Playing the Role: A Topical Guide to Roleplaying

Written by [SoT] Glory Comes

Role Playing, or RP as it is most commonly known, is an enjoyable art, and an art it is. In its most basic form it is friends getting together to tell a story, in its most complex form it is an interpretive commentary on an issue the author wishes to address while incorporating a complex and dynamic character base and quite possibly including others. (Essentially, you can tell a story or you can TELL A STORY ) Either kind of RP is enjoyable, and all the shades between, but there must be maintained a structure. Early players may have difficulty understanding this structure and the rules behind the role playing, and this makes it more difficult for a player to begin.

I have an extensive career as a role player, as well as having the interpretive skills taught in the IB English class, so i am a fairly experienced at role playing.
For those of you interested in my credentials, as if it is extensively important:
I have played D&D for several years as a dungeon master. For those of you who don't know what the game is, its a ROLE PLAYING game where a party of characters are led through a world of encounters by a dungeon master. The worlds can be uncomplicated and random or extremely in depth. Through my career as dungeon master, my worlds went from a few defined towns and a couple more as i went basing them to fit my needs with rather shallow stories to the encounters, to a very defined world complete with maps, nations, political structures, racial tensions, agricultural/economic outlines, trade systems, technological advances by regions, regional culture differences, and a variety of other advanced features. Basically, i made realistic world. For those of you who care, this form of role playing is both easier and more difficult than the form of role playing on this forum, because it involves advanced planning beforehand, and it also involves on the spot adaptation and roleplay for person-to-person encounters with NPCs (controlled by the DM of course) and the ingenuity of the players. I have to come up with a viable result when a player throws a rune of power at the energy field generated by the powerful artifact, rather than asking the professor about his research regarding it and finding out that it can be negated with a simple darkness spell.
I have role played with a group of friends in situations like this and have never been yelled at for bunnying.
I currently have a rather long RP thread going on in it, and if you read it you will find its not half bad (or so I've been told)
REGARDLESS OF MY CREDENTIALS, I am merely offering what advice i have on role playing. It bothers me that people do certain things in role play, and no one else made a guide, so why shouldn't I? and why do you care? Unless you feel you can do better, which i invite you to do, stay silent.

Following will be a guide to Role Playing. For simplicity, it will be separated by post into the different sections, because it will be fairly long. I ask you not to post here, even if you have relevant information, as it may hinder the readability of it.

Bunnying.

Bunnying is a No-No. This is commonly known, and yet it occurs some places without anyone making a fuss and other places very minorly, where even the bunny-er doesn't know it happened and people get their noses very out of joint. Bunnying cannot be defined definitively, but it is quite easy to spot once you know what you are looking for.

Bunnying is when one player causes the other player to act, among other things, which is clearly a bad thing because they may not maintain the other player's character. Staying in character is important to the Role Players, and having someone else break it is unendingly frustrating. Other times, bunnying is necessary to continue a story without having several one-liners going on back and forth between people.

Bunnying can be anything from causing the person to look around to causing them to make complete actions such as running, attacking, or even speaking.

Certain forms of bunnying are acceptable, and will never meet with a problem, while others are unacceptable and will never meet with acceptance.
'passive bunnying' is where one person causes another person to see or notice something.
"I drop my dagger, and he notices that I am wielding no other weapons"
This is quite clearly a harmless bunny. Of course, one should maintain that one does not have weapons, and going back on that, with something like "i draw a second dagger he did not notice" or something would then change this. One must maintain consistancy, and you cannot decieve a character, but having them notice something is an easy way to avoid having to outright say it and hope they let their character see it. It is a better way to guide the other person in your preferred direction while flawlessly incorporating it into the action and promoting a flow through the role play. Endless statements of details get annoying and can disrupt the continuity of the action. This form of bunnying is generally acceptable, as long as it is not detrimental to the character, such as if you have them notice you arent carrying a weapon and then somehow produce a weapon claiming they didn't see it.

'Reaction bunnying' is where one player causes a reaction in another player or group of players, without a physical reaction. This is something such as an expression, rather than an actual physical motion.
"He looked at me with anger in his eyes as i finished saying this, i could tell this had struck a nerve"
This is an example of reaction bunnying, the speaker has shown the reaction of the other player. This of course, can be a good or a bad thing. In some ways it allows another palyer to react without having a post of their own in the middle and allows the story to continue without delay. This is acceptable, as long as it stays in character. If i have my character walk up to a character described as a tough guy, shout in his face, and have him act intimidated, then i have abused this form of bunnying. This is unacceptable, it is out of character, and the reaction should not have been that way. However, bunnying him to react defensively and try to intimidate me back may also be out of character, and if you feel you do not know the character well enough to be able to determine definitively what is in character, you should ask them or wait for them to react.

'Reflex bunnying' Is where you bunny a reaction to something, such as a block or a yell. This is a non-expressive reaction, where the bunnied player does not show an emotion so much as they react to something done. Jumping back from a grenade, blocking a shot, flinching as a bullet whizzes nearby, all of this is reflex bunnying. This is only acceptable in certain circumstances, but it is generally not going to be questioned. Make sure you always keep in character, both yourself and the bunnied player, and there should be no problem.
"I throw my dagger at her, but she smacks it away with her sword deftly. She then assumes a stance and waits for me to charge. I charge her and punch her hard, knocking her down and stepping on her throat."
This has three examples of reflex bunnying. If you cannot spot all three, this is understandable, because it requires thinking outside the box. When 'she' smacks the dagger away with the sword, this is an acceptable reflex, rather than getting hit she blocked, understandable, as noone wants to get hit with a dagger. Assuming a stance and waiting for a charge, this is also an acceptable bunny, but not in all cases. The block bunny is acceptable, as there is no reason they wouldn't block, but in the case of the waiting, if the character is described as hot headed and prone to quick attacks then this is an inappropriate bunny. In either case it is insignificant and will not be challenged. The last bunny is unacceptable in ANY case. It is more of a lack of reaction than a reaction, but doing nothing is still a reaction. She blocked the dagger with the sword, and then her fighting abilities were completely ignored as the speaker knocks her down and puts her in a position of submission. This is unacceptable, and is borderline god moding (next issue i'll address)

'Action bunnying' is when one player makes another player do something, of their own volition, instead of in response to an immediate stimulus. This is the most ambiguous form of bunnying, and also the most dangerous. Causing the player to run and jump off a cliff randomly is not acceptable in most cases, unless the player is, of course, a lemming. Such things include attacking someone, following someone, or doing any form of other assorted actions. Keep in mind there IS a difference between action and reflex bunnying. Seeing a hole blown through the wall and jumping through immediately is action, as the stimulus was merely the presence of the hole, but seeing a hole blown in the wall and ducking to cover yourself from the debris is reflex, as you are reacting to being hit with debris. Anything that propels a character through into a course of action will fit this form of bunnying. THIS IS IMPORTANT: This form of bunnying should NEVER be done without explicit permission, unless you have the complete trust of the other to stay in character and you feel you can do this without problem. If you do this and it is contested, you should change it without question, and apologize. An initial infraction is acceptable, and even if you keep in character, it may be asked that you not bunny them, and you should from then on never bunny that person in this way again.
"I look to her and she nods, grabbing my hand and pulling me forward through the portal."
This is action bunnying, where she grabs the speakers hand and pulls him forward. The acceptability of this is up for interpretation, but it is ultimately the bunnied player's decision if they feel that is acceptable. If the character is a timid little girl, afraid of new things, this is unacceptable. A change like this is widely discouraged though, unless you have permission or you KNOW (not think, but KNOW, there is a difference) that the other person wont mind. Something like this changes a storyline, less drastic action bunnys don't. Be mindful of the difference, and avoid the former.

'State Bunnying' is where you dont actually cause anyone to do anything, but you change them in some way. this can be as little as changing their hair color to lighting their hair on fire and making them bald to severely crippling them to turning them into an alien. This is something that should be avoided at all costs. Regardless of how in character it is, all such state changes should be avoided. This can change a storyline and cause unpleasant changes, and unless the other player has put themself into a situation where it is obvious they are intending to injure/change themself, it is not easy to guage whether or not they should be doing this. If you read my thread, where tanya bunnys the fight between us and causes me to punch the column you will notice she merely damaged me, without saying the extend of the damage. I could have just said it hurt like hell and left it at a couple bruises.
"i slipped the poison into his food, and he ate it without noticing it, causing him to lose his memory entirely"
This is an example of state bunnying, completely inappropriate. It causes a drastic state change which cannot be undone now and throws the storyline along a plot which the author may not have decided to go for. If it was not the author affected here, this throws one player into a strange position, and unless the storyline shifts to follow them, it will probably knock them out of it. Either way, state bunnying should be avoided, as it can have bad effects.

'Drag Bunnying' is when you drag someone along on something, forcing them into doing anything without actually causing them to act. Contrary to some belief, this IS bunnying, even though you are merely propelling them, you are causing them not to resist it. At very worst, you should grab them and pull them towards something, rather than forcing them through it. This is not common but can be extremely annoying, if you MUST drag someone somewhere, give them a chance to fight back.
"I grabbed her hand and pulled her through the portal. I saw, on the other side, a doorway which looked promising, and dragged her toward it"
This gives two examples of the drag bunnying. The first, pulling the bunnied through the portal, is unacceptable. This forces that character to pursue that action, when they may have wished to (and been able to) knock you down and head in the other direction. The second, dragging her toward the doorway, is acceptable, as it points in that direction and allows her to decide if she is in fact pulled through the doorway or not.

The last form of bunnying is an extremely complex form I will not discuss at the moment. It is 'combat bunnying', which is, for all intents and purposes, bunnying someone while in combat. This will be addressed in a later post regarding combat, and it is often necessary, though it takes some skill to make combat believable and agreeable to all parties.


NOTE: It is IMPORTANT to note that in an author's thread, they are effectively god. Whatever they say goes, and if they choose to bunny you, you have to go with it, it IS their thread after all. The only bunnying that is not acceptable even by an author is the state bunnying, which can permanently change the player. Even if you are the author of the thread, you should remain courteous to your participants, but if you find need to bunny someone into or out of your thread, or bunny someone in the effort to advance the story, feel free to do so. It is your thread.

Important Note: Speech of all forms is action bunnying. Such speech should be kept simplistic, to the barest reaction, and I personally avoid it entirely. Speech bunnying can be very detrimental, putting words in another's mouth is never wanted. I avoid it entirely, by simply grouping all my issues into one long bit of speech and letting them respond to the entirety, and pulling up issues they missed later. If the topics are too far unrelated, I post quick bits of speech filled with some kind of description so as to keep it separated as well as keeping it interesting.

God Moding

God moding (or god modding as it is called by some) is when one player makes his character do something unrealistic in his favor, or presents himself as immortal. God moding is also when a character immunizes themselves from certain things, giving themselves an unfair advantage. When done, this ruins roleplay and makes a story rather one sided.

Role play is much like an unscripted movie, with a plot, characters, and different perspectives. As such, you will never see a movie (save those for 3 year olds) in which the protagonist, or hero, fights through an army without receiving a scratch, vanquishes all of his foes, and conquers a god without even so much as a smudge on his armor. Heroes have flaws, and they are constantly being injured and hurt. Your characters too should have flaws, use them, develop them, and work around them, and you will provide yourself an interesting storyline, and if you attempt to overcome these flaws you can make a dynamic character.

"I ran through the hall, dodging their shots, and pulled out my sword. In a single stroke i decapitated three men. picking up *PC1* by his neck, i hurl him into the wall knocking him unconscious, and leaving me free to grab *PC2* carrying her on my back, i run through the hall, dodging the gunfire of the remaining men and head out to my ship. My ship launches from the hostile battleship and is out of range before they can get their guns pointed at me."

This is god moding. it is quite impossible, quite unrealistic, and were someone to do something like this, the owner of the thread would probably request it be deleted.

God moding need not be so drastic, however, and while engaging in combat (something i will address in a later post) you should keep from god moding yourself into the victor.

"Sitting at the bar, I felt strange. As everyone looked at the newcomer, I leapt up into the pipes on the ceiling, and no one noticed i was gone"

This is also god moding. If he is sitting at the bar, there should be no pipes, and if he leapt up into them, SOMEONE would notice. This is giving your character an unrealistic advantage.

HOW TO AVOID GOD MODING:
Think of your character as what you define them. Zeitgeist said it quite perfectly to me, "You can make your character a three headed dragon, but not a three headed dragon that cannot be killed". Try to consider the events you describe and place yourself in it, from several angles, imagining what you see. The leaping up into the pipes and not being noticed may have been completely accidental, the author might not have thought it through that there would not be pipes on the bar ceiling. Had they, however, considered the place from an observer's point of view, they would have seen that had the character been placed between the observer and the newcomer described, the observer would have clearly seen the character leap up into the ceiling. Had they also considered what the bar would have looked like and thought about the ceiling, they would have seen how illogical that was.
Try to consider a situation from all angles, see what could be done to counter your actions, and try to give yourself logical reasons why they couldn't. The answer 'I'm too fast' or 'I'm too strong' is probably not a good reason why the countering action couldn't be taken and you should probably reconsider what you are doing.
Remember, no one is infallible, everyone makes mistakes, gets knocked down, takes a hit in battle. Your character is not exempt from this rule and it does not make them weak or stupid, it makes them realistic. If anything, setting your character up to fail from time to time is not a bad idea. Always failing, however, can be just as annoying as god moding, and it leads to an annoying 'I'm a loser' character that whines at every opportunity.
Sometimes its not a bad idea to allow your opponent a victory, and if you do not see a victory in clear sight in your own favor, do not push it and force yourself into it. Roleplay is not a game of wins and losses, its a game of playing your character well. Taking a loss from time to time can actually make you look better, and turning into an overbearing victory hound, taking over people's threads and beating them up in it, can make you look worse. If you are given a victory, rather than taking it, it is much more satisfying.

IMPORTANT NOTE: While it may be your thread, there is no reason you should dominate. Others should be courteous and allow you to progress the story as you see fit, but if you cant see a logical way to win, god moding is not the solution. If you god mode in your own thread, you can lose participants and readers, as well as story quality.

Staying in Character

I've used the term "staying in character" several times now without explaining it. here, folks, is your explanation.

Staying in character is one of the most important things to keep in mind while writing your RP. If you describe your character as an impulsive, hot headed man, you should not take something lightly with a laugh and let it roll of your chest, but explode in rage and retaliate. This is the issue i have dealt with while playing D&D, and it is especially difficult doing so for 8 different NPC's.

Tips for Staying in Character:

Outlining your character may help. Write down some basic features, 'prefers a sword' 'sensitive about mother' 'large and imposing' 'likes to take risks', that make your character individual. Write down anything you find outstanding about them, grudges, feelings, opinions, common reactions.

Outlining your surroundings may help, much like your character. Try to remember where you are, the features of your area. If you are in a tight packed hallway, you don't want to try to swing your sword in a full 360 degree arc, its impossible. Try to remember who is where. When possible, describe your surroundings as full as you can, leave nothing to question. I'll talk about this a bit more, but try to remember your descriptions, re-reading them as necessary.

Don't be afraid to act on a whim. If your character is impulsive, make them impulsive. If your character is calm and collected, make them think out their actions. Try to stay consistent and earn your character a reputation. Even though you don't specifically state what your character is you should design a role and fit your character into it. You can't have a constantly changing character, this doesn't lead to a good predictable role play.

Try to focus on some key aspects, what really defines your character. The minutiae can be worked out as you go, but you should define the main design of your character, if not written then at least mentally. Know your character before you type your first word, so you can ensure that you are consistent from beginning to end.

Its not a bad idea to plan things out. Have an idea of what is going to happen next and use the time between your next post to plan it out. Take time and figure out what your character would do, before you post. Don't go too crazy with your description of your character, you don't want to focus too intensively on one side of your character. If you overplay one aspect of your character you can get too involved in it and lose your storyline. This doesn't happen often, but in cases of those like Pallbearer (sorry to single you out but you are a GREAT example) they tread a fine line between random character focus and continuation of the story.

Remember your character's heritage, their emotions, their limitations. Feel free to act irrationally in some cases. If you are in love with someone, go ahead and do something stupid for them. If you haven't had a good night's sleep in 3 days, you aren't going to be thinking straight, go ahead and say something obvious and then do something pointless. Try not to focus on this too much, but a little bit can add some depth.

Remember, your character isn't a god, and you are going to get scared from time to time. Don't go launching an attack against a fighter wing of 30 enemies in a bold stand and then somehow survive with a barely functioning ship. That isn't going to make sense. Also, unless you are a coward, don't go fleeing from a fighter wing of 2 fighters. Of course, if you've got the girl you love in the ship and you don't want to endanger her life you can flee all you want, unless it would be in character for you to show off.

Try to keep all of these things in mind, and in the event that you bunny another player, keep that in mind.
Also, keep in mind that NPCs have emotions too. If you kill 8 of his buddies right in front of him, a Liberty guard is probably not going to stand there and watch you. He will either: become afraid and flee, or be thrown into a rage and attack you in hopes of revenge. Try to keep your NPCs as realistic as possible, give them things that cause them pleasure and things they are pursuing.

Always ask yourself, before you make your character act: Why would I do this?
If the only answer is 'because it would be cool' I don't think your actions are in character.

CONTINUITY NOTE: a lot of people continue one character in many RP threads. Do not change yourself in one thread without setting a chronological order to the threads first. Do not change the first thread if you already have posts in the second (regarding chrono order) with the change not present unless you plan on the change being temporary.


Dynamic Characters are wonderful, but they can be dangerous. If you change your character too much, you may end up with a stranger you don't even recognize, and if you aren't consistent in your change, you negate the effect entirely and add an air of question to your character.

Relationships
In higher psychology, it is said that we have no self without people around us, that the world is a myriad of mirrors through which we define ourselves.

Relationships, with other players or NPCs, are vital to staying in character. For example, my relationship with Tanya is that of a father to a daughter, even though she is far more dangerous, I place myself in positions of protection, covering her and defending her as I can. I assist her wherever possible but give her the freedom to act. Mostly I look out for her welfare. I would value her as an ally but more as a fellow outcast who I took in and helped. As can be seen in her roleplay, I have taken to placing myself in a position to assist her without taking the main spotlight, more of a defensive asset. My relationship with Zeitgeist, however, is more that of a serf to royalty. I practically worship the ground he walks on and even go so far as addressing him as 'my lord' I always try to keep this constant, which adds depth to my character.
Keep in mind your relationship, especially if it is one of adoration (or even love) and try to make it into a permanent one consistent throughout your RP.
As can be seen in my RP thread, my relationship with Markus is an important thing. I have focused on it, through our little exchange, and have illustrated our relationship without actually stating it. It is important that this relationship stay constant. If you are a beginner Roleplayer, it may be a good idea to leave your npc relationships rather ambiguous, so as to keep them simple and be able to develop your RP skills a bit before getting complicated. It is never a good idea to develop too many relationships all at once. You can't have a little orphan you take care of and a fellow pilot who is like a brother and a best friend who you owe your life to and a girlfriend all show up at once. You have to introduce your relationships one by one, focusing on each and developing it until you are satisfied before moving on to the next. Try not to flood yourself with emotion based on NPCs or other PCs because your character will end up suffering immense mood swings as the surroundings change.

Storyline

One of the most vital things to a RP thread is having a consistent moving storyline. An example of this can be seen in the Battleship Salvation and the Vipers Pit threads. In the BS thread, the storyline is one in which many characters can participate and it has brought a lot of people in, though it seems to lack a general direction and has led to people leading it where they see fit. This leads to a chaotic storyline, and if this is what you want, this is fine. The Viper's Pit, one of the infamous Bar Scenes, shows what a lack of storyline can do. when one is sitting in a bar, if one stays sitting in the bar, unless there is something extremely interesting to discuss, one will find themselves just sitting there...doing nothing. This is not good. Internal dialogue, character development, and descriptions are necessary, but there must be a balance between them and action.

Scripts:
Some people use a script for their RP, planning out every single move that will happen before it happens. In my career as a DM, I have learned that no one responds as you will expect them, and a script will tear itself apart unless the other person is acting by the same script. Scripts are a bad bad idea if you plan to involve other players. I personally refuse to script my actions, though I employ a different tactic.

Pre-Planning:
Not as binding as a script, this method is very beneficial. Without scripting every action, you can plan a general direction. For instance, whenever I begin a chapter to my Roleplay thread, I always know where it is going to end, or a general idea of where I want it to go. Do not bind yourself to a script, but don't let yourself fly free. This is one of the better (in my humble opinion) methods to writing a roleplay thread, giving you the freedom to act interestingly from post to post while providing you an overall direction. This is the method I employed while acting as DM, because it is impossible to guess what your PCs are going to try, you just have to be able to flow with it and have SOMETHING planned. A script can be written, but be prepared to abandon it should it become implausible.

Reality Show Planning:
The name I have given this method is really a pun. The 'reality' aspect of a reality show is that the people involved just act as they see fit, while the cameras roll, and no one has any kind of script. There is no planning whatsoever. This is just generally unplanned RP, letting your characters go where they want. For some people this works, they have the creative mind to make it work, without stagnating the story. For most, this doesn't work, and I personally have never been able to get it to work. Usually, this ends up in some random action, no consistent storyline, and just general chaos. I do not advise this for the beginning Roleplayer. Having an uneasy scripted feeling is better than having a chaotic unpredictable feeling.

Posting:

There are several aspects to the way you post, PoV, timing, separation of posts.
There are many ways you can vary these, pick one you like and run with it, but most importantly stay consistent. I personally have separated my RP into chapters, with headings and titles, the first entry of each chapter with merely a heading. For instance I have chapter 4:1 The calling followed by chapter 4:2 the calling: pain. This is a good way to separate your posts, and it adds emphasis on your posts over those of your participants. You can also leave your posts open without any kind of formal heading like that, or develop your own heading. Make it personal, make it your own.
PoV, or point of view, is important to your storyline as well. Decide beforehand what you want to go with and stick to it. There are two popularly used points of view, 1st person and 3rd person. There is also 2nd person, which is interesting but hard to use and it gives an interesting effect.

1st person: 'I did it'. This is when you speak for yourself, using 'I' 'me' 'myself', and describing things as your character sees them. In this point of view it is possible to state "I saw him disappear into thin air, without a trace, he vanished" without explaining that he disappeared via a trap door pulling him out of view faster than the eye could see. This also puts focus on your character over that of others, because only your character is 'I' where the rest are 'they'.

3rd person: 'he did it' This is when you speak from a detached point of view. I utilize this point of view myself. you describe things as they happen, and then you can point out how each person sees them. There is no 'I', and even the character you call your own is 'he' or 'she'. This allows you to then say "He activated a trap door, which pulled him out of sight faster than the eye could see. This appeared to everyone around him as if he had disappeared, and everyone was surprised by this."

2nd person: 'I saw him do it' This is when you speak from the point of view of ANOTHER person. This is hard to use in a role play, as your scenery changes, but it can also be useful. This gives an accent to the people around the person rather than the actual person, as they always seem to have one person around them. You speak from the point of view other than the person you control, presumably an NPC, so it provides you with a skewed view. You can misinterpret your own actions, and give a different perspective than that of your character on each event. This is very difficult to do, and it is not advisable. If you choose to do it, be prepared for a challenge, but you can provide an interesting and unique point of view to your story.

Swapping PoVs. This is a bad idea. It can be used to offer some kind of accent on something, switching from 1st to 3rd to symbolize a feeling of detachment. These switches, if done wrong, can provide a bad feeling of inconsistency to your RP, and its advisable you not do this. Go ahead and try it if you think you can do it well, it isn't a significant feature, though it can detract from your thread.

Timing of posts: If you notice, after the post that I ended with 'Markus that's ingenious you have outdone yourself this time' it took me about a week to post the results of what made my character say that. This was to build suspense. I only ever post once or twice (at most) a day, with at least 4 hours of separation between them. Don't post every 15 minutes. This will degrade your posts down to short posts, one liners, making them less significant. The more you can fit into one post without advancing the story too far, the better. Put some time between them, make the readers anxious for the next post, and give your participants a chance to respond. In the event you are a participant, only post as often as the main owner of the thread. If 3 participants post 18 times in 5 minutes, with the thread starter/owner posting once in that time and 2 other participants not being online to make a post, this will tear the storyline out of the owner's hands and leave the other participants in the dust. There is no rush, relax, take it slow, its not a race to see who can get their thread the longest.

When participating in a thread:
If the thread is not yours, DO NOT ADVANCE THE STORYLINE ALONG ANY ROUTE OTHER THAN THAT GIVEN BY THE OWNER. If the owner ends his post attacking a battleship, you should not, by any means, end yours with you and him sitting on curacao relaxing to some gentle music. Let the owner develop the storyline in his own intentions, assisting only where you can. Advancing the storyline is not a problem, and if you contact them first, advancing it in a new direction can be helpful. For instance, in Tanya's thread, she had stagnated after being knocked out by the guard, and i asked her if i could rescue her and get the four of us off the battleship. She said yes, i did so, and this rescued a potentially stagnating storyline.

Try not to incapacitate your character for too long. Don't leave him at the mercy of others, this will force other players to run your roleplay and rescue you, which makes it not so much your thread as their thread, and you have no control of the furthering events. Go ahead and pass out but be awake by the next post, if not in the same post. It is not a good idea to be unconscious at the end of your post. Remember, your post can describe .05 seconds time, or one week of time, as long as you state the amount of time passed. Saying something like -2 hours later- in the middle of your post will allow your character time to wake up and then you can determine what happened while you were out. IF you are unconscious at the end of your post, there is no telling where others will carry it.

Descriptions:

These are some of the most important features to a role play, but they can also ruin your roleplay. The descriptions of items, scenery, actions, and characters tell your readers and your participants what is going on. If you say something like 'i am in a room' that tells them nothing. But if you go into full detail you might say "i am in a large round room. It is about 30 feet in diameter, and it is slightly oblong, so it is longer than it is wide. At the one end of the room, a pair of tapestries flank an altar, upon which rests a pair of matched candles. The candles are not lit but they look as though they have been before. The tapestries are striking images of battles with a blue background, and in both there is one man standing above everything holding a shining light. The walls are relatively plain, stark white, and there are no doors but the one behind me, through which i just entered. There are 3 rows of pews and a small pulpit at the end. The ceiling is a dome, with an open center, allowing the light to flow in. The walls are not metal, but plaster, as buildings used to be made out of. The floor is polished white marble, with gold inlay making delicate patterns. In the center of the room, between the pews, is a very rich Yellow carpet with gold trim." Now, of course, both work, but if you go with the first, you might end up with someone running across the room (straight through the pews you didn't describe), or describing it in some other way, and you readers have no idea you are in some kind of a church. If you go with the second, however, there will be no question whatsoever as to what is in the room, but your readers might grow bored and skip over it. It is important to find the right balance between descriptions.

A time and a place for everything:
Sometimes, descriptions are inappropriate. For instance, if you are in an action filled scene, running down streets, turning corners, evading enemies, ducking into buildings, brushing past people and coming out the other side of the building, you do not want to describe the clothing of the person you bumped into in full detail, nor do you want to describe the interior of the shop you just ducked into. However, if you come to a stop facing an amazing palace, and you stand in awe of its beauty, it is disappointing for you just to stand there gawking and say "it was pretty". In such a situation a full detailed explanation would be appropriate.
There is a general feel to where your descriptions will be appropriate, and as you become more advanced, you will learn when it is right to tell people what. Until you get this feel it is good to follow a few simple guidelines:
* Describe only what is relevant. If you are in a room and there is a picture on the wall, but it is a picture of something not at all relevant to identifying the room or the story, don't talk about it. If there is an important aspect to the room, such as the fact that it was a chapel in the example i gave, include this!
* Don't describe things until they come into play. If you enter a house, describe the room you are in, not every single room of the house. If you feel the need to describe every room, have your character walk through the house, describing the rooms as he enters. If your character has a sword, describe only the scabbard while it is sheathed, and describe the actual blade when it is drawn. This gives a feeling of revelation, your readers learn about the blade as it is shown to the people in the RP, rather than knowing about it before hand. this can create suspense.
* Do not describe people who are bland or irrelevant If the merchant you are haggling with is just a merchant and haggling with him is only something to give you a pretext to be somewhere, don't worry about describing him much. If the merchant is extremely wealthy and he is an important character and is wealth is relevant, describe him lavishly, including details about how expensive his clothing is. Use your descriptions to give insight to your NPC's
* If your character is in a hurry, running through a hallway, do not describe anything. Give the most basic information possible and still stating everything relevant, without going into detail. If they are walking leisurely, taking time to notice everything, describe things in full. Example: if a character runs down a hallway with a picture frame in the middle, they aren't going to notice who the picture is of, so do not describe it at all, merely state there is a frame. If they walk down the hall and take time to study the picture, describe the people in it, their poses, the background, the kind of frame, everything your character is noticing.
* If your character is lost in thought, thinking or concentrating hard on something, don't describe anything, its not relevant.
* Do not interrupt action Describe something at the beginning or at the end of action, or very briefly in the middle if the beginning and end are not plausible. Descriptions interrupt the flow of action, and they do not belong in the middle of it. it is ok to describe the sword as it is being held, but if the sword is being swung at you, you shouldn't describe it.

Depth of perception:
When it comes to in depth descriptions, where you want to really describe something as much as you can, try looking at something similar first. if you are describing a room, look around your room, see what you notice. As an example, looking around my room, i notice: The color of the walls, the curtains, the texture of my walls, the wall hangings, the lighting, the pieces of furniture in the room, the contents of my shelves, the stuff sitting on my furniture, the scars in my walls from past things being hung, the clutter on my notice board, the stuff on the floor, the texture of the floor, the color of the floor, the amount of walkable space, the size of the room, the location of the exit(s), the location of the trash cans, the defining furniture (what gives it away that it is a bed room and not a living room or a bathroom). Then, of course, regarding each different item i can do this, for example, the wall texture (one of the less intuitive things), i can describe: The pattern of it, the shadows produced by it, the overall feel of the wall, any flaws in the texture, the estimated origin (where/how i think it was textured) of the texture, the composition (what it's made of) of the walls. If you do this with key things, you can produce an immensely in-depth description.
If i were trying to describe a sword, and i knew little about the sword i was trying to describe, a bit of research might help. At very worst, i could google some images (i actually use yahoo because i prefer it) of swords and compare them, picking out what i want. This will also show you what is important which varies in a sword: Blade length, hilt length (one or two handed), pommel stone/design, Blade shape, hand guard shape, Design where hilt meets blade, And any other variation you see. This will help you envision the sword you want to describe and then be able to describe it.
A few key things to keep in mind when describing anything: Color, texture, composition, shape, design (engraved, carved, painted?). If any of this is unique, or even important, be sure to mention it, though that does not mean that if it is only a side detail that you should not mention it.

Participation:
If you are participating in someone's thread, it is a good idea not to include any descriptions of any area the person is already in. IF you enter a new area, bring them into a new area, or are the first to talk about any given item, then a description can be given. But were i to butt into someone else's thread and try to describe his whatever it is he totes around, that would be completely unacceptable. If i felt that his description of the whatchamacallit was inadequate, it is not my place to describe it for him, but rather i could request he say more in the DRD or in PM.
If an item or place has been mentioned before by the author, they probably have something in mind for it, and it is a good idea to leave it alone, don't describe it, let them do it. If you feel the lack of description is keeping you from acting, do not post and request they describe it more on grounds that you are unsure how to base your actions.

Atmosphere:
Descriptions are the most powerful way to give an atmosphere to your thread. If you want a certain part of it to be scary or imply your character is on edge (or being brave in a scary situation for that matter) focus the way things cast shadows, eerie designs you see, dark objects, bad weather, so forth. If you want the atmosphere to be light and happy, describe bright things, pleasant things, such as a bright red car or a cute brown bunny rabbit. In either case, do not describe things that hinder the atmosphere, such as describing in detail a bunny rabbit while you are trying to add an intensely scary feeling. Bunnies aren't scary.
The atmosphere of your thread is something to consider, but only when you feel comfortable with the way your roleplay is going. If you are still unsure about how you roleplay, do not worry about atmosphere. Trying to learn too many things at once is detrimental, and while atmosphere adds to your roleplay, it is not vital.

Location, Location, Location:
Descriptions of locations are important, but only so important as the location is itself. Spend about as much time describing it as you intend to stay in it. Don't write a 1/2 page description of a hallway you walk into and out of in about 3 seconds. Conversely, don't write a 2 sentence description of your house, which you permanently live in. The relevance of the location also affects it. Even if you spend only 3 minutes in a room, if you want to stress how lavishly decorated it is, or how run down and broken and unstable it is, do so with your description. Talk about how everything is made of gold or polished marble, and how everything looks like it would cost a fortune, and you will not have to say "i was impressed with how well decorated the place was".

Going overboard:
There may be a point where you go overboard with descriptions, and your thread degrades into nothing but descriptions. Remember, actions are important. IF your post is merely a description of something, it is probably not going to be very productive. Describe something as soon as it becomes relevant, and then leave it. Make sure you act either before or after your descriptions, to keep the story moving. Too many descriptions is worse than not enough, and it may scare people away, so avoid describing every little speck of dust on the wall.

Participating:

When you participate in a roleplay, it is important to know that you are not the most important person. The person to whom the Roleplay thread belongs is the most important person. It is essential not to dominate. There are some Roleplay threads which exist (the BS and the SoT logs for example) which are claimed by none, but are a group effort, and in such you should remember that still you are not the most important person. You can guide it in the direction you would wish but give the others a chance to turn it around if they need. Sometimes, you may not have the best ideas.

Keeping with the story:
Try to keep in mind that the author of the thread has intentions (most likely) for where the story is going, at least in the near future, and that your ideas may (most likely) conflict with what they have planned. Try to place your character's actions into a 'passive' setting, rather than an 'active setting. This is, act as you would, but try not to drive the story. when it comes to discussing things, (consider the scene in the SoT logs currently), this is your opportunity to put your feedback in. Tell the author what you think, in character, should happen, and how you would accomplish it. Do not state what WILL happen, however. "I think we should attack the battleship this way" rather than "we are going to attack it this way". Always, when Rping in someone else's story, offer suggestions rather than definite statements of what will happen. If the author decides against what you say, this makes your statement out of place and it reflects badly on the roleplay thread.

Rank, Role, And File
In some instances, your Character may be in a position of rank above that of the other characters, including the author. For instance, whenever Zeitgeist participates in my thread, he is in this position, being Admiral, while i am merely private, captain, or colonel (depending on time frame). This is a tricky situation. Zeitgeist has handled it well, though he was never asked to play a key participating role, he just sat back and came along for the ride, as was his prerogative. If you are in such a position, wait for cues from the author that tell you when it is the right place to give orders. In combat situations, with NPCs, it is understandable for you to take control and give orders, but in other situations, your orders may screw up what the author has planned, and short of mutiny, they cannot go against them.
When you do give orders, unless you have discussed it with them beforehand, it is a good idea to leave the orders as ambiguous as possible. Do not tell them the exact attack plan, time, and place for destroying the battleship, but rather, tell them the battleship is gonna be in this place at this time and they need to take it out. This lets them decide of the setting given is good enough or they would like to pursue a different battlefield, and it allows them to be creative with the attack plan. Try not to give such orders though, as an order to destroy a battleship would be storyline changing. It is a good idea to try to maintain a position of authority without asserting it. That way, the character does not have to rebel against it do maintain the intended storyline. Orders such as "do not go here", "protect this", and other such open ended orders are not a bad idea, because they assert your rank without forcing the story down a possibly undesired path. of course, do not randomly hand the author a jewel and say 'protect this', such orders do have to have some logical context. try to make it so your orders are to do what the character would have done anyway without making it sound like it is intentional. This gives the author no reason to feel like you are dominating their thread nor telling them what to do.

It's all about the entrance:
Do not just appear in a room. Do not sneak in without mentioning you snuck in and without giving anyone a chance to notice you. Do not announce your presence where you could have been detected. You want to ENTER the storyline, both in roleplay and in participation. This means, instead of saying you are already sitting at a table in the bar, enter the bar and sit down at a table. Someone who has read my posts before will know that i have broken this rule, in the failed ambassador's lounge, when i made myself already sitting at a table, after having announced that the me that came in was not me. This was in poor taste, i admit, though it was somewhat creative, but it shows that all of these guidelines are exactly that. they can be broken, based on circumstance or merely personal want. Your entrance is extremely circumstantial, based on what is going on in the RP, but keep in mind, surprise appearances are not a good idea in most cases.
Try to find a REASON to be where you are. If you are a liberty agent, do not appear in New Berlin to participate without a well thought out reason. If you cannot find a reason, do not join until the scenery shifts or you find a reason. If you are at a loss for a reason, you can ask me (i'm good at finding reasoning, turning events around, and random general descriptions, its from my D&D career), or what would be more advisable, is to ask the author. They may be able to help you (i may too, I dont mean to sound cocky, its just that i can help in this, and i know it.) figure out why you are where you want to be, and thus get you inserted. When you insert yourself, it should be like diving off the high board. You want to have a bit of a flourish and a display but in the end you want to quickly with as little of a splash as you can make. An ill timed entrance can lead to an embarassing belly flop and bring a roleplay down a bit.

A splash? what do you mean?
When i say make as little of a splash as you can, i mean do not change things too much. If you enter by coming in and saving the author from an army of demon machines about to kill him, you've made a big splash, but if you enter by coming up beside him and saying "i'm here to help buddy", you've not made as big of a splash. Essentially, you want the situation after you entrance to be as close to the situation before your entrance (save the fact that you are in it) as plausible. This does not mean, however, that your entrance must be static. You arent limited just to coming up beside the author, you can also begin to roleplay the fighting of the demon machines. In certain circumstances, a big splash is necessary. For instance, the author roleplays themself into a position where they are helpless on the ground, with an angry man holding a gun standing over them, killing the guy is an acceptable splash. But if they are imprisoned on the battleship, in that position, saving them from the guy, and then pulling them off the battleship and rescuing them IS too big of a splash. Instead, you could save them and announce that you have a ship and you can get them off, and allow them to roleplay it.
The reason you want to make as small of a splash as you can is because you don't want your entrance to change the story in a way that the author doesn't like, because the only way then to change it back would be to push you out (most likely) and it can put your character in a negative spotlight. If the author's intent is clear and you further the story just a bit, this is ok, but bringing the story ahead a great amount with your entrance and taking it down a turn that you wanted, is not ok.

Rolling the Play:
You want your entrance to be as seamless as possible. This is, in fact, a more advanced topic, but i feel it necessary. When you enter, you want to keep with the format that is being held. If you enter during a time of action, you want to enter in a very active way, not a slow, thoughtful way with a long dialogue. This goes conversely, you do not want to burst into a quiet meeting with a battle, just as you do not want to enter with a long soliloquoy during a battle. It disrupts the flow of the roleplay. Similiarly, when you participate you want to continue with the pattern, or change it in the middle of the post in a logical place. For example, if you are in the middle of a battle, in your post you should not be speaking thoughtfully with the person next to you, but if you pull them into a closet and hide you can have deep thoughts regarding it and maybe whisper something to them. This is a transition that the author should make. Avoid parallels within a thread, do not keep your story going even when you are separated from the author unless it is extremely relevant. In that event, keep it short, tell the basics of the events, only what descriptions are vital, and try to keep with the flow of the roleplay.

Breaking the dam, Flooding:
Flooding is just plain annoying. At MOST, you should have 2 posts to the authors one. IF the author is not on very often, and their posts are few and far between, do not continue the story with the other participants. You can make one post, respond to a post that responds to your post, and there you should draw the line. If there is 3 pages of non-author posts between each author's post, it is no longer their thread. In the time between their posts you can change a lot which will possibly ruin their storyline. Do not abuse the time between author's posts, be patient, try to keep at their pace. If you are constantly posting twice to the authors one post, you are posting too much. In some occasions, doubling up is acceptable, but you should have at most 150% as many posts as the author. An ideal amount is anywhere from 80% to 120%. Depending on the number of participants, you may have to scale back, if the author has 18 people aside from himself, you want to post at about 10% (that is one post to the author's 10) the rate of the author. This will still end up with the author's posts constituting only about 33% of the posts, but it will keep them from being overwhelmed by the participants. In such a situation it may be advisable to withdraw from the action for a bit and let a couple of the participants fall out of the story. Running a storyline with too many participants gets problematic and very quickly turns into a situation like the BS, where it is a public thread rather than a personal thread.

Patching the Dam: damage control:
Just because you follow rules doesn't mean the other participant(s) will. IF you see someone's thread being eaten up by flooding posters, putting a stop to it is very possible. make a very short, uneventful post, and end it with something like "And then we all turn to (author's name) and await his reaction" or "and then (author's name) steps forward to say something, we all wait quietly for her to speak". This will hopefully give the participants the clue that they need to shut the hell up and wait for the author to post. If it does not work the first time, a second repetition usually drives it home, and if not it will probably slow the action enough to give the author time to come back. This kind of signal is often ignored but when it isn't it can be powerful.

NOTE: All rules given by an author are to be followed in their thread by the participants. If the rules state no bunnying, it is forbidden, do not bunny, under any circumstances. Breaking these rules will quite possibly end in the deletion of your post and all subsequent posts. If the author states that only certain people are to be allowed in, and you are not on the list, do not join. If you are on the list, do not bring with you someone who isn't. The author has reasons for the rules, their own personal preferences, and you should respect them. In the even that rules are not posted it is generally understood that bunnying is a no-no, unless done properly, god moding is a BIG no-no (no one likes a god moder), and that it is ok for you to join as long as you have good reason.

Combat I:

Combat is seemingly essential to most roleplays. In some situations combat is completely inappropriate and in other places, pacifism is unrealistic and annoying. Knowing when to fight, when to run away, and when to negotiate is key to running a roleplay thread.
The most important part of combat is playing it fairly and realistically. Knowing when to fight is good, but knowing how to fight, and most importantly how to lose, is also important. For this matter, this topic is actually going to be split into two sections, one on when to fight and one on how to fight.

Knowing When to Engage an Enemy:

Like sheep before the slaughter:
It is not always a good idea to engage in combat. The most detrimental time to engage an enemy is when you find yourself completely outnumbered. For instance, in tanya's thread (the old one) when she was stuck on the ship, it would not be appropriate for her to try to engage the entirety of the bretonian crew. Her goal, instead, was to get away. This is realistic. Had she tried to claim that she conquered the battleship, took control of it, and used it to destroy the bretonian forces that remained outside, this would be major god-moding. This situation is most prevalent in participations. An author will surround themself and their participants with enemies (possibly including one or more participants), and see what they will do. In some cases, this is an interesting little side turn, such as if tanya were to surround me and her with enemies, and see what tricks i might pull. This gives her a chance to relax and gives me a chance to show off my creativity. In other instances it is because the author has something in mind to happen and wants to end a post with them being surrounded, to allow the participants to respond. In either case, if the participants decide to throw themselves into a headlong charge and attack the enemies surrounding and outnumbering them, they would be making a mistake. First of all, they are clearly not intended to engage the enemy. Second of all, engaging the enemy would be a death wish, and death is something noone wishes on their character. Not only that, but it is unrealistic, as in a real life situation one would be more likely to give up than to commit themself to a suicide charge.

Knowing when to run away is very important. Try to size up your opponents. Realistically, do you think you could take them out? Realistically, do you think you would have a good chance against them? If you cannot anser confidently yes, do not try to attack the opponent. For example: "I found myself faced with 14 armed guards. I knew that more were on their way." This is quite clearly not the appropriate time to fight. Rather, try to think of ingenious ways to get away.

Tricks traps and secret pitfalls:
Ok, so now you know when to run away, but not how to run away. The best method is to find some kind of way to distract your quarry, or simply a route of escape. Explosives, blocking your path, fleeing quickly to a starship, all appropriate. Be creative, and use your characters personal assets to your advantage. Do the unexpected, to set your pursuers on edge. For example, in tanya's thread, when lilly put me in the situation where i was faced by a long drop below me and a bunch of guards behind me, all wielding guns, i did the unexpected, grabbed her and threw myself down the hole. I used my characters long spoken of ability to ignore pain to my advantage, though it did give me a weakness, a delay in putting the gloves on and so forth. This is an acceptable form of escape.

One thing you DONT want to do, however, is make something up. Don't suddenly become a computer hacker when you've never mentioned it before just so you can hack the computer system and shut down the defences. Do not make up some kind of secret escape route, without having said anything about secret passages in the area you are in or the route itself. For instance, if you were in a facility that was rumored to have lots of complex secret passages and traps, discovering the wall next to you is holographic and ducking behind it to evade your pursuers is acceptable, but when inside a regular building, declaring the wall is holographic is god moding. If you intend for something to be somewhere, mention it BEFORE it saves you. If you intended the facility to have secrets everywhere, mention it, or have your character discover it and THEN have it come in handy. If you simply state it once it saves your character from an unpleasant encounter, it looks very derived and fake.

He who fights and runs away:
There are more than two options, fighting and running away. You can do a combination of both. This is a kind of complicated maneuver, fighting and then fleeing, and it might lead to god moding with a sudden shift to vulnerability. If the enemy you are up against is not CLEARLY going to trounce you, you might find it fit to fight a bit, but then decide that this isn't working out. It is good to sustain some kind of injury during this kind of fight, as it shows your enemy is in fact superior. "there were 8 guards in front of me. I had to get past them, so i launched into their formation, flooring two with a well placed throw. I brought my foot around in a hard arc into the chest of another guard, as two of them tackled me. I slammed into the wall hard, my head cracking against the wall. I saw stars, and i flailed around, my hands contacting men. I leaned forward and bull rushed the closest man down, landing on top of him. Rolling over, my vision cleared, and i was able to barely dodge a kick from another guard. leaping to my feet i tripped the guard who tried to kick me as he recovered from the kick, and fled down the hallway. I had made it to the other side of them, and that was all that mattered." This is an appropriate fight and run situation. In this situation, the character thought they could take the guards and was driven by desperation. Upon realizing the guards were too hard for them, very quickly into the encounter, they tripped one (blocking the others) and fled. This is an effective show of mortality without weakness, and they still achieved their goal, of getting past the guards.

6/1 with Trample, First Strike, Haste:
Fighting and realizing you aren't tough enough isn't the only alternative option. You can also go into the battle knowing you are going to lose if you try to fight it out. Pilot your light fighter against the battlehsip, scoring several hits against vital parts and damaging areas of it before turning to flee as the fighter groups deploy. If you go into the fight knowing you'd lose but still getting in a hit before the enemy can retaliate and then fleeing, you can add a certain opportunist aspect to your character. This way too, you can do some damage to your foes before fleeing, which is much more satisfying than losing and then fleeing. In this situation, however, it is tricky to maneuver yourself, as you require an enemy that would clearly dominate you with an open weakness that you can strike first. "I encountered her in the hallway. By her stance i could tell she was a powerful fighter, and i didn't want to fight her. By her lean form, i could tell she would be able to easily catch me. Pulling out my knife, i ducked under her first kick and stabbed her in the leg. Drawing my knife down hard, i rent her wound and effectively crippled her. Her cry of pain lasted not long, before she brought her elbow down hard on my back. Pushing her back with my mass, suffering another strike to the side, i flung her back and turned and ran. With the wound on her leg i knew i'd be able to escape her now" This shows mortality, and that the character knows quite clearly that they would lose. Needing a quick strike to set the opponent back, the character dives in and cripples the enemy, while suffering some heavy blows. This shows that the character is not afraid to take a bit of a beating, and it is quite clearly not god moding. The quick counter attack gives credit to the opponents fighting ability, while the wound provides an escape. This maintains realism while allowing the character to score a hit and run.

a 1/2 with Flying, First Strike, and Unrealism:
Try not to aim for this attack plan, only use it if it comes to you. Again, it is an opportunistic attack, it cant be planned from the beginning by the character, unless it is an assault on a base or something where the weaknessess could be sized up. The simple truth is you cant plan this attack form very well. It has to be something you realize while typing, that you could make a strike and flee. It IS possible to plan this encounter but its not recommended because it usually ends up sounding corny and derived, rather than realistic and unexpected. Take this action when you can, but not whenever you want. (in case you are wondering as to what the hell the titles of these two parts are, i'll explain that at the bottom)

Fight or Flight reaction anyone?:
There are times when you just aren't outnumbered, or you think you could take out a group of enemies. This brings up the question, "would my character fight in this situation?" The simple answer is go with what you want to do. The complex answer is consider your character, is it a fighting character or a diplomatic character? if you are a trader who flies a dromedary, i'd recommend not fighting. Consider your surroundings, what does your character have to lose, and are they in a 'home team' situation? Think about what your character's motivations are, their mood at the moment. Keep in mind all wounds, burdens, and other hindrances that may keep your character from fighting. All of this in mind, do you think your character would fight in this situation? It is not a hard call really, just go with what you think is most in character, because you do define your character after all.
If you cant decide what to do, put yourself in the situation. Given all that is going on, and the enemy before you, would you want to fight? Don't be cocky, and say "of course, i'd fight everything". This is a ridiculous approach. Think realistically, and do not be afraid to run away. Running away is not a sign of weakness, for it is truly better to have a character who flees than one who senselessly dies.

Final Notes:
First of all, regarding the titles, i usually make some kind of reference in my titles, either a joke or a citation. Sometimes, it is a play on words, such as "rolling the play" where i talked about fluidity of the roleplay...punning on roleplay. These particular ones are from Magic the Gathering (MtG), a Card game some of you may know. 6/1 means 6 attack points and 1 life point (to put it in laymans terms, its 6 strength and 1 toughness really -i think-), which is quite clearly unbalanced. This is an attacker who cant survive being hit back (as 1 is the lowest it goes). a 6/1 with trample, first strike, and haste, is one that is well known. If you play magic, i'll give you a hint: it costs 1 red mana and it dies at end of turn. The card is ball lightning, and it is so good its banned from tournaments and no longer produced. The reason i used it is because it is the epitome of the hit and run attack, a creature who comes out one turn, can immediately attack for hefty damage (first strike means its hard to hit back, you have to survive the 6 damage first), and dies as soon as its over. A 1/2 with flying, first strike, and unrealism is a joke. 1/2 with first strike is nearly pointless, and the only thing that would save that from is something akin to the 6/1. Having more defense points than attack points shows that this creature is not an attacker, and adding in flying makes it that less realistic. Unrealism is not a MtG ability, and it is meant mostly as a joke, ridiculing made up events.

Secondly, this didn't cover all of the combat topics, and the following one will cover the actual sequence of combat and how it should appropriately be dealt with.

finally, my format for this has changed a bit as i went, and i've finally found one i like. Following posts will be in this format, with individual topics blocked off with titles of their own, for easy reference. All examples will be done in green italics, titles in default bold, warnings and important features in red (possibly underline if its REALLY important), and other miscellaneous in orange. This is the way its gonna be from now on.

'In Character' Further Defined

It has been explained what staying in character means, and it was explained satisfactorily, but the previous explanation lacks a few major points. I'd like to begin with a few examples here. Keep your focus on Derek in the following examples.

I:
The two men faced each other, both intent on murder. Derek adopted his combat stance and braced for combat. Stepping forward quickly, Marek began with an open punch, easily blocked by Derek, who then brought his foot around in a kick to connect with Marek's side. Winded, Marek lashed out at Derek, striking him in the face solidly. Spun about, Derek lost his balance and impacted the wall, pushing off and using that force to drive a spinning attack, slamming his fists into Marek's body, and continued pressing the attack, driving marek back with punch after punch. A swift, forceful kick brought Marek's feet from under him, and Derek stood over him triumphantly. "You were a fool to challenge me, brother." he said, looking down at Marek with scorn.
II:
The two men faced each other, both intent on murder. Derek looked Marek in the eye and snarled. Marek approched quickly with a punch, which Derek swatted away easily. Slamming a foot into Marek, Derek winded him with one solid blow. Marek lashed out, bringing a heavy punch into contact with Derek's face. Off balance, Derek lumbered back, thundering into the wall forcefully. He pushed off the wall, bringing his mass spinning around, and two powerful fists pounded Marek's chest brutally. Derek pressed forward, slamming Marek back with several powerful punches. One foot swung heavily under Marek, bringing his feet out from under him. Derek towered over his fallen brother triumphantly and said "You are not fit to live, weakling."
III:
The two men faced each other, both intent on murder. Derek lowered his center of gravity entering a fighting stance. Marek stepped forward, swinging hard, but his punch was turned aside as Derek brought a swift kick up into his side. Marek lashed wildly and connected with Derek's face, knocking him back. Off balance, Derek used the wall to recover as he impacted it, pushing off into a swift spinning attack that landed two blows onto Marek's bulk. Driving forward with deadly swift attacks, Derek pressed Marek back. Deftly, Derek brought Marek to the ground with a fast kick, catching Marek off guard. Looking down, Derek said with a glare, "Fighting is not only about brute force, brother, but you were always too foolish to see that," and the contempt dripped from his voice.
IV:
The two men faced each other, both intent on murder. Derek gestured to Marek with an open palm that said 'come get some'. Marek punched at Derek, but be blocked it and returned with a kick to the gut. Winded, Marek punched Derek in the face, knocking him back into the wall. Derek came back around in a spinning double punch, pushing Marek back. Pressing the attack, Derek continued punching Marek, and then he kicked his feet out from under him. Standing over Marek, he said "I win, brother."

This shows just how powerful keeping in character can be. A character is not just a character by WHAT he says and does, but HOW he says and does it. In all 4 passages, the exact same thing happened, D faced M, blocking an early punch, kicking him, being punched back into a wall, pushing off into a spinning two-hand attack, punching him back, kicking his feet out from under him, and at the end it is revealed that they are brothers, and D says a parting phrase. Each of them, however, exude a different mood, and are very much different. in I, Derek appears to be by far the superior in combat, and it is a clash of two skilled fighters. He seems to be an average fighter, not leaning towards any specific techniques, and is otherwise unremarkable. In II, however, we see a very different combat scene. This is a clash of titans, two powerful men bashing each other with heavy blows, and one can almost imagine the ground shaking as they do so. The combat is much slower, though the passage is no longer. Derek pounds Marek into submission, clearly the stronger of the two, as this was a battle more of might than skill. In III, we see a combat sequence that is quite the opposite. Much accelerated, the combat sequence seems almost too short, as Derek proves that muscle is not the only asset in a fight. In this sequence, Derek is not necessarily portrayed as weaker than Marek, but the thought quickly comes to mind, and it makes the reader feel as if Derek is a much lighter, faster, more agile character than Marek, landing several blows to Marek's few, but packing less of a punch. Derek's combat form seems to prefer fast attacks catching the foe off guard and putting him off balance rather than landing solid, destructive blows.

Passage IV is the kind of thing i see commonly, and I dread it every time I do. It is, in a word, satisfactory, which is to say, it is nothing grand. One cannot infer anything about the characters, this could be any two people fighting, and the action is not terribly captivating. There are punches and kicks, but they are nondescript and the way the recovery attack is presented, it seems borderline impossible. The character Derek acts somewhat unprofessionally, and the description is very unprofessional. punch punch kick kick punch kick punch is really boring, and thats all there is in this combat sequence. It desperately lacks adjectives of any kind, and the combat progresses way too fast without reason.

Why is it like this?
All 4 passages begin with the same sentence, "The two men faced each other, both intent on murder." This is just an opening sentence and is not terribly significant, it would be expanded in an actual Role Play and i simply used it to set the scene for my examples.
Lets start with the preceding actions, Derek makes a movement before combat begins, to provide a flow of a sort.
"Derek adopted his combat stance and braced for combat". Derek adopts a combat stance, labeling him as a fighter, and because it is HIS combat stance, one expects him to have a unique or standard fighting style.
"Derek looked Marek in the eye and snarled". This gives a very different feel, Derek is angry, and it gives him a bestial quality. Imagine, for a moment, two Gorillas facing off, and i'm sure you may see one do exactly this. This also gives him a feeling of power, he is snarling at Marek, looking him in the eye, he is not in the least intimidated, and actually is more intimidating himself.
"Derek lowered his center of gravity entering a fighting stance." This is very close to the action of derek in I, but is also very different. Derek does not simply ADOPT a combat stance, he shows his combat stance to the audience somewhat. The center of gravity is an important bit of physics to many forms of martial arts, but especially so to those that focus on using natural forces against the opponent, rather than providing simple brute force. One expects more finesse now, rather than dead on combat.
Derek gestured to Marek with an open palm that said 'come get some'. Cliche, matrix-esque, and 'come get some'??? This is terrible, its been done a thousand times, and it doesn't fit anywhere in a roleplay. Dont do this, dont do anything like this, and never, ever, ever use the phrase 'come get some' in a respectable roleplay.
Now for the first attack, Marek's punch, and its counter attack, the kick:
Stepping forward quickly, Marek began with an open punch, easily blocked by Derek, who then brought his foot around in a kick to connect with Marek's side Martek steps forward quickly, punches, is blocked, and is kicked, all in the same sentence, providing an epic sort of rushed feeling right in the beginning, both warriors come forward in a flurry of blows right away. Granted, there is no flurry of blows, but this is part of the flow, and it is intended to be swift, but it is not rushed. Derek easily blocks Marek's punch. This is the first combative exchange, and Derek proves himself clearly the superior. 'An open punch' suggests that Marek does not know well what he is doing and has foolishly left himself open. Derek does not 'kick' Marek, but rather, brings his foot around in a kick, which is important to see. The kick connects, which does not give an indication of how much force, but it does say clearly that Derek has succeeded in his first attack, furthering that he is, clearly, the martial superior.
Marek approched quickly with a punch, which Derek swatted away easily. Slamming a foot into Marek, Derek winded him with one solid blow. This little bit just drips power. Marek punches, though notice there is no comment on how he punches, just that it is a puncht. This was done because the fighting techniques are not so important in this passage. Derek swats the punch away easily. He does not block, he swats it, showing he is clearly more powerful than Marek. This time, the punch and the kick are drawn into two separate sentences, giving a slight pause in the action, making it slower. Derek slams his foot into marek, winding him with a solid blow, all of which suggests that hes not poking him with his toe but really kicking him hard. Note how different this is than bringing his foot around in a kick which connects, showing it is more intent on the power of the blow than the technique of the blow, which is opposite the preceding passage.
Marek stepped forward, swinging hard, but his punch was turned aside as Derek brought a swift kick up into his side. Now Marek does not step forward quickly, and he swings hard, making him feel slower, but giving his attack more power. Derek does not block it, no no, we expect finesse and he provides, turning the punch aside rather than stopping it himself. This exchange is in one sentence, but there is one word which really makes it a fast sequence, the word 'as'. The punch is blocked AS derek kicks, allowing both events to take place simultaneously, or nearly so, and it is Derek who is doing this, making him seem very much faster than Marek. The kick is swift, but again, no indication of power, focusing most on the speed of the kick.
Marek punched at Derek, but be blocked it and returned with a kick to the gut. A punch, a block, and a kick. Whoop de doo, when its presented this way, its boring. Marek punched AT derek, giving the reader advance notice that its blocked, and ruining any bit of suspense that may have created. This sentence contains NO adjectives, and the sequence of action just slips by. The action rushes by but not with a feeling of speed, making this feel like a very short, pointless exchange. Bad bad bad! Don't do this!!!!
Now, Winded from the kick, Marek returns a blow to Derek's face:
"Winded, Marek lashed out at Derek, striking him in the face solidly." Marek's injury is now shown, and this is a very reactive attack. Marek lashes out, lacking all technique, this is more of an attack of desperation. The blow does connect, however, and it strikes him solidly, showing it was a powerful attack of desperation. This is a part which lacks any kind of technique, so in this passage, it is not described in terrible detail. All description focuses on the attacks which do show fighting prowess, furthering the feeling that these are skilled combatants.
"Marek lashed out, bringing a heavy punch into contact with Derek's face." Marek has been winded, but it was in the preceding sentence, as a part of the attack. This separates the two events slightly, allowing the reader to even see Marek stumble back a bit before returning with an attack. In this case, the lashing is not so significant, merely a type of attack, but it is a heavy punch cmoning into contact with derek's face. Notice that punch is used as a noun in this case, avoiding "he punches him in the face", which is entirely bland. It is a heavy punch, coming into contact, which gives Derek's face almost a stone-like feeling, as though he's been pounded hard but there is not real damage, just a forceful contact. If, of course, Derek were a weaker man, the heavy punch would most likely smash into dereks face, giving it a clear, destructive impact.
"Marek lashed wildly and connected with Derek's face, knocking him back." Marek lacks the finesse of Derek in this passage, so he lashes wildly, connecting with Derek's face knocking him back. This is a punch that did not even use the word punch, an example of how one can avoid punch punch kick kick. Derek is much lighter, so he gets knocked back as part of the attack, Showing that Marek is the stronger of the two, though he lacks the dexterity of Derek, as shown by his wild blow.
"Winded, Marek punched Derek in the face, knocking him back into the wall." Marek is hurt, he punches derek, derek runs into a wall. Oh boy. this took a possibly interesting part of combat and made it bland, using the boring old punch, and not even providing any suspense with the wall. This is lame.
Off balance, Derek pushes off from the wall coming around with a pair of blows to Marek. Following with the same momentum, he presses the attack with a sequence of punches:
"Spun about, Derek lost his balance and impacted the wall, pushing off and using that force to drive a spinning attack, slamming his fists into Marek's body, and continued pressing the attack, driving marek back with punch after punch." The entire sequence is packed into one sentence, which accelerates the combat and makes the pressed attack seem that much more ferocious. This shows Derek was spun about by the blow, and now he loses his balance and smacks into the wall. Without even so much as a aush, he pushes off and uses the force from it in an attack. This is what you would expect from a skilled fighter, he can take his lumps and keep on fighting, using anything to his advantage. He does a body shot, the easiest target, and he slams his fists into his body, showing that this attack is especially effective. Again, without a pause, he continues the attack, using every furthered blow to his advantage and pursuing him doggedly. Marek is essentially helpless, continuing with Derek's clear superiority.
"Off balance, Derek lumbered back, thundering into the wall forcefully. He pushed off the wall, bringing his mass spinning around, and two powerful fists pounded Marek's chest brutally. Derek pressed forward, slamming Marek back with several powerful punches." What the preceding passage did in one sentence, this one does in three. Derek lumbers back, thundering into the wall forcefully. he pushes off spinning his mass, and his powerful fists pound brutally. he slams marek back with powerful punches. everything screams big, powerful. In this he simply spins around and then punches, the attacks are not linked, and the over all flow of it gives a lumbering feeling, one slow pound followed by another, something like that of a lavablade as compared to a vengeance. Marek is being utterly destroyed, focus on the descriptions of the blows on him, hes brutally punched, slammed, this is not a couple love taps here.
"Off balance, Derek used the wall to recover as he impacted it, pushing off into a swift spinning attack that landed two blows onto Marek's bulk. Driving forward with deadly swift attacks, Derek pressed Marek back." Two sentences, but its supposedly faster than the first passage, which proceeds in only one sentence? Again, there is the word 'as' in here, and the word swift is used twice. This gives it a faster flow, even though the action is more separate. he lands blows onto mareks bulk, rather than his chest or his body, making marek feel that much bigger. The attacks are not specifically named as punches, though they are called swift and deadly, giving Derek a feeling of great speed and making him seem that much more dangerous. The ambiguity of the attacks actually works in the author's favor, allowing the reader to possibly see a monk-like character flawlessly interweaving punches and kicks or a boxer-like character punching with both hands very quickly.
"Derek came back around in a spinning double punch, pushing Marek back. Pressing the attack, Derek continued punching Marek, and then he kicked his feet out from under him." Lame lame lame. Again, theres few adjectives, and its punch punch kick here. 'a spinning double punch' sounds not only lame, but ineffective and makes the author looks like he knows nothing about what hes writing. Then he punches him more and then out of nowhere, in the same sentence kicks him. A series of punches and then a trip do not flow together in combat, though this organization tries to make them. It simply breaks the flow of combat and leaves the reader even more frustrated at the author. again, avoid this, its bad!
Derek trips his brother, and looking down at him offers final words:
"A swift, forceful kick brought Marek's feet from under him, and Derek stood over him triumphantly. 'You were a fool to challenge me, brother." he said, looking down at Marek with scorn.'" A swift, forceful kick shows Derek to be a balanced fighter, and again notice kick is a noun, not a verb in this sentence. Derek stands over Marek triumphantly, clearly the victor. His words show they are brothers, and they show with their scornful tone (both in the words themselves and the description of it as scorn) show that Derek knew the whole time he was superior, but he is disappointed in his brother's performance.
"One foot swung heavily under Marek, bringing his feet out from under him. Derek towered over his fallen brother triumphantly and said 'You are not fit to live, weakling.'" The foot swings heavily, not using the word kick anywhere, the attack again shows the mass and power of the attacker. Derek towers over marek, showing he is the larger of the two, and accenting his size. He refuses to acknowledge the fact that this is his brother with his words, his angry tone (from the snarl) being carried over, so that fact is placed skillfully in the preceding action. The final word 'weakling' again brings accent on the fact that it was a contest of might, not skill, and that Derek clearly won.
"Deftly, Derek brought Marek to the ground with a fast kick, catching Marek off guard. Looking down, Derek said with a glare, "Fighting is not only about brute force, brother, but you were always too foolish to see that," and the contempt dripped from his voice." Showing finesse as usual, the words deftly and fast are used. Notice that in this one, Derek is not kicking his feet under him, but bringing him to the ground, a subtle difference that further corroborates the finesse aspect of Derek's character. Then, of course, his comtemptful words show his character knows that finesse is the key to combat. Again, his words assert superiority in the specified aspect which plays a big part of the character.
"Pressing the attack, Derek continued punching Marek, and then he kicked his feet out from under him. Standing over Marek, he said 'I win, brother.'" Could you get any more anti-climactic than this. If you have a roleplay, and a battle is won, never, ever, have one of your characters say 'i win'. The inclusion of the word 'brother' gives it a derived feeling, like the author wanted to make it known but couldn't find a good place for it and just stuck it there for convenience. bad bad bad!

The immense differences in the four passages which describe the EXACT SAME SEQUENCE OF EVENTS shows the power of being 'in character'. Keep in mind who your character is, as well as who the characters around you are. Dont have a dignified man trip on his shoelaces, and dont have an idiot outwit a genius. Especially if those put on the bottom of the situation are not your character. Even if they are, and you just want to make it happen because its funny, dont, its not funny, and it makes your character look stupid and ruins any effect you may have built up through your roleplay.
Falling out of character for comic relief or just simply to make your character look 'cool' is a big action killer and makes it look very bad. Try to avoid it.

Consistency

At the request of a colleague i have decided to do an issue on consistency.

One of the most important things to remember when making any kind of post in a roleplay thread is that it be consistent. Was that fighter a corsair or a hessian? Was he standing at the bar or sitting in a booth? Did she leave or did she just say goodbye and walk to a different part of the room? All of these questions are important, and if one forgets to ask them, it can lead to a roleplayer being shoved down a path they didn't intend to take.

Time and Place:
Keep in mind the time flow of time. If your partner describes an event happening in a matter of seconds, filing your taxes and finishing at the same time is a bad idea. This is an extreme example but it shows my point. Keep things flowing at the same rate, don't diminish a long battle and don't overextend a short exchange.
Also, know where everyone is. Don't be afraid to read back to figure things out. IF someone leaves the room, you don't want to roleplay walking over to talk to them, unless you have also left the room and have searched them out. If a fight happens in sigma 13, and you are in omega 5, don't roleplay flying by the scene of a fight, that is just discordant. Also, keep in mind travel times. Don't arrive at the sigma 13 fight in 5 seconds, travel takes time!

Specifics, Details, and other Useful Tidbits:
Don't run from the Liberty Navy if your partner mentioned the arrival of Kusari law forces. You have to keep in mind specifics. Whenever you go to roleplay an even that was previously described, make sure you have the facts straight. Reread any event you wish to replicate carefully, pay attention to little stylistic nuances. Refer to my 'in character' section immediately preceding this to see the nuances i'm talking about. If there is anything you can pick up from the writing, make sure what you say doesn't go against it. Ensure you have your facts right, double check what you've written to what your partner said. The rule of thumb is "he who posted first was correct", so if you have a pre-existing post to work from, make sure you match completely! Read carefully before, truth-check after, and if you have any doubts, even check while writing the post. I find it useful sometimes to open the post in a new window, and place them side by side so i can go directly between them. Other suggestions include printing the post in question and composing your post in a word document with the preceding post above it. Whatever it takes, make sure you get your facts straight. For anyone who thinks double checking is stupid, or pre-reading is a waste of time, I personally make sure I always do it, and sometimes I actually find where I've made a mistake. As far as spelling hard names or titles, don't be a hero. I have a knack for spelling hard words and I find certain things to be difficult myself. Use the clipboard. It saves time for you and it keeps you from ever spelling it wrong. (select the word, hit cntrl+C to copy. then use cntrl+V to paste wherever you need the specified word.) If there is a word you are unsure how to spell, but someone has spelled before you, you have no excuse there either, use the same trick!!!

It came from Deep in Left Field:
This happens to everyone. Its unavoidable, but it happens all too often, and all too catastrophically. It is the result of not reading it fully, and it often leaves any reader confused as to what just happened. As an example, the first poster may talk about defending a battleship, and blowing up a couple fighters. Then, a ship tailing the author blasts his hull near to oblivion and warning signs go off. The response that follows is that a second person witnessess a single fighter attacking a fleet of battleships and blowing a couple up. attacking the battleship the second person is on, he deals it heavy damage making warning signs go off, and he begins to tail them. The second post was completely confused as compared to the first one. battleships appeared out of nowhere and died, and instead of guarding them, the pilot was attacking them. A reader won't know whats going on, who is where, and if the people are even in the same universe. abstract and bizarre errors happen all the time. Make sure you have the facts straight! skimming a post in a roleplay is ok, but if you intend to post following it, make sure you read it carefully! if there is anything you are unclear on, do not guess!!! guessing is bad, you are usually wrong! Ask the person! most roleplayers are kind enough to clarify, especially when it involves a thread that they are author of! If something seems a bit far-fetched to you, or you aren't sure you understand something completely, ask for clarification! don't be afraid to, its ok, sometimes writing gives the wrong impression. People who constantly make left-field remarks are quite annoying to roleplay with, and tend to kill threads. Don't be a left-fielder, READ WHAT YOU INTEND TO RESPOND TO!!!!!

Divinations, Intuition, and the magic of the Sixth sense:

When running a thread, as most author's know, people usually have a general intent for the thread. It can be anything as simple as "I want a big battle in this system" to as defined as "I'd like first to head to curacao where i meet this person and then I want to be engaged by space pirates here, and then i...etc etc." In either case, through the author's posts, a general intent can (hopefully) be divined. When dealing with a second participant in the thread, it is your choice whether you should honor their intent, but if it is the author, you MUST do so (granted there is no rule set in stone, but its very rude not to). Picking these little signs up isn't hard. You simply have to look past what you want. If they run away and say you lose sight of them, they obviously intended to get away. If they walk into a room and meet an unnamed person, whereupon they draw a weapon, they obviously intend to have a fight in a following scene, or some kind of tense interaction, so coming in and saying "Wait wait, can't we all just get along" is clearly not with those wishes.
Granted, sometimes the intents of the author may be vague, but in many instances, you can tell what the author wishes simply through their post. Look for subtle hints, things said, or things indicated. A sure sign that an author does not have intent for an instance is if they leave it half off in the middle. If, instead of running away and then explicitly stating that the pursuer loses sight of them, they begin to run away and then end their post, they obviously intend to leave it up to the pursuer as to whether he chases them. If they explicitly state he chases them, again, it shows intent, and the pursuer's post then should follow suit. Such signs can be obvious or subtle but they are always there. Keep an eye out for them.

Group Roleplaying

Almost everything i've mentioned so far in this guide has been in-general stuff about roleplaying on your own. I haven't yet written a bit on combat between players, though that may quickly follow this one. Now its time to get to one of the more fun aspects of roleplay, that you only really encounter in a situation like this, interactive and reflexive roleplay.

A Clash of Titans
When two characters who oppose each other in any way, be it by faction or by simple verbal argument, meet, they begin an encounter that must be resolved before the story can continue. For this resolution there must be a winner or a tie of some form. Keep in mind that this can include anything from physical combat to a game of chess to trying to get to Freeport 9 first. In general, the winner of an encounter (an encounter ranging from a momentary meeting to a possible recurring opposition) is almost always decided before the encounter begins. The author of the thread usually comes out on top and they'll indicate if they don't intend to (if you see an author prepare a back door, try and give them a chance to use it), and if it is two non-author characters coming into conflict, usually the one more closely aligned with the author wins. This is a generally accepted rule, and you should never try to rebel against this. Note that if your victory is especially detrimental to the author (such as killing their best friend or blowing them up) then it is highly likely that they don't want you to win.

Taking a Hit: The Win Reflex
It is common to want your character to come out on top. Every roleplayer would like their character to be admired and loved by everyone, and would like them to have a blemish free track record, but to tell the truth, this is impossible, unrealistic, and extremely annoying to other roleplayers. Sometimes a player has to take a hit, lose a fight, fail a mission, or just plain admit defeat. Players who don't know how to do this usually end up surrounded by 200 expert ninjas and make their character somehow able to escape. This is annoying, if you always try to come out on top it just leads to improbable events and eventually god moding. Learn to take a dive, and do so willingly, it adds depth to your character, lets you show a bit of emotion, and you can be creative in how you deal with the loss. If you ever find yourself contesting another player who keeps blocking your movements and trying to come out on top with you, you'll realize just how annoying it is, and the best course of action is to just let them win, before the situation escalates.

Giving out a Hit: The Cheat Reflex
When you know its your character that is going to come out on top, there is a drive to make it a flawless and complete victory. To win a fight without getting hit, to completely outmaneuver an enemy, basically to stomp them into the ground without making the slightest mistake. This is bad. James Bond always gets beaten up in one way or another in the middle of the movie. Learn to give and take. Maybe they are able to get close to the president and get set up but you manage to catch onto their plan and evacuate the president in time, and then they lose your trail. Instead of blocking them entirely from getting near the president, you let them 'win' that little battle but claimed the war for yourself. Even though getting near someone doesn't seem much like a 'win' it is almost surprising the number of people who would naturally find themselves blocking off every path to the president in entirety without any thought of fairness. Always try to let your enemy get close enough to taste victory and steal it away from them. As long as you both understand who is intended to win (and remember you don't always HAVE to win, its ok to lose, i promise) this won't be a problem. A private rant: One of the most common 'cheats' out there is the interception of transmissions. It is NOT ok to intercept another person's transmission that they intend to be private. You don't always have to know exactly what your enemy is planning, figure it out as you go, react to them, its ok, you can still come out on top. Granted you can realize that there was a transmission, or perhaps pull ONE transmission out of the air, but not a ton. Remember that everyone uses encoded lines and they don't broadcast it. Private transmissions are intended to remain private, and violating that is borderline god-moding.

Being in the Same Room as Another Character: What do you do?

There are three different types of roleplay for when you find yourself in the same room or same area as another player. These situations are tricky because as your character acts, you have to remember that their character is acting as well, and this is something you can NOT forget.

Interactive Roleplay:
The first type of roleplay involves a direct and constant interaction between two players. The most common forms of this are a conversation and a fight. In the case of either, you have to remember to give and take, don't completely dominate the action and expect them to fill in the blanks in their post, it leads to choppy roleplay. perhaps throw a punch or make a statement and have them reply with a kick or a question (obviously the respective pairs go together, dont be silly about this). Try also to avoid the back and forth repetition. Throw two blows at once, or give a bit more of a speech. Remember that you aren't the only one in the conversation, so where you talk more than your partner (or launch more attacks) remember to have your partner do the same at a different time. It is best, in these kinds of roleplays, to collaborate with your partner, or know their character very well, so as to be able to continue the action in a long stream rather than breaking it up in a set of small posts back and forth. Also keep in mind that in your post you don't actually have to dominate. you can lose! its not a bad thing.

Reactive Roleplay:
The second kind of roleplay is somewhat similar to the first but also very different. It is a broader kind of scenario, involving a reaction to another player in some form. Conversations can (but are advised against) be carried out in reactive roleplay, each person saying one thing and waiting for the other to reply, but this leads to large speech following large speech which is very awkward to read and write. reactive roleplaying is best used in situations where there is not such a direct interaction as a causal interaction. That is, instead of punching him, perhaps you are able to key in a door lock that traps him somewhere. You can think of it in terms of distance, if you are within 3 feet of the other person, it is most likely that you are going to use interactive, and if you are beyond 8 feet it is most likely that you are going to use reactive, anywhere between is even up. Keep in mind this is a rule of thumb and not a governing law, and after a bit of practice it becomes clear which situation warrants which roleplay.

Responsive Roleplay (3rd Party Roleplay):
Being in the same room doesn't mean being face to face, or even having to interact with one another. I can sit in the back of the room and watch you the whole time without doing anything at all. This form of roleplay is responsive roleplay, and it often leads up to reactive or interactive roleplay. Responsive roleplay is best left short, and brief. You don't want to spend 3/4 of your post watching someone before you actually act, that is like staring at someone in the middle of a conversation for a minute before doing anything. Keep in mind, when you are watching and responding, that you don't need to detail their actions or show you know what is going on, they've already given the details its fine to leave things vague and just respond to them. One of the most important things in a post with this is to either segue into some form of personal action, be it with the observed or a 3rd party, or that you provide some form of personal reaction to them, even if it isn't an outwardly exhibited one. Try to avoid stating the obvious and try not to act like you know everything they've said in their post simply by observation. A lot of what is mentioned once need not be mentioned a second time, i cannot stress enough that this should be brief. On a personal note, i do not find anything more annoying than reading the same post twice, but the second time rephrased as someone watches it happen.


Ok, so now i know about this kind of roleplay, how do i use it?

This is a very good question, and the answer is simple.

Step 1: Identify who you're involving:
Figure out who you intend to react to and act with, and who you intend to be observing. You need to know beforehand so you can plan ahead, and make sure everything is accurate.

Step 2: Read their post:
Always, always, ALWAYS read the last post of everyone involved in your current post, at least once, all the way through. You simply cannot make your own post without reading theirs, and if you do you'll most likely piss a couple people off.

Step 3: Re-read their post:
The first time you read their post it was for content. Now you need to check on a couple important things. 1) Where they are and what they're doing. If they leave off with them in the back of the bar in a booth and you sidle up to the bar and start chatting with them, you have a bit of a problem. 2) Who they're with and how they're interacting. Don't ignore a person's companions, its rude and annoying. mkae sure to take every character nearby into consideration rather than just the ones who you intend to actively work with. 3) what they're aiming for. Check what they're setting up, what you think their next action is going to be (NOTE: Theres a big difference between what you THINK their next action is going to be and what you WANT their next action to be. Know the difference!!!) A writer will usually leave hints lying all around, not necessarily intentionally, as to what they intend to do. Try to figure this out.

Step 4: Place your character into the scene:
Ask yourself, what would he/she do if they were there? Try to work out the most realistic response, not necessarily the most valiant response. Figure out all the possible actions they could take and which ones they'd most likely want to take. Keep in mind, its your character and you can do whatever you want with it, but try to be consistant. Also, keep in mind that just because YOU know something from reading the other's post, doesn't mean your character does. They didn't get to read the post, so they don't know exactly what the other person is thinking, and they didn't see the bold statement that the 'dagger is hidding in my boot'. Granted, they may see the dagger anyway, but they'd have to have a good reason and its just bad juju if you try to do something like this.

Step 5: Figure out the best course of action:
Now that you've put your character in the seen and figured out what they would probably do, figure out what kind of actions and reactions from the crowd and your character best suit the current story and the other's expressed intentions. Keep in mind the implications on the story, the expressed desires of the author, and the limitations of your characters. Avoid god-moding and don't infringe on the author's intent by messing things up for them, thats just not kosher. Once you've figured out what works the best in the story, put it to use.

Key Concepts

1) You aren't god, you make mistakes, and its ok!
2) its ok to lose! do it from time to time, it builds character!
3) Don't ever win without taking a loss, its not cool.
4) don't fight for dominance, accept a loss from time to time to avoid conflict.
5) ignore the urge to cheat.