ROLL / ROLE Play

[VenomousFiligree]

This could mostly likely be posted on the likes of rpg.net, but because it happened on FG I'll post here.

I love combat, I love RP, now what is RP? I have heard it defined as Roll Play and Role Play...

The campaign I am running (The Laundry) has gone 3 - 4 sessions without a sword drawn or firearm fired, so I think that it must have had a fair amount of Role Play and i think (players, correct me if I'm wrong), that it has seen some enjoyable sessions. However when the Role Play starts to drag on, I have called for a Roll to quickly determine the outcome and move events on.

As a player today (of a low intelligence half-orc), I suggested that a Persuasion roll might be made to influence my character's train of thought. One of the other players met my request with horror "I am loath to make a roll when I have RPed!"

Physical skills / attributes are fairly easy to play, they have to be rolled, but mental / social skills and abilities of the character might be above and / or below those of the Player? Should / can they be RP'ed or should they be determined on the roll of a dice?

Depending on the answer, we might be excluding a lot of people from our hobby because the don't meet the RP elitist measure?

[drahkar]

Personally On events that are a contest of skills of some sort or are critical to the course of events I have people roll. I still expect them to roleplay out the course of events, and if they don't do it well I might choose to have it resolves differently, but I like the unbiased decision of the die as well.

[Valarian]

The dice add the random element to the game and are an essential part, I think, of the roleplaying experience. That said, rolls should be for critical parts of the story - not every action the character makes. If a roll can affect the way the storyline will pan out, that's probably a good indication. The level of skill can also be an indicator as to whether a roll should be applied at all. A character who is extremely skilled at something will be able to handle a lot more "off the cuff" than a novice. Only where the situation is stressful will a roll be required.

Good roleplaying from a player can be rewarded with a bonus to the roll, or other in-game rewards (FATE points, Bennies, XP). A roll made at the start of a conflict (social, mental or physical) can influence the narration of the scene. The player will know the outcome for the character and can be given narrative control to decide his character's fate. Trust me, players think up worse penalties for their character's failed rolls than the GM does, and it can add a twist to the storyline that the GM can exploit.

[Oberoten]

For social interactions, I normally apply a bonus for good RP, but I still make the roll. After all there might be something unforeseen that one stumbles upon.

Of course if the players make a brilliant discourse towards their goal and the character is at best barely coherent, this bonus might put the results somewhere in the middle of the scale.

... that poor roll for the master diplomat might be because he speaks ill of someone that the other character idolizes.

All in all the skill and the roll is what defines the difference between player skill and character-skill and let the less well-spoken play the more well-spoken or the other way around.

- Obe

[VenomousFiligree]

Posted here (https://www.ukroleplayers.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=9672) too, some interesting replies :)

[StuartW]

To be honest, some of the best games I've had the fortune to join (as player) have been using the WoD/Storytelling system and the GM (storyteller) made the plot so compelling that rolls were seldom needed and the game was thrilling.

I like to think that some of my plots (as GM) included plenty of story and less randomness. That said, there is a fine line to balance between telling a great story and manipulating the players (and I fear I don't tread that line well enough).

Finally, there is a good chunk of GMing devoted to understanding the moment and the audience: not just in total, but also each player's perspective. Another area where I feel less able, but where good GMs make a real difference.

There isn't a single right answer on role vs roll, IMHO, but as many answers as there are adventuring companies and situations they land in...

Stuart

[VenomousFiligree]

So the same Player has reared his head again, this time there was complaints against another Player copying a known (to him) character type that was outside the boundaries of "D&D".

The character type was unknown to me and another Player, although probably was fairly well known. The previous session I had actually enjoyed the way this "pariah" Player was being played. However this wasn't acceptable to the Player concerned, it just wasn't D&D! :rolleyes:

Now, anyone that is willing to try there utmost in a Role Playing game gets kudos from me, we should be encouraging the hobby, not knocking someone because there way of playing doesn't fit in with the role playing elite.... :confused:

(I am not a D&D player by choice! :) )

[RKBrumbelow]

As a player today (of a low intelligence half-orc), I suggested that a Persuasion roll might be made to influence my character's train of thought. One of the other players met my request with horror "I am loath to make a roll when I have RPed!"

Physical skills / attributes are fairly easy to play, they have to be rolled, but mental / social skills and abilities of the character might be above and / or below those of the Player? Should / can they be RP'ed or should they be determined on the roll of a dice?

Depending on the answer, we might be excluding a lot of people from our hobby because the don't meet the RP elitist measure?

Personally I roll then role. See the facts (roll) of what just happened then fit them into the story(Role) that is going on.

Yeah, I can be very elitist at times. I am reminded of a time in the not to distant past that a player got upset with me for not saying "I am stunned unable to attack for two rounds" and instead marveling at the foes movement for the duration, but I digress.

[BishopOmega]

There are many different ways to approach this subject and no one way is better or worse then another. It is most likely personal preference of the GM and the type of players he/she has.

If you have players who are not great Rpers and more tactical/combat orientated then the rolls will be mostly what they are interested in. However sometimes there are Great Rpers who stand out and sometimes a bad roll punishes them severely.

As one of the posts above has stated, I am somewhat similiar in the way I wish to GM. Each ruleset has a set of rules, with thoese rules comes abilities. Some players are better RPers then others but the rolls are what keeps the game part on an even keel. The difference is for me a player will RP what he does and others won't so much and I tend to step in and finish their move for them to help them and the game along. The people that try I usually reward with something at some point if their outstanding play is consistent.

Another thing I like to do is reward creative uses for abilities which also involves how the abilities are roleplayed/described. The ability is still being used per the rules but its application comes off unusual or unique in some way.

[Arazmus]

I used to believe that wargamers and roleplayers were among the most accepting group of people you could ever meet, welcoming anyone that wanted to join their hobby. Then I started to use the internet, and specifically Usenet, and found that my thinking was flawed: RPers include some of the most elitest, self back-slapping, obnoxious jerks that I have ever had the pleasure not to meet. But I digress. :)

MurghBpurn, I think you handled the situation perfectly well: the player had roleplayed; you had come to the conclusion that you as a player could not honestly make the decision how your character felt about it, and so you went for a randomised roll based on that. Only you know who your character is, so no-one else can dictate to you. If anything, I'd say that you were being too fair minded to offer the option of a roll: if the player's roleplaying hadn't made enough of an impact on you, I'd think the possibility of influencing your character was touch-and-go anyway.

I roleplay, but definitely don't rule out the possibility of rolling being useful in certain situations. One of my friends is not the most eloquent of people, but he gives his all when roleplaying. If he is in a situation where his roleplaying skills dictate the odds of influencing an elder statesman, I would either mentally 'translate' his roleplaying upwards (based on his character) or go for a roll coupled with a bonus for his roleplay. The exact same goes for any roleplay aimed towards characters with a differing level of understanding, and I think that it's arrogant of a player to assume they their roleplaying will have an effect.

To explain my reasoning on this, I think I need to divulge that I work with people who have learning disabilities. Very early on in my career, I found that my communication methods were woefully lacking: what I judged to be perfectly logical, acceptable, or reassuring, could be totally at odds with the person I was communicating with. As with anyone else, the clients I work with have their own likes and dislikes, their own internal worries, their own measures of whether someone or something is trusted, but their way of expressing those things might be different from my own. So, my communication now is based on a number of things: their communication skills, what I know of their emotional needs, what I know of their likes and dislikes, their prejudices, if they are a morning or evening person, if they like or dislike eye contact, and so forth. We then work together from there.

So, in the original example: how long had the other character known your character, do the characters like each other, do they trust each other, has a relationship developed to the point where they can communicate well with each other, did the other player's roleplaying take into account any prejudices your character has or what mood he was in, et cetera. Add in to that the race and 'class' of the other character: for example, would an elf mage really be able to communicate well with a half-orc, and would they even deign a half-orc worthy of an attempt at respectful communication in the first place? If those things can't be answered to your liking, and the roleplaying did not make a definitive impact on you (as your character's Id), I think you were extremely fair to put it to a dice roll.

If you had decided that your character wasn't persuaded, do you think the other player would have graciously accepted your decision after expending so much 'effort' in their roleplay?

[Arazmus]

So the same Player has reared his head again, this time there was complaints against another Player copying a known (to him) character type that was outside the boundaries of "D&D".

The character type was unknown to me and another Player, although probably was fairly well known. The previous session I had actually enjoyed the way this "pariah" Player was being played. However this wasn't acceptable to the Player concerned, it just wasn't D&D! :rolleyes:
[/I]

I'm not sure I understand you there: as long as a character's knowledge/beliefs fit in to the setting, how can any character type be out of place?

Can you expand a little, please?

[VenomousFiligree]

An apparently well known Anime character was being played as a D&D Character.

[RKBrumbelow]

Well so long as they were not trying to play a well known LotR character. After all there is no connection between LotR and D&D I guess it could be worse I have a friend of mine who wants me to GM for him but he insists on playing some guy named Drizzt. Which would be fine if We were playing a high level D&D game and not an intro RM game which is his first time ever really RPing.

For people who do not know how to Roleplay finding a character with whom they can associate their own character is fine, but I do find it annoying if they keep doing it over successive games.

[Arazmus]

An apparently well known Anime character was being played as a D&D Character.

The name was used, or a reproduction of the character's mannerisms?

To be honest, I can't see how either would be a problem, as long as the restrictions of the setting was adhered to. However, I can see how someone called Pikachu might be atmosphere breaking. :p

[Arazmus]

<snip>
I guess it could be worse I have a friend of mine who wants me to GM for him but he insists on playing some guy named Drizzt.
<snip>
but I do find it annoying if they keep doing it over successive games.

Solution: have numerous random people stop, look thoughtful, then say "Hey, are you any relation to..." ;)

[RKBrumbelow]

The name was used, or a reproduction of the character's mannerisms?

To be honest, I can't see how either would be a problem, as long as the restrictions of the setting was adhered to. However, I can see how someone called Pikachu might be atmosphere breaking. :p

Anyone remember the '06 April fools My Little Pony RPG (https://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dd/20060401a)?. Thats what that reminds me of.

Oh and Arazmus there are much more interesting ways of breaking a player from being some novel rip off in RM... much more interesting.

as the character crashes to the floor "You trip over an invisible imaginary turtle"

[VenomousFiligree]

The name was used, or a reproduction of the character's mannerisms?

To be honest, I can't see how either would be a problem, as long as the restrictions of the setting was adhered to. However, I can see how someone called Pikachu might be atmosphere breaking. :p
*shrugs* The portrait was Anime and the name is "Eastern", however as there is an "Eastern" nation nearby, don't see the problem. Having no knowledge of the Anime character, I couldn't comment regarding mannerisms.