Generally speaking I post the Foster Forest ads in the last day of the previous month. In this case, that would be today. March has been a particularly tough month at Foster Forest, however, and I feel that it would be inappropriate to invite people into the group while we're really just picking things up again and getting moving in an upward and onward direction.
Look for May's ad on April 30th!
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Metagaming is about PEOPLE, not THINGS
You cannot metagame an object; you can only metagame a person. If you have made actions for or changed the personality of a character not of your own creation, then you are metagaming. At Foster Forest Family Role Play, this could result in a ban.
The reason I'm bringing this up today is because one of our members asked the question of whether or not it is considered metagaming to find scrap around the community compound.
Obviously the simple answer is that "no," it is not, because in order to be metagaming, one would have to be acting on behalf of, or characterizing, a character not belonging to them. Since the objects have no ability to act independently and have no personality, this is not metagaming.
In the case of my specific example (which I gave yesterday in my article about metagaming), the individual who was causing the problems adjusted the personality of at least two entire families to reflect their own needs so that their thread would work.
Metagaming is never okay, and the majority of groups have some kind of a policy against it. However, object placement for convenience may be a different story, depending on the group that you are in.
In the case of Foster Forest, we allow limited object placement. For example, one new member changed the entire structure of the main house at Foster Forest (and was asked to redo their arrival thread as a result). This type of behavior is not okay. However, getting into the scrap wood pile (which does exist) and digging out some boards is acceptable.
The important thing here is this: When in doubt, ask. If you are visiting the Williams house and you need to use the clothes line, why don't you ask first if there is one instead of making an assumption that could be upsetting to the person who lives in that home? It might take a bit longer, but you are virtually guaranteed not to get into trouble over it!
The reason I'm bringing this up today is because one of our members asked the question of whether or not it is considered metagaming to find scrap around the community compound.
Obviously the simple answer is that "no," it is not, because in order to be metagaming, one would have to be acting on behalf of, or characterizing, a character not belonging to them. Since the objects have no ability to act independently and have no personality, this is not metagaming.
In the case of my specific example (which I gave yesterday in my article about metagaming), the individual who was causing the problems adjusted the personality of at least two entire families to reflect their own needs so that their thread would work.
Metagaming is never okay, and the majority of groups have some kind of a policy against it. However, object placement for convenience may be a different story, depending on the group that you are in.
In the case of Foster Forest, we allow limited object placement. For example, one new member changed the entire structure of the main house at Foster Forest (and was asked to redo their arrival thread as a result). This type of behavior is not okay. However, getting into the scrap wood pile (which does exist) and digging out some boards is acceptable.
The important thing here is this: When in doubt, ask. If you are visiting the Williams house and you need to use the clothes line, why don't you ask first if there is one instead of making an assumption that could be upsetting to the person who lives in that home? It might take a bit longer, but you are virtually guaranteed not to get into trouble over it!
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
The Admin Said I Metagamed! Wait... What?
So the admin of your favorite role playing site has told you that you've metagamed, and you've been given a warning that if you do it again, you could be banned! But what is metagaming, and why is it such a bad thing? How do you know if you've metagamed? What should you do if you realize that you've done it?
Metagaming refers to one member writing for a character that they are not logged into or, more importantly, do not play.
If you are new to role playing, or if you've been in the ageplay role playing community for a while, you might not know what metagaming is. It's not a word used outside of the role playing community, and the term most often used in the ageplay community is "power play" (which is incorrect and which I will address in a later post).
Here is an example: I play Peter Grisson at Foster Forest Family Role Play. He is an artistic type, often brooding, not always thinking through everything that he says or does. He loves women. Lots and lots of women. He is fastidiously tidy, health conscious and a great cook. He gets totally absorbed in his work when he's painting, but he is a wonderful and loving father.
Two members of Foster Forest decided that Peter was pretty stupid, mainly because he's always lost in his own world and doesn't always remember names particularly well. They played the game of continually poking at his intelligence until one of them finally got bored. But the other found that it was humorous, and continued to do this for a very long time (to the point that it was annoying not only to me but to other members). Later on, this same member made a post suggesting that Peter had chosen to leave an area of his home untidy enough that there were usable items left outside the house (on the porch or lawn). Peter would never, ever do this. This is a clear example of metagaming.
The previous paragraph is a true example of something that happened recently on Foster Forest. A temporary ban was implemented as a result of this behavior due to the fact that the member was a persistent metagamer who had been corrected on several occasions.
So why is metagaming bad? You have a story that you want to tell, and you need a specific situation in order to make that story happen. Why can't you use somebody else's character as a vehicle to make your story happen, as in the example above?
The answer is pretty simple: Because you don't know that character as well as the person who created them.
Returning to my previous example, Peter wasn't as stupid as he was coming across to other members. This might have been poor writing on my part, or it could be that his apparent absentmindedness was a vehicle that I was using for his own character. I know my characters better than anybody else does. I know what they would do. I know who can cook, who's a bad driver, which ones are strict, which ones are pushovers. Just as you know your own characters best, I know mine best.
The golden rule applies here: Do unto others what you would have them do unto you. If you prefer not to have someone else decide how your character thinks and acts, don't metagame somebody else's character!
Is metagaming ever okay?
Yes, sometimes. If I am logged into Peter's account and I need for Toby to make a small action, I might metagame Toby. If I am playing Peter and he is in an argument with Kevin, I can ask Kevin's keeper if it's okay with her if I make a minor action for Kevin.
Let me make it clear that this only pertains to Foster Forest. If you are in another role playing group, their metagaming rules might be entirely different. However, I would like to point out that metagaming is always seriously frowned upon in role play circles.
Metagaming is when you post actions for another character other than the one you are playing yourself. It is generally frowned upon and at Foster Forest, it may get you banned.
If you need more help understanding metagaming, you can also view this post.
Metagaming refers to one member writing for a character that they are not logged into or, more importantly, do not play.
If you are new to role playing, or if you've been in the ageplay role playing community for a while, you might not know what metagaming is. It's not a word used outside of the role playing community, and the term most often used in the ageplay community is "power play" (which is incorrect and which I will address in a later post).
Here is an example: I play Peter Grisson at Foster Forest Family Role Play. He is an artistic type, often brooding, not always thinking through everything that he says or does. He loves women. Lots and lots of women. He is fastidiously tidy, health conscious and a great cook. He gets totally absorbed in his work when he's painting, but he is a wonderful and loving father.
Two members of Foster Forest decided that Peter was pretty stupid, mainly because he's always lost in his own world and doesn't always remember names particularly well. They played the game of continually poking at his intelligence until one of them finally got bored. But the other found that it was humorous, and continued to do this for a very long time (to the point that it was annoying not only to me but to other members). Later on, this same member made a post suggesting that Peter had chosen to leave an area of his home untidy enough that there were usable items left outside the house (on the porch or lawn). Peter would never, ever do this. This is a clear example of metagaming.
The previous paragraph is a true example of something that happened recently on Foster Forest. A temporary ban was implemented as a result of this behavior due to the fact that the member was a persistent metagamer who had been corrected on several occasions.
So why is metagaming bad? You have a story that you want to tell, and you need a specific situation in order to make that story happen. Why can't you use somebody else's character as a vehicle to make your story happen, as in the example above?
The answer is pretty simple: Because you don't know that character as well as the person who created them.
Returning to my previous example, Peter wasn't as stupid as he was coming across to other members. This might have been poor writing on my part, or it could be that his apparent absentmindedness was a vehicle that I was using for his own character. I know my characters better than anybody else does. I know what they would do. I know who can cook, who's a bad driver, which ones are strict, which ones are pushovers. Just as you know your own characters best, I know mine best.
The golden rule applies here: Do unto others what you would have them do unto you. If you prefer not to have someone else decide how your character thinks and acts, don't metagame somebody else's character!
Is metagaming ever okay?
Yes, sometimes. If I am logged into Peter's account and I need for Toby to make a small action, I might metagame Toby. If I am playing Peter and he is in an argument with Kevin, I can ask Kevin's keeper if it's okay with her if I make a minor action for Kevin.
Let me make it clear that this only pertains to Foster Forest. If you are in another role playing group, their metagaming rules might be entirely different. However, I would like to point out that metagaming is always seriously frowned upon in role play circles.
Metagaming is when you post actions for another character other than the one you are playing yourself. It is generally frowned upon and at Foster Forest, it may get you banned.
If you need more help understanding metagaming, you can also view this post.
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Characterizing Your Inner Kid
A while back, I asked the question "how do you characterize your inner kid?" Well, nobody answered, so I'm going to spend some time answering this question myself.
Any time that you choose to take an emotionally real inner child into a role playing game, you are going to have to do something to make them into a character.
Now understand that I'm not telling you that you should remove all emotional connection that you have to your inner child, or that anyone who creates a character from scratch has no emotional attachment to that character. However, the majority of role playing games start out by giving you a setting, a back story, and a purpose. (Look at the Foster Forest Family Roleplay site for examples.) In order to fit in with this purpose and vision from the owner of the site, you are going to have to have something more than just a personality; You are going to need to have a whole person.
Remember that most of our IKs are in reality simply a personality, usually a part of ourselves that just hasn't grown up. They have no history apart from our own, and that history may not fit in with the vision for the game.
I have a total of three inner kids who are currently recognizable as separate personalities. All three of them are active on my ageplay role playing game. Each of them has a unique and entirely separate personality from the others, including their original families and their circumstances before arriving at Foster Forest. So how did I build their histories, and why did I choose to do it the way that I did?
To start with, let's talk about Toby. She is the longest-running role play character that I currently have. There is a lot of my inner child in this character. And yet yes, she is still a character.
Toby's character began in a different environment than where she is now, and yet she has always been the same; A fourteen year-old child who has been abused (sexually and physically) by her father and his friends since she was nine years old (when her mother passed away). She's been through a life of hell and back, but she is incredibly talented both intellectually and artistically.
The way that I reached this characterization for Toby was to take a lot of what her personality was, and reverse engineer her. Why would she possibly have the low self esteem that has made her anorexic (and when I'm in her head space in r/l, it's almost impossible for me deal with food and issues relating to food)? I tweaked her character to reach that personality trait, assuming that the issues that she's been through in her life would result in her low self-esteem.
Over time, Toby became a solid character. The reasons why she aren't with her parents are obvious: her mother is dead and her father was an alcoholic abuser who is now in prison. She fits in with the theme of Foster Forest because she had trouble settling and fitting in with other foster care environments. She is both an inner child and a character.
If you would like information for how I characterized Rachel, please ask in the comments and I will do my best to explain it. Both she and Mickey were engineered differently, starting out as characters before I recognized them as inner kids. In Mickey's case, I had to see that she had just aged in order to reach acceptance. You can find out more about my processes on my blog Confessions of an Inner Kid.
Any time that you choose to take an emotionally real inner child into a role playing game, you are going to have to do something to make them into a character.
Now understand that I'm not telling you that you should remove all emotional connection that you have to your inner child, or that anyone who creates a character from scratch has no emotional attachment to that character. However, the majority of role playing games start out by giving you a setting, a back story, and a purpose. (Look at the Foster Forest Family Roleplay site for examples.) In order to fit in with this purpose and vision from the owner of the site, you are going to have to have something more than just a personality; You are going to need to have a whole person.
Remember that most of our IKs are in reality simply a personality, usually a part of ourselves that just hasn't grown up. They have no history apart from our own, and that history may not fit in with the vision for the game.
I have a total of three inner kids who are currently recognizable as separate personalities. All three of them are active on my ageplay role playing game. Each of them has a unique and entirely separate personality from the others, including their original families and their circumstances before arriving at Foster Forest. So how did I build their histories, and why did I choose to do it the way that I did?
To start with, let's talk about Toby. She is the longest-running role play character that I currently have. There is a lot of my inner child in this character. And yet yes, she is still a character.
Toby's character began in a different environment than where she is now, and yet she has always been the same; A fourteen year-old child who has been abused (sexually and physically) by her father and his friends since she was nine years old (when her mother passed away). She's been through a life of hell and back, but she is incredibly talented both intellectually and artistically.
The way that I reached this characterization for Toby was to take a lot of what her personality was, and reverse engineer her. Why would she possibly have the low self esteem that has made her anorexic (and when I'm in her head space in r/l, it's almost impossible for me deal with food and issues relating to food)? I tweaked her character to reach that personality trait, assuming that the issues that she's been through in her life would result in her low self-esteem.
Over time, Toby became a solid character. The reasons why she aren't with her parents are obvious: her mother is dead and her father was an alcoholic abuser who is now in prison. She fits in with the theme of Foster Forest because she had trouble settling and fitting in with other foster care environments. She is both an inner child and a character.
If you would like information for how I characterized Rachel, please ask in the comments and I will do my best to explain it. Both she and Mickey were engineered differently, starting out as characters before I recognized them as inner kids. In Mickey's case, I had to see that she had just aged in order to reach acceptance. You can find out more about my processes on my blog Confessions of an Inner Kid.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)