Problems with partners...

[Undead Eyes]

Basically, come rant with me.
The last five days have been full of aggravation due to members seemingly lacking the ability to read the rules of a thread...
So, I'm annoyed... I'm not wanting to let it out on them for ignoring the fact that surrounded my threads, so I'm here to just talk with others who experience the same thing.

OBVIOUSLY, don't mention people's names. We're here to let out frustration and share stories, not dis anyone in particular.

My biggest issue, as stated, is the lack of people reading my threads.
I can have it neatly laid out stating the rules, and then people message me, (5 in the last 2 days) asking for stuff I clearly state I won't do, or asking me to do something that has nothing to do with what the thread was about...

What's your issues with partners lately?

[Captain Jordan]

When people obviously don't read what I've written, I don't read what they write. I'd just ignore their PMs.

[Undead Eyes]

Which is reasonable. I used to even state in my rules; 'If it's obvious you ignored my rules, I'll ignore your PM."

[Kaga]

I wrote a rant about my GM problems but then deleted it cuz I didn't want to whine on a public forum.

Though I did feel better just writing it up.

[Brovo]

I just usually doodle a little rule somewhere in my OOC thread saying "type this if you read everything: I'm not a moron" and voila. That filters idiots decently.

[Kaga]

Brovo said
I just usually doodle a little rule somewhere in my OOC thread saying "type this if you read everything: I'm not a moron" and voila. That filters idiots decently.

Yeah, I'm starting to consider using a sort of password/phrase on future RP's. I'm getting kind of fed up with people not following certain rules.

[Tick]

Kaga said
Yeah, I'm starting to consider using a sort of password/phrase on future RP's. I'm getting kind of fed up with people not following certain rules.

People get smart about that. They scan through the rules to find the passy into the game without reading the rules. You can make the password more complicated to figure out, but that generally becomes a pain to everyone that plays fair.

Harsh bio screenings have helped keep especially bad players or character away for one RP I'm in, and a policy of rejecting players that aren't ever active and leave without warning, if they come around again. It often tests how well the player takes criticism, how willing they are to change or fix something, how good of a sport they are, etc.
It also scares away good players or rejects decent to good players, either by not accepting what they did, or by killing their enthusiasm after the bio screening experience.

[Kaga]

Tick said
People get smart about that. They scan through the rules to find the passy into the game without reading the rules. You can make the password more complicated to figure out, but that generally becomes a pain to everyone that plays fair.Harsh bio screenings have helped keep especially bad players or character away for one RP I'm in, and a policy of rejecting players that aren't ever active and leave without warning, if they come around again. It often tests how well the player takes criticism, how willing they are to change or fix something, how good of a sport they are, etc.It also scares away good players or rejects decent to good players, either by not accepting what they did, or by killing their enthusiasm after the bio screening experience.

Oh, I plan to be smart about it, too, if I implement such a thing. One thing I had in mind was maybe having players tell me their "favorite" rule, which would at least make them read one rule. At any rate, even if it's not a perfect system, it would still be some help. Even if some people find a way to still not read the rules (which, at that point, sounds like it would require more effort than just reading them already), it would at least convince more people to read them. And just one additional member actually reading the rules is still helpful.

At any rate, though, I just started an RP and likely won't start another for quite a while, so I have time to think on this.

[Undead Eyes]

All good points. o-o
The ranting does help, even if you just delete it. I often rant with friend. =D
It really is amazing how people can be so lazy (and I call it lazy because the main excuse I get is; "You're thread was too long! I shouldn't have to read all that." Maybe but you could at least read the numbered rules if nothing else...) is that when you call them out on it, even if politely, they get mad at YOU, as if YOU did something wrong...
It's like; "I'm sorry I wrote a thread questing for something and you didn't have the ability to read the rules, but instead message me showing a blatant disregard to the work I put into my thread to find a partner who likes what I like. I am SO sorry to have you waste my time by ignoring the rules and trying to get me to do stuff I CLEARLY stated I didn't want to do! MY APOLOGIES!"

[Glitchy]

Tick said
It also scares away good players or rejects decent to good players, either by not accepting what they did, or by killing their enthusiasm after the bio screening experience.

I'm experiencing this right now with an RP where I'm trying to get my character accepted. Enthusiasm for it has definitely pitfalled with the character rejections. I am a good sport and this is my sixth time trying to get it accepted, but at this point just having a single word off causing the rejection, and having a crapton of assumptions lopped on you for attempting to be creative within the setting has made me reconsider whether I should even continue. It was a good setting too. Shame, really.

[Brovo]

Oh, that reminds me, two other things I'll do.

1) Check posting history. If they have a habit of jumping out of RP's, keep that in mind.

2) Reject some people for absolutely no reason (I can make up bullshit as well as the next guy) and wait 3-4 days to get back to that person. This tends to vaporize 50% of the problem players right there, since most of the impatient ones also tend to have fragile egos. Bonus points in that it also works against people who cannot stand criticism, which if you have a long lasting RP, will invariable occur to everyone at least once.

[Touch of Insanity]

See I find post history a very important thing, but when it comes to a section like the onexone's some players role play solely by PM and therefore have control of your creeping levels to see if they are a good person to role play with. I find myself struggling to find people who are really HIGH casual- Advanced writers who really are what they say they are. Like as it states in my own personal interest check, you should be able to put out at least 300 words AT LEAST, not at most, I would have stated causal in my interest if I wanted a max of 300 words.

[Dervish]

I often find that passcodes and the like are exceedingly ineffective. Even in games where I am just looking at it and looking over the sheets, it's really easy to notice a common trend, be it a passcode, saying your favorite colour, or whatever. It's not nearly as clever as most people would think, and there's a much easier way to sort through it all. It's exactly what Tick said; scrutinize the character sheet.

Now, this doesn't mean being so anal retentive like in Glitchy's case where minor spelling and grammar errors are the cause for rejection, it's requiring character sheets to be detailed and setting appropriate, and including things in it like how world-changing events effected your character, and keeping timeline appropriate. It's usually pretty clear if somebody took the time to read over the introductory OOC post and incorporated elements of the lore into their sheet compared to those who just got the gist of the game and whipped together a character sheet in ten minutes using only the most rudimentary of information. It's usually pretty obvious when somebody puts in a good amount of effort into their character sheet, which doesn't necessarily mean long, because they took care to address several of the details. The GM needs to be proactive about making sure the applicant's sheet is appropriate and matches the quality and standards that are set out and shouldn't be afraid to give it a detailed critique about why something doesn't work. If a player legitimately tries to address the issues and is more than willing to work with you the entire way, then they're probably a good fit for the game. If they're making a giant stink over changes you want to see or they half-ass in a justification for something, then it's probably a sign that person isn't going to work for your game.

TL;DR If it's obvious somebody didn't read everything, then don't bother with them unless it was an honest oversight. It should be pretty clear if someone is putting in an effort. A password isn't going to do anything for you other than make it really easy for someone who takes five seconds to glance at a couple character sheets to figure out how to get "in" the game. It's counter-productive, and in my opinion, lazy GMing.

Brovo said
Oh, that reminds me, two other things I'll do.1) Check posting history. If they have a habit of jumping out of RP's, keep that in mind.2) Reject some people for (I can make up bullshit as well as the next guy) and wait 3-4 days to get back to that person. This tends to vaporize 50% of the problem players right there, since most of the impatient ones also tend to have fragile egos. Bonus points in that it also works against people who cannot stand criticism, which if you have a long lasting RP, will invariable occur to everyone at least once.

I don't really agree with 2, at all. Rejecting someone to see if they'd be grateful to be accepted back a few days later just seems like an unnecessary dick move out of Fight Club. Starting a relationship with a player by establishing yourself as a manipulative liar is a terrible way to go about it. Just spend time going over the character sheet and go into a hard, detailed review that picks apart anything that looks questionable. If they are open to criticism and work at properly addressing it, then you have a good player. If not, then you get it out right then and there. Don't play head games.

[Seravee]

People leaving is my biggest problem. I suppose that I'm not interesting enough to keep them captivated.

[Seravee]

Dervish said I don't really agree with 2, at all. Rejecting someone to see if they'd be grateful to be accepted back a few days later just seems like an unnecessary dick move out of Fight Club. Starting a relationship with a player by establishing yourself as a manipulative liar is a terrible way to go about it. Just spend time going over the character sheet and go into a hard, detailed review that picks apart anything that looks questionable. If they are open to criticism and work at properly addressing it, then you have a good player. If not, then you get it out right then and there. Don't play head games.

And I agree with this 100%. If someone took the time to express their interest, the least you can do is be respectful. Even if they're not a good match, you shouldn't treat them poorly.

[Brovo]

@Dervish: Interesting that you presume that I disrespect them. I give them reasons, made up ones albeit, but ones where they can go to the effort to repair it themselves.

If they're not willing to adjust themselves to fit in with the requirements I've set, then they won't cooperate at other points in the story when the same kind of situation will crop itself up again. Not to mention, someone willing to spend the time to go over why their character is good, and why they want to play it, are generally the kind of people who genuinely want to play. Not join and then disappear because the character they spent five minutes on is no longer interesting to them.

It's not a lie to reject someone. It's not manipulative to ask them to change something just to see if they are willing to be cooperative enough to work with me. This is actually why my RP's tend to last a long time: I use the character creation process like a job interview. If you prove yourself to be unwilling to work with me, even on things where it makes no sense, and would instead resort to being aggressive about it or just up and leaving, then we weren't likely going to be good for each other anyway.

This isn't being a manipulative liar: This is being a good GM. You're evil. It's in your job description, quite literally, so to give a trivial test to the occasional player to see if they actually want to play or if they just threw up a five minute CS out of whimsy? Not wrong, or cruel. Just evil...

...Which is my job.

Also, no, I shouldn't have to defend rejecting someone as the GM. If I don't like someone's sheet, or if I think I won't work well with someone, I am well within my means and rights to just say no. My world, my rules. Period.

Seravee said
And I agree with this 100%. If someone took the time to express their interest, the least you can do is be respectful. Even if they're not a good match, you shouldn't treat them poorly.

As I said above. Not treating them poorly by giving them a test of their character. This is like saying that it's cruel to turn someone down: No, it's not.

[Crimson Flame]

The Password thing is a terrible idea. GMs should be able to tell if someone is following the rules by reading their CSs, and CS writers don't want to type some silly phrase just to prove they can do something simple...

Tick said Harsh bio screenings have helped keep especially bad players or character away for one RP I'm in, and a policy of rejecting players that aren't ever active and leave without warning, if they come around again. It often tests how well the player takes criticism, how willing they are to change or fix something, how good of a sport they are, etc.It also scares away good players or rejects decent to good players, either by not accepting what they did, or by killing their enthusiasm after the bio screening experience.

So basically we're all competing for spots. :/ From my experience, this always comes down to, "what kinds of characters the GMs like." Because the people that are willing to be judged like that are all good writers who have read the rules and know what's expected. So, what do you go on? :/

I really don't want to be competing against people for a spot in an RP. :/

[Dervish]

@Bravo

So just reject them if they aren't willing to work with you or they aren't able to meet the standards. You can do everything you just said without rejecting them and then asking them back because you wanted to test their character. I stand by what I said. It's a rather shitty way to go about doing things, in my humble opinion, since there's plenty of other ways of judging someone's character without resorting to bullshitting a reason to reject them even though you have every other intention to accept them.

It's not being "evil". It's just being a dick. Say what you have to up front and be done with it. I have two games that have been around for around a year each and I have rejected several applicants for each game for a variety of reasons. The ones who remain are the ones who have proven to be good characters and capable of meeting my standards without complaint. I am more than a little familiar with what it takes to run a game and chose people who are well suited for it, so believe me when I say that there are plenty of other very effective methods a GM can use that doesn't revolve around what you're advocating.

If you told me that I was rejected for a really silly, made up reason and then told me it was a test of my character three days later and you wanted me back, I'd refuse flat out. If you couldn't tell I'd be a dedicated and easy person to work with another way, then why would I want to participate? It's just rude.

Because this is over text, I feel like I should put a disclaimer here saying I'm not personally attacking you or saying you're an awful person, Brovo, I'm simply disagreeing with one GMing decision out of the many you obviously made that have worked for you. Healthy discussion and all that, blah blah blah, keeping it respectful and non-confrontational. I decided to edit this in because I've seen waaay too many things on the internet turn into something scrappy because text can come across as snippy or aggressive when it's not what was intended.

[Rilla]

At the end of the day, that's generally what you're doing unless it is a come one, come all.

I don't mind 'competing', in fact, it helps me come up with something better than I probably would if I know I'm getting in anyway.

[Dervish]

Crimson Flame said
The Password thing is a terrible idea. GMs should be able to tell if someone is following the rules by reading their CSs, and CS writers don't want to type some silly phrase just to prove they can do something simple...So basically we're all competing for spots. :/ From my experience, this always comes down to, "what kinds of characters the GMs like." Because the people that are willing to be judged like that are all good writers who have read the rules and know what's expected. So, what do you go on? :/I really don't want to be competing against people for a spot in an RP. :/

You sound like you're saying you prefer a "reserve slot" kind of game, which has its own problems and I think leads to a higher chance of RP death.

Let's say a game has 8 slots and 8 people reserve, anyone else who didn't make it in time is out of luck. Let's say 4 of those players whip something together really quickly and get accepted because the GM is kind of a softie who is just happy to have interest in the game, and doesn't like being the person to make hard criticisms. A few weeks into the game, three of those four players drop out, and the game starts to slow down, and then other players start to get bored and leave, or take the exodus as a sign.

I see this all the damn time, and it's really kind of sad. "Reserving" a slot usually screws people who legitimately want to be there out of the game, and what if somebody's in a different time zone and they were sleeping and missed it all? Not really fair at all, is it?

And for me, it's less "competing" for a position as it is just being able to put together a sheet and show a willingness to work with the GMs and get along with the other players. I'm usually pretty fluid with my player limits, and if somebody's got the right attitude and put a lot of good work into their character sheet, there's a good chance I'll say yes, unless I state a game is closed, full-stop. If given the choice between a player who has excellent technical writing skills and put a lot of work into their character sheet, but there was a conflict in personality or a coldness, for a lack of better word, from one player verses someone who is less of an experienced writer but still managed to hit all the criteria I'm looking for while having a warm, open personality and a willingness to address concerns, I'm going to take the second one. I want people I enjoy roleplaying with, and that's what's important above everything else. Yes, I want someone who's demonstrated they have read everything and took the pains to make their character fit into the setting and world, but I also want someone who isn't afraid to joke around and genuinely wants to be there to hang out. Roleplaying is more fun when you treat players more like friends than employees.

EDIT to add moar:

I'm often asked from people about what kinds of characters I'm looking for in a game, be it race/ class or team role or anything like that, and I always answer the same thing: I want people to pick something they identify with and will have the most fun with. I know what you mean by some GMs showing favouritism towards a certain kind of character, which in some cases has lead to some REALLY bad characters getting accepted over really good ones, which makes me want to pull my hair out. I don't mind mentioning something like, "Oh, we don't really have many warriors or clerics, so if you want to do something unique go for that", but overall I think that a solid character is a solid character and people tend to put more effort into something they want to write as opposed to what they've been asked to write. The beauty of roleplaying is it's not like a video game that's stat driven, if you have a fantasy RP that has a group of 3 rogues, 4 mages, and one warrior, you can still make it work out just fine. I think a big pitfall a lot of GMs and players alike have is they try to think of a game in terms of video games, which is why you see a lot of people with super abilities and powers and top-tier weapons because they kind of feel like they have to have all that to be competitive or to win or something. Not a healthy mindset, if you ask me.

But honestly? Don't worry about "competing" for a slot. Most GMs will likely pick you if you get along with everyone and put in a good effort that meets all the standards they're looking for. Every game I've been in, generally the only ones that don't get picked are the ones that you can tell really didn't meet the standards or the players themselves had some character flaw. I've only seen people get rejected who had amazing character sheets on two or three occasions in the two years I've been here.