freedom allows for the exploration of social structures, and cultural norms that are different than what we have in real life. So why do we keep falling into the pitfall of eurocentric Christian marriage ideals? This issue isn't just to do with settings, or the story in game, it has to do with the stories we tell as a society. Whether or not Planeshift wants to, it's going to have to take a political stance. Deciding not to act is an act within itself. Trying to justify compulsory heterosexuality in a fantasy world makes a very strong statement. We can either create a world that incorporates LGBTQ-alphabet soup voices, or excludes them. I know what world I'd want to play in.

Thanks for reading, and I hope this discussion continues in a positive direction!

Quote from: MishkaL1138 on February 28, 2015, 01:23:33 pm

All these drawings and yet you still wouldn't draw Mishka...

I'll add her to the list! 

Please please draw Mishy wearing all of the clothes in her description at the SAME TIME. 

Does it have a roleplaying server?