THIS IS A AN AUTOMATIC CAPTION TEXT from YouTube, so it’s written as spoken language from the video.
My advice is to use it just to help people like me, that are not english speaking, to understand the video.Roleplaying. a good friend of mine Chris Ashton and I
were talking about the Last of Us one of
the best games I’ve ever played
certainly the best story I’ve ever
encountered in a game and one I thought
a lot about I felt like there was real
meaning and subtext in there which is
normally missing from video game stories
even video game stories people really
like and hold up as exemplars of the
genre one of the things Chris and I
enjoyed doing was talking about all
these character moments in the game and
how we each responded to them close to
the end of the game the main character
Joel has to attack a hospital to rescue
a young girl who’s about to be operated
on killed by a bunch of doctors you
can’t get her out of there without
hurting anyone but it’s hard that’s what
Chris did he was curious how I got
through that scenario and I said without
batting an eye I killed every single one
of them I just murdered them all
immediately Chris freaked out how can
you do that these were doctors there was
some question I think about how much
they knew about what they were doing or
they thought they were doing the right
thing but the point is they were unarmed
doctors and you can meet that scenario
without killing them so why did I murder
all of them I shrugged because that’s
what Joel would do that’s one of the
themes of the game how much of a monster
Joel becomes to protect this girl to me
that’s role playing that’s sort of the
Platonic ideal of role playing and it
didn’t require me personally to speak in
character or do an accent and I don’t
think it’s meaningfully different than
what folks do at the table in a pen and
paper RPG I felt like I knew who Joel
was I had different ways to solve the
problem so I chose to act in the way I
thought Joel would very different from
how I would act folks online have
developed the habit of referring to
people speaking in character or doing a
voice as role-playing which they deem
good and anything else gets labeled
metagaming by which they mean bad I feel
like I know why this is happening we’ll
talk about that but I think this
attitude is a mistake and it sends the
wrong message in fact I think we have
several examples in my own games of how
you can do an accent and speak in
character and have it be pretty low
quality role-playing fun fun to watch
but not very sophisticated
very characterful a gimmick mostly when
we start out in the Hobby especially if
we start when we’re teenagers which as I
think the perfect time to get into the
game we overwhelmingly tend to play
idealized versions of ourselves the
person we think we are or wish we were
us plus plus it may be somebody very
different from you but different in all
the ways you wish you were different
that’s normal it’s not something to be
worried about or fight against it’s fun
eventually though if you play enough you
may start to get bored of that and
branch out into playing other people and
this can be a very subtle but
transformative experience because it
means you start wondering what other
people think not what would I do I know
what I would do
what would Joel do this doesn’t happen
to everyone I’ve played with people
adults who talk about how they don’t
like to read fiction because they don’t
like the experience of thinking someone
else’s thoughts or feeling their
feelings they don’t like empathy in
other words they consider it weakness
that is a real thing real people have
told me in person so I don’t want to
hold up role-playing as somehow virtuous
I see that a lot online people for whom
D&D is a hobby and moreover a lifestyle
I think I can say that’s true of me as
well but because their identity is
wrapped up in it they want to elevate it
it’s not just fun it makes you a better
person gives you empathy cures baldness
it leads to democracy yeah I mean for
some people sure some people sitting
around the table with other people
telling stories things can get intense
and you can have deeply meaningful
revelatory experiences but it is just as
likely if not more likely that you’ll
end up just sitting around rolling dice
and fighting dragons and collecting good
memories and there are people out there
who’ve been playing all their adult
lives who are bigoted venal small-minded
bad bad people play this game too and no
matter how much they play they don’t
become good people so I’m not going to
tell you that if you play enough you
will eventually develop empathy and
become a better person and it will
change your life
but I do think it is possible for one
player to be a better role
than another and I think someone who is
not a great role player can over time
get better at it and that’s we’re gonna
talk about and it’s gonna have a lot to
do with character and mostly what you’re
going to get is not only my experience
as a DM but also as a writer and a
player but in order to do all of that we
need to define our terms rhetoric 101
let’s define our terms because we’re all
using the same words but we all mean
different things and sometimes one
person uses the same term to mean
different things this is not a bug it is
a feature of human language what is
role-playing I’ve thought a lot about
this I’ve been thinking about this on
and off for about 30 years and during
some of that time I was being paid to
think about it that doesn’t necessarily
mean anything it’s very easy for someone
to think hard about something for a long
time and consistently come up with the
wrong answer but I don’t want folks to
think this is just something I came up
with 30 seconds ago personally I use the
term role-playing to mean two basic
ideas I described them as role-playing
lowercase R and role-playing uppercase R
lowercase role-playing is making
decisions about your character in a game
with a persistent world where your
character improves based on the
decisions you made this is a very broad
definition but I think it works because
it does what a good definition should it
includes all the things we agree are
RPGs like D&D and Baldur’s Gate and
fallout in Skyrim and it excludes all
the games we agree aren’t RPGs like
Super Mario and minecraft and rocket
League League of Legends gets close your
character doesn’t exist in a persistent
world the choices you make improve your
character only for this match so it’s
more akin to a sport and minecraft my
gear gets better
my character never changes role-playing
with a capital R I think of as the act
of making decisions about what a
character would do when that character
would do something different than what
you would do I know what you would do
what would Joel do this is why I think
someone who’s playing D&D who’s just
deciding what their character would do
is role playing that’s role-playing it’s
not complex it’s not sophisticated but
as far as I’m concerned that counts it’s
just role playing with a lowercase R but
once you start thinking about what your
character would do as distinct from what
you would do now your role-playing with
a capital R
it’s more sophisticated is a complex
process it requires you to understand
the fact that other people are
differently motivated than you and think
and feel different things from you which
I have learned is not something
everyone’s interested in so those are
the two different ways I think about
role playing people like to imagine that
video game RPGs are in all ways lower
quality role playing from tabletop games
but I think for a lot of players
especially new players the act of
pushing around their little 3d model in
a persistent world and making choices
and leveling up and dialogue trees is
not meaningfully different from pushing
lead and deciding how their character is
going to react to this NPC it’s all
role-playing just with a lowercase R
which is fine if we accept that there is
lowercase role-playing an uppercase role
playing an uppercase role playing is
more sophisticated and more meaningful
how do we get from lowercase to
uppercase how do we become better role
players well I think the first and most
obvious thing we need to talk about is
character what makes a good character
and once we know that how do we play
them just like I think there’s two
flavors of role-playing lowercase and
uppercase there are basically two kinds
of characters one dimensional and three
dimensional actually I guess there’s a
third and that’s zero dimensional no
character in fact I think that’s pretty
common there are lots of people playing
zero dimensional characters they know
what their character looks like they
know their stats their class and
ancestry and their name and that’s it
when you ask that player how their
character reacts to something they don’t
know they shrug I don’t know maybe they
come up with something in order to
please you but it’s basically random
they crack jokes but you’re never really
sure if it’s them joking or their
character maybe playing this character
gives them license to be lewd or
casually misanthropic in a way they
couldn’t get away with at school or work
or whatever but none of that amounts to
a character there’s no consistency
that’s what folks pejoratively referred
to as role-playing meaning all you’re
doing is rolling dice you’re not playing
a role we used to call this hack and
slash role-playing those people are
still having fun and there are whole
tables out there full of those players
who are not particularly interested in
being told they’re doing it wrong and
I’m not going to tell them that if
that’s your style of play
knock yourself out I worked with an art
a while ago we became good friends and I
really felt like we had similar
experiences in the hobby growing up then
his mom cleaning out their old house
finds his copy of this game Warhammer
Quest and sends it to him I had never
heard of this and so he busts it out
excited to show it to me it was
basically descent or gloom Haven from 30
years ago it’s actually one of the first
dungeon crawling board games which is to
say D&D without a dungeon master there
are four characters you pick one you
explore a randomly generated dungeon
kill stuff get loot level up explore the
next randomly generated dungeon no plot
no meaning I thought it was neat and he
smiled and said once this game came out
my friends and I stopped playing D&D
this was all we wanted wow that that
blew me away it meant he and I were very
different even when I was 16 I recognize
that D&D could be a powerful dramatic
tool but some people just want to roll
dice kill zombies and level up zombie
side very popular game but like
Warhammer Quest or descent or gloom
Haven full of zero-dimensional
characters just stats and art that’s a
zero dimensional character or no
character often their players are
audience members they like your campaign
and the adventure you are weaving but
they are passive consumers of it still
having fun I love some of these games
but I never think what would my
character do when I’m playing them so
the first step in moving past no
dimensions is to give your character one
dimension a one dimensional character is
just a character trait you know the
Seven Dwarfs this character is always
cheerful this character is shy this
character is cynical this is not always
a bad thing
a lot of sidekicks in stories are
basically one-dimensional and that’s
fine they’re not the main character a
lot of stories you have some Greek
chorus character whose job is to
contextualize the story for the audience
they’re not the hero they’re the point
of view character who is usually
freaking out in panicking and asking all
the questions the audience would ask so
the hero can explain everything and look
smart in that context to being the
panicky coward very one-dimensional is
fine that’s not a bad character it’s
appropriate in that context and even
with only a single character trait you
can do some amazing stuff some great
characters are perfectly one-dimensional
and no problem Darth Vader is a suit and
and if you see any scene with him in the
first two Star Wars movies you’ve seen
every scene with him great character
Heath Ledger’s Joker is just an agent of
chaos he never experiences doubt or fear
he’s never anything other than what we
see the first time we meet him and I
think he’s the greatest movie villain of
all time I do not think he will ever be
topped maybe a better way of saying this
is that a one-dimensional character is
defined by their one character trait
they don’t grow they don’t change the
always cheerful character might have
moments when they’re not cheerful but
those moments are important because it’s
a deviation the always cheerful
character might experience a moment of
sadness but that’s just something the
writer is doing to give a moment meaning
let the audience know look how important
this is the always cheerful character
just got serious for a second but then
after that it’s back to being always
cheerful we see this in a lot of kids
movies it’s still just one dimension
though one-dimensional characters often
don’t have once they have no motivation
except escape survive maybe like revenge
they shot John Wick’s dog he’s gonna
kill everyone there’s no subtext to that
it’s all surface he doesn’t learn
anything he doesn’t grow a lot of
classic action heroes Marty McFly
Indiana Jones John wick they don’t grow
they don’t change unless maybe they get
to a third movie that’s the defining
element of a one-dimensional character
they are nothing other than what we see
on the surface and for a lot of fiction
certainly a lot of RPG characters that’s
fine easy to play but limiting we’ll
talk about that in a minute a
one-dimensional character can have an
accent it can have a flamboyant
entertaining personality but that
doesn’t mean they have depth a lot of
the characters we see on D&D streams
seem one-dimensional to me including
streams I’ve been on including my own
characters
Morag my character and Phil’s game is
fun to play fun to watch if the comments
we got are any indication Morag East nor
Dagmar all fun to play fun to watch but
none of them are complex characters they
don’t even really talk to each other
they bark barks are those exclamations
video game characters make when you walk
past them typically one line long not
back and forth those exclamations can be
character form they can be informative
but they lack substance and meaning I
watched Tom playing Dagmar struggle
because he’d committed to this idea that
his character was basically dwarf Quint
but there were times when he wanted to
express an idea in character and
couldn’t figure out how Quint would do
it doing the voice very entertaining
often limiting you start to get into
what I consider depth and meaning once
you have a three-dimensional character a
three-dimensional character experiences
doubt has self-awareness a
three-dimensional character thinks
things they do not say when a
three-dimensional character acts that
action often comes out of an internal
struggle a three-dimensional character
holds conflicting values I must overcome
that conflict make a decision and act
just like a good campaign has a central
conflict through which we create drama a
three-dimensional character has an inner
conflict which lets us create drama with
just that one character I want to do
this but I can’t do that
this self-reflection capacity for doubt
internal unspoken monologue and inner
conflict makes a three-dimensional
character real real people hold
conflicting opinions they doubt they
struggle that realness is what gives a
three-dimensional characters struggle
meaning it’s what lifts fiction into art
because we watching these other people
learn something about ourselves and this
is the point of art Morag not a
three-dimensional character she has a
backstory there’s a reason she behaves
the way she does and wants the things
she wants but she’s just a cackle yeast
noir is just an accent and a catchphrase
but yeah contrast this with Marcellus
Scipio an npc in the chain of a cron
game Marcellus is a young man he’s
probably 20 or 21
he’s the scion of a noble family
studying at a prestigious university
abroad any plans to have a good time
doing it he’s been grandfathered
literally into a secret society the
Sapphire sky they are a good
organization and he’s incredibly proud
to belong and continue the family
tradition but he’s also a huge fan of
the chain of Acheron he idolizes them
the way you might follow a sports team
it was Marcellus ah’s idea for the
Sapphire sky to use these mercenaries to
help them stop Ajax the villain of my
campaign at one point Marcellus watched
Tom’s character boots the chain of
Akron’s lieutenant debrief a commander
of the Sapphire sky on everything that’s
been going on in ring well and up all
these proper nouns
overwhelming because you haven’t been
following my campaign I do not blame you
just stick around it’s about to make
sense
boots basically told the Sapphire sky
everything watching this Marcellus
thought this is a mistake if he keeps
this up boots will eventually tell my
commander something I don’t know what
that will pit us the Sapphire sky
against the chain of Akron the reason
we’re using them is because they can do
awful things we could never do they
can’t tell us everything this created an
internal conflict within Marcellus he
likes the chain that he belongs to the
Sapphire sky he cannot serve two masters
so on their way back in a moment alone
Marcellus stops boots and says be
careful how much you tell the vile
silencer and I guess that goes for me
too it was just a moment two sentences
but I thought that was high-quality
role-playing he was telling boots we are
alike and we like each other but we are
not the same we work for two very
different organizations that are only
temporarily aligned if you tell me
everything you may say something that I
have to tell my Master’s about I was
taking Marcellus as internal conflict
and contextualizing it in dialogue that
wasn’t something I planned on or wrote
down I just made it up I thought it was
what Marcellus would say I knew who
Marcellus Scipio was I knew what
motivated him because he’s a man of
honor he tells boots maybe keep some
stuff to yourself the stuff we might
have to use against you if circumstances
change I wasn’t doing an accent or any
particular manner or mode of speech it
wasn’t anything particularly flashing or
entertaining but it had meaning it felt
real I don’t think role-playing gets
much better than that it even had
subtext so hopefully we’ve gotten this
far without anybody feeling attacked I
don’t think there’s anything wrong with
a zero-dimensional character no
character if that’s your style of play a
one-dimensional character with a single
character trait and maybe a voice you
can do is fun very flashy very
entertaining for an audience nothing
wrong with that my own character Morag
is that but less flashy more meaningful
is the three-dimensional character how
do we get there how do we get from a
voice and an attitude to meaning and
subtext
well we think about motivation when
folks want to make fun of acting
and how pretentious an actor can be they
say what’s my motivation
and so that phrase passed into our
cultural lexicon as an absurdity but
this is a critical tool anyone can use
when making a character as a writer it’s
something I think about all the time
what does this character want what does
the protagonist what it’s a critical
tool in understanding our characters
enough to inhabit them and roleplay them
in my first novel the main character
starts the book by repeatedly turning
down an assignment until something in
his life changes he rescues a young girl
he didn’t expect to I was as surprised
as he was and he finds himself saying
yes to this job because he doesn’t want
to disappoint her
that’s his motivation he’s not just
living for himself anymore when he was
he wasn’t really living he’s seeing
himself through someone else’s eyes and
he’s at a stage in his life where other
men are fathers and now there’s a young
girl depending on him and he wants to be
a role model for her he’s not even
really able to articulate it he doesn’t
understand why he’s doing what he’s
doing
at one point he gets close to it he says
I don’t want to disappoint but then he
backs away from it he’s afraid of the
responsibility and literally can’t
finish the sentence he just says anyone
even he doesn’t know what he means I
didn’t spend hours on that line I just
wrote it in the moment I felt it I felt
like this is what Hayden would say I
felt like he wouldn’t really know why he
was doing this he doesn’t understand his
own motivation was what I was doing as a
writer any different than what we do as
role players was it any different than
what I did with Marcela Scipio this is
what I mean when I say I can just be
this character I can invent their
reaction to almost anything what I’m
really saying is I know what motivates
them there’s more to character than that
something characters are meek some are
aggressive some are clever some are dull
some are funny some are serious but
often not always often those
characteristics come out of their
motivation what motivates Frodo well he
wants to destroy the ring that’s pretty
clear it’s a good motivation for the
Lord of the Rings since that entire
series is about the ring and this can be
a fine motivation for a player character
in a game where the entire thing is
about the MacGuffin there’s a danger
though that if you pick a motivation
like that it might resolve before the
end of the campaign I want to find my
father okay
what are you gonna do if that happens
when you’re third level now what you
might have another six levels
play left in the game but if your GM
agrees that your game is going to be
about finding your father
you know Apocalypse Now into the jungle
find Colonel Kurtz that’s a tremendous
hook for an adventurer maybe even a
short campaign then that’s a perfectly
fine motivation I think Frodo’s
motivation is deeper than just destroy
the ring this is what writers and
critics mean by subtext there’s what
he’s saying destroy the ring but then
there’s what he’s talking about the why
what’s the real underlying unspoken
motivation why does he want to destroy
the ring well I think it’s because he
wants to go back to the way things were
before he wants to go back to before the
birthday party when Bilbo was still
around that was an e Zdenek existence
remember the Tom Bombadil video back
then he lived an idyllic life no
knowledge of good or evil or life or
death the world of opposites was outside
the Shire even time seemed suspended
Bilbo thanks to the ring never seemed to
age that’s the subtext of course he
wants to return to that time and while
he never says I am doing this because I
hope we could all go back to the Shire
and the way things were he knows that’s
not possible but he routinely goes back
to Bilbo in his mind because Bilbo
represents that identic past then after
what is almost literally a soul
destroying experience he succeeds the
ring is destroyed now what well he
discovers he can’t go home I mean he can
literally return to the Shire but he
can’t live there he can’t be there and
if he can’t be there he can’t be
anywhere he could no longer function as
a person he can’t relate to people no
one can relate to him and there isn’t
one thing one moment that caused Frodo
to feel that way he was ground down
relentlessly over weeks and months just
like the soldiers at the Somme or Verdun
or any one of a hundred battles between
1914 and 1918 so in the end he well he
leaves the world in a very genteel
manner Tolkien a Catholic allows Frodo
to check out to journey into the West
and arrived in Valinor which isn’t
technically heaven but it’s close enough
that’s that’s remarkable Tolkien is
saying to all his friends and college
all the kids he went to war with and who
came back unable to function it’s ok I
get it
some things can’t be endured that is a
hell of a motivation great for us as
authors the character who is driven to
accomplish a task that will destroy him
in the process and toward the end he
realizes that he won’t survive even if
he succeeds all he’s doing is giving
everyone else a chance to go back to a
normal life great motivation great
character art so we have the motivation
spoken clearly destroy the ring and the
subtext the meaning never spoken because
I want to go back to the way things were
what’s Luke Skywalker his motivation and
is there an unspoken subtext well he
wants to get off this rock and see the
world at face value
that’s his motivation but given the
chance he says no he rejects the quest
you know we object to the player who
rejects the quest and that’s reasonable
we got a game to play what are you doing
but rejecting the quest is classic
storytelling I think it’s perfectly
reasonable for your character to reject
the quest for a reason I can’t go rescue
the blacksmith’s children I’ve got a
sick grandmother to care for all right
well the goblins just burned down your
grandmother’s house on their way out of
town now what that’s that’s extreme but
you get the idea a character who can
give the GM a reason why they can’t go
and it needs to be a certain kind of
reason it needs to be solvable
that’s perfectly good storytelling Luke
rejects the quest because he has
responsibility and this is one of the
things that makes him a hero he wants to
do the right thing he can’t just break
his promise to his uncle and his aunt
and abandon them he’s honorable and
responsible so we approve he’s
fulfilling his societal obligations and
we approve of that but gosh we also
wanted to go on the adventure don’t we
so George Lucas roasts his aunt and
uncle and shows Luke they’re smoking
corpses and says now what we wanted Luke
to go on the adventure but we didn’t
want him to do it for abstract or
callous reasons I want to see the galaxy
that’s shallow I want to stop the Empire
that’s abstract but those stormtroopers
killed my surrogate parents and I saw
their smoking corpses now it’s personal
now Luke is well motivated and now we
are allowed to approve of him going on
the quest what motivates Luke well he
wants to save the princess remember the
video on verbs destroy the ring save the
princess great motivations but why does
Luke want to save the princess
what is the subtext he feels but never
says maybe
never even really thinks to himself
because she represents everything
Tatooine is not he wants to get off this
rock he wants to see the galaxy he wants
to be a pilot like Biggs the cool kid he
wants to join the rebellion fight the
Empire he wants to matter that’s what
this all boils down to he wants to
matter he wants to make a difference and
more he wants to be seen making a
difference he wants people to know he
made a difference he wants glory he
never says it he never says I want to
save the galaxy and have the princess of
the universe pin a medal on me and maybe
wink at me in a sufficiently chaste but
yet suggestive manner it would be
extreme hubris to say that and then we
wouldn’t like him anymore but that’s
what he gets that’s literally what he
gets and when you sum up all the
language Luke uses about how far away
his farm is from everything interesting
how he hates the Empire wants to join
the rebellion wants to be a pilot that’s
what it all boils down to he wants what
lots of kids who signed up for World War
one and World War two wanted glory he
wants to come back with medals pinned on
him war is now seen as apocalyptic but
for most of human history it was seen as
a great adventure this is now no longer
fashionable we no longer used this
language but I bet there are still tons
of kids everywhere who feel like
wherever they grew up is nowhere and if
they stay there’ll be nothing and they
want to go somewhere because if they do
they’ll be somebody they want to matter
Luke wants to go and come back a man too
Luke this is probably what manhood is
about obi-wan is just a sweet old man
until Luke finds out he used to be
Toshiro Mifune a badass warrior samurai
general you fought in the Clone Wars now
what we want is someone a man an adult
someone to look up to great motivation I
want to get out of this dead-end
backwater village and I want to save a
beautiful dragon from a ravening
princess the unspoken subtext
I want to matter I want to be someone I
don’t want to spend 70 years
precipitating water vapor out of the
atmosphere I want people to know who I
am great motivation for a hero that’s
one of the first things you learn in a
screenwriting class you start off doing
scene work and your teacher says this is
good but have you done your subtext work
by which they mean they’re arguing about
how he didn’t get the groceries on the
way home but the unspoken subtext is she
hasn’t been able to find a job and she
feels useless we now have some language
we can use to talk about different
character
and different degrees of role-playing we
have role-playing with a lowercase R in
which we’re just making choices for our
character we have role-playing with an
uppercase R where those choices are
different than what we would do which
requires understanding that the
character we’re playing is a different
person we have zero dimensional
characters who are just a name and a
look and a collection of stats and we
have one dimensional characters with a
personality trait and maybe a fun voice
to do and we have three-dimensional
characters with motivation and subtext
and inner conflict who seem real and
whose choices have meaning and well none
of these are bad and each of them is
appropriate for some groups and some
players at different times there are
definitely DMS out there who wish their
players would do the voice or who wish
their players would do their subtext
work and what they say is I wish my
players would roleplay more or at all
well I think they probably are already
role-playing you wish their role-playing
had more character and meaning this is
always dangerous to me because it smacks
of I wish my players would stop having
fun their way and have fun the way I
want them to but if you want to roleplay
better it starts with understanding your
character’s motivation which we just
talked about what does the character
want motivation and why do they want it
subtext obviously backstory can help
here but that’s a subject so complex it
deserves its own video
apart from developing motivation and
subtext what can we as Dungeon Master’s
do to encourage our players to roleplay
more well there are some tricks that can
work as long as we remember that the
player may be perfectly happy playing
the way they are and not want to do any
more the most simple thing you can do is
ask your players how their character
reacts to something players especially
new players are often passive it’s a new
situation and a new game and maybe with
new friends it’s up to us to coax them
out of their shell so just ask them
don’t say how do you react to that say
how does yeast Noire or Morag react to
that players often have a more
sophisticated idea of their character
than they are able to play very common
making a cool character with a backstory
in a motivation but not being a good
enough role player to pull it off what
can be done well if you know the
motivation of your players character you
can ask what does your character do in a
pointed way a player describes their
character as being concerned with
justice and doing the right thing and
someone may be an NPC maybe another PC
is doing something unjust
if you the DM don’t do something this
player is just gonna sit there and do
nothing they said their character is
concerned with justice and doing the
right thing but they’re not a very good
role player they don’t speak up and they
believe if they do nothing the scenario
will resolve itself don’t let them turn
to the player and say is raggedy going
to stand by and let this happen maybe
the player uses that opportunity to
speak in character maybe not but I bet
they will say no I’m not gonna stand by
and let this happen at that point who
knows what happens next maybe conflict
maybe the player will check it out but
for a moment they were thinking in terms
of what their character would do and
that’s how it starts we always tend to
say you when we mean your character but
calling out a PC by name can be a very
effective way to remind your players
they are not their characters that’s why
I write down every player and their
character’s name on a piece of paper
even when I’m a player so I can call out
their character’s name when it’s their
turn simple thing makes a difference
sometimes I challenge my players when
they tell me how their character is
going to react to something if I know or
believe that this is the player speaking
and their character would never do that
I don’t say no your character would not
do that I say okay that’s what you would
do
what would your character do and
actually I use their proper names that’s
what Matt would do what would Morag do
using those names makes it personal and
specific and sometimes it works another
very effective way to get your players
out of their shell and maybe get them
role playing more is to create an
encounter that is literally just a
conversation maybe encounter is the
wrong word for it how about interlude
early in the chain of a cron game I read
Phil’s characters backstory and came up
with an encounter just for sweet sweet
was a boxer the local crime boss ordered
him to lose a match and he rebelled the
crime boss was going to kill him so he
had to leave town that’s why he joined
the chain it’s now years later he’s the
commander he’s on a boat crossing the
bail sea one of the sailors recognizes
him from his days as a boxer this NPC
Jasper I think his name was just wanted
to talk to sweet no trick no hook just
hey I remember you
we boxed on the same card that’s why I
say let’s call it an interlude an
encounter has conflict let’s have some
language for those scenes that are just
opportunities for character development
you might even say this is just an
interlude it’s not an encounter so the
player relaxes and isn’t waiting for the
trick let it just be a moment between
these two characters and see what
happens
I spent my prep time thinking of
questions Jasper would ask the trick to
an interlude like this is asking
questions that don’t have a yes-or-no
answer why did you leave town back then
why did you join the chain what do you
miss about your life back then what are
you gonna do next
I mean after commanding the chain asking
yes or no questions is okay but they
don’t usually lead to conversation
introspection but they can be useful
just to get the player talking and go
ahead and have this NPC ask questions
you already know the answer to
remember the NPC doesn’t know everything
and just getting the player to describe
the things you both know in character
can be great role-playing it also helps
your players roleplay more if you put
them in situations that can’t be solved
by fighting a good aligned NPC has some
critical piece of information the heroes
need but this NPC doesn’t trust the
heroes or has a good reason to dislike
them now what the heroes have to
convince this NPC to share their
information that’s when you really see
who these characters are what are you
going to say to get this NPC to
cooperate no you can’t just make a role
you have to tell me what your character
says and if it’s good
you’ll get advantage on the role don’t
punish them for not role-playing reward
them for role-playing I know the trick I
use and it works a lot is when a player
asks me a question out of character I
answer in character you can see
sometimes the player doesn’t like this
they don’t want the burden of responding
in character but I don’t let them off
the hook if we’re gonna have this
conversation it’s gonna be between two
characters I even do this when the
players are debating what to do they’re
speaking out of character but I have an
NPC react in character the players often
objective hang on we weren’t speaking in
character and then I remind them but
your characters have to communicate to
each other somehow they’re not
telepathic however you’re saying this
this NPC can hear it and has a reaction
my players usually put up with all this
I am persuading them to react in
character but if I can tell they’re not
having fun I lay off this isn’t a
science it’s an art and you have to pay
attention to your players and gauge
their reaction as I’ve said before role
playing speaking in character
is a style of play it’s not for everyone
there are ways to get a character to be
a better role player but being a better
role player doesn’t make you a better
player me personally my favorite players
are the ones who treat the world like a
real place they take it seriously they
take notes and when there’s a problem to
solve
they don’t just look at their character
sheet they think about who they’ve met
and what they’ve learned maybe we can
get that wizard we met before to help us
that is my favorite player someone who
does the voice that can make it fun for
everybody but for me it’s just a
stylistic choice
I don’t think wow that accent makes him
a better player however there are people
who think that way there will always be
people who want to play but can’t maybe
they don’t have time maybe they don’t
know anyone who plays or maybe they’re
surrounded by people who think nerd
stuff is dumb that happens before twitch
those people would buy the books and
read them and talk about them online
there’s no way to know but I personally
think the number of people who want to
play but can’t so they buy the books
read them and talk about the online is
larger than the pool of people actually
playing in fact I think historically
going back to the 80s a lot of online
RPG communities were populated by people
who wanted to play but couldn’t and
forums and bulletin boards were how they
scratch that itch now they watch people
streaming this is much better than just
reading the RPG books and imagining what
the game might be like you can actually
watch people playing and if the people
are fun and charismatic you will like
them and you will feel like you are at
the table with them and this is a pretty
good substitute for not being able to
play the problem I’ve noticed with this
is the audience has different goals and
either the players or the DM and those
goals are sometimes in opposition with
the players the audience will always
primarily want to be entertained that
should not be a controversial statement
the players want to have fun
entertainment is passive it’s something
you consume like a movie or a book fun
is active it’s something you do so
naturally the audience prefers
situations that are more entertaining
players prefer situations that are more
fun sometimes watching people have fun
is entertaining
sometimes it’s not because the player
who does the voice is more entertaining
the audience values them
more than the player who does not do the
voice but is merely having fun and
because playing a three-dimensional
character doesn’t require you to do the
voice just be the character and know how
they would react no their motivation and
subtext the audience starts to value
simple one-dimensional characters over
complex three-dimensional characters and
is that even a little surprising most
box-office smash hits including some of
my favorite movies are all
one-dimensional characters all surface
the real gut punch movies that make you
think about what it means to be a human
being they might win awards but do they
come out on top of the box office this
perfectly natural reaction the audience
prefers being entertained becomes a
problem when the audience goes online to
talk about what they like and then the
community online begins to conclude that
doing the voice is role playing and
everything else is metagaming that I do
not consider doing the voice
particularly high quality role playing
even when I’m doing it more AG fun to
play fun for the audience nowhere near
as complex as Marcellus Scipio I’m
playing Marcellus I’m not doing an
accent
his demeanor doesn’t change much from
mine but he is very different from me
he’s done outrageous character like
Morag but he’s an actual person much
less flashy less interesting to an
audience but harder to play and more
satisfying last week Lars who was very
much not a flashy player spent like an
hour by the clock wrestling with what
King would do I had put him in an
impossible situation the night of the
falling star had to be killed but
killing her would bring the whole city
down on them conflict and then there was
the subtext King is the commander of the
chain it’s his responsibility to do
what’s best for the chain but he’s also
the neutral good priest of a neutral
good god and when push came to shove he
could not issue the order and have the
knight killed the chain are mercenaries
they have no morality the reason the
Sapphire sky teamed up with them is
because the chain can do awful things
that been explicitly goods secret order
would never do and when it came down to
it King punted he did the ethical thing
but he thinks a better commander would
have done the bloody awful evil
convenient thing and the chain would be
better for it if a random person had
tuned into that moment they would not
have been impressed they probably
wouldn’t have noticed
anything was going on nothing flashy was
happening Slim is a much more flamboyant
interesting character but King is a real
person we’re very lucky with our
community they do pick up on stuff like
this but we still get people many fewer
now that everything’s calmed down
who comment on YouTube saying and this
is a quote I have no business being a DM
if I’m not a trained actor we even get
people commenting that the players
should all go take improv classes why
how did these people come to this absurd
conclusion because they are audience
members who want to be entertained we’ve
entered a realm where and I think this
is dangerous where if people aren’t
speaking in character all the time
including when they’re talking to the DM
which is pretty weird if they try to
solve problems out of character which
should be normal some audience members
rebel the audience want to see Morag
solve the problem not Matt Koval so I’ve
seen I’ve been on streams where the
players are basically always doing the
voice even when they’re just talking to
the DM asking for clarification the
player is asking not the character but
the player is doing the voice for the
audience this is way more entertaining
do the voice all the time but those
audience members are also part of the
online community and so now we have
normal nerds trying to get into the game
and they go online and they read these
discussions and they conclude because
they’re new and they don’t know any
better that only doing the voice is
role-playing that is a dangerous message
even doing the voice is good
role-playing is a bad message I think
doing the voice is often a gimmick if
you’re making decisions about your
character that’s role-playing if your
characters decisions are different from
what you would do
that’s role-playing with a capital R if
that character experiences doubt and has
inner conflict with motivation and
subtext that is high quality role
playing no voice required doing the
voice all the time
I get it it’s hard to get the accent
right and it’s harder if you were
switching back and forth from the accent
to your normal voice so it’s easier to
just never drop the accent but it’s
weird because I’m here to play D&D with
you my friend because I like you you are
fun to hang out with I want to play D&D
with you I do not want to play D&D with
your character that is weird I have
played in games where I like everyone at
the table but as soon as the game
started everyone was doing the voice
even when they were talking out of
character
and I could tell that me just being me
just not being in character all the time
was disruptive okay
that’s your table I don’t want to change
it you folks have fun you’re gonna have
to have fun without me
because I want to hang out with you and
play D&D with you not your character a
little character is great just like some
tactical combat is great but all
tactical combat would be I couldn’t even
do it both have their place again if the
folks at your table like to get into
character and do the voice the whole
time that’s fantastic I have seen
amazing stuff happen in that environment
I’m not saying it’s bad it’s not bad
although I think it is sometimes
gimmicky but the audience deciding that
doing the voice is best leads very
quickly to the community deciding only
doing the voice is real and that’s wrong
you’re telling people if you enjoy
playing any other way you’re wrong
that’s not real role playing that’s
metagaming it’s not metagaming
metagaming is using knowledge your
character wouldn’t have to gain an
unrealistic or unfair advantage it’s not
speaking out of character I have to say
this because of the growing consensus
that meta gaming is any gaming that
isn’t in character we can’t let the
audience decide that what they find
entertaining to watch is the best way to
play no it may make the best stream sure
completely agree but at your table
the audience doesn’t matter the players
matter there’s another problem if we
reject players planning out of character
if we label that meta gaming and require
them to always speak and plan in
character then I think we lose some of
the most dramatic moments which are both
fun and entertaining players need to be
able to plan and argue out of character
because one of the things they’re
arguing about is what their character
would do what is the truth in this
moment taking time to figure that out
leads to dramatic outcomes think about
it even TV shows which are produced on
pretty grueling schedules they spend at
least a month on each script often
several writers work on it movies they
work on the script for years we played
D&D for three or four hours we are
expected to improvise our reactions
because we believe in this game as a
kind of storytelling exercise but
stories are dramatic if we want dramatic
outcomes we have to give the players
time you are the author of your campaign
you spend hours each week setting up the
central tension of the neck
session but likewise your players are
the authors of their characters they
must also be given time to invent author
edit their responses otherwise you lose
a lot of drama imagine how much less
dramatic your favorite show would be if
they had to improvise the whole thing
it’s the reason I don’t really like
improv I cringe and come away thinking
it needs a rewrite
so I deliberately gave Lars and the rest
of the players a week to basically write
that scene between them and the night of
the falling star and it worked if we had
kept playing without that week it would
have immediately gone to combat but they
spent the week arguing and talking and
these are exactly the same things
writers would do they talked about what
was good for the chain what was good for
the mission what their characters would
do and this is very like writers talking
about what’s good for the episode versus
what’s good for the character what’s
dramatic versus keeping the pacing
flowing and the result was something
extraordinary game-changing probably we
haven’t yet seen the repercussions but
stay tuned
people are gonna watch this video and
not get this far and go online and say
Matt the writer wants us to stop being
actors and be writers no that is that is
very much not what I’m saying I’m saying
we need both and none of it giving
players time to figure out what their
character would do leads to drama
knowing your character’s motivation and
subtext so you can improvise their
reaction leads to drama and just sitting
around playing rolling dice and killing
zombies is fun let’s have all three you
don’t need to do the voice it’s neat
it’s flashy but it’s not the same as
actually digging down and knowing your
character and just being that person in
fact I often think doing the voice
substitutes for the hard work of knowing
your character and improv doesn’t only
mean inventing dialogue on the fly
it also means inventing a solution to a
problem on the fly some of the best
advice I’ve given it’s changed people’s
games is that it’s okay not to know how
your players are going to get out of a
situation it’s not your job to get them
out of the situation it’s their job it’s
your job to listen and be open to good
or interesting ideas don’t be afraid to
say no but also say yes when it’s time
to say yes I routinely put my players
right in the middle of the no-win
scenario no idea how they’ll get out and
they pull a rabbit out of their hat and
everyone at the table is amazed
including them including me and the only
thing I did was sit back and give them
to argue and plan it’s one the most
astonishing things that can happen at
the table and it is the definition of
improv the players made all that up all
I did was say yeah that makes sense
could fail though give me a roll that’s
improv
that’s role-playing that’s it folks this
was the role-playing video we covered a
lot of ground I wanted to make a video
that would encourage the folks who want
to roleplay more and give them good and
useful tools to help them out but I also
want to make a video for everyone who
feels pressured to play in a way they’re
not comfortable with we talked about
role-playing with lowercase R just
deciding what your character would do
and role-playing with an uppercase R
making decisions for a character are
very different from you we talked about
character and motivation and subtext
about zero-dimensional characters who
are just a name and a look at a page of
stats and one-dimensional characters who
have some personality and
three-dimensional characters who are
complex and an inner conflict we talked
about ways to get your players to
roleplay ask them what their character
would do ask them if their character is
going to stand by and do nothing we
talked about answering in character when
a player asks out of character we talked
about creating interludes where PC and
an NPC just have a conversation and
creating scenarios where the players
have to solve a problem without fighting
hopefully in there somewhere was some
advice you find useful when I was
starting out in this hobby I was 15 and
already very into the whole acting thing
and my DMS would often reward me with
magic items and titles and whatnot my
friends objected saying it wasn’t fair
they were playing the way they liked I
was playing the way I liked why was only
I being rewarded they were right my
friend Dave miles was right 100% it made
me a better DM it also ended up getting
his character and our party in the
entire campaign into an apocalypse but
that’s the story for another video
thanks for watching everyone the
Kickstarter for kingdoms organizations
and warfare goes live soon if you don’t
wanna miss it there’s a link in the
dooblydoo to get an alert if you like
this video and you want to get an alert
when new videos go up hit the bell icon
down there I post my session notes each
week on our patreon for folks at the $5
level and above we have a store with a
dope shirt in it and quite a good book I
think you’re like we play D&D live every
Wednesday night links for all this in
the doobly-doo I hope to see you there
7:00 Pacific until next time peace out
— Matt “I’m Sure Pathfinder 2e is fine” Colville (@mattcolville) August 31, 2019
