/v/ - Video Games

>>15788791

It's easy to go straight good or evil, I agree maintaining a nuanced character is hard because you naturally have to make decisions. I think of it as a writing exercise where I have to try and understand the motivations of a character I made up and act accordingly, even better if my choices change over time and lead to an unexpected character development. Kotor gave me that feeling, surprisingly.

>>15788797

The only time i ever really got torn up over a choice in recent memory was Nier Automata where a character goes through something deeply traumatic and will kill themselves if you dont kill them or erase their memory first.

But even then it was my feelings rather than a role going 'this is a hard choice'. But in games where its like 'one of these traders is bitten by a lycanthrope and you are meant to protect the rest, what do?' its a easy 'kill him now or kill him when he turns, but prioritise the safety of the others' and becomes more analytical than 'what would this character do?'

>Single Player Games

>Longform, build your own character style rpg

>Reverted to following personal moral compass but often just being 'the good guy' like a generic rpg

Care to give an example?

Because I only have seen "No choices"(or they do not matter) and "Choose between Option 1 and 2 and get ending 1-4 depending on those" "RPGs".

>>15788791

the worst part of roleplaying in single player games is usually an either overly difficult situation for "a choice" or an uber item for making "the right choice"..

>>15788809

Well thats the thing isn't it, do only manufactured choice count?

Lets say some turbo autist loaded up Oblivion. Gets out of the sewers and decides "This run i am a poor wretch who will never fight again and become a merchant/self made man and see how far i can get".

Now the systems in place can support that, question is by avoiding most quests and just exploring the world is that 'playing it wrong' or just making their own experience like that autistic anon that had to fill his house with every aeylied statue from his grave robbing exploits, not for in game benefits but to satisfy his own quirks.

>>15788817

No wonder you revert back to beeing the good guy as if in a generic rpg.

Else you would not get any content out of the game.

>I will play 2D Mario, but only go left

Will only get you so far.

In contrast: Playing a naked Mage in Diablo Hellfire is not roleplaying but just a challenge.

Or perceptions of roleplaying have greatly changed.

>>15788840

Or to say it with other words:

>Play generic rpg

>wonder why you play as if you were playing a generic rpg

>>15788791

The sad thing is that most choices you can make in RPGs are tied to alignment. If you're planning on replaying the game, then you'll stick to one side for the entire playthrough to see everything related to that, and then do the oposite side in the next playthrough. There's never any real choice, you pick the Good choice because you're a Good character, not because you weighted the pros and cons of the situation.

I'm also quite sad that the roleplay potential for most singleplayer RPGs is incredibly shitty since you're often just a mercenary with a specialization in some form of combat-aplicable skills.

You can't be a Wizard that focus on enchantments, warding and information gathering, you can't actually be a priest while playing a Cleric, you can't dedicate your life to a career of crime as a Thief, etc, etc.

Even trading things around tends to not really happen since you always lose money from trading around to discourage exploiting the infinite gold merchants that populate the world.

The closest I get to this would be a fully modded Fallout TTW playthrough where I'll stick to 3 characters:

A commando that does the right thing for his fellow men, fielding excelent knowledge of weaponry and combat experience to live like a marine out in a mission.

A seductress that uses her Charisma to bypass any obstacle or her henchmens when that's not an option, selfish but not malicious, just self-centered.

A mysanthrope wild girl, young and ferocius. She relies on her fists and stealth to travel the world and scavenge for survival, complete psychopath.

A genious inventor, weak of body, strong of mind, that fields a large robotic army and Power Armor to vanquish any foes. Complete disregard for human life, science above all else.

Also of note would be Elona. You can pretty much dedicate yourself to a life of farming and animal breeding, playing the piano or stealing for a life.

There's plenty of content that isn't combat focused and I hear there's some overhauls like Omake that are focused around building entire towns, which I've yet to try.

CRPGs still haven't solved the problem of funneling the players into pre-programmed situations. You're not actually roleplaying in these games like you do in a tabletop RPG, rather, you're just twiddling stats and numbers and choosing from a very small, finite set of options for things to say or do.

>you come across a wounded elf on the road

CRPGs have you choose one:

>treat her wounds

>kill her because lol evulz

>say a druidic blessing and move on because fuck the world, you're true neutral

>get tiny morsel of story exposition in conversation that eventually loops back to this point in the dialogue tree

Tabletop RPG

>you can fuck the elf

>you can fuck her using as much evocative, sordid imagery as you want to simultaneously disgust and arouse the DM

>you could just do a cumshot on her face and laugh then walk away

>you could pat her on the head and tell party members elves are not for lewd but you would have to make a persuasion roll because that's a lie

>you could sit down with her and play chess

>maybe wax philosophical about the laws of magic in the game universe because you're a slightly senile old wizard

>>15788791

I agree with your take, I feel the same about KOTOR and wish character development was more thorough in it but/also when a game forces a good or bad ending on you, being nuanced while personally satisfying, feels like a waste of time. In KOTOR 2 you can save two of the Jedi masters and be a lightsider BUT disagree with for example the way Onderon is being run and that puts you at lethal odds with Kavar and thus all of the remaining JMs. I suppose in a way it shows another example of how draconian and inflexable the Jedi are so it kind of fits.

>>15788817

There is often a disconnect between what satisfies game parameters and what satisfies the player, though you can marry the two if the game is good enough, in Morrowind I had a tabletop completely covered in gems that I'd farmed from the world and made an autismal moon and star design with diamonds for the heavenly bodies, rubies for the ground (red mountain and all) and sapphires for the sky, it got to the point where I feared walking past the fucking thing for fear of knocking them out of line.

The problem is that game developers focus on the game part and not so much the roleplaying part. Usually you're penalized for roleplaying a character, when the game is really giving you two choices. i.e. Turn in your quest like a good boy and get a reward or murder the NPC and steal his phat loot. It's difficult to have a world where your actions aren't tied to some direct reward mechanic unless you have a live dungeon master or it's an MMO, because the game developers can't possibly foresee every possible action and the game is usually a focused experience aside from some silly side quests.

>>15788791

>Do you also have this problem?

I had it when i was younger but once the realization that the characters are just pixels/3d models programmed to act in certain ways after the player choices settled in, i actively looked for ways to take all the choices on a given game even if it means replaying it multiple times, my faulty memory ensures that i experience the game like it was the first time on each of my playthroughs.

>>15788856

Its one of those sad situations where you go 'why dont devs do X' and the best answer is 'theres a minecraft mod about that'. Say what you will about it becoming a memegame but with the right modpacks you and a friend can spawn in the same open world and one can start mining and working his way to a giant automated manufacturing complex or using mods that let you create npcs and turning into a townbuilding sim. While the other could become a INNWOODS hermit who summons demons via witchcraft or goes through portals and lives in other dimensions.

It makes me understand why goys bought fallout 76 for the idea of something similar in future even if they were fucking idiots for falling for todds repackaged skyrim mod.

>>15788846

I get the idea that the reason cRPGs are limited like this is because their world is a stage rather than a simulation.

There's a story the devs want to tell you and every NPC will play their role so you can see that story. You can pick a few choices to dress it differently but in the end it's still the story the devs wanted to tell you that takes priority over your choices and everything else is only as detailed as what's required to describe the many chapters that story goes for.

I believe this however keeps these games from blooming into what they should be, considering the unique aspect of videogames is their interactivity with the player.

Instead, RPG worlds should be full blown simulations, where every character is as detailed as the player and capable of independent action, acting out their stories at will. This way, if you find the wounded elf on the road, you can actually talk with her because NPCs understand the concept of relationships and the topics you pick to talk about, Even if she isn't relevant to your current quest, she still has the detail required for those things because everyone else does and it might just happen that she ends up becoming part of your history.

Ideally, there wouldn't even be an actual rigid and scripted story to tell. There's all the elements required for one, but they play out entirely based around the simulation.

If you have a Key of Death that unlocks mystical secrets, the tyranical king will want it not because he's scripted to be the villain but because his personality defines him as Greedy, Selfish and Ambitious.

But he won't be the only one trying to get the artifact (anyone with a similar personality or motivation will try it too) and he might not get the artifact in the end either.

Even more, with a proper simulation, he'd spend money and soldiers trying to get that artifact, resources that actually exist, are simulated and you can affect. You could even be one of the soldiers tasked for this.

You wouldn't necessarily have predictable encounters with his soldiers every now and then to keep things interesting, you'd only run into them if you were in the same spot they are searching currently.

The interesting bit here is that it helps to build actual characters. Say you meet a wizard and a rogue in a bar, whom you befriend. You learn that the wizard is found of arcane knowledge and seeks ancient relics for that, while the rogue is a daredevil thief with an heart of gold.

If you ever heard of a ruin that holds a powerfull tome, you could find the wizard inside, or you could feed him that rumor. If you ever saw the thief stealing something you could stop him, and later when you meet the kids that didn't eat because the thief had nothing to give them that night, you'd know who to blame.

Another interesting bit is that you don't actually have an official "gameover".

Did you fail to foil the plan of the villain? Well now you live in a world where he rules over all and you must survive however you can.

Did you die in your quest? You can start over again as someone else in a world that's familiar and already changed by your previous character. Or even "live" as a ghost in it for a while until you reincarnate somehow.

The entire simulation is obviously the hardest thing to do, but I get the idea that a game like this would sell like cupcakes if there's proper feedback to the player regarding how the world around him is working and moving.

I create characters and imagine their motivations and objectives, then how much they will deviate from whatever universal or cultural morality in the context of their world to get whatever they're trying to do done, and also tend to try to work in flaws or quirks stemming from either their history or events in the roleplaying that further develop into plans of action for approaching any given scenario. The hardest part for me in video games is that often games heavily encourage certain elements of my characters and don't let me explore others, so I also often try to make my characters fit into what the game systems allow or let me abstract gameplay into, as I suffer from min-max autism/desire to make my character's overall story as perfect as possible for the setting. Tons of times I restart everything if I find a small snag in my master plan, or I just only do this level of RP after I know everything there is to know about the game to avoid that. Also if the game has black/white morality attached to decisions I don't RP because I don't play SHIT.

>>15788935

>when you are just high tier lonely and its not clicked yet.

Sounds like you just want a family.

>>15788935

>Does things expecting a return and praise

>A hero

lmao no, brave sir valiant

>>15788935

Making the world a better place is the greatest reward.

>>15788886

Some games have attempted this. Daggerfall, Mount & Blade, Dwarf Fortress Adventurer. The idea has potential, and I hope more RPGs like this get made in the future.

>>15789033

Bannerlord looks like it might pull it off with mods in like twenty thousand years when it fucking comes out.

>>15788845

>The sad thing is that most choices you can make in RPGs are tied to alignment.

>If you're planning on replaying the game, then you'll stick to one side for the entire playthrough to see everything related to that, and then do the oposite side in the next playthrough.

>There's never any real choice, you pick the Good choice because you're a Good character, not because you weighted the pros and cons of the situation.

Pretty much this, especially if game mechanics are locked behind the alignments such as Fable 1 and KotOR 1&2.

Though if I'm playing a game with choices that don't really force you down a path I tend to play more along the lines of a 'true neutral' character if I had to use DnD terms.

I'll generally look out for personal gain, sometimes I may choose the morally righteous way despite losing out on rewards if I sympathize with the with the cause/NPC but a lot of the time I'm willing to backstab and steal.

I guess you could look at it as 'power gaming' where I sometimes get swayed into not being a dick.

>>15788935

There's something low-key reprehensible about your post. Maybe the obvious wanting something in return for good deeds, or the fact that you tried to blog about it.

Maybe a little of both.

You should probably do a little less so you won't feel used.

By the end of the day, the whole roleplaying thing is stupid. For tabletop games, roleplaying is a poor substitute for all the stuff is missing: sounds and graphics. For video games, you have gameplay, sounds and graphics so why would you need roleplaying?

>>15789097

>roleplaying is a substitute for sounds and graphics

You're an idiot. Roleplaying is for immersion purposes. Even the most realistic video game can still be less immersive than your typical DnD sesh. Inversely, games like Deus Ex or System Shock or Fallout 2 are more immersive than even the best DnD sessions.

>>15789063

>if I sympathize with the with the cause… willing to backstab and steal

Does a mix of good and evil make a true neutral though? I thought neutral was more like an un-sympathizing "Never go out of your way to do good if it doesn't pay extra and never go through the hassle of committing evil deeds unless someone forces your hand.".

>>15789097

You're what's stupid, anon. Unimaginative, too.

>>15789107

Neutral is whatever the other alignments in the game aren't. It can be a lot of different things.

If a game has a two-sided karma meter, ambivalence is the only way to be neutral.

>>15788840

>No wonder you revert back to beeing the good guy as if in a generic rpg.

>Else you would not get any content out of the game.

>I will play 2D Mario, but only go left Will only get you so far.

I think you mistook his example of Oblivion's bad mechanics with the idea of limiting what you can do as shaving off almost all the content in game. In his defense, his example would work far better in certain other games, its just that any elder scrolls that goes from Morrowind back would be a better example. One that comes to mind is the space game Avorion. If he wanted to avoid fighting and just become a wretch turned merchant/space miner (not hard as you pretty much start with next to nothing) , there is nothing really stopping him from doing that. You can mine the crap out of ore-filled asteroids, sell the material and purchase better drills, build a larger ship, add cargo holds, and start making trade runs to different systems. Want to drop mining entirely for trading or switch over to salvaging dead ships? Change out the old parts of your ship, or build a brand new one. Don't want to fight? You don't have to, just get out of combat range, set yourself for a jump, and jump. Or have the local security forces fight them and scavenge the dead ships.

It doesn't have to be mechanical gimps for a challenge. It could be something as simple as a thief in ye Olde fantasy RPG who always uses the front door, just as an extra " fuck you" to the local guard and residents. It could be a warrior who uses shortswords only as a homage to the mentor who taught him. Yes, you can make it go against you (a junkie who thinks that "as soon as you find it" is the right time for using drugs in New Vegas, consequences be damned) but there is also plenty of room for player freedom, provided the devs don't make only one way to solve problems or quests. And shit, even then players will still want to do things their own way

>>15789135

If a game has a two-sided karma meter, you waste your time by playing it.

>>15788935

This is pathological empathy. You act this way because deep down you expect everyone else to do it as well, that the world would be a much better place if everyone else cared about everyone else just like you do. That maybe the weight upon your shoulders wouldn't be this hard to carry if you had help.

It's how you rationalize your stance in the world and how you avoid falling into despair or depravity, by doing the right thing because you know it puts you above everyone else.

It's moral mastusbation since you're grandstanding to yourself alone, but as long as you keep being virtuous, you're the "winner" anyway.

It's far easier to care for other people than for yourself, and this includes caring for others so they'll reciprocate as well, taking care of you too.

It's the drive behind support\healer mains and every Paladin that actually plays that role, to support expecting attention and care in exchange for that.

You want to help and provide for just so everyone has a reason to care about you. You need others to need you so there's a reason for them to even think about you.

Welcome to the club, how's the suffering going, pal?

>>15789097

You're making the classic mistake of confusing Roleplaying with Pretending.

Pretending is when you tell yourself that something is happening, even though it really isn't. It makes you happy to imagine that things are happening in a specific way but nothing outside of your mind acknowledges it.

Roleplaying however is your actions affecting something by specific rules in that system, where the game acknowledges what you decided to do and changes based on it.

For tabletop, saying that you're an eloquent character is just pretending. Getting +3 to Bluff because of how eloquent you are however is roleplaying.

For videogames, eating food items every now and then because you're hungry is pretending your character has needs. But if you install mods or the base game supports hunger mechanics, you're roleplaying the need to eat.

>>15789148

Also true.

>>15788939

Nailed it. Growing up sucked and vidya characters at that time literally meant more to me than family.

>>15788940

When I was like 8 I would give the Christmas money I got for Christmas/my birthday to my local church for homeless people. It's literally a baked-in defense mechanism that I'm actively trying to get rid of, because I myself know I'm a fraud. If you've had a serious behavioral problem you might know that this sort of thing doesn't change overnight, but yes, you are absolutely correct. I want to be a hero, but I'm the person who knows most exactly how much I am not one. It actually fools most people., which makes me feel less understood. If I could snap my fingers and get rid of this stupid as fuck problem, I would.

>>15788976

Behavior like that certain helped me break the ice socially, but again, it's all purely selfish/fear-motivated on my part and just desirable on theirs.

>>15789067

I think you're absolutely right. Defense mechanisms are poor illogical ways of seeing things and all spiral downwards - the question is whether we can outrun the spiral, and everyone eventually does get tired. Right now I continue to displace my frustration productively, as I've been able to do in the past, but yeah, it's catching up as I age.

>>15789078

>low-key reprehensible

>or the fact that you tried to blog about it.

I'm a little relieved that the behavior is objectively reprehensible from a healthier person's perspective, because it does confirm to me that I should feel bad about it. I've never posted about this shit anywhere; OP was about roleplaying, if we do it, and why or maybe I just made it that in my head as an excuse? Like everyone else here, I want absolutely fucking zero karma points or reddit gold or whatever. I don't go telling this shit to people IRL, either.

>>15789151

>It's moral mastusbation since you're grandstanding to yourself alone

I am literally the only person in my life who I had to talk to during objectively very difficult developmental stages, looking back. I am trapped in a world where even love that people do express to me feels hollow and meaningless because I feel I haven't earned it through any genuine action. Moral masturbation, but when you're an "emotional" incel, what's one to do?

>how's the suffering

It's very tiresome. I am not above thinking I should not be hated for trying to be something I'm not, I just find myself here, mentally. I need therapy but don't want (((pills))).

>>15789767

Good post, anon.

Sorry, everyone. I won't blog post again. I was having fun with you all playing skribbl.io and will get back to that…

>>15789151

I don't think I completely agree with your definitions of roleplaying, you just seem to say that there must be mechanics in place to facilitate your actions and character's characteristics.

The stats and mechanics are there for you, making it easier to picture the character you're trying to create and walk in their shoes.

>Saying that you're an eloquent character is just pretending.

>Getting +3 to Bluff because of how eloquent you are - is still pretending.

In order to roleplay, you need to attempt to embody your character. It's the same rule as when writing fiction, 'show, don't tell'. You don't simply say 'yeah my character is super well-spoken guise', you also don't merely point down to your paper where it says '+5 to speech'.

When you speak as your character you have to actually do so in a manner where other people think 'oh this guy is really eloquent' without needing you to expressly tell them.

For a clearer example, how would you roleplay a brutish barbarian?

>Here look, I put points into dual wielding axes and 'berserker's rage'

Or would you rather have your character act and talk in a manner suiting that archetype?

In games you can pretend your character is hungry with or without a hunger bar, but knowing that there will be consequences for not eating makes it easier to emphasize and imagine that he's actually hungry.

You can play a game with a hunger system and not roleplay, instead of connecting with your character and thinking 'oh shit, I'm getting hungry', someone could just consider it as a bar they need to fill through mechanics of the game.

>>15789830

>Good post, anon.

Knowing you're such a people-pleaser, I can't tell if you're being genuine.But I don't care, thanks either way.

>>15789830

>It's literally a baked-in defense mechanism that I'm actively trying to get rid of, because I myself know I'm a fraud. If you've had a serious behavioral problem you might know that this sort of thing doesn't change overnight, but yes, you are absolutely correct. I want to be a hero, but I'm the person who knows most exactly how much I am not one. It actually fools most people., which makes me feel less understood.

It's not an uncommon philosophical argument to say that there is no true altruism since we all want something back for our actions and energy, even if it's just having others think of you in a positive light.

I tend to agree with that thought.

I'm a firm believer in 'treat others as you want to be treated' but there are multiple issues with that. Firstly many people don't subscribe to that way of thinking and secondly everyone doesn't want to be treated the same as you.

I've grown jaded and fully expect everyone to in the end always act out of self-interest, so I do the same without feeling bad for doing so. I'll still try to follow 'the golden rule' to the best of my ability but that mostly encompasses avoiding to do things that affect people negatively rather than trying to do good things for them.

But I also like fucking with autists on the internet and since I don't think words can (or should to someone relatively sound of mind) inflict harm, that doesn't conflict with my principles.

>If I could snap my fingers and get rid of this stupid as fuck problem, I would.

Work on hating people for being untrustworthy and ungrateful, you'll get there eventually.

>>15789893

>I can't tell if you're being genuine

I wish I knew whether I was being genuine, but I did think it was good. Made me want to watch trailer park boys also, which I never finished

>>15789969

>there is no true altruism

>rather than do good, don't do harm

Absolutely agree with what you wrote, just won't blogpost anymore

>>15788791

What game can you even play a nuanced character? Everything is always black and white. Where white is be a normal person and black is be a despicable evil piece of subhuman shit with these retarded choices that would never even make sense to anyone.

>>15790041

The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim GOTY Remastered Digital Edition: Now with full-HD downloadable Digital Map included with your preorder

>>15788886

Reddit and ResetEra feedback will ruin this kind if game if any big budget dev attempts it. Unless this is a huge text adventure that casuals won't play I doubt any modern game company wants to fund such a lofty project with modern assets. This sucks because I want this kind of game to be made.

Also why the limitation of text only? Because text strings are easier to generate than terrain, npc models, pictures, etc. The descriptors leave much ofthe game up to player imagination. Plus you can still program simulations with actual physics and have a system that outputs the result of the strings based on results. Also text commands by the player can be interpreted by the system in more complex lines if done right. So you could have the npcs be a chat bot that references a database of personality traits.

>>15790022

That's a good TL;DR of my post.

I mean there's nothing inherently 'evil' or wrong with doing good things and expecting the same kindness in return (so don't beat yourself up over it).

The problem is that you're doing yourself a disservice because that's not how the world works and it hinders you from living your own life to the fullest. But you seem to be fully aware of this.

>>15790041

MGS4 is a pretty good one. Theres so many things like bosses with none lethal endings that most casual players dont even know about. Many at the time thought it was 'too action shooterey' but only because kojimas autism hid some mechanics too well.

Like theres a windspeed/direction mechanic most think is never used only because they never figured out how to.

>>15789767

You know what was a game that did alignment and player choice slightly better?

The Suffering and its sequel, The Suffering: Ties That Bind.

There is a good, evil, & neutral ending for both games. The easiest thing to do is just ignore people asking for help and not going out of your way to hurt them. Evil is actually almost as easy (just kill everyone who needs help/go out of your way to harm others), but if you do an evil run in the first game, you can't carry its save (the morality) over to the second game.

Being a good guy took far more effort because you had to escort people (though most of them, except two escorts out of both games, are armed), though doing the right thing can be very hard in real life.

>>15788935

Games have trained you to believe that good deeds result in rewards, like gold and rare weapons. In real life, rewards are rarely given, they are taken.

>>15790074

>The Suffering and its sequel, The Suffering: Ties That Bind.

Never played them but sounds a bit interesting.

Also you just reminded me of some details about the Fable: TLC morality system I really hated.

>All hostile NPC's such as bandits and monsters give good boy points

>Even if you do nothing but fight for your own survival and only do the main quests that progress the story, you'll be considered 'good' for no effort at all

>In order to progress through the game as an evil character you have to systematically slaughter every innocent person that runs across your way in a tug-of-war battle with your own alignment meter

>There is no neutral ending

>>15790066

>But you seem to be fully aware of this.

That's why I'm trying to change. There was a nebulous conception of this that began a couple of years ago, but I was not in a position where I could cripple my own momentum by questioning what has been a foundational motive to struggle. It had to wait. So here I am. I'm trying to not make the mistake of thinking I can change an ingrained habit as suddenly as I want, because even if I could, that's almost the very definition of mania. Thank you very much for your understanding, it means a lot.

>>15790076

>they are taken

I give candy, I take smiles. Is it a "fair" transaction? Is it selfish to attempt to manipulate them, or is it manipulative of them to smile when they see me?

>play KOTOR

>want to be a nice sith so I can use force lightning and choke for good

>want to bake cookies and shit

>get turned light

>fuck it

>genocide everything

>have to keep genociding everything or risk losing my dark paladin status

>>15790118

If you minmax your attributes and gear with high willpower and charisma you can be a full light side Jedi and spam AoE lightning all day without your forcepoints going down.

>>15790108

I think what he's saying is that it's very rare to get something greater in return for something lesser, meaning that being generous puts you at a net loss since we don't live in an utopia where everyone returns kindness equally. 'Good feels' is not a currency that can be used to improve your life. Time and money can improve your life and those are things you waste on other people.

I find it easy to justify minor acts of generosity if it doesn't affect you monetarily or wastes your time and you don't expect a return other than a warm feeling in your stomach.

I very occasionally give some random cute homeless chick a cigarette or some sympathetic looking dude a coin or two for beer money but I do it very sparingly and only to those that appeal to me in some way (fuck off, gypsies). I get a nice feeling for having brightened their day and I probably never have to see them again, all at a cost that I won't even notice having paid.

But if you're doing it in an almost pathological manner like another anon put it, where you want everyone to like you so badly that you go out of your way to do nice things wasting both time and money that could have been spent on achieving higher goals, enjoyment and happiness for yourself, you're being taken advantage of.

Wow I'm really bad at compiling my thoughts into a single sentence or two.

>>15790285

Oh, but of course you'll want to build relationships with some people during your life. I'd say don't put effort into making people like you if they don't appear to already naturally do so and don't do it out of a need for wanting to appease everyone, do it because you like specifically them. Also don't be too generous. Start small and if they don't return your kindness in an equal measure, stop being kind.

Again, yes this is egotistical in nature but like we agreed on there is no 'true altruism'.

>>15789893

Asking a little much there. Handicapping yourself is easy, buy acting above your own skills is not. The only way to act as someone who's super persuasive without actually being that skilled yourself is to have somebody else write the lines for you. That "+5" exists for a reason

I think it'd be easier to roleplay in a multiplayer game, as you actually have an audience to play the role for and more freedom to express the character. Then again I've never had the autism/balls required to roleplay in front of others so I have no real idea.

>What games draw out your deepest 'Tism

CDDA. The most fun I've ever had with a run was the time I played a horny teenager who collected every piece of female underwear he could find and covered his bed with them, then spent a day stalking the first female survivor he found. Ended up dying in a fire he created with several backpacks full of panties and bras on him.