(10-14-2019, 10:31 AM)Sombra Hookier Wrote: People complaining about self-inserts are often self-inserts themselves. I think the only people who play different roles are the ones who stick to a character sheet they made with random attributes. In the end, however, most people here play characters that usually have attributes they find attractive in some way. Not necessary bad, as I just mentioned you should do what you enjoy. The only thing that bugs me are the ones who do self-inserts merely to crap on other people, bringing their ooRP intentions into the inRP environment that way.
Dark Knight Wrote:It's difficult to separate yourself from characters, I kinda see it like a play where you are just playing a part. I try to build characters that are wholly separate from myself, and then build on top of that their needs, wants, speech, behaviour and how they individually would act. As for the last part, yep...I kinda call them troll characters.
What qualifies as a self-insert? I think a lot of people accuse each other of self-inserts without insight into who people IRL are. Perhaps the biggest self-insert is feeling angrily protective of our characters - but our characters can't die, and we can ignore negative RP consequences if we so desire.
I consider it where if you are just wholly rping yourself, even more so if you use your real name. It's a little more nuanced to me, as I don't mind people wanting to do that so long as they change from that core. For me I consider self-inserts characters that don't change, keep to one thing and just make decisions based on OORP thoughts rather then putting themself in the shoes of their character.
I don't think self-inserts are a bad thing, it's more of a percentage for me. How much of yourself influences the character.
If you devote yourself to developing one character or another intimately, and with devotion, it's always going to be a self-insert to an extent. Because let's be realistic, where do these characteristics come from if not some part of yourself. You need to empathize with your creation on a significant level to be able to breathe life into them. If they weren't a part of you before, they become as such through the whole process. Unless they're on the other end of the spectrum, i.e carbon copies of other fictional characters.
(10-14-2019, 11:31 AM)Chrysalis Wrote: If you devote yourself to developing one character or another intimately, and with devotion, it's always going to be a self-insert to an extent. Because let's be realistic, where do these characteristics come from if not some part of yourself. You need to empathize with your creation on a significant level to be able to breathe life into them. If they weren't a part of you before, they become as such through the whole process. Unless they're on the other end of the spectrum, i.e carbon copies of other fictional characters.
It's unavoidable in the realm of, pretty much any character can be said to have occurred before in RL,Movies, TV and novels. But yes, I agree. I'm guilty of being inspired by outside sources at times, to a degree where I dialled it back with some (stopped quoting BSG on my Unioner for one :V)
(10-14-2019, 11:43 AM)Sombra Hookier Wrote: I think people use the term self-insert in Discovery mostly for people who use their characters as puppet to execute their ooRP agenda inRP.
That makes sense.
I'm trying to think of a solid example to flesh it out. What do OORP agendas boil down to intrinsically? Most of us have very little OORP influence over the mod, and if you are devving you have to totally separate it from what you, personally, are InRp doing.
Maybe it's just a point-scoring thing and there isn't any rhyme or reason to it.
THE SYNDIC LEAGUES
(A co-operative of Rheinland's outlawed trade unions, determined to take the underworld for themselves.)
(10-14-2019, 12:06 PM)Lucas Wrote: To this day I don't understand why people always talk about " cliques", when in reality people just like to play with their friends.
Because that's what a clique is. A group has a mind and motivations of its own, regardless of individual intent.
(10-14-2019, 12:06 PM)Lucas Wrote: To this day I don't understand why people always talk about " cliques", when in reality people just like to play with their friends.
Because that's what a clique is. A group has a mind and motivations of its own, regardless of individual intent.
So if a group of friends is a clique, then why would that be negative? What is the point of a game in which the community calls you out for elitism simply because you want to play with friends ( for example in events) instead of some Random people?
Get over the elitist thing people, and let people play with their friends without having to hear " Boo hoo ur too good at pvp/rp(if that even is said) so why do you play with friends that are good too instead of some Random people that you Barely know?!?!?!??!?!?!?" Every single time
(10-14-2019, 12:06 PM)Lucas Wrote: To this day I don't understand why people always talk about " cliques", when in reality people just like to play with their friends.
Because that's what a clique is. A group has a mind and motivations of its own, regardless of individual intent.
So if a group of friends is a clique, then why would that be negative? What is the point of a game in which the community calls you out for elitism simply because you want to play with friends ( for example in events) instead of some Random people?
Get over the elitist thing people, and let people play with their friends without having to hear " Boo hoo ur too good at pvp/rp(if that even is said) so why do you play with friends that are good too instead of some Random people that you Barely know?!?!?!??!?!?!?" Every single time
I think there's a difference between a group of friends and a clique really. Anyway, in my opinion all it comes down to is whether you allow outsiders to join your circle or look for ideas outside of your friends. Generally it's a problem of echo chambers, where you get everyone just agreeing with eachother because they're your friends. This is not a bad thing if you balance it with taking ideas outside of that friendship.
It's complicated, and of all the lessons I do agree it's the most difficult to explain and debate on. Everyone's individual opinions are going to be different.
There have been plenty of cliques past and present who unify under an almost hivemind-like banner to protect and put their interests above all others, often taking action detrimental to the health of the server if it means they 'win'.
People will play with their friends, and I don't think anyone is against the notion of that. Trouble arises when such groups put their mind and motivations above that of others. We're supposed to be a community, not a mob(s).
![[Image: XTF1d6x.png]](https://i.imgur.com/XTF1d6x.png)
![[Image: Lythrilux.gif]](https://sig.grumpybumpers.com/host/Lythrilux.gif)