Role playing, what's it mean to you? - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Role playing, what's it mean to you?

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
brassbaboon
Mar 11, 2010 16:26:23 I would be interested in what other players here think of when they hear the words "role playing" in the D&D game context.

My perspective is as follows:

Role playing is what you do to demonstrate the uniqueness of your character by giving that character a voice and making him or her come to life. By "voice" I don't mean using an accent or special catch-prhases, although that certainly qualifies, I mean doing and saying things that allow your fellow players and the DM to virtually experience the personality of your character.

Role playing is not using a power or casting a spell, or making a skill check. Those are game mechanics that are virtually identical across a wide range of players' characters.

One caveat here is that it is possible to inject that player's voice into the use of skills, powers or spells, and that would qualify as role playing as well.

For example, if you are in an encounter and on your turn you say "I use deft strike [roll], I rolled a 23 with bonuses, does that hit?" you aren't role playing. You are merely executing the game's combat mechanics.

If your party is in a bar eating dinner, and you say (or act out) "I lean back in my chair, kick off my muddy boots and put my feet on the table while I light a fat cigar and pinch the pretty waitress as she walks by." That's role playing.

If you are in an encounter and you say "I sneer and spit at my opponent as I whip my longsword around my head, calling on the spirit of my murdered father I take a vicious two-handed swing at the [monster's] head!" That's role playing the game mechanic.

How do you all do this in your own games? And does most of your group do the same thing? Are your encounters generally "OK, I use twin strike, that's a hit and a miss, total damage is 24" or do you and your fellow players embellish their turns with descriptions which demonstrate the uniqueness of their characters? And do you rush from encounter to encounter, or do your groups spend long periods of time in non-combat situations kicking back, telling stories and generally interacting as something beyond a bunch of miniatures on a battle mat?
#2
princess_artemis
Mar 11, 2010 18:05:33 Since we play online, combat can be pretty slow, so we generally don't roleplay our attacks (mostly it's "I move here, I use this, does this hit? Here's the damage, done"), though we do sometimes. Usually it's for special events, of a sort--the character is upset about something, showing off, or otherwise making a big to-do about laying the smack down (or trying to). The cleric most often RPs Turn Undead, I, the warlock, will more often RP Curse of the Dark Dream. Usually, if we RP an attack, it's the results of a crit--once I recall early on critting a swarm of rats with Sly Flourish and a magic dagger, so I said something about the shish-ka-bob of rats I had on my dagger and flinging them all off it, to the disgust of the cleric. Other times if we know we've roasted an enemy by a lot, we'll RP that there is little but a smear of them on the ground and grouching about getting all that blood on our armor. One fun one was when my warlock killed a dire boar with Avernian Eruption and everyone started joking about how I'd started cooking the bacon before we'd even got it skinned. Avernian Eruption is fun to get little moments of role play into otherwise dry fights (they kind of have to be because otherwise it would be too slow), with off hand comments by the cleric about how bad the goblin smells with his hair on fire, and once the DM saying that not only did it kill a bad guy, but it also boiled several squares of the river he was standing in, providing us and many elves with instant fish dinner.

So we tend to more role play the kills (the fighter collecting kobold heads so he can give the skulls to his granny as drinking cups, for instance). And we role play our wounds even if we know mechanicaly they really aren't wounds, per se...the cleric will cluck like a mother hen over the fighter and the warlock getting hurt worse than she likes to see, and such. We RP getting our powers (usually more interesting for the warlock since we've established he dreams in a particularly unpleasant way to get them while the fighter practices and the cleric studies) or the effects (more interesting for the cleric who we've established that channel divinity leaves her feeling cold and empty because it's direct access to the divine, and if she has to use it several times in a day, she gets very cold and worn out).

If the DM didn't rein us in, the two players in our game would roleplay in between encounters until dawn. We are totally awful about that! Since he plays a character too, we try to drag him into it, and he resists sometimes, but we've worn him down a few times and he's had fun with it. I'm not sure how it is with other groups, but we want to know more about the DMPC (we want to meet his granny...as much as we are absolutely terrified of her cooking for us)! Other times, it seems the DM has gone quiet and I ask the other player if the DM left, and she says he has...and off we go, role playing as long as we want. He doesn't mind, and in fact wants to know after some of our marathon roleplaying in-between-regular-sessions what we were doing all that time (and he is sometimes reportedly disappointed, saying, 'That's all?' Seems we got him addicted to our characters' personal story as much as he's got us wrapped up in his grand plot!). So we do a whole lot of out of combat role playing, both in session and out of it. Sometimes the DM leaves us chances to continue role playing and sometimes he doesn't.

Anyhow, that's how we do it. I wish there was a little more RPing in the battles, but I understand the constraints of time in an online environment and how we play, but we more than make up for it RPing outside of combat. Our characters are very established through how we RP, even the little we do in combat is definitely flavored the way our characters act outside of it. I'm not sure that exactly answered your first question, but I think it covered the last few.
#3
Shiftkitty
Mar 11, 2010 19:00:51 Roleplaying is when you are giving another PC at the table a royal ass-chewing, emphasizing what a blithering idiot you think he is and suggesting several anatomical impossibilities about what he can do with that plan of his, and creating several odd musings about his genetic heritage, and after the game having the player ask "Are you really mad at me?"

Roleplaying is when you've got the group so immersed in what you're doing to them and with them, that the sudden hiss of a pet cat causes everyone to jump, making chairs fall over and several people question if they've just had a heart-attack at 15.

Roleplaying is when they forget that the NPC retainer is not a full-fledged member of the group and start equipping him as well as they would equip themselves, even if it means one of them doesn't get some tasty magical armor or weapon.

Roleplaying is that dark pallor that hangs over the table when the aforementioned NPC retainer dies, and then the party blowing half their treasure haul to get him resurrected.
#4
Krusk
Mar 11, 2010 20:44:31
For example, if you are in an encounter and on your turn you say "I use deft strike [roll], I rolled a 23 with bonuses, does that hit?" you aren't role playing. You are merely executing the game's combat mechanics.

Eh, you might not be roleplaying right then, but there is nothing wrong with doing this for 9/10 turns in a given encounter.

Sometimes a player can't think up something cool to say right then, who cares if they don't pull out a flowery description and just go with "I attack, 24, does it hit?" There isn't anything wrong with that, and it's annoying playing with the guy who has an epic super amazing attack for every turn. Sometimes you just want to hear him say "24? cool, 15 damage" and move on.

I prefer to try to get a sweet description for when an enemy is bloodied and killed, and would rather do the "24? ok 15 damage" for the rest of them. Keeps things moving quick, and really is "I drag my sword along the ground shooting sweet sparks, do a quick dodge to the left, and bring the sword through his stomach" needed every round? Heck, that can even tear away some of that suspension of disbelief. You've slashed this guy to shreds, how is he not dead?

To me roleplaying is simply getting into character, and acting as they would for the duration.
#5
salla
Mar 11, 2010 20:51:48

Eh, you might not be roleplaying right then, but there is nothing wrong with doing this for 9/10 turns in a given encounter.

Actually, it may not be 'acting', but it's roleplaying. You're selecting your action, the target, your movement and everything else in-character.
#6
brassbaboon
Mar 11, 2010 23:34:05

Eh, you might not be roleplaying right then, but there is nothing wrong with doing this for 9/10 turns in a given encounter.

Actually, it may not be 'acting', but it's roleplaying. You're selecting your action, the target, your movement and everything else in-character.

In my mind executing game mechanics exactly as written is not role playing. There's nothing here that wouldn't be done exactly the same if you placed the minis on the battle mat and played a generic rogue with no name, no history, no backstory and no personality. By this description moving a knight in a chess game is "role playing" and I just don't agree with that.

I agree there's nothing "wrong" with doing this in 9/10 turns in any encounter, in fact I would say that there is nothing "wrong" with doing this in every combat situation, and leaving the role playing for out of combat, which is what I see a lot of players do, especially since there is a lot of pure game mechanic to navigate while in combat. I tend to do like you Krusk, and only role play especially interesting combat situations precisely because I don't want to hold up the combat, which takes long enough as it is.
#7
adun_irving
Mar 12, 2010 0:51:38 As a DM, I get into my roleplaying by not really trying. I just run with the first voice I come up with, and mannerisms seem to materialize to suit the character. My players are all inexperienced, but excellent roleplayers. They aren't descriptive at all, but they've adopted personalities for their characters that they would never use in real life. One plays a violent, angry brute who thinks that every problem can be solved by hitting it, killing it, or hitting it until you come close to killing it; one plays a half-orc vampire with a chip on his shoulder about pretty much everything, but he does it so naturally that it doesn't feel cliched; one plays a calculating psychopath who keeps asking me (on the cusp of in-character) whether his character can sacrifice others to his dark god; and one plays a guy who's trying to be a hero but frequently finds himself goaded into evil or at best morally ambiguous actions and circumstances by his amoral crackpot companions. Fun times for all.
#8
salla
Mar 12, 2010 1:19:18

Eh, you might not be roleplaying right then, but there is nothing wrong with doing this for 9/10 turns in a given encounter.

Actually, it may not be 'acting', but it's roleplaying. You're selecting your action, the target, your movement and everything else in-character.

In my mind executing game mechanics exactly as written is not role playing. There's nothing here that wouldn't be done exactly the same if you placed the minis on the battle mat and played a generic rogue with no name, no history, no backstory and no personality. By this description moving a knight in a chess game is "role playing" and I just don't agree with that.

I agree there's nothing "wrong" with doing this in 9/10 turns in any encounter, in fact I would say that there is nothing "wrong" with doing this in every combat situation, and leaving the role playing for out of combat, which is what I see a lot of players do, especially since there is a lot of pure game mechanic to navigate while in combat. I tend to do like you Krusk, and only role play especially interesting combat situations precisely because I don't want to hold up the combat, which takes long enough as it is.

Really?
Character A rushes in, provokes OAs as he goes. That doesn't sound like roleplaying a reckless, impulsive character?

Character B falls back between the front line and a wounded ally, drops a healing word then readies an action to belt anybody who gets close to his charge. That doesn't say something about the character and his devotion to his teammates?

No roleplaying there?
#9
brassbaboon
Mar 12, 2010 13:47:31

Really?
Character A rushes in, provokes OAs as he goes. That doesn't sound like roleplaying a reckless, impulsive character?

Character B falls back between the front line and a wounded ally, drops a healing word then readies an action to belt anybody who gets close to his charge. That doesn't say something about the character and his devotion to his teammates?

No roleplaying there?

Character A is making a tactical combat decision when he decides to rush into the room. Provoking an OA is game mechanics. Character A may have as a personality trait the tendency to rush into rooms, and that definitely qualifies as role playing. However, Character X may have no history or tendency to rush into rooms, but may rush into a room as a tactic that is not associated with any back story or personality trait. So rushing into a room is not necessarily role playing. It may be a straight tactical decision just like deciding to use en passant in chess.

The same is true of Character B. Whether the player is "role playing" these tactical maneuvers depends entirely on how consistent the tactical decisions are with the backstory, history and developed personality of the character.

So in a nutshell, these tactical choices are not role playing in and of themselves they only qualify as role playing insofar as they are expressions of the characters's personality.

There is always going to be some overlap between the purely tactical and the purely role-played actions of a character. But just examining the tactical move in and of itself would not qualify as role playing to me. But when tactical choices are consistently made in accordance with a character's personality and backstory, even tactical choices can be said to be role playing, to an extent.

For example, my ranger is a melee/ranged balanced ranger. On occasion he chooses to chunk his daggers instead of swing his chain because he just feels like chunking daggers. That usually means a point or two less damage, but it's a choice he makes because it fits his character. That tendency, expressed consistently over time, helps to define his character. But it helps greatly for the character to talk about this, or to make some comment to explain it during combat, which improves the role playing experience, imho. So given the example of character A who has shown over time a tendency to utilize the (questionable) tactic of rushing headlong into rooms ("Leeeroooyyy!!") but who otherwise shows no indication of impulsiveness, and character B who not only is impulsive in combat but demonstrates and even revels in his impulsivity in multiple situations, who then performs the exact same tactical maneuver as Character A; I would say that Character B is doing more and better role playing than Character A.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 brassbaboon Mar 11, 2010 16:26:23	I would be interested in what other players here think of when they hear the words "role playing" in the D&D game context. My perspective is as follows: Role playing is what you do to demonstrate the uniqueness of your character by giving that character a voice and making him or her come to life. By "voice" I don't mean using an accent or special catch-prhases, although that certainly qualifies, I mean doing and saying things that allow your fellow players and the DM to virtually experience the personality of your character. Role playing is not using a power or casting a spell, or making a skill check. Those are game mechanics that are virtually identical across a wide range of players' characters. One caveat here is that it is possible to inject that player's voice into the use of skills, powers or spells, and that would qualify as role playing as well. For example, if you are in an encounter and on your turn you say "I use deft strike [roll], I rolled a 23 with bonuses, does that hit?" you aren't role playing. You are merely executing the game's combat mechanics. If your party is in a bar eating dinner, and you say (or act out) "I lean back in my chair, kick off my muddy boots and put my feet on the table while I light a fat cigar and pinch the pretty waitress as she walks by." That's role playing. If you are in an encounter and you say "I sneer and spit at my opponent as I whip my longsword around my head, calling on the spirit of my murdered father I take a vicious two-handed swing at the [monster's] head!" That's role playing the game mechanic. How do you all do this in your own games? And does most of your group do the same thing? Are your encounters generally "OK, I use twin strike, that's a hit and a miss, total damage is 24" or do you and your fellow players embellish their turns with descriptions which demonstrate the uniqueness of their characters? And do you rush from encounter to encounter, or do your groups spend long periods of time in non-combat situations kicking back, telling stories and generally interacting as something beyond a bunch of miniatures on a battle mat?
#2 princess_artemis Mar 11, 2010 18:05:33	Since we play online, combat can be pretty slow, so we generally don't roleplay our attacks (mostly it's "I move here, I use this, does this hit? Here's the damage, done"), though we do sometimes. Usually it's for special events, of a sort--the character is upset about something, showing off, or otherwise making a big to-do about laying the smack down (or trying to). The cleric most often RPs Turn Undead, I, the warlock, will more often RP Curse of the Dark Dream. Usually, if we RP an attack, it's the results of a crit--once I recall early on critting a swarm of rats with Sly Flourish and a magic dagger, so I said something about the shish-ka-bob of rats I had on my dagger and flinging them all off it, to the disgust of the cleric. Other times if we know we've roasted an enemy by a lot, we'll RP that there is little but a smear of them on the ground and grouching about getting all that blood on our armor. One fun one was when my warlock killed a dire boar with Avernian Eruption and everyone started joking about how I'd started cooking the bacon before we'd even got it skinned. Avernian Eruption is fun to get little moments of role play into otherwise dry fights (they kind of have to be because otherwise it would be too slow), with off hand comments by the cleric about how bad the goblin smells with his hair on fire, and once the DM saying that not only did it kill a bad guy, but it also boiled several squares of the river he was standing in, providing us and many elves with instant fish dinner. So we tend to more role play the kills (the fighter collecting kobold heads so he can give the skulls to his granny as drinking cups, for instance). And we role play our wounds even if we know mechanicaly they really aren't wounds, per se...the cleric will cluck like a mother hen over the fighter and the warlock getting hurt worse than she likes to see, and such. We RP getting our powers (usually more interesting for the warlock since we've established he dreams in a particularly unpleasant way to get them while the fighter practices and the cleric studies) or the effects (more interesting for the cleric who we've established that channel divinity leaves her feeling cold and empty because it's direct access to the divine, and if she has to use it several times in a day, she gets very cold and worn out). If the DM didn't rein us in, the two players in our game would roleplay in between encounters until dawn. We are totally awful about that! Since he plays a character too, we try to drag him into it, and he resists sometimes, but we've worn him down a few times and he's had fun with it. I'm not sure how it is with other groups, but we want to know more about the DMPC (we want to meet his granny...as much as we are absolutely terrified of her cooking for us)! Other times, it seems the DM has gone quiet and I ask the other player if the DM left, and she says he has...and off we go, role playing as long as we want. He doesn't mind, and in fact wants to know after some of our marathon roleplaying in-between-regular-sessions what we were doing all that time (and he is sometimes reportedly disappointed, saying, 'That's all?' Seems we got him addicted to our characters' personal story as much as he's got us wrapped up in his grand plot!). So we do a whole lot of out of combat role playing, both in session and out of it. Sometimes the DM leaves us chances to continue role playing and sometimes he doesn't. Anyhow, that's how we do it. I wish there was a little more RPing in the battles, but I understand the constraints of time in an online environment and how we play, but we more than make up for it RPing outside of combat. Our characters are very established through how we RP, even the little we do in combat is definitely flavored the way our characters act outside of it. I'm not sure that exactly answered your first question, but I think it covered the last few.
#3 Shiftkitty Mar 11, 2010 19:00:51	Roleplaying is when you are giving another PC at the table a royal ass-chewing, emphasizing what a blithering idiot you think he is and suggesting several anatomical impossibilities about what he can do with that plan of his, and creating several odd musings about his genetic heritage, and after the game having the player ask "Are you really mad at me?" Roleplaying is when you've got the group so immersed in what you're doing to them and with them, that the sudden hiss of a pet cat causes everyone to jump, making chairs fall over and several people question if they've just had a heart-attack at 15. Roleplaying is when they forget that the NPC retainer is not a full-fledged member of the group and start equipping him as well as they would equip themselves, even if it means one of them doesn't get some tasty magical armor or weapon. Roleplaying is that dark pallor that hangs over the table when the aforementioned NPC retainer dies, and then the party blowing half their treasure haul to get him resurrected.
#4 Krusk Mar 11, 2010 20:44:31	For example, if you are in an encounter and on your turn you say "I use deft strike [roll], I rolled a 23 with bonuses, does that hit?" you aren't role playing. You are merely executing the game's combat mechanics. Eh, you might not be roleplaying right then, but there is nothing wrong with doing this for 9/10 turns in a given encounter. Sometimes a player can't think up something cool to say right then, who cares if they don't pull out a flowery description and just go with "I attack, 24, does it hit?" There isn't anything wrong with that, and it's annoying playing with the guy who has an epic super amazing attack for every turn. Sometimes you just want to hear him say "24? cool, 15 damage" and move on. I prefer to try to get a sweet description for when an enemy is bloodied and killed, and would rather do the "24? ok 15 damage" for the rest of them. Keeps things moving quick, and really is "I drag my sword along the ground shooting sweet sparks, do a quick dodge to the left, and bring the sword through his stomach" needed every round? Heck, that can even tear away some of that suspension of disbelief. You've slashed this guy to shreds, how is he not dead? To me roleplaying is simply getting into character, and acting as they would for the duration.
#5 salla Mar 11, 2010 20:51:48	Eh, you might not be roleplaying right then, but there is nothing wrong with doing this for 9/10 turns in a given encounter. Actually, it may not be 'acting', but it's roleplaying. You're selecting your action, the target, your movement and everything else in-character.
#6 brassbaboon Mar 11, 2010 23:34:05	Eh, you might not be roleplaying right then, but there is nothing wrong with doing this for 9/10 turns in a given encounter. Actually, it may not be 'acting', but it's roleplaying. You're selecting your action, the target, your movement and everything else in-character. In my mind executing game mechanics exactly as written is not role playing. There's nothing here that wouldn't be done exactly the same if you placed the minis on the battle mat and played a generic rogue with no name, no history, no backstory and no personality. By this description moving a knight in a chess game is "role playing" and I just don't agree with that. I agree there's nothing "wrong" with doing this in 9/10 turns in any encounter, in fact I would say that there is nothing "wrong" with doing this in every combat situation, and leaving the role playing for out of combat, which is what I see a lot of players do, especially since there is a lot of pure game mechanic to navigate while in combat. I tend to do like you Krusk, and only role play especially interesting combat situations precisely because I don't want to hold up the combat, which takes long enough as it is.
#7 adun_irving Mar 12, 2010 0:51:38	As a DM, I get into my roleplaying by not really trying. I just run with the first voice I come up with, and mannerisms seem to materialize to suit the character. My players are all inexperienced, but excellent roleplayers. They aren't descriptive at all, but they've adopted personalities for their characters that they would never use in real life. One plays a violent, angry brute who thinks that every problem can be solved by hitting it, killing it, or hitting it until you come close to killing it; one plays a half-orc vampire with a chip on his shoulder about pretty much everything, but he does it so naturally that it doesn't feel cliched; one plays a calculating psychopath who keeps asking me (on the cusp of in-character) whether his character can sacrifice others to his dark god; and one plays a guy who's trying to be a hero but frequently finds himself goaded into evil or at best morally ambiguous actions and circumstances by his amoral crackpot companions. Fun times for all.
#8 salla Mar 12, 2010 1:19:18	Eh, you might not be roleplaying right then, but there is nothing wrong with doing this for 9/10 turns in a given encounter. Actually, it may not be 'acting', but it's roleplaying. You're selecting your action, the target, your movement and everything else in-character. In my mind executing game mechanics exactly as written is not role playing. There's nothing here that wouldn't be done exactly the same if you placed the minis on the battle mat and played a generic rogue with no name, no history, no backstory and no personality. By this description moving a knight in a chess game is "role playing" and I just don't agree with that. I agree there's nothing "wrong" with doing this in 9/10 turns in any encounter, in fact I would say that there is nothing "wrong" with doing this in every combat situation, and leaving the role playing for out of combat, which is what I see a lot of players do, especially since there is a lot of pure game mechanic to navigate while in combat. I tend to do like you Krusk, and only role play especially interesting combat situations precisely because I don't want to hold up the combat, which takes long enough as it is. Really? Character A rushes in, provokes OAs as he goes. That doesn't sound like roleplaying a reckless, impulsive character? Character B falls back between the front line and a wounded ally, drops a healing word then readies an action to belt anybody who gets close to his charge. That doesn't say something about the character and his devotion to his teammates? No roleplaying there?
#9 brassbaboon Mar 12, 2010 13:47:31	Really? Character A rushes in, provokes OAs as he goes. That doesn't sound like roleplaying a reckless, impulsive character? Character B falls back between the front line and a wounded ally, drops a healing word then readies an action to belt anybody who gets close to his charge. That doesn't say something about the character and his devotion to his teammates? No roleplaying there? Character A is making a tactical combat decision when he decides to rush into the room. Provoking an OA is game mechanics. Character A may have as a personality trait the tendency to rush into rooms, and that definitely qualifies as role playing. However, Character X may have no history or tendency to rush into rooms, but may rush into a room as a tactic that is not associated with any back story or personality trait. So rushing into a room is not necessarily role playing. It may be a straight tactical decision just like deciding to use en passant in chess. The same is true of Character B. Whether the player is "role playing" these tactical maneuvers depends entirely on how consistent the tactical decisions are with the backstory, history and developed personality of the character. So in a nutshell, these tactical choices are not role playing in and of themselves they only qualify as role playing insofar as they are expressions of the characters's personality. There is always going to be some overlap between the purely tactical and the purely role-played actions of a character. But just examining the tactical move in and of itself would not qualify as role playing to me. But when tactical choices are consistently made in accordance with a character's personality and backstory, even tactical choices can be said to be role playing, to an extent. For example, my ranger is a melee/ranged balanced ranger. On occasion he chooses to chunk his daggers instead of swing his chain because he just feels like chunking daggers. That usually means a point or two less damage, but it's a choice he makes because it fits his character. That tendency, expressed consistently over time, helps to define his character. But it helps greatly for the character to talk about this, or to make some comment to explain it during combat, which improves the role playing experience, imho. So given the example of character A who has shown over time a tendency to utilize the (questionable) tactic of rushing headlong into rooms ("Leeeroooyyy!!") but who otherwise shows no indication of impulsiveness, and character B who not only is impulsive in combat but demonstrates and even revels in his impulsivity in multiple situations, who then performs the exact same tactical maneuver as Character A; I would say that Character B is doing more and better role playing than Character A.