On pages 66-67 of the Basic Rules, the author lays out two methods of RP, specifically Descriptive (essentially 3rd person aka "Tordek stomps over to the bar and orders a drink") and Active ( 1st person or in-character, including mannerisms and body language aka "I stomp over to the bar and glare at the innkeeper. 'Gimme another drink, ye daft bastard.'")

I've been involved with discussions about this in the past, and even taken some heat when professing my own personal distaste for the active method (you aren't really roleplaying unless you are speaking in-character!) but I think this is the first time I've seen each method clearly labeled and as such this section stood out to me.

Is this the first time Descriptive and Active have been used to define these two methods of RP, or have I just skipped over every What is Roleplaying? section in every book I've read since 1985?

I don't think there is a huge difference either way, I have seen people slip in and out of both without a major problem.

Eh. Either is fine. I personally prefer narration to embodiment.

However.

The really gifted RPer is able to provide characterization efficiently. A few very characteristic and appropriate words said during the active parts of a game have more weight to me than all the masturbatory fluff ever written.

One of the best segments written during the 2e era was from the castle guide. A character called in a favor and got a stone giant and his son to help him build a castle on the moors. After the whole castle was built, a century storm came trough, destabilized the ground, and the castle slowly sank right into the ground.

With no fanfare, the stone giant turned to his son and said, "that's why you never build a castle in a swamp."

Elegant. Efficient. Just nine words. Perfect characterization. You know exactly who that stone giant is.

I don't care whether the stone giant's player narrates the line or speaks in character. The line itself is perfection.

Quote from: Scott Anderson;768316Eh. Either is fine. I personally prefer narration to embodiment.

However.

The really gifted RPer is able to provide characterization efficiently. A few very characteristic and appropriate words said during the active parts of a game have more weight to me than all the masturbatory fluff ever written.

One of the best segments written during the 2e era was from the castle guide. A character called in a favor and got a stone giant and his son to help him build a castle on the moors. After the whole castle was built, a century storm came trough, destabilized the ground, and the castle slowly sank right into the ground.

With no fanfare, the stone giant turned to his son and said, "that's why you never build a castle in a swamp."

Elegant. Efficient. Just nine words. Perfect characterization. You know exactly who that stone giant is.

I don't care whether the stone giant's player narrates the line or speaks in character. The line itself is perfection.

I see you have read the Bible a bit.

Quote from: Raven;768299Is this the first time Descriptive and Active have been used to define these two methods of RP, or have I just skipped over every What is Roleplaying? section in every book I've read since 1985?

They're usually called First Person roleplaying and Third Person roleplaying.  

I think doing 100% either is kind of odd.  First person if you're speaking as your character, third person if you're talking about them, switching back and forth between them.

I say, "Conan orders more wine." - Third person
I say, "Barkeep more wine!" - First person
I say, "Conan says 'Barkeep more wine!'" is third person narration, don't really know anyone who does that.
Most people I play with bounce back and forth seamlessly, depending on what's going on.

Never heard the terms Active and Descriptive before, but they are decent terms.

Quote from: CRKrueger;768358They're usually called First Person roleplaying and Third Person roleplaying.  

I think doing 100% either is kind of odd.  First person if you're speaking as your character, third person if you're talking about them, switching back and forth between them.

I say, "Conan orders more wine." - Third person
I say, "Barkeep more wine!" - First person
I say, "Conan says 'Barkeep more wine!'" is third person narration, don't really know anyone who does that.
Most people I play with bounce back and forth seamlessly, depending on what's going on.

Never heard the terms Active and Descriptive before, but they are decent terms.

It would never occur to be not to be in 1st person.
I observed something interesting at GenCon a few years back. The Gm of a SW game had an aged officer giving us a debrief about a situation. He aapproached it like this
GM: The guy looks about 50 maybe 60 years old his voice is deep and horse from too long shouting orders at people. He describes the situation to you describing how the aliens arrived and what they have been up to for the last few weeks and why you were called in to assist.

To me that was totally bizarre. I would have been.
GM: The guy looks about 50 or 60 years old a seasoned guy used to giving orders:In a suitably deep horse voice "Right rookies you guys are here to do a job...etc.etc...." a minute or so of describing the situation all in character. From that point onwards I would use that characters voice and the PCs would know who was speaking etc.

I found the GMs unwillingness to engage in "in character dialogue" quite odd.

As a GM or a player all my dialogue is first person. As a Player all my directions are "I leap forwards, trying to snag the back of the truck with the handle of my umbrella" .  I find the more I do this and create the context in which it is deemed the norm the more the rest of the table follow suit.

Quote from: jibbajibba;768364It would never occur to be not to be in 1st person.

Yeah, me either.  Of course, you roleplaying the way you do will be roughly 12.73 quadrillion times more effective then Inspiration in teaching roleplaying.

I tend toward descriptive roleplaying. It's also how I tend to write, and as I prefer PBP or chat, it comes more naturally to me.

Quote from: dragoner;768312I don't think there is a huge difference either way, I have seen people slip in and out of both without a major problem.

Pretty much. My friends do whatever that they're most comfortable with, or whichever is easier. I don't care if online LARPing thespians don't like my style.

I think there is a place for third person roleplaying in terms of skipping over very minor scenes like buying provisions or updating characters on things the players already know about, but I would always want first person roleplaying to form the vast majority of any session. Even minor scenes like buying arrows and redundant exposition can be fun to play out sometimes, you just want to keep it in check so they don't stop you getting on with the actual adventure.

Yeah, I kinda flip between the two, depending on what's the easiest way to narrate what I'm doing.

Quote from: Raven;768299Is this the first time Descriptive and Active have been used to define these two methods of RP, or have I just skipped over every What is Roleplaying? section in every book I've read since 1985?

I remember something similar in Dragon 103 (I believe), one of the last articles Gary Gygax wrote for Dragon before his departure.  He had talked about Role Playing vs. Role Assumption, and that sounds vaguely like this--Role Playing is the active type while Role Assumption is the descriptive type.

Quote from: CRKrueger;768358They're usually called First Person roleplaying and Third Person roleplaying.  

I think doing 100% either is kind of odd.  First person if you're speaking as your character, third person if you're talking about them, switching back and forth between them.

I say, "Conan orders more wine." - Third person
I say, "Barkeep more wine!" - First person
I say, "Conan says 'Barkeep more wine!'" is third person narration, don't really know anyone who does that.
Most people I play with bounce back and forth seamlessly, depending on what's going on.

Never heard the terms Active and Descriptive before, but they are decent terms.

They are good descriptors, and more importantly, it is a nice inclusion in the books.  Good to see them taking time to talk about the roleplay.

Quote from: Ladybird;768398Yeah, I kinda flip between the two, depending on what's the easiest way to narrate what I'm doing.

Same here -- and for most of the people I've played with over the years.

This is a useful distinction I think. Been paying attention more to this because it came up in a discussion some time ago. It varies from group to group and player to player a bit, but I notice people shifting between the two as needed.