PDA

View Full Version : Roleplaying Is role-playing worth it? :smalleek:



karinrin55
2015-10-23, 09:01 AM
I'm starting a new campaign for my D&D group soon (3.5e FYI) and it's the first campaign I'm going to DM (though I've DMed a quest or two in the last campaign and in the one before that).
Now my previous DMs didn't put much effort into making us role-play our characters, which is a shame. When my friend first explained D&D to me I thought it would really be cool to play it with in-game role-playing, but the opportunity never came. I was able to role-play my paladin a bit in my current campaign but not to the level I wanted.
Now that I'm starting my own campaign I'm torn. On the one hand I would really like my players to role-play, I'm planing on giving quests related to their backstories and awarding good role-playing with a bit of XP. But on the other hand they never seem to be interested in the fluff of things, when I DMed a quest a few months back they told me to skip a fare bit of dialog between two major characters (a part of the conversation was supposed to be a plot hook for another part of the quest).
Now, I know I would enjoy role-playing in any campaign and so does another member of the group (which happens to be my twin sister) but is it worth the effort? I don't think my players would enjoy my campaign as much if I shoved role-playing down their throats, any advice?

JAL_1138
2015-10-23, 09:10 AM
If the dialogue was between two "major characters" who were both NPCs, with the PCs just listening, that may have been the issue in that particular case. Even when trying to seriously roleplay instead of treating it like a boardgame, it's just not much fun sitting there listening to the DM talk to himself.

hymer
2015-10-23, 09:12 AM
@ OP: Well, if your players don't want to RP, then it's not worth it. That doesn't mean you can't tempt them a little now and again with some RP, but don't expect a lot of it. And I wouldn't force the issue.
I know that can be frustrating. You may want to take it up with them, and find out where each stands. They may be willing to experiment a bit.

shadow_archmagi
2015-10-23, 09:14 AM
I'm starting a new campaign for my D&D group soon (3.5e FYI) and it's the first campaign I'm going to DM (though I've DMed a quest or two in the last campaign and in the one before that).
Now my previous DMs didn't put much effort into making us role-play our characters, which is a shame. When my friend first explained D&D to me I thought it would really be cool to play it with in-game role-playing, but the opportunity never came. I was able to role-play my paladin a bit in my current campaign but not to the level I wanted.
Now that I'm starting my own campaign I'm torn. On the one hand I would really like my players to role-play, I'm planing on giving quests related to their backstories and awarding good role-playing with a bit of XP. But on the other hand they never seem to be interested in the fluff of things, when I DMed a quest a few months back they told me to skip a fare bit of dialog between two major characters (a part of the conversation was supposed to be a plot hook for another part of the quest).
Now, I know I would enjoy role-playing in any campaign and so does another member of the group (which happens to be my twin sister) but is it worth the effort? I don't think my players would enjoy my campaign as much if I shoved role-playing down their throats, ant advice?


GOOD WAYS TO MAKE YOUR PARTY ROLEPLAY:

-Talk to them before the game about how you'd like to do something a little more serious and in-character. Don't force them to, just say it's something you'd really like to do and generally they'll go along with trying something new for a friend.

-Roleplay. If you speak in the first person, and some of the PCs do, then that'll create an atmosphere where the others might feel more comfortable with it.

-Encourage them to have backstories for their characters, then work those backstories into the storyline. Even the most reclusive player will get into the spirit of things when his PC's puppy is held hostage!

BAD WAYS

-Make it mandatory or affect the game rules in some way. That's where the throat-shoving begins.


Above all else, do whatever seems fun for you and for your group.


EDIT: Oh yeah no I missed that one line. Never have two NPCs talk to each other for more than a line at a time. NPCs should always approach the party one at a time. Unless the party is specifically eavesdropping.

Mastikator
2015-10-23, 09:21 AM
First off, dialog between NPCs =/= role-playing. Even if it's relevant to the plot and the NPCs are important. It's theater, not role play.

What you want to encourage is that the players not only role play with the NPCs but also with each other. One crass but effective way to get this done is to disallow OOC discussions about IC topics between the players. If one player wants to tell another player something they must do it in character.

It's very important that everyone gets a feel of what the other characters are like, race/class/alignment doesn't count (not even a little, sorry). So what you want for that is not character archetypes but character traits, things like greedy, happy, stingy, flaky. Adjectives, and tell them it's preferable to over-act than to try to be subtle. The best way I've found is to do this with NPCs, show them how it's done. And really sell the character, if a happy and sarcastic paladin NPC is talking to the players then overact, bring up the intensity to 11.
In later sessions when they understand then you can be subtle about things.

Of course, if they're not into it, then they're not into it and there's nothing you can do about that.

goto124
2015-10-23, 09:42 AM
EXP incentives are pretty good. Provide opportunities and rewards for taking alternative actions in-game. Talk to your players about your expectations the game before it starts.


Never have two NPCs talk to each other for more than a line at a time.

I noticed that it's not a problem in Play-by-Post, but that's because the NPC conversation doesn't eat up any more time than any other single-player (or single-GM) interaction.


One crass but effective way to get this done is to disallow OOC discussions about IC topics between the players. If one player wants to tell another player something they must do it in character.

How does this help at all?..?!

Mastikator
2015-10-23, 09:44 AM
How does this help at all?..?!

They have to communicate, if it's only possible through role play then they'll do it that way. If not they'll fall back on just talking OOC.

karinrin55
2015-10-23, 10:06 AM
One crass but effective way to get this done is to disallow OOC discussions about IC topics between the players. If one player wants to tell another player something they must do it in character.

The problem with this is that we have two new players in our group that still don't fully understand the game (I've been playing for about three years and I'm still not familiar with every rule there is so OOC talk can't be obsolete cause they still need a bit of help. But generally all your advice is really helpful, I'm meeting with the group tonight (not for D&D though) and I'll ask them if they wouldn't mind role=playing more intensely in my campaign.
Plus I am working hard on dialing down NPC dialog with one another, I'm an amateur writer in addition to everything and I get so caught up with a story that I don't realize I've written half a page of dialog that won't interest the PCs at all.

Lost in Hyrule
2015-10-23, 10:12 AM
Talking 'In Character' is not the same thing as Role Playing.

Talking as though you were someone else is Acting. Some people may not be comfortable with improv acting, and it may be difficult for them to get into that. I would not recommend you pressure them to do so.

Role Playing, however, is about choosing how you think a character would act in a given circumstance. Making decisions for a character is the point of a Role Playing Game! In that sense, I think you could add a few leading questions in to all sorts of interactions to help get them to think about their characters' actions.

Player: "We get rooms for the night."
DM: "Do you briskly demand rooms without further conversation?"
Player: "No, I ask politely for 3 rooms."
OR
Player: "Yeah, I toss down the money and say I want 3 rooms."

I don't guarantee this will work for your players, but I have helped my players to think a bit more about how their character is acting with comparable tactics.

As to what some of the others have said, having the players listen to more than a few sentences of conversation is likely not going to be fun for them. Try to compact the information you want to impart to them. Every moment spent listening to expositions is another moment spent not making decisions, and thus, not truly playing!

Geddy2112
2015-10-23, 11:00 AM
Talk to your players and make sure they want to roleplay and talk extensively in character. Some people do, some people don't. Neither is wrong, but the game will suffer if you and the players are not on the same page.

I second the notion of less NPC/NPC chatter. I normally don't talk that out in character as the DM. Instead you can say something like "Joe the Wizard and the noble are having a conversation about the recent trade caravan that went missing. The noble is clearly getting heated" and then let the players do what they want. The character's are supposed to be the stars and main focus of the story. If you have a lot you want to say, have an NPC say it to the players directly. It will make the information matter and engage them in roleplaying.



What you want to encourage is that the players not only role play with the NPCs but also with each other.
This is beyond important-it is the glue that holds groups together, in and out of character. This prevents situations where only some of the players are playing, and highlights the group nature of ttRPG's. Even if the group just wants to find a dungeon, kick in the door, kill everything that moves and loot everything of value, they should be doing it together and interact while doing so.

goto124
2015-10-23, 11:22 AM
Player: "We get rooms for the night."
DM: "Do you briskly demand rooms without further conversation?"

To be honest, if the DM talked to me like that, I would feel as if xe were insulting my (character's) intelligence. "What, no, I ask politely, why did you think otherwise? Were you going to have the innkeeper refuse to let our characters have the rooms because we were apparently that socially challenged?"

If it's something like "we get rooms for the night", the players probably want to quickly go past the relatively boring asking-for-rooms stuff and go straight to (preparing for) the next day of adventure. Roleplay has to be fun.

Even before the game starts, the first question would be "hey guys, I've been thinking of introducing a little bit of roleplay. The kind where your characters have some sort of personality and you try to play it out in the world of the game. Would you mind if your characters have to talk a bit more in-character?" It's okay if they refuse. Soft drinks and pretzels and OOC chit-chat is a perfectly valid way to play (as they're demostrated before).

Let's say they're onboard with increasing roleplay. Ask the players why they don't roleplay so much - it gives insight as to what pushes them away from RP. Afterwards, make some sort of arrangement as to when they're expected to do some IC talking, and how they should do it. Make sure they succeed, since this will be their first impressions of roleplay, and punishing them for not doing well just turns them off. Would you like to lose your first fight in a campaign because you're a level 1 warrior with only a wooden nonmagical club facing a vampire meant for a party of level 13 characters?

Don't use mechanical social skills such as Diplomancy. You'll punishing the players for not sacrificing their combat skills, which only helps to feed into the Stormwind Fallacy. It does not breed a positive attitude towards roleplaying.

Regitnui
2015-10-23, 11:42 AM
To be honest, if the DM talked to me like that, I would feel as if xe were insulting my (character's) intelligence. "What, no, I ask politely, why did you think otherwise? Were you going to have the innkeeper refuse to let our characters have the rooms because we were apparently that socially challenged?"

If it's something like "we get rooms for the night", the players probably want to quickly go past the relatively boring asking-for-rooms stuff and go straight to (preparing for) the next day of adventure. Roleplay has to be fun.

If the players are so roleplay-adverse, even before the game starts, there must be some sort of arrangement as to when they're expected to do some IC talking.

It was an example. Another could be "I demand the lich releases the prisoners." "How so? Do you shout it at him from the doorway, walk in and threaten him or just open negotiations with an arrow through the sacrificial dagger?"

JAL_1138
2015-10-23, 11:51 AM
In terms of "whether it's roleplaying," there's no difference between

1) "Ok, I tell the group what I overheard about the ambush they're planning" on the one hand, and

2) "*fake Ye Olde Butcherede Englishe accent* My good comrades, it is imperative that I relay unto thee the conversation I didst overhear (for in my absence from your midst, I engaged myself in the proverbial dropping-of-eaves upon our employer). Lord Blackwood didst convey unto Captain Red-Chert that he layeth a terrible scheme! We are to be but pawns, guiding the expedition into an ambush!"

Both are roleplaying; the second is (a very exaggerated version of) acting as well. Players who like roleplaying do not necessarily also like acting.

Lost in Hyrule
2015-10-23, 11:54 AM
Yes, it was just an off hand example.

Player: "I tell the king that he has to help us stop the lich!"
DM: "Are you demanding or asking?"

Player: "I'm angrily shouting at him to get him to listen."
OR
Player: "I am pleading with him to save his people."

I've been reading a lot of TheAngryGM lately, and I see it as the Objective and Approach method. To get players thinking for their characters, you need to figure out what they want to accomplish and how they want to accomplish it. Easiest way is to ask!

If you care about the mundane, you use this sort of approach with inn keepers. If you focus on the dramatic, you use it in tense situations with important people!

Solaris
2015-10-23, 11:56 AM
I'm fairly big on roleplaying, myself, and even I don't particularly care for it when the DM starts roleplaying with himself. (Fortunately, in the group where I alternate DM duties with another player, he and I both actively avoid doing it.) From the sounds of it, your group isn't that big on roleplaying to begin with. Introducing them to the concept through "Roleplaying is listening to me talk to myself about things you don't really care that much about" isn't going to win any converts.

If you want to write a story, that's swell. I'm never one to discourage another aspiring writer. However, gamemastering is not writing. When you write, you can do things like have the characters engage in dialogue without anyone interrupting or getting bored. You can also do things like write plots. Running a game, however, is much closer to improv acting than it is writing. You don't really write a plot, you establish a setting. Sure, you can provide some nudges here and there, but it's nowhere near the degree of control (or detail) found in writing a story.

This goes into the fluff, as well. You don't read or listen to roleplaying, you roleplay. You players aren't interested in fluff; most people (for reasons which utterly escape me) aren't interested in history, either. Even when they're invested in the setting, which is a loveless bitch to get players to do, they're probably not going to be interested in more than skimming a paragraph or two of infodump (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/InfoDump) and want to listen to even less. Interweave information about the setting into conversations with NPCs and environmental details as you describe things to them, and if it's interesting to the demented little homicidal psychopaths players then their characters will follow up on it without prompting.

Also keep in mind that third-person roleplaying is a thing (like JAL_1138 said). I'll rarely address an NPC in the first-person in-character. Heck, a lot of the time I'll skip coming up with exact wording ("My character asks about such-and-such" rather than "My character says, 'What about such-and-such?'"), because doing it takes a bit of effort and only rarely is a scene interesting enough to me to put forth the effort of getting all the way into character. (It also doesn't help that my character's something of an oversized ham who kinda lacks inside voice, and I like big climactic battles a lot more than I like talking with generic quest-giving old man in the tavern #9,141.)

I have to agree with Regitnui and Lost in Hyrule - asking for further information about how the character acts can be very a useful way for karinrin55 to get her players to ease into roleplaying. If the DM doesn't really provide useful information about context or setting, jumping straight into character from a cold start can be a bitch.

goto124
2015-10-23, 11:56 AM
I must say, those are much better examples. Heck, I would've asked that even if I wasn't looking for roleplay, since what exactly the PCs did are rather important as to how the NPCs will react and how the story will continue.

Unlike the inn rooms scene, where the choice is either 'boring stuff happens and they get a room' or 'they don't get rooms for stuff that shouldn't even happen'.

Solaris
2015-10-23, 11:58 AM
Unlike the inn rooms scene, where the choice is either 'boring stuff happens and they get a room' or 'they don't get rooms for stuff that shouldn't even happen'.

I agree.
Getting rooms at inns, buying things at a market, and most other one-off interactions with people nobody cares about are generally best glossed over and skipped to things that are actually interesting.
I mean, I can get a hotel room and shop at a market in real life. Why would I wanna RP it in a game?

goto124
2015-10-23, 12:01 PM
It can be interesting, but not with people who have barely started roleplay. The resulting RP will be real boring, and the players will think of all RP as 'boring'.

If you introduced someone to tabletop games for the first time ever, do you make that person play CoC, to have the character die in 10 minutes?


"I demand the lich releases the prisoners." "How so? Do you shout it at him from the doorway, walk in and threaten him or just open negotiations with an arrow through the sacrificial dagger?"

This reminds me: the GM can make roleplay easier on the players, by providing options for players to choose from. Otherwise they could get stuck trying to come up with something viable.

Flickerdart
2015-10-23, 12:06 PM
I fully agree with the "don't focus on minutia" crowd. You may be better off trying to get the PCs to roleplay their relationships with each other - get them to establish how one murderhobo is related to the next and what their goals are.

StealthyRobot
2015-10-23, 12:17 PM
My group tries to be in character as much as possible. We still have normal chit chat and all that, but the players voice their characters when talking with NPCs and each other.
When the group is talking to an NPC, for example:

Player 2: How much for that item, my good man?
NPC: That would be 10 gold, sir.
Player 1: (jokingly) we should just steal it instead!
NPC:Er, if you wouldn't mind, I would like your friend to leave my shop please.

I dont force my players to rp, but if they dont want to they can at least let others who want to actually do it. Also, if someone who is LG makes frequent jokes about murdering innocents, they're looking at an alignment switch coming up.
When they party is coming up with a plan, say, to break in somewhere, they must plan it all out before hand. If, during the mission, the rouge is on his own and forgets to unlock the door, the party cant remind him from 2oo ft away. Not without shouting, anyway.

Thrudd
2015-10-23, 12:18 PM
Plus I am working hard on dialing down NPC dialog with one another, I'm an amateur writer in addition to everything and I get so caught up with a story that I don't realize I've written half a page of dialog that won't interest the PCs at all.

Try to separate your story writing from your game prep. Designing an rpg adventure is not as similar to writing a story as you'd think. Basically, your writing for the game should end at the outline. You design characters that have motives, design a world and locations that have some context, and decide what should draw the characters into the situation. There should be few events planned, since you don't know where exactly the players will go or what they will do. Video game style "cut scenes", where the players have to watch or listen to something happening that they aren't supposed to interrupt or interact with should be avoided. Background info that all the characters should have can be provided in a handout or short exposition at the beginning of the game. In-game plot exposition in general should only happen at the behest of players seeking it out; for example when they ask questions of an npc or research something in a library.

A mistake some people make is thinking that the game should proceed as though it is a novel or a movie, and attempt to force the players to fulfill certain roles and react in certain ways, as though they are actors with a script. The problem is, they don't have a script and the story's overall shape and outcome is supposed to be hidden from them. It just doesn't work that way. Ask the players to provide motives for their characters relevant to your game. Then give them opportunities to pursue those motives in the game world. That's where the role playing happens, when players know and choose what their characters want and are able to freely interact with your game world to seek those things.

A good adventure draws in the players because it offers them a chance to pursue the goals of their characters. It then offers challenges which they need to solve using their characters' abilities, and rewards them for successful solutions with achievement of some progress toward their characters' goals (getting more powerful, getting richer, raising in status, defeating an enemy, fulfilling religious obligations, etc).

A not-so-exciting adventure tells the players what it is their characters are supposed to want, then brings them from one scene to the next without much input from them. They watch events unfold and are occasionally asked to roll a skill or fight enemies that appear before you describe the next scene to them. If they are failing to figure out something or make a specific action, your story can't continue until they do the correct thing or are forced along anyways. The players here will have less investment in their characters because they will see that they aren't really controlling anything. In this situation, some will rebel and try to throw your story off by doing things contrary to what they should. Others will play along, but are basically just waiting for the combats, which is the only time they actually have real decisions to make.

mephnick
2015-10-23, 12:39 PM
My group talks entire OOC for the most part. Even when they talk IC it's obviously just them talking to me as themselves.

I generally ask for "I'll try and scare the king into helping me by hinting another kingdom is coming for him, rolled a 16" over "I use persuasion on the king, rolled a 16."

I hate acting as a DM, so I don't require my players to do so.

Lost in Hyrule
2015-10-23, 12:47 PM
I must say, those are much better examples. Heck, I would've asked that even if I wasn't looking for roleplay, since what exactly the PCs did are rather important as to how the NPCs will react and how the story will continue.

Unlike the inn rooms scene, where the choice is either 'boring stuff happens and they get a room' or 'they don't get rooms for stuff that shouldn't even happen'.

Hey, you don't know me! :smalltongue:

Perhaps this is an oft frequented tavern between two major cities, so all sorts of folks come through. The tavern keeper looks up, a little nervous at the 3 vagabonds that have just walked in. The gruff man in front tosses a few coins at the bar in front of the owner and growls, "Three rooms, got it?" The look of nervousness leaves the owner's face, and he says, "Yes, of course." He leads them upstairs and offers the first room to the one he spoke with, and then the next two to his companions. "Enjoy your stay."

That night, the demon who demands a sacrifice from this tavern owner once a month creeps in to the first room up the stairs and steals away the gruff man to serve as his dinner.

His brusque attitude sure did make the Tavern Owner's job a lot easier this month!

Mastikator
2015-10-23, 12:58 PM
The problem with this is that we have two new players in our group that still don't fully understand the game (I've been playing for about three years and I'm still not familiar with every rule there is so OOC talk can't be obsolete cause they still need a bit of help. But generally all your advice is really helpful, I'm meeting with the group tonight (not for D&D though) and I'll ask them if they wouldn't mind role=playing more intensely in my campaign.
Plus I am working hard on dialing down NPC dialog with one another, I'm an amateur writer in addition to everything and I get so caught up with a story that I don't realize I've written half a page of dialog that won't interest the PCs at all.

Generally when it comes to NPC dialog it's better to just state the outcome (unless it the players are supposed to interject in the dialog), talking in character is very important when talking with the players and when they talk with each other.

A good springboard for roleplaying is something players like doing, shopping. When they go and buy the adventuring gear. This is an opportunity to ambush them with a quick and concise description of the town/village they're in, describing the various places they can go to and also add color to the environment, like if there are kids playing in the street, or if there's lots of traffic, or town guards, etc.
When they go to a blacksmith to buy a sword you can tell them "you enter the blacksmiths yard, there's racks filled with various tools, the blacksmith- a young woman in a dirt apron walks up to you Hello strangers, what can I do you for?".
If they try to speak out of character remind them that you only speak the language of in character. This sort of thing can be applied pretty much in all situations, roleplaying isn't just fluff, it's the medium through which the game is played.

Edit- the rules are important, but don't worry if you don't get everything right. As a DM you have the power of making stuff up on the fly, it's better to invent new rules than to break the flow of the game. Though that's my opinion, some may disagree.

Solaris
2015-10-23, 01:04 PM
A good springboard for roleplaying is something players like doing, shopping. When they go and buy the adventuring gear. This is an opportunity to ambush them with a quick and concise description of the town/village they're in, describing the various places they can go to and also add color to the environment, like if there are kids playing in the street, or if there's lots of traffic, or town guards, etc.
When they go to a blacksmith to buy a sword you can tell them "you enter the blacksmiths yard, there's racks filled with various tools, the blacksmith- a young woman in a dirt apron walks up to you Hello strangers, what can I do you for?".
If they try to speak out of character remind them that you only speak the language of in character. This sort of thing can be applied pretty much in all situations, roleplaying isn't just fluff, it's the medium through which the game is played.

Point of order: None of my groups and none of my players in nearly twenty years of playing have enjoyed shopping.
... Well, except my wife, but even she doesn't like doing it in the game.

Lost in Hyrule
2015-10-23, 01:09 PM
If they try to speak out of character remind them that you only speak the language of in character. This sort of thing can be applied pretty much in all situations, roleplaying isn't just fluff, it's the medium through which the game is played.

Talking In Character is not necessary to Role Play. This is certainly a way you could go about getting your players to talk in character, but it could also turn them off the game entirely, or make them quite uncomfortable. Now, being pushed out of your comfort zone isn't necessarily a bad thing! But you should definitely think carefully if you are willing to tell your players, "I like in-character dialogue. You must play this way to play in my game!"

Dalebert
2015-10-23, 01:22 PM
Apologies in advance, but I didn't read the whole thread. I did, however, do a word search for "inspiration" and nothing came up. I don't know if you're running 5e but if you are read up on inspiration. It's a carrot (as opposed to a stick) to reward characters for good role-playing. I like to actually hand them an inspiration token. Having that physical representation that they can then turn in for advantage on some roll can have quite a psychological impact. After a while, they might just start enjoying role-playing just for its own sake.

http://i.imgur.com/CnqA2gf.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/tQJbi8y.jpg


Talking In Character is not necessary to Role Play. This is certainly a way you could go about getting your players to talk in character, but it could also turn them off the game entirely, or make them quite uncomfortable. Now, being pushed out of your comfort zone isn't necessarily a bad thing! But you should definitely think carefully if you are willing to tell your players, "I like in-character dialogue. You must play this way to play in my game!"

I actually wrote a song for my bard in anticipation of a particular event in the game. I was really proud of it and looking forward to singing it in-character. When the time came and I was not singing it loudly enough (in a big room that had a lot more going on than just our D&D game), the DM said "Come on! Belt it out!" I clammed up and didn't bother singing it. I think that's a great example of making someone uncomfortable with role-playing. Baby steps.

JAL_1138
2015-10-23, 01:25 PM
My group talks entire OOC for the most part. Even when they talk IC it's obviously just them talking to me as themselves.

I generally ask for "I'll try and scare the king into helping me by hinting another kingdom is coming for him, rolled a 16" over "I use persuasion on the king, rolled a 16."

I hate acting as a DM, so I don't require my players to do so.

Doing it this way also avoids penalizing a socially-awkward person, or even someone ok at general socializing but not good at improv acting, who's trying to play a socially-skilled character. Lord knows my bard character would be in trouble if I had to talk in-character for him to flirt or flatter, for instance.

Like you, I generally don't let "I roll Bluff" to skate by, but "I tell the guard I'm a noble and flash a fake signet ring--16?" is perfectly fine by me.

Honest Tiefling
2015-10-23, 01:57 PM
I think that minor interactions should be kept to a minimum, but that they have a place. You're all at the tavern, you need to establish some characters quickly and get things across. A short interaction with NPCs is like that bit in the movies where they establish the who's who of the cast. Otherwise, unless it serves the plot (a character is trying to charm an innkeep to later use as a pawn, for instance), I'd gloss over the interactions quickly.

I would be careful about handing out tokens for 'good' roleplay, because everyone's definition is different. I've often found that some DMs do this quite poorly and only reward their favorite archetypes. Which gets to be a problem if the DM prefers cool types that plan things out carefully, but the party is faced with a situation where 'burn everything' is effective, efficient, safe, and/or cheap and the players believe their characters would genuinely do that.

Dalebert
2015-10-23, 02:23 PM
I would be careful about handing out tokens for 'good' roleplay, because everyone's definition is different.

Sure. I should say sincere attempts at role-playing, particularly if it's purely for the sake of role-playing and not necessarily just the obviously beneficial thing to do but you're actually playing your character's personality honestly, whatever you've decided it to be. I think the 5e book emphasizes rewarding inspiration when a player acts out their characters flaws when it's not beneficial to the party but I'm more liberal with it, at least with newer players who are just getting their feet wet with role-playing.

1337 b4k4
2015-10-23, 02:51 PM
If you want to encourage more role playing (which as others have pointed out, is different from acting at the table), I highly suggest you read through the Dungeon World rules (http://book.dwgazetteer.com/ use the menus at the top), specifically the GM section and see what sort of lessons you could import to D&D. At a high level, DW encourages you as a DM to do things like "always address the players by character name and ask them 'what do you do'", let the players describe their actions and roll only when what they describe calls for a roll (as opposed to deciding what you/they want to roll and then describing actions to fit the roll). Encourage your players characters to have bonds and to act on them. Make the character's lives interesting (which does go along with the, 'don't have a 20 minute real time acting out haggling for inn prices unless the players really find that interesting').

For me, role playing is about stepping into someone else's shoes and head and doing things as they would. The emphasis is on doing things, so as much as possible, I try to stay out of the weeds that are the mechanics. I want my players to tell me what they do, and whether that's first, second or third person I could care less, but I want them to describe actions and behaviors, not rolls and moves. And above all (and a huge "rule" from Dungeon World) be a fan of your players and their characters. If they describe this awesome thing they want to do, and you say "great give me a roll for X", if they say "I was thinking I would roll Y for that", unless there is an amazingly compelling reason for you to not let them roll Y, go ahead and let them roll Y. The point of rolling is to see what happens, in the long run, a difference of a few percentage points chance isn't going to make a big difference for you, but the less time spent on the mechanics underneath the magic and more time on the actual world being role played, the more role playing will occur.

Regitnui
2015-10-23, 03:45 PM
I'll certainly agree with that. One of my attempts at DMing had a barbarian who liked to smoke 'pipeweed'. Unfortunately, the concept of "barter" didn't quite make it into the character's head, so the party had a productive few minutes of a random, nameless merchant trying to explain to a barbarian holding him by the collar why he couldn't just demand the pipeweed. Eventually, the tiefling stepped in and tried to charm the poor merchant; she looked like a wingless Erinyes, so between the two of them, they got the pipeweed for free anyway.

It's a great example of how roleplaying can liven up.a 'boring' encounter like shopping.

Honest Tiefling
2015-10-23, 05:05 PM
I'll certainly agree with that. One of my attempts at DMing had a barbarian who liked to smoke 'pipeweed'. Unfortunately, the concept of "barter" didn't quite make it into the character's head, so the party had a productive few minutes of a random, nameless merchant trying to explain to a barbarian holding him by the collar why he couldn't just demand the pipeweed. Eventually, the tiefling stepped in and tried to charm the poor merchant; she looked like a wingless Erinyes, so between the two of them, they got the pipeweed for free anyway.

It's a great example of how roleplaying can liven up.a 'boring' encounter like shopping.

I think this too, can be a good example. But it establishes the character as one who doesn't understand something because of their background. Also, another character got into the action, so I would say it is a good example for that as well. But, different strokes for different folks. Some people want to RP only on the battlefield, which I think should be important as well. Also, not every interaction with the merchants should be like this, or shopping becomes a problem in that it'll take too long and people might run out of ideas or want to move on.


Sure. I should say sincere attempts at role-playing, particularly if it's purely for the sake of role-playing and not necessarily just the obviously beneficial thing to do but you're actually playing your character's personality honestly, whatever you've decided it to be. I think the 5e book emphasizes rewarding inspiration when a player acts out their characters flaws when it's not beneficial to the party but I'm more liberal with it, at least with newer players who are just getting their feet wet with role-playing.

Yeah, this. I sorta wish when in the past the DM meant rewarding roleplay they meant this, not wondering why everything on fire.

Arbane
2015-10-24, 12:11 AM
Play pirates.

No-one kin resist doin' THE VOICE, yarrr. :smallwink:

goto124
2015-10-24, 01:42 AM
When they go to a blacksmith to buy a sword you can tell them "you enter the blacksmiths yard, there's racks filled with various tools, the blacksmith- a young woman in a dirt apron walks up to you Hello strangers, what can I do you for?".
If they try to speak out of character remind them that you only speak the language of in character.

By 'reminding them', you mean 'continue to speak in-character'?

GM: You enter the blacksmith's yard. where there're racks filled with various tools. The blacksmith - a young woman in a dirt apron - walks up to you, and says 'Hello strangers, what can I do you for?'
Player: I ask for a sword.
GM: The blacksmith quirks an eyebrow. 'A sword huh? What type of sword would you like?'

It's a way of gently nudging the players towards roleplay, without shoving RP down their throats.

As someone who does lots of PbP, both GMs and Players usually use the third person. The GM would say "As Alice enters the yard, the blacksmith walks up to her". The player would say "Alice takes a look around the yard, and smiles at the blacksmith warmly". I'm not sure if it makes that much difference, but now I feel weird when I'm in a roleplaying game and see 'you see XX' instead of 'Alice sees XX'.


I try to stay out of the weeds that are the mechanics. I want my players to tell me what they do, and whether that's first, second or third person I could care less, but I want them to describe actions and behaviors, not rolls and moves.

I've been in a game where roleplay was enforced, OOC chat was minimized, and players did their very best to describe everything in IC terms. Thing is, I knew there were underlying mechanics. Let's use an analogy: it was like parents lying to their child about Santa Claus. The other players were the parents, I was the child, and I was smart enough to know the presents under the tree weren't from Santa but from the parents. And when I don't receive any presents this winter, I know it's nothing to do with Santa and everything to do with the parents.

The point is, don't pretend the mechanics are fluff.

Also, another reason players could be adverse to roleplaying: they believe it would hurt them. If I write down 'Alice hates elves', and Alice comes across an elf noble that she'll have to help for a significant amount of time for the campaign, I'll have to push the hate side or completely wreck the game. It goes down to the belief of "If I roleplay, I have to do non-optimal things for no reason other than 'my character is that', and that just hurts everyone's enjoyment of the game."

It's easier to swallow RP if it's defined as "describe what your character does".

Regitnui
2015-10-24, 02:30 AM
fAlso, another reason players could be adverse to roleplaying: they believe it would hurt them. If I write down 'Alice hates elves', and Alice comes across an elf noble that she'll have to help for a significant amount of time for the campaign, I'll have to push the hate side or completely wreck the game.

How many ways can you hold to that trait without ruining the campaign?
1. Keep near to the other party members, one hand on your weapon and making no attempt to hide your dislike or distaste for the village/noble
2. Suspect the worst of the noble until they do something overwhelmingly good to help your party, and even then keep a secret suspicion.
3. Blame the noble or elves whenever things start to go pear-shaped on a quest.
4. If playing with a elf party member, interact with then the least, only when you have to. After a while, admit that they're not so bad "for an elf".
5. If you get any material reward from your quests for the noble; a cloak of elvenkind or a elven-made bow; go out of your way to not use it or sell it at the earliest opportunity. Explain yourself as "not trusting the elfish stuff".

See? Reminds me of a player that thought she had to disagree with every quest-giver because she was chaotic. She got tired of making dexterity and charisma saves to get herself out of trouble when everyone else just wanted the quest.

goto124
2015-10-24, 02:35 AM
To clarify, I was expressing the possible opinion of one who's RP-adverse. It was a point of view I got after playing a particularly harsh game, where pretty much all your suggestions would've led to terrible consequences anyway. Yes, it was a poor game.

That's sound advice for roleplay, thank you so much!

Dalebert
2015-10-24, 11:24 AM
Also, another reason players could be adverse to roleplaying: they believe it would hurt them. If I write down 'Alice hates elves', and Alice comes across an elf noble that she'll have to help for a significant amount of time for the campaign, I'll have to push the hate side or completely wreck the game. It goes down to the belief of "If I roleplay, I have to do non-optimal things for no reason other than 'my character is that', and that just hurts everyone's enjoyment of the game."


See? Reminds me of a player that thought she had to disagree with every quest-giver because she was chaotic. She got tired of making dexterity and charisma saves to get herself out of trouble when everyone else just wanted the quest.

Many folks seem to take any kind of role-playing to the extreme. Maybe that's the other end of the spectrum . Finding a happy middle-ground would be helpful.

Ex: I made some characters for new players for a one-shot and am trying to nudge them in toward role-playing by giving the characters some interesting traits and giving somewhat specific scenarios where the characters will get inspiration. Think of it as role-playing training wheels. Maybe that was a mistake.

A rogue has background story of narrowly avoiding a deathtrap in his youth and being extra cautious. I put something like "Receive inspiration when your paranoia pays off." I pictured that as making sure to check for traps before opening a chest and maybe being a little extra cautious in general and excessively checking for traps, for instance. Actually he's constantly acting paranoid about everything to the point that he can barely be described as an adventurer. He just doesn't want to do anything remotely dangerous. He's also expressed wanting to kill an innocent woman because maybe she was bitten by a vampire and could turn into one. There is a paladin and a good cleric in the group! Next game, I feel the need to address this and say "You have several levels of rogue. You realize you got there by being adventurous. Don't role-play yourself completely out of the adventure and the group."

RedCloakLives!
2015-10-24, 05:43 PM
... is it worth the effort?

Yes, a thousand times, yes.

What we do is an Art Form.

Roll vs Role. Speaking very loosely, the progenitor D&D had both roll-playing and role-playing. The first was required. For the second, role-playing, there could be as much, or as little, as you chose. There's nothing wrong with pure roll-playing, but role-playing is the more evolved form of the art. The experience is richer. By far.


I don't think my players would enjoy my campaign as much if I shoved role-playing down their throats, any advice?

The eternal question: once you've decided What to accomplish, How do you do it?

I agree with a lot of the comments upthread. I think if done right, most people enjoy it. It kind of depends on everyone involved, too.

If you have players that are already in tune with the concept - for example, could your sister be a role model, and lead by example? In a way that is entertaining and satisfying for everyone? And infectious?

The other players -- it can really vary. Appearances are often deceiving as to who will like it and get into it. Have they seen examples?

You - how well do you know the other players? Are they close friends; do you know how get them to try new things? Do you have a large personality? How expressive can you be? When you describe something, such as something they do (and they've simply rolled a die for it), how much RP flair can you add to the description?

The system - you could try playing one-shots in other systems that are built to encourage, or built entirely on role playing, e.g., spend an evening playing Fiasco. Maybe that would be inspiration enough, or perhaps you could try to work in some of its scenario character construction concepts.

Different scenarios have their effect, too; less combat and more plot could help.

It can be a process, and how much you do does fall on a spectrum. For example, my current group started at a low-moderate level of RP, and we have been gradually increasing over the years. (And some players recently re-joined/joined us, and they are less evolved, and it is causing a little bit of not-on-the-same-page tension.)

1337 b4k4
2015-10-25, 08:17 PM
I've been in a game where roleplay was enforced, OOC chat was minimized, and players did their very best to describe everything in IC terms. Thing is, I knew there were underlying mechanics. Let's use an analogy: it was like parents lying to their child about Santa Claus. The other players were the parents, I was the child, and I was smart enough to know the presents under the tree weren't from Santa but from the parents. And when I don't receive any presents this winter, I know it's nothing to do with Santa and everything to do with the parents.

The point is, don't pretend the mechanics are fluff.


To start with, you have to understand that at my table, the fluff is mechanics, and the mechanics are fluff. They are intertwined and inseparable and rolling a 20 to hit has just as much of a real in game effect as declaring that you leap across the table and dive into the wizard preparing to cast. Rolls or no rolls, the point of the game is to have things happen. Rolling dice is just one of many ways to make that happen.

It's one of the reasons I like Dungeon World so much. You describe actions and those actions trigger the dice rolls. When the goblin warrior is swinging at you with his sword and you tell me you swing back, that triggers "Hack and Slash". When you tell me you pull out your crossbow and fire a bolt through his skull, that triggers "Volley". When you say you ignore the goblin because you really need to get that idol across the gap before the magic runs out, that triggers "Defy Danger". When you tell me that you stand strong because the orphan behind you depends on you not letting that goblin through, that triggers "Defend" (or possibly Defy Danger depending on what you specifically say you're doing. The point is, you don't tell me what roll you want to roll, you tell me what your character does and if and when they do something that matches a move, then you roll the move.

Now it helps tremendously that DW moves don't require you to fail to get your result just because you failed the roll. For example, take the "Fire a bolt through the goblin's skull" action above. The player decides that's what they want to do, and they roll a 5. In DW a 6 or less is essentially a complete failure. But that doesn't mean that I as a GM have to declare the player didn't do what they said they did. As a GM, when the player fail a roll, I have to use one of my own moves. I can go with the standard D&D trope and use my "Deal Damage" move and have the player miss and take damage from the incoming attack. I can also use "Tell them the requirements and ask" and tell the player "You can get the shot off, you have the time, but as you're taking aim you realize the momentum of the goblin will carry it into you and push you both off the cliff, you can take your shot but you're going to be in serious trouble, or you can brace yourself and take the full hit, what do you do?" or I could use a monster move "Call more goblins" by telling the player "As you take aim at the goblin, it realizes that it may not survive, but it's going to make damn sure you filthy humans don't make it out of here alive, and it shrieks out a goblin warcry. As your bolt pierces his skull and cuts the cry off, you hear the echoes of more goblins responding to the cry"

When I say stay out of the weeds of the mechanics, I don't mean pretend they don't exist, but I mean stay out of the "optimally picking the most mathematically perfect move and twisting what do to fit that" mind set. I encourage my players to tell me what it is they want to do first and foremost because doing things is what this game is about, and the mechanics help us determine how those things happen. I've found with my tables the less I talk to my players about the things written on their sheets and the more we talk about what their character is actually doing, the more role playing actually happens, and we still use the mechanics plenty. YMMV of course.



Also, another reason players could be adverse to roleplaying: they believe it would hurt them. If I write down 'Alice hates elves', and Alice comes across an elf noble that she'll have to help for a significant amount of time for the campaign, I'll have to push the hate side or completely wreck the game. It goes down to the belief of "If I roleplay, I have to do non-optimal things for no reason other than 'my character is that', and that just hurts everyone's enjoyment of the game."

It's easier to swallow RP if it's defined as "describe what your character does".

See, if your GM makes "alice hates elves" require the player to either ignore it entirely or wreck the game, they're failing (and frankly looking at bigotry and hatred as a caricature rather than the complex emotion it is). A character who hates elves having to work closely with one is a perfect role playing opportunity and a chance to explore a character and their growth (or lack thereof). Drama is a key part of story telling, embrace it.

themaque
2015-10-26, 10:03 PM
I love a good role playing session. If I'm active all night long but never once pick up the dice, I'm a happy camper.

However, You don't need role playing AT ALL to enjoy RPG's if that's your thing. It all depends on the particular table and how they have the most fun. I might enjoy talking in character for the next 4 hours but if George just wants to say "My Barbarian seduces the priest" and spends the next 4 hours killing guards, so long as everyone had a good time I would say that's a great game night.

GungHo
2015-10-27, 11:08 AM
It's worth it if people want to do it. If some folks hate it but everyone else is game, it may be good to find out why they hate it... though do that non-aggressively. Provide opportunities and see if they take the bait. If they just get a sour face every time, you might speak with them about it away from the table. They may have had a bad experience. Or, they may just not like it.

Personally, I don't do voices. I laugh when one guy in my group does voices because he sounds like one of Terry Jones' female characters.