Anyone else's toons connected to lore characters?

starlizard70ub17_ESO

A couple of my Khajiit characters are brothers, and due to an unfortunate "incident" in Senchal, they forced to leave. Their cousin, Durrali, the Silver Moons innkeeper at the Baandari Trading Post, invited them to stay there for awhile until things settled down. So 4 years or more after coming up with this backstory, The Khajiit brother will get to return home.

Aigym_Hlervu

VaranisArano wrote: »

If that's unsatisfying, sorry. Complain to ZOS about not forcing everyone through the original Coldharbor tutorial right off the bat. That would take care of the problem.

Until then, I think its important to recognize that ZOS doesnt require players to start the MQ. So we should respect that, for those characters, the MQ start didnt happen in their playthrough, and yet they can still revive from soul gems or at wayshrines.

No, that was absolutely satisfying, @VaranisArano, thank you! I've read everything you've written there and I appreciate your efforts - I have nothing sensible to reject. I have to agree there. ZOS should really think twice before allowing players to start anywhere except Coldharbour. At last we have what we have here. Thanks again and I've given you an awesome mark there. That really is.

Ajaxandriel

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

Ajaxandriel wrote: »

.. I'm not the OOC roleplayer type like NotDaedraWorshipper but even so, you can "interpret" each game event in an original "story" event, some kind of "headcanon" story...

The revival mechanic can be the coma after a faint or heavy harm and healing be an unspecified NPC who brought you to a holy shrine.

Or in a harder interpretation, it's the time flow resetting itself in a former state in the tale of your story (like, mini-dragon break yeah), so your character is not even aware of what happened.

That headcanon is nothing to me but a pure senseless imagination. I'm not interested in those dreams people live inside a certain game universe inventing backstories to their alter egos while the game does not give them such an option to write it and make it readable to everyone, inventing those ranks and titles which exist only in their minds and so on. Those ideas do not reflect on the screen.

In fact it does.
Ajaxandriel really masters the power of ice magic and mirorring spells. You can see him.
He really wears the colors of his kinship as outfit. You can see him.
He never was sacrificed by the Worm Cultist, because the quest was never done. One can testify it.
He really dwells in the palace of his father and the embassy of his league, even if this backstory is yet explained nowhere you still can visit and witness it.

Same for the dozen of characters I made.

So you're wrong. Roleplay is not just dream, roleplay is part of the real game.

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

That leads to some things I view as a real crap and abomination I've never seen before in Tamriel like those Orc Necromancers dressed pink and willing to join Mannimarco after all that n'wah has done to them. Or, say, those Dunmer fighting for the Covenant in Cyrodiil after all those Daggerfall fetchers did to us in Stonefalls. I guess many of them would even join Dagoth Ur if such an option could ever be given to them in TES III (I'm not speaking of those unofficial addons). I played a Redoran Sorcerer in TES III but here in ESO I cannot join House Redoran - so I don't play this role. But others do by stealing those motifs and pretending to be Redorans.. Well, only in ESO I finally understood why Dunmer view those of their kin who came from abroad as outlanders.. That is all because of that headcanon and their own fantasies they actually play. I haven't ever met even a single player here just like me who would just play this game as a whole. So I'm not interested in headcanon explanations of how do those characters supposed to actually revive at wayshrines before Mannimarco sacrifices them. I hoped to hear in-game based answer. Anyway, I understand it is useless because those guys are living in the world of their dreams within the world we are all actually playing.

Aigym_Hlervu

Your mockery, @Ajaxandriel, has no effect on me. We have settled that matter with @VaranisArano already, however I guess you have not read the thread further than that my reply to your offer to me of making some headcanon. I think you just do not understand neither me nor my point of view on this game. I'll try to state it more clear for you if you wish to understand it. Sorry for a wall of text. I hope you read it entirely before saying anything regarding some points.

You've said you have 10 characters. I think the majority of about 99% of the players play the game the same way. Thanks to @VaranisArano I'm no more surpised. I respect those ways, though I'm not among you, guys. I've always had just 1 character only. This character is a tool I use to interact with the world the devs have created. They gave us many ways to choose from: races, classes, titles, alliances, guilds, different achievements that make my character become someone I choose within the coordinate system of the fictional world I play. These choices are the only feature I call role-playing. I don't need 10 avatars to reflect my will there, to respond to different situations the game gives me. I can do it with just 1 character. I do not invent any backstories for my character, as well as any unexisting titles and roles - I write my story in this game within the lore, quests and game mechanics only through my own actions. Since that character is just a tool of my will - that character is me. His only "backstory" is a login button, his race, class and Alliance and that foul scum Mannimarco who started the mess. Thus I take all the benefits and all the responsibilty of my character's actions in this game personally. It is not he who kills an unarmed Khajiiti prisoner - it is me who makes that decision. The difference between me and those 99% of the players is only in the number of characters we have and their buck passing of all the responsibility for their actions to their characters who nevertheless fully depend on their will along with their backstories. If your, say, Khajiiti character ever steals from another player (well, if the devs allow it sometimes) or an NPC due to his backstory you invented for him, I will accuse you, not your character be it your main character or not. Because you are the source of those actions and his backstory will be irrelevant to me. I hope this is clear to you.

17 years ago inTES III I was a Redoran Sorcerer, the Patriarch of the Tribunal Temple, the Nerevarine and so on. Yeah, at first point I was considered an outlander by all the NPC there, but still I was Dunmer and I earned the honor not to be called that way through my actions. ESO does not give me the same options to play those roles, so I do not make any headcanon I do. Instead it allowed me to become the one I wished to be in this universe so many years ago: now (besides my other achievements and roles like being a Vestige, a various guilds adept and so on) I am an Ordinator, one of the Hands of Almalexia as she proclaimed me herself during a certain quest. I legally wear a full armor set of a Vvardenfell Ordinator with the same weapons and dyes those Vivec City Ordinators use. You may also see it. But in spite of it I am the one who I am. I do not steal anything if only the game does not force me to do it through a quest which goal is to save the world or my Dunmer kin. If it is a side quest, I will abandon it because I do not steal the property belonging to someone else be it an NPC or a PC. I do not kill innocents if it is not a war time, I do not rob them, I haven't joined the Dark Brotherhood and do not plan to play that content at all. In Cyrodiil I've always been fighting for the Ebonheart Pact only. Being an Ordinator I also defend the Tribunal because I played TES III and realize they must stay alive and powerful by the 3E 427 whatever means necessary, thus my personal attitude towards some Almsivi actions means nothing here.

But there is also a dark side: all the solo Ebonheart campaign in ESO is based on the invasion of the Covenant and the Dominion forces into the lands of the Pact races. They ravaged Stonefalls and killed Pact NPCs leaving only ruins. In Cyrodiil those races do the same. Thus, being a Dunmer there who fought them for the freedom of my Morrowind, I'm forced to dislike all the other races except Nords and Argonians at this point of time. I see no reason to invent any stories reasoning the controversal relation. I was strongly disappointed the devs have not made any counter invasion quest line so I could murder those Bretons, Khajiits, Altmer and ravage their own cities as a retaliation act. So all I can do is only to ruthlessly murder any of them and to mock at their corpses in Cadwell's line and in PvP. With pleasure I remember how I ordered to execute that Khajiiti invader Kazdi after she yielded herself prisoner and how I sabotaged the Covenant warship fleet by giving those Warship Designs to our Telvanni spy during that Alik'r Desert quest. With pleasure I remember all those Aldmeri and Covenant player characters I killed in Cyrodiil and during the Battlegrounds matches. I do not take part in any event like "save Khajiits - kill Dragons" because of it. I'd better murder those Khajiits but save Dragons from those n'wahs who kill us along.. Dragons have done no bad neither to me nor to my Morrowind, they've even saved my virtual life at the very beginning of TES V but I was forced by the game circumstances to kill them.

You thank the devs for that - they were the ones who created such an interesting but a hostile and unfriendly world. You have to understand if this universe becomes kind like The Sims one, TES dies because no one will ever play it again. It won't be that thrilling. If Good wins Evil entirely, the world dies.. Anyway I just play it within its rules and boundaries according to my views of honor, Good and Evil and all its circumstances which force some of my actions of course - the same way we all live our lives IRL. I've been sticking to my choices all these years in spite of any nerfs of my class, any EP defeats in PvP campaigns, any certain lore twists like the destruction of Vvardenfell and the Red Year. I will stick to them even if I'm the last PvP player in Cyrodiil to fight for the Pact - I will still confront you all alone there just because I am a Dunmer Sorcerer, my virtual country joined the Pact and fights for its freedom. Though I understand and respect your way of playing, I see you do not understand and respect mine, you mock and say I'm wrong. In that case your opinion is irrelevant to me the same way mine is irrelevant to you and the likes of you who agrees with you. Your numbers mean nothing to me and you may mock as many times as you wish. But if you choose mockery as the way of communication, then be ready sometimes I mock you the same way whatever discussion you participate in and whatever topic I decide fitting. If this suits you - see you around, ten-faced n'wah.

Zacuel

*sniffle, wipes tears*

My whole world is a lie...

VaranisArano

Cygemai_Hlervu,

No mockery here, but I honestly can't tell if you realize that its really easy for you to come off as rude and judgmental when you talk about "I blame the player, not the character" or you say roleplayers are "passing the buck" by caring about why their character does an action.

Its fine to be judgmental when you roleplay alone. When you roleplay with others or we discuss role-playing on the forums, its really important to abide by the foundation of all succeasful role-playing groups: respect your fellow roleplayers.

That means that just like you appreciate when others treat your approach as valid without mockery, that's true for pretty much everyone. We appreciate not being judged IRL for our approach to role-playing.

I know that, when I've already explained that I draw a clear distinction between myself as a real person and my characters, I wouldnt want to roleplay with someone who's going to continue to blame me IRL for what my character does. I'm just not comfortable role-playing with someone who's going to make it that personal. That's a sure way to lose a friendship at the gaming table.

Another part of it is simply that there's a really good reason to draw a distinction between games and reality. The 1980s Satanic Panic about D&D was in large part driven by people claiming that gamers couldnt tell the difference between rolling dice to let their characters cast imaginary spells and the players doing real demonic magic. That was complete hogwash, obviously, but that's one reason why many roleplayers with a D&D background tend to maintain an ironclad sense of division between player/character. There's always people who want to pass judgment on gamers, without respecting that the vast majority of gamers are perfectly capable of telling the difference between in game actions and actions in real life. Basically, those people insisted that every gamer roleplayed like "my character is basically me" and refused to listen to anyone who said otherwise.


So, I hope I can give you the benefit of the doubt, and I hope that you can understand why you "blaming the player" comes off as pretty judgmental when you start talking about other roleplayers. To me, it seems rather disrespectful of the other players who you know don't roleplay as "my character is basically me" and if would make me very uncomfortable if we were roleplaying together at the same D&D table.


But I did think the idea of " If your Khajiiti character ever steals from an NPC due to his backstory you invented for him, I will accuse you, not your character" was interesting in a Lit Criticism sort of way.

Take Les Miserables.
Did Jean Valjean steal a loaf of bread to feed his sister's starving children? Or did he steal a loaf of bread because the author, Victor Hugo, made him do it?

Depending on what level of Lit Criticism you like best, the answer is both.

Many roleplayers are more interested in characters and their backstory, so the answer "Valjean stole because his sister's children were starving" is more interesting than "the author made him do it." Because frankly, "the author made him do it" applies to every character ever written.

The character did it for X reason is a valid, and often interesting approach. Its also something that roleplayers are interested in exploring.

Here, with the Khajiit NPC, you took the opposite approach. Why did Valjean steal the bread? "The author made him do it." Why did Javert pursue Valjean? "The author made hin do it.

That's a valid approach to Lit Criticism, but a less interesting approach to roleplaying.

Its also problematic when you try to push this approach when the other person is trying to explore the first approach - and that's what I think is happening here.

Example:
RPer 1: "My Khajiit went to prison for stealing a loaf of bread to sister's starving children."
RPer 2: "No, what really happened is that your Khajiit stole that loaf of bread because you, the player, made him do it."
RPer 1: "No...he's got a sister and her kids were starving. That's his backstory, and that's why he did it."
RPer 2: "No he doesn't, you made up that backstory, and you made your character steal that bread. Quit trying to pass the buck off on your character's backstory that you made up."
RPer 1: "Are you serious? I'm role-playing here!"

RPer 2 ran into pushback because he was pushing his vision of roleplaying onto RPer 1 by engaging on a whole different level of Lit Criticism than RPer 1. RPer 2 saying "You made up the backstory and you made the khajiit steal the bread" is both true and completely missing the point of what RPers 1 was trying to accomplish.


I hope that makes some sense.

Aigym_Hlervu

@VaranisArano, this is another time you prove yourself to be a very wise and clever man. My hat is off to you. My words about mockery were directed to those who mocks only. Just read that post addressed to me above. I'm quite polite and respectful with those who acts the same way towards me. I've told it, I realize everything you tell on role-playing, so you'd better explain everything not to me but to those role-players you've marked as RPer-1 in your reply.

You say you wouldn't want to roleplay with someone who's going to continue to blame you IRL for what your character does, you're just not comfortable role-playing with someone who's going to make it that personal. You're not comfortable to make a foul act in the game towards someone and to have no ability to pass the buck to your character? A nice approach. I do not share it with you as I've said it before, but if you act honorably whatever role-playing model you venerate, I will respect you for your fair play. You say RP-1 is a table D&D way of role-playing - this table game has never been popular in my country, I haven't played it either, so I have no opinion on that and cannot judge. But I think the approach you state is one of the reasons why this game has never been popular here. It's a bit unserious approach to any game be it sports, chess, whatever. And yes, this is only my opinion you don't have to share.

Regarding your examples, you're absolutely right, I am an RPer-2. I guess you're the only one here to understand it, so I thank you. The main point here is, as you've stated it, it is a less interesting approach for the majority of you here. You want to play scoundrels but do not want to be treated as scoundrels. A nice approach. This is your choice, not mine. Of course I will not treat you as scoundrels IRL, but I can do it in Tamriel, on its in-game chat and on the forum of this game. I will not hate that player IRL - I'll just have no business with him in the game but that doesn't mean I'll be rude with him in the matters not regarding the game. I thought it was easy to understand.

Blaming an in-game character is like blaming a gun for shooting somebody because it was somehow directed at somebody. Stealing and robbery are considered evil by the game rules. It is evil IRL also. If it is a starving sister who made a Khajiit to steal that loaf of bread, I do not accuse neither a player nor his character. The dicision a player made due to such a situation is absolutely right according to my views on Good and Evil. The ZOS being the authors and creators of that world are the only ones here to blame for creating such a situation and especially if that Khajiit is an NPC. But if the same Khajiit steals just because he is a Khajiit with certain views on property with no starving sister existing in the game, I will blame the player who controls that Khajiit for making that decision (or the ZOS if that Khajiit is an NPC - this way I'll just harm that Khajiit if the game allows me). The player is the only one to make that decision to steal. Yes, we have to judge every situation individually, but the backstory the player creates for his character, as I've said, is absolutely irrelevant here. At least he could choose to (role)play another more honorable race or still being a Khajiit just stay away from robbing anyone - thanks to ZOS they give us that choice.

Watchdog

@Cygemai_Hlervu - I would like to add another perspective into this discussion.

If you meet a movie actor or actress who played a villain in a movie (or simply a petty thief, on par with that Khajiit you mentioned), would you treat the real person accountable for that character's actions? Even on a discussion forum? That real person definitely is not the character, you see? Besides, for which character's actions would you hold that actor/actress accountable? The nice guy from one movie, or the villain from the other?

Roleplaying is like acting, while often being the director, the script writer, and the actor all in one neat package. This is why so many of us roleplayers choose different roles, often as detached from the official story as possible, to be able to play together with others, to create compatible stories together. We may still recognize the main story as something happening, but it is happening around us, independent of us, and our characters are not the main heroes. Often no heroes at all. Sometimes even villains or petty thieves. In the minds of many roleplayers, the world of ESO is merely a sandbox with a story going on. Our characters live their own lives, and game mechanics, quests and all, are simply heroic tales, legends, we imagine happening.

I have 15 characters. None of them is a "toon". Each is a full character, with a defined personality, each has his or her own backstory, motives, goals, virtues and vices. Writing this post made me realize that I basically got two games in one when I bought ESO (yay! ). One is the legendary story of the Vestige, the other is a compilate of the individual stories of my own characters. Some of those stories influence the others, as some of my characters know one another, some are even related.

None of my characters is me, the real person. I am still me, the real person, in game chat, unless speaking "In Character". Then I am actually acting, much like a movie or theatre actor. I am playing the role of my character, who is like another story NPC then, just a bit more smarter (hopefully ) and more interactable. I remember a funny moment from Age of Conan when we played a scene so well in the starting area of Tortage, that newbies approached us and tried to click my character repeatedly, and then complained in the game chat that this quest giver was bugged.

Another thing roleplaying with other people requires is a certain level of compatibility of the participants' characters. Imagine this situation:

Your character apparently is the Vestige. Imagine you meet another roleplayer who claims their character is the Vestige too. How are your characters compatible at all? How can you two interact?

"Hello, I am Bob the Vestige, I singlehandedly defeated Molag Bal and saved Tamriel, while depleting the Amulet of Kings for centuries, just a month ago."
"Hello Bob, nice coincidence, you see, I am Tom the Vestige, and I have done exactly the same thing yesterday."

Being THE HERO works in a single player game, but not in an MMORPG, unless one does not plan to interact with other characters as characters.

VaranisArano

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

@VaranisArano, this is another time you prove yourself to be a very wise and clever man. My hat is off to you. My words about mockery were directed to those who mocks only. Just read that post addressed to me above. I'm quite polite and respectful with those who acts the same way towards me. I've told it, I realize everything you tell on role-playing, so you'd better explain everything not to me but to those role-players you've marked as RPer-1 in your reply.

You say you wouldn't want to roleplay with someone who's going to continue to blame you IRL for what your character does, you're just not comfortable role-playing with someone who's going to make it that personal. You're not comfortable to make a foul act in the game towards someone and to have no ability to pass the buck to your character? A nice approach. I do not share it with you as I've said it before, but if you act honorably whatever role-playing model you venerate, I will respect you for your fair play. You say RP-1 is a table D&D way of role-playing - this table game has never been popular in my country, I haven't played it either, so I have no opinion on that and cannot judge. But I think the approach you state is one of the reasons why this game has never been popular here. It's a bit unserious approach to any game be it sports, chess, whatever. And yes, this is only my opinion you don't have to share.

Regarding your examples, you're absolutely right, I am an RPer-2. I guess you're the only one here to understand it, so I thank you. The main point here is, as you've stated it, it is a less interesting approach for the majority of you here. You want to play scoundrels but do not want to be treated as scoundrels. A nice approach. This is your choice, not mine. Of course I will not treat you as scoundrels IRL, but I can do it in Tamriel, on its in-game chat and on the forum of this game. I will not hate that player IRL - I'll just have no business with him in the game but that doesn't mean I'll be rude with him in the matters not regarding the game. I thought it was easy to understand.

Blaming an in-game character is like blaming a gun for shooting somebody because it was somehow directed at somebody. Stealing and robbery are considered evil by the game rules. It is evil IRL also. If it is a starving sister who made a Khajiit to steal that loaf of bread, I do not accuse neither a player nor his character. The dicision a player made due to such a situation is absolutely right according to my views on Good and Evil. The ZOS being the authors and creators of that world are the only ones here to blame for creating such a situation and especially if that Khajiit is an NPC. But if the same Khajiit steals just because he is a Khajiit with certain views on property with no starving sister existing in the game, I will blame the player who controls that Khajiit for making that decision (or the ZOS if that Khajiit is an NPC - this way I'll just harm that Khajiit if the game allows me). The player is the only one to make that decision to steal. Yes, we have to judge every situation individually, but the backstory the player creates for his character, as I've said, is absolutely irrelevant here. At least he could choose to (role)play another more honorable race or still being a Khajiit just stay away from robbing anyone - thanks to ZOS they give us that choice.

Thank you again for clarifying. I do appreciate it.

There's one point I'd like to clarify of my own.

You asked: "You're not comfortable to make a foul act in the game towards someone and to have no ability to pass the buck to your character?"

No, actually, I'm not comfortable roleplaying with someone who can't tell the difference between actions in game and actions in real life. In game consequences are appropriate for in game transgressions. Real life consequences are appropriate for real life transgressions. What I don't like is someone mixing them up, and deciding that its appropriate to treat me or someone else disrespectfully because they dislike how we roleplay in the game. Or someone mixing it up the other way, and acting like a jerk IRL only to blame their character to deflect blame (much rarer, IME). I've seen it happen both ways and its a quick way to break a friendship. Its important to be a responsible roleplayer and respect your fellows, whether they are around the table or discussing ideas on the forums.
I think you understand and agree with that distinction, but its something I wanted to make sure I was clear on.



And that brings me to the other part I'm glad you clarified.

You said: " Of course I will not treat you as scoundrels IRL, but I can do it in Tamriel, on its in-game chat and on the forum of this game. I will not hate that player IRL - I'll just have no business with him in the game but that doesn't mean I'll be rude with him in the matters not regarding the game. I thought it was easy to understand."

This explains so much about your behavior on the forums. And yeah, it explains why I think you sometimes sound rude during threads about role-playing.

When you say things that are rude on the forums, consider that most of the time you aren't talking to someone who's role-playing a character. You are talking to a Real Person behind that Forum ID. A real person who happens to be talking about their character(s), and who may or may not appreciate the rudeness.

There's an exception of sorts: when two or more people are having an in-character discussion, then its more acceptable to be rude in an in character sort of way. Its more acceptable because most people draw a distinction between character and person! Your character can insult another character, and most people won't be offended IRL. But even there's an important caveat: the Internet is tone deaf, and its really easy to just be the nasty sort of rude because we often don't know the other people we are roleplaying with very well. Its a lot easier to be rude in-character around a D&D table with friends so I can make sure I don't go too far.

(The other exception of "They started it!" Is always valid, but not necessarily the best justification. )


I would strongly encourage you to rethink that idea that its okay to be rude to players about their roleplaying on the forums. There are some contexts when its okay, like when you and the other players are all talking in-character. But most players in discussions like this aren't in-character. They are real people (using a forum ID) discussing their characters.

So if you aren't trying to be rude to players IRL, I think its worth considering that the forums usually are a lot closer to talking to real people IRL than it is to in game roleplay chat between characters.

Thanks for your consideration!

VaranisArano

Watchdog wrote: »

Cygemai_Hlervu - I would like to add another perspective into this discussion.

If you meet a movie actor or actress who played a villain in a movie (or simply a petty thief, on par with that Khajiit you mentioned), would you treat the real person accountable for that character's actions? Even on a discussion forum? That real person definitely is not the character, you see? Besides, for which character's actions would you hold that actor/actress accountable? The nice guy from one movie, or the villain from the other?

Roleplaying is like acting, while often being the director, the script writer, and the actor all in one neat package. This is why so many of us roleplayers choose different roles, often as detached from the official story as possible, to be able to play together with others, to create compatible stories together. We may still recognize the main story as something happening, but it is happening around us, independent of us, and our characters are not the main heroes. Often no heroes at all. Sometimes even villains or petty thieves. In the minds of many roleplayers, the world of ESO is merely a sandbox with a story going on. Our characters live their own lives, and game mechanics, quests and all, are simply heroic tales, legends, we imagine happening.

I have 15 characters. None of them is a "toon". Each is a full character, with a defined personality, each has his or her own backstory, motives, goals, virtues and vices. Writing this post made me realize that I basically got two games in one when I bought ESO (yay! ). One is the legendary story of the Vestige, the other is a compilate of the individual stories of my own characters. Some of those stories influence the others, as some of my characters know one another, some are even related.

None of my characters is me, the real person. I am still me, the real person, in game chat, unless speaking "In Character". Then I am actually acting, much like a movie or theatre actor. I am playing the role of my character, who is like another story NPC then, just a bit more smarter (hopefully ) and more interactable. I remember a funny moment from Age of Conan when we played a scene so well in the starting area of Tortage, that newbies approached us and tried to click my character repeatedly, and then complained in the game chat that this quest giver was bugged.

Another thing roleplaying with other people requires is a certain level of compatibility of the participants' characters. Imagine this situation:

Your character apparently is the Vestige. Imagine you meet another roleplayer who claims their character is the Vestige too. How are your characters compatible at all? How can you two interact?

"Hello, I am Bob the Vestige, I singlehandedly defeated Molag Bal and saved Tamriel, while depleting the Amulet of Kings for centuries, just a month ago."
"Hello Bob, nice coincidence, you see, I am Tom the Vestige, and I have done exactly the same thing yesterday."

Being THE HERO works in a single player game, but not in an MMORPG, unless one does not plan to interact with other characters as characters.

I love your story about Age of Conan! That sounds so amazing to have a player actually believe that you all were NPCs.

I've managed it once, sort of. I was fishing in the Imperial City while wearing the Xivkyn polymorph, and had a fellow EP player jump down and try to kill me!


You bring up an important point about how important compatibility is when roleplaying with other people. Roleplaying with others is such a cooperative endeavor, and so its very helpful for at least the players to have compatible goals and be willing to have their characters work together. I've seen a number of roleplaying groups fall apart because our characters weren't compatible or we weren't all working towards the same general goal. We stayed friends, but the roleplaying session ended because we couldn't get it together.

Aigym_Hlervu

Watchdog wrote: »

If you meet a movie actor or actress who played a villain in a movie (or simply a petty thief, on par with that Khajiit you mentioned), would you treat the real person accountable for that character's actions? Even on a discussion forum? That real person definitely is not the character, you see? Besides, for which character's actions would you hold that actor/actress accountable? The nice guy from one movie, or the villain from the other?

Man, I think it's obvious - I will treat him as an actor only. He just plays the role written in the scenario and he was not the one to write it. Watching movies I usualy blame its scriptwriter for different scenario twists I find far-fetched, illogical or something. There's a Turkish TV series I've tried to watch recently, there are 150 episodes taking 2 hours each (I'm not Turkish though). The problem was that the scriptwriter always saved those hopeless characters never making the events logical. All the plot could take 3 episodes at max if the scenario was a bit more logical. There was another foreign (I hope Hollywood makes its US adaptation so we could watch it more habitual way) movie the scriptwriter in order to end the episode just made one of his main characters (who had been a very smart and logical one all the runtime) a complete imbecile in the very last episode due to no adequate reason - just out of a blue sky. Thus he killed him and ended the movie. What would I say an actor who played that character? Nothing. He played his role really fine. What would I say its scriptwriter? Well, if I ever need to do that, I'd say he he had taken my money and disappointed my expectations by ruining that movie at the very end of it. I might also call him with some bad word for that. But actually, I won't buy any other movies based on his writings anymore. Or.. I will because he is basically a talented <bad word> . I guess you haven't read my post above if you make parallels between movie characters and its actors and game characters and its players.

Watchdog wrote: »

Your character apparently is the Vestige. Imagine you meet another roleplayer who claims their character is the Vestige too. How are your characters compatible at all? How can you two interact?

"Hello, I am Bob the Vestige, I singlehandedly defeated Molag Bal and saved Tamriel, while depleting the Amulet of Kings for centuries, just a month ago."
"Hello Bob, nice coincidence, you see, I am Tom the Vestige, and I have done exactly the same thing yesterday."

I see no trouble here. Both Bob and Tom are Vestiges, they both killed Molag Bal and reclaimed their souls. So what? It is completely irrelevant for me if they did it in a MMO or in a single-player game each. I see no problem here. There might be a problem if it works like a 1996 NY Times tuesday crossword puzzle where a player had to know the future: he had to answer the question who would win presidential race the next day of November 6th - Bill Clinton or Bob Dole. Both variants were correct the day the puzzle was published (November 5th) with all other blank spaces fitting whatever answer the player chose. But November 6th showed the only correct variant was Clinton, so those who chose Bob Dole had to rework the puzzle completely again. It is just an example I hope you understand what I mean.

Aigym_Hlervu

@VaranisArano, I might have said something rude in the past to the players regarding their RPing - but I've said it several times I was sorry and I didn't mean to offend anyone personally. Who could ever imagine you all were playing dolls (sorry, but the process is similar the one girls do) here all the time, discussing the out-of-game backstories and fantasies you invent for your characters? I realized it only after your explanation, Varanis.

I respect your views, though I do not accept them. Play whatever fiction you create - I hope I will not see its fruits in the game. Because ss I've said it multiple times I see your way of role-playing wrong due to two examples it leads to:

1. If you wear a Redoran armor that will not make you a member of House Redoran in this game. You may role-play whatever you want, but the fact will make you a thief or a player who just bought that motif from a thief. Until we have a certain House Redoran skill line or a certain NPC names you a member of this House you will be either a thief (in the game, not IRL) or a thief's customer. No more no less. Those who do not understand it - read it slowly several times until realizing it and before trying to prove me something opposite and trying to vindicate your actions by some sort of your own character's fiction.
2. The first point above leads to the situation I state here. I haven't seen in any chat be it a solo area like Stonefalls or a PvP one like Cyrodiil or Battlegrounds, anyone blaming characters for their certain actions - it is players there always blaming other players for certain actions their characters do. If you run there under the Pact banner but leak the tactical info to those Aldmeri or Daggers, you know who you are. A traitor at least. What words does a traitor deserve? And all the rude words will be directed to you personally, not your character to whom you have created a beautiful love story with an Altmer girl that vindicates your treason. That is another proof I'm right and the rest of you here wrong.

You want to role-play that way - fine. But don't say you are offended when someone like me points at your foul actions. Your character's backstories will not save you from rude words said by others. I don't say it to you personally Varanis, cause I don't want you to think I blame you personally in something. I'm just getting tired you try to differ all the game content from each other and vindicate actions that lead to things I've stated multiple times. Sorry for being rude at some points, but I was rude only regarding that RPing-1 as you call it. On the other hand others except you were rude to me personally while argueing with me and trying to prove I'm wrong. Think about it. I'm not trying to make you rethink your ways of playing because I understand it's useless. But don't try to prove me black is white either. A thief, a traitor, a guiser, etc. - are just those who they are. I guess we have to stop at this point because I find further discussion will turn useless and non-costructive.

VaranisArano

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

@VaranisArano, I might have said something rude in the past to the players regarding their RPing - but I've said it several times I was sorry and I didn't mean to offend anyone personally. Who could ever imagine you all were playing dolls (sorry, but the process is similar the one girls do) here all the time, discussing the out-of-game backstories and fantasies you invent for your characters? I realized it only after your explanation, Varanis.

I respect your views, though I do not accept them. Play whatever fiction you create - I hope I will not see its fruits in the game. Because ss I've said it multiple times I see your way of role-playing wrong due to two examples it leads to:

1. If you wear a Redoran armor that will not make you a member of House Redoran in this game. You may role-play whatever you want, but the fact will make you a thief or a player who just bought that motif from a thief. Until we have a certain House Redoran skill line or a certain NPC names you a member of this House you will be either a thief (in the game, not IRL) or a thief's customer. No more no less. Those who do not understand it - read it slowly several times until realizing it and before trying to prove me something opposite and trying to vindicate your actions by some sort of your own character's fiction.
2. The first point above leads to the situation I state here. I haven't seen in any chat be it a solo area like Stonefalls or a PvP one like Cyrodiil or Battlegrounds, anyone blaming characters for their certain actions - it is players there always blaming other players for certain actions their characters do. If you run there under the Pact banner but leak the tactical info to those Aldmeri or Daggers, you know who you are. A traitor at least. What words does a traitor deserve? And all the rude words will be directed to you personally, not your character to whom you have created a beautiful love story with an Altmer girl that vindicates your treason. That is another proof I'm right and the rest of you here wrong.

You want to role-play that way - fine. But don't say you are offended when someone like me points at your foul actions. Your character's backstories will not save you from rude words said by others. I don't say it to you personally Varanis, cause I don't want you to think I blame you personally in something. I'm just getting tired you try to differ all the game content from each other and vindicate actions that lead to things I've stated multiple times. Sorry for being rude at some points, but I was rude only regarding that RPing-1 as you call it. On the other hand others except you were rude to me personally while argueing with me and trying to prove I'm wrong. Think about it. I'm not trying to make you rethink your ways of playing because I understand it's useless. But don't try to prove me black is white either. A thief, a traitor, a guiser, etc. - are just those who they are. I guess we have to stop at this point because I find further discussion will turn useless and non-costructive.

Hey, I don't expect to convince you. So if it's an unproductive discussion, that's fine. We can stop. Since that's the case, I won't discuss the Redoran example in detail because I think it repeats the RPer -1/RPer -2 example discussed earlier. True, but also missing the point. RPer -1 knows its pretend because he's the one who made it up in the first place. RPer-2 telling him that its all pretend might satisfy RPer-2, but RPer-1 is like "Okay, I can see you don't want to roleplay with me or discuss characters with me. What's the point of sharing my imagination with you if you arent interested? Moving on, bye." (Edited, because I mixed up RPer 1 and 2 at first, my bad!)

PVP is weird, because IME most people don't roleplay beyond faction loyalty of the lack thereof, and it's another case where ZOS made it entirely possible to play a character with no faction loyalty at all or who has reasons to swap alliances based on what the character saw on screen. Thanks ZOS! So most PVPers jump straight to blaming the player. (Side note: PVP is complicated in its own right, because you get people who distinguish between PVPers as opponents on the enemy team amd PVPers who are just jerks IRL - often based on who's sending nasty whispers and teabags. You also see this with PVEers a lot who tend to jump from "I got ganked" to "Gankers must be horrid people in real life!" When most gankers are just playing the game as intended.) PVP is just weird and complicated, not too different from how people react to IRL sprts teams.


But I'll try to wrap this up with my thoughts.

Roleplaying with other people is a complex thing, because people are complex! Its hard to be black and white when people themselves aren't black and white. As Solzhenitsyn said, "the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?"

What I try to keep in mind is that roleplaying with other people is always a cooperative endeavor. We're having fun, imagining a made up story together, and there's a lot of social niceties that go into that, as there are any time that people cooperate. One of those social niceties is that if I can't cooperate in telling the story someone wants to tell, I don't take part, amd I let them get on with telling their story. I try not to nitpick their story or critique their characters unless they asked me to - I do a fair bit of offering writing feedback to authors and I quickly learned there's no quicker way to put someone on the defensive than an unasked-for critique. That's especially true in role-playing where, yes, we all know its pretend and we made up our backstories and we're really in control. No one needs me to remind them of that, because it's pretty obvious. And always, I try to follow the idea of "respect my fellow roleplayers", albeit imperfectly.

Now, that's my method. You do you.

Aigym_Hlervu

VaranisArano wrote: »

Hey, I don't expect to convince you. So if it's an unproductive discussion, that's fine. We can stop. Since that's the case, I won't discuss the Redoran example in detail because I think it repeats the RPer -1/RPer -2 example discussed earlier. True, but also missing the point. RPer -2 knows its pretend because he's the one who made it up in the first place. RPer-1 telling him that that might satisfy RPer-1, but RPer-2 is like "Okay, I can see you don't want to roleplay with me or discuss characters with me. What's the point of sharing my imagination with you if you arent interested? Moving on, bye."

PVP is weird, because IME most people don't roleplay beyond faction loyalty of the lack thereof, and it's another case where ZOS made it entirely possible to play a character with no faction loyalty at all or who has reasons to swap alliances based on what the character saw on screen. Thanks ZOS! So most PVPers jump straight to blaming the player. (Side note: PVP is complicated in its own right, because you get people who distinguish between PVPers as opponents on the enemy team amd PVPers who are just jerks IRL - often based on who's sending nasty whispers and teabags. You also see this with PVEers a lot who tend to jump from "I got ganked" to "Gankers must be horrid people in real life!" When most gankers are just playing the game as intended.) PVP is just weird and complicated, not too different from how people react to IRL sprts teams.


But I'll try to wrap this up with my thoughts.

Roleplaying with other people is a complex thing, because people are complex! Its hard to be black and white when people themselves aren't black and white. As Solzhenitsyn said, "the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?"

What I try to keep in mind is that roleplaying with other people is always a cooperative endeavor. We're having fun, imagining a made up story together, and there's a lot of social niceties that go into that, as there are any time that people cooperate. One of those social niceties is that if I can't cooperate in telling the story someone wants to tell, I don't take part, amd I let them get on with telling their story. I try not to nitpick their story or critique their characters unless they asked me to - I do a fair bit of offering writing feedback to authors and I quickly learned there's no quicker way to put someone on the defensive than an unasked-for critique. That's especially true in role-playing where, yes, we all know its pretend and we made up our backstories and we're really in control. No one needs me to remind them of that, because it's pretty obvious. And always, I try to follow the idea of "respect my fellow roleplayers", albeit imperfectly.

Now, that's my method. You do you.

Oh, my.. I wouldn't have written you back anything but so many words of respect I've spoken to you and only now I see what kind of a man you truly are.. What a sorrow it is.. Varanis, sorry, but this time I haven't read your wall of text you wrote below the first lines I've marked bold above there. Since you like to give advice so much, I allow myself to finally give you a couple of mine:

1. Men can be rude. It is our nature. But if the two men agreed not to discuss something, they do not discuss it. You should have stopped right after those words I've marked bold at the very beginning of your reply. This propriety, however, as you know, does not expand on women. But even a good-mannered woman knows well of the point to stop.
2. I slightly ran my eye over that text you've written and got stuck on that surname I've marked bold in the middle of your text. We both seem to be good at world literature, but trust me - I know the Russian one (and maybe a couple of other countries' I won't say since we haven't discussed it) much better than you do for sure. Here's the second advice: before making a serious quote of any of the Russian writers and public persons study their lives well first. It might happen you qoute a man who teaches to live not by lies but turns out to be an abject liar himself. I have rock-solid reasons to say it regarding that dishonorable man you quote. That's a kind of another specific feature especially of the 20th century Russian literature. If you have studied it already but still quote him - we have nothing to talk about anymore due to our dramatically opposite points of view on that matter.

I will not read and respond to your further possible replies here because you will never admit you are wrong at something due to the fact you forced me to give you that advice No. 1 which is so uncommon to be given.. I don't feel it necessary to explain you anything now - it is your father who should have explained it to you, not me. To my regret you are no more the man who's opinion is valuable to me. You seem to be someone of a culture absolutely opposite to mine or just a badly brought up man. So I solely end this off-topic debate now. Let the guys discuss their role-playing dreams without our interference here. Farewell.

VaranisArano

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Hey, I don't expect to convince you. So if it's an unproductive discussion, that's fine. We can stop. Since that's the case, I won't discuss the Redoran example in detail because I think it repeats the RPer -1/RPer -2 example discussed earlier. True, but also missing the point. RPer -2 knows its pretend because he's the one who made it up in the first place. RPer-1 telling him that that might satisfy RPer-1, but RPer-2 is like "Okay, I can see you don't want to roleplay with me or discuss characters with me. What's the point of sharing my imagination with you if you arent interested? Moving on, bye."

PVP is weird, because IME most people don't roleplay beyond faction loyalty of the lack thereof, and it's another case where ZOS made it entirely possible to play a character with no faction loyalty at all or who has reasons to swap alliances based on what the character saw on screen. Thanks ZOS! So most PVPers jump straight to blaming the player. (Side note: PVP is complicated in its own right, because you get people who distinguish between PVPers as opponents on the enemy team amd PVPers who are just jerks IRL - often based on who's sending nasty whispers and teabags. You also see this with PVEers a lot who tend to jump from "I got ganked" to "Gankers must be horrid people in real life!" When most gankers are just playing the game as intended.) PVP is just weird and complicated, not too different from how people react to IRL sprts teams.


But I'll try to wrap this up with my thoughts.

Roleplaying with other people is a complex thing, because people are complex! Its hard to be black and white when people themselves aren't black and white. As Solzhenitsyn said, "the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?"

What I try to keep in mind is that roleplaying with other people is always a cooperative endeavor. We're having fun, imagining a made up story together, and there's a lot of social niceties that go into that, as there are any time that people cooperate. One of those social niceties is that if I can't cooperate in telling the story someone wants to tell, I don't take part, amd I let them get on with telling their story. I try not to nitpick their story or critique their characters unless they asked me to - I do a fair bit of offering writing feedback to authors and I quickly learned there's no quicker way to put someone on the defensive than an unasked-for critique. That's especially true in role-playing where, yes, we all know its pretend and we made up our backstories and we're really in control. No one needs me to remind them of that, because it's pretty obvious. And always, I try to follow the idea of "respect my fellow roleplayers", albeit imperfectly.

Now, that's my method. You do you.

Oh, my.. I wouldn't have written you back anything but so many words of respect I've spoken to you and only now I see what kind of a man you truly are.. What a sorrow it is.. Varanis, sorry, but this time I haven't read your wall of text you wrote below the first lines I've marjed bold above there. Since you like to give advice so much, I allow myself to finally give you a couple of mine:

1. Men can be rude. It is our nature. But if the two men agreed not to discuss something, they do not discuss it. You should have stopped right after those words I've marked bold at the very beginning of your reply. This propriety, however, as you know, does not expand on women. But even a good-mannered woman knows well of the point to stop.
2. I slightly ran my eye over that text you've written and got stuck on that surname I've marked bold in the middle of your text. We both seem to be good at world literature, but trust me - I know the Russian one (and maybe a couple of other countries' I won't say since we haven't discussed it) much better than you do for sure. Here's the second advice: before making a serious quote of any of the Russian writers and public persons study their lives well first. It might happen you qoute a man who teaches to live not by lies but turns out to be an abject liar himself. I have rock-solid reasons to say it regarding that dishonorable man you quote. That's a kind of another specific feature especially of the 20th century Russian literature. If you have studied it already but still quote him - we have nothing to talk about anymore due to our dramatically opposite points of view on that matter.

I will not read and respond to your further possible replies here because you will never admit you are wrong at something due to the fact you forced me to give you that advice No. 1 which is so uncommon to be given.. I don't feel it necessary to explain you anything now - it is your father who should have explained it to you, not me. To my regret you are no more the man who's opinion is valuable to me. You seem to be someone of an absolutely opposite culture I am or just a badly brought up man. So I solely end this off-topic debate now. Let the guys discuss their role-playing dreams without our interference here. Farewell.

I'm sorry my thoughts on the points you brought up wound up continuing a discussion you didn't wish to have.

Farewell.

RaddlemanNumber7

It's something I tend to avoid. Only 2 of my 19 characters have any link to Lore characters.

One is loosely based on TESIV's Mathieu Bellamont. Same family but not a direct ancestor. He's DB, and not a nice person. He has a secret bad place too, but nowhere near as bad as the basement of the Anvil Lighthouse. And The Vestige doesn't have a mother, so he has no problems in that direction thank goodness.

One of my Necros is the re-animated corpse of a certain dead Emperor. You really shouldn't leave such things lying around in Coldharbour. You never know what might happen to them. This is the only one of my characters that is not played as The Vestige.

Ilsabet

Hey Varanis, I find your posts very thoughtful and well worth reading, and I appreciate your efforts on behalf of creativity and imagination. Please accept the pretend respect of a fake internet person with no ties to established lore.

Ajaxandriel

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

We have settled that matter with @VaranisArano already, however I guess you have not read the thread further than that my reply to your offer to me of making some headcanon. I think you just do not understand neither me nor my point of view on this game. I'll try to state it more clear for you if you wish to understand it. Sorry for a wall of text. I hope you read it entirely before saying anything regarding some points.

Hey my mockery was just in reponse of yours first My reply was a reply to your reply - nothing more, nothing less.
But I agree, let's deepen the matter a bit. Not sure to be clear in english but I'll try my best ^^'

this is what Mannimarco told us while chained in Heart's Grief. (...) I was really surprised so many players still wish to join Mannimarco and do everything to show their allegiance to him.

I would agree as in-character.
But from a general standpoint this is not unrealistic either, pledging loyalty to Mannimarco is even consistent as a kind of "volontary servitude" or Stockholm Syndrome. Things happen.

The same way I view those who fights against the Tribunal and want them destroyed not understanding that the Tribunal must survive and stay powerful by any means by 3E 427 with only one purpose - to teach the Nerevarine to destroy Dagoth Ur in TES III.

This is metagame (Real Life) information so it's irrelevant...

Unless the peculiar case if one's character is aware of a Prophecy (like, an in-universe interpretation of what the Real-Life player knows about The Elder Scrolls 3)...

If not, as an in-universe character without any knowledge about prophecies, a character could wish the fall of the Tribunal. In the world, people often wish impossible things...

@VaranisArano

There's no in game statement of "If you haven't done the Main Quest, you can revive for X reason."

There's just the simple "Once you've started the Main Quest, you revive because you're the soul-shriven Vestige."

Yes, that's unsatisfying.

Yet it is not even a statement.
IIRC it was mere in-universe theories you could read from some unreliable narrator in its own essay (lore letter).

if you go with the "whatever happened on your screen is part of canon" Bethesda approach.

This is my own approach too on each game and believe me, if you have any respect for your own immersion and suspension of disbelief, you don't want this to work otherwise. (You think you do, but you don't R.I.P. Warcraft Chronicles.)

Spoiler
(...)has a side quest that references your soullessness,

Well... who referenced so ? A NPC.
And... this character was wrong - as any faillible character.

Summerset comes after Morrowind in order to close major plot holes with Clockwork City, and Elsweyr requires you to have completed Castle of the Worm in order for Abnur Tharn to be running around.

"It wasn't me."

So the "in game chronology" answer is that even if you started in Elsweyr, your character is/will be/always has been the soul-shriven Vestige since its a requirement to kicking off the future events in the other storylines. At some point or another, your character becomes the Vestige regardless of whether or not you actually did the quests, and that's valid across the whole timeline.

This is the standpoint of a single-RPG but by no means this would work here.

I quite agree with the "Game Timeline" vs. "Characters Timeline" distinction though, but the former is an unpractical ideal, and the latter is just right and concrete.

If that's unsatisfying, sorry. Complain to ZOS about not forcing everyone through the original Coldharbor tutorial right off the bat. That would take care of the problem.

No, no, no god, no please, no, just don't.
A good RPG is about having choices...

Back to stuff:

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

I think you just do not understand neither me nor my point of view on this game.

I guess I do - from the begining, I was just kidding a bit.
And you sum it up quite well here This character is a tool I use to interact with the world the devs have created.
Roleplayer's characters in general are not tools, they are...character ("personnage" / persona).

Indeed there are different types of conceptions for the roleplay.

It depends on how a player relates his self (as player), his avatar (the tool) and his character (the creation/persona) with one another.

Some years ago I started a way to sort these differences from the RP population out of another mmo (Manifeste du jdr intégral ~"the Full-RP manifesto")... This was based on how much a player acknowledges what happens on the screen during one's online time, with the game mechanics, or else, how much he acknowledges what is told by a "Word of God" authority generally told on other media or from other players' fanfics, by discarding the actual gameplay.

Interestingly enough you seem to be what I called "Full-Literal" (intégral rigoriste) type of role player, which seems quite rare in the MMORPG playerbase (a close friend of mine was so, yet), but I guess more spread among single-RPG players.

= You consider the source game as the only truth without according much value to your own player's "free will" in your headcanon - The quests, dialogs and mechanics are taken "literal". Right?

Most MMO roleplayers in the 2010s are what I called "Purist" type: the game mechanics are widely discarded in their headcanon and they chose to rebuild their whole roleplay frame, from scratch and from "word-of-god" sources, they also lean to roleplay the persona in "pure staging" moments, apart from actual game content, but they play the actual game PvE/PvP/quests as "out-of-character" avatars.

As for me I do care for the actual game mechanics and what I can or can not render on the screen, so I'm the Full RP type, but not Literal (I'd say, "Skeptical" maybe) since the main way to enjoy the story in my headcanon is not reading it but interpreting it. I don't wait for the permission from the game to create a type of character, as long as it does not contradicts what is on the screen.

In fact we are not that different you and I.
I don't discard the actual gameplay, and I don't like to "pretend" instead of "actually play", and I don't like to make my characters do "evil" things - that is why I hardly played the Dark Brotherhood story with one alt only, like if I watched an horror film while not liking horror films.

But still, from my standpoint it's like if you pushed the immersion way too far.

I do not invent any backstories for my character, as well as any unexisting titles and roles - I write my story in this game within the lore, quests and game mechanics only through my own actions.

I respect that.
But... Did you ever ask yourself if your character had a life before being played? In the world of Tamriel?
... Is the world of Tamriel (Nirn) even relevant in your mind while playing?

Since that character is just a tool of my will - that character is me. His only "backstory" is a login button, his race, class and Alliance and that foul scum Mannimarco who started the mess. Thus I take all the benefits and all the responsibilty of my character's actions in this game personally. It is not he who kills an unarmed Khajiiti prisoner - it is me who makes that decision. The difference between me and those 99% of the players is only in the number of characters we have and their buck passing of all the responsibility for their actions to their characters who nevertheless fully depend on their will along with their backstories. If your, say, Khajiiti character ever steals from another player (well, if the devs allow it sometimes) or an NPC due to his backstory you invented for him, I will accuse you, not your character be it your main character or not. Because you are the source of those actions and his backstory will be irrelevant to me. I hope this is clear to you.

Really interesting as a testimony because that fully sustains this Full Literal playing style

Look, let's do the little table
3 entities : PLAYER - AVATAR - PERSONA

- If "player = avatar ≠ persona", or "player ≠ avatar ≠ persona", then Purist RP types ("what the avatar does ≠ the roleplay")
- If "player ≠ avatar=persona", then Full RP type (witnessing the character living as an in-game avatar)
- If "player=avatar=persona", then Full Literal type (blurring the lines between all 3)
- If "player=avatar" and no persona at all, then Not Roleplayer type (character's named like xxOMG-THIS-PLAYER-IS-A-GODxx)
- (And obviously if "avatar=persona" but no player at all, it's the NPC / BOT type )

Who could ever imagine you all were playing dolls (sorry, but the process is similar the one girls do) here all the time, discussing the out-of-game backstories and fantasies you invent for your characters? I realized it only after your explanation, Varanis.

Exactly. As childish it seems, roleplaying is like playing dolls. Or toy soldiers and cars if we speak as boys hahaha. (Brace yourselves, stereotypes incoming)

The example of series and movies scriptwriters versus actor/actress is really good too.

The ESO player is like the child /the scriptwriter,
his avatar is like the manufactured doll itself /the actress,
and the "persona" is the personality meant to be represented in the child's game /in the movie.

2. The first point above leads to the situation I state here. I haven't seen in any chat be it a solo area like Stonefalls or a PvP one like Cyrodiil or Battlegrounds, anyone blaming characters for their certain actions - it is players there always blaming other players for certain actions their characters do. If you run there under the Pact banner but leak the tactical info to those Aldmeri or Daggers, you know who you are. A traitor at least.

Two things to say here:

First, in zone chats, everyone chats as out-of-character Real Life player, this is like a common rule. In Tamriel, the "personas" do not have cellphones nor laptop to chat with one another, so the chat, like most of the User Interface, is not known by the personas - only the Real Life players are aware of that.
It is like when the actors of a movie speaks backstage as real-life actors, not their characters.

Second, the leak example you take here is meta-game, only the (IRL) player knows the tactics AND have the means to leak them the to adversary. I agree in 99% of cases, such treachery is not a roleplayer's character thing, it's a real-life gamer thing.
But you can also consider the 1% exists when it is roleplayed and backed as a treacherous character. It's easlier to understand if you rolled more than one character in the game.
And also it seems obvious to me that the player of such character is still responsible for his own character's dealings.

Again, roleplay is a way to interpret facts - to explain a story - It is not an excuse.

VaranisArano

Ajaxandriel,

I generally agree with the points addressed to me. In an RPG, the internal chronology of the character is more important to the player than any external order of events. Certainly, trying to impose an external order that doesnt match what the player experienced tends to result in "What? No. That's not how that happened." reactions.

While ESO does has a particular order of certain quests due to the pre-One Tamriel design of the game, it's entirely possible for players to experience those events all out-of-order. And so for those players, their experience is going to be more important than any "official" order.

Its one of the reasons my most popular post is the guide about "What order should I do ESO's story arcs?" For players who want their experiences to match the actual order of quests in the game so everything makes sense, that post serves as a reference.
For players who don't care, ESO is very well set up for them to experience quests in whatever order they like, as long as they are willing to pretend or handwave over some inconsistencies like NPCs referencing stuff that the player hasn't actually experienced. (And it seems like you are, such as by saying certain NPCs were incorrect about their ability to damage/claim your existing soul or that someone else was the Vestige who rescued Abnur/Sai, which is totally cool with me! I'm fine with pretending past inconsistencies with the game text - after all, all roleplaying is basically a work of imagination.)


I also agree with you about choices. I often see players who wish they had the choice to follow the original chronology more closely by starting in Coldharbor. On the other hand, I've been playing since before One Tamriel, and I love that we aren't railroaded into doing quests in one certain order any more. Freedom is good! My ideal would be that we all get a choice of which starting tutorial we want to do that way everyone gets more options to tell their character's story how they want.


Also, good catch on the wayshrines! The Main Quest does a pretty good job of explaining things like skyshards and the effect of soullessness, but in looking up the lorebook you mentioned, I remembered that wayshrines actually appear in Oblivion and the Dawnguard DLC from Skyrim!

While ESO definitely postulates that soul shenanigans are necessary for Wayshrine use, that's not true in the Knights of the Nine DLC when the Hero of Kvatch uses wayshrines to have visions of Pelinal Whitestrake, or in Dawnguard when the Dragonborn uses the wayshrines to teleport in the Forgotten Vale.

So actually, Dawnguard is proof in gameplay that one doesnt have to be soul-shriven at all to use wayshrines as transport as both the Dragonborn and Snow Elf pilgrims would have used those wayshrines. (That doesn't necessarily explain reviving, but we already saw some explanations of how that could be explained earlier this thread.)

Also, I agree that the reference book in ESO is definitely on the less reliable side when the narrator admits he doesn't fully understand what Lord Corvus Direnni meant. We have a pretty good guess he means soul-shriven, but I agree that book leaves plenty of room for freedom in role-playing! https://en.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Wayshrines_of_Tamriel

VaranisArano

Ilsabet wrote: »

Hey Varanis, I find your posts very thoughtful and well worth reading, and I appreciate your efforts on behalf of creativity and imagination. Please accept the pretend respect of a fake internet person with no ties to established lore.

Thank you! And if I haven't mentioned it before, I quite enjoy reading Ilsabet's Headcanon!

Your recent post on the conclusion of the Rivenspire questline was especially engaging, since I remember my Vestige being like "Wait a minute. We're handing over the relic to WHO, now? WTF?!"

Such a memorable questline!

Ilsabet

VaranisArano wrote: »

Ilsabet wrote: »

Hey Varanis, I find your posts very thoughtful and well worth reading, and I appreciate your efforts on behalf of creativity and imagination. Please accept the pretend respect of a fake internet person with no ties to established lore.

Thank you! And if I haven't mentioned it before, I quite enjoy reading Ilsabet's Headcanon!

Your recent post on the conclusion of the Rivenspire questline was especially engaging, since I remember my Vestige being like "Wait a minute. We're handing over the relic to WHO, now? WTF?!"

Such a memorable questline!

Woot woot.

It's been interesting retracing (and in some cases recreating) Ilsabet's early steps as she grew from a displaced kid totally out of her element into a legit hero. Rivenspire in particular provided some major growth and turning points, both in the challenges she confronted and in the development of certain significant personal relationships.

Flashback Ilsabet hasn't realized it yet, but I'm still mildly annoyed that that particular plot thread was never addressed when we actually got to Coldharbour. That's pretty high up on the list of "things ZOS could have done more with later but pretty much forgot about." I suppose we could also put it on the list of "things that are just begging for fanfiction," but I don't think I'm going to be the one to write that particular script.

VaranisArano

Ilsabet wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Ilsabet wrote: »

Hey Varanis, I find your posts very thoughtful and well worth reading, and I appreciate your efforts on behalf of creativity and imagination. Please accept the pretend respect of a fake internet person with no ties to established lore.

Thank you! And if I haven't mentioned it before, I quite enjoy reading Ilsabet's Headcanon!

Your recent post on the conclusion of the Rivenspire questline was especially engaging, since I remember my Vestige being like "Wait a minute. We're handing over the relic to WHO, now? WTF?!"

Such a memorable questline!

Woot woot.

It's been interesting retracing (and in some cases recreating) Ilsabet's early steps as she grew from a displaced kid totally out of her element into a legit hero. Rivenspire in particular provided some major growth and turning points, both in the challenges she confronted and in the development of certain significant personal relationships.

Flashback Ilsabet hasn't realized it yet, but I'm still mildly annoyed that that particular plot thread was never addressed when we actually got to Coldharbour. That's pretty high up on the list of "things ZOS could have done more with later but pretty much forgot about." I suppose we could also put it on the list of "things that are just begging for fanfiction," but I don't think I'm going to be the one to write that particular script.

Yes, I would have loved the chance to talk to Verandis in Coldharbor! Such a missed opportunity.

Ilsabet

VaranisArano wrote: »

Ilsabet wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Ilsabet wrote: »

Hey Varanis, I find your posts very thoughtful and well worth reading, and I appreciate your efforts on behalf of creativity and imagination. Please accept the pretend respect of a fake internet person with no ties to established lore.

Thank you! And if I haven't mentioned it before, I quite enjoy reading Ilsabet's Headcanon!

Your recent post on the conclusion of the Rivenspire questline was especially engaging, since I remember my Vestige being like "Wait a minute. We're handing over the relic to WHO, now? WTF?!"

Such a memorable questline!

Woot woot.

It's been interesting retracing (and in some cases recreating) Ilsabet's early steps as she grew from a displaced kid totally out of her element into a legit hero. Rivenspire in particular provided some major growth and turning points, both in the challenges she confronted and in the development of certain significant personal relationships.

Flashback Ilsabet hasn't realized it yet, but I'm still mildly annoyed that that particular plot thread was never addressed when we actually got to Coldharbour. That's pretty high up on the list of "things ZOS could have done more with later but pretty much forgot about." I suppose we could also put it on the list of "things that are just begging for fanfiction," but I don't think I'm going to be the one to write that particular script.

Yes, I would have loved the chance to talk to Verandis in Coldharbor! Such a missed opportunity.

I still think the chances are pretty good that we'll have some kind of Molag Bal Redux plotline someday, so maybe that'll become a new opportunity. ZOS has been pretty big on the "give the fans what they want" train lately, especially with bringing back "fan favorite" characters, so maybe we just need to make more Verandis noise.

Aigym_Hlervu

Ajaxandriel wrote: »

Hey my mockery was just in reponse of yours first My reply was a reply to your reply - nothing more, nothing less.
But I agree, let's deepen the matter a bit. Not sure to be clear in english but I'll try my best ^^'

Well, I see no mockery at that my reply you mocked on and I didn't even mean to mock you there! Maybe I've stated it the way which made you think so, but I really didn't intend to do that to a person who did not mock on me. Anyway, if you considered that a mockery, I'd apologize for that if you've told me, but you've already payed back with your own, so I guess it's a 1:1 then and so we've settled it here, agreed?

Ajaxandriel wrote: »

Interestingly enough you seem to be what I called "Full-Literal" (intégral rigoriste) type of role player, which seems quite rare in the MMORPG playerbase (a close friend of mine was so, yet), but I guess more spread among single-RPG players.

This thing is really interesting to me too! I thought the rest of you views role-playing the way I do. I'm still shocked to know that is me who's rare here to view it so, not you all.

Ajaxandriel wrote: »

And you sum it up quite well here This character is a tool I use to interact with the world the devs have created.
Roleplayer's characters in general are not tools, they are...character ("personnage" / persona). Indeed there are different types of conceptions for the roleplay. It depends on how a player relates his self (as player), his avatar (the tool) and his character (the creation/persona) with one another.

I understand it now, but it's still to uncommon to me. I was shocked you all began to convince me in your role-playing style with those walls of text, I had only to defend mine.

Ajaxandriel wrote: »

You consider the source game as the only truth without according much value to your own player's "free will" in your headcanon - The quests, dialogs and mechanics are taken "literal". Right?

Right. And that is what I tried to say in that post you've considered a mockery. I don't make headcanon and feel no necessity to do that. There was another video game which concept is very close to what role-playing is for me. "Very close" does not mean it is the concept itself that reflects my views though! It's just very close. Ok, so there were multiple characters almost each of whom had a certain backstory being already a part of the game. It was really interesting to know that Kay'l 669 had a wife, his own life and so on. I played their roles still being myself! Well, later it turned out who exactly came out to ask a player for help in that intro.. Well, I won't write another wall of text here about the other game, you just watch that video below and read about this game if you haven't played it back in the 90s.

Ajaxandriel wrote: »

Did you ever ask yourself if your character had a life before being played? In the world of Tamriel?
... Is the world of Tamriel (Nirn) even relevant in your mind while playing?

I guess you know the answer - no I haven't. Because from my perspective the character I play has no "previous" life there. It is me who has a huge history in TES world of its different time periods, but those characters change like tools, as I have mentioned before. Well, you may consider from your perspective I'm the one who has achieved CHIM and broke those chains of causality Sitha Sil mentioned . But I don't do that.

Ajaxandriel wrote: »

Exactly. As childish it seems, roleplaying is like playing dolls. Or toy soldiers and cars if we speak as boys hahaha. (Brace yourselves, stereotypes incoming)

Well, that's what I mocked on. Now I don't as you see and I will not interfere in your fiction anymore guys. We just have different views on role-playing and thise forums section is realy designed not for the likes of me. That's what I understood. Ok, here's a video I've mentioned above. Have a good time around, guys! Sorry if I have offended someone, you now know the reason. It's just hard for me to realize I'm alone here among you.. But that's my trouble I'll handle alone somehow. See you!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L__xNz8ipnk

MythicEmperor

My Telvanni is a Telvayn after the ancestral tomb. My Redoran is a Venim after (or I suppose before) the Venim family who ruled House Redoran in TES 3. My Hlaalu is, well, a Hlaalu but his first name is Hir in reference to C0DA.

Pheefs

Cygemai_Hlervu wrote: »

Right. And that is what I tried to say in that post you've considered a mockery. I don't make headcanon and feel no necessity to do that.

Ajaxandriel wrote: »

Exactly. As childish it seems, roleplaying is like playing dolls. Or toy soldiers and cars if we speak as boys hahaha. (Brace yourselves, stereotypes incoming)

Well, that's what I mocked on.

OMG this thread!

From a collegiate improv point of view I will agree that rolePLAY is indeed PLAY, but its dismissive to label something that's often sexual and violent and thoroughly adult as "childish".

My one 'character' can perceive the dragon-break and is fully aware of all the Vestiges running around, but she's a disciple of Sheogorath so this incongruity does not bother her in the least.

& if you aren't the Vestige, being able to ressurect could mean you are blessed by another Aedra or Deadra... like Merric or Darien or that aspect of Boethiah lady we meet.

Ajaxandriel

VaranisArano wrote: »

I also agree with you about choices. I often see players who wish they had the choice to follow the original chronology more closely by starting in Coldharbor. On the other hand, I've been playing since before One Tamriel, and I love that we aren't railroaded into doing quests in one certain order any more. Freedom is good! My ideal would be that we all get a choice of which starting tutorial we want to do that way everyone gets more options to tell their character's story how they want.

Pheefs wrote: »

& if you aren't the Vestige, being able to ressurect could mean you are blessed by another Aedra or Deadra... like Merric or Darien or that aspect of Boethiah lady we meet.

I did play the dark times when one had not the choice, when the path was written for you. Altarya was my first Veteran ranked character, and she's still my main, so I had to go through the main quest and the established order of the Covenant zones. That made me (role)play my first character as a legendary Meridia-blessed character, so I chose her - a "who-knows-if?" Falmer - to begin the game in 2014.
Like many (role)players I was fed up with this lack of choice, especially for the alts.

But still, I like smooth backgrounds, the "maybe or maybe not" narrator like everything in the Elder Scrolls out there, so when I found the lore of Summerset, I wrote down the alternate theories about my main's pre-game backstory: maybe Altarya is a Falmer brought from the First Era, maybe she's a descendant of exiled surviving Falmer, maybe she's merely an actress who "mantled" the one ancien "Altarya". My fellow guild members can believe the version they believe the most and I'm fine with this, exactly what I was saying earlier about Jendaya al-Gilane being one of the daughters of the king of Gilane or a prentender if such a king even exists. X)

jaekobcaed

Yes, in my personal roleplaying, at least. My main character, Isachar, fell in love with Queen Ayrenn during his time serving with the Queen's Eyes and she seemed to share the feelings, but they were unable to make that happen since he isn't nobility despite his family's immense wealth and Ayrenn was too preoccupied with the Three-Banners War. This ends up with a slightly ironic twist. During his adventures after joining the Psijic Order, he discovered that he is the last known living heir to the throne of the second-to-last Ayleid kingdom to fall, which ends up explaining why he seemed to be born with an inherent interest in the Ayleids and an aptitude for magic that resembles their own. While he does desire to see a new Ayleid kingdom rise (one governed by the values of the Dominion) and while he'd be more than happy to take up that throne, he is fiercely dedicated to his work with the Psijics.

wolfbone

well, my char hates with passion, meridia as she took his new found friend darrien, away from him.

If I had the choice, i would tell her to get screwed.
but there is no choice to tell the skeeving horker to go soak her head.

Sheezabeast

I have one Dres, her name is Ember Dres, but my other characters are names I created outside ES lore. For example, my main character Svanhilde has been in my head canon since Oblivion. She gets remade in every game I play. Her story lines stay bubbled in the worlds they happen in. In ESO I’ve been able to flesh out her character, bring her to life, and I love her so much.