07-15-2024, 02:17 AM
Interesting way to categorize different RP styles!
I also feel like I lean towards immersive, though I'm not against situations that are more storytelling oriented (such as events), either. Mostly, I just think it's more fun to have a sense of unpredictability and tension in the atmosphere, and I find myself enjoying improv-style scenarios more. I like the feeling of going about my day and not knowing when something new might drop into my path. Early Korvara had a lot of that feeling to it.
The downside is that, yeah, you don't have much to rely on besides PvP or dice rolls if you both run into disagreement in how to resolve those situations. PvP is divisive and perhaps not always accurate to the IC. Designing systems to handle the heavy lifting is difficult since there are so many different situations and scenarios to try to account for. I feel like this only really becomes an issue with someone who isn't used to the 'saying yes' improv style, though.
For an antagonist character, the storytelling part can also be hard to work around if you're more immersive oriented. Because if you get captured on your first crime, you don't have much recourse if no one wants to play ball and give you a chance to escape. It's a place where an independent game system could be useful, but then you also have people who would just try to abuse it and make everyone else miserable. It's hard to design such a system that is lenient enough to allow for its intended purpose, while also being resilient enough to stop 'bad faith' plays.
Don't get me wrong - there are certain things I might not want to subject my character to, for whatever reason. I may still have some story beats I want to hit later, and killing or crippling them might be a bit of an inconvenience for that. But I'm also more likely to come up with an excuse as to why my character might not have a choice but to let the antag go - too weak from the battle, even if they win, for example. Storytelling has its benefits, too; if you have a specific 'destination' in mind, it's a lot easier to get there without a ton of chaos and people trying to pull the cart in different directions.
I think that inflexibility creates a vicious cycle, ultimately. It's a bigger issue than just how people to prefer their stories. People view some villainous characters as 'throw-aways' because when they finally get locked up for good/killed, another one pops up; because they got axed before their story really went anywhere, or just because the player just likes to play these types of characters. At the same time, the 'good guys' don't interact with these villains beyond the bare minimum to get them executed/retired; either because they don't care to, or they don't know how to make more out of it. It feels like a waste of a well of possibility, at times.
I do agree that being able to play both, or at least with a balance of each, is important to maximizing your opportunities and leads to increased enjoyment for everyone involved.
I also feel like I lean towards immersive, though I'm not against situations that are more storytelling oriented (such as events), either. Mostly, I just think it's more fun to have a sense of unpredictability and tension in the atmosphere, and I find myself enjoying improv-style scenarios more. I like the feeling of going about my day and not knowing when something new might drop into my path. Early Korvara had a lot of that feeling to it.
The downside is that, yeah, you don't have much to rely on besides PvP or dice rolls if you both run into disagreement in how to resolve those situations. PvP is divisive and perhaps not always accurate to the IC. Designing systems to handle the heavy lifting is difficult since there are so many different situations and scenarios to try to account for. I feel like this only really becomes an issue with someone who isn't used to the 'saying yes' improv style, though.
For an antagonist character, the storytelling part can also be hard to work around if you're more immersive oriented. Because if you get captured on your first crime, you don't have much recourse if no one wants to play ball and give you a chance to escape. It's a place where an independent game system could be useful, but then you also have people who would just try to abuse it and make everyone else miserable. It's hard to design such a system that is lenient enough to allow for its intended purpose, while also being resilient enough to stop 'bad faith' plays.
Don't get me wrong - there are certain things I might not want to subject my character to, for whatever reason. I may still have some story beats I want to hit later, and killing or crippling them might be a bit of an inconvenience for that. But I'm also more likely to come up with an excuse as to why my character might not have a choice but to let the antag go - too weak from the battle, even if they win, for example. Storytelling has its benefits, too; if you have a specific 'destination' in mind, it's a lot easier to get there without a ton of chaos and people trying to pull the cart in different directions.
I think that inflexibility creates a vicious cycle, ultimately. It's a bigger issue than just how people to prefer their stories. People view some villainous characters as 'throw-aways' because when they finally get locked up for good/killed, another one pops up; because they got axed before their story really went anywhere, or just because the player just likes to play these types of characters. At the same time, the 'good guys' don't interact with these villains beyond the bare minimum to get them executed/retired; either because they don't care to, or they don't know how to make more out of it. It feels like a waste of a well of possibility, at times.
I do agree that being able to play both, or at least with a balance of each, is important to maximizing your opportunities and leads to increased enjoyment for everyone involved.