The Pro Role Playing Discussion

[The Skarzs]

@Skarzs, okay my friend I want you to understand something, I was crediting your story on good characters while critiquing the fact that most (Not all) RP story's are bad. I wasn't saying anything about your RP being bad, it is actually quite good. Anywho..

. . . OH.




  I know you were just making points, and I respect that. I would respect it even if you were critiquing it, I just wanted to know the reasoning.

  I agree that many RPs lack story/purpose, partly because a lot of good ideas have already been used, and people are reluctant to reuse said ideas, even if they aren't sure if they have been used before or not. In that case, it is often up to the characters to make the plot mean anything, but as I said in the Roleplaying Revival topic, I feel that if the players really want the role-play to work, they need to help the GM.
  The game master is a person, just like everyone else, and they have things that keep them busy, as well as being prone to writer's block. If you see the RP beginning to fail, offer some ideas! That's how those massively popular/long RPs got so far; each player did what they could to improve the plot. In A Winter to Freeze Your Heart, the GM, HanNorwood, wasn't around for most of it, and they got so very far! What I mean to say is that the players must be more than just pieces, they must be placers of the pieces along with the game master.

[Izeroth]

 I think one problem with roleplays is that they simply go on for too long. To give an example: The Epic of the Golden Tomb. Because the characters remained in the town for too long, people lost interest in the RP, and the search party never even made it to the Golden Tomb.

[Hickory]

@Skarzs, okay my friend I want you to understand something, I was crediting your story on good characters while critiquing the fact that most (Not all) RP story's are bad. I wasn't saying anything about your RP being bad, it is actually quite good. Anywho..

. . . OH.




  I know you were just making points, and I respect that. I would respect it even if you were critiquing it, I just wanted to know the reasoning.

  I agree that many RPs lack story/purpose, partly because a lot of good ideas have already been used, and people are reluctant to reuse said ideas, even if they aren't sure if they have been used before or not. In that case, it is often up to the characters to make the plot mean anything, but as I said in the Roleplaying Revival topic, I feel that if the players really want the role-play to work, they need to help the GM.
  The game master is a person, just like everyone else, and they have things that keep them busy, as well as being prone to writer's block. If you see the RP beginning to fail, offer some ideas! That's how those massively popular/long RPs got so far; each player did what they could to improve the plot. In A Winter to Freeze Your Heart, the GM, HanNorwood, wasn't around for most of it, and they got so very far! What I mean to say is that the players must be more than just pieces, they must be placers of the pieces along with the game master.

I think a really good example of an RP is (not trying to be pig-headed here) one of my own creation , Winter wonderland, which, did, after all, die, mostly from inactivity, but it succeeded, I think, because it was a do-what-you-want RP, where it was a loose plot and loose rules, allowing creativity and openess.

Another good RP is M.R.S. Genesis, because

1.) Creative setting
2.) Creative plot
3.) Characters that work together
4.) A firm but gentle grip on the plot, allowing people room to expand while stopping any ambitous ideas     

[Dannflower Reguba]

       I have a few things to say on this topic.
   
       In regards to allowing a character to fail, indeed, there's certainly a need for people to be open to failure as the story becomes far more realistic with death and injury. That having been said, allowing those things makes your character vulnerable to other writers, causing a concern for loss of character, and discontinuing of participation in said RP. This makes it difficult to allow, a lot of incidents will involve a discussion between the party that falls, and the ones that would have an opportunity to take advantage of it. This is a lot of the reason why I love "A Winter to Freeze Your Heart," so much, is because multiple characters have died, and several that haven't have experienced heavy injuries. I'm not saying unrealistic things haven't happened, they most certainly have, but the communication has been amazing, and that's a huge part of being open to failure.

       Second one's a no-brainer, presence does not equal participation.

       Thirdly, yes, you should try to make things happen. That having been said, if you're in a conversation, or a duel, etc. and your partner(s) are giving you two line responses, you're not getting grade "A" material back. Forcing good posts is not good, because a forced good post is identifiable, and they just come across as excessive.

       The last one, I both disagree with to the core of my being, and couldn't be more in sync with. Reason being, if you spend a lot of time on a story, likely hood is, people are going to get confused, lost, annoyed, uninterested, etc. I speak from experience, every time I try to make an RP, I think all sorts of things through, I get the players involved, etc. And the RP proceeds to die within a month of release. Amazing stories have a higher likelyhood of being abandoned. The seemingly bland ones are popular because they're simple and FLEXIBLE. Let me say that again, FLEXIBLE. Flexibility is extremely important in an RP because people are prone to have epiphanies AFTER something starts. Again, going back to AWTFYH, it had a very typical, bland plotline, but it BECAME good through the efforts of the players, and the COMMUNICATION between the players to take advantage of major events. I'm not saying amazing story is bad, you just need to get a dedicated group of people who'll stick with you and keep things moving. Character sheets should be filled out well though, no argument there.

[LT Sandpaw]

Thanks Dan for both your agreement and you disagreement, those points you made were very good. I am wondering though, if you are one of the ten percent that actually make a good story, if you look at all the RPs they rely entirely on good characters and flexibility like you said.


Also besides that, I have another complaint to make, its about NPCs Non Player controlled or something like that, no one really cares what it means. However RPs need NPC on both sides to work, I have seen role playing going on where it seems the only characters there are the player and that player, they will mention that they have armies and other characters besides the Player controlled ones, but they never really get developed or really do anything besides getting in the way of some other players character. NPC's present a wonderful opportunity to have a good six or seven characters that you don't really have to care about and protect.

I'm not saying they are never used several players have utilized NPCs though never to their full potential. Heck I have even considered posting in a RP where I don't even use my original characters at all in that said post but just my NPCs (SiegeoTM).

Anyway something to think about, and remember not to take what I said out of context, I'm not saying to flood RPs with faceless meaningless NPCs that do nothing.


~LT Sandpaw Mathion Ledary

[Skyblade]

NPC's present a wonderful opportunity to have a good six or seven characters that you don't really have to care about and protect, therefor having the perfect opportunity to make the sensitive people cry. (Sorry Sky)

What does this mean?

[Lady Ashenwyte]

NPC's present a wonderful opportunity to have a good six or seven characters that you don't really have to care about and protect, therefor having the perfect opportunity to make the sensitive people cry. (Sorry Sky)

What does this mean?

Killing them in gory ways, I think.

[LT Sandpaw]

It was actually a joke, a mean one I'll admit... I'll remove it.

[Skyblade]

It's all good.

[Dannflower Reguba]

       NPC's (Non-player characters) are tricky. Reason being someone's gotta control them, and when multiple people control the same character at different times, agenda's clash, problems arise, etc. Their blandness typically comes from the simple fact that they aren't someone's character, so no one really puts the effort into giving them a "face," because at that point they really just become another one of their own characters with the same protective tendencies as others. I'm not saying NPC's are bad, they're most certainly essential to RP's, but they often become insanely difficult to incorporate because of the risks they pose.

       @LT: Race to Ascension was the RP I most had in mind, others I've tried to start but either crashed fast, or didn't even make it off the ground would be "The Dawn of Responsibility," "Attack and Defend - an Exercise of Strategy," "Finscéalta, miotais, agus Fables .. anois Réaltacht," and, "The Arena of Bound Fates ~ The Impossibilities of Escape." There's also, "Lost and Found: PEARLS," and another that I really would prefer stayed in the ground, but these ones aren't quite the same as the others.

[LT Sandpaw]

@Dan,

Okay neat, I'll have to go find RtA and read though it. BTW are you planning on starting any new RPs?

[Dannflower Reguba]

       I've given consideration to one I've had in my head for roughly.... two years now. Problem is, I really don't know if I'm up for it or not, because time and again the RP's I spend weeks perfecting just get flushed down a toilet. I'd absolutely love to start some super in-depth RP's, but experience says it's a bad idea.

       Oh, fair warning, Race to Ascension is a bit different. It was my attempt at running a 10 participant tournament, in a Roleplay/game of choice format. Players would Roleplay until they happened upon a situation I gave them where they had a select number of options to choose from. If you look it up, just read through the rules and some of the posts and it should all make sense.