Welcome to the Dragon's Egg RPG subforum

[Ravana]

Talking about how Burnbright must serve Brynhild. Does that sound like she made the decision on her own?

Well, "must" could be taken to mean "must if you want to become a valkyrie": Baldhart isn't always the best at expressing herself.

And, of course, Baldhart could be wrong about the requirements of becoming a valkyrie—I suspect the faithful of other deities have the chance, too. Or, at any rate, I can't see Brynhild nixing a recommendation from, say, Odin. Not twice. Even if Brynhild's followers have the fast track to the position.

•

The problem I'm facing here is that, while this discussion is "out of character," I'm not sure just how far out of character one might appropriately go. Hiljikki has a very different view of the situation… or would have: in part this depends on how much she's been filled in on events she was not present to witness. So I'm a bit reluctant to mention my own thinking, since she might not come up with those results and therefore the party would not have access to them.

•

…she mutters "I'll be honorable."

 

[Legendary Sidekick]

Yea, I saw that post when I was looking for when Baldhart spoke of her becoming a sevant of Brynhild (I qouted it in my post) One page before the post you linked. Talking about how Burnbright must serve Brynhild. Does that sound like she made the decision on her own?

(But Matthew knows none of this. He simply wishes her to study to see if her choice is right for her.)

Oh… I skipped that post when I was looking back. But you're taking that out of context. That's a response to Burnbright wanting to become a valkyrie, and that's Baldhart talking her out of dying pointlessly, not intended as talking her into Baldy's religion. I would know that because I wrote it.

 

[Phietadix]

Oh… I skipped that post when I was looking back. But you're taking that out of context. That's a response to Burnbright wanting to become a valkyrie, and that's Baldhart talking her out of dying pointlessly, not intended as talking her into Baldy's religion. I would know that because I wrote it.

Despite the intent, it looks like it was attempting to convert her.(At least to me it does) And Burnbright's response is almost certainly because of the post I mentioned.

May I bring up a recent post of the queen of long posts. (But this is a short one.)

What is said is not always what is meant—or at least not what it appears to mean.

 

[Ireth]

Ravana, just a quick note -- I think it's typically frowned upon in RP circles to infer other people's actions or reactions in your posts unless the other person has already stated them; it's a form of godmodding, which is rather taboo without permission. I believe the GM may be the exception, however.

 

[Phietadix]

Ravana, just a quick note -- I think it's typically frowned upon in RP circles to infer other people's actions or reactions in your posts unless the other person has already stated them; it's a form of godmodding, which is rather taboo without permission. I believe the GM may be the exception, however.

Well it's been done many time in this RP. _____ does it often, and I know some others have also.

 

[Sparkie]

Everyone? Let's make sure the tone here stays friendly, please? I'm not singling anyone out. I just want to keep the peace.

(Is that how you spell 'singling?' It doesn't look right to me.)

 

[Ireth]

Well it's been done many time in this RP. Ankari does it often, and I know some others have also.

I guess it's just a bit more noticeable with Ravana's tendency to use second person POV (interesting choice, though it does tend to throw me off a little when I get used to long stretches of first person. Not that that's Ravana's fault). It does put a VERY different dynamic on her posts, though.

 

[Ireth]

Everyone? Let's make sure the tone here stays friendly, please? I'm not singling anyone out. I just want to keep the peace.

(Is that how you spell 'singling?' It doesn't look right to me.)

Incivility was not intended, I promise. And yes, that is how you spell singling.

 

[Phietadix]

Everyone? Let's make sure the tone here stays friendly, please? I'm not singling anyone out. I just want to keep the peace.

(Is that how you spell 'singling?' It doesn't look right to me.)

Sorry, not trying to upset anyone. And I try to keep anything purely negative directed at myself, (Plenty of negative stuff there anyway.) I can edit out the name.

PS. Runnig it through spellcheck that appears to be the correct spelling of singling.

 

[Ravana]

Ravana, just a quick note -- I think it's typically frowned upon in RP circles to infer other people's actions or reactions in your posts unless the other person has already stated them; it's a form of godmodding, which is rather taboo without permission. I believe the GM may be the exception, however.

Yeah, I know: sorry 'bout that. I occasionally like to infer something which seems (to me) reasonably likely in the situation, for the purposes of moving the dialogue/situation along without having contributions broken up between posts. (It's more a writer thing than a gamer thing with me, I think… though the ratio of GMing to character playing I've done probably leaves me more susceptible to the temptation.)

Assuming you're referring to the most recent, I could have said "Your first tool. You cannot hold a needle…" etc., then ended without the final "You get the feeling…" line. In this instance, the reason I didn't was that Hiljikki isn't the sort of person who would have explained why the bulb was important unless she received some cue—which would have added what was probably an unnecessary extra pair of posts. The final line I'd intended to read more as a… not quite sure what to call it: "universal observation"? the sort of thing where if someone sees someone shoot three consecutive bullseyes at a hundred paces, you can predict the observer's going to think "There's a good archer"—not as a moral judgment specific to that character's internal dialogue. Which, I imagine, could have been phrased differently and better, to make that clearer. So, my bad.

In any case, I wasn't trying to ascribe attitudes to your character. You can always change the reaction I "give" you if it seems inappropriate—I certainly don't mind. Though I'll try harder to avoid doing that in the future. Some days it just slips out.…

•

Okay, second most recent. My most recent also has a line with an unnecessary "You notice" beginning it. Which is closer to what I had in mind with the other, I think: perhaps someone wouldn't "notice" this, and it would go straight over their heads; but as a description of what's happening, "you" (i.e. = "the reader," not the character) could hardly fail to notice it once the author has brought it to your attention. So, yeah, authorial voice sneaking in. Gonna have to watch that, I guess.

•

P.S. Just realized my pattern. If I say "you," what I mean is "the omniscient observer": when I mean a particular character, I actually put the character's name there instead—so that would have read "Sir Cadell notices…" if I'd meant him specifically. Which is actually kinda bizarre, and I haven't the slightest idea where it came from. Somehow I unconsciously decided to break the fourth wall by referring to the universe in second person and particular characters in third. Not that it means I should… but at least now I know where it's arising. Should make it easier to control.

 

[Ireth]

No worries. ^^ Also, I'm curious... why *do* you use second person POV while the majority of us use first? It seems like first person would make it easier to get into Hiljikki's head, rather than having her be looked at from outside by whoever happens to be interacting with her at any given moment. Just a thought.

 

[Ravana]

Think that crossed the P.S. I just added to the previous. Though as mentioned I don't have an answer to "why," just that I realized the "what."

Think I'm avoiding "I" in the descriptions of her actions to help keep clear when I'm referring to her and when I'm referring to Ravana. Redundancy coding… or just in case I miss putting something in double parens.

 

[Ireth]

Okay, second most recent. My most recent also has a line with an unnecessary "You notice" beginning it. Which is closer to what I had in mind with the other, I think: perhaps someone wouldn't "notice" this, and it would go straight over their heads; but as a description of what's happening, "you" (i.e. = "the reader," not the character) could hardly fail to notice it once the author has brought it to your attention. So, yeah, authorial voice sneaking in. Gonna have to watch that, I guess.

•

P.S. Just realized my pattern. If I say "you," what I mean is "the omniscient observer": when I mean a particular character, I actually put the character's name there instead—so that would have read "Sir Cadell notices…" if I'd meant him specifically. Which is actually kinda bizarre, and I haven't the slightest idea where it came from. Somehow I unconsciously decided to break the fourth wall by referring to the universe in second person and particular characters in third. Not that it means I should… but at least now I know where it's arising. Should make it easier to control.

Oooh, okay, that makes a bit more sense. ^^ Still an unusual and interesting style choice though, if a tad confusing at times.

EDIT: Just re-read your most recent post, and I realize the source of my confusion. When Hiljikki was examining Cadell's stump, for example, you used "you" and "your" when there should have been his name. It makes it sound like the universe is having its stump examined. ^^;

 

[Ravana]

Yeah, confuses me, too—not that I don't know what I mean, but that I don't have the first idea why I started doing it.

I'll have to store that in my notes somewhere. Maybe some day I'll be able to take advantage of it in my writing.

What's really odd about it is I've never felt that writing in 2Per is a particularly viable mode… even though I know there are authors who've done it successfully. I could never see being able to do that myself. Maybe I've opened up a new window here, eh? Thanks for forcing me to examine what I was doing.

•

Edit: yep, you're right. Which means I'm not being consistent. Ah, well. Guess I've only cracked that window.…

Changed it.

 

[Ireth]

Heh. You're welcome, I suppose.

(Also, see my edit to the previous post if you haven't already. ^^; )

EDIT: Saw that, thanks. ^^

 

[Ankari]

Am I reading too much into the previous posts in this thread? This is an RPG. We have created characters with different motives and personalities from our own. What my character does, or doesn't do to other characters has no reflection on my personal opinion of the character, or the writer of that character. Do not look for contention when there is nothing there to find.

I consider this RPG as a tool to enhance my skill at character development. I also happen to enjoy our little game. Keep it simple. Write great characters and stick to them. Remember, at the end of the day, it's only a game.

 

[Phietadix]

Has anyone said or even implied that you share your character's opinion?

 

[Ravana]

Naah, it's not that… so, yeah, you may be reading too much into it. (At least if you're referring to the interaction between Ireth and me.) It isn't writing your own character: it's when someone says another player's character "does such-and-so" that it can be received poorly.

Which, as I admitted, I do have a bad habit of doing from time to time. I don't mind having it pointed out. As I said, I did it with the best of intentions—to facilitate my own character's actions, to make writing her a bit smoother—but as I also said, no, it isn't really appropriate to play someone else's role for him or her.

At any rate, that's all I'm getting from this… which I should probably mention since, if I'm wrong, then I am ascribing actions and motives to other real people.…

 

[Ravana]

The death of the shaman passed with a weak convulsion as the awl slipped through the earhole and pierced the brain. Impassive as stone, Hiljikki cleaned the awl against the troglodyte's tunic and deftly stashed it away.

Now, see, I have absolutely no problem with this. I think it's great. Hiljikki would never have bothered describing it this way.

I'm not even sure anyone else noticed she was the one who finished the trog off, the way she reported it.…

 

[Phietadix]

After looking back over Ankari's post in the main thread I must say again. Matthew doesn't own a sword.