Why are Copy-Paste characters allowed?

[SaintBatemanofWallStreet]

1 hour ago, Exploits said:

 

Okay, so. It seems we can break things down into two broad categories: People who role-play to create a story, and people who role-play a character. No, one is not exclusive of the other. If you role-play a character, you'll also have role-played a story, and if you're role-playing a story, then you're still going to be doing that through a character. I am only identifying two base motives that we've come across in this thread.

 

If you are in the 'story' category, then it would indeed seem absurd for somebody who has spent perhaps years on a 'story' look to replay that exact same 'story'. But that's not the case if those people are in the 'character' category. They aren't playing the same story over at all, because there's no expectation of a story in the first place. They aren't transposing a story (although they may make it a part of their character's history), they're transposing a character.

 

If I were to make a new character on GTA:W today, and make that exact same character on another server as well, and played them out simultaneously (somehow), both of these characters will experience entirely different lives and should, after a month, two months, half a year, etc., come out very, very different people -- not necessarily in terms of personality, but in terms of their literal story. It simply cannot be the exact same story because the medium of role-play isn't conducive to doing that. You're going to have different social circles, different factions, and most importantly, different role-players, which is always going to change outcomes. But of course, if you're playing to create a story ... then none of these variances or nuances should matter. The outcomes will always be the same because 'that's my character's story'.

 

Full disclosure, I used to be in the 'story' camp. I look back on that period of my role-play as a time where I had many opportunities to grow into a better role-player but did not. I was of the opinion that what made role-play great wasn't even the role-play itself, but the total accumulation of all the things your character did, ie., the story. I literally cringe when I look back at a street gang character I had made because, with the benefit of hindsight, I realize how absurdly obstinate I myself was. My character was given many opportunities and met many understanding and amazing people, but because I was determined as a player, not as a character, to have this character be a gang member, I conducted in role-play that was barely in keeping with my representation and which was quite frankly poor because 'the ends justified the means', I guess? To say the least, it was not very organic. I eventually got into the gang, but quit a few weeks later because my character felt awkward, dissonant, slapped together, and fake. Like farts and friendships, good role-plays aren't forced.

 

Again, nobody can be the 'protagonist' of 'their story' in a role-play environment, because that would mean everybody is a protagonist of their story ... but wait, who is the protagonist? It can't be everybody. If your 'story' is to live a rich and successful life and die old, but mine is to be a serial killer who targets the rich, then we're at an impasse. Something has to give. Somebody's 'story' isn't going to follow what was originally intended. This conflict is where role-play actually occurs. The problem comes not from that conflict or the incompatibility of these intersecting stories: the problem comes when the player, whichever, perhaps both, believe that their story takes precedence over somebody else's. Again, something has to give. This refusal to accept an outcome or possibility which you never actually had control over to begin with is where rule breaking mostly comes from, in my opinion.

 

Most of the complaints outlined about 'recycled characters' seem to fundamentally misunderstand that, no, not everybody who reuses a name or character is attempting to replay the same story. Conversely, you really should not assume that players who make new names and characters aren't attempting to replay the same story, as I could openly name and shame a few people I've met over decade who always have new characters ... but they always seem to be exactly the same, and do the exact same things, and end in the exact same way ... Again, new =/= original.

 

I do at least agree that I am not a fan of your example of the 'returning officer who for some reason is now a rookie'. It is forced, and trite, and lazy, because it should be abundantly clear from the moment of creation that such a concept isn't really realistic or feasible. But again, if the role-play is done believably, and the character is well-executed, then I don't think boring onto specific details simply to find fault is necessary or productive. Ultimately we're here to role-play, and presumptions of purity aren't conducive to that goal most of the time.

 

A 'story' concept of role-play just does not jive with what role-play actually entails, and I think this thread is a great example of how believing this or misunderstanding role-play concepts as 'just a story' is mostly harmful and at best restrictive.

So I more or less agree with everything you're saying. I think I'm just coming at it from a different angle. Of course character is character and that's what matters. But in my mind, the development is the story. Or it should be.

I think a character and the story that goes with it dwells on the server that it was created on. And the replication of the character to another medium just doesn't play well. Specifically because I see in a lot of long term roleplayers a sense of chasing nostalgia. And I think everyone is guilty of it to some degree. But I just see the recycling of names is the biggest chase of that nostalgia. 

It just seems like the majority of the recycled name crew, it's an instant tap into that nostalgia. And the characters might not be the same at all. But if that's the case, why keep the name?

So if you're just peddling the same character from server to server, fine. I think it's wrong, but okay - I get it. Some people get super attached and just can't let go.

But the whole argument people tend to be making about it not being the same character? That makes even less sense to me. Because if you're going to go through the trouble of making a brand new character save for the name, why even bother?

[Denise]

I don't think it's a big deal at all and I think administrators' time is better spent on different matters rather than checking other communities and making sure people aren't replicating a past character that no one cares about anyhow.

[Exploits]

15 minutes ago, SaintBatemanofWallStreet said:

But the whole argument people tend to be making about it not being the same character? That makes even less sense to me. Because if you're going to go through the trouble of making a brand new character save for the name, why even bother?

 

I have no answer to that myself.

 

I'm not so certain that characters belong on the server they were created. I understand, at least, that it's an oddity to, say, have a character who was on the cusp of being a made-man in a mafia on Server A exist with that history on Server B working for an entirely different mob, or the common one of a cop who transferred from the LSPD to the ... LS ... PD ... again ... somehow. This probably isn't the norm though.

 

Right now I'm actually playing Claire Betancourt, who is a character I had run intermittently on LS:RP for three or so years in law enforcement. Guess what? I totally did it out of laziness, 'cause I don't have that much time to invest into role-playing as I used to or would like to for character development, so it's much easier for me to import all of her past experience into GTA:W, age her up a decade, and play her as a retiree. I can keep the history vague and even hand wave about having worked in the SD/PD by relegating it to a nebulous 'previous administration', and it hasn't been a problem in the slightest fifty hours later. But it helps that I hadn't played her for roughly seven years before dusting her off.

 

Meh, I just don't really see a need for the criticism directed to people who do this, and certainly not to the point of requiring a fixed rule. Anything egregious is already pretty cleanly captured by other existing rules, and I trust the administration is good at where they draw the line. You're certainly free to not do it as much as they are free to do it.

Edited October 29, 2020 by Exploits

[SaintBatemanofWallStreet]

2 minutes ago, Exploits said:

 

I have no answer to that myself.

 

I'm not so certain that characters belong on the server they were created. I understand, at least, that it's an oddity to, say, have a character who was on the cusp of being a made-man in a mafia on Server A exist with that history on Server B working for an entirely different mob, or the common one of a cop who transferred from the LSPD to the ... LS ... PD ... again ... somehow. This probably isn't the norm though.

 

Right now I'm actually playing Claire Betancourt, who is a character I had run intermittently on LS:RP for three or so years in law enforcement. Guess what? I totally did it out of laziness, 'cause I don't have that much time to invest into role-playing as I used to or would like to for character development, so it's much easier for me to import all of her past experience into GTA:W, age her up a decade, and play her as a retiree. I can keep the history vague and even hand wave about having worked in the SD/PD by relegating it to a nebulous 'previous administration', and it hasn't been a problem in the slightest fifty hours later. But it helps that I hadn't played her for roughly seven years before dusting her off.

 

Meh, I just don't really see a need for the criticism directed to people who do this, and certainly not to the point of requiring a fixed rule. Anything egregious is already pretty cleanly captured by other existing rules, and I trust the administration is good at where they draw the line.

And this, I understand what you're doing completely. It makes perfect sense to me. But I think there is more of the transferred from the LSPD to the LSPD and was a Captain and is now a rookie because they didn't jump ship on an upstart server or the mafia captain on one server to associate on another than you think. And I think the people who are doing that deserve the criticism in a constructive manner. Because to me it actually devalues the previous accomplishments of your character to do something like that, right?

So if I'm switching to a new server, I'm not carrying an old character. And we put all this work into a backstory. If the character never ends on the server you're on, is it wrong to write an ending in the same fashion? At least so you the player can get some closure if you are that attached? I don't think so. I've had a character that went out virtually on top when a server shut down. It did not make sense for me recreate him elsewhere and have him climb that ladder again if the story would've gone that way. So I just wrote it off that he basically rode off into the sunset with his wife. It was a cheesy ending to a story that was anything but, but I mean what could be done that made any sort of sense? You know what I mean?

[Exploits]

11 minutes ago, SaintBatemanofWallStreet said:

Because to me it actually devalues the previous accomplishments of your character to do something like that, right?

Yes, to you it would, and I would agree that for me it also would. But we don't interact with the past character: that character is gone now, or we never knew of them to begin with. If the person who created that character feels differently on the subject or they are indeed relegating that past to a sort of alternate reality, then I don't think there's much to do about it other than let bygones be bygones and role-play with what we're presented, when it's presented.

 

As an aside, if I were part of some prestigious faction's leadership, and I had gotten wind of a prospective or current member doing this exact thing, I wouldn't have any compunctions to removing them or asking they name change due to it being arguably low effort, and I would prefer, as a faction of any kind, that we represent our possible bests. But I've seen players take the laziest of concepts and make great role-play out of it, and others take the most convoluted and constructed ideas and run it straight into the dirt with their execution (myself included). And again, some people have had thirty 'characters' yet they've only really ever play the one actual, which has irked me before, too. Yet alas, I am not in such a position, and I find it easier to simply let it go and focus on my own role-play and what I can put out.

 

I don't think any of my characters, aside from dying, of course, have ever had an 'ending', to be honest. I certainly tried in the past, but even those would usually 'end' with me just moving on to a new character or fizzling into inactivity.

Edited October 29, 2020 by Exploits

[Pathway]

who cares bruh. also im 99% sure u guys r talking abt natasha valentine from lsrp so just tag them





@Natasha Valentine explain urself 

[yerro]

2 hours ago, Pathway said:

who cares bruh. also im 99% sure u guys r talking abt natasha valentine from lsrp so just tag them





@Natasha Valentine explain urself 

No one has to explain themselves.

 

Just like Exploits said in the first reply here, if they're roleplaying well, it's none of your concern.

 

Roleplaying is a creative pursuit. Much like choosing a movie to watch or a book to read, it comes from inside, something we can't always put our finger on. Some people like fantasy genre, others prefer sci-fi or adventures. You don't force someone to read fantasy or classics because of whatever reasons, you let them read and watch and play what they want.

 

Each and every one of us found themselves roleplaying in a community like this for their own reasons. Each of us has a source of inspiration that drives them to keep roleplaying. There's absolutely no difference where you draw your inspiration from — yourself or others.

 

Many communities I've come across on GTA have this very stern belief that drawing inspiration from your own past or your own dreams is "bad", and the only way to roleplay well is to detach yourself to the character. That's the same level of elitism that once saw people that aren't hardcore roleplayers shunned in many communities in the past (that shall remain unnamed).

 

Roleplaying well requires you to have the motivation to do so. Where you get your motivation from doesn't matter. As long as you're roleplaying a character and are aware of their own thoughts, motivations, pursuits and experiences that form reactions, you're fine.

 

Telling people they can't RP this or that character is just plainly wrong.

[Ms KarMagick 🖤]

Seems like a really petty thing to cry about honestly. If someone quits an old community because it doesn't offer much of what they want anymore and want to migrate their character to gta.w, why stop them? They want to carry on developing the character they've played maybe for years and not flush it down the toilet over the poor management of their previous dying community, again, why stop them? If their roleplay doesn't conflict with gta.w, if it's roleplayed well, if they bring solid interactions with people, who gives a shit?

Seems more like a "look how superior I am" kinda thread than a legitimate issue.

[Garras Up]

1 minute ago, KarMagick said:

Seems more like a "look how superior I am" kinda thread than a legitimate issue.

bloody oath

[Whatwasit]

Everything seems to be a damn problem in this community. People are so focused on the actions of others it's close to insane. Maybe try and spend this time to improve your own roleplay and character development instead of telling others how to do theirs.

 

Better make a topic about why everybody is driving in fully tuned and coloured vehicles like the whole city has been part of the episodes of Pimp My Ride.