Fanfic Writers' Virtual Water Cooler

[Gatefan1976]

Not the popular mindset. My own personal experience.

Then your experience matches the popular mindset
Look at something like WoW, which is sold as a "Massively Multiplayer Online RPG", I play it, but really its just a kill the baddie, nab the loot game, much like (don's flack jacket) the Final Fantasy series of games. You can say it's a RPG all you want, but it really isn't, they are high end "Choose your own adventure" stories at best.

I used to play D&D and Traveller. I know how the games work, and I've never once encountered an RPG that would handle any of the stuff I've mentioned as being important to characterization in my style of writing.

I would say that is more a function of the games (or more accurately the DM/GM) in question rather than any failing of RPG's in general.

The last time I played any sort of RPG was just as I was getting the ball rolling on All That We Leave Behind, as a matter of fact. If you have a login for Alternatehistory.com, go there and look for "Everyone Goes To Bogie's". Posts by TimeJockey are mine, and begin here.

No I don't but I would consider doing so on your say so.

That game comes a lot closer to what you're probably thinking of, but it still wasn't the gameplay itself that led to my development of my character's personality. I gave her a history and a personality because she wouldn't have been a very effective character without one, and I could just as easily have developed her in the context of a story as in a game.

I am quite sure you could have, but my *suggestion* was merely to help people who get "stuck" in character development.

The gameplay isn't what made her who she was; who she was determined what she did in the game, and I fleshed her out before I really began playing, because that's what I do as a writer. I create characters who are people, and I can do that even more easily in a story than in a game, because in a game I'm dependent on the actions of others, whereas in a story I have a lot more control over what's going on.

This is the difference between storytelling and roleplaying. Roleplaying thrives on that "lack of control".

I abandoned this game sort of in mid-stride because there are only so many hours in a day and I had to make a choice between spending them playing an RPG and spending them on writing a story that had formed in my head and demanded to be written. The story won, and that's why All That We Leave Behind exists.

You made the right choice IMHO

And no, there is no analog in roleplay to the sort of thing I do when creating a character and situations in writing fiction. At the very least, there's nothing in roleplaying that I need in order to create such a character. What you're calling roleplaying has nothing to do with the game itself and everything to do with a person's innate creativity. While people can and do create some very intricate characters in RPGs, it isn't the playing of the game that brings this about; it's the creativity of the player, and that kind of creativity can happen quite well in contexts other than gaming.

Yes, it can, but as I said, it was a suggestion, not a "directive".

Trust me, there's no way I could RPG 90% of what's in ATWLB.

Could you see ATWLB as a movie or a series?

[SF_and_Coffee]

Then your experience matches the popular mindset
Look at something like WoW, which is sold as a "Massively Multiplayer Online RPG", I play it, but really its just a kill the baddie, nab the loot game, much like (don's flack jacket) the Final Fantasy series of games. You can say it's a RPG all you want, but it really isn't, they are high end "Choose your own adventure" stories at best.

If you wanted to discuss something other than those, then (and it's obvious now that you did), it might have been best to clarify that early on, before we all went traipsing down the "roll the dice" road, you know?

I would say that is more a function of the games (or more accurately the DM/GM) in question rather than any failing of RPG's in general.

Actually, I'll differ with you there, too. The DM in my very first D&D group was one of the most creative people I knew at the time, who came up with some amazing stories for us to muck about in. Along with that, everyone in the group was involved in theatre, so we were all pretty creative and had some experience at getting in touch with a character's motivations. We had mysteries to solve, and even some deep philosophical stuff to play around with in the process. It was definitely not "slash & grab, fight the monster and get out with the treasure" simple most of the time, and the interactions between the characters in the game were a riot. I still never got anything out of it even approaching the kind of fiction I write, though.

No I don't but I would consider doing so on your say so.

I haven't actually been active over there since sometime in 2010 due to time considerations, but it's a fun site. I should probably drop the other players a note letting them know why I dropped out and inviting them to read the reason why if they're into SG-1.

I am quite sure you could have, but my *suggestion* was merely to help people who get "stuck" in character development.

I still think that in character development the best solution is just to start asking your characters questions and then listen carefully to the answers.

This is the difference between storytelling and roleplaying. Roleplaying thrives on that "lack of control".

Certainly it does. But as an author I shape the events of the story, so lack of control is the antithesis of what I'm looking for in that context.

You made the right choice IMHO

Thank you. I think so too.

Yes, it can, but as I said, it was a suggestion, not a "directive".

Understood.

Could you see ATWLB as a movie or a series?

Yes, actually, although that would require finding a way to translate all that lovely stuff that goes on within Frank's and the other characters' thought processes into something audiovisual. Nevertheless, I can definitely see it as a film or a television series if that translation were successfully accomplished. To be honest, what I'm developing in ATWLB is in fact the basis for a re-imagining of the SG-1 series and universe to an extent, which is why there will be several more stories going forward.

[Gatefan1976]

If you wanted to discuss something other than those, then (and it's obvious now that you did), it might have been best to clarify that early on, before we all went traipsing down the "roll the dice" road, you know?

Again, this is where the "difference of perception" comes into play. From *my* perspective, I was never talking about the "roll the dice" road because that simply isn't what roleplaying is to me. Could I have been more direct in that position, yes.

Actually, I'll differ with you there, too. The DM in my very first D&D group was one of the most creative people I knew at the time, who came up with some amazing stories for us to muck about in. Along with that, everyone in the group was involved in theatre, so we were all pretty creative and had some experience at getting in touch with a character's motivations. We had mysteries to solve, and even some deep philosophical stuff to play around with in the process. It was definitely not "slash & grab, fight the monster and get out with the treasure" simple most of the time, and the interactions between the characters in the game were a riot. I still never got anything out of it even approaching the kind of fiction I write, though.

Then I maintain you made the right choice in pursuing writing.
I think this is just a situation where *I* just happened to get more out of RPG's than you did.

I haven't actually been active over there since sometime in 2010 due to time considerations, but it's a fun site. I should probably drop the other players a note letting them know why I dropped out and inviting them to read the reason why if they're into SG-1.

Well, thats just life, especially "online" life.

I still think that in character development the best solution is just to start asking your characters questions and then listen carefully to the answers.

Same result, different avenue to reach it my dear. I "act my way" to it, you "write your way to it"

Certainly it does. But as an author I shape the events of the story, so lack of control is the antithesis of what I'm looking for in that context.

If you listen to your characters, you already have given up some control

Yes, actually, although that would require finding a way to translate all that lovely stuff that goes on within Frank's and the other characters' thought processes into something audiovisual. Nevertheless, I can definitely see it as a film or a television series if that translation were successfully accomplished. To be honest, what I'm developing in ATWLB is in fact the basis for a re-imagining of the SG-1 series and universe to an extent, which is why there will be several more stories going forward.

If you can see it as a series, it can be role-played.

[SF_and_Coffee]

If you listen to your characters, you already have given up some control

Of course, but I've given it to the very people who are co-creators of their own story. That's different from giving it to a game structure.

If you can see it as a series, it can be role-played.

No. Once again, we're talking about different things here. Role-playing in the context of a game and role-playing in the context of an actor in a film or a television show (or a play, for that matter) are two different things. Unless you've suddenly expanded the term "role-playing game" to encompass any and all works of fiction no matter what their format -- a definition for which it was never designed -- no. Oh, certainly, RPGs can be created from films and tv shows; we both know it happens all the time. But that is by no means the same as saying that the RPG is the same animal as the film or show that gave rise to it.

The bottom line for me is that I am the author of the story. If I have a co-author (and for some stories, I do), then there is one other person responsible along with me for the shape of the plot and the actions/reactions/interactions of the characters. In either case, the characters themselves, if they are strong individuals, will naturally lend their own efforts to that shaping process. But that's still very different from any type of gameplay I've ever been involved in.

If all you're really talking about at the end of the day is using the sort of creative techniques that some people obviously put to work in gameplay to flesh out a character, I still maintain that the game itself is not the important element here. The operative element is that creative technique or process itself, which is separate from the game no matter how useful it may be in playing one.

In other words, yes, I do imagine my characters and their interactions before I write -- sometimes; on other occasions it all just flows once I have my fingers on the keyboard and even I don't necessarily know what's coming next in the short-range sense because the characters themselves have taken over and are telling the story -- but in my personal lexicon that's just the nature of storytelling. Perhaps we're thinking of the same thing and you simply call it gaming, but to me it isn't because gaming means something very different to me. What I do is storytelling.

[Gatefan1976]

Sorry, Had KP duty for the potato bake

Of course, but I've given it to the very people who are co-creators of their own story. That's different from giving it to a game structure.

True, but is that not *exactly* what a DM does when they design a scenario and let 4-5 of thier friends take on the roles of the characters within that story?
Are they any less the "co-creators"?

No. Once again, we're talking about different things here. Role-playing in the context of a game and role-playing in the context of an actor in a film or a television show (or a play, for that matter) are two different things. Unless you've suddenly expanded the term "role-playing game" to encompass any and all works of fiction no matter what their format -- a definition for which it was never designed -- no.

It wasn't me who expanded that definition my dear
You *seem* to see RPG's as no more than a bunch of people sitting around a table with pens, paper and dice, *my* definition is much broader than that simply because RPG's *are* broader. D&D, Traveller, these are generally examples of what you see RPG's as, but what about things like LARPing?

Oh, certainly, RPGs can be created from films nad tv shows; we both know it happens all the time. But that is by no means the same as saying that the RPG is the same animal as the film or show that gave rise to it.

No, such games are far closer to fanfic than anything else.

The bottom line for me is that I am the author of the story. If I have a co-author (and for some stories, I do), then there is one other person responsible along with me for the shape of the plot and the actions/reactions/interactions of the characters. In either case, the characters themselves, if they are strong individuals, will naturally lend their own efforts to that shaping process. But that's still very different from any type of gameplay I've ever been involved in.

Then I can wholeheartedly say you and I have had far different gaming experiences.

If all you're really talking about at the end of the day is using the sort of creative techniques that some people obviously put to work in gameplay to flesh out a character, I still maintain that the game itself is not the important element here. The operative element is that creative technique or process itself, which is separate from the game no matter how useful it may be in playing one.

I do believe I said that awile ago. This whole convo spawned from me suggesting people reading "premade scenario's", which generally only tend to exist in either writing or games. RPG scenario's however tend to be fairly easily accesable, hence the suggestion to use them. For a more literary example, I could just as easily make "X Character" and run them through ATWLB *as a scenario* to gauge how "Character X" may act under the same circumstances.

In other words, yes, I do imagine my characters and their interactions before I write -- sometimes; on other occasions it all just flows once I have my fingers on the keyboard and even I don't necessarily know what's coming next in the short-range sense because the characters themselves have taken over and are telling the story -- but in my personal lexicon that's just the nature of storytelling. Perhaps we're thinking of the same thing and you simply call it gaming, but to me it isn't because gaming means something very different to me. What I do is storytelling.

Yeah, we are on the same page, we are just using different languages

[SF_and_Coffee]

True, but is that not *exactly* what a DM does when they design a scenario and let 4-5 of thier friends take on the roles of the characters within that story?
Are they any less the "co-creators"?

Completely different paradigm. At the end of the day, I could simply decide to change all manner of things in the story I'm writing. For that matter, I often do go back and edit things after I've written them. That mechanism doesn't exist in RPGs, at least not if the GM wants to maintain the sanity of the players.

It wasn't me who expanded that definition my dear

Well, it certainly wasn't me.

You *seem* to see RPG's as no more than a bunch of people sitting around a table with pens, paper and dice, *my* definition is much broader than that simply because RPG's *are* broader. D&D, Traveller, these are generally examples of what you see RPG's as, but what about things like LARPing?

Okay, first off, no. I did, after all, put up a link to an RPG I'd been involved in online a couple of years ago. No pens, paper, dice, table or any of that were involved. It was all just people using their imaginations and a website. So if you think I'm still thinking of D&D, one of us has stopped paying attention to both sides of the conversation. I will leave the question of who that is as an exercise for the reader.

Secondly, while I am familiar with LARP (although I don't play those games myself), it still isn't the same as writing a novel or a short story as a solo author or even in partnership with a single co-author. The closest thing might be writing round-robin stories, and that isn't really the kind of writing I do.

No, such games are far closer to fanfic than anything else.

No, they're more like round-robin writing exercises. When I write fanfic, I use the same techniques I use in original fiction.

Then I can wholeheartedly say you and I have had far different gaming experiences.

At this point I'd be hard-pressed to even try to imagine what your gaming experiences must be like, but I can say with a fair amount of certainty that they bear little resemblance to the process I use as a writer... unless you are playing them alone or with only one other person, and you have ultimate control over all of the characters and situations yourself. (Whether or not you choose to use that control is a separate question.)

I do believe I said that awile ago. This whole convo spawned from me suggesting people reading "premade scenario's", which generally only tend to exist in either writing or games.

Which brings me right back to the question of what value there is in a "premade scenario" when one is trying to write an original story. And note that for purposes of this sub-discussion, even fanfic qualifies as an "original story" in the sense that it is an original sequence of events and reactions to those events that differs from what occurred in the material from which it is derived. If you have to make your own "premade scenario" then you've just written fiction and you don't need to put it into a game structure to make it useful. Just take the story and run with it.

RPG scenario's however tend to be fairly easily accesable, hence the suggestion to use them. For a more literary example, I could just as easily make "X Character" and run them through ATWLB *as a scenario* to gauge how "Character X" may act under the same circumstances.

What are these accessible scenarios you're referring to? Unless a scenario is going to occur in my story, I don't need to find out how my character would react to it. Unless your character is going to find themselves in the situation given in ATWLB, I don't see what use there would be in gauging how he or she would react to that. It would be rather like asking, "Well, what if Character X were a Tibetan Buddhist monk in the 18th century?" when in fact Character X is an aging female former supermodel in 1980s America. There's no overlap between the two situations.

Yeah, we are on the same page, we are just using different languages

I'm not entirely certain we're even in the same section of the library, to be quite honest.

[Sealurk]

First off, I've never actually played a proper pen-and-paper RPG, and secondly I've only skimmed all the posts on this particular subject due to time constraints so I can't comment with any authority.

That said, I think that anybody who wants to write is better off learning how to think creatively as a writer from the start. Introducing any elements from an RPG may assist the odd writer or two, and I certainly tried it years back with the various generators in the old 40K Rogue Trader book, but ultimately I doubt it will do you much good.

Quite simply, I think that if you want to write you need to develop a writer's mind and not a roleplayer's mind, and that while there is a degree of overlap, being too reliant on those kind of systems will ultimately stunt your ability to produce meaningful, logical, enjoyable works.

That's my two cents (or approximately one penny in UK money) at any rate.

[selene0789]

I have played D&D before. That said, I can see how using the process in writing. Not the rolling of dice and such, but the use of character sheets.

Depending on how a person plays (as it is often player's preference what to use and not use), some gamers use character sheets as their mini-bios, so to speak. It keeps track of abilities and powers, and also the frequency with which they are used.

For me, the use of the character sheets would be useful not in determining the sequence of events, but in keeping it real. You deal damage, you sustain damage. It would be a decent way to dish out the whump accordingly, and avoid the trap of superheroism/invulnerability.

That's just what I would use them for, especially in a big epic-scale war scene.

But to each their own. What works for one author might not do it for another.

[Whytewytch]

This is not what I mean at all, I am talking about the processes of breathing life and individuality into characters by "getting into thier heads" the same way a good RP'er can, NOT the pen and paper mechanics of the game in question.

Then perhaps I have misunderstood. I will read the rest of the page to catch up and see if I get what you're saying.

This is something we learn to do in time and perhaps a skill we've come to take for granted.

Maybe some people who are new to writing haven't yet experienced a conversation with their characters. I know mine have had conversations with one another in my head for a long time. At some point I either had to chose between being a writer or being schizophrenic.

I agree with SF about that last line. Best. Line. Ever.

As for the first line, the last part may be true, for me at least. I have always heard my characters in my head. Growing up, I played "make-pretend" games and spent many hours riding horses with my friends, pretending to be this or that made-up person, or lying in the sun, eyes closed, chewing on a blade of grass and telling myself stories in my head. Listening to the voices in my head is almost as instinctual as breathing to me.

[Whytewytch]

Lets dial this back a bit.
How do you *as an author* make that initial "connection" to a character?
Do they "pop in" as fully formed entities, or are they nebulous shapes in the back of your mind?
If you are lucky enough to have the former, then you are quite correct, an exercise such as this would serve no purpose for you.

My characters show themselves to me over time, but an exercise like this would still serve no purpose for me. It's not how I create. I guess that's what I was trying to get at with my other comment--my characters come to me, revealing themselves a bit at a time, like getting to know a new person. Honestly, I've never understood RPGs, and the closest I've come to playing one is either Life or one of those world-building games like Caesar or something, but hubby's played D&D and he tried to teach me. Like with football, he failed utterly.

[Whytewytch]

I grew up on a farm so I used to spend long, long hours mowing the back forty (and the front forty, the East forty, yadda, yadda, yadda...). I used to write in my head. I'd concoct long scenarios between characters while perched on the tractor simply to pass the time. And I swear, while one of the voices was always mine, the other(s) belonged to wholly different individuals. To this day, all I've got to do is get in (or on) a moving vehicle and I'm creating. I've had to take to carrying a voice recorder because some of the best exchanges occur at 70 miles an hour on the interstate. (And other commuters get really creative with their gestures when they see you with a pen and legal pad perched on the steering wheel.)

Sounds like me. Give me time and few distractions, and I'm creating.

Obviously, I can't speak for SF, but for me they aren't necessarily fully formed. Not at first. But as more conversations occurs I learn more and more about them. I like to think they're never fully formed until I'm done writing with them, anyway. I'm not the kind that can fill out a character bio before I write and then write a story about that person. I keep learning about them as I put them in new situations. But they always start with something - even if it's little. A job. A look. One crazy line that just pops into my head.

THIS!

[fems]

I have to agree with the others in that most of the characters just come to me. I don't set out to fully create one before I even begin writing but I do have an idea about what they're like. The rest comes instinctively as the story progresses and doesn't really require much thinking on my part.

[SF_and_Coffee]

One of my characters just told me a lot more about his history than I'd been aware of. It's kind of neat when that happens.

[Amara D'Angeli]

One of my characters just told me a lot more about his history than I'd been aware of. It's kind of neat when that happens.

I really wish we had a "like" button.

[Cold Fuzz]

First off, I've never actually played a proper pen-and-paper RPG, and secondly I've only skimmed all the posts on this particular subject due to time constraints so I can't comment with any authority.

That said, I think that anybody who wants to write is better off learning how to think creatively as a writer from the start. Introducing any elements from an RPG may assist the odd writer or two, and I certainly tried it years back with the various generators in the old 40K Rogue Trader book, but ultimately I doubt it will do you much good.

Quite simply, I think that if you want to write you need to develop a writer's mind and not a roleplayer's mind, and that while there is a degree of overlap, being too reliant on those kind of systems will ultimately stunt your ability to produce meaningful, logical, enjoyable works.

That's my two cents (or approximately one penny in UK money) at any rate.

Like you, I've never actually played a proper pen & paper RPG, though I am familiar with some of ideas involved with RPGs. One particular aspect I've found useful in the past few months is the concept of alignment. Honestly, it's not something I gave much thought to in the past but I'll definitely pay more attention to it in the future. Virtually none of the of the original characters I've created (that is, characters not already in DW) would pass for lawful good. I think the alignment concept and its variants are useful for determining some of a character's motivations. For myself, I find it difficult to create a character that is almost totally good or totally evil because there's virtually no such thing.

Lets dial this back a bit.
How do you *as an author* make that initial "connection" to a character?
Do they "pop in" as fully formed entities, or are they nebulous shapes in the back of your mind?
If you are lucky enough to have the former, then you are quite correct, an exercise such as this would serve no purpose for you.

Interesting questions. My initial connections to almost all of the characters I've created come from some form of visualization. That is, I imagine them in my mind and picture how they would speak to me if they were sitting in the room.

For example: I'm sitting on a couch as I write this and I can imagine four of my characters sitting in the room with me. One of them would look around at my furniture and then behold the view out of one of the windows--and then lament the constant grey fog outside. Another would look around at the various pictures in the room and comment on them. The third would be peeking over my shoulder and be playfully intruding on my personal space just to see how I would react. He would then start making faces and obscene gestures with his hands to distract me. The fourth would probably throw a pillow at the third character and then assert, "Me, hungry. Food, want."

Virtually all the characters I've created, even minor ones, seem to come complete with their own personal biographies and idiosyncrasies. Because I envision them all as real people, my muse delivers them to me as a total package, complete with motivations, quirks, and flaws. Some of the details in their lives, like whether they prefer beef or chicken, originate as something nebulous but actualizes as I write.