General Roleplay Discussion

[Arenti]

As there are locations that have apples, but no wood, we can safely assume that there are types of trees that are not suitable for building (or burning) purposes.

Maybe Cantr apples grow in a different way?

[Surly]

As there are locations that have apples, but no wood, we can safely assume that there are types of trees that are not suitable for building (or burning) purposes.

You have no idea how things like this bugged me when I first joined the Resources Department.

Honestly, if I go outside it would not take me long to find wood. And I live in the centre of a city... the scarcity of wood was the topic of many "discussions" between myself and Anthony. At least I got timber, I suppose...

[Taralyn]

good point

[EchoMan]

As there are locations that have apples, but no wood, we can safely assume that there are types of trees that are not suitable for building (or burning) purposes.

You have no idea how things like this bugged me when I first joined the Resources Department.

Honestly, if I go outside it would not take me long to find wood. And I live in the centre of a city...

True, but what would happen to you if you brought your hatchet and started chopping it?

[Arenti]

lol.... I do imagine few trees in other towns in cantr that way. That there are some trees but that can't be chopped down.

[curious]

possibly the biggest pollutant to an independent world would be the attachment of a forum to it, and discussing it.?
yes, i am reading these boards... but in the hope that i may become a good rp'er... maybe to live as 'in-world' intended, and less to 'play God'.

i wonder if there is a forum somewhere discussing this world..?

[Dudel]

*is back from the dead*

At the OP:

The problem with Cantr and the type of RPing where you normally allow the inclusion of thoughts is the perspective that is taken and the way Cantr words things.

First person perspectives mean that you are your character (within reason) and as a consequence, you can not read minds. In any other environment this would actually be encouraged as players should know how best to interact with characters in order to get the result they want. Cantr doesn't work that way, to put it simple.

Skimmed the rest of the thread:

When I did play (and I'll post who I played when I find the thread if people didn't know already) I had zero reason to argue against a "lone tree" or a "stray rock". Just because there are not trees with WOOD doesn't mean there are not trees. Cantr is a mysterious place!

[Ryaga]

I like the idea of keeping character's thoughts separate in all RP. It adds a bit, for the player not knowing the other's thoughts.

[returner]

When I did play (and I'll post who I played when I find the thread if people didn't know already) I had zero reason to argue against a "lone tree" or a "stray rock". Just because there are not trees with WOOD doesn't mean there are not trees. Cantr is a mysterious place!

Eh, I generally avoid 'sitting on logs' if I'm not in a forest. I don't mind if a character does it, but I'll only sit on fallen trees in a forest, or a big stone in a place with stone.

[curious]

just out of curiosity... i have been wondering about one thing here...
what of having a character imply what a certain look may be intended for..? for instance... say a frown is intended to be sympathetic to another character..?

*frowns sympathetically* or just
*frowns*

with the latter relying on additional (and contextual) text...which is possible easily enough but more easily summarised in the former?

is this an acceptable 'in-game' strategy..? or not..?

thanks

[Miri]

I think it's ok. It's just a further, more detailed description of the facial expression. IRL emotions are most often clearly readable from ones face (especially when you know the person for longer than a few minutes), so such description would make much more sense than, for example, describing the frown in every physical detail.

I'm often using it myself, anyway, and noone has scolded me yet, sooo...

[Kelli]

Yeah...I often use thinks like "Smiles apologetically*

Helps a lot imo...

[gejyspa]

Yeah, what Miri said. A "frown" describes a myriad of facial expressions, with many subtle nuances. Anyone seeing it, and especially in context, should be able to determine, with a decent level of confidence, the reason behind that particular style of frown, so there is nothing wrong with short-cutting the style description. That being said, it is NOT acceptable to say "*frowns at the thought, that tomorrow, unbeknownst to the townspeople, Frodo will have to betray the mayor, climb up a six story building, and plant a cream pie in the face of Jonquil, the court jester*" (unless of course, that was EXACTLY the topic of the current conversation) See the difference?

[curious]

Yeah, what Miri said. A "frown" describes a myriad of facial expressions, with many subtle nuances. Anyone seeing it, and especially in context, should be able to determine, with a decent level of confidence, the reason behind that particular style of frown, so there is nothing wrong with short-cutting the style description. That being said, it is NOT acceptable to say "*frowns at the thought, that tomorrow, unbeknownst to the townspeople, Frodo will have to betray the mayor, climb up a six story building, and plant a cream pie in the face of Jonquil, the court jester*" (unless of course, that was EXACTLY the topic of the current conversation) See the difference?

*smiles*

Yes, thank you... this is all helpful.
I am actually enjoying Cantr a great deal more these days, and because of the contents of this thread.

Learning.

[Piscator]

Always try to think about whether a given information is useful to the reader or not. If you write for example *smiles as he remembers happier times* other chars can of course not be certain why you are smiling, but the player knows exactly what kind of smile is meant. So while giving away parts of information the reader is not allowed to act upon (the fact that he indeed wallows in pleaseant memories and not just looks like it), the information can all in all be considered helpful. (*smiles nostalgically* would probably be a more elegant solution, but not all of us find the right words immediately and sometimes a little variation from *Xs Yly* is quite refreshing, too.)