How many chances do you usually give to a bad RP?

To further explain, me and this person arranged a romantic RP, the person themself is great, they are not the problem. Download ringtone free: phoneringtones.info

The problem is their character, we started playing and I already simply hate her. She has a difficult personality to work with and I am honestly not enjoying it and I don't think my character will ever get to love her if she continues being the way she is. I don't think it's the players fault, maybe it was me who misinterpreted the character profile.

I am super tempted to drop this RP but on the other hand we barely started, not even 10 posts in. Do you guys usually give chances to bad RPs ( feel free to add your tale of bad rps gone right) or you drop it as soon as you feel the dread kick in? iPhone 12 Pro klingelton

And if I am to drop it (considering I will let them know and not ghost) do I simply tell I wish to stop or do I tell it's because their character makes me want to roll my eyes to the inside of my skull?

First of all, wrong forum to post it in.

Second of all, bad RPs are subjective and relative to our standards. Is an RP bad because of a good concept but not enough players or a horrible concept but having a large player base?

Third of all, since it’s an 1x1, you can probably negotiate and state that you don’t like their character. Try to ask them to tone it done or something. Or dump them. Who cares?It’s an RP, mate. It’s not like they’re gonna stalk you to your house for revenge and dump your carcass in a river.

Fourth and this is my personal opinion, if you’re going into RPs specifically to get romance booty, maybe your priorities should be crafting an interesting storyline to supplement that romance?

@Maxbrady
Just tell them. No sense in continuing an rp you don't enjoy.

Indeed, there's few original RPs and most of what you see has descended from something weeby, edgy, or cringy. Thing is, they don't need you to give them a chance. They find popularity anyways. It's called Sturgeon's Law.

As a rule of thumb, any roleplay that asks for your 'sexual orientation' in the character sheet format is worth avoiding. It's likely a safe space roleplay run by someone without any hair on their balls, and you'll never influence the status quo in any meaningful way.

Why would you post this publicly instead of talk to the person you're RPing with? That's rude as hell lmao

Huh? im so confused by this post, sexual orientation is for rps with romance involves duh. I dont understand the issue here.

Huh? im so confused by this post, sexual orientation is for rps with romance involves duh. I dont understand the issue here.

Huh? im so confused by this post, sexual orientation is for rps with romance involves duh. I dont understand the issue here.

Huh? im so confused by this post, sexual orientation is for rps with romance involves duh. I dont understand the issue here.

Indeed, there's few original RPs and most of what you see has descended from something weeby, edgy, or cringy. Thing is, they don't need you to give them a chance. They find popularity anyways. It's called Sturgeon's Law.

As a rule of thumb, any roleplay that asks for your 'sexual orientation' in the character sheet format is worth avoiding. It's likely a safe space roleplay run by someone without any hair on their balls, and you'll never influence the status quo in any meaningful way.

@GoreLore

It's to do with the status quo, as I said. Such public roleplays, while they may be called 'romantic' (I call them 'sexual'), will typically result in there being very little leeway for spontaneity or freedom of action. A kind of railroading if you please, that primarily supports players with their heads up their butts who only want the plot to progress in a way favorable to them and their relationships. You have people crying at the least little unaccounted disturbance, realistic or not, and it makes for a very boring experience unless you have a boner 24/7.

Usually these players are the kinds of folks who worship social media and, as a result, have no taste for anything outside their own realm of experience. One-dimensional, like a Disney sitcom.
I'm not saying romance is bad in roleplay, there just needs to be freedom and variety. It's like music. More people like the Jonas Brothers than Led Zeppelin today, but anyone with a lick of common sense knows which band kicks more ass. Some folks just listen to good music and lose their socially constructed boner because it doesn't fit within their personal paradigm.
They reside within a teeny comfort control bubble and anything that isn't bloody mundane is met by a REEEE!!
Hardly any tolerance, if any.

Ain't sayin' pop is bad either, but rather than having the Jonas Brothers OR Led Zeppelin forced on me, I'd want a roleplay that permits both in equal measure depending on the the roleplayers involved and what they like. In life shit happens, and not everything is always within your control. Especially not the actions of others.

The VAST majority of 'Mature' roleplays I see are the exact opposite, and those propagating them seem to miss the irony of it. You should always have a choice, but you shouldn't always have total control and peace outside of your own head.
Many 'sexual orientation' roleplays, in a manner of speaking, accept only Jonas Brothers music and whine when you get the Led out.

@GoreLore

It's to do with the status quo, as I said. Such public roleplays, while they may be called 'romantic' (I call them 'sexual'), will typically result in there being very little leeway for spontaneity or freedom of action. A kind of railroading if you please, that primarily supports players with their heads up their butts who only want the plot to progress in a way favorable to them and their relationships. You have people crying at the least little unaccounted disturbance, realistic or not, and it makes for a very boring experience unless you have a boner 24/7.

Usually these players are the kinds of folks who worship social media and, as a result, have no taste for anything outside their own realm of experience. One-dimensional, like a Disney sitcom.
I'm not saying romance is bad in roleplay, there just needs to be freedom and variety. It's like music. More people like the Jonas Brothers than Led Zeppelin today, but anyone with a lick of common sense knows which band kicks more ass. Some folks just listen to good music and lose their socially constructed boner because it doesn't fit within their personal paradigm.
They reside within a teeny comfort control bubble and anything that isn't bloody mundane is met by a REEEE!!
Hardly any tolerance, if any.

Ain't sayin' pop is bad either, but rather than having the Jonas Brothers OR Led Zeppelin forced on me, I'd want a roleplay that permits both in equal measure depending on the the roleplayers involved and what they like. In life shit happens, and not everything is always within your control. Especially not the actions of others.

The VAST majority of 'Mature' roleplays I see are the exact opposite, and those propagating them seem to miss the irony of it. You should always have a choice, but you shouldn't always have total control and peace outside of your own head.
Many 'sexual orientation' roleplays, in a manner of speaking, accept only Jonas Brothers music and whine when you get the Led out.

I'm having a hard time understanding what point you are trying to articulate here.. so let me get this straight. So you are saying that romantic Roleplays often have players who have very particular tastes and thus makes you feel like you cant have the freedom to step outside of the boundaries they place? if that is the point you are makibg then I have to disagree, first off most romantic roleplays arent sexual by any means btw. But also Many roleplays just have guidelines and social expectations that differ from one another. Sure you may a find a RP with people you cant truly interract and let loose with "the jonas brother fans" but that doesnt mean there isnt a jonus brother/led zeplin lovin Rp out there either. What im saying is that your view is very close minded. You seem to have the wrong idea about the genre and the people who enjoy the genres. You also have to keep in mind that most of these Rps are grounded in a universe? reality with rules and expectations so that it remains true and sensical to the world building thats as crafted for the characters. For example, your character you submitted to Neotokyo, The character clearly was built for arena free for all Roleplays while Neotokyo had strict limitations and a predefined reality in which the characters needed to abide by. Now you can say that it's conforming to the "status quo" you speak of but you will find that in any Roleplay with a narrative in which is based in Semi Reality.

@GoreLore

That's all missing the point.

Let's first get it out of the way that Neo Tokyo is unrelated. That was a power issue. My OC was too strong for it, sadly. I don't remember if that RP asked for my orientation, if so I likely skipped that part with gusto, but remember that in roleplay, in life, in reality, there are always exceptions. Neo Tokyo looked like an exceptional roleplay, and is likely well worth trying for anyone else.

Most high school roleplays are the inverse, unfortunately, but hey, some people really are sad enough to want to pretend to be at school in their free time. Sorry if that offends anyone, NOT.

The issue is exactly the boundaries many roleplays impose that, as I've stated twice now and shall simply state again if prompted like so, railroads players and doesn't allow them to influence the status quo even if they realistically could.
The vast majority of these kinds of roleplays that ask for one's sexual orientation do so because that's most likely going to be a primary, driving focus for the players in addition to a plot as stiff as a calcified weinerwurst. Anything that skews that objective makes them sweat like a hog. It's blatant pandering and stale as all get-out.
Let me provide you with an example.

If I want to punch your love interest in the face, I may very well do it. Can you stop me? Sure. I'd encourage it.

Should you cry to an admin that I'm going to punch your love interest?
Now we have a problem.

Instead of properly addressing an unfavorable circumstance in the roleplay and 'playing through', you have folks who may say it's against the 'spirit of the roleplay', as if such a shallow excuse could justify their safe space. People play roles, that's roleplay, but if they try to dictate every facet of what other characters can and can't do, well...

They might as well sit in a cardboard box and just play in their imagination solo.

@GoreLore

That's all missing the point.

Let's first get it out of the way that Neo Tokyo is unrelated. That was a power issue. My OC was too strong for it, sadly. I don't remember if that RP asked for my orientation, if so I likely skipped that part with gusto, but remember that in roleplay, in life, in reality, there are always exceptions. Neo Tokyo looked like an exceptional roleplay and is likely well worth trying for anyone else.

Most high school roleplays are the inverse, unfortunately, but hey, some people are sad enough to want to pretend to be at school in their free time. Sorry if that offends anyone, NOT.

The issue is exactly the boundaries many roleplays impose that, as I've stated twice now and shall simply state again if prompted like so, railroads players and doesn't allow them to influence the status quo even if they realistically could.
The vast majority of these kinds of roleplays that ask for one's sexual orientation do so because that's most likely going to be a primary, driving focus for the players in addition to a plot as stiff as a calcified weinerwurst. Anything that skews that objective makes them sweat like a hog. It's blatant pandering and stale as all get-out.
Let me provide you with an example.

If I want to punch your love interest in the face, I may very well do it. Can you stop me? Sure. I'd encourage it.

Should you cry to an admin that I'm going to punch your love interest?
Now we have a problem.

Instead of properly addressing an unfavorable circumstance in the roleplay and 'playing through', you have folks who may say it's against the 'spirit of the roleplay', as if such a shallow excuse could justify their safe space. People play roles, that's roleplay, but if they try to dictate every facet of what other characters can and can't do, well...

They might as well sit in a cardboard box and just play in their imagination solo.

Ah finally now I understand what you mean, the analogy you used before left me more confused. Yes I see what you mean you should be able to have interractions with others in any way you see fit without worrying about someone's whining. As well as other's dictatioon over your role, however my stance on making appropriate (As in skills, backstory, appearence) characters for a certain roleplay still stands.

@GoreLore
Yes, that's true indeed. Ultimately the GM decides if a character is accepted or not. It's their roleplay, after all, so they reserve that right, as they should. By all means, let freedom ring. Some roleplays may not be worth trying out for though, which is what this thread's about. Giving bad roleplays a chance? I say no, because they already have a fair amount of success, quality aside.