The solution to all our problems: Schyzophrenia!

[Lorgan]

I was thinking, why dont we allow characters to have several offshoot characters which they can create and name, then select as an alternative to write roleplays (maybe letters too?) from. When writing roleplays it should make it clear that it's not the main character writing, maybe just something simple like "Roleplay from Johannes Kepler, Captain of Abraham Miller" where it would normally say "Roleplay from Abraham Miller".

I often don't "play" (write something for) a character because I'm not in the mood for that particular character, sometimes because he's too serious, sometimes because he's a joker and sometimes because what he would say brings consequences I don't want to deal with. I'm suggesting to allow players to add other kinds of outlets to their different characters, some could have a jester, others their captain (maybe make that one standard? How many times have you seen people rp their captain?), a drinking buddy, an old uncle or grandmother... Hell, it'd be a great way to introduce the heir! Either way, the player of that character now has different sorts of outlets in his realm, increasing incentive to say something. Many of the "entourage's" jibber jabber probably won't lead to (though some I believe could be very pertinent) anything but it is entertainment, for the player and the ones he plays with. And that's something we need more.

Of course we've all seen plenty of players roleplay a secondary character but how many of them have done it consistently? How many have developed the character or even truly focused on it in that roleplay? If you add this option and those links, you allow players to enshrine those characters in the game, to make them permanent, without having to clumsily mention them left and right to make sure others (and you) don't forget. You can then really start developing them and have them interact with eachother and with your main character. All of this could be done by normal roleplays and word documents but I'd think it's a good thing to encourage in this game, which could use with a little more chatter sometimes. Also, it would function as a sort of support group for the development of your main character, which would then encourage more of that.

Thoughts?

[Constantine]

Wait, you can actually preface your message with a disclaimer like "Roleplay from Johannes Kepler, Captain of Abraham Miller" and it would have the exactly same effect. Or am I missing something?

[Indirik]

I've seen several do that kind of thing before.

[De-Legro]

Wait, you can actually preface your message with a disclaimer like "Roleplay from Johannes Kepler, Captain of Abraham Miller" and it would have the exactly same effect. Or am I missing something?

Yes, read his entire post, he cover why he believes making it a feature improves upon the current practise for people that want to have supporting characters.

[Constantine]

I often don't "play" (write something for) a character because I'm not in the mood for that particular character, sometimes because he's too serious, sometimes because he's a joker and sometimes because what he would say brings consequences I don't want to deal with.

Okay, I've read the entire thing more attentively and I have one problem with this.
If you want to say or do something in character you should always be ready to deal with the IC consequences. I would hate people using this outlet as a means to fool around, insult or libel someone and not face any consequences because it was technically a different character.

[De-Legro]

Okay, I've read the entire thing more attentively and I have one problem with this.
If you want to say or do something in character you should always be ready to deal with the IC consequences. I would hate people using this outlet as a means to fool around, insult or libel someone and not face any consequences because it was technically a different character.

You can already do that, RP's are not necessarily IC knowledge. If I RP talking to myself in my estate far from any prying ears, and use that RP to insult all and sundry, or even perhaps hint at plans like rebellion, that is NOT IC information for anyone else. The fact that there are players that ignore that doesn't change the fact that there are right now methods to do what you "fear" that should be pretty much free of IC consequences.

[Sacha]

You can already do that, RP's are not necessarily IC knowledge. If I RP talking to myself in my estate far from any prying ears, and use that RP to insult all and sundry, or even perhaps hint at plans like rebellion, that is NOT IC information for anyone else. The fact that there are players that ignore that doesn't change the fact that there are right now methods to do what you "fear" that should be pretty much free of IC consequences.

Well actually I think the rule is: if you post it for people to read, people can use it.

[Constantine]

You can already do that, RP's are not necessarily IC knowledge. If I RP talking to myself in my estate far from any prying ears, and use that RP to insult all and sundry, or even perhaps hint at plans like rebellion, that is NOT IC information for anyone else. The fact that there are players that ignore that doesn't change the fact that there are right now methods to do what you "fear" that should be pretty much free of IC consequences.

Is there an official ruling on this? I was under an impression that if someone sends you an RP letter, you are free to assume you somehow learn this information in character (spies, rumours, etc.)
Otherwise, what's the use of publishing RP that does not interact with anyone in any way? Taking cheap shots while denying others ability to react? What kind of roleplay is this?
As they say in pbp communities, characters can not reads thoughts, so don't use italics to bait other players out of character. If you want to insult someone, use direct speech and face the consequences.

[Chenier]

Well actually I think the rule is: if you post it for people to read, people can use it.

Indeed. It could be poor form, but it's also kind of poor form to "think" against others to pass a message across while denying them an opportunity to respond.

If you go about "If only everyone knew he told me he'd do the exact opposite, thought Bob", Bob's player would be in his rights to respond and say "You seemed distracted, seemed like you were thinking out loud, there, buddy..."

[De-Legro]

Indeed. It could be poor form, but it's also kind of poor form to "think" against others to pass a message across while denying them an opportunity to respond.

If you go about "If only everyone knew he told me he'd do the exact opposite, thought Bob", Bob's player would be in his rights to respond and say "You seemed distracted, seemed like you were thinking out loud, there, buddy..."

Rubbish, it creates stories, when people need to worry about everything being used in character, we run into the problem of characters never having a chance to emote or create backstory. The result is that when ever someone does an action that is "out of the blue" we end up with masses of complaints about how it was meta gaming, power gaming or otherwise acting contrary to the characters established persona. Because far too many people can not stand to know something as a player and not have their characters act on it, the world in general lacks character persona's. We keep those hidden away or shared only with a handful of players to ensure that plots and plans are not derailed by those that seek every advantage.

Well actually I think the rule is: if you post it for people to read, people can use it.

Yes that is the rule. That in no way makes it IC knowledge, it is simply an acceptance that we have not the systems nor the resources to police what is and isn't IC. The easiest solution then is to make a blanket statement, one which could be assumed would cover secondary characters if they existed as well.

Is there an official ruling on this? I was under an impression that if someone sends you an RP letter, you are free to assume you somehow learn this information in character (spies, rumours, etc.)
Otherwise, what's the use of publishing RP that does not interact with anyone in any way? Taking cheap shots while denying others ability to react? What kind of roleplay is this?
As they say in pbp communities, characters can not reads thoughts, so don't use italics to bait other players out of character. If you want to insult someone, use direct speech and face the consequences.

Back stories, points of interest, context for events that might occur later, establishing a character for the benefit of players rather then the benefit of characters. Like I stated above, the fact that people will use such information means that people don't post it. Characters in BM are bland, this is especially true of characters that intent to get up to underhanded activities, as any HINT of such is jumped upon almost instantly. Then the player base complains when a character that seemed so loyal ends up being dishonest.

Any good book has story elements that are between the reader and a specific character, that are not the knowledge of the rest of the characters in the world. It allows the reader to actually fathom what is going on. RP is a story telling tool, and our stories become that much poorer and harder for the audience to understand in BM because in so many cases we can not provide that privileged information to players in general.

[Constantine]

Back stories, points of interest, context for events that might occur later, establishing a character for the benefit of players rather then the benefit of characters.

Well, you're telling me how one can use it. I'm talking about how one can abuse it.
I just don't see the benefits outweighing aforementioned downsides.
It's kinda naive to suggest that people don't roleplay only because they can't have side characters.

Like I stated above, the fact that people will use such information means that people don't post it.

Don't see your point here, really.
People who don't roleplay because they are afraid of being metagamed which might lead to their character "losing" are half-hearted roleplayers to begin with.
You can't build a big community where no one metagames even the slightest. So there will always be a perfect excuse to not roleplay and pretend that it's someone else's fault.

Characters in BM are bland, this is especially true of characters that intent to get up to underhanded activities, as any HINT of such is jumped upon almost instantly.

You probably think people in RL are bland because they don't narrate their backgrounds and don't retell you their inner monologues.
If you are a backstabbing traitor of course you must keep it to yourself rather than warn every other player about upcoming devastating treachery and expect them to play along.

[De-Legro]

It's kinda naive to suggest that people don't roleplay only because they can't have side characters.

I didn't say that, I said that prevalent use any and all RP info results in players that have characters up to nefarious activities hiding that from both character (sensible) and player (arguably not so sensible). I personally don't RP from side characters, though my own characters might speak to them from time to time. The feature as requested is of little personal use to me at all.

Don't see your point here, really. People who don't roleplay because they are afraid of being metagamed which might lead to their character "losing" are half-hearted roleplayers to begin with.

Of course there is always going to be a issue of metagaming, you know what though, there are differing levels of prevalence. When something occurs but is infrequent, people in general will role with it and take the risk. When something is so prevalent that you can pretty much guarantee the outcome, then no people aren't going to bother, they are either going to find a different story to tell, or they are going to decide that they will RP it in a different way. Remember not all RP is on coloured paper. And this is what we see, the problem here is the the RP is now through a limited set of actions, with a very limited audience, so that if the story reaches a successful outcome players, not characters, feel betrayed, and we have the very real issue of losing players, as has been demonstrated by several of the larger betrayals in the last few years.

You probably think people in RL are bland because they don't narrate their backgrounds and don't retell you their inner monologues.

The level and types of interaction, and ones ability to mask their emotional response in real life are completely different. They are of course different mediums that have different requirements, just as the story elements of a book and that of TV have different requirements and implementations. Besides which its RL, I'm not necessarily looking for an entertaining story from it.

If you are a backstabbing traitor of course you must keep it to yourself rather than warn every other player about upcoming devastating treachery and expect them to play along.

Again, you miss context. In real life you might think someone acts odd or shady. That would not entail that you automatically assume he is out to screw you and take actions to marginalise them. I'm not talking about using RP to necessarily warn people about exact plans, but in BM currently if your character is even the tinniest bit "disloyal" or shady, the general player base will take that as a reason to be paranoid about your actions.

[GundamMerc]

Having been a part of other roleplaying communities before, I can definitely say this is the major issue on the roleplaying side of Battlemaster. Characters for the most step are expected to march in lockstep with the leadership, and any deviation from this is usually stepped on and squashed before any kind of story can be written out. Something rulers should try sometime is to have willful ignorance of the attitudes of most of their nobles. Let them get away with things, just to keep things interesting.

[Indirik]

I agree in some ways with this, and not necessarily in other ways. Whether or not you are allowed to get away with making trouble depends on how you approach it. We've had simply ridiculous amounts of dissension in Caelum, and rarely has anyone ever gotten banned for it. (Caelum is the most absurdly dysfunctional realm I have *ever* seen!) Dissension, sniping, petty political fighting, and troublemaking are damn near ingrained in our way of life.

Whether or not you can get away with things often depends on how you approach it. If your character is dedicated to helping the realm (at least publically) you can almost always get away with causing problems and fomenting dissension. Problems mostly start when people think you are working against the realm, or at the expense of the realm.

But yeah, some realms are a bit quick on the ban trigger.

[Constantine]

We've had simply ridiculous amounts of dissension in Caelum, and rarely has anyone ever gotten banned for it. (Caelum is the most absurdly dysfunctional realm I have *ever* seen!) Dissension, sniping, petty political fighting, and troublemaking are damn near ingrained in our way of life.

Yes, I actually have lots of fun spectating the drama between Ralina and Plaraveen/O'Deathh clans. I don't see much RP messages in Caelum but it's way more fun than reading someone's "character development stories" your character can not even be aware of or react to. I've seen those fanfics before, if it's not meant to generate interaction it's dull.