Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[freeformschooler]

not particularly memorable

Well if that isn't the most subjective statement of the year. I think you'll find a lot of people disagreeing with you here. Just because you didn't enjoy them...

Actually, most seem to agree with me. See the old topic on segregation of suggestion games. Great discussion there.

There's tons of good stuff on here, but you'd be crazy to say the majority of it isn't dropped quickly and then later replaced by new games which are also dropped quickly, etc. Even many of my games are guilty of this and for that reason I find them, too, unmemorable.

[Digital Hellhound]

I think we might just not gravitate to the same games in the first place. Games dying quickly is true, but fairly unique to B12 - the majority of MSPA forum adventures die very quickly, for example. That's just the nature of things (though this Eagletime place doth intrigue me).

[Fniff]

You know, we don't seem to discuss players that often. I mean, this is mostly working on mechanics, and mechanics are only 1/3 of roleplays/suggestion games, the other 2/3rds being plot and players. Here's my question: how do you make a plot that involves the players and interests them? I find that "You all meet in a tavern, here, have a job" only goes so far, and doesn't work in a game meant for politics. However, there is always the risk of the players shrugging the plot hooks off and ending up wandering pointlessly around. Now, I'm not asking for advice on how to most efficently railroad your players, but I generally find having a goal makes an RP last much longer then one that's just directionless. So, how can I make a plot involving, interesting, and (not) intrusive?

[10ebbor10]

One word:

Consequences. It helps if things actually matter, after all.

[freeformschooler]

I think we might just not gravitate to the same games in the first place. Games dying quickly is true, but (not?) fairly unique to B12 - the majority of MSPA forum adventures die very quickly, for example. That's just the nature of things (though this Eagletime place doth intrigue me).

Eagletime is only less affected by that because it's currently filled with the dedicated and passionate previous GMs from MSPA who wanted to continue making cool stuff after that section of their forum was shut down. In time it will also be filled with cool adventures which ask for your personal investment in their stories which die the moment you become invested in them.

You know, we don't seem to discuss players that often. I mean, this is mostly working on mechanics, and mechanics are only 1/3 of roleplays/suggestion games, the other 2/3rds being plot and players. Here's my question: how do you make a plot that involves the players and interests them? I find that "You all meet in a tavern, here, have a job" only goes so far, and doesn't work in a game meant for politics. However, there is always the risk of the players shrugging the plot hooks off and ending up wandering pointlessly around. Now, I'm not asking for advice on how to most efficently railroad your players, but I generally find having a goal makes an RP last much longer then one that's just directionless. So, how can I make a plot involving, interesting, and (not) intrusive?

Start them with a common goal. And I mean literally build it into the bio section of their character sheet: "why did this character join Superspace Military?" Sure, you'll get a few people who aren't invested and take off on their own, but this seems to be the most effective way of having both the player and their character sign up for a specific experience and follow through as best they can.

[Digital Hellhound]

We don't discuss players because they are puny insects trying to get in the way of YOUR enjoyment. Insects!

You should generally make sure the players know what they're getting into. If you want a political game, make sure you get players who want that in the first place. This is obvious basics, though. I wish I knew the answers to your question.

Honestly I'd just say that different things work with different people but that's, like, the lamest cop-out.

@freeform: As an addendum, I kinda agree that this forum doesn't produce memorable characters that often, but it sure as hell produces interesting worlds. A world-hopping crossover might work better.

[monk12]

In time it will also be filled with cool adventures which ask for your personal investment in their stories which die the moment you become invested in them.

Well that's not incredibly depressing at all!

I will say one of the reasons I don't often hop into new forum games is because of this. I prefer to let them develop a bit to get a gauge of how much effort and investment the GM has, since a GM willing to put in a lot of work up front (and not show signs of disinterest/burnout in the early stages) is more likely to stick with things in the long term. Of course, if EVERYONE did it my way we'd end up with a Tragedy of the Commons situation where (apparent) lack of player interest kills promising forum games in their infancy (*cough**cough**TornAjar**cough*) leading to a situation where only established GMs are able to attract interest to their new games.

So, uh, I guess I'm saying don't do what I do? That's probably safe advice in general.

[Fniff]

Yeah, I have a problem with burnout myself. I've been trying to push through it, though, and maybe I can keep my two forum games alive. The worst thing about it is that you do have ideas, you just don't know how to connect them to the current situation or how to make the current situation interesting, and you just feel like everyone's really bored in this situation including your players.

[Harry Baldman]

Good way to keep things interesting for both the GM and the players is to let random shit happen and not impede derailing. Give players the idea that they have a set storyline to follow and let them shatter it into tiny pieces or ignore it if they want to. That's what player satisfaction is made of, no? Provide an atmosphere where players can be killed off or changed over periodically (provided they are unlucky or silly enough), that keeps the people rotating and improves the general freshness of things. If you have a setting, let it be as flexible as possible in terms of what is and isn't likely to happen. If you stick close to realism, it's much harder to make things seem interesting, I've found.

So, if people seem bored, add random events. Manipulate the dark unknown that is the bit of the setting the players don't know about and put what you want in it. Put it on a collision course with innocent people (or PCs).

[monk12]

I get that too. In my experience, I usually try to deal with it in a couple ways.

1) Make sure the game mechanics are interesting enough to be enjoyable in their own right. Most video games are like this; a lot of the game is filler (random battles and sidquests and things like that) but the experience of playing the game is part of why the player is here, so it's okay. Can still burn you out as a GM if you aren't fascinated by the workings of your own mechanics (and the fact that I can be probably speaks to narcissism on my part.)

2) Skip the boring bits. If nobody cares, it happens offscreen. If this means that the game only has enough "interesting bit" content to make a chapter or two, then so be it. I'd rather have a short, thoughtful, spirited game than a grand epic of mostly bland crap. Obviously tricky to handle when you think something was going to be fun but turns out to be kinda boring halfway through, but experience is all about learning to recognize what you're going to like or dislike ahead of time.

3) Try to reason out why people should care in the first place, before you start. Obviously the most preferable one, but also obviously the hardest one. Trying to plan out a step-by-step game of honest to god content is a lot of work, and a lot of times I feel I write better/maintain interest longer if I work out the details on the fly. It's a balancing act I try to get better at with every game (Star Crossed is exciting as it's the first game where I really know everything I want to do from the start, just about. I hope I can pull it off.)

[Digital Hellhound]

Good way to keep things interesting for both the GM and the players is to let random shit happen and not impede derailing. Give players the idea that they have a set storyline to follow and let them shatter it into tiny pieces or ignore it if they want to. That's what player satisfaction is made of, no? Provide an atmosphere where players can be killed off or changed over periodically (provided they are unlucky or silly enough), that keeps the people rotating and improves the general freshness of things. If you have a setting, let it be as flexible as possible in terms of what is and isn't likely to happen. If you stick close to realism, it's much harder to make things seem interesting, I've found.

This doesn't sound like it'd bring too much GM satisfaction or player satisfaction for that one player who was enjoying the plot and doesn't like the others breaking it. It's good advice, but not really universal to every type of game.

(In other words, that sounds kinda... imperfect for me both as a GM and a player. Mainly because words like 'shatter' so I can only imagine a bunch of vandals laying waste to a centuries-old precious mural (the lovingly-crafted plot) or somesuch. Kerping your plot flexible and un-railroady is key in any game, naturally.)

[Harry Baldman]

This doesn't sound like it'd bring too much GM satisfaction or player satisfaction for that one player who was enjoying the plot and doesn't like the others breaking it. It's good advice, but not really universal to every type of game.

(In other words, that sounds kinda... imperfect for me both as a GM and a player. Mainly because words like 'shatter' so I can only imagine a bunch of vandals laying waste to a centuries-old precious mural (the lovingly-crafted plot) or somesuch. Kerping your plot flexible and un-railroady is key in any game, naturally.)

Well, if there's just one player who was enjoying the plot, it's going to be pretty difficult for them to enjoy it if the rest don't share in the joy, know what I mean? And lovingly crafting a plot for a game implies several things. For one, it means that you're planning too far ahead. Secondly, it means you're getting too attached to your plot. You shouldn't do that. It just makes it hurt more when somebody ruins it by accident or on purpose.

And laying waste to things (such as a lovingly-crafted plot) is very fun, I must say. Particularly when it's clear you're not supposed to be doing it - subverting expectations and surmounting odds gives the player joy. Particularly when you feel like you're destroying something beautiful, powerful or wonderful, especially if it's done through planning and effort.

Speaking of, I'd also say that one way to increase your GM satisfaction is to get the players plotting or thinking strategically. This is difficult to achieve, but one way to get people thinking is to add more potential for strategy (primarily on the enemies' part as a GM) in combat portions and reward the players when they do unconventional things generally.

[10ebbor10]

There are quite a lot of people who enjoy a decently crafted plot, and just one player randomly shooting a plot important person for no raisin can ruin it for everyone.

Only applies to decently crafted plots though.

[Harry Baldman]

There are quite a lot of people who enjoy a decently crafted plot, and just one player randomly shooting a plot important person for no raisin can ruin it for everyone.

Only applies to decently crafted plots though.

Certainly, that sort of thing can happen, though I'm having a hard time imagining such a situation where it would, unless one particular player joining the game (a good game, no less) specifically to disrupt it as much as possible (as in, somebody just joining for trolling purposes and nothing else, which in most cases would be noticed by players sooner rather than later). And even in that case, it is usually possible to continue the plot somehow, or make up the beginnings of a new one. For these purposes, it's good to keep track of what the players have seen before and what they have not, and also what they have done in their time.

[Digital Hellhound]

It could be, for example, a novice RPer joining such a game and derailing the others' fun with selfishness/godmodding or just poor roleplaying, which I've experienced more than once. I've probably been such a person in the past. They could shoot up the plot-important NPC because they're not all that invested and just want to have their fun, no matter what the others think. It's not easy for a GM to manage.