Current mood:	calm
Current music:	Weird Al - All About the Pentiums

No telepaths about? Then why should we care what you're thinking?
I'm of the mind that if you're playing on a chat/MU*, you should only post what your character says and does, not what they're thinking while they see it. In chat-RP, internal monologues serve only two purposes, IMO:

1. It's a cheap way to get the character attention or sympathy without actually having to worry about that pesky ROLEPLAY. I have seen countless instances when characters have either been influenced by or try to influence people through the use of internal monologues.

Characters who sit alone and sigh, making no attempt at interaction, are mostly ignored, as they would be IRL because people assume they want to be alone or that they may be waiting for someone. But put something like, "*sighs, feeling the loneliness that has weighed on her for months without an end in sight...even this place of peace offers no succor*" on the screen and suddenly two characters are coming over to say hello. What's the difference between the former and the latter in the eyes of the CHARACTERS? Absolutely nothing, but the internal monologue presented by the PLAYER makes the difference. It's the mental equivalent of, "*stumbles in, covered in blood*", and it's just as cheesy.

2. It's a poor attempt to justify a character's actions/opinions that appear inappropriate or inflammatory.

That's the thing - IRL people only see how things -appear- until they're explained outwardly. The characters' responses to situations should be influenced by how things APPEAR, not by a mental exposition of what's going on inside the character's mind. Writers are told to "show, not tell" when writing, to better draw the reader into the story. Internal monologues are doing just the opposite, they're telling, not showing.

Along the same line, internal monologues eliminate completely the possibility for IC misunderstandings for all but the most steadfast of players. There is so much possibility for conflict and good RP to be found through misunderstandings and miscommunication, but when any action is followed by an internal monologue to justify it, those roleplaying possibilities are squelched.

For example: A character has just lost a dear friend and is inconsolable. Someone is attempting to comfort them, while others watch and sympathize. The character asks tearfully, "Will the hurting ever stop? How can I ever smile again without him?"

Of the following two responses from one of the observers, which would cause more roleplaying possibilities?

Jonathan> *snorts a soft laugh, shaking his head*

Or

Jonathan> *snorts a soft laugh and shakes his head, remembering how, after the loss of his beloved Anya, his Pooka friend Matthew had played prank after prank until he learned to laugh again*

The former would likely rouse everyone's ire and the character would be reproached or perhaps attacked for his APPARENT lack of caring. The latter would likely be ignored, as the players understood that there was no ACTUAL malice behind the out-of-place laughter. No need to roleplay any misunderstanding or miscommunication. As the meaning was clear to the -players-, it's not necessary to put the characters through that hassle.

Apparent vs. Actual, Appearance vs. Reality...it's the very stuff of roleplaying. Internal monologues, no matter how we players try to have our characters react realistically, will almost always influence how we play our characters' reactions.

I tested this quite successfully in one of the chat rooms that was a "border" room (ie, the chat room bordered the local Werewolf Caern but was outside the bawn). I thought it would be an interesting idea to play a Kinfolk wildlife photographer who sat in a tree blind and photographed all the lions and tigers and bears in the woods for eventual publication (because we all know that Simba, Khan and Gurahl are all buddies with the local American Garou). No sooner had I posted: "*writes in her journal: Day One - heard some odd animal calls today, but no sightings as yet*" (this was my own blunder - see below), a wandering Khan in Feline form had spotted her, climbed the tree and destroyed the blind, causing her to fall to her death. Funny, considering that hadn't said a damned thing, but the character knew within seconds of my post where she was, what tree she was in and exactly what kind of danger she may have posed to the Veil.

The worst (and I made this mistake above) is when the characters don't say anything at all, but the players aren't satisfied to leave it at that and narrate their character's silent thoughts, or in some cases, their stupidity. I've seen, on a few occasions, a player narrate a character's one-word responses just to illustrated how stupid the character is: "*an intelligent person would have understood the underlying threat to the Eshu's words, but since she is not intelligent in the least, just nods confusedly, her standard response to anything other than direct questions.*"

The above example falls under both categories of internal monologues: The player is showing both that she is far more intelligent than the character (and thus her character is worth more IC attention than the stupid brute would otherwise get), and showing that the character's nod is not acquiescence, but a response out of puzzlement, so no harm will befall her for not acknowledging the threat.

"What are we supposed to do, then?" you may ask. Easy - post what your character says and does, NOT what s/he thinks. Sure, it may lead to some misunderstandings, but that's what roleplaying is all about. Nobody is able to make himself perfectly clear all the time, so how in the world can we expect the same of our characters?

So yeah, those are my thoughts regarding the previous post about putting IC thoughts into their character posts. I figured it was a bit long for a comment, and I apologize if it's too repetitious.

This also isn't mean to apply to journal/message-board RP's - that's more of the collaborative writing exercises that another poster mentioned, and isn't the same thing.

tanya