Hello, and thank you for passing by.

Lately, I've been curious about something that baffles me: that people are able to roleplay in an eletronic rpg such as Skyrim. I played Skyrim and others, and had lots of fun with it, but trying to roleplay never amounted to much, to me. I'm a tabletop rpg player, and may be spoiled because of it, but the limitations imposed upon the player in games like Skyrim break any roleplaying immersion to me. One can't even join Alduin in his goal, for example. Conversations feel limited, rigid, most of the time*. Yes, I know there are mods for certain needs or wants, but I feel they lower the wall, but don't eliminate it.

*I can't even say "thank you" when I want, for example. And don't get me started on the cursing...

So I ask of you, how do you roleplay despite the limitations? Assuming you have any experience in tabletop RPing, do you think it is the same?

Lots and lots of pretending/headcanon.

I don't have much experience in tabletop RP, but I agree that the game is severely limited when it comes to RP.

Some people have mods to make things easier, though.

why do people say this game is limited in RPing. Is this the only video game they have ever played? Compared to most games, you have a lot of choice and freedom.

On topic, it is very similar to a Tabletop, you ust have to pretend your character is saying something and that there are limitations on what you can do as if a DM has just told you "no you cannot do that"

You have freedom in the fact that you are allowed to do what you want and go where you want. In the aspect of an open gameworld. ( sandbox )

However, it is still limited with choice. Mainly in dialog and the linear writing of questlines. The only real choice one has is to actually do the quest or not. The quest lines lack choice within themselves. Granted there are a few, and I mean... very few, questlines where you have a choice to make and reflect two different outcomes. Otherwise it really doesn't matter as there is only one path and one outcome.

It is still way more open than most other games.

No doubt. Way more open. And.. don't get me wrong, we have a great game. It just lacks the details to be truly epic.

EDIT :

To address the OP's inquiry of RPing and my take on the subject...

Different players have a different outlook on defining what RP is to them and how they employ those measures. Some view RPing as eat / drink / sleep. Those things contribute to RP indirectly as they are immersive elements. Some place themselves in the character. My characters are not an extension of myself nor do I live vicariously through them.

To me, RP is strictly bound by actions that are representative of a given character's personality profile. If it's not fitting for my character to say or do something, they don't do it. They are unique from one another with different skills, needs, desires and goals. They advance through the gameworld with that mindset and react accordingly.

Before I let them set foot in a given direction, I ask myself... " What would they do?"

Then there's the element of previous knowledge. Just because I know the Mace of Bang Your Head is in Smelly Skeever Cave, doesn't mean my character knows. If they have no reason to to go there... they don't go. I find this to be the most trying means of showing restraint. It is the hardest part sometimes, for me. Is the next action truly based on my character's viewpoint... or influenced by mine?

There will never be a game like that though, games and game designers have limitations and will never be able to put down every possible choice you could make into every part of the game.

It's not about every possible choice. Just simply have choice and consequences of those choices. It's done in FONV. Almost every questline has multiple choices through dialog and / or actions. Hell the meeting with Cesar has 5 or 6 ways to complete that thing. From siding with him, curing him, killing him...

There are games that do that. TES could do it, but linear questlines is just the way TES has always been.

1-I don't know about others, but I played Fallout 1, 2 and New Vegas, Baldur's Gate 2, Neverwinter Night 1, and Mass Effect 2. So, compared to most games, yes, there is plenty of choice and freedom, but I always felt fallout 1 and 2 offered more in that aspect.

2-You think it's similar? We may have differing experiences then. In my table, despite combats with 300+ individuals, the most challenging task was to convince someone to not commit suicide, because even if it would make him pay for his crimes, it would feed a certain entity that's the Big Bad. And my GM doesn't simply say "no you cannot do that", that's...lazy from his point of view. The guy is unsual though (I did say I may be spoiled).

But it still loses to a RL sandbox, because in one of those I can go play at the playground . In tabletop game terms, nothing would stop me from traveling to Akavir.

It is a truly great game for me as well, I'm just nitpicking a detail that bugs me.

Perhaps both of you would like to see this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvwlt4FqmS0

Yeah, but in my headcanon, I want to offer condolences to the Thalmor, because of their loss.

I'm afraid I was completely lost in translation and couldn't get through the 5 minute mark.

Basically, it's about something good and bad, depending on how it's done: how games do not need to follow a linear narrative like a average book or movie. A - B - C -D, may become, to you or me, G - B - deathclaws - + money - D. Instead of following the narrative offered, we may make our own, and certain games mix the barrier between narrative/plot elements and setting/background elements to allow for that. He uses New Vegas as a modern example of it.

Gamewise the Roleplay aspect is extremely limited in this game because the game was designed for this guy: http://bestgamewallpapers.com/files/elder-scrolls-5-skyrim/dragonborn.jpg You can clearly see that in the dialogue where in most cases people talk to you like you are a dumb drunk ignorant nord and in most cases your dialogue options often are snarky comments that wouldn't really come out of an Altmer's mouth for example. In Oblivion and in Morrowind this was addressed better as most of your dialogue options are just general topics where you could basically come up with whatever it is you want to say.

Like most people say here, it involves not roleplaying but pretending the way the game was design doesn't apply to the player character and make everything up as you go along. If something is impossible like maybe joining the Thalmor, you would either resort to mods or just ignore quests and actions that a Thalmor agent wouldn't do, go on a meaningless killing spree of Thalos worshipers (meaningless to the game but not the player) and pretend most of the way

I come to the realization that this is a computer game, and computer games have limitations so my RP has to fit within the limitations of the game. Tabletop RPing has it's own limitations too does it not? like give me some basic actions and describe to me how you do them in a tabletop game? swinging a sword, talking to a dragon, planting crops in your garden/greenhouse. What is your audio and visual experience when it comes to tabletop games?

Am i correct in assuming that you also have some trade offs when it comes to tabletop? to me the trade off for RPing in a PC game is worth it. I lose some freedom and flexibility, but i'm not some monopoly-like piece on a paper map, using my own voice to carry on a conversation between myself and a dragon. In a PC game i'm actually in a dungeon walking around...when i'm talking to a dragon i'm actually listening to him speak...when i swing my sword i'm not doing dice rolls, thac0, rolls or however the system works nowadays. I click my mouse button my character swings her 2h greatsword and she takes some bandits head off in a sweet finishing move.

As people already mentioned, pretending and your imagination are your best allies. Especially the second one.

For example, just today, Arinbjorn, my character, has arrived to Solstheim to find out that, as he was afraid (but never imagined that it'd be that bad), it is no longer the land his forefathers reigned upon, and loved. The shock has been pretty hard on him. And when he discovered it was the Red Mountain to blame, he cursed it, with all his heart.

Very tragic, but an awesome roleplaying from my part

Basically a lot of pretend, especially since the game can only offer me the choices it's coded to.

Singleplayer? yah probably not for a long time. Maybe if the computer systems from Skynet and The Matrix got together and had themselves a little baby we could play "that game" on their offspring super AI computer.

Multiplayer? I would say yes. Eve online is probably a good example of such a game, but of course EVE is mostly PVP. But having all that player interaction leads to lots of random events. You become the others players random event, and you become their random event. Unfortunately games that are entirely PVP end up being contests in who can become the biggest dirtbag. I've played EVE for a few months and also DayZ and there is little to no incentive in those games for acting civil.

1-Oh yes, group cooperation being the hardest element to be achieved. But I see a good side to this, because there are other people to roleplay with, you can't simply pretend your way, you have to adjust to them, you see? The magic word is "interaction".

2-Tabletop is, like, 95% verbal based. You say everything, maybe acting when enthusiastic. The acting may be good for some, because it helps them feel like someone else, brings more "escapism".

3-I'm sorry, you mean my basis for imagination? Because if so, everything, really, including Skyrim. In certain moments, we may use recordings, soundtracks and lights off to help bring different feelings, but's hardly necessary.

4-Yes, immersion is certainly easier, otherwise I wouldn't have fun playing it. Combat is more complex and tactical, if that's one ideal, and I can decapitate anytime I want it hehehehehe.

Funny, I would say those are the same allies to tabletop, but I don't seem to equalize one with the other.

The last awesome roleplaying I had involved dealing with a subordinate's sense of hopeleness, and how that made him corruptible, then explaining to him why my character, Basil, is so enthusiastic leading his troops, because he was green and 15 once, in his first battle, and during the charge crapped his armor. Them, a veteran grabs him up, shouts in his face how he's not the first neither the last to do that, and go kill a troll. 40 years later, he's a Legatis, comanding elite troops, trying to prevent every ally from feeling "crappy" like he did. And it was awesome not only to me, but also to the other players in my group (because they were impressed enough not to make poop jokes at the time).

PS: is that me or my reply feels like a counter in a competition ?

It's certainly dependant on what RP is for you.

But it's obvious that a game isn't able to give you the same freedom as a tabletop rpg (I'm more used to call it pen&paper for whatever reason) with a human game master, who can dynamically react to whatever the players are doing.

This is especially true if you (deliberately or unknowingly) try to do stuff that's basically like going in the opposite direction the game intends you to go.

You said in a tabletop (or pen&paper*) game, nothing would stop you from going to Akavir. That's only true if your game master is ready for this adventure. If he has not foreseen you would want to do this, and he has no source material about Akavir at hand, he probably wouldn't be happy about this idea.

It's like if he would have bought source material and prepared days or weeks for a new campaign in Skyrim, and the first decision of the players is "let's go to High Rock!"

"So I ask of you, how do you roleplay despite the limitations?" - Roleplaying in a game is much easier if you don't go straight on collision course with the limitations.

As many have already said, imagination, pretending, creative freedom is key.

For me there are different aspects of roleplaying, and roleplaying in Skyrim is different from roleplaying in a tabletop group (and even they can differ greatly). It's more focused on immersion and creating an entertaining and unique journey within the game's limitations.

It's actually really difficult to describe. As much as I like to describe roleplaying in Skyrim as a try to turn the game into a movie in my head, in comparision with tabletop I would say it's rather like writing my own book. Roleplaying in tabletop games is more about the what (do you want to do?) and in Skyrim it's more about the why (are you doing this?)

Edit: another stupid comparison, tabletop roleplaying is more third person perspective and game roleplaying is more first person perspective. If that makes sense (It probably doesn't).

*why I'm constantly thinking of games like W40k when I'm saying tabletop?

Because although it claims to be an RPG, it fails where many other past games have succeeded. I'd say Fallout 3 and NV has far better roleplay that Skyrim or Oblivion did.

As do I, though unfortunately the game won't really acknowledge that, much like any other dialogue option in it. Honestly, that makes it somewhat easier to pretend. At least, it does to me.

1-I don't actually bother to define it, even because I would be hard pressed to find agreement in my own group.

2-Agreed.

3-I could argue an experienced master plays along, but it's too much of an individual trait to be generalized. I would improvise the details to prepare for such a trip in the imediate session*, then plan the rest before the next.

*Here is one of the greatest dificiencies of tabletop compared to Skyrim, guys: you can't pick up the joystick and simply start, you need everybody meeting together and such

4-While it may happen, it's an extreme example, and according to my master, such unused material is eventually recycled along the way, even if only to prevent the waste of time.

5-Work WITH the limitations, not despite it? It's doable.

6-Me, I consider both "what" and "why", but the vast majority of tabletop players focus on the what, as you say.

7-Actually, it does. It's about how internal the roleplaying is done, right? Expressing it physically versus mentally?

8- I would argue a table is more essential to WH40k than pen&paper rpg, as you suggest.

I'm starting to think that my "make-believe" depends on interpersonal interaction to work...

PS: You also think the fall of Crystal-Like-Law created a race-wide yet personal trauma upon them?

Coming from a serious Neverwinter Nights roleplaying server, I understand how you feel. It comes down to mood, the ability to pretend something happened and how faithful you are to any values your character has.

Wait, wait, wait. Are there serious NN RLing servers? Man, tell me more! There's a girl I know who would like to use those. Are there any in russian?

Neverwinter Nights 1's master server is down and is no longer being hosted by gamespy or anyone, so unfortunately you'd need to direct connect. Russian servers? Not sure. You'd have to look around but I know there are some serious ones that have a good story or a good 'set' for a story to be made.