_{Yep, that's the question. I trust you all to behave yourselves so Mods don't feel obliged to lock this. If you can't behave, please get out at this stage. Cheers.}

So, the big question is Is there such a thing as a good RP?
By which I mean, can an RP be measured in such a way that one is 'better' than another? I've spent a lot of time being frustrated by this collective medium of storytelling (which is explicitly how I view RPs) and wondering what the difference is between an RP and a play. Both have a cast of characters typically controlled by one actor/player each under the stewardship of a director/GM who creatively guides the content and may or may not participate in the show/IC thread themselves. We wouldn't find it outlandish for a critic in a newspaper to assess the merits and weaknesses of a given production of a given play - so is RPing different? And if so, why? And if not, how does that translate to this hobby that I gather most of us on here do?

Bonus food-for-thought questions:

• Is RPing 'art'?
• If so, is it less 'art' than traditional media - say, The Great Gatsby?
• If one instinctively looks at one game and considers it 'better' than another, what does that mean, and what is that based on?
• At what point, if any, can a game be judged? When it's being born, while it's still being played, while it's dead, or never?
• Do the 'Free', 'Casual', and 'Advanced' Tags factor in here? Even if not the sections themselves, which are unregulated, but the principles behind them?

Please for the love of god no specific examples before this thread gets more locked than Trump's cold, dead heart.

Okay, word of warning, this turned out rambly and random.

Disclaimer: THIS IS PERSONAL OPINION ONLY.

I feel as though "good RPs" are a very subjective thing. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all.

As far as me? I myself prefer more subtle plots, with more of a focus on the intricacies of politics and the complex nature of social interactions than on the hard nitty-gritty action/warfare plots. I don't mind a slower-paced story. I find a good RP is often more slowly paced, with the character relationships built up slowly and believably over time and a continuous story arc.

What I see as the difference between an RP and a play is that, well, I guess a theatrical play (correct me if I'm wrong but I'm assuming this is the kind of play you're talking about) has lots of people wearing different costumes but the whole plot and all the interactions are contrived by the playwriter. There is no spontaneity. In an RP it's different. Sure it's still a public showcase but it's collaborative and can be random and almost never turns out as planned (I've at least never been under the direction of a GM who tried to control every aspect of the plot, buuut that's just me.)

I feel that critiquing an RP, when it's done right, can be beneficial. But too often people take it too personally and get butthurt about it. I've noticed, mostly on other sites when I've asked for constructive criticism, that people often were too personal in their discussion, criticizing me instead of my plot. "What are you, ten? grow up and write a good story already." etc. I think it's a combination of fears of these (the ones critiquing fear they might offend the roleplaying party, while the roleplay group fears that potential critiquers might be too offensive.) Just a general lack of communication makes this somewhat of a taboo thing as far as I can tell.

That said, when it's a participant in an RP who talks to a GM and says, "hey I'm not sure about this plot point or this character interaction could we maybe take a group poll of it?" or posts a group poll themselves, it's generally accepted and even taken as a part of active, good roleplaying. It's only when it's someone outside of an RP that does the critique that gets a little bit sketchy.

Generally I feel like it's kind of a "keep it to yourself" thing. You can privately judge and rank RPs all you want and privately come up with ways to make them better, but unless you're an active contributing member of the group or have been asked by the GM/participants for advice, probably not a good idea to share them.

---

I would say that in my mind RPing, and RPing well, is an artistic skill. It takes work to write artfully and expressively, while still being considerate to the people around you. I almost feel like collaborative writing cannot be considered even remotely the same art form as classical literature; classical literature is about YOU, about the ideas YOU create and conjure and the characters YOU hold in your head, whereas RPing is all about US. The group as a whole. It's spontaneous and uncertain and can be random and can take a sudden 180 but the art form is all about learning to roll with it, and to take ownership of your part of the story, but also to back off and let others take ownership of their parts of it too.

Personally, I "judge" games all the time. Generally the more involved I am/feel I could be in the plot, the better the RP is. The criteria I use is simply, "will I enjoy exploring this world and these characters?" If I do, I'll read more. If not, I walk away there. I judge interest checks. "Is the premise interesting? Is the writing on the level I expect to see?" I judge RPs as they're beginning. "Are these people and characters people I want to interact with, both as myself and as my character?" I judge them as they're in progress. "Am I still enjoying myself? Am I engaged and thinking and processing and learning?" and I judge them when they're done. "Did this live to its full extent? If yes, what would you have changed about the story/characters/gming style/etc. If no, what went wrong and how would you fix it?"

Now I don't share these observations, most of the time, but that judgement is always going in my head. I do it to a lot of RPs, even ones I'm not considering joining. "Is this a world and a set of characters that I would enjoy spectating?"

Yes, I read along with other peoples' RPs. Call me weird.

I don't really think that the theme of each section matters in calling the roleplays "artistic" or "good" or "bad". I feel like each section needs to be judged as it's own entity. It takes a very different set of skills to RP Free level well, to fit character development and continuity into short, often furiously-paced posts, than it does to RP Advanced well, to fill out posts with details and make the language beautiful to read. Each section is its own entity and, at least in my mind, is judged entirely independently of the other sections.

Aaaand that got to be waaaay long. I'm sorry to everyone who tried to read through me babbling incoherently.

TL;DR

the correct answer is no.

Because I should be bed by now. I'll write my shorter two cents. XP

Yes. Personally I can judge good RP's vs bad RP's, to things I've been in personally, or to just looking at them without context. Though the factors of what make them good differ drastically if it's something I'm personally apart of or not. It's just a different form of writing, it can be artful, fun, or terrible depending on all the pieces involved. And it actually has more factors than just how the writing is. I've been in RP's were the writing was fine and the plot moved fast enough, it probably would be remotely enjoyable to read. But the way people got along, and how certain actions transpired, I wouldn't call it a 'Good' RP.

* I believe not all that is done is automatically art. But some can very well be, yes.
* Don't understand. I suppose my question, is a book less artful than a movie? I know opinions would be far different depending on who you asked. Those people that believe the book is always better than the movie. I mean most screen plays or movie scripts are technically written by more than one person. I know some people edit RP's they do and make them into books. I think it's the writing equivalent of gaming. It's more of an interactive medium. Can games be art? Are they less art than movies?
* I mean it can be personal, and usually is, but not everything is an opinion. Yes something's CAN be better by fact. Games for instance, smooth and high frame rate is something that cannot be argued. For role playing, writing capabilities of the group would probably be a noticeable factor.
* I suppose it's good to finish something before you judge it critically. And good RP's do know how to end, and usually do have an ending point set in their heads.
* Well not all RP's on websites have this exact thing, so this is specific for this site. But I will say, good role players. (vs good RP's help.) Do matter in making an RP a good experience. So people who can write just fine, but are incredible inactive or slow or rude or bitchy about unimportant details. A good RP it doesn't make. I don't think writing more/advanced automatically equals better. If that's the question. Since RP's are suppose to be interactive, overly long posts can make your pacing drag on tremendously. I'd call it the equivalent of having cut scenes in your game. Some is fine, but too much ruins the whole interactive thing.

Good is subjective like you said. You can have RP's that are written well, you can have RP's that are fun. Either counts as good if that is what the participants are into, and if an RP is both of those things I suppose it's pretty good then.

As for if it is an art... I think that depends on what you mean by "Art". I'd contend every rp is art in the sense they are all creative works. But if you mean art as in "Good art", then that's harder to tell. I can't say I've seen casual or free rp's that are organized enough to qualify, but I have seen some pretty decent advanced rp's. The thing is, this forum has plenty of decent writers. If they get organized to write a coherent plot, I think it can absolutely be considered good art. Hell, I'd go as far to say the only thing between a lot of the advanced writers here and publication is the limits of the literature market.

As for the question of how it compares to other forms of art... no, I don't think RPing is high art if that is what your thinking, but that shouldn't be discouraging. All high art is is the stuff people have decided stand out amongst all the other creative achievements. I don't see anybody grabbing an RP and deciding it needs to be taught in an english class anytime soon.

As for the free/casual/advance split, because I mentioned this earlier and you mentioned it, here is my thoughts. It isn't impossible to imagine a free or casual rp becoming organized enough to be compared to a script, i've just never seen it happen. Advanced has the upper hand in the artistic merit debate since advanced approaches literature more closely and the slowness makes it easier for something thorough and thought out to come together. Not to mentioned advanced RPers, because of the requirements, only attract people willing to make the effort, which makes it easier for the good writers to coalesce.

lol no

as long as you enjoy yourself it's a good rp

everyone has preferences. find your own and thrive

"Is there such a thing as good music?"

Just like the question you're asking, no, there isn't. People who are like "you can't listen to this it's shit" are dumbasses (imo). If one sound brings you more joy than another then go on ahead. If people don't like that . . . WELP, too bad.

art is also very subjective, and people will find incredibly (imo) shitty pieces of art to worship. no one can set a boundary because there exists no one who can truly set a standard for what is good art, good food, etc.

tl;dr

no

It can be good like a match of chess or any other board game, in the sense that you left satisfied with the experience.

Artistic value though, eh, its pretty messy. I feel like Roleplaying is closer to storytelling and folklore to typical literature, its a bit hard to explain...

RP is not art.

RP is science.

Yes.

All my RPs.

@Ebonsquire But their is quality differences and talent differences in music. And all media. Yes, you can like anything and people that tell you that you can't are in fact dumbasses. But can you really listen to two songs, and not figure out which one would be harder to produce and require more talent to make?

Start with movies, I mean people watch sharknado...and enjoy sharknado, but can you not admit, it's no citizen kane?

Same with music, I like Hollywood Undead but will I say their equally as talented as say Soilwork? Hell no.

Saying their is no way to tell what's objectively better, is not entirely accurate. But yes, beauty is in the eyes of the beholder and yes art is mostly subjective.

@SleepingSilence

Just because something is harder to produce and takes more time doesn't mean it's better than something. People put a lot of energy and focus into creating a song that only very few people like. Those few people consider the incredibly underground group talented because of the song they made. Is noise music as hard to make as one of your Hollywood Undead songs? Eeeeh. Wouldn't say so. But fans of that genre consider the creation of that music to be the apex of quality, and Hollywood Undead to be particularly terrible because it just sounds bad to them. Some people find true talent in simplicity, and some in complexity. Once again, no individual(s) can really determine, objectively, what is better in regards to artwork. We are too divided.

Do you like Nicki Minaj? Some think that she's far more talented than the Hollywood Dead and that her music is much more detailed.

Finnegans Wake, a book by James Joyce, is one of the most difficult books to read in English literature. He utilizes (I think) 20 different languages from across the globe and then adds a colloquial twang to nearly every single word. I tried listening to the audiobook. It's a horror to try and comprehend.

But then there's a split. It took him 17 years just to write this book. He put nearly two decades of work into writing this piece.

Is James Joyce talented? Even English professors think it's just gibberish and unnecessary. But then that same group believes that . . . I don't know . . . the first book of Harry Potter, which only took around five years, is far better because it appeals to a large group, the writing is concise and understandable, the plot and characters are very good, and the setting is solid.

And then you have avant-garde music. John Cage's 4'33". You know how much work he put into "composing" that?

Guess:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTEFKFiXSx4

He is regarded as a 'talented' artist. Is he talented? You decide -- but for yourself, of course.

I'm just going back to the point that even though us humans have created an innumerable amount of artwork over time, are not at all fit to set an objective standard for what is truly quality, or set a benchmark standard.

I actually don't like this idea myself because I do find myself agreeing with you that Citizen Kane is much better than Sharknado, but that's just our own opinion.

(alright im done ranting like an ass now)

tl;dr

it's pretty much all subjective

Yes.

All my RPs.

April Fools! Nice joke!

[Removed at the suggestion of a friend]

Like some have said, I think an RP is 'good' if the players enjoy it. If the players/GM aren't having fun, then it's a 'bad' RP. I'm more used to table top gaming. That can be an 'art form' but in most cases, unless you were there, you will never witness that piece of art. Our written RPs have the benefit for being written, so people can read them after the fact.

I wouldn't compare an RP to a 'play' but I would compare it to 'improve'. In the play, the actors have a script and they know what should be coming and how they should respond. But in an RP or improve, you really have no idea what the person will say or how their character will react. Then you have to come up with your own character's reaction to the changing situation. Since we are playing by post, a player has some time to decide how to reply. We can think about it before replying. Depending on the posting rate, we may have a few minutes to a few days to decide how to reply. But on stage, somebody doing improve has only seconds to reply. Improve is usually comedy. Can you imagine trying to do drama as improve? Well that's what our RP's are...sort of.

What the hell, I'll continue talking. I love to hear myself talk or see my own writing. :)

• Is RPing 'art'?
  It can be. And maybe bits and pieces of an RP are art, but maybe not the whole thing. Again, it's the eye of the beholder. When I write a RP, I'm writing for the other players/GM in the game, not a wider audience.
• If so, is it less 'art' than traditional media - say, The Great Gatsby?
  I don't know. Is painting more or less art than movies? Some RP can be good. But I personally judge a game by if I'm having fun or not.
• If one instinctively looks at one game and considers it 'better' than another, what does that mean, and what is that based on?
  I guess for me it's on technical aspect of the writing. I don't mind spelling or grammar errors, if I can still understand what the player is trying to say. But if it takes me a long time to decode what the player was trying to say, then that's a huge negative for me. But other factors I look at are can I follow the story? Or is it so disjointed from post to post that it seems like nobody is responding to what the others have written. Are the characters believable? And for me, are they likable?
• At what point, if any, can a game be judged? When it's being born, while it's still being played, while it's dead, or never?
  As players we judge RP's all the time. When a new RP starts, we judge it to decide if we want to join or not. Once the game get's going, we judge it if we want to stay in the game, are we having fun? Or do we feel the need to leave the game, for whatever reason. But I guess the basic reason is that the game isn't fun for us. Or there are other things we rather be doing. Yes, I know sometimes people also quit games because of RL issues, but that's another matter.
  
  Other than praise, I don't think anybody really wants feedback on their games. Unless asked, I would never tell a GM or player what they could 'do better'.
• Do the 'Free', 'Casual', and 'Advanced' Tags factor in here? Even if not the sections themselves, which are unregulated, but the principles behind them?
  This is a personal issue for me. But I hate Advanced RP. I don't want to have to read 30 minutes of posts before typing up my post. Just trying to keep up up on what's going on in advanced is something I don't enjoy. Again everybody is different and people like different things. I'm liking the shorter, to the point post. Maybe a few longer posts from time to time and when everybody is making their first one or two posts, introducing their character. But after that, seeing a wall of text that I need to read to before I post just turns me off.

@EbonsquireI would argue that to be the case honestly...No, that doesn't mean you can't like it just as much. But liking something has absolutely nothing to do with good quality music. And yes it's true that pop music is liked by more people...but saying a 4 chord pop song. Is JUST as good as something like prog rock/metal. No, because those artists are far more talented and could easily produce 4 chord pop songs. People like Nikki Minaj do not even produce their own music, (and I'd argue their own lyrics too.)

When certain artists create one man band's. Production quality of music also can be a factor. Like how audible the bass is, or how the song is mixed. Or if the singer is auto-tuned, or off key. There is a lot of technicality to music. More so, than other media's IMO.

I can find talented music as something I don't like and I can find bad simple music enjoyable. But I think its more fair to compare genre to genre you usually can pick apart who is a more talented musician. Lyrics can also factor in how 'good' a song is. If it's something like Tonight I'm Fucking You...I don't care if you find the music catchy, the lyrics are appalling.

Certain, genre's like noise/ambient I find more pretentious than actually hard to produce. I mean I literally can produce those genres with a computer alone. (I had a similar argument a long time ago with someone trying to tell me techno music was just as hard to produce as rock. And I made an electronica track in literally 10 minutes with loops, which is often how their music is made. I can assure you there is a noticeable difficulty curve.) Though I wouldn't compare terrible radio pop/rap to avent garde music. Haha. I mean crappy music magazines can pretends rappers saying "peanut butter jelly, no deli" is some kind of high art. But, frankly I think some people are just very stupid. xP

Art, I'd argue is more is a bit more subjective than music. But I will argue for all media's not everything that is created is 'art'.

Yes, there is such a thing as a good roleplay. It's called NEVER EVEN ROLEPLAYING ERMAGAWD WHY WOULD YOU NERDS CONSIDER ROLEPLAY WHAT THE FUCK IS WITH YOU BACKWARDS HICKS WOW JUST GO AND PLAY WITH SOME DOLLS SOME MORE YOU DOINKITY DOINKS GUHHHHHHHHHHH

...
..
.
..
...
..
.
..
...
..
.
..
...
..
.

The above is not actually an expression of my opinion. I felt obligated because it's April 1st.

Yes, there is such a thing as a good roleplay. It's called NEVER EVEN ROLEPLAYING ERMAGAWD WHY WOULD YOU NERDS CONSIDER ROLEPLAY WHAT THE FUCK IS WITH YOU BACKWARDS HICKS WOW JUST GO AND PLAY WITH SOME DOLLS SOME MORE YOU DOINKITY DOINKS GUHHHHHHHHHHH

...
..
.
..
...
..
.
..
...
..
.
..
...
..
.

The above is not actually an expression of my opinion. I felt obligated because it's April 1st.

playing with dolls is art tho too

Also, anyone who legitimately thinks roleplaying is "art" is the kind of person who likes to think their shit don't stank.

Are there "good" RPs?

Well...yes and no.

"Good", as multiple people have already stated, is subjective. It's an opinion, and like every opinion, the definition of "good" fluctuates with each individual. One person might think seafood is "good", while another thinks pizza is the best thing in the world. Is one of them wrong? Yes, because pizza is life. No, of course not. Opinions are supposed to vary and contrast with eachother. It's how we make decisions and improve. If everyone agreed that their favorite color is yellow, then we'd be living in a piss colored world.

Now, that's not to say that there's no common agreement on what makes something "bad" or "good". I mean, how many people out there would actually agree that the cringe-worthy classic 'My Immortal' is a literary masterpiece? Not many! And the few that do need a good shovel to the head. We define works as those--and let it be noted I'm using that term lightly--as "bad" because they don't meet certain standards that we describe as "good". These factors aren't all the same. Some people expect masterpieces while others just like whatever seems okay. Horever, there are, in regards to RP, several factors that are mutually agrred throughout most of the community on what defines something as good or bad.

• A Fun Idea
  
  An RP can't be considered worth your time if it doesn't have a story you enjoy. It has to pull you in, make you interested, and give you somehting to work with. What would be the point of jumping into a story with a setting that bores you? Ideas differ, though, and so do some people's opinions on certain stories and cliches.
  Opinions on ideas can differ, and that's alright. But if there's an RP with ideas that seem interesting and smart, then chances are it's gonna be a "good" RP.
• A Fair GM
  
  Rolepayers need someone to guide them. Someone to push the plot when it's slowing down, or keep players from bickering in the OC or IC, or uphold rules when players are getting frisky. That person is the GM.
  A "good" RP cannot function without a "good" GM. What makes a "good" GM? Like an RP, the factors usually change. But the main points arenthat it usually includes someone who, while firm in upholding the rules and keeping the players in check, is flexible, especially with ideas.
• Active Players
  
  What's the point of RPing if you've got no one to do it with? RPers are the life blood of an RP. They provide the characters, give ideas, and can even drastically change the plot. Their decisions affect the story as much as the GM's. So if you've got a cast of people just awkwardly standing around too scared to talk to each other, then it won't be as fun. Most RP's that last and/or are enjoyable involve communication with the players and GM. The exchange of ideas will not only spark inspiration, but bring the group closer to gether and make the whole experience just plain fun.

Are these the only factors? No! Hell, you don't even have to agree with them to describe an RP as good. What makes it good is if you enjoy it, and if you think it's good. Theres no strict rubric or time limit to jjudge it. It's like when you read a book or watch a movie or eat a meal. If you think it's good, then its good.

while i feel like i couldn't give my opinion on the idea that there is a thing as a good RP (Mostly due to that i share an opinion with most everyone here and that is, that it is subjective) however i feel like i can give my two cents to the idea that RP is Art. And when i mule it over then yes RPing is an Art in the fact that is like video games (it's an interactive form of Art) and Like books (it's an written form of Art) and such you could categorize it as a form of Art