Print

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

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

Maybe rather than a 'completed games list,' we could instead use this as a commbination as a sort of sigtext for games, as well as a listing of prior games run (latter forming a kind of pedigree for what type of games are run <maybe divided into active/hiatus/completed/passed off/abandoned>)?  OP could link to the postings of the GMs, allowing for people to check in on what was done by a particular person, see other active games by someone, read old games by a person, take up now dead ideas, etc.  Maybe the OP could have traits, like helmacon suggested, after the post links to give a general idea of the specific GM...

I'm willing to go into my history and difg stuff up if we do this.  Might even go mad and try to track down ones I've been a player of as well, though that would be a particularly wild hair if I do that...

[_DivideByZero_]

Since completion is so circumstantial, and not necessarily indicative of a good game (Not to mention a bit exclusionary) I think we ought to just go by a trait system.

For example, a list of GM's, and people suggest what they feel describes thier games. So someone might be tagged with "Updates quickly" and "shallow plot" ,but another GM might get tagged "Novel-esq updates" and "Snails pace games".

This would let people browse the list and find GM's that run games like they are looking for without necessarily calling people good/bad GM's. (There's not really any such thing).

It would also be a good way for people to judge the community reception of thier games and know what they need to work on. So it would still provide that rewarding sense of accomplishment when you get recognised enough that people are giving you tags, but wouldn't make people feel excluded because they are "Lower on the scale"

It's my earnest experience that games which expect great investment are the least likely to repay it (looking at you, high-story games), since it pressures GMs into a death spiral of increasing responsibility and consequent inactivity. The answer, then, is to join simpler games first and foremost, so that your engagement with the game is not merely limited to writing up a novel's worth of character sheet.

Oh god.. I am that GM. I tried starting a super simple RTD lately because i figured "thats less commitment as a GM right? Simple characters, simple updates, the dice decide everything; then I got a whiff of story and next thing i know my opening update is over 5000 words. I have a problem.  The best kind of problem.

Let's not do a hall of shame, please.

[ATHATH]

Maybe rather than a 'completed games list,' we could instead use this as a commbination as a sort of sigtext for games, as well as a listing of prior games run (latter forming a kind of pedigree for what type of games are run <maybe divided into active/hiatus/completed/passed off/abandoned>)?  OP could link to the postings of the GMs, allowing for people to check in on what was done by a particular person, see other active games by someone, read old games by a person, take up now dead ideas, etc.  Maybe the OP could have traits, like helmacon suggested, after the post links to give a general idea of the specific GM...

I'm willing to go into my history and difg stuff up if we do this.  Might even go mad and try to track down ones I've been a player of as well, though that would be a particularly wild hair if I do that...

+1

[helmacon]

-snippity snoop-

Let's not do a hall of shame, please.

That's like... the opposite of my suggestion?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Also, we are awaiting your update in the RTD.

[_DivideByZero_]

So someone might be tagged with "Updates quickly" and "shallow plot" ,but another GM might get tagged "Novel-esq updates" and "Snails pace games".

[Chiefwaffles]

I myself wouldn't be offended by those types of labels, and assumed others wouldn't as well.

[Weirdo]

I myself wouldn't be offended by those types of labels, and assumed others wouldn't as well.

I wouldn't. It would just motivate me to do better.

[helmacon]

So someone might be tagged with "Updates quickly" and "shallow plot" ,but another GM might get tagged "Novel-esq updates" and "Snails pace games".

Honestly, some people look for those kind of things. Not everyone wants to get super invested in a story, and not everyone has the time to be checking for updates every day. Point being, everything has it's niche. Often times its intended. Ozzark's RTD "Grunts" for example is purposely shallow on plot. I enjoy playing a game like that now and again.

[_DivideByZero_]

If Shallow Plot is an intentional trait then it's perfectly possible for a GM to be good at both shallow and deep plots. I'd suggest the term "casual" instead of "shallow" to make the distinction more clear.

[Pencil_Art]

I feel like these tags would apply more to games than they would to GMs, as it wouldn't really be a helpful classification to prospective players if said GM suddenly decided to branch out and try new things. A GM having multiple such tags might make things confusing (ie. Chiefwaffles: (just off the top of my head) SG, Shallow Plot, Deep Plot, Casual Plot ), what would you expect? Then again, quite a few GMs specialize in specific games, Draignean for example I've only seen do really deep games, perhaps without a plot but definitely with a ton of worldbuilding.

[_DivideByZero_]

Yeah, don't get me wrong, I think it would be helpful to new players to have a list that tells you what games to look for and to give GMs a bit of recognition. But I think the strong suit of the Bay12 community is that GMs aren't restricted by genre, for example that dwarven mining game from a while back. I got the wrong idea from helmacon mentioning "shallow plot" as a tag and thought it would end up as some kind of "review" system, which I'm entirely against since not everyone enjoys the same kind of games.

Plus, reviewing games instead of GMs would allow all these accolades to "time out," so to speak. No need for a board to review whether a host deserves a tag or not.

[IamanElfCollaborator]

I still feel that these labels unnecessesarily point people out and pigeonhole them into certain types of RPs. If they like making those types of games, great. If they want to try something else, it'll take a while to shake the pigeonholing.

[Haspen]

If I were to get a badge for every game completed and then a badge taken for every dropped game...

...I think I would be in double-digit negatives

_{This is thinly-veiled PTW.}

[Ozarck]

So someone might be tagged with "Updates quickly" and "shallow plot" ,but another GM might get tagged "Novel-esq updates" and "Snails pace games".

Honestly, some people look for those kind of things. Not everyone wants to get super invested in a story, and not everyone has the time to be checking for updates every day. Point being, everything has it's niche. Often times its intended. Ozzark's RTD "Grunts" for example is purposely shallow on plot. I enjoy playing a game like that now and again.

If you think Grunts is shallow on plot, you should have seen my Sharknado rtd. 

[Tomasque]

I think we should have a list of GMs and what they're good at. Therefore, instead of writing the type of things they usually do (such as "casual story" or "deep story"), we write what they excel in doing (such as "good at casual story" or "good at deep story"). This would prevent people from going to a GM's casually story games because they like all his deep stories, and instead would make it far easier for a GM to get players to a game he is good at making simply by advertising that it has elements he's good at.