RPG Seasonal Rotation Thoughts

[twylight]

*nods*

Yes, the applications used for each individual RPG are left up to the GM of the RPG.

Maybe we should have a GM Workshop thread? Since *not pointing fingers* Many people who are GM's only contact with how to be a GM is seen in the other RPG's on this forum. And the applications for each RPG are basically copy/paste of what the 'original' two *DC & Marvel* made.

Each Application should be tailor made for the RPG it's for. BUT..that is another subject entirely and heaven forbid I try to 'make these RPG's like everyone elses on the webs' *glares at SF*

*puts thread back on track*
P.S. I have like horrible sentence structure right now..*is typing half asleep* so hopefully my burbling is understandable.

 

[wiegeabo]

Limiting Characters: This would require and entire restructuring of the RPG's as they are played now, and might bring up the 'reserved' characters which seems to be walking a fine line as it is now since there are behind the scene's character trading going on with the larger/in-demand characters. How many RPG's will have people drop their secondary character there for them to join a different RPG, because of the limit. And they you have the dedicated players who can play more than x allowed characters, and play them well and they will be sore about it >.<;
It also will make the GM's have to be more involved *not a bad idea*

We wouldn't necessarily have to change everything. The Limiting rule could be applied after a certain point. Everyone keeps their current characters, even if they're over some limits. But if they're over the limit, they can't add characters until the go back under the limits of all the games their playing. Anyone under the limits when the rule goes into effect doesn't have the problem and won't until they try to add to many characters.


As for reserving characters. Not allowed. (And in the create your own character games, not even an issue.) You can express interest in a character, and if people want to let you have it, fine. But if someone comes along a takes it, that's a shame, but everyone's held to the same standard. I could argue that if you wanted a character bad enough, you'd have an application ready to go to make sure no one else got it. And if having too many characters keeps you from getting the one your interested in, that's a situation you put yourself in. It's no one else's fault. (Again, these are just generalization that may, or may not, be happening or true. I don't know.)


Trading characters...why not? If you're passionate enough about a character to talk to it's current owner and convince them to give it to you, that just makes me excited to see what great stories you want to tell.


As for established players having to give characters up...If have the start date (like I mentioned above), their characters would be 'grandfathered' in. They just wouldn't be allowed to take up any more. Or GM's could give exemptions to players they know won't be a problem (but that starts a whole slippery slope of possible debates/arguments that, if I was a GM, I would not want to get into).

 

[Eddie Brock]

This thing has taken a mind of its own. What was a discussion about set seasons has now turned into a general discussion about the flaws of the RPG.

 

[wiegeabo]

And that's a bad thing? Maybe working out these other issues means we don't need to worry about set seasons or rotations.

 

[Charlie No-One]

We wouldn't necessarily have to change everything. The Limiting rule could be applied after a certain point. Everyone keeps their current characters, even if they're over some limits. But if they're over the limit, they can't add characters until the go back under the limits of all the games their playing. Anyone under the limits when the rule goes into effect doesn't have the problem and won't until they try to add to many characters.


As for reserving characters. Not allowed. (And in the create your own character games, not even an issue.) You can express interest in a character, and if people want to let you have it, fine. But if someone comes along a takes it, that's a shame, but everyone's held to the same standard. I could argue that if you wanted a character bad enough, you'd have an application ready to go to make sure no one else got it. And if having too many characters keeps you from getting the one your interested in, that's a situation you put yourself in. It's no one else's fault. (Again, these are just generalization that may, or may not, be happening or true. I don't know.)


Trading characters...why not? If you're passionate enough about a character to talk to it's current owner and convince them to give it to you, that just makes me excited to see what great stories you want to tell.


As for established players having to give characters up...If have the start date (like I mentioned above), their characters would be 'grandfathered' in. They just wouldn't be allowed to take up any more. Or GM's could give exemptions to players they know won't be a problem (but that starts a whole slippery slope of possible debates/arguments that, if I was a GM, I would not want to get into).

Yeah. This sounds perfect to me except for the bolded part. No exceptions. It really doesn't require a lot of restructuring, but even if it did, why not do it? If there is a problem with how the RPG's are going now, and people are adamant about fixing it, why not restructure if it will help matters out.

I think scheduling and rotating RPG's is a bad idea. It is confusing, not beneficial to every player, and unfair.

If you limit the amount of characters a person can have and letting every RPG set this limit, you may fix the problem and you are being fair to everyone if we follow what wiegeabo said.

Now, I do, however, think if we were to limit characters, there should be an overall, no matter which RPG, be a set limit to how many characters one player can have. If you just let the GM's decide, their own limit may be to high and not correct the current problem.


EDIT: Maybe a name change should be in order for this thread since it is no longer based just around set seasons.

 

[Eddie Brock]

And that's a bad thing? Maybe working out these other issues means we don't need to worry about set seasons or rotations.

True - but there is a time and a place for everything. I come back here to find out about the rotation issues, and I find several pages on totally unrelated tangents.

 

[Charlie No-One]

Well it is still related in a way. These are alternate ideas instead of seasonal rotation. You are, therefore, finding out rotation issues.

 

[Johnny Blaze]

All right, Twy, you want advice? Here's mine. Short and sweet.

People in this thread have made their points pretty much known. So, take them into account and work out a system for the rotation of the RPGs. After working it out, present it here. If the majority are for it, run with it. To hell with the few who hate it.
You're never going to please everyone. They can either learn to deal with it or drop out. And yes, I'm including myself in "They" too.

As for the whole limiting of characters deal, you can take that and shove it you know where.
If a person wants to play a character, let them play it. If they can't take over the responcibilities of playing said character, the GM of said RPG just has to grow some balls and tell them to either pick up the slack or they'll be cut. And then, if they don't pick it up, then cut them.

And if the player has a track record of signing up as a character and then not doing anything, then just don't approve them to begin with without first hammering things out with the player privately. After talking with them, then decide whether or not you think they can handle the responcibilities of the character in question (which would definitely depend on how major the character is as Batman would take a more active role than Howard the Duck).

 

[Keyser Soze]

I have a wild, radical idea to propose. How about we show enough faith in the intelligence of posters to let them make their own decisions? Lets take a step back here and see what we're suggesting. Players can only post in certain RPGs at certain times. Players are only allowed to play a certain number of characters. We're a community, guys! Let's show our fellow players enough respect to let them establish their own limitations.

Instead of saying, "You can only play 3 characters," or "You can only play 5 characters," why don't we let THEM say "I can really only commit to 3 characters, I should cut down." Or instead of saying "Okay, people aren't posting a lot, lets institute a rota system, if you look at this wall chart I've created, you'll see availability shifts between this month and that blah blah blah....", just, you know, get them to post more.

All this creating a system malarky is far from new. I think back in the day, us veterans did a pretty good job of establishing one. It went like this:

- No more than two characters in any one RPG
- If you don't post as your character(s) after two weeks, you're gone

If anyone actually bothered to enforce that last rule, we wouldn't be having this conversation. GMs need to cut the deadwood, and encourage active play. Players need to sort out their own time management, no matter how many characters they play. You can argue that people don't have time to commit to several RPGs at once. Well? Don't join them! "Oh, but if people don't have time to play some RPGs, they'll die!" Well, if it comes to the crunch, and an RPG isn't exciting enough for people to MAKE time for it, maybe it SHOULD die.

Fact is, it doesn't matter if there are 2 RPGs or 50, the problem will always be the same. People who are just too lazy to post. And I'm not pointing fingers! I'm guilty of it too. You know the score. You say you don't have time to post. Yet, you're online all day. You browse the Batboards. Watch some videos on Youtube. Pester Electro UK on MSN. Then you go onto the RPG board, look at the IC thread, and go "Pfffffffffffffffffffffffft.......who else is on MSN?" The truth is, if you're motivated, you can get a post up in minutes. When I'm in a writing mood, I can get caught up in Marvel, DC and 1U inside an hour, maybe even inside half an hour.

But here's the thing. I'd rather that, if I'm not feeling it in Marvel, or if I'm waiting for a response, I can go over to....say, 1U, or CAH, or whatever, and make a post there instead. I don't want to be told, "No....sorry....you're only allowed to post in this RPG this month. Well, what you waiting for? Post!" It doesn't work that way. No matter what systems and initiatives you introduce, people will post when they wanna post.

The best way to make them WANT to post isn't through these external measures. It's through the games themselves. Introduce stories people want to be a part of, get people talking, make players feel welcome. That's what made the RPGs so buzzing in the first place, after all.

 

[Lord Doom]

I don't know what the restrictions for making an RPG are, but I have seen some pretty loose restrictions on allowing players in an RPG.

And I agree that an RPG should only be allowed if real commitment is going to be given. And if real commitment is there, then jumping through a few hoops (or extra hoops) shouldn't be a big deal.


I also think that there should be some hoops to go through before getting a character in an RPG. Might weed out some people who want to play a character who they think is cool (but have no long term ideas) in favor of those who really want to do something with it (and won't mind backing it up when joining).

Of course, that could be (and I believe is) left up to the GM's. And if they give players easy access, and it ends up biting them in the ass, that's a problem they made for themselves. But I would hope they realize that letting a new player in doesn't just effect they're game, but all the games that player is already in.

That's true. I've seen it happen first hand. There are lot's of RPGers out there that play the RPGs for different reasons. Noobs usually will try out each lRPG a little until they find the one that's right for them. Every RPG is different and every RPG PLAYER is different, too. Also, there's some trouble with players who are playing the important characters, but rarely ever make a post for them. If you're gonna play a character like Spider-Man or Batman or Superman, PLEASE make sure that you can play as them as often as possible. It's not really fair to keep a character that someone else would DEFINITELY keep. Hell, I know people who'd be willing to drop out of every other RPG they're in just for a chance to play as Spider-Man.

 

[Electro UK]

See? Johnny and Keyser have got it spot on.

People are acting like the RPGs are suddenly dieing out, but Marvel, DC, and OU all had slow spots before this stupid board came along. If an RPG is dieing, it is because in the players eyes, there is no desire to post in it. An average post can take 10-20 minutes to write, and I think if the RPG is worth posting in, the players can be trusted to post in them.

 

[Charlie No-One]

That is exactly what I think and have said before in numerous threads. The problem isn't that we have too many RPG's, it is that people don't post or want to play in them.

 

[wiegeabo]

- No more than two characters in any one RPG
- If you don't post as your character(s) after two weeks, you're gone

I do love simplicity. But my question is, what about games that don't lend themselves to losing characters?

Sure, if someone hasn't posted as Superman in two weeks, it's easy to take him away and give him to the next person who wants to play him.

But what about a create your character RPG? Do we take their character away and let someone else have it (might work in Create a Hero, but not in Zombie)? Do we just make them NPC's?

 

[Lord Doom]

I do love simplicity. But my question is, what about games that don't lend themselves to losing characters?

Sure, if someone hasn't posted as Superman in two weeks, it's easy to take him away and give him to the next person who wants to play him.

But what about a create your character RPG? Do we take their character away and let someone else have it (might work in Create a Hero, but not in Zombie)? Do we just make them NPC's?

Umm... That's a good question...

 

[Keyser Soze]

I do love simplicity. But my question is, what about games that don't lend themselves to losing characters?

Sure, if someone hasn't posted as Superman in two weeks, it's easy to take him away and give him to the next person who wants to play him.

But what about a create your character RPG? Do we take their character away and let someone else have it (might work in Create a Hero, but not in Zombie)? Do we just make them NPC's?

You write them out, until the player chooses to return and reclaim them. If they don't return, they're gone. You move on.

And perhaps if we actually enforced the deadline, people would be more inclined to post. A guy is going to wait a month before making his Superman post....because he can. He knows nothing will be done about it. If he knows that, after two weeks, his character will DEFINITELY be available to other players, perhaps he'll want to post more. And if he doesn't, then the character gets picked up by someone who will.

And this brings me to another point, one change which is a lot more simple, and requires a lot less overhaul than the ideas being suggested, but one which I think will instigate much more change. Shorten the posting deadline from 2 weeks, to 1 week. It might not seem like much, but it'd make a hell of a difference. I'd rather see a character pop up once a week than once a fortnight.

Now, some might say this is putting unfair pressure on people. Not really. If day 6 is looming, and you're thinking "Uh-oh, I've got a Batman post due", you don't need to write an epic. Just something like:

"Emerging from the shadows, Batman approaches Nightwing.

"Have you found him?" he asks."

Not a masterpiece, but you get the point. It's a game, folks. Every post doesn't need to be a freakin' essay! Sometimes I think the RPGs have the best flow when its a BAM-BAM-BAM-BAM chain of back-and-forth 2 paragraph posts. When we're playing together as a group. It tends to be a lot easier to get motivated to post when you've got someone to play off of.

 

[twylight]

*hugs all*

*mission accomplished*

*zooms away*

Actually, while I started out with a suggestion as a thread I love how its evolved and I love that people are actually discussing things.

About the 2 week thing, that's a GM thing and to be honest while we could have a GM workshop that would be coddling. >.<; *sigh* I actually went around the web and saw how others ran RPG's, heck, when I could I sent e-mails to people who were forum GM's for ideas. >.<

Anyway I feel the rotation idea is at a rest, and I *hope* clarity is had..it just feels like I was a bit misguided that instead of creating something, we just needed to refocus on what we already had.

 

[Blacklight]

I absolutely HATE WITH A PASSION the idea to limit characters. I have a list I write on paper of the amount of characters I have, and I have 16 at least, and frankly, you couldn't make me drop any of them even if you tried. I love all my characters and I'll be dammed if I have to drop any of them to play in a new game. As it is I plan on adding three more to that list. Just because some people can't handle it, doesn't mean I can't. I always post for my characters and I shouldn't lose because of that.

 

[Blacklight]

Not to mention the only idea I see working that doesn't involve a schedule is requiring each RPG to wait a month or more before posting a new season's OOC and IC thread. Which in my opinion is a good idea. Why the f**k do you have to post a new OOC thread not even a day after the season ends? If that's the case, we shouldn't end seasons at all and have it run indefinately or at least until the thread reaches the Hype limit, and that's just pointless.

 

[Charlie No-One]

 

[wiegeabo]

Not to mention the only idea I see working that doesn't involve a schedule is requiring each RPG to wait a month or more before posting a new season's OOC and IC thread. Which in my opinion is a good idea. Why the f**k do you have to post a new OOC thread not even a day after the season ends? If that's the case, we shouldn't end seasons at all and have it run indefinately or at least until the thread reaches the Hype limit, and that's just pointless.

I've wondered that myself. Taking even just a couple of weeks between seasons can give everyone much needed time off either to focus on other characters, or just rest. It's also useful to plan stuff out and set stuff up with any other players.

 

[twylight]

I've wondered that myself. Taking even just a couple of weeks between seasons can give everyone much needed time off either to focus on other characters, or just rest. It's also useful to plan stuff out and set stuff up with any other players.

In all honesty the DC RPG always had at least a week break *when I did it >.<; Gawsh I was trying so hard to say that without feeling scummy*

P.S. When am I gonna have people take my characters from me from my lack of posting? *thumb nose GM's*

Actually I always sent a PM to people after 2 weeks and normally they came back.

 

[Byrd Man]

Infact, there could even be a thread made, in this very section, to keep a tally of how many characters everyone has. That way, gamemasters, in approving an application, could look to that thread in order to see if he or she is past the given limit.

Not to mention, players could link back to their post, for sig listings of the characters they play in Hype RPG's.

No...God no!!

Yes, but alot of people can't be Byrd.

Goddamn right about that!

*nods*

Yes, the applications used for each individual RPG are left up to the GM of the RPG.

Maybe we should have a GM Workshop thread? Since *not pointing fingers* Many people who are GM's only contact with how to be a GM is seen in the other RPG's on this forum. And the applications for each RPG are basically copy/paste of what the 'original' two *DC & Marvel* made.

See, I like this idea. Some people, including myself, need to learn more about the art of GMing.

Also: About the two week rule, let it be known that I will start enforcing it with an iron fist in DC. I didn't plan on telling anyone this, but a few weeks ago I sent MB and JRK a PM telling them that if they didn't post as Batman and Supes, I would take their characters away from them and give them to someone who appreciated them. MB gave up Supes and JRK seems to be back on track with Bats. So, all you other ****ers out there better be ready. Including you, twy. I'll rip Dinah from your fingers in a heart beat.

 

[Batman]

Egotistical prick.

 

[Byrd Man]

Don't forget my sexy body.

 

[Spike_x1]

I have a wild, radical idea to propose. How about we show enough faith in the intelligence of posters to let them make their own decisions? Lets take a step back here and see what we're suggesting. Players can only post in certain RPGs at certain times. Players are only allowed to play a certain number of characters. We're a community, guys! Let's show our fellow players enough respect to let them establish their own limitations.

Instead of saying, "You can only play 3 characters," or "You can only play 5 characters," why don't we let THEM say "I can really only commit to 3 characters, I should cut down." Or instead of saying "Okay, people aren't posting a lot, lets institute a rota system, if you look at this wall chart I've created, you'll see availability shifts between this month and that blah blah blah....", just, you know, get them to post more.

All this creating a system malarky is far from new. I think back in the day, us veterans did a pretty good job of establishing one. It went like this:

- No more than two characters in any one RPG
- If you don't post as your character(s) after two weeks, you're gone

If anyone actually bothered to enforce that last rule, we wouldn't be having this conversation. GMs need to cut the deadwood, and encourage active play. Players need to sort out their own time management, no matter how many characters they play. You can argue that people don't have time to commit to several RPGs at once. Well? Don't join them! "Oh, but if people don't have time to play some RPGs, they'll die!" Well, if it comes to the crunch, and an RPG isn't exciting enough for people to MAKE time for it, maybe it SHOULD die.

Fact is, it doesn't matter if there are 2 RPGs or 50, the problem will always be the same. People who are just too lazy to post. And I'm not pointing fingers! I'm guilty of it too. You know the score. You say you don't have time to post. Yet, you're online all day. You browse the Batboards. Watch some videos on Youtube. Pester Electro UK on MSN. Then you go onto the RPG board, look at the IC thread, and go "Pfffffffffffffffffffffffft.......who else is on MSN?" The truth is, if you're motivated, you can get a post up in minutes. When I'm in a writing mood, I can get caught up in Marvel, DC and 1U inside an hour, maybe even inside half an hour.

But here's the thing. I'd rather that, if I'm not feeling it in Marvel, or if I'm waiting for a response, I can go over to....say, 1U, or CAH, or whatever, and make a post there instead. I don't want to be told, "No....sorry....you're only allowed to post in this RPG this month. Well, what you waiting for? Post!" It doesn't work that way. No matter what systems and initiatives you introduce, people will post when they wanna post.

The best way to make them WANT to post isn't through these external measures. It's through the games themselves. Introduce stories people want to be a part of, get people talking, make players feel welcome. That's what made the RPGs so buzzing in the first place, after all.

I agree with everything, but the bold part, I think, should be something more like "If you don't post after as your character (without a decent prior excuse), you will get a warning from a GM or AGM via PM; and if your inaction is continued for another week further, then you'll be cut."

I know that I've been guilty of going passed the two week rule many times, and most of the time I wouldn't even realize it until I return to the IC thread and notice the date on my last post. If, however, whenever I logged onto the Hype just to browse the forums, I received a friendly PM bringing the fact to my attention that I've been stingy on the character posts, then that would definitely prompt me to churn out a post, and even perhaps gain some new momentum.