Roleplay Pet Peeves

[Bacon is fluffy]

People who make weaknesses that ARENT WEAKNESSES to counterbalance the strangths of their character

Mind elaborating on this one?

 

[duegxybus]

People who make weaknesses that ARENT WEAKNESSES to counterbalance the strangths of their character

Weaknesses:
-Overprotective of friends
-Puts friends lives over their own
-Gets too angry too easily
-May cause too much damage with their power on accident

LIKE WTFFFFF

THOSE AREN't WEAKNEESESSSS

I agree with you on this one.

 

[Umbrie]

People who make weaknesses that ARENT WEAKNESSES to counterbalance the strangths of their character

does a Nocturnal Illusionist who can see in the dark but gets very dizzy in bright light count as a weakness that isn't a weakness? because low light imaging is a sensory benefit that has built in weaknesses.


i'd argue the bull headed, stubborn and aggressive warrior who happens to be strong and hardy but very foolish doesn't get to truly count making bad tactical decisions as a weakness if they are strong and hardy enough to fight just fine, regardless of those poor tactical decisions.


i mean sure, the mage with a childish body has the physical weakness of a childish body hindering their ability to perform physical feats long term is a valid weakness. but the blind old man who can pick up vibrations in the ground and air with his whole body really doesn't get to call their blindness a weakness when it matters, because they literally are compensated with a sense that is more powerful than sight for the purpose of combat. which the character is built for


but the paladin can't really consider their code of conduct a weakness, because most paladins have amazing defenses and the lack of mobility in all that armor would be more of a weakness than the code of conduct.

 

[Onikmey]

things that i have seen:
-Character gets super agility at the cost of being physically weak. it doesnt matter though because their super agility prevents them from getting hit and allows them to apply force at just the right spot so as to not have to use as much strength.
-Character gets schnazzy mind powers that let them understand everyone at the cost of being "Socially awkward". doesnt matter though because they always know just the right thing to do and how to be awkward with it.
-Character wears near indestructible armor at cost of not being stealthy.

does a Nocturnal Illusionist who can see in the dark but gets very dizzy in bright light count as a weakness that isn't a weakness? because low light imaging is a sensory benefit that has built in weaknesses.


i'd argue the bull headed, stubborn and aggressive warrior who happens to be strong and hardy but very foolish doesn't get to truly count making bad tactical decisions as a weakness if they are strong and hardy enough to fight just fine, regardless of those poor tactical decisions.


i mean sure, the mage with a childish body has the physical weakness of a childish body hindering their ability to perform physical feats long term is a valid weakness. but the blind old man who can pick up vibrations in the ground and air with his whole body really doesn't get to call their blindness a weakness when it matters, because they literally are compensated with a sense that is more powerful than sight for the purpose of combat. which the character is built for


but the paladin can't really consider their code of conduct a weakness, because most paladins have amazing defenses and the lack of mobility in all that armor would be more of a weakness than the code of conduct.

daylight sensetivity is only a weakness if you have to go outside in daylight frequently. the magical childs lack of strength is only a weakness if the child doesnt get to use magic for everything theyd otherwise have to use strength for.

in short- weaknesses should come across often enough that they actually prevent a character from doing something in the roleplay. otherwise its a minor annoyance like - my barbarian gets a runny nose when he rages.

 

[Umbrie]

things that i have seen:
-Character gets super agility at the cost of being physically weak. it doesnt matter though because their super agility prevents them from getting hit and allows them to apply force at just the right spot so as to not have to use as much strength.
-Character gets schnazzy mind powers that let them understand everyone at the cost of being "Socially awkward". doesnt matter though because they always know just the right thing to do and how to be awkward with it.
-Character wears near indestructible armor at cost of not being stealthy.



daylight sensetivity is only a weakness if you have to go outside in daylight frequently. the magical childs lack of strength is only a weakness if the child doesnt get to use magic for everything theyd otherwise have to use strength for.

in short- weaknesses should come across often enough that they actually prevent a character from doing something in the roleplay. otherwise its a minor annoyance like - my barbarian gets a runny nose when he rages.

i wouldn't necessarily say any character should be excluded from participating in any portion of the roleplay they intend to participate in and shouldn't technically be turned useless in that particular portion. but the light sensitive character i played could easily be forced to faint from a mere flashbang, and flashbangs were able to be made at an affordable price by any chemist, and well, she had companions that spent a lot of time outdoors during the day, so she spent a lot of time outdoors where she was hampered enough to matter. i mean, she wasn't excluded from participating and wasn't completely useless, but the dizziness hampered her mobility and combat ability during the day because it hindered her concentration and her perception,

the magical child i was considering for the example, would probably just be some kind of offensively inclined magic user who spams offensive natured spells at range, but literally still needs to worry about carrying their load, still needs to worry about having the endurance to run away, and still has to deal with the social restrictions on what weapons a character perceived as a child could carry. meaning probably nothing better than a dagger, and so on.

and even if a physically weak character had super agility, that physical weakness also hinders their stamina, and repeatedly avoiding attacks generally eats up stamina pretty quickly and a physically weak character with super agility will get tired extremely fast, and applying force at the right spot also requires you to be able to pick out the right spot, to reach said spot, and have a knowledge of your target's anatomy. so being able to pick out the right spot wouldn't work against a slime and wouldn't work against an aberration whose anatomy you don't recognize.

not every annoyance or inconvenience is minor. some can be moderate or major. the weakness doesn't need to be a constant thing to be relevant, it merely has to be something somewhat meaningful. even if a weakness doesn't show up once per weekly session, you could fix that by making the weakness really irksome during the times it does happen.

 

[Onikmey]

and those are all fine. its when weaknesses. dont become anything more than a minor inconvenience that its not a weakness

 

[rae2nerdy]

When I ask for weaknesses I stress that the weakness must be something an opponent can use for defense in a fight. Being shy is not something your opponent can exploit.

Being dehabilitated by loud noises is

 

[Umbrie]

When I ask for weaknesses I stress that the weakness must be something an opponent can use for defense in a fight. Being shy is not something your opponent can exploit.

Being dehabilitated by loud noises is

Getting Dizzy in bright light is something an opponent can exploit in a fight. and what the hell is a shy fighter even doing trying to fight in the first place? a shy fighter is as good as a dead fighter, because a lack of self esteem is bound to get you killed pretty early in combat.

 

[duegxybus]

Shy Fighter: "Uhm-...Senpai...I can't swing my sword w-without e-exposing my body..." *blushes*
Murderous Murderer: "Mwahahaha take this!" *swings sword*
Shy Fighter: "KYAAAA~~~! DON'T LOOK AT MEE~~~!!" *runs away crying*
Senpai: *Facepalm* *stabs murderer up de butt*

Nah. Being shy is pretty good for your flight or flight response. Especially if senpai is there to protect you. But probably not for fighting.

Edit: This is all a joke. Don't take it seriously. I don't anime.

 

[rae2nerdy]

Shy Fighter: "Uhm-...Senpai...I can't swing my sword w-without e-exposing my body..." *blushes*
Murderous Murderer: "Mwahahaha take this!" *swings sword*
Shy Fighter: "KYAAAA~~~! DON'T LOOK AT MEE~~~!!" *runs away crying*
Senpai: *Facepalm* *stabs murderer up de butt*

Nah. Being shy is pretty good for your flight or flight response. Especially if senpai is there to protect you. But probably not for fighting.

Edit: This is all a joke. Don't take it seriously. I don't anime.

Lol well the problem is the “being shy” is somehow never brought up in combat. It’s only used to make them seem idk more assessable or something in social situations.

In a fight nah fam they kick bad guys tail due to convience of andrenaline or the love of their friends or some bullshit.

That’s what I meant about something that can be exploited.

It’s likely your villains would have the means of producing loud noises but unless they are familiar with your individual character how are they gonna know they’re shy in the first place to even exploit the weakness ?

Assuming the player allowed it to be a believable weakness at all rather than just some personality pseudo conflict that goes away when it’s convience.


Or if that’s not a good example - I don’t like working with others. Is not a weakness for someone with super strength. As it makes them more dangerous not less. Now does that mean you can’t have an antisocial character with strength as a hero with weaknesses. Of course not but you have to understand what is a character flaw and what is a realistic limitation of their powers.

 

[Doctor Nope]

My character: "So you're saying I'd technically be able to do *insert fairly powerful move that most people would have difficulty with* if I got past all the pain coming from it?"
Me: "Yeah, but--"
My character: "Sweet, so Imma get some painkillers and then--"
Me: "--you'd instantly fracture your limbs and rupture your organs"
Me character: "...wHAT'S tHE fUCKING pOINT?!?"

 

[Intellectual Sword]

Though I think it's just a flaw of the structuring of roleplay, dialogue branching out into two or more separate conversations kills me so hurtfully when I witness it. Here's a generic example.

Person A: "Hey, generic question?" pauses, does something, then adds "another generic question?"
Person B: "Answers first generic question, supplements another question to get the conversation going" -reacts to what Person A did in their pause "answers to the second question, supplementing another second question to get that topic going."
Person A: Repeats exactly what B does, maybe adds more lines of dialogues, compelling Person B to have a response to each one for whatever absurd reason.

They're simultaneous discussions, who.. who does that in real life? It's even worse with talkative characters who have to perform an action in between each line of dialogue, ignoring interjections that can change the dynamics of the conversation. Also just lengthy dialogue in general, like the ones that sound as if the character had rehearsed for this conversation - perhaps conveniently in their showers- or something. e>e;;

 

[Bacon is fluffy]

When I'm worthless and contemplate cutting down my own rp load, because I'm weak willed(the school effect). Dx

 

[Lady_Feonis_of_Fairhaven]

Whenever I see a summary like this, I have to fight the urge to tell them to write a book instead of an RP. It's no fun being in a group when there's one clearly superior character. This is an exaggeration. I don't have anything against school roleplays, I swear.

That just makes me mad, honestly. How rude.

 

[JcRpSpace]

Mild pet peeves (I can put up with these most of the time)
- constant exclamation point
- overuse of the word "suddenly" (something I'm probably guilty of myself, though.)
- One-liners (They're annoying but not that bad. While I rarely stoop to one-liners myself, I can adjust my post length so the posts are closer to being equal.)

Stuff I will not tolerate
- Mistakes in the behavior/anatomy of an animal. Yes, I will call people out if they mess up a fact about an animal I know about. Heck, I'll call you out on anything I know is wrong unless it's an acceptable break from reality because of the plot/setting/character.
- Extremely powerful characters where an extremely powerful character is uncalled for. (Like, no one else in the RP can feasibly beat that character in a fair fight.)
- Controlling other character's actions. This includes telling someone exactly what their character sees, as opposed to simply stating what was there to see. The difference is while in the former, you're dictating what my character actually takes notice of, while in the latter, you're simply pointing out something that my character might notice, but I can still choose that they don't notice it.

There's more; it's on the tip of my tongue, but I can't actually think of a way to put anything else into words right now.

 

[Umbrie]

the point of a character who can hijack other people's nervous systems is that they can specifically control what the hijacked characters perceive. some would see it as an attack on a roleplayer's agency, but it isn't any worse than being subject to hypnosis from a vampire's eyes. messing with other people's minds is a popular psionic power and really separates the concept of Psionics from magic, because any wizard or shaman can create fire, but a Psionicist can actually mess with the senses of other entities, and i beleive a true Psionicist generally shouldn't be using the various subdisciplines of Psychokinesis such as Telekinesis, Pyrokinesis, Cryokinesis Etc as a default answer because i consider those the lazy psionic powers to slap onto a character.

tabletop roleplaying games have all sorts of abilities you can use to temporarily hijack some aspect of another player's character, usually with an opposed roll, and the one doing the hijacking usually has a fat bonus to the hijacking because they made it their specialty.

 

[Bacon is fluffy]

Controlling other character's actions. This includes telling someone exactly what their character sees, as opposed to simply stating what was there to see.

the point of a character who can hijack other people's nervous systems is that they can specifically control what the hijacked characters perceive.

This sounds like a clear overstatement of the problem. If I may ask, what situation was someone telling you what your characters had to perceive? My initial thought is that they're simply concerns over consistency. You don't want someone to claim there's a elephant in a room if there's actually just a dog. Unless the person mistaking the dog for an elephant has a specific reason for the gross misperception on their part.

 

[AkuroZ]

I just have two: Post length nazis and Writers' Block

 

[Umbrie]

This sounds like a clear overstatement of the problem. If I may ask, what situation was someone telling you what your characters had to perceive? My initial thought is that they're simply concerns over consistency. You don't want someone to claim there's a elephant in a room if there's actually just a dog. Unless the person mistaking the dog for an elephant has a specific reason for the gross misperception on their part.

i wouldn't normally like roleplayers dictating the actions and perception of characters belonging to other roleplayers, but there are psionic abilities that allow control over those things, so you need a way to separate the real description from the deception, because creating illusions or traps without hinting beforehand is generally a horse bile manuever. because it just becomes an excuse to an auto hit or auto avoid. because traps make a good excuse to get a free hit when pulled out of nowhere and illusory clones or holograms are just a way to interact with NPCs without risking your character taking damage from an attack.

in fact, some of the worst godmodders i have seen, use "you killed a clone" or "it is a hologram" to save their character from taking damage as a hat pull trick and it is just as much a hat pull to have a trap pop out of nowhere without a chance for the players to notice it.

in fact, it is even just as bad to bring an army of minions to take down one opponent, unless the opponent is the equivalent to an MMO raid boss that requires 5 parties of 10 elite player characters apiece or whatever, and well, if a player is equal to a freaking raid boss, that player is too powerful.

 

[Bacon is fluffy]

i wouldn't normally like roleplayers dictating the actions and perception of characters belonging to other roleplayers,

Hell no. If I walk into a room and it's green, then you walk into a room say it's blue. I'd call you out for that. Barring illusions, which is not part of my normal rp repertoire. I'm asking why I should allow someone to change the integrity of the story and write the wrong information about the environment? There's a difference between percieving different stimuli due to different focus: Family walks into a room. Bobby likes the toy train, mom gets giddy for the fireplace and dad is drawn to the beer. And writing the wrong info.However, If that room is stated by the gm to be green and you post and say it's blue, why should anyone put up with your bullcrap?

As for the rest of the post, I genuinely don't know what it has to do with my question. Unless you went on a tangent about different pet peeves of yours.

 

[Umbrie]

Hell no. If I walk into a room and it's green, then you walk into a room say it's blue. I'd call you out for that. Barring illusions, which is not part of my normal rp repertoire. I'm asking why I should allow someone to change the integrity of the story and write the wrong information about the environment? There's a difference between percieving different stimuli due to different focus: Family walks into a room. Bobby likes the toy train, mom gets giddy for the fireplace and dad is drawn to the beer. And writing the wrong info.However, If that room is stated by the gm to be green and you post and say it's blue, why should anyone put up with your bullcrap?

As for the rest of the post, I genuinely don't know what it has to do with my question. Unless you went on a tangent about different pet peeves of yours.

Tangent about another pet peeve which is popular, using traps or illusions without hinting beforehand as a thinly veiled excuse to auto-succeed at something.


but i was explaining, you shouldn't allow somebody to change the integrity of the story and heavily alter the environment from the original unless the change was the result of a psionic power such as illusions, hypnosis, or telepathic perception control (also called sensory hijacking and most infamously used by Sosuke Aizen). but then, Psionic powers of that nature aren't common among roleplayers and have an extreme stigma that makes them come across as being frowned upon.

i have a character who uses variant forms of all three of those psionic abilities i mentioned, which can all be lumped into the mind against mind psionics category. and all 3 of them can change how another character percieves the environment. certain real life disorders like schizophrenia or most drugs of the hallucinogenic category can also affect how a character percieves the environment. so there are plenty of ways a player character can percieve an environment differently.

though you should use a separate description for the illusion or hallucination to discern it from the real thing. so illusionists generally need 2 or more descriptions per action.

 

[Emrys]

One- People always wanting to be female. It's annoying as hell and it's the reason I only do mxm or fxf now.

Two- When someone creates a plot and they haven't put any thought into it. Like seriously world build a little bit, if you don't it slows the rp down

Three- Cliché personality types. This one really annoys me

Four- Harmful stereotypes. Not every black woman had to be strong and independent, not every gay guy is super flamboyant ect ect

There's probably more I can't think of right now

 

[Angel2Mars]

1. I'm bothered when people do not put enough thought and energy into their own posts and expect you to be able to make a miracle post of your own with very little to respond to.

2. Cliquishness. Give someone else a try once in a while.

3. And I guess I just expect a level of respect and politeness out of character.

 

[JadeGreen17]

Bugs me when a CS lists a characters sexual orientation but never their romantic orientation. I hate to be the LBGTQA+ nazi but this is a very important difference, as romantic and sexual orientation are completely different things. Sexual orientation determines who someone wants to... well 'do it' with. While romantic orientation determines who you will develop an emotional romantic attachment to. Someone could be say for the sake of example an Aromatic Hetrosexual. They don't care about having romance with anyone, but seek out and enjoy sex with someone of the opposite sex as them. Likewise you could have a Heteroromantic Asexual, someone who enjoys romance (dates, hugs, kisses, cuddling) with the opposite gender, but doesn't care about sex with anyone.

IMO since this is a PG-13 site, we should really more be concerned with the romantic orientations since the big bad mods will come n' get us if we write about anyone getting to second base or beyond. I've taken any CS with 'sexual orientation' to mean romantic orientation, and just assumed it to be a bit of ignorance on the part of some people. While it's somewhat forgivable to someone outside the LGBT community. (I myself am a proud Aromatic Asexual). * I suppose I should be thankful that people are at least making the effort to be inclusive to characters of other orientations and including a slot for orientation and not simply assuming every character is a Hetroromanic Hetrosexual.

This kind of thing can be a huge trigger for some people. I'm not triggered, I swear. This is a pet peeve of mine, not a dealbreaker.

*I'm not claiming to be an expert on this stuff or anything. Just voicing an opinion from what I know.

 

[Emrys]

Bugs me when a CS lists a characters sexual orientation but never their romantic orientation. I hate to be the LBGTQA+ nazi but this is a very important difference, as romantic and sexual orientation are completely different things. Sexual orientation determines who someone wants to... well 'do it' with. While romantic orientation determines who you will develop an emotional romantic attachment to. Someone could be say for the sake of example an Aromatic Hetrosexual. They don't care about having romance with anyone, but seek out and enjoy sex with someone of the opposite sex as them. Likewise you could have a Heteroromantic Asexual, someone who enjoys romance (dates, hugs, kisses, cuddling) with the opposite gender, but doesn't care about sex with anyone.

IMO since this is a PG-13 site, we should really more be concerned with the romantic orientations since the big bad mods will come n' get us if we write about anyone getting to second base or beyond. I've taken any CS with 'sexual orientation' to mean romantic orientation, and just assumed it to be a bit of ignorance on the part of some people. While it's somewhat forgivable to someone outside the LGBT community. (I myself am a proud Aromatic Asexual). * I suppose I should be thankful that people are at least making the effort to be inclusive to characters of other orientations and including a slot for orientation and not simply assuming every character is a Hetroromanic Hetrosexual.

This kind of thing can be a huge trigger for some people. I'm not triggered, I swear. This is a pet peeve of mine, not a dealbreaker.

*I'm not claiming to be an expert on this stuff or anything. Just voicing an opinion from what I know.

Well in my opinion the split attraction model can really only be applied to Aesexuals/Aromantics. Many people from the LGBT+ community has said that the Split attraction model can be harmful did those not of Aesexual/Aromantic orientation. Which I believe is why people only list 'sexual' orientation, because that usually applied to your romantic orientation as well.