Let's B!tch. I feel it's a healthy release for our roleplay annoyances 2.0

[Innue]

Yog Sothoth said
Most of the time if there's nothing for the characters to do except just talk then the rp doesn't last very long. That's my experience, again most players want direction and something to do

You seem to not have quite taken from it what I had hoped, but I also advise that you might want to avoid speaking in such absolutes for anything expressly identified as your feelings.

[Nemaisare]

Azel said
Something that has been confusing me ever since I joined sites completely devoted to roleplaying is just how insanely popular pairings are as the main theme of an rp.When viewing the 1 on 1 interest check you'l notice that almost all the request posted there are either plots based on certain pairings or in more extreme cases just a list of pairings. Am I the only one who thinks that is an rather flawed way to build a plot? Call me old fashioned but I always believed the plot should be the main focus of any story.

Was not going to quote allllll of your post. :P

I have to agree with a lot of what you said. And you're definitely not the only one who finds pairing characters up for romance before even having a plot to be getting ahead of the story. Of course, if the person who's posted the interest check wants the romance to be the main part of the story, then it would be important to know what character roles/species/genders that they like and want, so you know what you're working with and can then tailor a plot that will fit those character types rather than coming up with a plot and then suddenly having to wedge those character types in even if it seems to make no logical sense.

Granted, if it's just for romance, and a lot of the posted pairings will be, then it can be bloody annoying to have to deal with making a character to those exact specifications. Then again, it does make it easy to know if you'd be interested or not, right from the get go, without having to read more than two or three words. I think quite a few interest check writers now use pairings as a shorthand to avoid having to type too much. Or maybe not wanting to share an idea with the public before they have someone willing to listen to it and write it with them. (no idea if that's what anyone's actually thinking, though)

For myself, I don't mind pairings in interest checks so long as I see that romance is not the end goal and that they've put some thought and effort into having plot ideas handy as well. I think it's perfectly fair to say "Hey, I'd like to write a story that has as the main characters a.... vampire and a human(or mermaid/human, god/mortal, etc.)" And see if anyone else is interested in writing about humans and vampires. There's still a lot of flexibility there to make up a story, all you need to include are humans and vampires. The rest, whether they're friendly to each other, what time period you're playing in, if they're from earth or another world completely, is still up in the air and free to be discussed. After all, Beauty and the Beast can be summarised as a story about a pairing. human/beast (and a lot of psychology mumbojumbo about sexuality and father figures and something or other fairytales)

With all that said, however, I do still find it a much more exciting moment when I open an interest check to find actual plots rather than the immediate bare bones of one.

[Yog Sothoth]

Innue said
You seem to not have quite taken from it what I had hoped, but I also advise that you might want to avoid speaking in such absolutes for anything expressly identified as your feelings.

I hope this doesn't sound rude but you are aware this is the internet? People speak in absolutes all the time and it's just role playing we're talking about, I've seen a lot worse absolute statements on the internet.

[Innue]

Yog Sothoth said
I hope this doesn't sound rude but you are aware this is the internet? People speak in absolutes all the time and it's just role playing we're talking about, I've seen a lot worse absolute statements on the internet.

Fine, then consider my complaint to the thread that people are speaking in absolutes. ^.-

But it being the internet doesn't make it any better (especially in discussion like this). You don't speak for the majority of the roleplayers and I know some people may not appreciate it.

Back on the original point, there can also be a serious slant away from character driven stories in which the characters have little to no impact on the world. In general, it is probably wisest to tread a very fine line through the center to ensure the characters can feel like they have an impact, but still have some kind of direction (again, not necessarily story/plot).

[Gwazi Magnum]

Yog Sothoth said
I have been in several rps with great characters but the rps barely last a week before its dead.

And you can also have a good story in an RP that lasts barely a week.
Yes you may argue "Good story takes time", but so does Characters.
So if you're claiming you had good characters in such a short RP I only assume the posting for it was intense.

In which case, a good story and characters can still happen.
But the outside world still exists, and still influences peoples abilities to keep up.

[Nemaisare]

This is probably a stupid question, but what is the difference between character-driven and story-driven?

I mean, I assume it's the focus, but everytime I try to think further than that my mind says well, a story without characters is a setting, and a character without a story is really going nowhere. And, to me at least, most rps unless they're nation rps, would seem to be more focused on the characters the players came up with, I mean, yes, you should generally give them an end goal or at least an idea of what they're supposed to be doing, but without developing the character motivation, it just becomes railroading. Or am I looking at this wrong?

[Innue]

Nemaisare said
This is probably a stupid question, but what is the difference between character-driven and story-driven?I mean, I assume it's the focus, but everytime I try to think further than that my mind says well, a story without characters is a setting, and a character without a story is really going nowhere. And, to me at least, most rps unless they're nation rps, would seem to be more focused on the characters the players came up with, I mean, yes, you should generally give them an end goal or at least an idea of what they're supposed to be doing, but without developing the character motivation, it just becomes railroading. Or am I looking at this wrong?

It isn't a stupid question, especially since at what point someone marks off whether something is truly 'story driven' or truly 'character driven'. Likely roleplays will require elements of both.

However, to clarify a bit. I've been a part of roleplays in which the GM is so focused on pushing the roleplay forward with his story that even when my character disrupted it, he completely ignored the actions my character took and shouted at my in the OOC saying that I couldn't do such a thing 'for plot reasons'.

[SoleAccord]

Posting templates and never posting ...like bruh.

Bruh.

[Yog Sothoth]

Magic Magnum said
And you can also have a good story in an RP that lasts barely a week.Yes you may argue "Good story takes time", but so does Characters.So if you're claiming you had good characters in such a short RP I only assume the posting for it was intense.In which case, a good story and characters can still happen.But the outside world still exists, and still influences peoples abilities to keep up.

Well in my experience a role play gets old pretty fast when we're just having our characters talk back and forth with no movement in the story. If there's no story then it's boring as hell for me

[Yog Sothoth]

Innue said
It isn't a stupid question, especially since at what point someone marks off whether something is truly 'story driven' or truly 'character driven'. Likely roleplays will require elements of both.However, to clarify a bit. I've been a part of roleplays in which the GM is so focused on pushing the roleplay forward with his story that even when my character disrupted it, he completely ignored the actions my character took and shouted at my in the OOC saying that I couldn't do such a thing 'for plot reasons'.

That sucks when gms do that. My point is that it gets really frustrating for me when the rp turns into a social gathering and then becomes a total mess when every single character gets in on a conversation because the players don't have anything else to do with their characters and then it gets really annoying having to respond to each character. If I want a social gathering then I converse in the ooc, it especially pisses me off when the theme of the role play is suppose be about telling a story and instead becomes conversational mess. I don't role play for the sake of conversation, I role play to create interesting characters and to tell a story as well as have my characters face challenges. I'm in it for the Hero's Journey

[TheCaptainQ]

Yog Sothoth said
That sucks when gms do that. My point is that it gets really frustrating for me when the rp turns into a social gathering and then becomes a total mess when every single character gets in on a conversation because the players don't have anything else to do with their characters and then it gets really annoying having to respond to each character. If I want a social gathering then I converse in the ooc, it especially pisses me off when the theme of the role play is suppose be about telling a story and instead becomes conversational mess. I don't role play for the sake of conversation, I role play to create interesting characters and to tell a story as well as have my characters face challenges. I'm in it for the Hero's Journey

Amen to that

[Rilla]

When I GM, I push for everyone to push the story each post, which can be done in conversation. They usually know the endgame I want so they know what to do, plus I push the story why my posts as well.

More.GMs, I think, should.be more.flexible and.have viable enough. characters to work with any unexpected change on.in actions.

[Scout]

I don't think there's really a difference between plot-driven and character-driven. Character-driven doesn't mean it's all dialogue - think about how many real people or characters are drastically changed by conversation. It doesn't happen quite so often - especially when somebody is older. However, it seems to me that lately a lot of roleplays don't have that organic experience - either the GM is too focused on pushing their agenda, or the pairings are all far too planned out between players. If anything, people shouldn't discuss it before hand, and if you don't like somebody who tries to push the pairing on you, there's *always* a way around it. But too many relationships are forced and clearly rushed between two characters who don't have enough connection for it to work properly.

To argue that "plot" or "character" is more important than the other is a bit counter-productive because they need one another. In roleplaying, the characters *are* the plot - otherwise the GM may as well just write their own story. ^^"

Not that I'm not guilty of having been involved in it before, but it's just an observation. I think the characters are what make the story.

[bosesbjorn]

On the subject of character-driven, or plot-driven I usually think about it this way. Does the plot usually drive the character development, or do the characters drive the plot development. A character driven story doesn't mean that there is little or no plot, it just means that the characters make the plot, as opposed to characters being made to fit a specific plot.

[Yog Sothoth]

If the story is good then I'm perfectly fine with average characters as long as they're not op or douchebags. I'm not a snob when it comes character creation, I'm pretty open as long as the idea is cool

[ASTA]

Rilla said
More.GMs, I think, should.be more.flexible and.have viable enough. characters to work with any unexpected change on.in actions.

So how's that touchscreen phone keyboard working out for you?

[Rilla]

Like.a.charm why.do.you.ask? XD

[Nemaisare]

Thanks for the clarification. Also... touchscreen keyboards = argh.

[Scout]

Asta, may I just say, I'm far from complaining about your awesome signature? XD I could seriously sit here and watch that .gif ALL DAY. It's so smooth and the loop is well connected to the point that it's just aesthetically pleasing. I feel like a cat, just watching... back and forth... back and forth...

[Dinh AaronMk]

Scout said
I don't think there's really a difference between plot-driven and character-driven. Character-driven doesn't mean it's all dialogue - think about how many real people or characters are drastically changed by conversation. It doesn't happen quite so often - especially when somebody is older. However, it seems to me that lately a lot of roleplays don't have that organic experience - either the GM is too focused on pushing their agenda, or the pairings are all far too planned out between players. If anything, people shouldn't discuss it before hand, and if you don't like somebody who tries to push the pairing on you, there's *always* a way around it. But too many relationships are forced and clearly rushed between two characters who don't have enough connection for it to work properly.To argue that "plot" or "character" is more important than the other is a bit counter-productive because they need one another. In roleplaying, the characters *are* the plot - otherwise the GM may as well just write their own story. ^^"Not that I'm not guilty of having been involved in it before, but it's just an observation. I think the characters are what make the story.

I've always preferred to go sandbox, free form sort of RPs. I put more effort into the world and establishing the parameters and say, "Do whatever". That way people can explore their own characters and figure out how they're going to interact with others as opposed to pulling something shit out of nowhere because they're forced to right away. And then everyone also has their own incentive to doing what every agrees needs to be done, subconsciously or through a process of evolution in the RP itself.

This also sort of falls back to my general philosophy that if you're too reliant on everyone to post regularly and someone doesn't it's an easy way to trip a chain reaction and destroy the entire RP. From a damage-control standpoint if everyone's doing whatever and at the start not doing anything with anyone then the risk of one guy deciding to drop out without warning or a "goodbye" diminishes and maybe only effects one person, who then could be steered around the missing guy.

I've had a few cases where a guy doesn't show up to post. Even badgering him over his Steam chat to post didn't produce results. RP died before we could even get everyone to go off and do their own things. Letting everyone do whatever helps to identify those who'll commit versus those who won't.

Anyways, that's my tangent.