Role-Playing on Designing Virtual Worlds

(Continued) Polly’s Tale

Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000

Why won’t they role-play?

Everyone is in the same real-world room. Everyone can see each other in real life. They’re in MUD, but only shallowly; they’re still connected in Reality. Everything they do in the virtual world is subject to the same peer pressure as in the real one, because they still feel like they’re their real selves. They’re constrained.

Yet I’ve played D&D. I know that people can be connected in the real world and still role-play. MUD offers even more opportunity to experiment with identity—precisely what my friends seek. So, why won’t they step over the line?

Postscript

Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000

Did any of this help my friends?

To be honest, probably not—it was by then too late for most of them. It did help denerd those that followed, though.

It also set a lasting precedent: Virtual worlds are seen as acceptable shielding contexts. To this day, playing a character in a virtual world with a gender different from your own does not suggest anything about your sexuality—just your readiness to spread your wings and fly.

On Being Others

Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000

I told Polly’s tale for three reasons:

To illustrate the importance of identity exploration in virtual worlds, and the emptiness of a world without it.
To demonstrate how something that many designers take for granted as part and parcel of virtual worlds has a real-world beginning.
To counter the popular notion among some researchers that MUD1 was written by a couple of one-dimensional hackers whose only aim was to provide a medium for adolescent males to live out fantasies of bloodthirsty violence ¹.

The Role-Playing Paradox

Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000

Experienced players will sometimes speak of “wearing” a character, like they might wear a mask. The freedom of revealing less of their outer selves can lead them to reveal more of their inner selves. They can, therefore, learn more about their inner selves, and change their character so it fits more comfortably. Ultimately, their inner and outer selves line up, and character becomes persona.

This is often described as role-playing. It is not. Role-playing is about assuming a role and maintaining that role. The role doesn’t change; if the character changes, it’s only for reasons that make sense for that character, not for the role-player.

Soft Role-Playing

Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000

Role-playing in virtual worlds is one of those concepts that is inherited from “parent” virtual worlds without a great deal of thought as to its nature. Consequently, over the generations it has become less understood. There are honorable exceptions—particularly among TinyMUSHes—but for the most part virtual worlds have a fairly relaxed idea of what constitutes role-playing.

One of the tenets of role-playing is that role-players must have a role to play. It doesn’t matter per se whether these roles are created by individual players or they’re assigned by some referee. Players usually like to create their own characters, but in practice most settings have constraints on the roles people can play (no cowboys in the court of Louis XIV). A midway position is therefore usually adopted where a number of scenario-specific templates are provided (musicians, advisors, guards, courtiers) and players get to choose which one they want. They can customize their character further if they so wish, so long as they stay within the character’s (and scenario’s) stated parameters. There will be limits on specific roles (only one person gets to be Louis XIV) and balance issues between generic ones (guards are needed—not everyone can be a courtier). These are rarely hard to resolve, though.