Do you really Role-Play, or do you Character-Assume?

[KevinJ]

I have done both.

Back in the olden days I played myself, transported into a fantasy world. The erntire group did. We chose our own stats, but the GM could veto outragious claims.

In the summer of 1987 while stationed in West Germany, the group I was a member of did the same thing using Champions. Later while stationed at Ft Campbell in 1989, I used the same version of myself in a different Champions game. Then again, in 1995 I again played the same version of myself in a third Champions game being run by one of the guys I played Champions with back at Ft Campbell.

Normally I role play. The characters are not me, though they might have some of my ethics and morals. Sometimes, I even find myself thinking about how a given character would reaxct in the situation I am not in, though I rarely take their advice on how to handly these situations... [Shut up, you!] {Make me!}

[KevinJ]

Originally Posted by Stormcrow

I've never heard this distinction between "role-play" and "character-assume" before.

I am familiar with both and I've know players who never actually role played, they just 'put on a costume' and were themselves. You see this whenever a player objects to a social or cultural norm in the game. Players who are always social justice retards or feminazis in fantasy games or the uner critical realism guy/girl who nitpicks over any 'fact' in a made up world that isn't outragiously silly or unbelievable.

I think modern players do not understand what a roll is any more. To them their role is tank, healer, thief, or DPS. They don't both separating themselves from the character, thyey can barely keep up with the combat part. To me a role is grizzled veteran, crotchety old man, impressionable youth, sly rogue, or spy. The role of Hamlet is way cooler than the role of secondary healer.

[KevinJ]

Originally Posted by Jackal

In fact, I need to be careful NOT to make the "best" decision, but the most "appropriate" one.

This is actually how I play. And I sometimes have to pull myself back a bit when playing some charactesr since not character I play is a brilliant tactician like myself...

On NPCs, I try not to make any of them oracles, but sometimes, in mid-game, I think of a way to foil my own carefully planed scenario and if the players are at an absolutely unable to figure something out I might allow an NPC to provide this work around.
Normally, I think of dozens of things players can do in a given situaltion and write out NPC responses, but I think of everything.

[David Bofinger]

Originally Posted by Stormcrow

I also prefer games that keep players ignorant about information their characters don't know.

I think it depends on the nature of the information. Obviously some things the players have to enjoy figuring out, and some things are meant to be surprises. Those are nearly always GM-created facts and the GM knows more or less what stage of the story they'll become known to the players.

But then there's the information created by players that the players aren't really trying to figure out. Maybe one character is a woman, disguised as her brother, but there's no particular expectation that this is ever going to be revealed. If nobody ever figures that out then it's kind of pointless. Whereas if the players know and the characters don't there's all sorts of scope for roleplay and humour.

I think you have to trade off the benefit of players finding out against the benefit of players knowing. It's not a trivial decision.

[zot]

Originally Posted by Stormcrow

I don't do the method-acting thing. I also prefer games that keep players ignorant about information their characters don't know.

At our table, players are expected not to use their own knowledge when their character doesn't have it. My role playing game is a bit different though, we all trade off GMing and the story (so far) and NPCs are "open book". This expectation does carry through in our TFT play testing, though.

[Stormcrow]

Originally Posted by David Bofinger

But then there's the information created by players that the players aren't really trying to figure out. Maybe one character is a woman, disguised as her brother, but there's no particular expectation that this is ever going to be revealed. If nobody ever figures that out then it's kind of pointless. Whereas if the players know and the characters don't there's all sorts of scope for roleplay and humour.

It's no different than an adventure including a location that the players never discover. You don't want to force them to go there just because otherwise "it's kind of pointless." Some things the players just don't learn, and that's okay. Their very existence in the mind of the GM helps shape the adventure nonetheless.

It's like an author who comes up with a big backstory for a character but then only uses a fraction of it in the published book. The reader may not know it, but it still shaped the character they do know.

But I like to keep the knowledge of the players equal to the knowledge of their characters so the players can apply their full intellect into solving problems, rather than just going through the motions because they have to pretend they don't know the answer. There's nothing less satisfying than seeing through an illusionist's tricks but having to pretend to be astounded anyway.

[KevinJ]

Here is a twist on the topic.

How many things in your game should the character's know that the players do not know?

When prepping for my current game (an oft used statement for me) I wrote a Common Knowledge document of things the characters would know, but the players wouldn't know unless I told them.

Here is an example:

• The Gods love and care about us.
• Wicked priests have caused many troubles in the past, but the Gods are much stricter now and will punish transgressing priests and false priests.
• Posing as a priest is a crime and the Gods will punish you for it.
• There used to be magic.
• Wicked and false priests helped the Sorcerer-Kings gain power.
• The Sorcerer-Kings summoned many monsters to fight for them and some of these monsters have been seen in the Taboo Lands.
• The Sorcerer-Kings caused the magic holocaust.
• The People, with the help of the Gods, defeated the Sorcerer-Kings and their monsters long ago.
• The Boundary Totems were set up to keep monsters from the Magic Holocaust from coming out of the Taboo Lands.
• The magic holocaust was a long time ago.
• Magic is evil and those who use it are cursed by the gods.
• The Taboo Lands is home to changelings, boogiemen, and degenerate spawn from the magic holocaust and Exiles.
• Going into the taboo lands means banishment.
• If you cross the Boundary into the Taboo Lands you will not be able to come back.
• The boundary of the taboo area is marked with 8 el tall stone totems.
• Bruin Lake is so deep that no one has even reached the very bottom. Some think there is no bottom.
• Gold nuggets are sometimes found in the Minniath river, west of Leeds.
• Many of the tin mines in Dorack are playing out and bronze is becoming more expensive.
• The ship yards in Leeds are the best ship builders.
• Farmers in North shire grow the best barley.
• Smiths in Bruin make the best swords.
• The armories in Race make the finest and strongest armor.
• The best beer comes from Kasos.
• The best cheese is produced in The Shire of Tendil
• The most famous painter was Feiler, or was it Nomel.
• Merchants from Calden are known to be fair at all times.
• Never trust a traveling tinker from Jabed, they will always cheat you.
• You can find fresh water pearls in Bruin Lake and salt water pearls on the south coast, near the Taboo area.
• Even though we may look different we are all People, brothers and sisters as children of the Gods.

All things the characters should know, but the players do not until they start the game, and then only if they read this...

While there is a lot the players might know that their characters will not there is probably just as much about your world that the charactesr would know, but the players do not.

[JLV]

Since my approach the past 15 or so years has tended more and more towards the "sandbox" style of play, knowledge for the players is pretty situational in my games.

In effect, they decide which knowledge they're going to discover (even though they don't realize it when they make the decision) by deciding which rumors and areas they're going to explore. The nice thing about this approach from my perspective is that they are the ones that figure out the meta-information in the game. (Since people are highly subject to pattern matching, they invent patterns where I had none originally, and, in effect, create the meta-villain or meta-plot out of the whole cloth for me! Did I ever mention just how lazy I really am? ;-) )

[ak_aramis]

Role-play more than Character-assume; my typical cleric PC in D&D is a total heretic universalist (different forms of universalism have been used), while I'm a dedicated monotheist of liturgical bent. My typical fighter has been an elf with patience galore, and is a bowman, or a human polearms type; I myself have studied multiple sword arts, and am a poor bowman.

My favorite TFT character was a Reptilite (with riding lizard) that I put through Grail Quest.

[KevinJ]

Originally Posted by JLV

Since my approach the past 15 or so years has tended more and more towards the "sandbox" style of play, knowledge for the players is pretty situational in my games.

In effect, they decide which knowledge they're going to discover (even though they don't realize it when they make the decision) by deciding which rumors and areas they're going to explore. The nice thing about this approach from my perspective is that they are the ones that figure out the meta-information in the game. (Since people are highly subject to pattern matching, they invent patterns where I had none originally, and, in effect, create the meta-villain or meta-plot out of the whole cloth for me! Did I ever mention just how lazy I really am? ;-) )

Since all the characters come from the same race and culture (and on the same Gods sent mission) I wanted them to feel like their own culture was 'alive' in ways many games ignore. Now this isn't railroading, they were given instructions from their Gods, but it is up to them on how they will go about it. So far they have explored about 1/4 of the Taboo lands and have only delt with 3 hostile races and one dragon who could have been hostile if the characters had made poor choices.

I'm currently working on the same thing for the other races that will eventually be available.