This is based on an improvisation workshop I recently attended, my general knowledge of improvised theatre, and my experience roleplaying furry scenarios online.
---
I recently attended an (LGBTQ+) improvisation/theatresports workshop. There were four participants (including myself) and two coordinators. Four was a small group for two coordinators but enough to make things workable. There were two sessions, each lasting roughly five hours (with breaks). In the first session we were taken through a series of exercises regarding movement, reacting to others, replying without "censoring" one's reply, and establishing character and location quickly. From there we performed short improvised two-person "scenes", with occasional prompts from the director to demonstrate how to improve a scene's movement. We were invited to bring in a prop and a character concept for a "soap opera" the next week for the second session; talked "as" our character to the group; and indeed improvised an episode of the soap opera. Apparently the "soap" is a common structure for improvised performances as it's a well known and succinct dramatic format.
There is a lot I could talk about here as pertains to improving the quality of furry roleplay. At the workshop, the "character interaction" scenes were what I see as most analogous to furry online roleplay interactions (FORIs). In this essay, I describe some improvisation concepts that can be applied to improve a scene; and I assert that if these concepts were more widely known and applied by people engaging in FORI, the average quality of these interactions would approve and I would be a happier online animal person (OAP).
The form of the character interaction scenes was as such:
The two performers then interact and attempt to establish a dramatic scene while simultaneously preserving the integrity of the scene. Here is an example.
A is lying on her side on the three chairs, her face toward the back of the chairs and away from the audience.My reading of the implications from this would be:
Much about the scene has now been established. We have a location, a scenario, and a dynamic which can quickly be expanded to a defined relationship (Romantic partners? Family?).
There were two concepts that were stressed in the workshop as important and leading to better roleplay, which were:
Offers are important. If you only get one thing from this, I hope it is the concept of a roleplay offer. An offer, in improv parlance, is the suggestion of where a scenario should go. Take B's offer:
> B, LOOSELY: How long did they say the bus was delayed?
In this, B is "offering" the idea that they are at a bus station. Some roleplayers or writers might describe the bus station elaborately. Unless you both really like bus stations and the appearance of them, this is a mistake! It both stops A from potentially responding creatively (maybe the bus stop is in the middle of a wood!) and takes additional time when you haven't established the relationship of the characters yet; and the relationship is what most people are there for.
A's response to B's offer can be categorized in three ways: Accepting, Passing, and Blocking.
Accepting is agreeing with the premise of an offer, and adding something new to it.
> A: I already told you, fuckhead. Five hours.
A has accepted the two of them are waiting for a bus, and is adding a NEW offer to it: That the two of them are not strangers. If this continues back and forth, and the offers lead to dramatic situations, we have good roleplay.
Passing is agreeing with the premise of an offer, but not adding anything new in your response about the situation.
> A: Five hours.
A accepts the bus premise but doesn't give B anything new to work with. Passing is what leads to one person "carrying" a scene if the other doesn't give them anything to work with. It can be used to excellent effect if one person is in a monologue and the best thing to do is get out of their way (I think of the Hammock District bit as an excellent example of this) but this should be done sparingly if at all in text roleplay as it's not as fast to type as it is to talk.
Blocking is disagreeing with the premise of an offer.
> A: What bus? I am a humble cabbage farmer.
It is impossible to roleplay if you do not agree about the premise of the situation; or worse, are fighting about the premise of the situation.
I will now apply this concept to three distinct kink roleplay problems that I've seen.
1. I'M BIGGER THAN YOU!
There is the phenomenon of the dominant or macrofur who asserts they are the largest or most powerful and will only play with people who accept this premise. This person is guaranteed to be a bad roleplayer because they are stating upfront that they will Block all your offers. Why would you want to play with a person who will not even think about your preferences?
2. IDK I'M INTO ANYTHING.
Roleplayers without a strong sense of what they want will be constantly Passing and will want to be spoon-fed the scenario. I'm sympathetic - not being able to articulate your desires often comes from a painful place - but it leads to dull roleplay.
3. WHY DON'T I ENJOY THIS ANYMORE?
A more subtle problem I see among experienced roleplayers is that they get good at Accepting and responding to offers; but since it's a social activity, they are working beyond the skills of most people on RP websites, and get frustrated when people do not respond in kind, instead preferring to articulate better-quality scenarios on platforms like Twitter.
The other workshop concept I see as applicable to FORIs is Not Workshopping Yourself, or Not Censoring Yourself. I favour Workshopping to avoid political overtones in this essay in particular (interesting, but that's a different essay). You should be able to respond to an offer with the very first thing that comes to mind, and not have to process what comes to mind into an "acceptable" form.
This requires trust between the performers, and the ability to handle awkwardness. One of the workshop coordinators talked of (something like?) making eye contact with an obese woman in the audience and then saying "Fat" to respond to some prompt in the improvisation; and how this was inavoidable if you wanted to give a good performance. The trust was that if you did this, it would not reflect negatively on you.