Type 2 is the best, IMO. Still slender and feminine, but not as fragile-looking as type 1. They are a bit chesty, but all the female body types seem to be so. /isn't just saying that because her BH is type 2

In other international news: Torian apparently loves my BH, wants to be with her forever, but STILL won't put out. I think he's been relegated to kitchen duty.

concept!

Yeah. I kinda side-eyed all of Traviss' work when the RepCom characters became important to the central post-ROTJ narrative. The way the RepCom dudes were written -- they shouldn't have given a womprat's behind about any Jedi.

/raises hand

HUR DUR I NEED TO LEARN TO READ. /scratches out post and does over In my opinion, being a Sith is... well, being a Sith. That's not to say you can't be creative with that, but there are firmer canon lines drawn. If you're a Sith, you are going to learn everything about subterfuge from the Sith, from their ideas. There's a case for that sort of training and upbringing to be a little ... cloistered. Not that a Sith would know or think that on his/her own or anything, but it could be considered a little limiting. But being in Imperial Intelligence gives you a lot more licence to figure out backstory; shady pasts work better in that setting -- you can have a lot of fun trying to establish where the Agent got all of his/her dirty tricks. How'd they join II? It's not like being Sith where you were found to be strong in the Force; it was probably a case of enlisting or otherwise signing up. Maybe your character was working against the Empire but was so darn good at what they did that the Empire ended up hiring him/her. In my opinion, the Operative will give you most creative license, but that's just my thoughts.

The answer to the question is presentation. If you wish, you are totally within your rights to say OOCly "You do know that according to class story, every Bounty Hunter's won the Great Hunt, right?" That's a statement of an informative nature. Critiquing them would be saying something like what you say in your second paragraph; in that you're saying what is wrong with their character concept. In lieu of saying "try to figure out a new background", though, you should be offering a concrete solution, like "well, maybe this guy could have just won a top-end contest or something that isn't the Great Hunt by name." (Tangentially, that's how I play my Bounty Hunter) But in the end, if you're playing against a far-fetched idea that doesn't mesh well with what you think is proper, and if that person isn't soliciting critique, the best thing to do is to ICly excuse yourself from the scene and move on. You don't have to "put up with it" until asked at all. A lot of people won't ask; often people get very defensive about their RP concepts. The point of my statement was not that we should go about critiquing everyone we see. It was that when people ask for pointers/critique, those of us who can give it shouldn't feel like we have to tell half-truths or make issues seem less important than they are just because we might hurt someone's feelings. If you're asking for critique, remember that critique isn't about your feelings. And in the end, if we have ideas about what RP ought to be like, this is really the best way to go about it in the end. A character can change for the better; I think giving a new RPer the benefit of the doubt and an implicit "it's okay to change things" vibe will lead to better things than going "omg you're wrong!" I consider myself an "elitist" if that is defined as "wanting to play things that make sense in SWTOR"; but as long as the case is made to me either ICly or OOCly, I'll pretty much roll with anything.

Yeah, I am partial to Jango, too. Plus, he fits the bill (for me anyway) as fanservice-for-teh-ladieeeez. I really like Mace Windu because of how he was characterized in the Clone Wars-era EU books too.

Why are we having this conversation again? The only people who care about this are people who can't delineate characters from players. Pro tip: for a lot of people playing this game, character and player are separate entities.

Whoa whoa whoa wait what? I thought I was here to be your archnemesis and we were supposed to be having internet slapfights. Well, I'm just gonna take my ball and leave! But naw, Slaine's got it in one. Most of the time, the insistence of another viewpoint isn't always necessarily to be argumentative; it's to try and figure out how we can make inclusive, positive experiences while considering as many points of view as possible. And sometimes, an injection of humour is necessary to ground ourselves again (see above).

The entire Grand Army of the Republic. /fans self I'll be in my bunk.

The children, Slaine. THE CHILDREN. /pearl-clutches (also, screenshots or it didn't happen.)

Unsolicited critique is a no-no, but if someone asks, we shouldn't feel like we have to hide under a blast-shield of "nice" and avoid addressing the issues we have. I can elaborate on what this means if you like; I'm just not entirely sure it's on-topic at the moment. Too, in my experience the ones who want to "enforce" proper RP are usually the ones who'll let you rip their concept a new bodily orifice -- and will then make changes based on what you suggest. Spoiler'd anecdata that doesn't relate to TOR at all below: But I guess this all depends on the company you keep and the type of community you're playing in.

Yeah, I like to argue a lot about RP theory, but when I get on my server to *actually* RP? Psh, I don't give a hoot who they are, so long as the scene's interesting. That the community spends a long time trying to argue their piece to one another doesn't mean we hate each other! The discussions and debates on the verisimilitude and etiquette threads aren't really hostile inasmuch as it appears to be indicative of the passion we all share for this craft. I know I've actually garnered huge respect for a lot of individuals in these threads -- even the ones I argue with til I'm blue in the face. The idea for these discussions and arguments is often to show differing viewpoints. From those, even if you don't disagree with them, you get a really good handle on how other people view the art of RPing, and you then can use those insights toward your next IC interaction. I find all the discussions - as loud as I am about my opinion - to be really enlightening.

Just noticed an upswing about people who are brand-new to RP, so I figured I'd throw together a handy little glossary of the terms RPers tend to use. Feel free to chime in and add; I'll edit the post. This includes any addenda or changes to existing definitions; I'm using the most common ones I know and how I know them. RP Terminology - Commonly Used Terms and Abbreviations RP, of course, stands for Role Playing, which is what you're doing in the first place! Mun - can refer to a player as opposed to their character, e.g, "Tiona's mun has to go afk, so let's wait for her." IC - In Character. Used to indicate something that a character is doing, or a state of being where someone is actively roleplaying, e.g. "That was totally IC for Tiona" "I'm feeling very IC right now." OOC - Out of Character. Used to indicate something that a player is doing, or a state of being where someone is not actively roleplaying, eg. "I'm OOC -- can't play right now, but let's talk later." Toon - Refers to a character. Cantina (Tavern) RP - a very free-form RP, usually done in a cantina, where the intent is often to get players together for the sole purpose of having their characters meet up. Canon - refers to established facts about the game setting. God-Mode/Godmod - loosely defined as exerting power over characters ICly without letting the recipient of the action react; the most egregious examples usually refer to situations of violence. e.g. "Tiona punches Etaine in the face and breaks her nose" is a god-moding emote. Can also extend to 'someone avoiding all attacks; cutting off his own arm trapped in machinery and laughing as he switches his weapon to the other hand and continues to battle to victory, whipping out some preposterous deus-ex-machina to triumph in every situation'. (thanks, Sendra) Handwave - usually means that a plot point occurred that was either too dry, too time-consuming, or too racy to be played in realtime. A lot of romantic interactions get handwaved. It's an event that's mutually assumed to have happened in a certain way. Metagaming - Using knowledge shared between players OOCly in an IC fashion that is beyond the scope/abilities of one's character, or that has not been divulged to a character ICly. Emote - any narrative action denoted by use of the /e or /me command. Most commonly used narratively in-game, though deviations from the style do exist. ICA = ICC - an abbreviation standing for In Character Actions = In Character Consequences. Also used when explaining harsh things that have happened to one's character, e.g. "Well, when Tiona mouthed off to the Sith and got Force-choked, that's ICA=ICC for you." Scene - refers to a discrete occasion of RPing. Storyline - refers to an ongoing story told through a series of scenes. CR - Character Relationships. "Building CR" refers to having one's character interact with and have relationships (all sorts, not just romantic!) with others. Commonly used in forum or play by post games; haven't really seen it used here much. Event - an organized occasion or location wherein people are invited to RP. Open RP - means, generally, all are welcome to join. Usually only applies to forum or play by post RP. Closed RP - RP intended for a select group of people. Usually only applies to forum or play by post RP. That's all I could think of -- I used this site to help with defining some of the more nebulous stuff.

Also, don't be afraid to drum up your own RP. Lots of RP servers have "RP channels" where RPers can discuss things in an out-of-character (OOC) fashion. Ask around, join one of these, and ask where one can most commonly find RP. Take your character to that place, plonk him or her somewhere, and just start emoting things. Or talking to yourself/an NPC. Anything at all to send the message "Hey, I'm willing to RP!" You'd be surprised how many people "take the bait" so to speak.

YES I AM GOING TO TELL SATELE SHAN ON YOU SHE WILL TAKE YOUR LIGHTSABER AWAY AND MAKE YOU SIT IN THE CORNER WITHOUT SUPPER (yes, I'm just kidding too.)

What objective, quantifiable proof do you have that you weren't, or that these Padawans didn't think so? Saying "I wasn't being a jerk" doesn't count; even a person caught red-handed in something that the majority of the population would see as pretty jerky will still say EXACTLY that. Too, simply because they played along isn't an indicator that they were okay with what was going on. You don't get to decide how your actions get interpreted by others. You're implicitly requesting a level of sheer control here that goes waaaaaaaaay beyond RPing, and frankly at this point, I'm gonna throw my lot in with the people who might treat lore a little loosely, simply because they seem to grasp how characters change and how different people interpret the same event differently. I still agree with you, romantic Padawans are kinda silly and I wouldn't go out of my way to engage with or play one myself, but, you know, fine. Yes. There is a perfectly valid reason your character did what they did. I'm not disputing that, though I do think that the escalation of the scene was motivated more by OOC opinion than IC conviction. However, it has also been said upside down and sideways, over and over again, that the Padawans may have had a myriad of reasons to do what they did (that is, to not immediately snap-to in the presence of a Jedi Master), both RP-related and game-mechanic related... ...plus we also have your Jerk Caveat. I think it's been established that, while the response of the Padawans may not have been your ideal RP experience, it is quite possible for it to be logical for the Padawans in question. And that's something you're not equipped to assess, nor do you have the right to assess. You're not privy to all the RP these characters undergo; you're not privy to what might have made them that way, and yet in the end, you still insist that because it doesn't fit your personal vision, that it's wrong and that's the end of it. In the end, it's just another flavour of "I do what I want", really. Even if it *is* grounded in lore.

Then why is this thread here? I mean, I agree that the whole damn community should abide by Don't Be A Jerk, but what that means can vary so widely in practise (not definition; almost all words have objective definitions) that it's almost a futile thing, and in the end, can often read as dictatorial as a list of lore-rules. Which -- and I think I had a mid-post epiphany here! -- I think is the crux of my issue with this thread; I think I might just have an issue with the language used; the stern-sounding dos and don'ts and unsubtle jabs at the verisimilitude thread. It reads (to me!) less as something helpful and more as a take-that to the people you might have disagreed with in that thread. (Not to sound presumptuous, but given when this thread was created relative to the discussion o'er there, it kinda makes sense.) I do believe with a change of wording and with the addition of some of the other things brought up downthread, it'll go down a lot easier. Now, that's just my opinion; but if you like, I can do a quick revision within the next few days and send it over to you via PM. "No thank you" is a completely acceptable answer and I won't go over your head or anything.

Well, see, now, the minute you went beyond a finger-wagging and verbal admonishment (which is really all you needed to do to establish your Master as a conservative, straight-up Jedi type), and essentially gathered up other players to "corral" these Padawans -- the minute you did that, your behaviour could be interpreted as you being a jerk. Especially since you've more-or-less stated that the fact that you thought their RP was bad OOCly and you were somehow granted the responsibility to teach those players a lesson. You may argue that you weren't, but how did the players of those Padawans know that? A "jerk" isn't an objective definition that everyone can agree on -- just like 99% of the things in RP. By your own argument up there, those Padawans didn't have to do a single thing that you thought they should have done. Why? Because they could have seen you as being a jerk. I agree with your assessment that this is bad RP, and seeing Padawan after Padawan out there pushing romantic plots gets a little old sometimes. And I agree that in my ideal RP community, all players would be held to a standard that embraces concepts of ICA=ICC and verisimilitude. However, what I ideally want and what's out there don't always line up, therefore in order to have a good playing experience, I realize I must make concessions. I'd argue that everyone, to some degree, has to make some kind of concession in order to have a good time RPing. Everyone. P.S.: If there's a side in this argument, I would like to vote to be moved to the Switzerland faction.

I'm not making that claim. What I'm saying is that a Jedi has a very specific "look" that is most commonly seen nowhere else, especially in TOR itself. (we need more "RP" clothes)

Actually, for the most part, they have been received as intended. What I've been seeing is one or two people who seem to always have to default to making character judgements on people who might have something to say that they don't agree with. If someone is coming across as overbearing, the respectful and courteous thing to do is to say "Hey, you're being a little aggressive/jerkish/whatever when you say this" as opposed to making sly judgement calls on the content of my character. I'm brash. I'm outspoken. I know these things don't always mesh well, but I'd much rather be called out and told my words are boorish or mean-sounding than to have it implied that my opinion makes me a terrible person. But then that brings up another point: what constitutes courtesy and respect in practise is, just as what constitutes good or exceptional RP, varies from person to person. I may think I'm being honest, polite, and maybe helpful. The person I'm speaking to may think that I'm being a complete meanie, simply because our views of what respect and courtesy are can differ. Now, I'm going to ask a couple of questions. These are questions that I'm asking simply for the sake of asking them, not because I inherently have an issue with this thread, but here it is: Given that courtesy and respect in practise differs from person to person, why is it so important to dictate to others what courtesy and respect entails? How is this any different from demanding an RP standard?

Rubat Crystal is definitely a make-your-own RP sort of server that treats RP a little casually. But I quite like it there. The thing about RP, though, is that if you're not finding it, you gotta make it. It's not just going to come to you.

Is this actually true? I respecced my BH shortly after launch, and went to do it again a couple of days ago and had to pay 1300 credits for it. I was under the impression that it reset after a week; would this not have meant that Thursday's respec should have been free, since my first one was almost two months prior?

And it's that very expression -- considered by myself and a lot of the RPers I've played with in various media over the past twelve years to be Rule One of RP (right behind Rule Zero of Don't Be A Jerk) -- that led me to use the term consequence. But, at the risk of this turning into a semantics argument, when discussing things that happen to RPers as a result of their interaction, when I write the word "consequence" one can consider it to be the same as "outcome" or "result", simply because of its relation to the adage that Sendra cited above. I would remind you to refrain from taking a policing tone with your requests, since that is the very thing you're decrying in this thread. I understand you're trying to drive home the points of courtesy and respect, but: when I say I'm going to do something "politely", that's exactly what I mean. There's no hidden message there. I will be frank, but frankness doesn't preclude politeness or courtesy. And judging solely on the reactions some of my posts have garnered, I think that's something the community could take home, too.