Acp, Ucp And How To Deal With It

[MonMarty]

This is a bit of a tough subject matter that may be too convoluted, but I've been struggling with this concept for quite a while. The core of the issue is how players perceive a character, how other players change perception of a character, and how such a character is portrayed despite, or in spite of character perception. There are a couple of self made up terms which I will be using throughout the post that I will explain first:

• ACP, or A-synchronized Character Perception occurs when a player wants their character to be a certain way, for example very handsome or smart, but the players around them don't see it that way because they either can't play it well, or because the character design for it makes no sense.
• UCP, or Usurped Character Perception occurs when players actively go out of their way to change public perception of another player's character, usually for malicious intents, through OOC conversations for example on Skype or PM with the intention of making others dislike the character or see them as different than they were designed by the maker.

I suffer severely from perpetual ACP, but not on my character, yet on everyone else. I don't know if it's because I'm a control freak or because I made up most of the universe lore, but whenever I see a character made by someone else, I envision a form of this character that is the "ideal" fit to "my" lore. This is usually a culmination of character design and emotive impressions, aided by for example Character Applications. Essentially, when I meet a character, I have a "perfect" image of that character in my head, which may either become dissonant with how the player portrays them, or may stay closer to the intended design. I have this with practically every character I meet, though the degrees vary from person to person. For example a person who from character design is intended to be highly intelligent, but is not portrayed that way IC, has a high degree of ACP, causing me severe irritation when dealing with that character. Alternatively, small degrees of ACP may also occur in case if meet a character, they are portrayed just the right way, but I imagine them having different hair or a different body shape. Bottom line, I have a view of every single character I ever interacted with, read about, or saw IC. I have a version of them in my head at all times, and it becomes a matter of comparison when the player does not live up to the standard I set in my mind.

The irritation from severe ACP sometimes progresses to the point where I catch myself in UCP, venting against the public perception of a character that either attacks the concept of the character, or the player behind it, forcing me to dial back for a moment. And that is essentially what Character Dissonance comes down to:

How much are we allowed to have a say in how others create and express their Characters​

How valuable is our immersion, in comparison to the property rights of other Players
​

Immersion is a weird concept that is not consistent for everyone. For some, Immersion is simply the suspense of disbelief, or just feeling "in the zone" when connecting to the world of Aloria. You'd say breaking Immersion here, is some flying snake rolling into a scene with god powers and shooting lasers from its eyes. To me, Immersion breaking is the very act of ACP, perceiving another character in a way that it was not designed, either intentionally or unintentionally (because sometimes players who have a very low ACP degree engage in trolly roleplay which increases ACP). So the question essentially becomes:

How far can we ethically go to influence or criticize the character design of another player (entirely rule enforcement aside, purely just regarding expression of design) without it becoming harassment or undue criticism.
​

I've never quite been able to congest my exact feeling on the matter. On one end, I don't think anyone has any business telling me that they think for example that Cedromar should not be Emperor because he behave very un-Emperor-like, but on the other hand, if I see a character that in their character design states "intelligent", but IC they are the biggest fool ever conceived, I feel the urge to tell them to make a more realistic character design based on their OOC capabilities.

It's especially that last part where I feel immense irritation at a character if they somehow become portrayals of what the player wants the character to be, but can never achieve. That presents the flip side of the question:

How far can a player ethically go, forcing a character view on players around them even if they cannot live up to the standard they set for themselves. How far can they ethically go forcing immersion breaking on others by holding onto and being respected in using their character design.

Do other players even experience this immersion break on Characters that are not portrayed in a way they were designed intentionally or unintentionally? Am I the only one?
​

I'm curious how others in the roleplay community feel about these things, I've spoken about it a few times with some friends (who equally have characters that I experience ACP from in various different degrees), but I've never really proposed the "issue" more publicly to gain an understanding of my own feelings on the matter.

Alternatively. If others also experience ACP, maybe we can exchange our dissonant views on each others characters? You tell me how you view my character differently from design, and I'll do yours, something like that.

 

[Reaganism]

I suffer severely from perpetual ACP, but not on my character, yet on everyone else.

Click to shrink...

Do other players even experience this immersion break on Characters that are not portrayed in a way they were designed intentionally or unintentionally? Am I the only one?

Click to shrink...

Absolutely not lad. Pretty sure we all have our own idealised concepts of the characters of others. I do, you do, heard other people discuss that they do. Perhaps we could have the safe zone (no, lmao, more like a violence zone) that is only entered by those who agree to take & give the critique and to develop a moderated discussion, where anyone who is toxic and destructive is removed? I would be down for that.

How much are we allowed to have a say in how others create and express their Characters

Click to shrink...

I say reverse the statement a bit and we can all agree on it.

"We are allowed to have as much of a say in how others create and express their characters as they desire us to aid them in doing so."

Of course if the character is systematically breaking immersion we'll most likely go down the ignore avenue unless lore staff intervenes.

How valuable is our immersion, in comparison to the property rights of other Players

Click to shrink...

I mean we'll probably say "individuals matter more" but we all are filthy and corrupt humans caring all about our immersion except when it's our character being called out. I still say best way to go is to allow critique to be passed to those who accept it with a fair smile.

How far can we ethically go to influence or criticize the character design of another player (entirely rule enforcement aside, purely just regarding expression of design) without it becoming harassment or undue criticism.

Click to shrink...

Now there's things to differentiate here. There is critique that can be passed as long as the one critiqued is fine with it, and there is enforced ooc toxicity trying to defame a character. Yes I am looking at you nobles with your Bigge puns. I totally bought onto that propaganda and if it weren't for my weird drama-system based roleplay (which was pretty much skewed by the ooc defamation either way) I would not have even considered interacting with the defamed characters. Oops, there to build a community.

I think obvious attempts to OOC influence IC opinions, perceptions or related should be punished. No idea I never encountered this before but it may have to do with the fact I roleplay in a platform where the stakes are very little.

How far can a player ethically go, forcing a character view on players around them even if they cannot live up to the standard they set for themselves. How far can they ethically go forcing immersion breaking on others by holding onto and being respected in using their character design.

Click to shrink...

Ignorance is bliss and this can be applied here as well. I think when someone lists "charismatic" or "intelligent" as their strength and fail to roleplay it it's just best to go with the fact the character probably believes they are charismatic/intelligent and treat them that way. Leaves you an easier job handling the player as well.

So to not be a ping-pong champion agreeing with you and posting paragraphs of agreement and meaningless forum-diarrhoea:
- How about we create a chat where players can ask and share critique freely, only involving those players who accept critique, and moderated so that those way toxic or way hurt in their feelings are just removed?
- How about a guideline is added to metagaming and a definite punishment is created for those who attempt to de-fame players or characters ooc?

 

[Conflee]

I feel like I have major ACP issues, where I want my characters to be viewed one way, and then they arent because I am a moron and I create a huge disconnect between my perception and other people's perceptions. Example being Conf Ladveer- I genuinely see him as a nice guy who takes the antagonist role due to conflict between his morals and the general morals of the Empire. Most people just see him as someone who is there, is sometimes a bit edgy and dumb, and just, is around. Or at best they think he has a moral compass shoved up his arse.

Granted I have been working to fix that since it was pointed out.

How much are we allowed to have a say in how others create and express their Characters

Click to shrink...

I say as long as it follows the lore and isnt too obstructive to roleplay, its fine. If its something super edgy or super overdone , stating as much to the player- in a nicer manner of course, with constructive additions and chats, is fine.

How valuable is our immersion, in comparison to the property rights of other Players

Click to shrink...

Again, as long as it isnt overly obstructive, I could care less what people make. It becomes an issue however when we have waves of things, like when all the Aphmau fans found the server and flooded it with copy-paste characters based on Aphmau and Zane. Especially since most of those people seemed to be like, 12, and didnt listen to any criticism or warnings from staff.

How far can we ethically go to influence or criticize the character design of another player (entirely rule enforcement aside, purely just regarding expression of design) without it becoming harassment or undue criticism.

Click to shrink...

I think talking with a player in message, and trying to understand what they are going for, and offering legitimate advice and or criticisms is fine as long as you are polite about it. If their concept is entirely unworkable in your opinion, and they seem receptive to help, perhaps trying to rework bits to work more with lore and playability would be fine as well.

Personally, I never got any of this, and I suffered for it. My first months on Massive are painful to look back on. Even with basic things like roleplay etiquette I didnt get many pointers. And my concept of Conf, the Edgy revolutionary Vampire, makes me want to jump off a bridge now. If I had someone who was willing to risk coming off as a dick to tell me that it wasnt going to work for the setting, I would have been a bit hurt, but in the end it would have saved so much more time than finding out the way I did, by learning manually bits and pieces and struggling.

Do other players even experience this immersion break on Characters that are not portrayed in a way they were designed intentionally or unintentionally? Am I the only one?

Click to shrink...

For some things, I do. Some things, less so. Its more for me when players try to portray characters as having skills that they themselves dont understand even on a basic level OOCly. Like sword fighting where the person is, lore wise, an expert, but in game is emoting spins and really badly thought out attacks, and has to ask you OOCly what a 'parry' is. Or a tactician who sucks at tactics OOCly. Its such a disconnect, between stated skill and actual portrayed skill, that its hard for me to ignore.

 

[Erzly]

Yes I am looking at you nobles with your Bigge puns.

Click to shrink...

but they're pretty funny IC and OOC

but in all seriousness,

How valuable is our immersion, in comparison to the property rights of other Players

Click to shrink...

fun should be put at the forefront of anything, even above immersion. Players should come first, without a doubt, because when people are told they're going about things all wrong, it's often quite disheartening, then no one is having a good time.
Just like real life, everyone's going to perceive people/characters differently, even if it goes against what the player originally decided they want their character to be like. prejudice is everywhere (in the nicest way you can use that word).

For some things, I do. Some things, less so. Its more for me when players try to portray characters as having skills that they themselves dont understand even on a basic level OOCly.

Click to shrink...

very guilty of this, and i definitely break immersion when i'm doing the simplest, least detailed emotes because i really have no idea what i'm going on about, however I wouldn't say it discourages roleplay or w/e. if anything, it reminds people that it's just a character, not me doing these things, y'know? and vice versa. I see people doing things IC wrong because they don't understand OOC but i think as long as you know what they're implying, there isn't much of an issue.