[Friendly Debate] Point of View

[Juno]

Continued from "Dual Characters" -

Being allowed to expand the viewpoint of a story is one of the few things that separates Chubbs from other sites.

"Expand the viewpoint," in my understanding, is completely different from what I'm discussing. You say expand, which, by definition, I'm fine with. The word I'm looking at as a form of, to use Kaden's wording out-of-context, 'kind of cheating,' is alter. I have been on other roleplaying sites, where you must only write about your character's actions, dialogue, and thoughts, and you're not allowed to control the other person's character at all. True, being different from this format is what Chubbs is, in effect, all about, and I'm personally alright with that.

To clarify, what I'm talking about is using an NPC's thoughts and feelings to push the story along, and telling the story solely from their view-point. Generally, we at Chubbs write in third-person limited, and I, personally, don't like it when limited becomes "semi-limited," and while Joe is the character we control, we also get to see into Bob's thoughts for a period of time, or maybe even Annie's thoughts.

[Jesper]

What, exactly, do you dislike about it? Does another vantage point somehow give a person an unfair advantage? Joe's posts could vary between Joe's POV and Bob's, and nothing would change for another player. Hell, there could be an exchange between Joe, Bob, Annie, Suzy, Mary, and Samuel L. Jackson and the situation is still largely unaffected. The fact that this has been done for years and you just realized it pretty much proves that point.

EDIT: I should clarify that what is being talked about largely applies to personal sagas/private RPs.

[Orion]

Generally, we at Chubbs write in third-person limited, and I, personally, don't like it when limited becomes "semi-limited," and while Joe is the character we control, we also get to see into Bob's thoughts for a period of time, or maybe even Annie's thoughts.

Why? Good books tell the story from multiple angles. While it's important to have a main character, it'd be like having a television show or movie solely focusing on one person's reactions/thoughts as opposed to everyone who's involved. To me, what you're suggesting is very limiting in terms of what a writer can describe.

[Orsalis]

In a technical sense, we're not writing from a single character's perspective anyways. Nothing is written in the first person. If we wrote on a solely first person basis, I can understand why it might be out of place to have side-stories that verged off and went with other characters, but it's not as though we're experiencing the world of Chubbs through the eyes of a person, rather reflecting upon a character's, or several character's experiences.

If we write from a single point of view, how can we be expected to write collaboratively with others? Just writin bout yer character the whole time is certainly acceptable as far as I've seen it, but it's far more interesting and more engaging for other writers to see how they see your character as well.

Now if you can see the same dilemma in a personal storyline, you can see your character, or the people who are important to your character in a slightly more focused view to gain a greater appreciation for the rich and diverse background and spectrum of emotions that help build a nice, round character.

Even writing as an unrelated third person party can help give both the reader and the writer valuable insight into the full picture of who your character vehicle might be. Shows, movies and pretty much every form of media chooses to take this route if they have the time and interest, so why not here?

If it pertains to something going on with your main character or storyline, I think it adds to the experience of the writer and the reader.

[Juno]

I've never really thought of Chubbs, personally, as a place to write "good books," but rather, "stories" about a character you create. IMO, an RPG is exactly that - a roleplaying game, with a premise. You play a specific role, and in my opinion, you shouldn't falter from it.

Now, when I write other things, I'm open to switching point of view. Eldest, for example, often switches between characters. I just don't personally think it fits in with the guidelines that have been established.

Also, I haven't just realized it, I've just never said anything about it previously. I still don't think it's that important, it just came up and I'd like to discuss it.

EDIT: To respond to one of Orsalis's points, in a technical sense, everyone here - that I've seen - writes in third person limited, not third person omniscient, so even if it isn't in first person, it's still from one character's point of view at a time.

[Vad]

I've never really thought of Chubbs, personally, as a place to write "good books," but rather, "stories" about a character you create. IMO, an RPG is exactly that - a roleplaying game, with a premise. You play a specific role, and in my opinion, you shouldn't falter from it.

Whether or not you see it or choose to call it something different, you are indeed writing a book about a character. A story that illustrates the tale of someone through a series of threads here is a book in a logical sense. It may not be physically compiled and formatted like one, but you must not use the term book to describe length in this example.

[Belle Hibiki]

Short version of my opinion:

Some stories have multiple viewpoints (Timothy Zahn's Star Wars). Some do not (Harry Potter). It really depends on the work, and the writer, which is used.

For me, Chubbs has always been a writing forum with game elements, not a game with writing elements. This has been even more true since the reset. Saying "no you can't write from the perspective of your NPC because that's CHEATING" is just completely alien to me.

[Juno]

"Cheating" probably isn't the best term, true. I suppose it all comes down to difference of opinion. I don't like it, because I'm a writer who likes prompts, and I feel like Chubbs has laid down a fairly specific yet fairly general prompt. I think that writing from the mind of another character breaks from that prompt. Plain and simple.

[Orsalis]

I agree that it's a matter of opinion.
And this is my opinion:

I think its fair to say that a few of us bend the third person limited on occassion, so long as it stays on point, and provides insight into the story and isn't just random gibberish. I talk about other character's thoughts, feelings, I even break scene and go to completely different areas of the spectrum to give a few other characters that may or may not be important down the line a glimpse of the story. I know Vad certainly does the same.

I dunno, I don't feel like it breaks the prompt to do so either. Maybe I'm just not looking into it enough. I AM lazy as hell, after all.

[Juno]

"Bend" is modest, IMO. Not for everybody, but just saying.

I'm okay with it when it's ABSOLUTELY NECCESSARY to push the plot along, and did it once or twice myself back in Kill Town as a way to push a point in my post, but I'm not going to write the majority of a story or post from another character's point of view just to "explore another character." That's what writing with others is for. When I read a post about Kaden, I want Kaden. When I read a post about Ander or Belle or Sage or Orsalis or Ashe, I want Ander or Belle or Sage or Orsalis or Ashe. As a reader, I read your post because I want to explore your character, and it puts me off when that's not happening.

EDIT: I somehow missed Vad's post. I, personally, don't agree. I'm writing a story. I don't plan to take my work and bind it and sell it. To me, that's a book, and you're teasing yourself if you call what we do on here novel material. Sure, if someone takes their stories, edits them to appease a novelistic format, more power to them, but we're not writing books. We're writing extended histories of our characters. And I repeat myself - if you try to call that a book then you're lying to yourself.

[Jesper]

I still don't really understand why you dislike it, or why you think it's breaking some sort of code. :/

EDIT: But I'll agree to disagree. It doesn't really matter anyway.

EDIT2: And worse things have been published than some of the things that have been written here.

[Juno]

Mostly, it's just my personal view of the purpose of the site. I view it more as an exercise to improve my writing than something I'm oh so omgserious about. It's fun, and I'm trying to challenge myself by writing about this character, and in my personal understanding of the prompt, that doesn't mean constantly switching from character to character.

But, as you said, I, too, will agree to disagree.

And it's sad but true. Twilight is a great example. However, publishable material is a far shot from novel material, in my definition of it.

EDIT: I'd like to stress that when I said "switching" that does not in turn apply to actually performing a character switch or using a dual character, I mean the use of NPCs in writing. I actually think that dual characters is an excellent way to write a separate story for a separate character while not leaving the boundaries of the prompt.

[Jesper]

My point wasn't that you're overrating published material (although some of it is overrated to be sure), but that you're underrating the writing here.

[Belle Hibiki]

No, what he's doing is differentiating between "real writing" and our writing. We apparently can't follow the same rules since it's an RPG and the rules somehow change just by virtue of that.

Or something.

[Juno]

Please, don't take this as me devaluing what we right here. All I'm saying is that from my perspective, writing here is different than writing a novel.

[Orsalis]

I agree. I certainly don't take my writing here as a 'great endeavor' or anything. The only book I ever plan to take to a publisher is a book on philosophy, and hopefully one day I can write comics.

I write here for fun and to help my literary skill, tact, and perspective. This is another reason I choose to write in the third person omniscient a little every once and a while.

I mean, I certainly like reading everyone's work who is posting here, BECAUSE we all write a lil differently.

However, I do see the pitfalls that would come if you tallied too far when you were writing for projects including other characters. The rules need to be pretty tight there, or the waters can get very muddied and possibly spiked with a lil blood.

[Ashe]

No, what he's doing is differentiating between "real writing" and our writing. We apparently can't follow the same rules since it's an RPG and the rules somehow change just by virtue of that.

Or something.

Well, he is correct in that there is a difference. As far as an RPG is concerned, you control your character. Even for tabletops, and you might have limited control over an NPC or two depending on the GMs discretion. In a novel, you have the full freedom to write about anything that happens in the world and evolve it as you please, because you are the only person writing that novel (even if its a shared world novel in which other writers pick up where your story leaves off and continue, which can lead to plot holes and all). If someone else writes a novel after yours that involves events from your novel, they have to adjust their story since your novel came first. But otherwise, a lot larger amount of freedom is involved as its "your novel" as opposed to "the story of _____". The difference is that the novel can be "storyline focused" where its main drive is to push a certain storyline, regardless of who's involved or how many (Song of Ice and Fire anyone?) while RPGs tend to be a lot more "character focused" where the story relates heavily to the character itself.

In other words, we can't do like the Song of Ice and Fire series and kill every character that looks like they might become the focus of the story because our stories revolve around the characters themselves. When they don't, they are sagas.

That said, this isn't an opinion about the stance of using NPCs and writing from their point of view because to me, and I think this is what the rule allows, as long as your NPC point of view is telling a story that involves and relates to your actual character (origin, or setting up a trap for him/her, etc) then it should be ok. But I'm pretty sure this is one of those things where we'll be lenient on it until someone starts abusing it (like going "I'm writing entirely about this NPC on their own quest that has nothing to do with my character, but occasionally my character will bump into them, exchange a greeting, then continue on their way. Their actions don't actually affect anything though, and I'm just explaining what the NPC was up to during the time he would have been offscreen." That's not a point of view shift, that's roleplaying another character.) If it did/does become something heavily abused, we'd have to take a surgical axe, err, knife to it and and fix the situation.

[Belle Hibiki]

Well, he is correct in that there is a difference. As far as an RPG is concerned, you control your character. Even for tabletops, and you might have limited control over an NPC or two depending on the GMs discretion. In a novel, you have the full freedom to write about anything that happens in the world and evolve it as you please, because you are the only person writing that novel (even if its a shared world novel in which other writers pick up where your story leaves off and continue, which can lead to plot holes and all). If someone else writes a novel after yours that involves events from your novel, they have to adjust their story since your novel came first. But otherwise, a lot larger amount of freedom is involved as its "your novel" as opposed to "the story of _____". The difference is that the novel can be "storyline focused" where its main drive is to push a certain storyline, regardless of who's involved or how many (Song of Ice and Fire anyone?) while RPGs tend to be a lot more "character focused" where the story relates heavily to the character itself.

In other words, we can't do like the Song of Ice and Fire series and kill every character that looks like they might become the focus of the story because our stories revolve around the characters themselves. When they don't, they are sagas.

This really wasn't what I was getting at.

I'm well aware that we have less freedom for what we can do with other people's characters and to the world than we generally would if it was a novel. We can't, say, blow up Earth, and I can't, say, claim that my character kills Kaden off in the next post.

That's obvious. That wasn't what I was talking about.

I'm talking about styles. I'm talking about techniques. How I write in Chubbs - my ticks, my expressions, my prose, my structure - is probably very similar to how it would look if I wrote a novel. This includes, in my case, occasionally dipping into an alternate perspective.

The only functional difference that I see between 'real writing' and Chubbs writing is that here I have some very general rules set about me to prevent abuse and to keep it relevant.

[Carter]

I really don't understand your argument, being that we write in third person the only real perspective is one of an outside veiw. With that said there is no reason as to why someone would have to leave the focus on a single character in their story. Yes, we represent a single character, but show me any story that doesn't have a main character. So really the only point of veiw you have is a ghost that hangs around your main character, who is to say that your ghost can't focus on emerging characters from within the story? Your stance just seems to be nonsense to me.

As for your comment on the difference between what we do and what novelist do, I believe that was a blatent attack on our integerty as writers. The only difference between us and a paid writer, besides obvious freedoms Rei mentioned, is the simple fact that they get paid. Wouldn't you know it, Lil Wayne, George St Pierre, and Kobe Bryant all began the same exact way in their own respective fields. I don't believe that you meant that as an insult, but then again I can't seem to understand any of your points in this argument.

On a side note, the only thing that determines who gets paid and who doesn't is opinion and in my opinion there are very talented writers on this site that could easly make a living at the edge of the pen. Sorry, that commented really seemed to be a slap in the face to me, even though I know it wasn't intended to.

Also, I'm certain you have been around long enough to understand the general concept that here at Chubbs it is always writting first, game second. With that in mind why would you even consider hindering a writers abilty to express their story to their audience? Yes, we represent a single character, but more important than that we are representing a life that can only be experienced through imagination. And however a writed feels would be the best way to convey their story, thats the best way.

[Ashe]

Belle: I stated the obvious intentionally to make sure it was passed over when describing my overall point.

Carter: I don't think he intends it to be condescending at all. I think he's basically pointing out similar points as I made, in that (commonly, though with obvious exceptions) the goals between the two mediums differ. One uses the character as the anchor and tells a story about the character. Novels do this too, in a lot of cases, but they are far less bound to it than a Play by Post RPG is. Novels tend to broaden the concept to telling a larger scale story (in a decent number of examples, anyway. I can easily point at just as many examples of the contrary) where we can't do that as often unless we get it approved on saga level.