[Ranylyn]

A number of recent debates on Skype got me wondering. DIfferent people RP different ways, and clearly there are some rules in play. Illusion Magic, for example, has rules stated so you can't just go "lol illusions" for everything. No time travel. No divine powers. And so on. However, debate got very heated about what is and is not acceptable, and I was curious, so I just thought I'd get people to weigh in with their opinions.

I've compiled a small list of examples based on what I've seen other people do, and what I've done myself. I'm going to break it up into categories. If you want to simply go "Category 3 is Good, Category 5 is Bad" you can. This is why I am doing it. If, however, you wish to weigh in more heavily, you're welcome to do so.

With that out of the way, let us move on. Category deignation is bold. Examples are normal. My own thoughts are italicized.


1) Taking the Mechanics literally and completely.

You were introduced into the Black Knights by moving in an L shape, and brag to your friends about the people you saved by "using Castling" on them. You regularly practice your stalemate technique, and laugh as you use the "Forced Move" technique to stop them from getting away. These are the people that quite honestly take everything -TOO- literally. No deviation allowed. If you're a Lantern Bearer, you need a Lantern visible in your description or else you get accused of metagaming. Renaming a dagger as a spear to fit your theme is punishable by death. And don't even get me started on Rising Game!

In my own experiences, these people are actually kind of painful to play with. ICly telling people how to unlock classes this way is just one example of how bad I personally feel this method is handled. Thankfully, they are few and far between.


2) Taking the mechanics literally, within reason

A variation of the above, but far more practical and lenient. They do not literally explain everything like unlocking classes, but generally play everything completely straight. When using a Monk's Power Up, for example, they will emote the gesture described in the description, just because it's "more accurate."

Honestly, so long as they don't take issue with, at the very least, marginally more creative adaptations, I have no issue with them.


3) Marginally more creative adaptations.

This category is about merging class properties together to truly make dual-classing seem natural and not tacked on.

Say you have a Kensei/Monk. A popular combo. How do you RP Power Gradation? Monks have Ki skills. Why not an infusion of Ki into the blade to grant it that property of dealing magic damage? Protection from Arrows and Blade Barrier? A dodged arrow in a battle was also (ICly, at least) swatted aside by the blade.

Another fun example is how a mage casts their spells. The "spell" itself is the same, but the gesture itself can vary wildly. Punch the ground to cast Magaisendo as an Evoker/Monk, or something.

This is one of my favorites, honestly. Finding ways to make two different styles into one seamless whole. And few people have ever complained about it so long as it didn't look like I was godmodding.


4) Alternate Interpretation (Realism)

This category is about applying common knowledge to a few "skills" that... just seem normal.

Rising Game, for example. You don't want to RP it as just some "Ghost" Technique. It's anger. Or an Adrenaline Rush. There's a ton of different ways this could be approached. This also applies to things like Lupine/Felidae/Grimalkin Instinct, or a Mechanation's Mechanical Strength, to give a few examples.

Honestly, the fact that I've met anyone who had an issue with this baffles me.


5) Using existing mechanics to REPRESENT things that EXIST in the lore.

Let me use alchemy, as an example. Not everyone has thousands of zelegrand leaves or wellwarts lying around. So what about using MG and LB skills to represent that? Guns and Shell effects? Bombs. Offensive Lantern spells? Bombs. Healing? Bom- I mean potions! Alchemy, bombs, and potions are a thing in SL2, but as there is no dedicated alchemist class, and the items aren't common enough to be able to make a character use them as their main gimmick, someone could decide to do this. They are not canonically a gunner or LB. They just use their skills to REPRESENT other skillsets.

Other examples: Fist mages (Monks who levelled as Evokers who aren't canonically monks) or just about any summoner who evokes/installs without summoning and treats it as part of their skillset.

This has been accused by a small handful of being "Lore Breaking" because "That's not how that skill works!" I counter that with "Uh, they're NOT using "that" skill." They're using "X." I personally really like this kind of thing, if done well.


6) Extrapolating mechanics to explain another idea being repesented.

Say you have a Half-Hyattr with whose insides took a bit after their other parent, and using the Fire Breath is agonizing. Magical catalysts are a thing (Tomes, spelledge weapons, etc.) If they channelled that destructive energy to their weapon instead, why not release the fire in the form of a Shinken, if a sword using Soldier/BK? Unlike the above example, this -IS- something they're ACTUALLY doing that goes against how it NORMALLY works.

IMO, this is where it really gets iffy. I haven't seen enough people do this to really have an opinion. The above example was my own character.


Curious to see what others think about this.

[Mivereous]

I RP on one character as every weapon (except I think one or two) as being made of Focus, since their skills are how they get by, and that would explain the rapid loss of FP. That, combined with most of their weapons are either Ether (meaning they haven't mastered focusing that weapon into being), or Divine (meaning they have mastered that weapon and can bring it up at will). There was also the thing a while back where someone was saying "Oh, X, you must be a Verglas because you kick so fast!" (because they used Rapid Kick), but the character ICly denied this, then there was a kerfuffle that they MUST be a Verglas ICly to use Rapid Kick, which was really dumb and countered with the logic that anyone can kick fast, and the Verglas didn't invent feet.

So yeah, I have seen all of these examples before, and usually people new to RP are on the 1 side, and usually move up those numbers based on the experiences they have with others. Then again, some people can be stubborn 1s, and when they meet stubborn 4-6s, have a hard time grasping imagination. I personally prefer 4-5. I have a feeling 6 represents 'edgy'? xD

[Maikito]

I'd rather look at this as sort of scale, personally. There's such a thing as being -too- creative in a structured RP environment like SL2. People commonly forget that this isn't a 100% Free form RP. Lore and such are in place as guidelines to give the overall RP a feeling of cohesiveness and not more like a giant clusterfuck of various fantasy elements people can find/come up with. It's made to give the RP a bit of a more immersion as you realize and understand the limits of the lore. In a way, people who find a way to do what they desire within the lore seem a bit more creative to me than the ones that go,"LOL well, my character can possess people because he ate a forbidden fruit found at the bottom of the sea.". Personally I enjoy seeing the antics of 3-5, but I'm not exactly bored with the 2s either. 1 and 6 are the most odd to RP with, as they seem to be in their own little "world" even when Dev explicitly states that such a thing is Lore breaking. I can deal with both though as long as they are able to be reasoned with. At the end of the day, the main thing i'm concerned about is the true Logic of their RP. If it's completely random and unthought out, then It will discourage me from RPing with them further or as much. However,if it is a well planned and at least somewhat easy to explain with the boundaries of lore, they then in fact interest me further.

[Miller]

Mechanics shouldn't really define much other than being a base structure to build off. However, Lore and general Common-sense should be the limits of how open ended you are with the way you roleplay.

As a seclusive roleplayer, 1) is enough for me to take a complete 180 and walk right out of there since they would provide nothing interesting. While 2) bothers me slightly I can at least deal with it.

I'm fine with 3 to 5 for the most part. While 6 generally isn't done well for me to bother.

[Sarinpa1]

2-5 are fine with me. 5 being sometimes done very poorly, but that's a good indicator for me that I shouldn't bother to roleplay with them in the first place, so yeaah.

I myself enjoy PvP, as it's the main and almost the only feature in the game that's not just RP and since I verily dislike tedious grinding and I also stick to single character, I have to use 5 to actualy use different classes without completely breaking character, or pulling the incredibly dumb shit some have been pulling, like a certain corbie intentionaly falling a flight of stairs to induce amnesia and go LE.

6 is a nono. Mainly because people often aren't educated enough to even make something that makes remotely any sense.

[Sawrock]

I usually do three and four, and I'm fine with two through five.

[Ryu-Kazuki]

It's pretty much a mixture of 2, 3, and 4 on my count (it really depends on the theme I have set for the character), mostly because despite the skills having descriptions, people have asked in the lore before, "Hey Dev, how does X work?" And sometimes he'll say it can be an interpretation of the user's, but it still has some lore defining features, like Black Wind related skills. Sometimes the mechanic, and lore, tie in together. Otherwise that's like saying Black Bolt coats the enemy in purple kool-aid just because I felt like it.

I don't see why asking everyone matters anyway, since everyone has different opinions, and different interpretations. I stand by what Miller said with the "lore is your limitation" statement.

[RoboCat]

I hate 1 oh god it's horrible. I elbow drop the brains of anyone I catch doing it.
2 is meh and ok, but super bland
i use 3&4 myself, but sometimes I get really paranoid of people who use style 5 because it's so close to 6.

I hope that's not my corbie. Only like what4-5 active corbies. I'd feel sorry for that corbie.

But on a more serious note, I think styles 2-5 should be promoted with the game's lore.

[Rockabye]

I'm okay with 2 through 4. 1 is extremely irritating to me. 5 is hit and miss, but honestly I tend to avoid people that do this. Primarily because it can lead to a great deal of confusion, so I think it's a poor practice in general. If they're doing 6, I would probably just avoid them altogether in most circumstances. They can have fun with people who like doing things their way if that's what they're into, but it's not for me. Then again, it can depend on how far I'm willing to suspend my disbelief for what they're trying to do. Unfortunately, people often tend to take things too far.

[DioAliken]

1s have annoy the hell out of me, I still remember getting moaned at because my guy says Chi not Ki and that Chi is not in the lore so should not be used or said. Was annoying and stupid. I personally like seeing interesting takes on stuff, one of the people I'm rping currently is a illusion mage item user, so all his abilities come from enchanted cards. I have notice some people getting a little confused about his abilities but I do make sure when using it that it clear it cards that his power comes from and it is a illusion. Still find some people annoy to accept it, but personally I like takes on powers that are new.