And this means what, exactly? I have defined the difference between "role-playing" and "share storytelling." For some reason, people have some burning need to call what they do (shared storytelling) "role-playing," even when it clearly is not. It's like it's a threat to their emotional well-being to be told that what they are doing is not, in fact, role-playing. They can play the game however they wish, as I have said many, many times, and I'm not going to tell them they are playing the game wrong.
What I have done is point out that true role-playing is inherently more difficult than shared storytelling and requires a greater degree of creativity.
Pithy, but irrelevant. Those calling "shared storytelling" "role-playing" are in fact the ones erroneously calling a non-horse a horse. I am saying a non-horse is not a horse.
For goodness sake. The horse is RP, not shared storytelling. Has it ever occured to you that you are the only one who seems to use that definition, and that it may be incorrect. YOU have defined "Shared Storytelling" and "RP", while no one has given you that right to definition. YOU are infact the one who seems to "have some burning need to call" what others do "Shared Storytelling". At least from my point of view.
You HAVE defined it, but that does not mean that that is how it SHOULD be defined. Can it really be that you do not understand, that just because YOU have defined it, it does not necessarily mean that it is THE definition?
I am truly amazed, but of course, if that is the case, all the above discussion makes more sense...
Bregir
For goodness sake. The horse is RP, not shared storytelling.
Exactly. And some people are calling the non-horse (shared storytelling) a horse (role-playing). If you read the appropriate sentence in my post, the syntax is all there. "I am saying a non-horse is not a horse" means "I am saying shared storytelling is not role-playing." Which is exactly what you just said. Perhaps we can get together later and agree that liquid water is wet.
YOU have defined "Shared Storytelling" and "RP", while no one has given you that right to definition. YOU are infact the one who seems to "have some burning need to call" what others do "Shared Storytelling".
If people want to call "shared storytelling" "role-playing," I can't stop people from using the wrong term any more than I can make them format their posts correctly.
Clearly the term "role-playing" means playing a role, which means playing the game as your character. Your character cannot possibly deliver, in character, all the OOC emoting people do when they are engaging in shared storytelling. As I said, when people do shared storytelling, they are not playing as their character, they are writing about their character.
So, to restate, shared storytelling and role-playing are two different ways to interact with other players and their characters in a game such as LotRO. Neither one is morally superior, although role-playing is inherently more difficult, which is why relatively few people do it and choose the easier path of shared storytelling. There is nothing wrong with that, just like there's nothing wrong with playing the game so you can raid (which is arguably more difficult than just doing quests) or do PvMP or whatever else strikes your fancy.
If people want to call "shared storytelling" "role-playing," I can't stop people from using the wrong term any more than I can make them format their posts correctly.
And yet you are using a fabricated term; ''shared-storytelling''. Oh the ironing. I mean irony.
Originally Posted by maxjenius
So, to restate, shared storytelling and role-playing are two different ways to interact with other players and their characters in a game such as LotRO.
Well no, roleplaying is a form of interaction in LOTRO, as is OOC banter. A lot of us do it y'know. This 'shared story telling' is something you made up. Notice how the Laurelin server is named Roleplay server [RP], and not ''Shared-Storytelling''[SS].
- some people like to roleplay, which others may classify 'shared storytelling', which to their own made up definition, is morally not inferior to roleplay but less difficult and cannot be called roleplay, but the roleplayers accused of performing shared storytelling will not accept the classification and try in vain to proof their style is actually roleplaying. To no avail (eh?)
- some people like to roleplay while questing the storyline. So now they are good mates with Aragorn and Gandalf to name a few. They shot up a lot of walking trees with Legolas. But they better not mention their deeds in an in-character (roleplayed) conversation: "Oh you killed a balrog too? How nice, did that last week. Pint of ale?".
- some people like to roleplay a Hobbit while questing in Moria and Lothlorien, which some other people would call breaking the lore of the original story in the books by JJR. Well, not the game lore the hobbit says, because the game allows it, so!
- some roleplayers like to live up to the world as described in the original story of JJR Tolkien. They are willing to sacrifice a few game mechanics and restrict themselves to areas where their chosen race and role would belong. Ofcourse they quest and level, but mostly OOC. But IC they remain that Elf librarian in Rivendell, or a Breeland lumberjack in Staddle, or a Dwarf merchant on the road.
- the majority that reads this thread will smile astonished. The thread starts with a lot of good pointers. But the slogging match about a classification, really. Much ado about nothing
Yes several pages of it. It might even be turned into a novel for the New Year entitled.
The question that is Roleplaying
I wonder if Gary Gygax is still around?
Khalis - Elven Warder & Captain in the Warband of Imladris
An Elven Kin based in Rivendell, composed of Elves and Men in honour of the old alliance formed by Lord Elrond.
Member Online status:
Reputation:
Originally Posted by maxjenius
Member Online status:
]
Senior Member Online status:
Senior Member Online status:
Poster of Note Online status:
Junior Member Online status:
Reply With Quote
Posting Permissions
