I feel like all this discussion kinda took away from the point of this thread , I took it as it was meant to make up your own worst/bad character concepts, not discuss what is bad roleplay or jab at bad roleplay/TRP you’ve seen yourself(Akamito even said that).
We got the Pet peeves thread for the other stuff.
Edit: Nevermind, my bad! I looked at the wrong thread!
The other problem with this is that it gives players information that their characters wouldn’t know. Thoughts, feelings, opinions, background - there’s no need for the history and inner lives of characters to be broadcast in this way.
I don’t think that this kind of emoting is really roleplay - it’s more like narration, and I think that’s a problem, because narrators are actively trying to influence the readers’ reaction to, and interpretation of, events and characters. Narrators have a perspective outside of the characters, and a point of view, and as such can make value judgements, within their own worlds and stories, about the nature of their characters. They also have control over diegesis, and they can flash forwards or backwards in time to give context, and emotional significance, to characters’ actions, reactions and to events.
To give an example of a “narration” emote as opposed to a “roleplay” emote:
Narration:
“Sergeant-Major Gregward Nork fixes the man with a dreadful, glacial stare - the kind of abysmal stare that strikes terror into the hearts of greenhorn recruits, and often has. Oh, he’s an old hand at this - this isn’t the first, and won’t be the last time that he’s had to face down some hot-blooded youth. His face is a ghastly picture of frozen rage - one feels one’s marrow begin to ice, one’s blood to chill, just to behold it. Evidently - not a man to cross, or bandy words with.”
Roleplay:
“Gregward fixes the man with a long, cold stare - his expression as rigid and stiff as a carven statue. He seems disdainful, even contemptuous, of the offer - showing visceral disgust at the mere suggestion.”
I think the emote in the first instance works to subtly coercive effect - it tries to establish a narrative relationship of power. The other character has apparently been categorised as a greenhorn and a hot-blooded youth, regardless of their actual nature - furthermore, Gregward’s narrator has already tried to place conditions on the response of the “recruit’s” roleplayer. He -should- be feeling terrified. He -would- be a fool to “bandy words” with him.
The difference between narration and roleplay is that, in roleplay, the writer only seeks to communicate their own characters’ actions and reactions - whereas in narration, the writer is effectively trying to dictate other characters’ responses, hijacking the writing of other players. In attempting to establish a definitive, or “correct”, interpretation of their own character, narrators are trying to define the responses of other players --their characters’ opinions, emotions, and even identities.
I think this happens because narrators have created static characters that can only exist within certain narrative situations - they require other roleplayers to co-operate with, and participate in, their vision of their character. They require that other characters be confined to specific roles, and follow specific scripts, in order to realise their character concept - and it’s nearly always a question of power. Your suave, charming Casanova can’t be any of those things if he or she is unable to suavely charm anybody. Your Vader-like death knight isn’t intimidating or awe-inspiring if nobody is awed or intimidated by you.
Ultimately, I think narrators are people more interested in the recognition of their characters than the roleplay of them - they don’t want to take part in the collaborative, dynamic, improvisational form of story-telling that roleplay is and should be, as their characters’ stories are already pre-defined. Their narrative arcs, their “canon” actions, even their endings have all been pre-written - other players, and characters, are merely meant to take on supporting or spectatorial roles. Narrators’ characters are never intended to be changed or affected by their roleplayed events and experiences, by the choices and actions of other characters.
You could still easily roleplay, rather than narrate, character types like the above - your Casanova is still an incorrigible flirt and flatterer, your cold, stoic death knight is still driven by hatred - you just have to forego “winning” encounters (and thus, power) as a condition of your concept. Your death knight doesn’t have to terrify people as long as they are cold, distant, and dismissive, hateful in their interactions. Your Casanova doesn’t have to successfully charm anyone to indiscriminately and obsessively try to anyway.
TL;DR - one of my least favourite type of RP’ers are the “narrators” who approach roleplay like it’s a novel and their character is the hero.
Now, this next one has to do with the understanding of OOC and IC. There are people who, when they see someone do something, immediately conclude OOC that this is not appropriate, and that this character should not be capable of such. Then the whispers begin. This has much to do with feats and ability, but can also be found in the spheres of information, wherein someone will assume the person should not, for instance, know about a particular thing. Treat IC happenings IC, unless they’re so ridiculous that you just cannot accept them as possible.
Also people who do the following: ICly, OOCly. Out-of-characterly? Think on this.
I think one of the worst types of RP are the silent RPers who simply stand around the Stormwind Cathedral, either waiting for something to happen or only write in the private/party chat.
I often feel that finding someone to RP with is pretty hard or near impossible because of these invisible standards some/most people have. And if you find a group, you either stick out like a radioactive waste or they simply don’t know how to build you into their established rp-group.
To my own surprise I find RPing with everything but human, draenei and the druid class far more engaging as otherwise.
Oh, I’ll add ‘Rpers who do bad/illegal things but don’t consider themselves the bad guys despite doing said things over and over and over and have the general populace dislike them for it and they don’t know why.’
I’ll go ahead and add “The multiclasser”
Storytime:
Once upon a time I had been challenged on a throw-away Dk to a spar, SOMEWHERE on horde side.
Ok, weird enough to pick a Dk as your sparring partner but I was willing to give it a shot. Maybe it’s fun who knows, don’t knock it till you try it. While my dude was swinging his sword Iquickly discovered that I fell into the trap of going up against John McDodge, weaving and bobbing away and parrying with his sword, and I qoute the emote “forged in the heart of a dying star”. At the same time my poor Dk found himself under fire from fireballs and chains of light in cadency of a minigun before McDodge decided to engage barehanded for melee “striking and kicking like the wind” with chi.
At this point I decided to take the meme to the next level. I layed out my plan for the dreaded “second wind comeback”, the powerboost out of nowhere.
tl;dr: The battle ended with lvl58 Dk deathgripping the sun down upon the face of Azeroth.