Finding roleplay

[SG]

@The_Supremes How do you keep track of this stuff? Do you have a staff spreadsheet somewhere?

I was thinking some sort of Big Bad Daytimer might be a fun tool to have for situations like this.

[The_Supremes]

I have a number of tools I use. The process by which you get approved to run your PrP is you file a job in the PrP bucket. That job stays open until the ST declares the thing done and logs are submitted, then it becomes my reminder to hand out xp. The job is then archived when it's closed so that I can pull it back out.

I also have a good head for keeping track of all this shit. Until I have more than two other ST staff, that's enough. We're a small site. But when the time comes, I'll probably move out to a Google Doc or something.

[Arkandel]

@The_Supremes said in Finding roleplay:

New Puppy Syndrome, however, is a big drain on staff time and resources. An ST may have a finite interest in their own PrP. They want to run the scenes, they want the things to happen, and then they're done. But their players, and folks who hear about these events second and third hand may want to poke at these goings-on or the aftermaths. The PrP ST, however, is done with it and no longer has interest. This is fine, but that means the aftermath RP (usually investigation type stuff) lands in staff's laps. I need to keep tabs on what PrPs are running, have been run, etc, so that when I get weird +requests from players that make absolutely no sense to me otherwise, I know who's new puppy this is that they got bored with and sent back to the shelter. Unlike with the real puppy, there's no ethical failing here, but taking a first look at a PrP before it goes live lets me be ready for the secondary and tertiary effects it might have.

For starters it's your game, so please treat the following as an counter-argument rather than criticism. If what you're doing works for you and your players that's great, keep it up.

... But it seems like a counter intuitive way to look at PrPs. Look at how I read it: "Storytellers might run things to their conclusion so that several players involved enjoy the story but others who come too late to join the fun will ask staff to keep it going after some fashion. I'd rather make it harder for the first part to happen than have to deal with the second one."

When good plots are ran everyone wins. Dealing with the aftermath of plots is indeed a hassle but not having them in the first place is orders of magnitude worse. It'd be easier - for example - to ask STs if they don't mind answering a few late threads about their stories even if only to inform people any further trail has gone too cold (the mysterious muggers have gone to ground, the orcs have retreated to their mountain lairs, the cultists appear to all be dead) than to pre-empty the fun with red tapes and hoop jumping.

What I've found is that many people who want to run plot but don't are discouraged before they start. For the most part that's just jitters ("do I know the mechanics enough? What if someone uses powers/mechanics I'm not familiar with? Is my story fun enough?") which may or not be something others can help with - confidence is gained through practice - but anything added to the heap just makes it even more likely.

See, what you view as perfectly reasonable and benevolent approval process ("just talk to me, we'll figure it out") is very often seen as an obstacle, a reason for staff to look down at a creative task that's often fuzzy in the early stages. Having someone trying to poke holes into a plot before it even gets off the ground isn't fun, after all, and few people can take rejection or even constructive criticism well.

In my experience it's always better to go back and fix things that don't work than to not have things which do never get off the ground in the first place. I'll never get tired of saying this: Storytellers and coders are by far your scarcest resource as a game-runner, so the more staff can do to stay out of their way until something goes wrong or if they ask for help - as opposed to putting obstacles up - the better it is.

But as in all things your mileage may vary.

[Bennie]

This all seems very gentle handed, but I feel like the sandbox and sandboxing exists for a reason. If I, and 3 other people, want to have a more meaningful evening once or twice, adding hoops doesn't make that happen. It just forestalls it happening. And in truth, it is just a way to weed out the unwanted. "Only someone really dedicated is going to 'do all this' so we have nothing to worry about now. We'll have dedicated players!" It's a weeding process, honestly.

The truth is, a lot of games have all these processes, submissions, tracking, and so forth, but the reality is most players are going to quietly sidestep all that and attempt - with the least amount of effort and investment - to find a solution that lets them return to "I, and 3 other [friends], want to have a more meaningful evening once or twice". Which means, for all your tracking and effort, you're missing all the unsubmitted material that people simply hide.

It's sort-of like learning to read when it's banned. People will likely, with the lights down low, sitting in the quietest place they have, read a paper that has been passed around with the fish deliveries for the last six months. Least amount of chance of being caught, most amount of reward, just a few quality moments spent together. It's a weird way to reinforce bad behavior, creating checks and balances that require monitoring of people's sense of privacy.

Now, the opposite is being freer. Most freer games that have an open policy and little reinforcement are likely imo to find that players are much more open, inclusive, and interested in keeping others, and Staff, up to date on the pitter patter of trickled storytelling. Which means, in the end, that you've created a space for people to have little trouble getting in, getting involved, getting active, and the benefit is they're excited afterward to involve you in what happened, because their sense of pride in fun well had is replacing their sense of being invaded and controlled, so there is no need for them to feel the need to be sneaky.

[Lotherio]

What @Arkandel said there. The reason submissions and tracking may deter from helping find RP. On most games I get into, I do put in the, if it doesn't break theme, feel free to run wild. Someone asked about tracking too. I don't want to track as staff minor things like what happened to Villain X. Four to five years back, I found comic place that used the 'if you don't break theme' policy too, and didn't want to track villains (literally, because super heroes and lots out there), so they had a table on their wiki that had every villain that came up in a scene. Folks could add a line with the current status (escaped, in jail, on the run, etc.) as they used them.

I updated the wiki to allow folks to add lines of history to villains, just a click 'new page', fill in infobox stuff (last scene:New York City; What: Fighting Team Orion in Financial District; Outcome: Escaped after destroying benches and sculptures in a park). Literally two seconds to even code it, two seconds to add an entry. No reason to +request a plot to fight a villain, or submit anything afterwards.

Most places use wikis these days. Its handy to track information and meta across all parties. I like open wikis, not a fan of completely locked down wikis with only staff control. I like to build it so players can easily add things they want; places, NPCs, events, plots, etc. A Mu* is a joint effort, in my view, between staff and players, to make the stories.

[The_Supremes]

@Arkandel said in Finding roleplay:

See, what you view as perfectly reasonable and benevolent approval process ("just talk to me, we'll figure it out") is very often seen as an obstacle, a reason for staff to look down at a creative task that's often fuzzy in the early stages. Having someone trying to poke holes into a plot before it even gets off the ground isn't fun, after all, and few people can take rejection or even constructive criticism well.

This is true, as with everything I look at this as a balancing act between maximum functional freedom and a minimum of me spending my time running down the details of a PrP on IC hearsay alone when I could be running scenes.

The phrasing in our PrP policy is different than the frank discussion I gave here for exactly the reasons you state. Most people never even realize that I've actually thought about the implications their intended PrP might have. (In all but one case the implications were nonexistent, the scope of the story was so localized that all I did was say 'have fun, send me logs when you're done.' In that one case it directly overlapped with a player-requested TP I was running, and I basically offered the PrP ST a full hand-off of my stuff for them to shape as they pleased. They accepted and took off with it, it was great.)

How you frame a policy is at least as important as how you execute the policy, though. And any policy at all is going to offer some kind of resistance, you're right.

I'll never get tired of saying this: Storytellers and coders are by far your scarcest resource as a game-runner, so the more staff can do to stay out of their way until something goes wrong or if they ask for help - as opposed to putting obstacles up - the better it is.

So very, very true. Also, staff can be reaching out to their players. With only three staff, we have a number of players who are on during times that staff aren't on-hand. I've had a couple of players comment on this and let drop a story idea or two without even realizing it. Those are opportunities to suggest to the player that they step up and PrP ST. The usual concerns of "what if I do it wrong, etc." come up, but that's an opportunity to coach a new ST, share a few tricks, and help someone get over those first-timer cold feet. Most people who do it enjoy it, even if they never do it again. Some folks catch the bug.

[Arkandel]

@The_Supremes said in Finding roleplay:

How you frame a policy is at least as important as how you execute the policy, though. And any policy at all is going to offer some kind of resistance, you're right.

That is true, although I'd say it's more important how you interpret and implement policies on a day-to-day basis than how it's worded on a news file or wiki. People respond to what staff does, not (just) what they write.

It might be also important to offer leeway to both staff and your players. For example as I become familiar with staff I talk to them more, bounce off ideas and pitches with them not because I have to but because I want their input; likewise when I lead spheres in the past there were people I knew well enough to realize I just need to support them and get out of their way. Why get mess with something that already works?

So very, very true. Also, staff can be reaching out to their players. With only three staff, we have a number of players who are on during times that staff aren't on-hand. I've had a couple of players comment on this and let drop a story idea or two without even realizing it. Those are opportunities to suggest to the player that they step up and PrP ST. The usual concerns of "what if I do it wrong, etc." come up, but that's an opportunity to coach a new ST, share a few tricks, and help someone get over those first-timer cold feet. Most people who do it enjoy it, even if they never do it again. Some folks catch the bug.

@Bennie just said something that's very true - a lot of plots aren't planned in advance. In fact I'd say there might actually be more of those impromptu ones than well thought out multi-part storylines - basically you have 3-4 people sitting around on their thumbs and one of them gets the urge to 'run something'. It might be something they were inspired to do from a TV show they watched or book they just finished or just a flash of inspiration. If this is to happen it will be right there on the spot, once the moment is gone... it's gone.

When that happens you never, ever want this potential Storyteller-making opportunity to go to waste. Let people do it! Encourage them, tug on their sleeves if you have to. The person who's never ran anything who finally takes the plunge with a couple of buddies who have a blast can easily become your newest asset. This stuff should be boosted any way possible - because if on that critical moment they even think 'well, man, I need to run this by the sphere people first, should I make a +job?' it might never happen, and that's a damn shame.

[Lotherio]

@Arkandel said in Finding roleplay:

TL:DR ....

This stuff should be boosted any way possible - because if on that critical moment they even think 'well, man, I need to run this by the sphere people first, should I make a +job?' it might never happen, and that's a damn shame.

I can't two upvote a post with my thumbs, but yes, both ...

[Coin]

On the other hand, @The_Supremes makes a good point: when a storyteller abandons a plot, or worse, runs something that is completely contradictory to the history and timeline of the game, it's not that storyteller that's held responsible for picking it up, making it make sense, and rectifying it--it's staff.

And it shouldn't be a given that staff need to put up with ill thought-out plots just because one time this one dude had the idea to run a random thing.

That's why I advocate a tiered plot scale. On Eldritch, for example, if you wanted to run spirits, you just needed to keep it at a certain Rank. Beyond that, you needed to consult with us. This also helps you run one-offs and turn them into longer plots: this one low-level antagonist did X, but they did it because this much more powerful antagonist (whom you've now had time to consult with staff about) wanted it done, and the longer plot can take hold. Or you can just leave it at the low-level antagonist having done X sucessfully or not, if you don't feel like consulting.

It doesn't have to be an either-or proposition and I feel like insisting "let everyone do all the thinnnnnnnnnnngs!" is the best way to get the worst result. Not to mention that, in my opinion, any storyteller worth their salt isn't going to run an epic, game-breaking plot in a single night--so anyone wanting to do a one-off fun outing for a night will more than likely be able to easily use whatever is freely available without requiring staff consultation. If they can't, chances are they're not very dedicated storytellers and will flake anyway.

My view may be cynical, but it's honestly the product of my experiences in this community. BITN and Eldritch have had some of the laxest PRP policies I've seen short of games where there are none because everyone can do whatever, honestly.

[The_Supremes]

@Arkandel said in Finding roleplay:

@Bennie just said something that's very true - a lot of plots aren't planned in advance. In fact I'd say there might actually be more of those impromptu ones than well thought out multi-part storylines - basically you have 3-4 people sitting around on their thumbs and one of them gets the urge to 'run something'. It might be something they were inspired to do from a TV show they watched or book they just finished or just a flash of inspiration. If this is to happen it will be right there on the spot, once the moment is gone... it's gone.

Yeah, we frame our policy to explicitly allow for those things to come to us after the fact. The major reason I want to know about these things happening is so that I can be prepared to pick up when the ST's done, and also so I can hand out XP. To the extent that things happen out of my earshot... shrug folks don't get XP and possibly wind up having their character look like an idiot if they take those events as canon into TP I'm running. It's not like there's enforcement action or whatever. I'd never chew someone out over it.

Some of my favorite scenes, as a player, happened in that spontaneous fashion. We explicitly define 'PrP' in our policy to exclude single-scene pick-up stuff like that, too. For exactly that reason, with the option, if it turns into more, to send us logs for XP.

I suspect we're actually in agreement in what the workable form of this looks like, but have different communication styles.

[Arkandel]

@Coin said in Finding roleplay:

Not to mention that, in my opinion, any storyteller worth their salt isn't going to run an epic, game-breaking plot in a single night--so anyone wanting to do a one-off fun outing for a night will more than likely be able to easily use whatever is freely available without requiring staff consultation. If they can't, chances are they're not very dedicated storytellers and will flake anyway.

I was fine within the system Eldritch used so no issues here.

I'm also quite fond of systems which don't front-load the checks - look at the logs after the fact and decide, was this thematic? Is this okay? If not (and most will be just fine) then run adjustments as needed, even if it means some retcons. Any reasonable ST won't mind too much (the cultists only seemed to summon a tentacled demonic abomination, in truth it was a mutated sea-creature due to those chemical waste spills) and you can probably have the cake and eat it.

If I had to have actually raise a complaint though? It'd be because of players like, well, me. I've started multi-part plots in the past which for one reason or the other didn't go anywhere and that fact - not the story itself - created logical inconsistencies.

For instance on Eldritch (since we were kinda talking about it) I had a big thing discussed and approved by Eerie, but near the end of its first chapter many of its participants went inactive; that killed my enthusiasm so I let the whole thing die down. However that creates all sorts of continuity problems, wasn't the head villain's plan going to result in Very Bad Things unless the PCs stopped him? What happened to that, huh? Huh?

In other words if I disagree somewhere with @The_Supremes it's that unresolved plots are the ones which arguably create the biggest problems as opposed to finished and almost-but-not-quite wrapped up ones. More multi-part PrPs fail than are completed.

[The_Supremes]

@Arkandel I include those in New Puppy Syndrome. I probably could've been clearer on that, but that post was getting wall-o-texty as it was.

I suspect we differ in our preference for Retcon vs. Pre-check. To me, the threat of retcon is chilling in the same way that a basic lookover is. But I'm super allergic to retcons, I find them very off-putting especially when they could've been avoided. But that's a style choice, really.

[Arkandel]

@The_Supremes said in Finding roleplay:

@Arkandel I include those in New Puppy Syndrome. I probably could've been clearer on that, but that post was getting wall-o-texty as it was.

Oh, I didn't word my objection well though. What I meant to say is... how do you deal with this? Because it doesn't get fixed no matter what hooks and guards are in place - that staff approves of a plot doesn't mean it won't get orphaned at some point. Things happen, people vanish, burn out, can't coordinate or just play something else so the arc first grows stagnant then moot.

If it's ambitious enough I'd argue it's very difficult to find a foster ST willing to bring things to a conclusion (it's hard enough to find STs, period, let alone for someone else's story). So you'll probably want to gracefully (?) abort it, which based on the plot's nature might not be effortless. If your original concern is to ensure staff don't end up burdened by such work, what's your take on it?

The usual solution, of course, is to ignore and shove everything under the carpet. What happened in the end? Nothing happened! <handwave>

[The_Supremes]

@Arkandel It's not that I think you can avoid being burdened by such work, and more a matter of: if we start keeping tabs on it from the word go, we're better prepared to step in when this happens.

[Bennie]

That would be cool to add to a Wiki like BITN. I see they use forms. But being able to click on the map addresses, and fill out a few form lines, and produce a small, formatted entry on the wiki, and update players on RP that you divulge has taken place there. (There was fireworks on the beach on 4th of July.) That would be kinda keen.

[faraday]

@Arkandel said in Finding roleplay:

See, what you view as perfectly reasonable and benevolent approval process ("just talk to me, we'll figure it out") is very often seen as an obstacle, a reason for staff to look down at a creative task that's often fuzzy in the early stages. Having someone trying to poke holes into a plot before it even gets off the ground isn't fun, after all, and few people can take rejection or even constructive criticism well.

FWIW, that has been my experience over many years. No matter how well-meant and encouraging and helpful the policy was, the fact that there were any hoops to jump through just deterred people from doing anything. Especially given the general level of distrust on many games from people who have been burned one too many times by psycho staff. So ultimately this sort of policy made way more work for staff (who now have to run more because the players aren't doing it themselves) than cleaning up the mess in the unusual situations where something went awry.

[mietze]

To be honest, I've seen more /staff/ run plots that are anti-thematic, weird, and off the rails than I have player stuff. (It's why I tend to be leery of metaplot or staff plot unless I know the staffer's STing style--sat through too many 5 hour scenes of "dramatic audiencing" or things blowing up for no purpose whatsoever and creating a giant pain the ass for everyone while also making them care even less/feel even less hope about the sphere than they already did.

Most players are far more conservative with what they want to do. It makes sense. I think very few people feel empowered to just blow up a building just 'cause or have the big bads of the sphere running around kissing people or tea parties or have just weird nonsensical things happen. (Unless they're odd individuals, but weirdos are going to be there regardless.) Sometimes staff tend to get a little overexcited about the appeal of their ideas to their playerbase, and then try to force it, ect. I have seen that happen now and then in player stuff, but not really at the semi-regular basis i've seen it from staff folks. (And to be really honest with you? I've seen as much or more staff loss of interest/farting out/neglect as I have with PrPs. I don't think that's a character flaw or anything, but just the reality of burnout/timecrunch that frankly we all face.

[Three-Eyed Crow]

@mietze said in Finding roleplay:

Most players are far more conservative with what they want to do.

I think it really depends on the player. I'm pretty conservative and engage in a lot of self-censorship, but I've seen enough wonky idiots to know that's not the norm. It's not really rare, but a lot of people really lack for common sense.

Not that I really think this is a reason to create PrP hoops. That Guy is going to do nutty stuff anyway and you'll probably just have to deal with it one-on-one eventually whatever you're doing. The vast median generally needs to be encouraged to do something, even if it isn't perfect, so creating as little work for them as possible is probably the best idea.

[Coin]

@mietze said in Finding roleplay:

To be honest, I've seen more /staff/ run plots that are anti-thematic, weird, and off the rails than I have player stuff. (It's why I tend to be leery of metaplot or staff plot unless I know the staffer's STing style--sat through too many 5 hour scenes of "dramatic audiencing" or things blowing up for no purpose whatsoever and creating a giant pain the ass for everyone while also making them care even less/feel even less hope about the sphere than they already did.

Most players are far more conservative with what they want to do. It makes sense. I think very few people feel empowered to just blow up a building just 'cause or have the big bads of the sphere running around kissing people or tea parties or have just weird nonsensical things happen. (Unless they're odd individuals, but weirdos are going to be there regardless.) Sometimes staff tend to get a little overexcited about the appeal of their ideas to their playerbase, and then try to force it, ect. I have seen that happen now and then in player stuff, but not really at the semi-regular basis i've seen it from staff folks. (And to be really honest with you? I've seen as much or more staff loss of interest/farting out/neglect as I have with PrPs. I don't think that's a character flaw or anything, but just the reality of burnout/timecrunch that frankly we all face.

Sure, but I think this is often the product of giving the wrong people staff bits (or, more likely, the wrong people being willing to staff, while smarter folk avoid it. Hurr hurr).

[Arkandel]

@Coin I don't know if I'm a right or wrong person for anything at all but I usually find being staff detracts from my ability to help a game I care for rather than help me. Anything I can do well - give input, run plot, etc - is perfectly possible from a mortal bit, but once you are staff players treat you differently so you get a different perspective of issues, perhaps even a skewed one.

I prefer the view from the ground.