I’m afraid Lhaa and others clearly did miss my point. I was questioning why people thought that their physical descriptions alone made for good role play. In truth, I should know better on these forums than to use examples to demonstrate how even such descriptions can be weak I did, as people tend to react subjectively on each item rather than see the more general issue… making the items themselves the focus of discussion.
I will try to put the point more subtly. There are numerous versions of enacting role plays and numerous ways to perform them, and I’m sure many here have participated in other variations than just PS. All depend on good character definition at the start, but how much other people know about that character depends on how you wish to develop the roleplay. This can vary between 2 extremes of scene setting, open and closed, though most fall somewhere in between.
In the open environment everyone will know something about each other. An example would be a close knit community where you have grown up and hence know something about most people, from your peers to your teachers, traders etc. In the closed you will know nothing, such as for a complete stranger entering a large sprawling city on their first day.
The medieval world would have tended toward the more open environment as most people stayed within their communities, knowing much of neighbouring communities, regular visitors etc. Even strangers would have been quickly assimilated, if friendly enough, and soon become part of the gossip and rumour chain. If I took Lhaa’s example of the bar brawl the knowledge and details of such an occurrence would spread very quickly. I know that in my own environment I find out about any such disturbance very quickly the next day from neighbours or people at the shops, long before I see someone covered with bruises.
By restricting descriptions to only what you see pushes this game toward the more closed scene of the stranger lost in the cold sprawling city. This is fine for those already established as they can go about their role plays with their existing acquaintances occasionally inviting others they feel safe about. Even introducing new characters they will target those they already know. What about the newcomer? How many of you in RL would walk up to a stranger in a dark corner of a bar clearly carrying weapons and who is covered in bruises, scars and strange adornments or markings? Or are you more likely to walk up to someone and say “ Don’t I recognise you from XXX?” (only to be rudely told that information is OOC!). I’ll let you decide which is the more realistic.
The choice to adopt the more closed approach of no character background is precisely that, a choice, it is not because it is the only or better way of role play. Nor does the more open scenario make the role play any less imaginative though it can allow it to develop more quickly (e.g. as you are not slowed down by the detective work) and be more inviting to others (by increasing the opportunity for conversation). There is no reason that both approaches cannot be used with those preferring to be open using some background (but not too verbose), while those wishing to be more secretive having none. Good role players are able to discern what information they should and should not know without ignoring it completely if there is relevance (and yes, people will be rude and say read my description, just as others can be rude when telling you you’re OOC).
