Post by Savoie Faire on Dec 27, 2014 21:33:57 GMT -5
Lately there has been some angst over what is or is not appropriate in an RP thread. The word 'godmodding' has been used. Whoa! Back up a step, please!
Rules violations are the purview of DM's. It is not the place of any player to chastise another for rules violations. If a player feels such has occurred, then by all means report it to a Player Advocate or DM. If you must speak to the player about it, do so in a private format, and do so politely. If the player is unresponsive to your efforts, do not press the issue, but report it. None of this should be public. Shaming another player for his post is not acceptable, and is itself a rules violation.
Now, back on the subject: what is appropriate to post in such discussions?
It's perfectly acceptable to play your character within such scenes. That is the essence of a role-playing thread.
"But Savoie," you say, "I don't wish to perform Hamlet's soliloquy! I need a foil, another character to whom my words may be spoken. I must play the part of the Undertaker of the Necropolis!"
If you must play the part of an NPC there are heavy restrictions on what you may have the NPC do, and common sense will spell out most of these restrictions for you. Said Undertaker, for example, will not be interested in any activity not directly related to his role as an NPC. He will not stop his daily business to play a game of pick-up-stix, nor will a lavish bribe cause him to turn a blind eye to the corpses you are loading upon your wagon. If he does these things while possessed by a DM then all is good, but a player may not decide his acts outside of established personality traits as portrayed by DM's in game!
"Whoa again!" you say. "What mean you by established personality traits?"
I mean that some NPC's have character quirks which have been demonstrated in game, and it is fine to include such quirks in your roleplay thread. It is not acceptable for you to create your own quirks for NPC's. Let us assume said Undertaker has been portrayed as a harsh-voiced, mean-spirited old man who will accept a free bottle of whiskey from anyone. It is then acceptable for you to have that NPC accept a bottle of whiskey while speaking to your character sarcastically in your roleplay thread. But to then infer this bottle will cause him to look the other way as you stack corpses on your wagon is beyond what has been established. You may not assume permissions not given in game by a DM, and you may not assume a one-time thing will become a permanent deal between you. Such actions must be adjudicated by a DM.
Many NPC's perform a public role. Innkeepers, guardsmen, clerks of court, merchants, and clergy all do a job and deal with the public on a daily basis. Having such an NPC act within the bounds of his job in a professional manner, (consistent with established characterization if such has been observed,) is completely valid. Assume a shrine tender in a temple of healing will be sympathetic to your pain, emotional or physical. Assume a shrine tender in a temple of pain will be sadistic and desire to cause you pain, emotional or physical. These are valid assumptions. However, to assume either is an ally to your cause and will cooperate with your character's roleplay is going a step beyond what is acceptable.
Assume a guardsman will arrest pickpockets. Assume a clerk will file paperwork. Assume a merchant will assess the value of an item. These things are the daily job of such persons.
Assuming a guardsman will accept a bribe, that a clerk will 'lose' paperwork, or that a merchant will refuse to assess the item's value is not valid because these actions are not typical for such NPC's. If you feel that they may well act this way you must have the consent of a DM to thus portray them. Stepping outside the normal activities of NPC's is in most cases not acceptable in a roleplay thread.
Now for the juicy bit: what about player characters?
A player always, (repeat, always,) has the final say on any activity in which his character participates. There are no exceptions. You must have that players permission to portray his character, and if permission is given then rescinded you must delete that player's character from your roleplay post. It is strongly advised that if another PC is desired in your roleplay thread that you allow that player to portray his character. At the very least, gain the player's approval before making the post public. In no case may you dictate the behavior of another player's character.
So, when creating a roleplay thread, please feel free to write your character's actions and words to your heart's content. Feel free to portray NPC's doing their jobs as they have been portrayed in game by DM's. Get permission before having an NPC do something else, (anything else,) and always always get permission from the player of a PC you wish to portray in your thread.
Happy posting!
Rules violations are the purview of DM's. It is not the place of any player to chastise another for rules violations. If a player feels such has occurred, then by all means report it to a Player Advocate or DM. If you must speak to the player about it, do so in a private format, and do so politely. If the player is unresponsive to your efforts, do not press the issue, but report it. None of this should be public. Shaming another player for his post is not acceptable, and is itself a rules violation.
Now, back on the subject: what is appropriate to post in such discussions?
It's perfectly acceptable to play your character within such scenes. That is the essence of a role-playing thread.
"But Savoie," you say, "I don't wish to perform Hamlet's soliloquy! I need a foil, another character to whom my words may be spoken. I must play the part of the Undertaker of the Necropolis!"
If you must play the part of an NPC there are heavy restrictions on what you may have the NPC do, and common sense will spell out most of these restrictions for you. Said Undertaker, for example, will not be interested in any activity not directly related to his role as an NPC. He will not stop his daily business to play a game of pick-up-stix, nor will a lavish bribe cause him to turn a blind eye to the corpses you are loading upon your wagon. If he does these things while possessed by a DM then all is good, but a player may not decide his acts outside of established personality traits as portrayed by DM's in game!
"Whoa again!" you say. "What mean you by established personality traits?"
I mean that some NPC's have character quirks which have been demonstrated in game, and it is fine to include such quirks in your roleplay thread. It is not acceptable for you to create your own quirks for NPC's. Let us assume said Undertaker has been portrayed as a harsh-voiced, mean-spirited old man who will accept a free bottle of whiskey from anyone. It is then acceptable for you to have that NPC accept a bottle of whiskey while speaking to your character sarcastically in your roleplay thread. But to then infer this bottle will cause him to look the other way as you stack corpses on your wagon is beyond what has been established. You may not assume permissions not given in game by a DM, and you may not assume a one-time thing will become a permanent deal between you. Such actions must be adjudicated by a DM.
Many NPC's perform a public role. Innkeepers, guardsmen, clerks of court, merchants, and clergy all do a job and deal with the public on a daily basis. Having such an NPC act within the bounds of his job in a professional manner, (consistent with established characterization if such has been observed,) is completely valid. Assume a shrine tender in a temple of healing will be sympathetic to your pain, emotional or physical. Assume a shrine tender in a temple of pain will be sadistic and desire to cause you pain, emotional or physical. These are valid assumptions. However, to assume either is an ally to your cause and will cooperate with your character's roleplay is going a step beyond what is acceptable.
Assume a guardsman will arrest pickpockets. Assume a clerk will file paperwork. Assume a merchant will assess the value of an item. These things are the daily job of such persons.
Assuming a guardsman will accept a bribe, that a clerk will 'lose' paperwork, or that a merchant will refuse to assess the item's value is not valid because these actions are not typical for such NPC's. If you feel that they may well act this way you must have the consent of a DM to thus portray them. Stepping outside the normal activities of NPC's is in most cases not acceptable in a roleplay thread.
Now for the juicy bit: what about player characters?
A player always, (repeat, always,) has the final say on any activity in which his character participates. There are no exceptions. You must have that players permission to portray his character, and if permission is given then rescinded you must delete that player's character from your roleplay post. It is strongly advised that if another PC is desired in your roleplay thread that you allow that player to portray his character. At the very least, gain the player's approval before making the post public. In no case may you dictate the behavior of another player's character.
So, when creating a roleplay thread, please feel free to write your character's actions and words to your heart's content. Feel free to portray NPC's doing their jobs as they have been portrayed in game by DM's. Get permission before having an NPC do something else, (anything else,) and always always get permission from the player of a PC you wish to portray in your thread.
Happy posting!
