NSWRPF Archive State of the NSWRPF Thread

Please note: this poll is forum-specific and applies only to the NSWRPF, not the Role Playing Forums as a whole

---

This is your chance to tell me what's on your mind. As long as it remains constructive, I'm happy to hear it. If you have ideas for how things can be improved, projects you'd like to see implemented, or words of praise (those are always fun :p ), go ahead and respond.

Thank you in advance. :)

:x your Moddess,
[color=lightseagreen][b]NP[/b][/color]

 

Generally I think the forum runs well. I have very few complaints.

I voted for that, my only complaint being that I have difficulty in getting a game going. But that's more me than anything.

It would be nice to see more interest in up and coming games, though. It seems for every Hammer hit, many, many great games go unnoticed. For example, KissSpooky's excellent steampunk/western game High Devil Sands, Reynar_Tedros' Altar of Naugh, Darth_Elu's Extraordinary, and Obi_Wan21's Hollow Men game.

 

I agree with Peng.

 

Ditto

 

I just voted in the SWRPF poll and the only big problem I can think of there is lack of experience in games. That isn't much of a problem here so never mind. But I agree with Reynar's agreeance of Mister Peng.

 

I love this forum. I never have any complaints unless something is seriously wrong. This forum is great and I spend alot of time here, only venture out rarely.


Beast

 

Voted. Generally this board seems to run okay ... although the stagnation of some threads like the UF threads is sad, mostly because it probably has as much capacity for imaginative and complex play as IBOP did, if not more because there's greater capacity for creativity.

The question is, is that a board issue or a player issue? I personally think it's a player culture issue myself, and I don't know if it's for our Moddess to police or whether we have to do something about that ourselves.

I'm probably biased because I've been spoiled: most people here would know this is my second go-round on these forums, having had a hiatus of about two years or more. I'm loath to simply trot out the line that "They don't make things like they used to", but there does seem to have been a change in culture between when I was here and when I got back.

I think this is predominantly because there's been something of a change in the playing crowd. Ktala, GrandAdmiralJello and Mitth can probably comment better because they've been here all along, but for my part there seem to have been, I don't know, more players like KenKenobi, Winged_Jedi, and Kai_Halicon who were prepared to bring more creativity to their player characters in-game. (And yes, I know NaboosPrincess has been here all along, but I can hardly compromise her neutrality by asking her to comment publicly, surely?)

This is not to say that such players don't exist now, and I'm not having a go at anybody here, but I get the impression two 'sociological' trends have arisen while I was out. And I can't pretend to having taken up an exhaustive analysis of every RPG running:

(1) There seems to be more of an MSN attitude to posting -- shorter posts, less description, less internal reflection for characters. It hasn't gotten to the point of people just hammering randomly on the keys and then clicking 'post', but there seems to be less of an inclination to "test the boundaries" of characters or their RPGs -- that is, less in-game creativity. Please feel free to throw the brickbats if I've got it wrong; that's just the impression I have.

(2) RPGs look less like playing fields and more like walled cities. It's probably Darth RL and I could be getting thrown by the "seasonal" thing that it's exams time for a lot of people, but I don't see a lot of cross-RPG gaming, and something of an "the boat has sailed" attitude for some RPGs that look a bit too intimidating for new players to join. And this isn't a criticism, it's perhaps more a reflection on Darth RL time pressures and that experienced players probably are more interested in not wasting their time on five or six different RPGs at once, but rather wanting to try and make quality posts for those RPGs they are involved in.

Is there a need to address these things? Or do we simply adapt to the changes? I don't know. I'm not trying to get on the soapbox, just offering an observation or two for people to stick in their pipes and smoke.


EDIT: A very big positive note to add, although it's not strictly the subject of the poll: I think the "Role Playing Resource" forum is running extremely well. I've read back through the posts, and in particular the Character Designers' Guild and Game Designers' Guild are going like well-oiled machines at the moment. Similarly the "tips/advice" threads are in excellent shape and offer superb advice. I think a lot of players could really benefit if they actually took the time to wander through that forum, because it's more than just an information bank; it's also a development area and they do a lot of good work in there.

 

With regards to the "boat has sailed" attitude: as a new RPer here, I think to call it an 'attitude' is insufficient. Perhaps it's just me, but I think it's more than a sentiment; it's a reality. Some boats do sail, and it's a definite obstacle for the new player to jump aboard a ship that's already left the harbor - especially when the boat has gone quite a long way since its departure. Getting aboard a running RP is a mess, because information (ranging from crucial knowledge to unnecessary detail) is spread out over hundreds of posts, with no real way of easily sorting it.

One possible solution which I have proposed before (but not fiercely advocated) would be to use internet resources to organize this information. Google offers a slew of free tools (Google Docs, Google Groups, and Google Pages) which would enable the GM to include a link in the first post to web pages which could be edited by GMs and players of the RP. As the game progresses, the players would maintain a few important pages: mainly a (relatively) brief summary and a list of all character sheets, along with a note regarding the status (active or absent) of the character.

Failing that, there are always recruitment drives. Imperial Hammer recently infused his Pirates RP with quite a bit of new blood. Most impressive.

 

I forgot to mention that I will also accept PMs on the subject if people do not feel like posting something for everyone to see.

Thank you for the response thus far!

 

*sigh*

QFT, indeed.

 

Uh, isn't he in Africa(?), doing volunteer work?

 

Saintheart, from what i've seen there has been an increase in newbies and game-killers within the last year. Newbs I can stand but I cant stand it when they come in, continue to god-mode after they are told and shown how not to and kill a perfectly good game.

Another thing is when they start their own games and dont GM them. Way back when we didnt need GMs because everyone was creative and willing enough to start their own sub-storylines (its why WOTG was so successful), now most players need a GM to guide them along. Certainly some games dont need a GM because they're so broad and vast with the storyline, like 128 and IBoP for example, but players still rely on the GM regardless.

My only serious beef with this particular forum is the restriction on games per franchise/type. Its rather hard to join a game of a particular franchise you like when A) it is dead or dying B) its story is not really what you want to play and C) its full of god-moders. If I recall correctly, the limit is one per franchise/type. Could we perhaps increase it to two or three? It may bring in more players and increase the activity here. Sure you'll have more threads to police but its really no different than over at the RPF where we actually have an unlimited number of similiar games but just limited to two per author.

I've had an idea for a couple franchises now that Ive wanted to do here but I cant because someone else has already beat me to the punch.

 

I think I'll second that. The restriction to one can really be limiting; occasionally, we'll have great GMs in charge of the franchise RP, but too often, a newbie (or worse - someone who leaves on page 3) will take up one of the big franchises. Harry Potter has had a bit of an ugly history (though it's picking up now under blubeast), and LotR is also in some trouble. Another possibility would be a restriction on new players taking up one of the big franchises. Perhaps six months to a year of experience, or possibly an approval from NP.

 

Actually thats asking for more trouble than its worth and I doubt NP would want to have to figure out who can start a game and who can't.

 

I agree with Mitth.

I mean we have a damn resource forum where people can go to learn tips and skills to better Role Playing, but its all in the RPer to go there and read it.

The thing is, most newbs and inexperienced players don't join stories that have long intros or seem too complicated.

So how can we expect them to read tips and such, when they don't want to read the pages and pages of text there are that will help them?

NP can only do so much, and truly its in the RPer to decide whether they want to increase their knowledge of Role Playing.

Hopefully, they will discover that higher RPing is available they just have to search for it.

As to the franchise problem, I don't know. Multiple franchise games would confuse things and players are going to favor one game over the other. If both games turn out bad, it could make lovers of the franchise hesitant to join future RPGs.

Like I said, I don't know.


Beast

 

Hm!

From the poll results, our friend the NSWRPF is lookin' a little under the weather!

Nurse: "Whats the diagnosis doctor?"

First off, I think we have to remember that the NSWRPF is less popular than the SWRPF. Its a non-SW thing on a SW board, so just by default, it will always be a little weaker than its sister forum. Plus, the NSWRPF is newer, compared to the traditional SWRPF. Its highly likely that people still don't know of its existence, or rather choose to ignore it!

Back in the day when I was running Non-SW RPGs back before the split, they suffered the same problem. Although they shared the spotlight with the SWRPGs, they never turn out as popular. The NSWRPF, by virtue of its character, suffers the same thing, just on a macroscale. Its easy enough to hop into games which basically concern one franchise, but the sheer scale of the NSWRPF in content (Everything thats not SW), imposes some restrictions.

---

As to the actual illness, my diagnosis a lack of loyal GMs. I think this is a chronic problem, and those who IM with me know I'm all about this. GMing is too much work for alot of people. They would rather play in the games of a few established GMs then strike out on their own. This is what, in my opinion, creates the "walled city" effect. And this of course hinders growth.

[i]"But I_H, our games fail! All your Hammer hits are stealing available players!"[/i]

Giving up is not the answer to this. Even if you don't have a hit, keep on designing, keep on building. Look. Think. What games are in demand? What does the forum not have? What are the interests of the people around you? How will you build a game that will run successfully? Its both a science and an art to make a successful game. In both cases, its not easy.

And build contacts! If you're looking for players, makes friends with them! Talk to them! You scratch their game, and they will scratch yours.

In my opinion, [b][u]its the duty[/u][/b] of every person that partakes in any game to GM one as well...

Its not right to be taking from the community without giving something back in return...

How it would work would be as follows:

1.) More people start GMing, newly emboldened by their belief in their duty to GM
2.) Game volume increases, even if the percentage of successful and unsuccessful games remain
3a.) For the successful games, they thrive and prosper
3b.) For the unsuccessful games, they fail, the GMs learn from their mistakes, and try again.

[i]Now hold on I_H! You can have a good game and no players! You need a base for a good game to succeed. Your idea doesn't solve this.[/i]

I have two views on this opinion.

Firstly, in my opinion, to have a sucessful game is to have players. The type of games that do not have the art, but not the science. Games need players to survive. So either you advertise and fight for them and succeed, or you don't and fail! People have criticized my "Market Theory" as being soulless, turning gaming into a business, but that is exactly what these boards are. The free market.

To advocate anything else would be institute some sort of quasi-RPF socialist welfare regime....

HOWEVER...

As in all markets, capitalism tends to lead to monopolies and oligopolies. Which might be whats plaguing this board at the moment! Laissez-fair has been shown to quash the little guy. So how to solve this? Hard to say!

The easiest answer is for every player to give starting games a chance. Find a new game. Join it! Make that GM's day.

[i]But sometimes their games suck Hammer! Why would we want to waste our time there?[/i]

Ah ha!

Firstly, such a view only demonstrates the pervasiveness of the free market system. Let the fittest survive...

Secondly, in joining a newly GMed game, what you give the new GM is the opportunity he might not have had prior. If he throws away the opportunity, thats his decision, BUT the opportunity was given to him nonetheless. This is very important if you want to see different types of people succeed in the NSWRPF.

People should remembe

 

That's what I was talking about. I couldn't quite put my finger on it. Players seem reluctant to stray outside what the GM tells them to do, or try and run their own subplots within the stories. I personally find it a great moment when you can work a player's substory into your RPG ... or have the opportunity to do something a bit out of the ordinary because a player is thinking outside the box. (BTW: that's not me encouraging people to godmode. Thinking creatively in the context of the RPG and godmoding are completely different things.)

I haven't thought in detail about this possibility, so I'm just going to cautiously support it. One franchise at a time does have the effect of concentrating a lot of players in one RPG, and for very popular ones it's a big job for a new GM (theoretically). But that's just my unleavened thoughts.

A variant of the problem is the GM who's determined to act as the overall star of the show -- you know, the RPG's called "Radioactive Man" and the GM posts very little story apart from saying he's playing Radioactive Man and other players can be civilians that Radioactive Man will be rescuing. This is not GMing -- it is egotism. It's one thing to take the lead character's role in the franchise just to provide guidance to other equally-advantaged characters; it's another to try and create a story where you are the one and only star.

I understand where you're going with this, but I'd also add the assertion that this would amount to something of a lame excuse. Given players can join as many RPGs as they want it doesn't follow that supply is limited...although I certainly can appreciate why players might avoid new RPGs because they're involved in others and don't have any more time.

And, might I add, this isn't a situation where intellectual property strictly applies to a game. If you find a game structure that is successful, why not consider asking the GM if you can use elements of

 

Well, Impy, another problem with up and coming GMs isn't necessarily the fact that they're not confident or willing to try their hand at a game, it's that other players aren't always willing.

The ideal situation would be to have an eager GM and eager players, but that ain't happening any time soon, in my opinion.

 

I hate to say it, but...

I don't think you're on the right track, Hammer. First, let's examine the current successes, which I shall classify as any thread with over 100 posts and a post within the past week. We have X-Men, Pirates of the Caribbean, Harry Potter, Realm of Darkness, Exiles, the Ultimate Fantasy, and Kingdom Hearts. That's seven, four of which are based in prominent existing franchises and one of which is a crossover of existing franchises. The other two both call themselves "Ultimate Fantasy". Since the birth of the most recent of these, we have had roughly a dozen flops. The ratio is ugly - we're talking about 12:1 here. I understand that this is pretty unscientific, but if we look at the ratio of successful original RPs to failures, we're seeing something along the lines of 2:91 - roughly 2% chance of success. So if, as Hammer predicts, the success rate stays the same as new games are founded, then if fifty new games are created, we will have one more success.

But we can't expect the rates to stay the same as more games are created. You see, the market is - more or less - saturated. The big franchises definitely fare better than small franchises or original RPs. And since we're only allowed to have one RP per franchise, our options are limited. Sure, there's probably a couple more franchises we could expand into. Lord of the Rings and Indiana Jones come to mind, and perhaps the Matrix. But most smaller franchises will fail to draw enough players.

No matter how many games we make, rigidity will persist. That is our problem. Anything mildly different from the norm (see High Class Low Life, IDS, Colorado Frontier, and many others) will fail, no matter how well thought-out. Right now, the only way for an original RP to survive involves labeling it "Ultimate Fantasy" - and both of these exceptions are two of the slowest RPs right now of the seven survivors. Everything with a non-fantasy setting dies. Thus, options for GMs are limited (because, of course, you seem focused on making successful RPs) to two categories: major franchises and ultimate fantasy.

I know I'm not the poster child for joining otherwise-unpopular RPs. Only now do I recognize the mistakes I've been making: namely, waiting a little while to see if the boat floats before I hop aboard. I think it's my duty - and everyone's - to take more chances, to hop onboard while the boat's still in port. That way, perhaps there'll be enough of us to crew a few more of these ships.

 

Hammurabi, I realise you're not proposing the maths as anything other than quick and dirty, but I think there's a factor that is missed in the calculation: the quality of the startup and the players behind the RPG to begin with.

X-Men and the UF Realm of Darkness are run by greyjedi125; Imperial_Hammer runs Pirates, LS_A runs the UF overall thread; Dubya_Scott runs Exiles; and I can't find the Kingdom Hearts RPG. All of these guys are experienced at the very least, and know how to start a good RPG but also how to keep it rolling. Just providing a gamespace in the franchise universe to play in doesn't seem to cut the mustard -- you have to have some sort of direction for the RPG, something to keep players interested beyond the coolness factor of having dark sunglasses and knowing kung fu. Hammer does it by constant polishing of the game and periodically advancing the story along; Exiles is a game that shifts worlds, constantly changing the dynamic; X-Men is well-thought-out and invested in by GJ; the UF worlds to my point of view need more players before they'll take off in a big way.

From one point of view, it's encouraging that not all the successes here are from ancient oldbies (sorry guys ). Which is not to say that name-recognition doesn't play a part; it does. But I still reckon the delicate balance of the first post, the concept, and the ability to keep the game going is the key. And that comes either with practice or with coaching from other people.

I sought out Obi-Wan21's Hollow Men RPG just to see what had killed it, and it seems a rather unfortunate combination of the GM's illness and the end of school exams that sent it down the gurgler. I haven't checked other RPGs that have crashed and burned, but based on my experiences I'd say a big factor in their failure has been the provision of a gamespace without an actual game to play.

One other alternative: go on a PM recruitment drive before you start the RPG. There's nothing in the rules that says you can't invite people to join your RPG before it begins. And if the concept sucks, hopefully people will tell you by PM rather than just leave you with no replies on the board.

 

You're right - the approach I took was definitely quick and dirty. I definitely overstated some things and entirely missed other key factors. A closer examination reveals flaws. I had examples (IDS, 1860s, and High Class Low Life) I thought could counter what you've got, but on a closer look, my examples only confirm what you've said. An absent GM kills a thread. A newbie GM is less likely to have much of a chance.

Of course, I'm still not quite comfortable with Hammer's solution. I don't think it's quite right to view GMing as a community service, in which the final goal is to produce 'successful' RPs for the enjoyment of everyone. I think to undertake something like GM duty, the GM must also have a real connection with his or her content. Duty won't suffice in the long term, especially when more important duties come up in real life. And if everyone's aiming for success, I fear we won't have any opportunity for GMs to have any real fun. I don't know exactly how to put all this - it's late, and I'm about to go to bed - but something about Hammer's post makes me a little uneasy. Perhaps it's his insistence that everyone GM, which contrasts with my lack of plans to do so in the near future. I don't know - maybe I oughta try one, but it seems to early.

Something to think over.

 

Ah...then we are in "violent agreement" with each other, as someone once said ...

 

I agree with you here, though some of your thoughts on GM-hood just don't work for me. It's not so much a duty as it is, well, just plain fun.

Looking at it like a chore is part of the reason why many RPGs suffer; the GM doesn't always love the project when it's up and running, and they keep it going for the players.

Some GMs are so eager to please the players that players can't get a word in edgewise.

Lastly, games with the GM as the only main character are destined to fail - sorry to name names, but The Punisher game is guilty of that. No-one really wants to be the regular joe that gets saved. They want the character flaws, the tension, the excitement.

The only duty a GM has is to make sure the players have just the right amount of this - and then sit back and watch the fun.

But on to why I quoted this passage - To begin with, I will make the assumption that we all enjoy writing. We all enjoy RPGs (we wouldn't be here if we didn'). We all want to have fun. Part of that fun stems from the fact that we are writing actions and reactions to other people's actions and reactions. We're telling one big story - with many different points of view. In this case, it's not always about your character. It's about this one, sometimes, and this one, other times.

If you want to talk duty, here it is: we're not only trying to write something unique and fun that makes others go "wow", we're trying to get other people to make us say "wow"!

It's all about balance. Recently, especially in Pirates, I've tried very hard to not make it all about my character - not that I was in any danger of shanghaiing the RPG. I wanted to get others to make a story with me; I want them to react to my little nuances, I want to see their little nuances. I want drama and comedy and action. And I get that by letting go of the reins every so often.

Sometimes, you may want to get your character in the thick of things, right when someone else needs to - and should - do the same. Resist the temptation! Hold back, let them give it a go. Who knows? Maybe you'll come up with something better to go around their character.

The NSWRPF is about interaction; we need more of it.

 

On the contrary, I think it is the looking at GM ship as fun that dooms alot of games...

GMs start their games expecting to be entertained. And then, when the action lags or the work becomes too much, it becomes a chore and they (naturally) leave them.

Perhaps theres a middle ground in this all. I look to my own games, and I do admit, I was and still am very excited about the ideas...

To some degree then, a game needs to be appealing to its GM. But this needs to be the meat on a steel skeleton of duty. GMs can't start ditching their games because its not entertaining "them" anymore. GMing shouldn't be about the entertainment of the Game Master. It should be about fostering enjoyment for the games' players.

I've always looked upon the RPF as a creative outlet. Its not about happy-funtime (in fact, I disagree with alot of tenets of this increasingly popular school of thought), rather its about sharing your art and your trade with others. And like all trades, this takes work.

As to my views on "duty": I'm all about real-life, so obviously, we can't enforce people to GM their own games. I don't think a swamp of games will happen, because again, not everyone will GM, despite any theoretical insistence to do so.

I just view it very simply...

People come here and enjoy the largely "free" entertainment/excitement from games being run by a GM. I think its only fair to reciprocate that GM's sacrifice. The GM devotes his time and effort to making an environment/scenario for others. The least a player should do is offer that GM the similar opportunity to participate and enjoy another game. Otherwise you'll wind up with too many receivers and not enough givers.

Even in the RPF, there is no such thing as a free lunch!

-I_H