Who in the Hell Was THAT?

Ah, the character. The basis for all role-playing and dueling. The foundation that we build our skills upon. Weak or bad, flawed or clichéd, our characters only perform as well as we write them to, and often-times, those characters are so completely horrible in their own right that even considering them should be grounds for being slapped in the face. Some of my own are like that. But sometimes, our characters are works of art, unique and alive in their own way.

If you look around the site Juryrigged, you'll find in the RPG section a sub-section of dueling/role playing guides. Some of those guys are meant for character creation. We talk about the importance of names, of powers, of traits and abilities; in fact, we stress so much about the value of these abilities, powers and traits that we forget a key concept--the importance of the characters' character; or even yet, the importance of their name.

Ooh! Maybe I got your attention with that one, didn't I?

When a character lacks, well, character, they're less real to us--like 2D animations on a piece of paper. They don't have meaning, they don't have depth, and we don't empathize with them. If they suffer, are joyful, exuberant, stuck in a rut or anything else, we don't care. We need to make these characters feel, and the only way to do it is through our writing, and if the writing lacks, the character lacks. It's a two way road. We build on the character with our writing, but both need to improve in their own right.

But what of names? Names make up an important part of the character, and we must choose a name that thoroughly fits the character. But a question: do you pick a name then created a character to match the name, or create a character then pick a name to match the character? A name can make or break a character. Sure, you wouldn't see a medieval knight with the greatest sword skills you have ever seen being named Bob. But why not? Isn't Bob a good name for a knight of unsurpassed prowess?

But what happens when we can't even get past the name part, let alone choose a name altogether? Some people want dearly to role play, but lack the ability (or haven't developed one) to create and fine tune characters. In which case, it might be useful to use this scenario.

Pretend for posterity's sake, that the character in question has committed a crime. We don't have a name yet, but we can still move forward with the creation of the character. Now, you saw this character commit the crime. In fact, you saw it in all its gruesome detail. You now stand behind a one-way mirror looking onto a police line-up with the character in question standing in the line up. Describe him to the police. Everything you could recall. Height, build, eyes, hair. You name it. In fact, include what he's wearing, and how he committed the crime, and what kind of weapon he used.

To me, this is a good way to begin development on a character when you normally can't seem to do it. Probably not the best, but still a useful idea. Another good idea is to ask yourself questions like: if I were a superhero, what kind of super-power would I want? You could ask yourself other questions along similar lines. Each one helps further define your character and give them substance.

Does my character have family? If so, what kind of a family? These questions and more should be asked. The sky's the limit really when coming up with a character.

 

- W. Visarett

Does This Make Me Look Fat?

I was asked why I hadn't updated this yet, why there wasn't another article on dueling or role-playing and some myth that needed to be debunked or some problem or conundrum solved. Well, it's because I haven't been able to think of something to write about. I go in search of questions in which to answer. And speaking of questions to answer, a funny question was poised to me by Corbow:

What would you suggest when undertaking a new character of the opposite sex?

I can't say my own response to the question was any good, or even a half-way-decent answer, and the answer I gave is heavily biased from my own point of view, especially so considering I'm a male. The answer itself was very stereotypical, actually--a generalization; anyway, my answer went like this:

If you're a guy trying to play as a girl, become bitter, petty, fickle and misunderstand all things.

If you're a girl trying to play as a guy, think about baser instincts and emotions; hate, rage, anger with a smattering of angst and horny.

Yeah, real poor answer. But then again, there's always the movie As Good as it Gets to fall back on:

"How do you write women so well?"

"I think of a man, and I take away reason and accountability."

Yeah, still pretty bad, isn't it?

I suppose it is a real conundrum in and of itself. How would a guy role-play a woman, and how would a woman role-play a guy? Neither sex understands the other. All we have are generalizations, and it then takes a huge leap of faith to see if we can't get even part of the scenario right if we were suddenly put into the opposite sex's shoes.

Could always fall back on those stereotypes, and they might see you through only partway, though. Role playing is meant to be immersive, to immerse yourself in the role of the character. To not only get inside the characters' head, but let other role players see you're good at it and to make a connection with your character and empathize with it. No easy task, especially so when you're trying to role play as the opposite sex.

You'd think with this one there are easy answers. There aren't, and I'll make no claims that I have any good answers on this subject. I'm pretty sure someone somewhere has a better answer for all this than I; maybe they'll drop me a line and give me a tip, or leave a comment. Best I can offer up for advice is experiment. Worst comes to worst, base the character off a girl (or guy) you know and see how it goes.

 

- W. Visarett

Say What?

We get signal.

What?

Main CRT turn on.

It's post!

How are you role-players?

All your post are unintelligible.

You are on the path to misunderstanding.

What you say?

You have no chance to comprehend, make your time.

Yeah, that's exactly what happens in my mind when I run right into another garbled post for a duel or role play. I don't think any of us happen to like posts that are so unintelligible that we can't make sense of what's what in them, especially in duels. In a duel, you're supposed to explicitly tell your opponent what you are doing. When you fail to do so, there is a lack of clarity and understanding to be had turning the whole post into one giant ambiguous mess--and let's face it, when you fail to write what you're doing clearly for all to understand, you fail as a duelist.

Why do I say this? Well, I'll give you an example.

In business, especially large corporations, when you relate a proposal to your boss, you have to be very clear, very explicit, about what it is you're proposing. If you're not, the proposal goes down the drain and becomes a waste. If you send documents to another law firm with documentation about something, and that documentation isn't clear, a trial could be won or lost on that lack of clarity.

In my mind, and if I were the boss of a certain individual, and he continually submitted documents, proposals and forms that lacked clarity, weren't explicit in their meaning and generally vague, I'd fire him and find someone else who was clear and explicit in their meaning.

But that's me.

I don't like somebody stringing me along without a clue as to what the hell is going on, do you? I should trust not.

If an attack isn't clear, you don't know how to counter it. Throwing in extra words in the hopes of making your post look pretty doesn't make it clear. Cutting out needed details to make your post short doesn't make it clear. What makes a post clear is description that gets the point across. The description doesn't have to be paragraphs upon paragraphs to be clear, either. And example would be something like this:

Ex: Stent jabbed with her right hand toward the bridge of the man's nose.

A single sentence. It tells you exactly, to the letter, what the character is doing. There are no ifs, ands or buts about it. You know for a fact, that Stent is going to punch the man in the nose. You can't get clearer than that. And yet I find many instances where people lapse over the important details for the sake of making things look pretty, or just lapse over the detail altogether.

I guess the problem is, again, always trying to find the happy medium--not too little description, but not too much description. Although, when you think about it, too little is never enough, but too much is superfluous. For all our sakes, I hope we can all be as clear as possible with our attacks in duels. I don't want to think what would happen if we weren't.

 

- W. Visarett