General RP Best Practices

[Spacer1999]

I thought it would be fun to talk about some best practices in RolePlay. I come at this from a playwriting perspective and view each post as a sort of 'solo' scene. I mean that by the fact that when you post, it's not like you are writing dialog for your partner, so it's really your side of it.

As part of that idea, one key aspect is that the player needs to respond to the prior post AND move things forward with response that is actionable by the other player. Basically, think of it like a game of leapfrog. You take your partner's post and 'leap' the action forward.

I'll keep it basic and give a generic example and list a good answer and a bad answer. I'm keeping these short. These are just for illustration purposes.

***

PLAYER 1's Post:

He blushed at her reply. It isn't easy to put yourself out there an ask someone out, even for coffee or something like that.

"Okay, great!" he said, smiling. "How about we meet at that new coffee shop in the mall? Foam and Froth, something like that? Does four o'clock work for you?

PLAYER 2's not-so-good response:

She agreed and went about her day, looking very forward to them meeting up.

PLAYER 2's actionable response:

"Perfect," she said. "I'm done with work at three and I'm free the rest of the night. I've been wanting to try that place."

She could barely concentrate at work and ended up arriving at the coffee place at 3:45. Her heart was pounding at the thought of seeing him again. It had been a long time since she'd felt this way.

A few minutes later when she saw him approaching, they caught eyes and she felt her face flush with anticipation.

"Hey you!" she said, hugging him in that awkward 'how-do-we-hug-given-our-current-relationship' type of way. "Great suggestion on the place, I was checking out the menu and everything looks amazing."

***

Like I say, some basic examples, but the important thing to think of is what the partner can respond to and act on. In the not-so-good example, it was left in Player 1's hands to move everything forward. In the second reply, Partner 2 reacted to the seed that Partner 1 had planted and got them to the spot where they could keep moving ahead.

This is a simple example, but whether it is just action, or an erotic scene, I've found it is always helpful to play off your partner and not just 'echo' the motions or ideas, but move things along and give them a new element to respond to.

 

[Passion]

Yes, you should always give your partner something to respond to (unless they are too tied up; cough). I think leaving scenes open for a character to alter is also essential. This is an issue I've run into a bit, that I don't like, but it could be fine for others.

Example for an adventure RP: Saying a monster tears off YC's arm.

No, it should be an attempt. Allow the character to try to fight back or accept what has happened.

Sometimes, if you have been RPing long enough, you can assume a few things which is contradictory. This is often true for transition scenes.

Example: Two characters are in a long and happy relationship, it can be safely assumed that they get into a car together to drive off to a planned date.

However, assuming that MC will get in a car with a total stranger and writing a whole scene about driving off together without even asking or forcing my character into the car (which again, my character should have an attempt to try to escape or say no), is not great to me.

It is taking control of someone's character, and not allowing them to RP.

I've also had this happen while I was setting up scenes. I build up to a scene I've been planning within the RP, and then my partner decides to rewrite it bluntly with their ideas. It is different to add to it or if they pick up on the fact I'm leaving something very open-ended for them to take control, but not rewrite what I'm is clearly trying to build up with specifics attached.

Example: I am building up an adventure to a mountaintop. There are strange monster noises that our characters keep hearing as they venture. I would not like for my partner to then decide what monster is up there, while I'm obviously trying to set something up. Of course, it is up to them how they react and interact with what I'm writing. They can totally turn a scene on its head by deciding to no longer climb the mountain out of fear, and that is the beauty of RP, but what is mine as a creative is mine. What is theirs is theirs. We allow our characters, plot devices, and general creativity to interact to tell a colorful story.

I have dropped partners for what I've explained. Not that I'm even upset; it is more of a style thing. I'm not gonna expect someone to change how they RP for me, nor would I for them in such a foundational way.

After all, there aren't any real rules for RP (other than the site rules and some general common sense!), so as long as two writers are happy with how they telling a story, it doesn't really matter, does it? Even what I expect from RP isn't 'correct'/the only way. RP is much like a dance, and every pairing dances uniquely.

 

[Sync]

Give your partner agency to react in ways that you might not intend.

Example: "Yeah, you could always work in a brothel, Jane" Tom offered lightly; he was obviously joking.

Okay...but what if Jane's in a bad mood and the player doesn't want to respond to the joke? Jane's player may write along with the joke, but may also feel like there's no agency or freedom to do so.

Alternate: "Yeah, you could always work in a brothel, Jane" Tom offered lightly; hopefully Jane would take it for the joke it was meant to be.

Now Jane's player has agency to write freely without risking upsetting you or your set-up. With that freedom, it's more likely that Jane's player will go with the joke and not feel pushed into it.

Also: to me, giving your partner an opening or two to respond to is essential.

I tend to follow a format when writing my posts, and while it may be a little formulaic, it generally works:
Paragraphs 1-2 - respond to my partner's post;
Paragraphs 3-4 - have my character act and speak according to paragraphs 1-2;
Paragraphs 5-6 - add new actions and/o conversation that leads to an open-ended question and/or action that pushes the story forward and gives my partner something to respond to.
(Hopefully that makes more sense than it now looks.)

 

[Siph]

Closely related to everything above, especially in the context of dialogue: don't throw too much at your partner all at once, either. Since RP is much more turn-based than real and solo-written conversations, it's easy to write a post where your character responds to a question about A, adds something that has to do with B, introduce an unrelated topic C, and goes about doing D. But that leaves your partner with four different things to respond to, and they probably want to bring something up themselves too, so that you end up with at least four parallel conversations.

Something I often end up doing in those cases is simply dropping or ignoring one or two lines of conversation to recover some semblance of what feels like a natural interaction, but obviously that's not ideal either.

It's really a matter of balancing between giving your partner something to work with and giving them the breathing room to return a meaningful response of their own; between moving the story forward and not pushing too far ahead.

 

[Spacer1999]

Closely related to everything above, especially in the context of dialogue: don't throw too much at your partner all at once, either. Since RP is much more turn-based than real and solo-written conversations, it's easy to write a post where your character responds to a question about A, adds something that has to do with B, introduce an unrelated topic C, and goes about doing D. But that leaves your partner with four different things to respond to, and they probably want to bring something up themselves too, so that you end up with at least four parallel conversations.

Siph, this is exactly what I have a problem with when people say that they prefer novella-length posts or have a minimum paragragh/character count with their RPs.

I've said it in other posts... but if someone wants to co-write a two-part novel together, that's one thing, but that isn't roleplay.

 

[Carpe Diem]

Siph, this is exactly what I have a problem with when people say that they prefer novella-length posts or have a minimum paragragh/character count with their RPs.

I've said it in other posts... but if someone wants to co-write a two-part novel together, that's one thing, but that isn't roleplay.

i have a problem with people gatekeeping what roleplaying is in this way.

you see, i'm someone who people could consider novella-length, since i can easily get to 1000+ words in my posts. it works just fine with the folks that i do it with. sometimes it can take a bit of communication (e.g. "hey, i'm gonna have mc do this and move them to the next scene, is that okay?") and that's fine, i've never had a problem working it that way. same as i have no problem with shorter replies in an rp, where it's more of a fast-paced kind of thing (although i'm anything but fast-paced with my writing).

so i don't really see how qualifies as roleplay more than the other. it's still the same hobby of collaborative writing in my eyes.

 

[Spacer1999]

you see, i'm someone who people could consider novella-length, since i can easily get to 1000+ words in my posts. it works just fine with the folks that i do it with. sometimes it can take a bit of communication (e.g. "hey, i'm gonna have mc do this and move them to the next scene, is that okay?") and that's fine, i've never had a problem working it that way. same as i have no problem with shorter replies in an rp, where it's more of a fast-paced kind of thing (although i'm anything but fast-paced with my writing).

I don't know if we're disagreeing here. I can certainly have page-long replies. But, when someone sets up their rules as novella-length and always expects the same in return, then in my experience, it isn't roleplay with action and reaction, but something else. To echo what siph commented on, for me, if a partner consistently has posts with 5+ sections of dialog/action that I need to respond to and sort of back-track and respond to the multiple things they said/did, then it is not reactive and improvisational, it is exhausting.

 

[Carpe Diem]

I don't know if we're disagreeing here. I can certainly have page-long replies. But, when someone sets up their rules as novella-length and always expects the same in return, then in my experience, it isn't roleplay with action and reaction, but something else. To echo what siph commented on, for me, if a partner consistently has posts with 5+ sections of dialog/action that I need to respond to and sort of back-track and respond to the multiple things they said/did, then it is not reactive and improvisational, it is exhausting.

maybe i just haven't come across this issue then, because i've never had anyone require me to reply piece-by-piece to all of their dialogue. it's fine to let threads of dialogue go. if i had to reply to each line of dialogue and then also add something extra to push things forward, then i certainly would agree that it is an issue, but i haven't come across it in the 15+ years i've been roleplaying. and even if it was, i think that would be the individual's problem, rather than a whole section of people.

i think it's fine to have requirements. i certainly struggle replying to someone who gives me less than 300 words. it's just a matter of preference in that case, but i would certainly not call someone less of a roleplayer if they prefer shorter replies. they are just not within the same demographic as mine, and that's perfectly okay.

 

[Spacer1999]

maybe i just haven't come across this issue then, because i've never had anyone require me to reply piece-by-piece to all of their dialogue. it's fine to let threads of dialogue go. if i had to reply to each line of dialogue and then also add something extra to push things forward, then i certainly would agree that it is an issue, but i haven't come across it in the 15+ years i've been roleplaying. and even if it was, i think that would be the individual's problem, rather than a whole section of people.

i think it's fine to have requirements. i certainly struggle replying to someone who gives me less than 300 words. it's just a matter of preference in that case, but i would certainly not call someone less of a roleplayer if they prefer shorter replies. they are just not within the same demographic as mine, and that's perfectly okay.

so... by your logic, because you've been roleplaying 15+ years, if someone doesn't play according to your sensibilities, it's their problem.

 

[Carpe Diem]

so... by your logic, because you've been roleplaying 15+ years, if someone doesn't play according to your sensibilities, it's their problem.

if someone required me to reply to every single line of dialogue and had a problem with me not reacting to everything in their post, then yes, i would think it's their problem regardless of my experience.

the 15+ year part of my post was towards the idea that you have to reply to every single part of your partner's post. that is not true, and has never been true in any forum i've played, but i'm sure there are people with very strict rules who may be like this. that's more of an exception than the rule though.

but it's fine to agree to disagree here.