Post by Raenius on Jul 29, 2009 21:27:50 GMT -5
Rules are like fortune cookies. They must be broken in order to fully understand their need and the lessons that we should learn from them.
This game that we play is a funny little one, where we each live vicariously through our characters to such a degree that we tend to take the rules quite seriously. Most of us do, anyway.
Cough. Wayne.
You’ve got your generic rules. Respect the staff and your fellow players. Plagiarism equals death. Role-plays must be on time. Don’t use other people’s characters without permission. No-shows, cancelling matches, blah, blah.
But there are some rules that could be debated.
Like the “keep things tasteful” rule. Racism, sexism, pornography and all of the other good stuff that, mixed together, make normal life function. Who here, honestly, hasn’t made a quip or remark (serious or otherwise) that degrades different races? Or the different sex? Or the elderly? Or whistled across the street at some wee blonde thing with a skirt too short for functionality and showing enough cleavage to make you think that a spec of rain would lube them up enough to make them pop out? I, for one, am all in favour of letting people be casual and natural. If people are going to get insulted simply by being called a cracker or a slut, then they’re too uptight to be allowed contact with the outside world in the first place. They can fuck off back to Sunday school or whatever cardboard box they live in that they think will keep them away from these things.
This is the first place I’ve role-played in that has different rules for every different stipulation for every match. Generally, they make things quite interesting and spice things up. The limiting of words or forcing works to exceed a certain amount of words is a great one. It challenges people to either get to the point or to justify extra dialogue or scene setting. Inclusions of specific places, peoples and objects again present a perfectly achievable test.
Though I do believe that no one, ever, should be asked to role-play as someone else’s character. Assigning someone a generic or neutral party that has nothing to do with either character – now that would be dead on. But making someone work with a character that they don’t know well enough is a horrible thing. Mostly for the person whose character is being despoiled. After all, they’re the ones that are going to have to continue on writing as that person, and they’re going to have to find some way to justify acting differently or, at worst, simply pretend that it never happened and ignore it. Which, let’s face it, is pretty fucking lazy. For the person writing as the other player’s character – and I know this rings true for me – there would come the inevitable fear and consternation over abusing someone’s work and putting a nice big cock up the arse to a personality that they have worked hard on (for years, in most cases) and that they adore.
Adding lyrics to role-plays? Again, I’m going to have to call bullshit on that. A fine, different, challenging idea, certainly, but when it comes to be that one person in the match can work their balls off to add all or most of a song’s lyrics into their role-play, and some lazy motherfucker can just waltz in, use one line, and have it count the same? No. Can’t be that way. If there was a way of making it be a certain amount of lines or words… or use the entirety of a chorus or anything of the like, then I could see some sense in it. But giving such vague requirements to the rule means that different people will do different levels of work – just like normal role-plays – and so, once it’s thought of like that… is there any point in the stipulation at all?
Then there’s the one about a role-play being in the superstar’s “everyday life”. This is the worst by far, for me, since that makes up about ninety percent of what I do. My view on the whole subject is that role-playing should be about showing that character doing what they do and being who they are. Cutting promos is a thing for TV shows. Trash-talking is a thing that, in reality, wrestlers do on the television shows so that everyone sees it. In my role-plays, if I need to do it, I make the trash-talk in casual conversation or I write about my character being in front of a camera or in the ring with a microphone in his hand doing his thing. It juggles my tits to see someone’s every role-play being as though they were on a show, talking smack about their opponent and saying how much better they are and how badly they’re going to beat them down – when the show is yet to be posted. Works, in my small opinion, should be character development, the furthering of storylines, exploration into a different lifestyle and all should come together to interest the reader.
I’m fairly certain that there’s a reason why television promos are so short. That they’re just not that interesting. There are only so many times I can listen to a guy threaten to tear another person apart, or make fun of their mothers or wives, show off their muscles or hit on the interviewer without wanting to cut my ears off, my eyes out, put them in a blender and pour the lumpy, sickly juice up my arse pipe.
Then fart it all over my mother.
One that I’m just not sure about, however, is the voting system for results on the pay per view shows.
When I think about its good points, I come up with the fact that it makes everyone make sure to read every role-play and critique them fairly. It gets people involved and lets them know that they make a difference. But on the flip side… this is a pay per view. The most important show of the month. What happens if the general consensus on a player is that they’re work is good, but boring? Then, when they’re up against someone mediocre, but funny, they suffer for it because people generally like to be amused more than they like to be intellectually challenged. What if people just don’t like a player personally? And a situation that has come up a couple of times during my thought process… what happens when a person wins the world title, then the next week when they defend it, their work sucks donkey balls? A one-week reign that lessens the prestige of the title? What happens if the world champion has eleven out of twelve weeks of superior writing, and the person that they’re up against has one good one in the twelve – but the good one happens to be the title match. Do they really deserve it?
I ran a fed for over a year. Not a good one… but I digress… when I gave titles to people I gave it on overall effort, enthusiasm, work and everything else all rolled into one. I wouldn’t have a title be defended every week, or even every two weeks. It’d be defended once or twice a month, maximum, against other people that I thought deserved a shot based on their work, mindset, loyalty and the effort put in over however long a time. I have been the victim of the point above, as have many, many friends of mine, where we have had untouchable work for X amount of time, had one slip up against a usually inferior opponent, and been stripped of a title that we deserved far more for overall work over our tenure in the e-fed. Titles, to me, must be a show of respect to a player who goes above and beyond the call of duty. Acknowledgement for grinding out work every week. For never being any hassle. For being understanding. For helping make storylines and help others make theirs exciting. Match and segment writing. Decision making. Website upkeep. Or just generally being a good player of the game that keeps things fair and interesting.
Personally, I’d rather that the staff be the ones who make the choices of who wins in the important matches. After all, they’re the ones that should know the ins and outs of each character and their feuds. Maybe that could leave the voting to every other, small show in between, weekly or bi-weekly.
Really all I want is for everyone to play this game together and have fun. Let the easily offended fuck off. Let the childish ones throw the toys out of the pram every time they lose. Let the bullshit fly and the good times roll.
This beer’s for all of us sad cunts that aren’t six feet tall, built like a brick shithouse and can’t be entertaining no matter how hard we try.
This game that we play is a funny little one, where we each live vicariously through our characters to such a degree that we tend to take the rules quite seriously. Most of us do, anyway.
Cough. Wayne.
You’ve got your generic rules. Respect the staff and your fellow players. Plagiarism equals death. Role-plays must be on time. Don’t use other people’s characters without permission. No-shows, cancelling matches, blah, blah.
But there are some rules that could be debated.
Like the “keep things tasteful” rule. Racism, sexism, pornography and all of the other good stuff that, mixed together, make normal life function. Who here, honestly, hasn’t made a quip or remark (serious or otherwise) that degrades different races? Or the different sex? Or the elderly? Or whistled across the street at some wee blonde thing with a skirt too short for functionality and showing enough cleavage to make you think that a spec of rain would lube them up enough to make them pop out? I, for one, am all in favour of letting people be casual and natural. If people are going to get insulted simply by being called a cracker or a slut, then they’re too uptight to be allowed contact with the outside world in the first place. They can fuck off back to Sunday school or whatever cardboard box they live in that they think will keep them away from these things.
This is the first place I’ve role-played in that has different rules for every different stipulation for every match. Generally, they make things quite interesting and spice things up. The limiting of words or forcing works to exceed a certain amount of words is a great one. It challenges people to either get to the point or to justify extra dialogue or scene setting. Inclusions of specific places, peoples and objects again present a perfectly achievable test.
Though I do believe that no one, ever, should be asked to role-play as someone else’s character. Assigning someone a generic or neutral party that has nothing to do with either character – now that would be dead on. But making someone work with a character that they don’t know well enough is a horrible thing. Mostly for the person whose character is being despoiled. After all, they’re the ones that are going to have to continue on writing as that person, and they’re going to have to find some way to justify acting differently or, at worst, simply pretend that it never happened and ignore it. Which, let’s face it, is pretty fucking lazy. For the person writing as the other player’s character – and I know this rings true for me – there would come the inevitable fear and consternation over abusing someone’s work and putting a nice big cock up the arse to a personality that they have worked hard on (for years, in most cases) and that they adore.
Adding lyrics to role-plays? Again, I’m going to have to call bullshit on that. A fine, different, challenging idea, certainly, but when it comes to be that one person in the match can work their balls off to add all or most of a song’s lyrics into their role-play, and some lazy motherfucker can just waltz in, use one line, and have it count the same? No. Can’t be that way. If there was a way of making it be a certain amount of lines or words… or use the entirety of a chorus or anything of the like, then I could see some sense in it. But giving such vague requirements to the rule means that different people will do different levels of work – just like normal role-plays – and so, once it’s thought of like that… is there any point in the stipulation at all?
Then there’s the one about a role-play being in the superstar’s “everyday life”. This is the worst by far, for me, since that makes up about ninety percent of what I do. My view on the whole subject is that role-playing should be about showing that character doing what they do and being who they are. Cutting promos is a thing for TV shows. Trash-talking is a thing that, in reality, wrestlers do on the television shows so that everyone sees it. In my role-plays, if I need to do it, I make the trash-talk in casual conversation or I write about my character being in front of a camera or in the ring with a microphone in his hand doing his thing. It juggles my tits to see someone’s every role-play being as though they were on a show, talking smack about their opponent and saying how much better they are and how badly they’re going to beat them down – when the show is yet to be posted. Works, in my small opinion, should be character development, the furthering of storylines, exploration into a different lifestyle and all should come together to interest the reader.
I’m fairly certain that there’s a reason why television promos are so short. That they’re just not that interesting. There are only so many times I can listen to a guy threaten to tear another person apart, or make fun of their mothers or wives, show off their muscles or hit on the interviewer without wanting to cut my ears off, my eyes out, put them in a blender and pour the lumpy, sickly juice up my arse pipe.
Then fart it all over my mother.
One that I’m just not sure about, however, is the voting system for results on the pay per view shows.
When I think about its good points, I come up with the fact that it makes everyone make sure to read every role-play and critique them fairly. It gets people involved and lets them know that they make a difference. But on the flip side… this is a pay per view. The most important show of the month. What happens if the general consensus on a player is that they’re work is good, but boring? Then, when they’re up against someone mediocre, but funny, they suffer for it because people generally like to be amused more than they like to be intellectually challenged. What if people just don’t like a player personally? And a situation that has come up a couple of times during my thought process… what happens when a person wins the world title, then the next week when they defend it, their work sucks donkey balls? A one-week reign that lessens the prestige of the title? What happens if the world champion has eleven out of twelve weeks of superior writing, and the person that they’re up against has one good one in the twelve – but the good one happens to be the title match. Do they really deserve it?
I ran a fed for over a year. Not a good one… but I digress… when I gave titles to people I gave it on overall effort, enthusiasm, work and everything else all rolled into one. I wouldn’t have a title be defended every week, or even every two weeks. It’d be defended once or twice a month, maximum, against other people that I thought deserved a shot based on their work, mindset, loyalty and the effort put in over however long a time. I have been the victim of the point above, as have many, many friends of mine, where we have had untouchable work for X amount of time, had one slip up against a usually inferior opponent, and been stripped of a title that we deserved far more for overall work over our tenure in the e-fed. Titles, to me, must be a show of respect to a player who goes above and beyond the call of duty. Acknowledgement for grinding out work every week. For never being any hassle. For being understanding. For helping make storylines and help others make theirs exciting. Match and segment writing. Decision making. Website upkeep. Or just generally being a good player of the game that keeps things fair and interesting.
Personally, I’d rather that the staff be the ones who make the choices of who wins in the important matches. After all, they’re the ones that should know the ins and outs of each character and their feuds. Maybe that could leave the voting to every other, small show in between, weekly or bi-weekly.
Really all I want is for everyone to play this game together and have fun. Let the easily offended fuck off. Let the childish ones throw the toys out of the pram every time they lose. Let the bullshit fly and the good times roll.
This beer’s for all of us sad cunts that aren’t six feet tall, built like a brick shithouse and can’t be entertaining no matter how hard we try.
