learntorp: (Default)
2012-10-12 08:16 pm

09: Character Growth part 1: stagnating

One of the hardest parts of roleplaying is managing character growth. There is a lot of material to cover here, so I'm going to split this topic up into two parts.

When a character is first apped into a game, they are (barring a few game-specific instances) exactly like they are in canon. Because of that, it's pretty easy to see if someone is being IC or not! We have canon to compare it to, so we can give critique about how IC a character is. This is really only true for the first couple months at best, though. After that, you really have to have been following the development of a character to see how they have changed, because they don't quite compare to canon anymore.

The reason for this is simple: all characters grow and change as they are in a game for longer. They learn from their experiences, and they act differently based on what they have seen. When they don't change, they become stagnant.

Ideally, if a character encounters the same situation twice, they should act differently the second time. This is because they have already experienced it, so they should know what to do to get the results they want. For example, in the game I mod, we have a yearly event around Halloween, and the characters who have been around for more than a year should know what to expect by this point. However, many characters do the exact same thing each time, and they get the same results each time. Many even act like it is their first Halloween and don't know what to do! Obviously this is a problem, since the veteran characters should be experienced in this particular event by this point.

The reason characters stagnate is usually because the players are afraid of making changes. If the character isn't 100% true to canon, it's wrong, or so they are told. Indeed, our very concept of critique within RP feeds into this false notion: if a random person comes in and sees a character they are familiar with, they expect that character to be just like they are in canon. If they aren't, then they complain, saying that the character is OOC.

I'm not saying that being OOC isn't a problem. No, there are people who can take their character development too far and turn their character into something unrecognizable (This will be covered more next week). But that fear of being accused of being OOC drives players to disallow all character growth, which is not the right response either.

As a general rule, your character should change, yet remain recognizable. Any development made should be a believable development for that particular character. It's hard to set concrete rules for character development, since every character is different, but there is one rule that helps. Even with all of the changes a character goes through, they should still have their core personality stay mostly the same. Grumpy McDrywall might learn how to be friendly with a few certain people who chip through his frosty exterior, but he should still be cold and unwelcoming to most people. Likewise, the bouncy bubbly energetic team member may become jaded from a zombie apocalypse, and they might start thinking more practically, but at their core they are still that same bubbly happy character, just with better judgement. if Grumpy McDrywall and happy bubblehead stayed exactly the same, it wouldn't be very fun to play with them.

Next week I will talk about the other extreme, where some players take development too far and the character becomes unrecognizable. For this week, though, I want you to take a look back at your characters and how they developed over the course of their games. Look for parts where the development slowed to a crawl, or where no changes were made at all. Try to see how key moments in the game should have changed them, and how those changes would have affected them.
learntorp: (Default)
2012-09-14 09:50 pm

06: You Are Not Your Character

As a preface, the majority of the real-life experiences I'm using for this post are tabletop-based, but the idea still applies to other mediums of roleplaying.

When I was in college, I used to run tabletop games for my friends. One of these games occurred my junior year, with a group of five players. There was a guy in the group, who we shall call J, and he played a paladin. This paladin was pretty blatantly just a copy of himself. J made no effort to make his character different and unique, and even the description of the character sounded exactly like an idealized version of himself. Needless to say, this caused problems whenever the paladin got into trouble. Every difficulty this paladin encountered caused J to get angry, even when those problems were a result of actions J had made his paladin do. The final night of the game ended when J's paladin failed a saving roll and was turned into stone (something that can be fixed in the world of D&D). J was so upset that he stormed out of the apartment and never came back to another game.

Because of this game, I had a rule added to all of the games I ran after that: keep In-Character and Out-of-Character separate. It seems like a pretty simple idea, I know, but you would be surprised how many people have trouble with this. I could talk all day about the number of times a problem has been brought to me that had it's roots in blurring the line between IC and OOC, and I'm sure all of you can think of a time when you heard about this as well. Hell, I could go onto any of the anon comms and pull up half-a-dozen links to wank that involves blurring the line between IC and OOC. Despite the fact that it's common knowledge to keep IC and OOC separate, it's still a very common problem.

It's interesting to note that, when going by percentages, I see this problem a lot more in tabletop gamers and people who play OCs. I think it has something to do with the fact that these characters are something we personally made, so attacks on them feel like attacks on us. That's not to say that it's entirely absent in people who play canon characters, but it happens a lot less. Still, regardless of what ind of character you're playing, you need to remember one important thing: you are not your character.

If bad things happen to your character, it's not because someone hates you and they want you to suffer. It's because their character had a beef with your character that was settled within the context of a game. Bad things can happen to your character without being a personal attack against you. If another character hates your character, it does not mean that the player hates you.

I think most people understand this idea, though. There may be a few players that let IC actions bother them OOC, but the majority of players know that IC problems should not bleed into OOC. That said, most people who have a problem with this do forget the inverse: OOC problems should not bleed into IC.

You should not let your OOC problems affect how you play a character. If you've just broken up, you shouldn't have your character suddenly break up and hate dating. If you're feeling sick, it's probably not a good idea to have your character develop a case of the sniffles. Most importantly, if you have problems with another player, problems that make it impossible for you to even communicate with that player, you should never let those problems show up in how you play ICly. Just because you have a problem with Player A does not mean your character should go around saying Characters A1, A2, and A3 are horrible people.

Whenever you are having trouble defining the line between IC and OOC, just remember that you are not your character. Your issues should not reflect on your character, and your character's problems should not reflect on you. Don't take things personally; we're all just trying to have fun, after all.

For your practice, I want you to do some self-reflection. Where do you have problems keeping IC and OOC divided? What issues tend to leak over into roleplay? The first step to keeping IC and OOC separate is to identify the problem, so try to keep the phrase "You are not your character" in mind when you roleplay.