Traveller's Cafe 3: Brainstorming, discussion, tea, advice

[Harbertia]

Mass Effect Characters: Divergence
A Character rather then Faction Based Mass Effect RP. I was originally going to poll players to discern the past and who Shepherd was but I've opted instead to create a timeline that provides players with the greatest creative liberty post Mass Effect 3. I however want some review of what I have thus far in case it can be improved with more or alternate chooses aimed at giving players greater resources to draw from.

For the record: I don't enjoy all of these chooses but feel they are needed for the greatest 'liberty' in character creation. While the faction RP timeline is focused on faction conflict and relations this timeline is focused on providing players with the greatest level of character customization.

Mass Effect

• Council was Saved (greater political freedom in regards to backstory material for characters)

Mass Effect 2

• Shepherd is killed and the Normandy destroyed
• Arkship Hyperion leaves for the Andromeda Galaxy
• Shepherd is revived via Project Lazarus

Mass Effect 3

• Geth and Quarians Coexist on Rannoch (Quarian fleet stood down allowing the Geth to finish the upload and a peace to be negotiated) (this option allows for both Quarian and Geth individuals to be player characters)
• With an Effective Military Strength of 2650+ Shepherd choose to control the Reapers and 'shepherd' them away from the Milky Way. At this amount of strength no physical harm happens to the galaxy save that caused by the invading reapers prior. The Citadel is sealed and deactivated- once the center of government now a hunk of metal and the tomb of many dead organic life forms from the reaper invasion.

-snip-
*alright I'm back. Just needed a breather.
*Well this is ambitious, my own game was very different so- a lot of research. But a good idea aye?

I might suggest adding the decision on whether or not Shepard destroyed the Collector base in ME2 (as it was a pretty major decision, and some folks might want to use the base as a hideout or something along those lines if it's still around).

That is a good point. I'm not sure how I over looked that decision. *goes to wiki* preserving the base does apparently aid in the 'control' option as shepherd has access to a Reaper Brain and the base offers the benefits (in options) you've mentioned. Alright. I'll go with that option for this project.

[Harbertia]

Has everyone done a Mexican Election RP before?

Not to my memory yours could be the first.

[Unit 23]

The Mexican politicians looked wistfully at the clock, for they had abolished the siesta in 1944.

[Harbertia]

So far that seems to be all the choices that really 'expand' player character options. Might rename the project 'Aftermath' and have likely (as before) missed some choice or choices that'd benefit the RP.

[Streuburg]

Would want one be interested in an AH where Americaost the revolutionary war and their is a new cold war in the continent

[Unit 23]

Forgive me but I feel like the community has problems with collaboration and over-detailing.

For example, many different RPs of similar premise are being made, each with a specific scenario, narrow appeal, and attracting fewer members.

As a consequence, fewer writers manage more creative work and the idea eventually crumples as people get bored. The objective is to at least conclude the story and close the topic, no?

An alternative would be a single, flexible, officially leaderless RP which caters to an entire genre. But I think people are too set in the bizarrely designated "OP" mode of RPing, which is quite limiting.

Until then, ten ongoing <insert genre> RPs of various flavor is appropriate by default, I suppose, lol.

[Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States]

Forgive me but I feel like the community has problems with collaboration and over-detailing.

For example, many different RPs of similar premise are being made, each with a specific scenario, narrow appeal, and attracting fewer members.

As a consequence, fewer writers manage more creative work and the idea eventually crumples as people get bored. The objective is to at least conclude the story and close the topic, no?

An alternative would be a single, flexible, officially leaderless RP which caters to an entire genre. But I think people are too set in the bizarrely designated "OP" mode of RPing, which is quite limiting.

Until then, ten ongoing <insert genre> RPs of various flavor is appropriate by default, I suppose, lol.

Very broad RP's have been tried in the past, and are still being tried, but a lack of structure and cohesive story turns off many players.

A player-democracy has a lot of trouble planning a story arc that may span a few chapters. The OP, as central authority, can handle that much easier.

[Achesia]

Forgive me but I feel like the community has problems with collaboration and over-detailing.

For example, many different RPs of similar premise are being made, each with a specific scenario, narrow appeal, and attracting fewer members.

As a consequence, fewer writers manage more creative work and the idea eventually crumples as people get bored. The objective is to at least conclude the story and close the topic, no?

An alternative would be a single, flexible, officially leaderless RP which caters to an entire genre. But I think people are too set in the bizarrely designated "OP" mode of RPing, which is quite limiting.

Until then, ten ongoing <insert genre> RPs of various flavor is appropriate by default, I suppose, lol.

I would agree though that the tendency exists to create a. RP and barely get a week into it before either the OP looses interest and is on to the next RP or the players have moved on to the next best thing. The number of RPs I've been in compared to the ones that have completed is staggering.

[Harbertia]

Forgive me but I feel like the community has problems with collaboration and over-detailing.

For example, many different RPs of similar premise are being made, each with a specific scenario, narrow appeal, and attracting fewer members.

As a consequence, fewer writers manage more creative work and the idea eventually crumples as people get bored. The objective is to at least conclude the story and close the topic, no?

An alternative would be a single, flexible, officially leaderless RP which caters to an entire genre. But I think people are too set in the bizarrely designated "OP" mode of RPing, which is quite limiting.

Until then, ten ongoing <insert genre> RPs of various flavor is appropriate by default, I suppose, lol.

Very broad RP's have been tried in the past, and are still being tried, but a lack of structure and cohesive story turns off many players.

A player-democracy has a lot of trouble planning a story arc that may span a few chapters. The OP, as central authority, can handle that much easier.

Indeed, players can't get involved in a plot if it's going all over the place. I personally like to know what's going on or I feel out of place.

[Camicon]

Forgive me but I feel like the community has problems with collaboration and over-detailing.

For example, many different RPs of similar premise are being made, each with a specific scenario, narrow appeal, and attracting fewer members.

As a consequence, fewer writers manage more creative work and the idea eventually crumples as people get bored. The objective is to at least conclude the story and close the topic, no?

An alternative would be a single, flexible, officially leaderless RP which caters to an entire genre. But I think people are too set in the bizarrely designated "OP" mode of RPing, which is quite limiting.

Until then, ten ongoing <insert genre> RPs of various flavor is appropriate by default, I suppose, lol.

I would agree though that the tendency exists to create a. RP and barely get a week into it before either the OP looses interest and is on to the next RP or the players have moved on to the next best thing. The number of RPs I've been in compared to the ones that have completed is staggering.

And yet, of the RP's I've seen brought to an actual conclusion (rather than die of inactivity), they have all been OP driven.

I can't recall ever seeing a sandbox RP follow a complete story arc, and the reason for that is simple: whatever problems an OP driven RP might have when the OP loses interest, a sandbox RP has those problems tenfold, as sandbox RP's make every player an "OP". Everyone has their own story and is more or less operating with only their characters in mind, and nobody has any reason to continue their story after their interest wanes and something else catches it. If I'm in an OP driven RP and my interest falls for a little while then I probably won't post as frequently as I might otherwise, but my character is working towards discovering and completing a common goal with other characters, and that makes me invested in the RP for reasons beyond my own.

OP driven RP's are more of a team effort, whereas sandbox RP's are more of an individual effort, and on NS the former is far more likely to reach a conclusion than the latter.

[Achesia]

I would agree though that the tendency exists to create a. RP and barely get a week into it before either the OP looses interest and is on to the next RP or the players have moved on to the next best thing. The number of RPs I've been in compared to the ones that have completed is staggering.

And yet, of the RP's I've seen brought to an actual conclusion (rather than die of inactivity), they have all been OP driven.

I can't recall ever seeing a sandbox RP follow a complete story arc, and the reason for that is simple: whatever problems an OP driven RP might have when the OP loses interest, a sandbox RP has those problems tenfold, as sandbox RP's make every player an "OP". Everyone has their own story and is more or less operating with only their characters in mind, and nobody has any reason to continue their story after their interest wanes and something else catches it. If I'm in an OP driven RP and my interest falls for a little while then I probably won't post as frequently as I might otherwise, but my character is working towards discovering and completing a common goal with other characters, and that makes me invested in the RP for reasons beyond my own.

OP driven RP's are more of a team effort, whereas sandbox RP's are more of an individual effort, and on NS the former is far more likely to reach a conclusion than the latter.

For sure OP drive is best. My point is that the problem on NS is not the OP driven vs sandbox, its dedication to the RP you're in.

[Unit 23]

I'm not necessarily criticizing the functional importance of the OP as a manager.

Every event needs key players because they're the ones who take it upon themselves to write new modes for the plot, keeping it alive. However, the OP format appears to set a precedence for many particularly-themed topics and many bored people because it implies the story is probably inflexible, largely overseen, and that when all is said and done, only the OP has basal responsibility for the topic's success. It's strange to me this would take the form of one person rather than an informal committee, because any RP naturally has two types of participants -- those who would gladly go behind the scenes to assist the story, and those who just want to write. Currently this first group is likely limited creatively by the understanding that they're a guest and any initiative is interfering in the OP's design.

May I ask, why are so many small RPs being made if people aren't feeling limited by existing options?

[The Land of Golden Blobfish]

I'm not necessarily criticizing the functional importance of the OP as a manager.

Every event needs key players because they're the ones who take it upon themselves to write new modes for the plot, keeping it alive. However, the OP format appears to set a precedence for many particularly-themed topics and many bored people because it implies the story is probably inflexible, largely overseen, and that when all is said and done, only the OP has basal responsibility for the topic's success. It's strange to me this would take the form of one person rather than an informal committee, because any RP naturally has two types of participants -- those who would gladly go behind the scenes to assist the story, and those who just want to write. Currently this first group is likely limited creatively by the understanding that they're a guest and any initiative is interfering in the OP's design.

May I ask, why are so many small RPs being made if people aren't feeling limited by existing options?

In terms of small, specific RPs with focused narratives I'd say it's so people can get invested in someone they specifically like. For example, if there's a detailed RP with a somewhat linear plot, people are going to join because they like the specific idea and those who don't aren't going to. It's less likely for someone to leave the RP. However, if you try to make it as broad as possible and appeal to a larger audience, like a sandbox RP, sure more people might be interested at first but more are gonna ditch early on.

And if you try going "well, I'll do this for these people and those people can do that since they don't want to do the same thing" then it's still splitting up the RP player base and at that point it might as well be two separate RPs

For example, if I was to do a Star Wars RP and had 2 very different ideas for it (lets say a faction rp and a character driven one), I wouldn't try cramming them into one RP. A lot of roleplays try to appeal to a larger group by being both faction and character driven which splits up the player base, reduces player activity with each other, and makes many feel insignificant

[Unit 23]

Isn't a faction composed of characters?

[The Land of Golden Blobfish]

Isn't a faction composed of characters?

Technically but on a larger scale. It's like how one player would RP as an entire Empire while another just a single mercenary. The two are differentiated because it's highly unlikely they will mingle and have very little reason to. Large factions will RP with other factions while individual characters will only RP with other characters. While I'm not saying it's impossible to cross this boundary, it's rather difficult and there usually lacks any real reason why one would.

[Forest State]

Isn't a faction composed of characters?

It probably should be. But not really, in practice for some threads. One of the reasons I don't usually join faction threads unless I'm very sure about them is that some players end up just treating the faction as a character and only playing the faction as a whole without really considering character implications.

[Shadowwell]

Isn't a faction composed of characters?

Yes and no, depending.

A faction can be made up of characters in say a character rp that has factions the characters are a part of, but typically in faction rps, the rper controls a faction as a whole, and usually detail multiple characters, or just the leader doing things and setting them in motion and stuff.

[Camicon]

*snip*However, the OP format appears to set a precedence for many particularly-themed topics and many bored people because it implies the story is probably inflexible, largely overseen, and that when all is said and done, only the OP has basal responsibility for the topic's success.

Every RP needs to have a plot that has been thought through from stem to stern. If the OP hasn't done this then the RP won't conclude, which is how most people measure the success of an RP.

It's strange to me this would take the form of one person rather than an informal committee, because any RP naturally has two types of participants -- those who would gladly go behind the scenes to assist the story, and those who just want to write. Currently this first group is likely limited creatively by the understanding that they're a guest and any initiative is interfering in the OP's design.

There are plenty of OP's that take on co-OP's, people with which to talk about the plot and think of new things and directions to go, and assistance with RP administration when necessary. Worldbuilding threads that precede the OOC are also a not-uncommon practice when an RP is being set in an original literary universe.

May I ask, why are so many small RPs being made if people aren't feeling limited by existing options?

Because we have a large community, and there are limits as to how many RPers you can have in an RP before it becomes unmanageable for OP and participants alike. Not everyone (in my experience, most people) wants to manage or participate in a thread where they still don't have all of the characters straight after the first ten pages.

[Unit 23]

A faction can be made up of characters in say a character rp that has factions the characters are a part of, but typically in faction rps, the rper controls a faction as a whole, and usually detail multiple characters, or just the leader doing things and setting them in motion and stuff.

You're describing two different power degrees. As I mention elsewhere, RPs look to control two things about players: 1) personal/plot/OoC influence 2) agent/event/IC influence.

I don't see how it's difficult to allow players to play both entire nations and characters in the same RP if distinction of power between a character and a nation is recognized.

One implementation of this would be to place both agents on a single power scale, and then require nation-perspective posts to necessarily be more considered (higher quality) if they affect any PCs to respect the fact they're piloting a "large vehicle"; the entire plot. The general rule here is, "overtly influential actions require convincing description and intelligent implementation". Regular posts from characters and nations which don't have any meaningful global plot influence have no such restriction. Where the boundaries lie can be specified if required. Worst case scenario: Any nations which repeatedly sideline characters can be called out, potentially leading to a consensual boycott or similar.

Every RP needs to have a plot that has been thought through from stem to stern. There are plenty of OP's that take on co-OP's, people with which to talk about the plot and think of new things and directions to go, and assistance with RP administration when necessary. Not everyone wants to manage or participate in a thread where they still don't have all of the characters straight after the first ten pages.

Thanks for your comments.

However, the first point is simply an exaggeration, and although planning is important, it isn't always possible because RP isn't always the neat, pre-sealed entity you imply. The second point doesn't acknowledge my example of a council, the equivalent of multiple co-OPs, which I argue is a naturally emergent phenomenon anyway, because select RP participants intend to contribute to the story more than others and formal titles describing this intention aren't always useful because they're not always accurate or appropriate -- for instance, isn't there an RP currently happening where the formal OP, supposedly the holder of intention, vanished without any actual consequence after those remaining underwent the natural emergence of shared responsibility I mentioned above? And finally, the last point is personal preference which doesn't really count for much, but I take the entirely opposite position that in my experience RPs beginning with the big picture and intricately detailing atomical elements in order to set a grand stage are at risk of becoming impermeable, predictable, and unpopular. Because our accounts are contradictory their value is effectively nullified.

Edit: Here's a rough translation; I'm exampling a meritocratic sandbox with a rolling council of rule-observing players who demonstrate special interest which hypothetically accommodates the concerns raised.

[Camicon]

Every RP needs to have a plot that has been thought through from stem to stern. There are plenty of OP's that take on co-OP's, people with which to talk about the plot and think of new things and directions to go, and assistance with RP administration when necessary. Not everyone wants to manage or participate in a thread where they still don't have all of the characters straight after the first ten pages.

Thanks for your comments.

However, the first point is simply an exaggeration, and although planning is important, it isn't always possible because RP isn't always the neat, pre-sealed entity you imply. The second point doesn't acknowledge my example of a council, the equivalent of multiple co-OPs, which I argue is a naturally emergent phenomenon anyway, because select RP participants intend to contribute to the story more than others and formal titles describing this intention aren't always useful because they're not always accurate or appropriate -- for instance, isn't there an RP currently happening where the formal OP, supposedly the holder of intention, vanished without any actual consequence after those remaining underwent the natural emergence of shared responsibility I mentioned above? And finally, the last point is personal preference which doesn't really count for much, but I take the entirely opposite position that in my experience RPs beginning with the big picture and intricately detailing atomical elements in order to set a grand stage are at risk of becoming impermeable, predictable, and unpopular. Because our accounts are contradictory their value is effectively nullified.

You assume that making the plan requires you to follow the plan. Not true. Having a plan is proof that you've thought everything through, so that when (not if) things don't go as you expected you're in a position to adapt. Like in warfare, not having a plan is a recipe for disaster, and having a plan is always better than not, but no plan ever survives first contact. You think, you plan, you adapt as necessary.

And while I'm not familiar with every active RP, I can direct you to an older RP that did survive the absence and eventual abandonment of it's OP, and which was carried on by the two co-OPs for years afterwards.

The simple fact is that, unless you're lying to us and the account you're using is a sockpuppet, you have little to no experience with RPing here, on NationStates. In much the same way domestic politics are unique to each state, the habits and behaviour of roleplay forums are unique to each website. Your experience elsewhere does not necessarily translate, and numerous longtime natives of the RP sub-forums on NationStates disagreeing with you would strongly suggest that your assumptions are, if not wholly mistaken, not as applicable as you believe they are.

[Shadowwell]

A faction can be made up of characters in say a character rp that has factions the characters are a part of, but typically in faction rps, the rper controls a faction as a whole, and usually detail multiple characters, or just the leader doing things and setting them in motion and stuff.

You're describing two different power degrees. As I mention elsewhere, RPs look to control two things about players: 1) personal/plot/OoC influence 2) agent/event/IC influence.

I don't see how it's difficult to allow players to play both entire nations and characters in the same RP if distinction of power between a character and a nation is recognized.

One implementation of this would be to place both agents on a single power scale, and then require nation-perspective posts to necessarily be more considered (higher quality) if they affect any PCs to respect the fact they're piloting a "large vehicle"; the entire plot. The general rule here is, "overtly influential actions require convincing description and intelligent implementation". Regular posts from characters and nations which don't have any meaningful global plot influence have no such restriction. Where the boundaries lie can be specified if required. Worst case scenario: Any nations which repeatedly sideline characters can be called out, potentially leading to a consensual boycott or similar.

You asked "Isn't a faction made up of characters."

My response was directed towards that, not anything to do with degrees of power or your own take on rping, nor anything to do with difficulty of including both Character and Faction aspects in a single rp.

And the discussion was concerning factions, not nations, they are similar, but there is a distinction, generally, most of the time.

[Unit 23]

You assume that making the plan requires you to follow the plan.

Yeah, if this is acknowledged then I completely agree. (As in it's not necessarily true).

The simple fact is that, unless you're lying to us and the account you're using is a sockpuppet, you have little to no experience with RPing here, on NationStates.

This makes the assumption that everything I'm proposing isn't really possible, though. I'm suggesting it's at least hypothetically possible. To disprove this, examples would need to be summoned, no?

You asked "Isn't a faction made up of characters."

Sorry. Reply was a general one, since you were talking about things other people seemed to touch on.

[Camicon]

You assume that making the plan requires you to follow the plan.

Yeah, if this is acknowledged then I completely agree. (As in it's not necessarily true).

I've never come across an OP that simultaneously creates a very detailed plan and then refuses to deviate from it in any way. On NS, or elsewhere. Anyone with the drive and desire to run an RP is cognizant of the fact that other people are going to be involved in it, and that things are going to go in unexpected directions.

The simple fact is that, unless you're lying to us and the account you're using is a sockpuppet, you have little to no experience with RPing here, on NationStates.

This makes the assumption that everything I'm proposing isn't really possible, though. I'm suggesting it's at least hypothetically possible. To disprove this, examples would need to be summoned, no?

No, the only assumption I'm making is that you are, as you claim, new to NationStates; and, operating under that assumption, your assumptions about roleplaying on NS have necessarily not been tested here. Which is not our responsibility, but yours.

[Unit 23]

That's fine. The idea of people having freedom was never under question. I understand people have degrees of choice and the plot is variable.

Your assumptions about roleplaying on NS have necessarily not been tested here. Which is not our responsibility, but yours.

I appreciate they've never been tested, that's why I'm proposing them; I also find myself under no immediate or necessary responsibility to prove my ideas since for now this is just a hypothesis in a discussion topic, lol.

[Camicon]

Your assumptions about roleplaying on NS have necessarily not been tested here. Which is not our responsibility, but yours.

I appreciate they've never been tested, that's why I'm proposing them; I also find myself under no immediate or necessary responsibility to prove my ideas since for now this is just a hypothesis in a discussion topic, lol.

"I know I've been here less than a month, and I've never actually participated in an RP here, but let me tell you about some problems I think that your RP community has; then, I shall expound at length about how to fix this, as though I am a trusted voice, but do absolutely no footwork to backup my opinions".