Community Discussion #4: January 27th 2013

Part 3 of 3

The_Ross: Speaking of which, still haven't watched today's ep

Jane: When does a character "not work" ?

GrandFinale: Ergh, sorry Ross, this discussion must be getting to me.

Alecia: Kim: Oh, I see! I got the impression that some people were inclined to just kinda forget about them altogether. I don't even write them, I just imagine them doing stuff purely for my own amusement, and am always happy when they work in RPs and other people have fun, too!

Ben: That is what I meant, Sanne, thank you.

Bonebag: Jane: An easy example would be a fantasy character in a modern setting (with some exceptions.)

Ben: Jane: When people don't enjoy interacting with them. Love-to-hate is different to just not wanting to RP.

Kim: Why does the idea of "normal" characters make people feel intimidated or defensive when it comes up, when nearly everyone has at least one that they play? How can we frame the concept as fun rather than character killing?

Jane: well, why would I want to roleplay a fantasy character in a modern setting?

The_Ross: Has anyone been getting defensive?

woodlands: I've never heard of normal characters being negative.

Loki: I've never really had that problem Sanne. I still disagree with telling someone they are 'wrong.' Your version of 'wrong' and mine are going to be completely different. I think it could take a long time, but you could find a setting for pretty much anything you want, at least where I used to rp

Kim: "Modern fantasy" is a common genre, and one that I love! I think you guys need to be more specific.

Jane: I love normal characters if they are not boring.

GrandFinale: So, Ben, this is pretty much what you mean:

RPer: "I just spent years finely crafting my character and training my writing skills for this one moment, and I think I've finally made a character everyone will enjoy!"

Tons of others: "HOLY JESUS ON A STICK THIS THING IS AWESOME"

One miffed, opinionated RPer: "Dude, this thing sucks."

The first RPer: "NOOOOOOO I CAN'T HAVE THIS! A SINGLE PERSON DISLIKES MY WORK?! BETTER THROW IT AWAY AND FORGET ABOUT IT FOR ALL ETERNITY!"

Sanne: Because 'normal' characters are easily forgotten and their unique talents and skills are not considered having enough impact on the plot to make it worth the while.

Ravdaer: It takes a lot of work to make a 'good' character

Bonebag: Without thinking about it: Would you rather be 'special' or 'normal'? I would much, much rather be special. The idea of having something special taken away from you and simply blending is almost a personal attack to some.

Kim: Finale: That is exactly NOT what he means.

Ben: No, Finale, that's the exact opposite of what I mean...

The_Ross: Forgettable and normal are not equivalent

The_Ross: If a character is forgettable, it was probably just bad.

GrandFinale: I know, I'm just jacking around now, besides, that's such an unrealistic situation I don't think it could ever happen.

Bonebag: I think Ben was shooting more along the lines of constructive criticism.

Bonebag: youwoudbesurprised.psd

Jane: A "normal" character can be special.

Ben: That's what I'm getting at, Bonesie.

Kim: Bones, why are you pasting filenames into the chat?

Jane: Depending how much thought and work you put into your character.

Loki: I've never had a negative reaction to my 'normal' characters, they actually tend to be some of my most loved by other people

Sanne: I don't think that's what Ben meant, Loki. When a character has difficulty sticking to someone because their interactions are not compatible, it makes the RP more of a chore than fun. When this happens frequently, Ben suggests it might be a good idea to evaluate the character for the flaws that make it so hard to RP them, and change that. Sometimes that means letting go of key features that you're attached to about that character, because those key features might interfere with finding roleplay.

GrandFinale: theyrenotactuallyfiles.mp3

Kim: Finale, again, please don't just say sarcastic things during a busy chat. People can't read tone and respond seriously, and there's already so much going on that we need to stay focused.

Lorvilran: Normal characters are overlooked and treated as lesser beings in some groups of rpers.

Bonebag: It's a meme-ish thing. You take your response and a file extention to it. likethisforexample.jpg

Loki: That's not what I took from what Ben said at all Sanne, but when you say it like that it makes more sense

Kim: Jane: Exactly! So how do we promote the idea of normal being special?

Bonebag: Lorvilran: YES. YES YES YES YES YES.

GrandFinale: I wasn't actually being sarcastic.

The_Ross: I thought kim was being silly. I thinks she knows thesearejustjokes.xcf

Rubix: By not shutting it down, Kim.

Oaky: @Kim How is normal special?

Oaky: If everyone is special, then no one is.

Ben: That was the gist of what I was getting at. Being able to let go of, or change, your ideas if they don't work. It happens. Be constructive with your own work.

Oaky: Special becomes normal.

Lorvilran: Then normal=special?

professor_cuttlefish: It depends on the situation lol

Oaky: Lor, I believe so.

Jane: What do you mean with "promote" ?

Alecia: Hmmm... I don't even know what normal means. Almost everyone who knows me would unanimously agree that I'm definitely not normal, I'm sure So the idea of 'normal' characters actually does make me intimidated, because I just genuinely don't know how to RP that.

professor_cuttlefish: If 8 people have purple eyes and only one has brown, the brown eyed person is the special one.

Kim: I know they are not real files. I'd encourage people not to paste fake filenames into the chat rather than speaking in sentences because they add less meaning and the chat is already moving incredibly fast!

Rubix: I apologize Ben, I didn't get that from you at all. I saw more "if you don't conform you don't belong and you are wrong". I guess I must have misinterpreted the way you were explaining your opinion.

Jane: I enjoy plain characters (from the look) and put most work into their personality, and their "mind"

GrandFinale: @Alecia Holy crap, we're in the same boat.

The_Ross: Oh snap, Bones. Guess you'd better get good.

Loki: I do too Jane

The_Ross: You might have to actually have ideas!

Ben: It may have been a failure on my part in communicating the idea. No problem Rubix.

Alecia: @GrandFinale - Yay!

The_Ross:

Ravdaer: *trying to catch up with chat*;;;

Bonebag: makes everything better. In all seriousness, I agree with Jane.

Kim: Alecia: Do you think that a character who was like you would be so abnormal as to disrupt a community? Or are you within a realistic and "normal" standard of deviation for humanity?

Jane: And when I see a super special looking character that is incredibly well thought out from the species .. mostly I end up realizing that the character may be interesting at first, but it has no "depths" because the user mostly was concentrating on looks rather than the personality.

Rubix: Kim can you repost your last prompt? I'm afraid some people may have missed it.

The_Ross: Yeah, like ponies with video game controllers as cutie marks. Universally awful.

woodlands: Yeah, a balance between looks and mind is best rather than weighing heavily in looks.

Kim: Let me introduce a different but related one...

How restrictive is "normal"? Does it mean you can't add anything special or unusual to a character at all?

professor_cuttlefish: Am I the only one who doesn't think looks are really important at all? I remember people by their personalities, not their physical attributes.

Jane: normal looks or normal brain?

Bonebag: No, everyone is capable of doing extraordinary things if they are truly put to the test.

The_Ross: Am I the only one who's [CHERRYBERRY] sick of people using the phrase "Am I the only one?"

woodlands: I'd say it depends on the character and what you have in mind for them.

professor_cuttlefish: And by people, I actually mean characters lol

Rubix: Thanks Kim! And I believe normal is as restrictive as you make it, you have to find the special or unusual in your characters on your own.

Sanne: I think what you want to do with 'normal' characters is focus on their talents and skills and make those special to the plot you're playing.

Kim: professor_cuttlefish: I normally do too... and yet we wouldn't have the Trojan Wars without Helen of Troy!

Kim: Jane: I am referring to both normal looks and normal brain.

professor_cuttlefish: Truth!

Jane: define .. normal brain xD

Sanne: You can also make them special by having them flawed. They won't be able to do certain things that may be vital to the plot!

Alecia: Kim: Not at all, I have tons of friends who seem to like me (alhough I have no idea why). I have a form of high-functioning autism, so my view of the world is very different than most people's, that's all. Sometimes it's super useful and very enjoyable, some people hate it or don't understand it.

Kim: Sanne: What happens if you don't know the plot you're playing in advance?

Bonebag: A brain that functions within a set range of parameters as defined by the local population and/or species.

Kim: Jane: No, YOU define normal brain!

Jane: I do not think I am able to define "normal" for a brain

Jane: Sanne can do that

Oaky: I think a "Normal" person is one who is a standard human. They can have abnormal height, weight, etc. but they are still human. No mutant powers, no psychic abilities, no uber-awesome weapon skills, etc.

Kim: That sounds pretty unrestrictive to me, Jane!

Oaky: Their personality can be totally unique, just like IRL!

Oaky: But no fantasy stuff.

The_Ross: A normal brain is the brain of someone who thinks they're WAY TOO QUIRKY AND SILLY AND WACKY to be able to determine what normal is.

Jane: I enjoy characters with mental flaws. But I do not know if others consider them normal, while I do consider them normal.

The_Ross: Because that guarantees they're just like everyone else.

Oaky: Aaand AFK

Ben: The fact is that nearly everyone is extraordinarily talented at something. Having one special talent is very normal. That gives you a lot of leeway when creating a character.

Jane: I have a pretty little girl, that look innocent, but unsettled others because she was staring at them, and talking in an odd way. I would think she is pretty normal, but she definately stood out from the crows, by her behaviour.

Bonebag: If everyone is super-talented at something then where's my cutie mark?

Alecia: Ben: Ditto on that.

Kim:

Ben wrote:

The fact is that nearly everyone is extraordinarily talented at something. Having one special talent is very normal. That gives you a lot of leeway when creating a character.

I'm requoting this to make sure it gets seen, because it's an important idea!

Sanne: I feel it's unlikely that you'll go into a roleplay without having SOME idea of where you want to go with it. If there's no goal in a roleplay, there's neither purpose nor plot. Usually the plot will unfold more and more the longer you're in the roleplay, but in the meantime there's nothing withholding you from actually exploiting the character's talent(s) or weaknesses. You've usually set those up prior to the roleplay, and if there's no defined plot yet then you can shape it as you go along.

The_Ross: BLANK FLANK!

The_Ross: *group laughter*

Ben: Bone: Get a tattoo!

Jane: agreed with sanne

Bonebag: Sanne: That's true, to a point; however, there is always free-form and spontaneous rp'ing that genuinely doesn't have a plot at first.

GrandFinale: *somewhere, Diamond Tiara is punched in the face* Jeez, I hate those kinds of people/ponies.

The_Ross: Tiara and Spoon are the best fillies.

Sanne: That's why I said this, Bones:

'You've usually set those [talents and weaknesses] up prior to the roleplay, and if there's no defined plot yet then you can shape it as you go along.'

Bonebag: That's not to say I don't agree with you, but I think there are always exceptions.

Kim: Do you think anyone has the right to decide when someone else is too abnormal in an open RP? Should a healthy "norm" be a subject of discussion between players, or should people just move to a different group?

Loki: I think that goes back to a few of the other discussions, where we agreed that you should have a good ooc relationship with the people you roleplay with

Jane: I think everybody (not depending on the character) has the right to decline a roleplay.

The_Ross: Nobody is obligated to rp with anyone else, and no one is entitled to rp.

Bonebag: I think there should be a certain amount of commonality between characters for it to be cohesive - like fantasy characters in a fantasy setting - but the opposite can also be true: what if you have a few characters together that have almost nothing in common? Both can be driven to equally fun ends.

Sanne: I think people who are deeply integrated into a continuity/plot/setting have every right to decide when someone is too abnormal to contribute to the plot. Some characters just don't fit into the setting because they can't exist by the setting's rules. That's the most valid reason to ask someone to leave I can think of.

Lorvilran: I think it should be group set for what is too much for something. If one person has a problem they should be able to talk it out. Abby normal is fun sometimes.

Lorvilran: Sanne sometimes higher ups use that excuse to bully someone they don't like into leaving is my problem with one person deciding it.

Bonebag: I agree with both Lorvilran and Sanne. Especially Lor's latter statement.

Ben: That's why I work with a group of admins. We keep each other in check and make sure our rulings about disruptive characters are fair.

Sanne: Why would you want to be in a continuity where people bully someone out with stupid excuses?

Loki: I've been in a community like that before Sanne, it is not fun at all

Lorvilran: Sometimes you have friends within it who you enjoy rp with.

Bonebag: Perhaps it's the only rp they can turn to, for whatever reason. That situation occurs constantly in the real world.

Loki: Hence why I am here and not there anymore

Ben: We recently had an application that was not within the bounds of the community, but instead of sending them away, we're going to try and work with them to change the character to become more suitable.

Ravdaer: This place is awsum

Bonebag: Of course it is, Rav. I'm here.

Jane: I think RPR has a place for almost every character, and most likely everybody will find somebody to rp with .. no matter what the character is.

Loki: I think so too Jane, this place is huge!

Lorvilran: I haven't rp'd in a long while.

Bonebag: But in all seriousness, I believe that at it's core, roleplaying is all about having fun. If you aren't having fun, you need to branch out and try another group of people or a different setting. If you're in an environment where you are constantly belittled, even if you have friends within that group who you hold dear, then you need to think about getting a different group of friends, or branch out into some free form and see where that leads you.

Jane: yep, I agree with bonebag.

Ben: Agreed, Bone.

Kim: Good points.

Sanne: I agree with you Bones. Being friends with someone shouldn't become an anchor to keep you tied to some place if you're not enjoying it anymore.

Copper_Dragon: Mhm!

The_Ross: If you're not having fun, there obviously aren't enough ponies in your story.

Kim: This has been our most touchy chat yet! I'm going to try and steer this back around into sunshiney waters to wrap us up with.

Penultimate prompt! Now that we've been through this discussion and hopefully we've had some eye-opening things to say, I ask again: What is remarkable about "normal" characters?

Jane: Extremes are extreme and its most likely it will be more hard to fit in. Normal characters have more in common with others and are easier to approach.

Earendill: Nothing! Isn't that the point of being normal?

Sanne: The ability to make 'mundane', every day and common skills valuable to the plot.

At least in my experiences.

The_Ross: The most remarkable things about them are their rarity, and that they actually require skill to write and to make interesting.

Bonebag: wutz normall

Applebloom (played by The_Ross): What's uncouth?

woodlands: I'll basically ditto what Jane said. Normal is sometimes more challenging than special.

Loki: They can fit into a lot of different types of settings

Copper_Dragon: They can be just as plot worthy as any 'abnormal' character.

Ben: Everyone loves an underdog story. Normal characters can BECOME remarkable.

Jane: I had so much fun to roleplay simple chores like 'ironing' for hours xD

Kim: Personally, the best thing about "normal" characters is that when there's a bunch together, they create a unified flavor or setting. I can feel like I'm really in a different culture or a different place, because there's some commonality between the people that inhabit that place. Even though they might all have something special about them, they also reflect (and help to create) their environment strongly.

Jane: I agree with Kim.

Bonebag: Ross, not sure if subliminal message to me.

I think that normal characters present the most potential for story-driven fun, and since they have no super outstanding qualities, it REALLY lets you go hog-wild with them if you so choose. That's not to say that can't have something special about them - just as Ben said, everyone is good at something - but to have a certain amount of restriction is an excellent way to better yourself overall; conforming to a set norm can allow you to push past what you think your creative limits are.

Ben: They do make worlds more immersive.

Rarity (played by The_Ross): ALL of my messages are subliminal, darling.

Kim: There are some awesome answers here.

Kim: What was good about this chat, and how can we make it go better next week?

Bonebag: Well, for starters, I was here this time. That's all that matters.

The_Ross: More ponies.

Jane: Kim is what made this chat awesome.

Earendill: I wasn't paying much attention to it, sadly ><

woodlands: I had fun

And it was on at a time that was easy for me to participate (I'm GMT).

Jane: *who (not what) sorry.

Bonebag: I think that everyone's different views on the same thing is what made it awesome. It forced me to open up my brain a little bit and go outside my comfort zone.

Lorvilran: I waas lost half the time another quarter or so I was distracted.

Ben: This chat has revealed some underlying ideaological differences in the way people play their characters. There were some disagreements but I hope they will be seen as informative rather than anything else.

Bonebag: If this sort of thing happens every week, EXPECT ME.

The_Ross: Bones always makes me go outside my comfort zone.

Loki: We got a lot of different opinions out there Kim

The_Ross: But it's in a good way.

Jane: and in the end everybody sort of agreed

The_Ross: And that's what friendship is all about.

The_Ross: *group laughter*

Bonebag: *RAINBOWS.*

The_Ross: *clopfics*

Sanne: I'm hoping that in the next chat, we can focus more on the topic and try to leave irrelevant and off-topic chatter at the door. As fun as it is in normal chats, it was a little disruptive and didn't contribute positively to the discussion, making it more difficult to follow.

Bonebag: It's nice that we can all think as a cohesive unit instead of screaming at each other that you're WRONG.

The_Ross: Sanne, I'll contribute positively to YOUR discussion.

The_Ross: Also, Bones is wrong.

GrandFinale: Also, absolutely everyone (including myself) is wrong.

Jane: Hugs, Ill leave now for some rp

Thank you for the interesting conversation @ all.

GrandFinale: See ya, Jane!

Bonebag: While inevitable offtopic chatter will occur, it was kept somewhat to a minimum this round. It could have been faaar worse.

Loki: Bye Jane!

Bonebag: Bye Jane. Nice meeting you.

Kim: This was some of the most offtopic we've had yet!

Kim: Thanks for coming, everyone! I will take your comments to heart and try to make next week even more awesome.

Degu: INDEED.

The_Ross: Offtopic

Offtopic everywhere

Ben: Was a fun one!

Ravdaer: What's next weeks topic?

Degu: Thank you for running it, Kim~

Loki: Yes, thank you for running these Kim

Part 1 - Part 2 - Part 3