Hello, RPGN! Big fan of the newsletters, especially the interviews. It's always great to hear people talk about their views and experiences in roleplaying.
I don't believe I would be able to commit to being a part of the staff, but here's my own tiny contribution for this one: there are a few small errors that I noticed in the newsletter, and it's particularly odd because I don't believe I've seen
any in previous months. Um, first, in the interview, it appears that Asuras responds to a question that Jorick asks, but the question itself is omitted from the final post.
RPGN said
Jorick: Alright, so it's great for dialogue and actions. One objection I can think of is that it may be restrictive for adding character thoughts into a post, which a lot of people use for character development. Another is that it may interfere with giving details to objects and scenery, that the pacing of back and forth dialogue or actions in a collab post just don't allow for that kind of thing. Do you think that's the case, or can collab posts contain those elements without any issues?
Asuras: There's no reason someone couldn't input those sorts of things. I encourage players in roleplays I GM to input whatever they like wherever they like during a collab. Otherwise, it's best to simply say, "done," when you've finished with whatever it is you're describing. Then the next person can respond.
Player A could begin writing a dialogue response and then afterwards input his/her character's thoughts. During that time, Player B might be inclined to put in a response of their own between Player A's dialogue and the thoughts; this might change Player A's thoughts before he even finishes. Once again, in the real world people don't have the luxury of getting time to think whenever they want.
Of course, if it's a really short thought process that barely even needs focus, it could be input at any time. The time it takes to think, "I like this guy," is negligible.
On the topic of scenery and objects, discerning what something looks like is instant. One could describe a scene between dialogue (if such were ever to be needed), without it detracting from the realism. While you and I walk into a grocery store, we can still maintain dialogue and realize we're in a gorcery store.
<------- Jorick's omitted question should go here.
Asuras: Of course. It requires attentiveness. Because the collab is on a different site, players have to check in regularly if they want to progress the post. Normally in the Guild players merely have to see that something new has been posted in the IC, whereas in collabing they must go somewhere else to check. It's not tough to do, but it's an extra step that might make players who are tired or distracted less likely to input more text.
It's also sometimes difficult to guage when the post should stop. In normal posting structure you simply input what is needed; during a collab you're writing out an entire scene, possibly more. It would be strange to post it up on anything other than a cliffhanger of some sorts, and so you and the others have to decide when that is, or how to write one in that works well.
If they're very long posts (and they often are), players in the rp who are uninvolved with the collab might be less inclined to read it. This can lead to a division in the roleplay where players focus entirely on their own characters and the ones they're collabing with. It practically seems like several different rp's in the same thread at times.
A tiny second and third, in the Notable Interest Checks and Notable Roleplays respectively:
-the "Arena Interest Check" section has no roleplay or link, nor any note stating a lack of options or choices to put in the newsletter.
-the "Arena Roleplay" link to
Star Wars: Duel of Fates has an incomplete Bold QQCode.
:) This is no insult at all to this wonderful newsletter or its staff, just a few things I noticed.
