No really, I'm curious as I'm sure everyone who's ever made an rp only to have it flop completely. When you see an interesting roleplay and you check it out what is it that makes you decide not to submit a character?
Printable View
No really, I'm curious as I'm sure everyone who's ever made an rp only to have it flop completely. When you see an interesting roleplay and you check it out what is it that makes you decide not to submit a character?
For me it's the level of literacy and the spare time I got which puts me off. Those are the first things I think off. When it comes to the roleplay in itself I need some more time to think of an answer.
For me, it is the originality of the plot and the time it seems that the GM has put into crafting the game. I also prefer "Chapter" games over location games- though I will play location games if the theme is good and works with the local type setting. If a game does seem interesting, I will see if I can picture a character in the setting. If I cannot, I pass. The GM has to seem dedicated and able to lead a story, but at the same time adaptable enough to roll with the punches that good players will throw their way.
I generally pass on unscripted games. The "here is a setting aaaand...go" type games. They tend to fizzle out and have no direction. People "blow their wad" on their character angst/history fairly quickly and then there is nothing left interesting in the game.
There is also just that initial feeling. The feeling you get when you read the overview and know that you just have to join a game. Some games just don't have that. They feel flat and uninspired.
Also, I hate elves. It is an irrational hatred, but a strong one that whips me up into a frothy rage (which is 7 times more potent than a plain old rage). As such, I steer clear of games that are "pick a race", meaning that any race is allowed.
----------edit------>
Another thing that makes me skip a game- if I go to read the over view and it is type in size 1 font in light colors that I can't read, I don't bother.
For me, it's 30% not knowing if I have the time to devote to the game. I tend to let myself get caught up in whatever I have enthusiasm for at the moment/what I have with a deadline, and neglect other things if they don't have a deadline/whatever. I'm better about this than I used to be, but...
The other 60% is divided up amongst these:
a) I may know the internet habits of the host or the initial players and think that it's likely the game won't last long.
b) The premise isn't clear enough for me to be sure the host has an idea of where to go with it (meaning it's likely to fizzle out).
c) The host or players aren't around much... meaning it'll be up against my first issue - getting caught up in something else because I feel sure that "no one will notice" if I don't post that day/for a few days... And sometimes those time extensions can get longer and longer... >_>; It's a bad habit.
and...then there's...
D) I've also realized something a little upsetting to me, personally. xD; You may think that with me running the site, I have a lot of experience doing forum rpgs. But I don't. Hardly any, actually.
I thought that the reason I wasn't enjoying the games I'd participated in before was because of various reasons (the first series being that I played with that group in chat and the slower pace wasn't good for either of us, the second being a game that the player was quite young and we weren't well matched, third never got off the ground, fourth was that the setting wasn't what the host described it as and the players and hosts kept disappearing and then I got caught up with work)... But, really, it's just that my experience is almost entirely chat-based gaming and that style suits me better.
So there are a crackton of games here that I would just kill to play, but I struggle to actually play them in the forums the way they're currently set up. I am considering asking if people are interested in doing chat rps in IRC instead, so I can rp with people as a more regular, scheduled thing rather than in the forums. >_>; And use the site to store the chat logs and character information. ::shrug::
Of course, the post above probably makes it sound like I don't like the site (obviously, I'm very invested in it and want to make the forum features as great as possible for those who don't struggle with it the way I do xD) or that I'm not invested in the games I am playing (I am, but the games themselves are struggling). It's just an explanation why I didn't join games I was extremely excited about and why I'm not pushing my own game to get off the ground. xD
I have seen that type of roleplays at LiveJournal. Generally all panfandom roleplays are like that. However in one panfandom roleplay I follow the mods and admins now and then throws in a major storyline. Those are rather interesting e.g. they change the setting or stirs some trouble among the players.Quote:
Originally Posted by Utopia
It takes a good group of Admin/GMs to lead a game like that. (And any game in general.) But, that is usually why I steer clear of panfandoms and fandoms in games.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brook V
I agree with you on the "level" of roleplay thing as well. I prefer more advanced games, but some styles are really fun as beginner games as well. I actually prefer games where you don't have to write a "minimum" number of paragraphs...that keeps people from writing novels in posts and keeps the game moving.
I agree with Maneki Neko- I hate waiting on people. I actually quite like a blend of forum and chat games. If you can get people to all agree to show up at X time, you can actually have a nice blend of forum and chat. Some scenes are really fun to do as chatters- like fight scenes and scenes where there is a lot of interaction between players. (It would be awesome if we had a chatter here and the logs would save to the games they are associated with. *nudge nudge wink wink*)
xD No need to wink-wink-nudge-nudge... Without going too much into specifics, the reason I felt like I could mention it is that there is some discussion about a compromise that may be reached. I've said too much, though - as I have no idea when or if we may get it. :B
Does no one get my Monty Python references? *le sigh*
But, aside from that...super nifty. I shall go back to being oblivious and anticipatory.
Oh no - I missed a Monty Python reference? My geek cred is declining. D:
For the most part I believe what keeps me from joining games varies day by day, and game by game. I'm not too picky, believe me, but I do flip flop on what I am into at the time. But these are some of the reasons I have passed on joining a game;
- The GM has an overview page (let this be rules or what not) that is flooded with a "nonchalant dick" kind of attitude. The second I read a line like "... if you can't [censored] follow my [censored] story then [censored] you! I don't want you here!" I am instantly turned off. Even if the game is interesting, and I love the idea, and yes, I did plan on following the rules that kind of attitude is a huge turn off for me. Yes, we all know that you are god, and you can do as you please but if you are going to act like that already, I have a feeling you're going to be a tyrant of a GM who will more than likely flip their gasket on the players instead of working with them.
(( Which is why I go out of my way to be the people-pleaser when I run games. ))
- There is no plot, no back story, just a setting. Now, this is where I have been known to flip flop. I love an advanced game, but sometimes I love a relaxed beginner game. One that doesn't involve too much thought and is free willed and flexible. But it all depends... I just know that 90% of the time if all the GM has done is thrown down a school building and a character form, my imagination and interest will not be electrified.
- If the game already has a clique of fast paced players that have already made their way into the story, I shy away. Mainly because I've seen a lot of games that once a group has come together, it's hard to join in.
- An overused setting / plot that has no personal creative flair to it. I will use zombie apocalypse games as an example, sure... I love them. But if you as a creator have not put in enough effort to make the game unique in some way, I'm just going to shrug it off. I've been in plenty, and I don't want to play the same scenario over and over again.
THE WRITING.
When I browse role-plays, the first thing I scan is the writing style. If the writing is flat or uninspiring then I'm out. I don't want to take part in a role-play where the GM's writing is something that bores or confuses me. I like plots that aren't just interesting on their own merits, but sell because of the hook the GM provides.
I mean, a plot is just an outline — it can be changed, altered, and maybe even improved upon by the players — but a writing style will stick around throughout the story. If the GM's writing is some slipshod, snore-fest then we have a problem. Haha. I mean, a good plot can be totally ruined by poor writing.
THE PLOT
Now, I know that, in the above, I prioritized writing style/intrigue above storyline, but that doesn't mean the storyline can be absolute shit either. Free-plot stories put me on the fence (unless I know the owner or the crew that's joined) because, usually, they involve a lot of ridiculous characters, which are just the writers' wet dreams or unfulfilled aspirations (it also means that a lot of the characters are unusually similar). I have had a slew of bad experiences writing in free-plot stories, lol.
But slice-of-life role-plays aren't necessarily bad — per say. But they are difficult to pull off because they require a group of players who have great chemistry/dynamics with each other and aren't afraid to talk out ideas in the OOC or run up crazy shenanigans to spice up the place. A good GM alone won't be enough to keep the place alive.
Now, I know that a lot of people have mentioned how they like clear, focused plots (because it gives them a sense of direction), but I find that plots with all their cards on the table to be incredibly boring. I want to have things hidden from me and I love it when the plots are mysterious and cryptic! It gives me a need to explore and keeps me hyped up for what is about to happen.
Plus, the vagueness can be compensated with a detailed setting, which will give players a sense of what to build upon when creating characters.
THE OTHER PLAYERS
This sounds superficial and crazy, but if I don't "like" a person in a role-play then I'm less inclined to join. Although, conversely, if I really like someone in a role-play, I will probably join it even if the GM writes like shit and the plot is some free-form-last-second deal. Personally, I think player-dynamics are extremely important.
Hell, one time, I joined a role-play JUST for a friend despite having reservations about the GM — whole thing, predictably, turned chaotic. The role-play successfully finished, but I was grinding my teeth halfway through and my friend, upset with the creator over very legit issues of unnecessary meta-gaming and etc, actually left 3/4 of the way in. I stayed until the end, but I was more than sick of the people and the wtf writing. Haha. Lesson learned, some creators should be avoided no matter who else is in the RP.
It was probably the WORST rp'ing experience I have EVER suffered through.
THE ISSUE OF INSPIRATION
Even if there is a very good role-play presented to me, if I don't have the motivation to make a character — I won't join. Unless, of course, the role-play is so amazing and the people in it are too epic to give up... lol.
Usually, if I can't come up with a character, I won't join. But, with that said, I'll join any RP that suits a type of character I want to play. If I have an idea I want to try out, I will join any half-baked idea just to see how I would do with it.
ON-GOING GAMES
If a game is looking for one or two slots to be filled because former players left and the game is 387984 posts in... I'm out. I won't join a role-play where the story has already taken off and I'm just trying to slip in unnoticed. I don't like joining late and rarely ever do unless there was a situation specifically crafted for my late entry. It's just a personal thing, I guess.
There are some other things that I weigh on and consider, but they're localized to each individual role-play and something arbitrary called: my feelings. lol.
I don't know that the people who say they like clear, focused plots mean they want everything spelled out in advance so much as having a thought-out setting and a general direction to start in. >_>Quote:
Originally Posted by jingRAWR
To me, there are (essentially) three basic types of this:
a) "This is the world. These are the types of roles I need to have filled. Events X and Y are going to happen and so roles A, B and C need to be filled before the game can start. BTW, A and C are married, but B and A are secretly lovers."
I actually started rping this way, where the GM told us what we were going to play that night and so the only surprise was in "how" we eventually got there. It has its place in a small group (especially, perhaps, with beginners because it gives them a track to follow), but once you outgrow the training wheels, the only place it really has is in a pair or small group that wants to write a particular storyline rather than going where the story goes because of what the characters do/say.
c) "This is the world. It's a [genre] type world and everything is [mood/condition of world]. As long as your character fits these broad guidelines [ex: "is human with no super powers" or "is between the ages of 14 and 30"], you can do whatever you want. Go."
A setting so wide open is likewise not something I'd want to join a game for. Because while the GM will probably be okay with whatever direction I choose to go in - what about the other players? What if they go in a completely opposite direction? I've seen games where one person goes into this sort of game wanting to play a villain, another player goes in wanting to play a lonely shut-in, and a third wants to play a prankster kid. The game quickly fizzles when neither the players nor the GM try to unite the characters and have them interact, but instead throw NPCs at them to keep them entertained while waiting for the magic moment where they do it without being proactive about it.
I'm more interested in:
b) "This is the world. These are the types of roles you can play. There is a [broad event or condition of world] that [either happened in the past, is happening rightthismomentnow, or will happen in the near future] that [did/will] affect your character. The story will grow and change based on what your character does."
The balance between determining everything narrowly and leaving things so broad that your options are vast means that there is a focused character creation process that leads to a focused direction. I go into the game going, "this event happened, how does my character feel about it? how did it change them?" or "this event is going to happen - so what sort of character do I want to play? one who changes because of the event or one that was out of place before the event but thrives in the change?"
Ideally, I don't want to go into a game knowing everything (I'm actually thrilled when the GM makes it clear that they have plans that they're not telling the other players about). But I do want to go into a game feeling like what my character does can affect the world, rather than having the GM 'reset' everything or just ignore it. And I want to have an idea of what the world "is" - what does it look like and what can I do in it? I want to know that I'm on the same wavelength as the GM and the other players.
Anyway - I have the feeling we're on the same page ourselves on this. xD I just felt like explaining what I meant by my own post.
One of the biggest reasons I won't join a role-play is because I don't like the plot. I'm very picky about the plots. If I get even the slightest feeling that it isn't up to par, I leave immediately. Another gripe I have is character pictures, if they are being used. I can't stand looking at profiles and the style of the pictures isn't uniform. It makes no sense when some characters are depicted with photos, others with anime, and some with realistic fantasy art. Right off that bat that shows that the person running the show lacks some serious quality control, or is just completely lacking in any sense of structure or order. My third turn off is when I see million word posts that go nowhere. I have no desire to role-play with people that have length counts as a standard, and then proceed to post a bunch of drivel.
I have to agree with you on the picture thing. I really prefer when all the pictures are uniform. But, sometimes, no matter how you ask, the players just won't conform to the image standard. This is not the fault of the GM. Some people just won't do what you ask of them. As a GM, I can let this slide if the character is well written, thoughtful and fits the world. But, it is seriously irksome to me when I look at my character list and see that one glaring difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitsukashira
Also- I will change my image if it doesn't match the rest of the images used in a game, just to keep the feel that the majority of the people have. (Even though I personally don't much care for using the anime images.)
I understand what you're saying, but I'm just a big baby when it comes to that stuff. I've run role-plays where I've either turned someone down because of the picture, or helped them find one that fits. It is far from the best way of going about it, but it's just the way I am. I don't even make role-plays anymore anyway. I prefer the control you can have with a one on one.
Ah, sorry about the misunderstanding! The confusion problem stems from the fact that I could have articulated my point better, but, for reasons beyond us and logic, I didn't. Terribly sorry! So, in order to rectify this (and any future misunderstandings), allow me to elaborate:
I have no problems with a role-play where the entire idea is centered or focused around a particular setting. I find that the existence of a fully developed plot (or a hint of a fully developed plot) is not a necessary prerequisite for a role-play to be successful or attention-keeping. If anything, I find these particular role-plays to be the most fascinating and, if done right, the most enjoyable.
Of course, this is IF the described setting is clearly articulated and the boundaries are well-defined. If both requirements are successfully met then the threat of an inappropriate character is mitigated. And in the instance where a few sneak through, the GM should handle it accordingly. I also realize that this falls closely to your third scenario (but minus the extra condition of "roles" for characters).
And while it's true that these free-form (plot-less, so to speak) role-plays place greater burden on the players than a more structured/GM-controlled story, I have always believed that a role-play is a collaborative effort. A role-play should thrive on the idea/input of everything and if that means a story will assume multiple directions then it should. If cast dynamics dictate certain stories be explored then it only seems best to pursue those stories.
I think, if a role-play's plot stifles character relationships (of any kind) in favor of some un-relatable plot then it takes away some of the fun or excitement of writing. It definitely detracts from a character's full potential, which, in my book, is a little upsetting. When I write, I want to know that the option of seeing my (and other people's) character develop to still be kept on the table without having to be compromised. Of course, I understand the concern of some maverick trying to story-jack. In that case, it's the GM's responsibility to shut it down ASAP.
Therefore, I don't really see a problem with the second option you put down. Since I'm not heavy on concrete outlines and lean more in favor of dynamic development, really structured plots (or lack of) is not really something I consider or weigh in too heavily about. I mean, if someone wants to be villainous then they should! But they should run the idea by the GM before jumping the gun (just to make sure that it's not too out there or might interfere with some other pre-planned ideas). Naturally, these kind of role-plays will take a lot more GM supervision than a point A to point B design.
Although, with that said, it doesn't mean that I don't see where you're coming from. Poorly structured role-plays ARE apt to devolving into chaos and even with a strong GM there is no surefire way to protect against crazy, deluded plot-hijackers. And, for that, I can only say this: It has happened rarely and, in those instances, it occurred because of the GM or GM oversight.
I don't know if most people role-played like they do here (where you take reserves or just throw out a character to be approved), but I have always been involved with "competitive" role-plays. Essentially, the role-plays were structured where the story only allows a set number of players (often with defined slots, but there are some without) and since there is usually more players than availability, people were encouraged to generate best-fit profiles/characters. This system mitigated the issue of non-synced characters and couple this with productive OOC-chatter (outside plotting for possible events, etc), stories went places without a very active or direct GM-intervention.
To be quite honest, I do agree with a lot of what you are saying, lol. I also think we're describing the same thing, but with minor tweaks that, ultimately, change nothing in the larger rationale. Haha...
xD I think we do agree in the large picture but it comes down to personal preferences on the little things, which we may be swayed in favor of or against depending on the GM and other players. xD Which I think is pretty great, really. xD
I think, when you get down to it, I tend to like my online roleplaying games to work fairly similar to how my tabletop roleplaying games work. I like a GM, I like a plot (with lots of wiggle room for character deviations and tangents), I like fun people who throw a wrench in what happens, I like good interaction between people, I like a solid world. Heck, I even like playing a game with dice online- though freeform work pretty well also. I actually tend to prefer gaming with people who first played tabletop games because they know how to take GM hints and keep things moving forward without too much muss of fuss.
After that, it just comes down to style preference. I'm not all that into fandoms, so I generally steer clear. Same with Vampire/Werewolf games and God/Demon games.
Really- I think a good game comes down to 2 really important things: a good GM/Storyteller/Admin and a good group of players. If you have those two things, any game can be fun.
Time.
Originality (or lack thereof).
Undesirable plot.
Characters in the story.
Roleplayers in the story (there are some people I avoid).
Rigidness of plot/characters.
The creator/GM.
Too many rules.
Too few rules.
Not enough guidance.
Poor grammar/spelling.
Reading through this, I was interested by the fact that some liked such a spelled-out plot idea. I mean, I myself like to have a vague plot in mind, much like Neko said, but I like to have the freedom to do and explore whatever I like in the created world rather than be dragged about the nose-- but I think this is because I like and am more used to 1x1 roleplays, when I and the other person get to agree on and do whatever we want.
I've played tabletop-like games on chat and forums once before and even though I enjoyed it, it just wasn't the same.
But anyway, here's my usual train of thought when I check out an RP that interested me, but in the end I don't join:
1. Check the overview: It's well written? Interesting premise? It's not cussing me out? It has some freedom? Does it have a "write x paragraphs or bye bye"?
1.a As for the background story: is it 500 pages long? If it is, then I won't join. It's not that I don't like a well developed world, because I do, but if you wrote 500 pages on the world and I mess up, you're gonna flip, and also I do this on my free time, so I would rather not have to read 500 pages just to see if I can be accepted in. A good condensed setting explanation will suffice, and further questions can be dealt with at length later on/in ooc topics.
2. Rules and characters allowed: I like rules. I don't like a 50 pages book of rules. I like character creation options- you don't need to spell out everything to me though, if your werewolves/elves/whatever are average.
3. I check current characters: If there's like a million characters already chances are I won't join.
4. I check pace: if there's like 50000000 posts already, yeah, no thanks. If there's 0 posts, no thanks also (unless it was just created). I tend to like small games. I agree with whomever said above that if the rp is already well into the story I feel uncomfortable even attempting to go in.
5. I check post quality and length: Quite honestly, if an RP fitted all the above but the posts are long as a book, I'm not joining it.
I also like to check the GM, if they have 50 other games running, I likely won't join any. Maybe they're great at GMing, but I'd like them to focus more on a few stories rather than spread it out in 500. (Tho I can completely understand the wish to play out a lot of things xD).
Okay, I haven't read everything on the second page, but I have to put my foot in the door and linger here.
Now anyone who knows me, or has RP'd with me, knows am the GM-ONLY person. I don't join RP's solely based on the fact that I like GMing and I like the control that comes with the job and I don't like having that stripped from me. Thus I know from experiences gone all-kinds-of-wrong that when I join an RP I meticulously pick characters of power, I instantly insert my own ideas, and in the end I take control from the inside out. Most GM's do not like this, hell I can even admit players like that drive me nuts, and every time things end terribly. So this is the only reason I don't join.
However, this thread is rather informative, because though it isn't directed at me, as a GM it is good to know how players feel and think. I often doubt my GMing abilities, I often wonder what players think and feel about my RP's and my in-game structuring and approach; because generally I (and this may come off as . . . I dunno . . . arrogant) do not know what it is like to be GM'd. I've joined a tiny handful of role plays in my history (this is in regards to paragraph role playing, so 6 of my 12 years experience) and those that I have, have ended badly. I honestly have GM'd role plays ever since I started paragraph role playing and I've never really asked players how they feel about me or other GMs.
Which is a long winded way of saying this is interesting being I sit on the other side of the fence.
//goes to read the rest of everything everyone said.
EDIT: I finished reading what was written on the second page and I'm so over the moon with the insight. I like the varied but still shared opinions on how GMs moderate and what styles/systems/setups seem to work better than the others based on player experieince.
@jing: Your opinion my darling is very important. *gobbles it up and tucks in all awa*
Utopia's too. We've not RP'd long and our one/possibly two ventures did not end well. All my fault too, because I loath to admit it but I'm not the best GM even though I know I could be! >D
MODEST AREN'T WE STRUDE! --- > . >'
Hi everyone, since I can't resist a good oppurtunity to share rp opinions, I'm gonna spell mine out lol.
Reasons I wont/will join a roleplay
1) I almost always join roleplays that either Xavi or Schizo or both are in. Because I <3 them and their styles. I look at every roleplay where the genre interests me, but if I'm on the fence the participation of one of these two ladies helps me make up my mind. I guess thats a little odd but I can't help it- After seeing what they do in Don't Let Your Hope Fade, I love them and their writing. I also have a deep respect for everyone in Zodiac and anyone I roleplay with more than once. That being said, now on to the not so person specific reasons.
2) I like structured roleplays, and I don't mind the ones with x number of slots, as long as I can get a slot. What I can't do, though, is join an rp like that after the slots are taken and then be treated like my character doesn't matter even if I'm just as lengthy, detailed, and frequent as the "mains". I don't believe its fair to treat someone as less because they don't hold a slot if they are literally doing everything that the others are doing.
3) I don't join rps if the DM seems too controlling or so invested in their games they don't have a sense of humor/allow for changes.
4) I ALWAYS check the characters in an rp before I join- if I see a single Mary Sue I will not join. I will also quit/leave a roleplay if a character gets out of hand. I can't stand characters like that and there are several occasions where my characters have verbally ripped those characters to shreds to their faces. I guess that makes me a little mean, but I really hate it when myself and other players work hard to be unique and a team and then some character swoops in who magically deserves all the attention/pity/help/respect etc.
5) If an rp has waaaaaayyy more females than males I usually won't join. Cause I'm one of those rpers that just kind of sucks at writing for the males out there and I don't enjoy it.
6) I will usually join a dark rp over a light hearted one
7) If a world is unique but explained well, even if I'm a little iffy I'll join
8) I refuse to join rps that certain members participate in, I hate to say it but there are just some rpers I prefer to avoid.
9) If I know little about a genre, I generally don't join
10) If the literacy level seems needlessly high I usually wont join simply because I don't have the time, although there are some rps I make exceptions for if I'm really into them.
Sorry if that was needlessly long/rude/self indulgent. I do apologize, and I will add that generally most people on this site are top-notch rpers
I didn't think it was any of those things nicole. I think those are reasonable explanations as to why you wouldn't join a role play.
Oh hoo hoo hoo. :B Is that the sound of my ego inflating? <3 You! I have to agree with you though, sometimes my "on the fence" decisions are made up by the personal chemistry I have with the members or GM. If it's good, we're on. If it's not... I'm out!Quote:
Originally Posted by a91nicole
I want you to know that I tried to "like" your comment. Then I remembered this isnt facebook lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Schizophrenic
For me, the cast is a very decisive component. It usually makes or breaks the role-play for me.
If the players (or characters) involved are dull, closed-off, or personally irritating, I won't apply. I don't want to write in an environment where I can't get along with the other writers because, from experience, it tends to create a very bad and sluggish environment. The same is true for characters. If the accepted characters are flat or obviously over-reaching, I'll take a rain check on the game - there's no reason for me to subject myself to half-baked ideas.
Players/Characters aside, I'm also a harsh judge on writing. I prefer my role-plays to have quality writing. I don't necessarily need paragraphs upon paragraphs, but I do want fun and creative posts that offer more than an amalgamation of all the adjectives in the English language. Prose can be nice, on the off-chance, but continuous descriptions about things nobody cares about gets to be rather off-putting and, in a way, very uninviting.
If the creator's writing is lacking (poor grammar and spelling), I'm, usually, sitting on the fence (assuming the rest of the cast is acceptable). Additionally, I think the tone the creator sets for a game is very important. So, people who think swearing in the rules or being a high-and-mighty bitch throughout the introduction makes them "badass" - I would reconsider that opinion. But, that's not to say, tasteful coloring of a role-play is something I'm against. I just think it takes more skill than the typical: Here's my idea and these are my rules, please follow them!
Outside of those things, I'm not too picky about the kind of games I join or take an interest in. But, even if a role-play appeals to me, if I don't have the time to join, I won't. I don't want to leave people sitting around all day, waiting on my sorry ass to post, haha. So, in a way, I suppose one of the biggest concerns is free time and whether or not I have any of it.
(I usually do not - evident in the fact that I still haven't picked up a game yet, lol).
There are a lot of reasons I will not join a roleplay. Mostly it is because I do not think I have the time, or I don't think I fit their standards (this happens a lot).
Though, more often than not I will hit that back button if there are a lot of rules/things I am supposed to do. Really? I have to keep track of all of that? It makes me afraid to join. What if I do something wrong? It also makes me think that instead of a roleplay they would rather it was their story. It's kinda hard to explain.
If there is a word goal. No no no, I roleplay for fun and when I have time! I don't want to have to make sure I wrote just the right amount of words for this roleplay! Sometimes I can write a lot, other times I cannot. And why should I fill something that doesn't need to be 800 words long with extra fluff just to pack more words in there? It seems unnecessary.
When the plot or background is very very long I probably will not want to join either. Again, it seems more like it should be a story than a roleplay.
And then there are the characters. I usually read a bit of the roleplay before joining, and if there is a character (doesn't necessarily have to be a Mary-Sue) but if they're blushing and being embarrassed at people they just met I kinda steer clear. I just. I don't like it when other people like my characters when they don't know them. I mean they've spoken maybe five words to each other. Are they going to assume my character should like them too? I don't know. BUT this is also probably because I generally dislike roleplays that are centered around romance.
Though some of these things annoy me, if I have the time I will usually give it a chance if the GM seems very nice and patient. Then I am less worried about making goofs.
. . . I sort of disagree, because that is a bad basis. You assume the information is the GMs attempt at "story writing", what if everything was a collaborative effort by all players in the RP and the information there helps to build the world you're about to enter into. So that you as a player know the details needed to accurate function in the RP world.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zomby
I think a lack of information should be more of a turn off than an abundance, given the circumstance.
I understand to much information is a turn off, it's a lot to read and take in. Then again you should be confident that you're getting into bed with a damn good RPer if they have their shit in a ground.
This coming from a GM/host. Some of my concepts require a lot of information, just so players can play in the world and understand exactly what their function and purpose is.
Guess I understand this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zomby
This is one where it depends. I run RPs where most of the characters are assumed to have known each other for months to years. Such as MAPS! where most of the pirates have been on the ship together for a very long time, months to years, and have worked with one another.
But I understand in an RP where you don't know one another and someone gives you googly eyed, without previously talk to you about possibly establishing a relationship (not talking romance, I mean any form of relationship) can be a bit annoying.
I guess what I mean is when they streamline everything? Not so much an extensive back story, but when they say "okay you do this and than that happens because of this thing". It just doesn't seem as fun if everything has already been decided on what is going to happen. I mean don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that it should be my way or the highway or anything it just isn't my cup of tea.
I understand, but as a game host guidance for players is key to keeping a game alive.
I don't like excessive predetermined outcomes though. I just mean like . . .my RP MAPS is a good example of what I mean. We have plot goals, little objectives all the players agreed we should cover between the start and end of the mission. What happens, how things happen and little personal touches are all up to the player as we play though.
But I can see being told you have to do this, and you must make this happen can be a pain in the ass.
---------- Post added at 12:28 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:20 AM ----------
I've never really experienced a game where players are told exactly what to do, where and when . . . I want to see these beasts to be honest >D