In games - all games - there is are gradiations from "playing a role" to "making a story".

While playing a role, you tend to talk in first-person voice.  Common activities include manipulating the environment through the character, having discussions in that voice, thinking about what you (character) should do in ways that fit the character and their desires and goals, both present and future, and changing the character based on the stresses that your mental picture of them "is feeling".  I personally do this in RPGs.  I have a character, and I talk as that character, try to keep my mental picture of them consistent and realistic as a person so that I can play them well, and try to get into the game "through" the character.  I do it far more when I'm a player than when I'm the GM, but there are plenty of moments that I'm called on to do this in small ways while GMing, too - to play an NPC, determine the reactions of a shadow conspiracy, stuff like that.

While making story, you tend to talk in third-person voice.  Common activities include manipulating the environment simply by describing it, thinking about what would be good for the fiction that's being created as a whole, both at the moment and in future, and making changes to character based on concerns regarding what you want to see happen.  I personally do this in RPGs as well.  I have a picture of the situation, and describe details of it here and there, and think about the overall flow of the game.  I do it far more when I'm a GM than when I'm a player, but there are plenty of moments as a player when I do bits of it - I'll describe the clothes my character has on, nail something to a wall and realize that nobody ever told me that it was a wooden one until I added that detail, and so on.

In different games, I do more or less of each.  The two fade into each other pretty smoothly for me.  But in general, in RPGs I play, one person heads up the story-making-type activities, while the others do the lion's share of the role-playing-type activities.

Some games claim, and some players want, to engage in full-on collaborative story-making, with everyone having a joint share in the activity, and participating all the time.  This causes me a degree of bafflement.  Because at any given instant, I'm doing some combination the two ends of the spectrum - I can slide into all sorts of places in between - but I can't occupy both states (or, if you prefer, stances) at once.

A game that is fully one thing can't be the other.  A game that was pure roleplay would include no third-person speech - it would be a full-immersion LARP.  A game that was fully co-authored story-making would include no roleplaying at all -  Once Upon A Time, in many style of playing that game, for example.

The first impulse to smooth out the division is often wrong.  When people recognise this division, or start thinking along these lines, in a great many cases, the first impulse is to try and make sure that the GM gets all of the story-making authority.  Stupid shit results from this - railroading being the obvious example, and "the ubercharacters and their great tale, which you are side characters in" being another.  Break out your old White Wolf books and read the rhetoric of the GM advice; not the nuts and bolts, but the stylistic text.  It's bloody awful, and basically reads like it's telling you to engage in glorified railroading.

The actuality of doing it well is easier.  The group loads up characters with stuff that will create tension and relationships, and the GM drops dilemas and choices on them.  The focus of the game (though not the world, by any necessity) goes onto the characters.  This gives the game the basic, central facets of fiction most desirable - the fiction being produced is about the characters, because they're central, and their decisions shape that fiction.  They aren't "collaborating on story", but they don't need to, either.

NOTE:
This doesn't include cases where the traditional division of GM and player are changed up or erased.  Not because I'm opposed to that, but because, frankly, this wouldn't be my first choice of boards for talking about that.

Agreed, all-around.

Quote from: Levi KornelsenWhile playing a role, you tend to talk in first-person voice. [...]

While making story, you tend to talk in third-person voice.

Doesn't match my experience. I've one player who never says, "I will -" or "I am -". It's always, "my character will -" or "Erika will -". Are you saying she's not roleplaying? That's absurd.

On the other hand, I've a player who always says, "I..." Are you telling me that in the 50+ sessions I've had with the guy, he's never once been "making story"? Absurd.

Do you have more objections, or just that one?

Quote from: Levi KornelsenDo you have more objections, or just that one?

We don't need to go any further. That stuff's the foundation of the rest. If you don't accept that, none of the rest even pops up.

If we don't accept the "I" vs "my character" distinction, then the "roleplaying" vs "story-making" distinction isn't made clear by anything here, either. And without that, none of the rest makes any sense at all.

It's like you've built a builiding, and I've said, "your foundations are rotten, it's about to fall down," and you're saying, "yeah, but what about the roof?" The roof doesn't matter - when the thing collapses, that roof will be a very messy floor.

Quote from: JimBobOzWe don't need to go any further. That stuff's the foundation of the rest. If you don't accept that, none of the rest even pops up.

I said "tend to".  What the hell?

Okay, how about this:

Tell me what you think I'm trying to convey.  If you're right, we'll use your wording.

Quote from: Levi KornelsenTell me what you think I'm trying to convey.  If you're right, we'll use your wording.

Mate, I have got no clue. I just don't get this "roleplaying" vs "collaborative storymaking" distinction at all. The second seems the inevitable product of the first.

If you roleplay, and have different characters, you will have conflicts, and make decisions, and things will happen.

A "story" is just a thing where something happens, and we're told how it happens.

A "collaborative" story is just something where several people contribute to the story.

A collaborative story is just the result of several people roleplaying together. It may or may not be a good story, or have a point to it, but it's a collaborative story.

That's what I think, anyway. What you think, I have no idea.

I had the same comment on 1st  person vs 3rd person...

I don't think roleplaying vs storytelling is directly linked to narrative voice.

Is it important?  It's an activity in which a small group gets together to act out in some form.  I think this constant scrutiny of what makes one thing roleplaying and another something else is a distraction at best, and harmful to the hobby at worst.

Sure you might like your PC's to remain in character 24/7 but sometimes they're either embarassed to act out stuff in the 1st person when they can gloss over it in the 3rd.  Other times you as GM might want to beat them up if they insist on narrating every single, tiny, detail about their actions like a 40's P.I.

But the question then becomes are you going to force people to play in a certain way which you or they may find uncomfortable becuase what your playing is a '3rd person roleplaying game' or a 1st person collaborative storytelling exercise'.

Play the game, have a laugh.  Don't waste your time navel gazing.

What story? In play you, as your character, are experiencing events. In a sense you are living the adventure, much as if it were happening in real life. With the advantage that you're not likely to stub your toes racing to save your buddies. Stories could be told about the adventure, but the composition of such tales will have to wait until the adventure is done, for it is a rare man who can frame a story while parrying a deathknight's blows.

Levi:

I think I like where you are going with this, but the 1st person vs 3rd person thing is just not true. I've met plenty of excellent roleplayers who prefer third person narration. This makes it look like your other conclusions are built on shaky ground. I don't think they are, but it looks that way.

-clash

Quote from: flyingmiceI think I like where you are going with this, but the 1st person vs 3rd person thing is just not true.

Fair enough.  I'll work on it.

The first person against third person is irrelevant. This comes from the baggage of the word "roleplaying".

I think roleplaying isn't necessarily "playing a role" in the actor's sense.

As long as a player is focusing on a character and does not control other areas of play, he probably fits the "first person" definition. As long as the player thinks strictly about what his character is thinking, knowing and wants to do, he's immersed in first person even if he *expresses it* using the third person.

Once the player begins to take decisions based on his own wants and needs (instead of the character's), or if the player wants to control other aspects of the story, he's drifting further and further from what is refered to as "1st person" toward "3rd person".

It's completely irrelevant whether a guy says "I attack" or "Roargard attacks". What matters is the limits the player has imposed upon himself or been imposed as far as what else he can do apart from playing a certain character.

Likewise, in a "story game" where players control several elements, it's very possible to go in and out of immersion and use "I attack". I've played Formless and we each controlled several characters in turn and we frequently went into immersion using first person.

One of the keys to find out where you stand is to analyze how you take success and failure against story progression. If you use "Roargard attacks" but insist on playing the role no matter how shitty the story might turn and if you take Roargard's failure as a personal affront and if his death is as painful as getting fucked by a rabid Rottweiler, you are probably in total immersion mode and what Levi refers to here as "first person".

If on the other hand you see your characters (or even your single character)as nothing but pawns. And are only interested in building some kind of drama, you are knee-deep in a sort of flowery dramatic mode.

Most people, me included, fall somewhere in the middle. I prefer "Immersion" and "drama" to the "first VS third person" denominations.