Of course, some core and central aspects of a character will usually remain, although even then if there is no flexibility at all there's a real danger you end up playing a caricature rather than a character.
Perhaps I interpreted it wrongly, but the OP felt like an attack on the RP interactions.
While they may be a little out of hand at times, it didn't sit well.
I'd not speak for THP (I'm sure he can do that for himself just fine
) but I'm not sure there's an 'attack' on any of the RP folks, just one of those situations where, whether in-character or not, some people do things that just seem unhelpful or counterproductive to others.
I have quite a few problems imagining any great state occasions where the 'head of state' (and it's not just the current Casca cycle where this has happened) turns up to be abused and insulted by a bunch of local councillors, who then start the equivalent of a food-fight amongst themselves..... but there have been a few UO occasions where that seemed to be precisely what was going on.
We don't like the crowds at EM events spamming 'give items', but is it really so hugely different from a bunch of people saying 'me and what I think are most important, so I'm going to insult and scream until I "win"', no matter whether IC or out of it?
The 'freedom' to speak and act allowed by the game, and the lack of consequence for those actions within the game world, means that sometimes the RP is not particularly credible, or edifying. Sure, 'in-character' there's a hell of a lot of leeway since it's
your character, but sometimes it's a little too self-referential, and especially to outside observers simply bizarre or confusing.
People are fond of citing the differences between standalone solo RPGs and MMORPGs - there's also a certain boundary between RPing to your own friends and community, and engaging the rest of the game world. That balance gets skewed very easily, and thus to the rest of the people watching, the RP element can make a very poor impression.