3 Guests viewing this page
Hidden 7 yrs ago Post by FrankenDaughter
Raw
Avatar of FrankenDaughter

FrankenDaughter Land Child

Member Seen 3 yrs ago

I don't like creating a character application for a role play while it's still in the interest check process. When I complete it, the role play never gets green lit or the GM scraps the idea.


I'm not sure which one is more disappointing--submitting a character for a check that doesn't have the momentum to take off, or getting the ball rolling with a really nice emsemble cast and then watching the momentum rocket off a cliff by a GM that doesn't have the gumption to tend their garden.
Hidden 7 yrs ago Post by Dervish
Raw
Avatar of Dervish

Dervish Let's get volatile

Member Seen 1 mo ago

I don't like creating a character application for a role play while it's still in the interest check process. When I complete it, the role play never gets green lit or the GM scraps the idea.


My advice is to check a potential GM's post history and see how their other games tend to go. It's probably the easiest way to tell what to expect.
1x Like Like
Hidden 7 yrs ago Post by mickilennial
Raw
Avatar of mickilennial

mickilennial The Elder Fae

Member Seen 0-24 hrs ago

My advice is to check a potential GM's post history and see how their other games tend to go. It's probably the easiest way to tell what to expect.

Or you could ask them. Funny thought that. Most GM's would be privy to explain how they work if you have worries they need to address.
Hidden 7 yrs ago Post by Dervish
Raw
Avatar of Dervish

Dervish Let's get volatile

Member Seen 1 mo ago

<Snipped quote by Dervish>
Or you could ask them. Funny thought that. Most GM's would be privy to explain how they work if you have worries they need to address.


And how many GMs will willingly say they are a flake or really bad at running a game?
Hidden 7 yrs ago Post by mickilennial
Raw
Avatar of mickilennial

mickilennial The Elder Fae

Member Seen 0-24 hrs ago

And how many GMs will willingly say they are a flake or really bad at running a game?

Hard to say, but for example I'll use myself. I can be inconsistent, have slow pacing, and ultimately a lot of my games falter due to a lack of focus. I would be straight up with those flaws I hold if asked about what they can expect from me as a GM. I have no reason to hide it; it serves little purpose when people can look around at the base examples.
Hidden 7 yrs ago Post by ArenaSnow
Raw
Avatar of ArenaSnow

ArenaSnow Devourer of Souls

Banned Seen 4 yrs ago

<Snipped quote by Dervish>
Hard to say, but for example I'll use myself. I can be inconsistent, have slow pacing, and ultimately a lot of my games falter due to a lack of focus. I would be straight up with those flaws I hold if asked about what they can expect from me as a GM. I have no reason to hide it; it serves little purpose when people can look around at the base examples.


There's so many variations of people that your way is but one, and I'm not even sure a very common one.

Yes, you can ask, but sometimes seeing track records is the only way to get a true image of how one operates. Having roleplayed with said GM helps too sometimes, but perhaps not often :p
Hidden 7 yrs ago Post by Lemons
Raw
Avatar of Lemons

Lemons Resident Of The Bargain Bin

Member Online

@Inkarnate 'Tis because Inky is a paragon of the GMing art.
1x Laugh Laugh
Hidden 7 yrs ago Post by vancexentan
Raw
Avatar of vancexentan

vancexentan Hawk of Endymion

Member Seen 2 yrs ago

I hate stupidly specific character sheets. As long as a picture is used that fits the setting it should go. If they can't find a picture you should allow them the option of allowing them to make a description of the character in question instead. Likewise going hard into specifics is unnecessary half the time when a personality section can include likes, dislikes, and other things. It drowns out creativity for the individual and forces them to align to the GM's own idea of what a CS should be like. I personally prefer simple baseline CS's.
1x Like Like
Hidden 7 yrs ago Post by Lady Absinthia
Raw
Avatar of Lady Absinthia

Lady Absinthia ⚘ Blossoming ⚘

Member Seen 1 mo ago

When I get a pm from someone telling me they would love to join one of my Rp's but...

"But... I can't post as much as your rules require."
"But... I don't want to write a history for the CS."
"But... I want to use a race you don't allow."
"But... I want to use a character that wields magic in a No magic allowed RP."
"But... this."
"But... that."
"But..."



But your butt right out the damn door. I am not changing my rules or requirements that EVERYONE else in the RP has already been following for a year just to make an exception for you. I won't do it for an Rp partner I have been rping with for 25 years, I won't do it for you. There are 5000 other Rp's out there that don't have the rules and requirements mine do, go there.

And no, there is no harm in asking but when they start whining and badgering after I say no, or heaven forbid the whole "I'm a damn good Rper! You're missing out not letting me join!"... Piss off!
2x Like Like 1x Laugh Laugh
Hidden 7 yrs ago Post by FrankenDaughter
Raw
Avatar of FrankenDaughter

FrankenDaughter Land Child

Member Seen 3 yrs ago

Booooooy does that behavior come from a lot of different places but come to the same result. I identify with this so strongly, not as a GM, but as a roleplayer who is pretty good at writing but interests and time constraints that make it pretty difficult to participate in the stories I would otherwise like to. This means I have to make exceptions and, for lack of a kinder term, "write down," to participate in some of the stories I've helped write years ago. People need to take the time to appreciate their skills/interests and the limitations it means they will have to work with, otherwise not only are they cherry picking out of their strike range with stories they as a player might not have the time/patience for, but their standards might not be realistic enough to let them discover story environments they could truly thrive in.
1x Like Like
Hidden 7 yrs ago Post by Fabricant451
Raw
Avatar of Fabricant451

Fabricant451 Queen of Hearts

Member Seen 2 mos ago

I dunno, not wanting to do an entire history in a CS seems fine to me. But then I come from the school of thought that I'm more interested in a character when they don't tell me how juveniley tragic their backstory is (because it always is) right from the start. But also I'm petty and all my history sections on a profile are intentionally vague and surrounded by adjectives and sentences that add nothing but length. Kind of like every essay done last minute.

Don't get me wrong I understand why some people want a history section since it shows the RPer put a modicum of thought into the character beyond the name age and who they want to fuck but I don't really see the point in needing fucking essays about their favorite Christmas memory as a child or whatever.

But also I think super strict and specific character sheets are bad so maybe it's me being shitty.
Hidden 7 yrs ago Post by ArenaSnow
Raw
Avatar of ArenaSnow

ArenaSnow Devourer of Souls

Banned Seen 4 yrs ago

While we're bitching about CS, my reason for not being particularly fond of highly specific ones (I'll use the post x amount of likes and dislikes as an example) is that either
a) they form in the rp
b) they change in the rp
c) they're completely bloody irrelevant to the rp

I don't really mind that information, personally, as much of it does come to my head while conceiving the character, and I like being true to the character (the foundations of which I post in a CS). But some things are unnecessary fluff, especially in regards to other roleplayers I've met.

I prefer a simpler CS, but I don't mind longer ones too much - it's just that they often either become irrelevant in practice, a waste of time because the GM goes 'oh, I'm sorry, I can't do it" 1-2 weeks later, or because a character develops beyond the sheet/something happens with the character that makes the player realize some edits need to happen to the sheet because "y" was the more reasonable thing for the character to do/like/et al instead of what was originally presented in a purely theoretical context.

History is good to a point to indicate someone's general life, but having half a dozen paragraphs or whatever dedicated to the task strikes me as asinine if the end result is one of the first two potential occurrences mentioned just above.

But ultimately, I don't particularly mind. I don't fill out full sized sheets for fun, but I don't mind the task either. It does get me thinking about characters I'm otherwise not too familiar with.
Hidden 7 yrs ago Post by FrankenDaughter
Raw
Avatar of FrankenDaughter

FrankenDaughter Land Child

Member Seen 3 yrs ago

But also I think super strict and specific character sheets are bad so maybe it's me being shitty.


Eh, I'm fine with having a 'strict' CS policy, but if the 'super' comes from not looking past someone's CS to give their current work a cursory glance and see whether their actual story writing will be at par or better if they get involved, well, that's pretty... uhm... not good?

I dunno. Disengagement is a huge obstacle to making online communities work on any level. Environments like this are just as vulnerable to the pitfalls of what amounts to standardized testing for widely varied roles as everywhere else.
Hidden 7 yrs ago Post by Dion
Raw
Avatar of Dion

Dion THE ONE WHO IS CHEAP HACK ® / THE SHIT, A FART.

Member Seen 8 days ago

I dunno, not wanting to do an entire history in a CS seems fine to me. But then I come from the school of thought that I'm more interested in a character when they don't tell me how juveniley tragic their backstory is (because it always is) right from the start. But also I'm petty and all my history sections on a profile are intentionally vague and surrounded by adjectives and sentences that add nothing but length. Kind of like every essay done last minute.

Don't get me wrong I understand why some people want a history section since it shows the RPer put a modicum of thought into the character beyond the name age and who they want to fuck but I don't really see the point in needing fucking essays about their favorite Christmas memory as a child or whatever.

But also I think super strict and specific character sheets are bad so maybe it's me being shitty.


I usually just combine personality with history and just put it down as biography. At the minimum I request a paragraph so I can see someone can actually write a cohesive sentence rather than just jotting down 'male' '21' 'Arkansas' to standard questions but other than that I typically don't read it unless I wanna sarcastically poke fun at the cliché's in a character.
Hidden 7 yrs ago Post by Lady Absinthia
Raw
Avatar of Lady Absinthia

Lady Absinthia ⚘ Blossoming ⚘

Member Seen 1 mo ago

Everyone has their preferences and that is fine. Stick to RPs that fit your preference or start your own and run it as you see fit. For me, long and in-depth is a must. Since so many are saying why they don't like it that way, I guess I will throw in my two cents as to why I have such structured and strict CS's. And going to break it down by section in CS format!!! (Because I am an anal bitch that way, lol)



Now, Cs's in my Rp's get updated through out the RP, as do the relation sheets. It lets people add in their new skills, change their characters personalities as they grow and develop, add or take away likes and dislikes as their life happens in RP, even fears can be over come or new ones can develop.

Yes, my Cs's are long, in-depth, and a pain in the ass. I know that. Most Rpers I RP with I could get away with a lot less. Been rping with many of them over a year, some much longer than that. I trust them to stay in character, not godmod, not metagame. Thing is, I have new people come in as well that I don't know and I need something as a base. A way to weigh out an Rper and for me, much of the time I find if a person isn't willing to fill out a CS for an RP they want to join, chances are they won't stick around long. That isn't always the case but it is what I have.

Sure I could do established Rpers just run with it, new comers fill out the full thing but I feel that every Rper should be held to the same expectations and standards as the rest in the RP - no favoritism. So for me it is better to give everyone the 9th degree instead of praying everyone can be trusted because they can't. Over the years, for every 1 Rper I find that will stick it out in the long run in one of my RP's I have seen a dozen that either walked, ghosted, or get kicked.

So there are my reasons. Not perfect but it works for me. I've tried less rules and smaller CS's on this forum and others - Every last RP I did where I went the ~lax route~, it flopped. Since I switched over, sure I have less Rpers over all in RP's but the success of the RP's has jumped tremendously. So as long as it works for me, will keep it that way.
1x Like Like
Hidden 7 yrs ago 7 yrs ago Post by Fabricant451
Raw
Avatar of Fabricant451

Fabricant451 Queen of Hearts

Member Seen 2 mos ago

I just dislike CS' in general. Often it feels like an application for a job and when some people ask for like multiple paragraphs (in casual, even) sometimes it makes the hobby feel more like work. But like, that's just me here and I'll fill out a sheet to the standards expressed even if it is often begrudgingly so. I've found that there are better ways to gauge potential than subjecting new RPers to a potentially intimidating sheet. In casual especially which always seemed to be like the comfortable ground between the lawless free pool and the advanced tower.

Obviously I'm not saying that people should change or shit. I'm weird in my approach to RP characters where I don't like having so much of them on the table at the jump. If it works for you, it works for you and that's cool.

Everyone has different experiences and such, and I obviously don't have extensive GM experience but I do have an anecdote and that is that every RP I've joined with a super long, super strict CS process has wound up dead in the water after like a month.

Shit.

Maybe I'm the problem.
Hidden 7 yrs ago Post by POOHEAD189
Raw
Avatar of POOHEAD189

POOHEAD189 The Abmin

Admin Online

the RPer put a modicum of thought into the character beyond the name age and who they want to fuck

Oh Fabby

I dunno, not wanting to do an entire history in a CS seems fine to me. But then I come from the school of thought that I'm more interested in a character when they don't tell me how juveniley tragic their backstory is (because it always is) right from the start. But also I'm petty and all my history sections on a profile are intentionally vague and surrounded by adjectives and sentences that add nothing but length. Kind of like every essay done last minute.

Don't get me wrong I understand why some people want a history section since it shows the RPer put a modicum of thought into the character beyond the name age and who they want to fuck but I don't really see the point in needing fucking essays about their favorite Christmas memory as a child or whatever.

But also I think super strict and specific character sheets are bad so maybe it's me being shitty.

I agree though. A History should not be extra detailed. It should give a good structure on their past and explain why they are the way they are. Kind of like just reciting a memory. After that, should be good.

Hidden 7 yrs ago Post by tanderbolt
Raw
Avatar of tanderbolt

tanderbolt Time is the substance I am made of

Member Seen 6 mos ago

I see why GMs opt for detailed character sheets, but I think that there are possibilities for refinement. An elaborate CS will cut down the amount of really rough roleplayers (and maybe curtail powergaming if that’s a big concern for the RP), yet I think most of the details that are provided aren’t really useful in the context of the RP. Appearance descriptions have always been something I have difficulty with, especially because the level of detail usually expected in them isn’t something you’d see in the literary world outside of 19th century novels (and those are great but pretty far removed from what’s popular today). The personality sections are even more troublesome. I respect Lady A, but I think that simply listing positive and negative traits is one of the worst ways to describe who a character is, and outside of RPing the only place you’ll find it is when someone is interviewing with a particularly uncreative hiring manager. It doesn’t get into the real interesting parts, the way a character thinks and decides, what drives their emotions and goals in life.

EM Forster has some good insights in his book, “The Art of the Novel”, and I was surprised at how it made me think about roleplaying when I was reading it. There’s a part where he talks about flat characters “In their purest form, they are constructed round a single idea or quality: when there is more than one factor in them, we get the beginning of the curve towards the round. The real flat character can be expressed in a single sentence” Now, in roleplaying most people would like their characters to be round, when the whole point is playing your character we view it as a failure if we don’t have all the details on hand and ready to flow. Yet, Forster offers us insight into why flat character exist “One great advantage of flat characters is that they are easily recognized whenever they come in – recognized by the reader’s emotional eye” When you can tell what a character should be, when you can tell where a writer is going or what they will do when confronted with a new scenario, it makes it easier to react to them, easier to think up an interesting turn of events because the players involved are so simple.

I’m not saying that we should aim to make flat characters, that is not good roleplaying. What I like is interesting characters, and a flat character can be more interesting than a rounded one. Personally, I prefer to start with a flat, simple idea and then build off of it, rather than starting from a complex whole. I’ve tried it the other way and I end with an amalgamation of quirks and personality but no direction, no clear psychology for me to roleplay. Maybe other people know some tricks I don’t when it comes to this method. Going back to character sheets, I wish I saw more character sheets that gave me an idea of what Forster called their “inner life”, what he talked about when he said “ We know each other approximately, by external signs, and these serve well enough as a basis for society and even for intimacy. But people in a novel can be understood completely by the reader, if the novelist wishes.”

This has gotten off topic, and I’m afraid I can’t offer any clear solutions. I’ve seen some CSes include something like “Character Concept”, or maybe a field like Worldview would help, but I am always in search of something that will show me not just what a character is but why they are that way, their thoughts and the creative vision behind them. I fully recognize that some people want to keep those private. Perhaps it’s the mark of a true roleplayer to make a good story without any of this, in life we make do without insight into any of this. I just wonder if there’s a way we can start working more like coauthors of a story instead of passing strangers.
1x Like Like
Hidden 7 yrs ago 7 yrs ago Post by FrankenDaughter
Raw
Avatar of FrankenDaughter

FrankenDaughter Land Child

Member Seen 3 yrs ago

While we're bitching about CS, my reason for not being particularly fond of highly specific ones (I'll use the post x amount of likes and dislikes as an example) is that either
a) they form in the rp
b) they change in the rp
c) they're completely bloody irrelevant to the rp

Boy oh boy I get all of this. So much of it comes from false expectations set up by the GM, co-GM, genre, or even the forum that contains it. And I'm not sure how much of this is preventable in long term.

I don't really mind that information, personally, as much of it does come to my head while conceiving the character, and I like being true to the character (the foundations of which I post in a CS). But some things are unnecessary fluff, especially in regards to other roleplayers I've met.


I don't mind explicit fluff as long as everything the players/GM(s) can find on a CS is being presented as a body of resources that everyone should feel free to use. For example:

"My parents are dead," is the joke you tell about Batman. Lots of people's parents die for various reasons. If someone chucks this in their bio in one way or another, it's not presenting context and history that can be used, it's presenting springboards for character development that could be better presented as revelations in roleplay. Why put it on your CS? It cheapens the fact's weight as an exposition in roleplay and worse, for the audience, everything you do as a writer to explain what was unique and impactful about the death of Batman's parents is much harder to show than tell. Indeed one of the worst things about writing for comics with this constraint is how much story new writers don't get to create based on having to work with this fact.

"My parents were murdered by wizards." is the joke you tell about Harry Potter. In that universe, lots of wizards are murdered by other wizards, especially around the time period that his parents got the gibbins. Slow-dripping all of the details of the Potter murders over the course of the book series, though, is what's important. Edgy scar isn't just a scar but effectively a warding rune. Parents knew their murderer. Daddy was friends with baddie. All of thise facts are resources for J.K. Rowling that we get to see as the audience. Again, putting that on a character sheet makes every single detail less important. That information belongs to the player, not the group.

Paulie's caretaker was a radical anarchist but, paradoxically, a fervent believer in The Guild's methods and goals. In short, a {hypocrit and elitist}. She grew into adolescence with {an excellent but abusive} teacher. {Shit hit the fan} as {he did all the drugs, oops} and was unable to care for her as a growing teenager and himself as a person. This coincided with her mastery of {the magic she do}. At the age of seventeen, she {ran away, taking} advantage of The Guild's {shitty information network} and her caretaker's {spiraling depression}. She {has had no contact with them since}, and {hasn't tried either}.


This is a complete story. It gives players and the GM a lot of concrete details to work with. Telling the story in her CS isn't about giving Paulie drama or a motivation, but about knowing how to write Paulie's story as it unfolds in whatever narrative is coming up. She has an important character any player or the GM can use, undisclosed location she used to live in any player can make, an established relationship with drugs any narrative could be affected by, and close to home knowledge of abuse cycles that any GM or player can remember when they want to present a particular situation. All of these are resources to capitalize on.

-a bunch of other stuff relevant to the conversation at hand.-

Just... yup. I feel this post somethin' fierce.

Big sigh.
Hidden 7 yrs ago Post by Fabricant451
Raw
Avatar of Fabricant451

Fabricant451 Queen of Hearts

Member Seen 2 mos ago

<Snipped quote>
Oh Fabby


Knowing who my characters want to fuck is vital to their development. Vital.
2x Like Like
↑ Top
3 Guests viewing this page
© 2007-2024
BBCode Cheatsheet