I'd like to see people be clear about player vs player games, and character vs character games.
PvP uses player skills at conflict to contest results with winners and losers.
CvC is just a story setup. Ideally its with two players who trust one another and collaborate in generating events and story for others they draw in. They are free to express less effective characters and negative consequences of their own actions because they aren't trying to win anything.
@faraday which gets us back to PvP is just a bad idea for RP.
Sad.
@Ashen-Shugar I actually thought along those lines as well. I got what the OP was talking about, but I couldn't help but think about how immersion isn't really a thing, as you can't throw all the information at players to constantly remind them of the setting and its realities, physical, social, economic and so on.
Then I realized that if you think about immersion along the lines of a person sinking into water, you can say you are immersed, but you aren't a fish. We can do more to make you feel like you are a fish, but you won't be, and its all just illusion and willingness to focus on what is in the fiction over whats in the real world.
That worked well enough for me.
Meanwhile, things like current shared weather, population levels and what they are doing in this place at a given IC time are always helpful to me. I would love things that told me how cultures and groups are relating, what has the populaces attention, what am I hearing and seeing on the streets, all moderated by my skill levels and perhaps what my area/region/culture thinks is important to pay attention to. It's a lot of work and the emits get intrusive.
I thin social RP is the better term. It covers coffeeshop which seems to be more about meeting random characters, but also includes family, vocation, and special group interactions, and public events like holidays, religious days and festivals.
Really what I am asking is does anyone have examples they really think worked well for most players, or deserve more exploration.
"Rule based" in this case means something the RPG system in use suggests or provides in some mechanical sense.
RP prompts are a vast range of things.
There are tons. My typical concerns are does it take too much effort to use or set up the prompts, and does uneven use produce uneven power or effectiveness for a character or player.
Alternately, do people play the same "game" everywhere they go, and resent having an experience design intrude on their play?
One day when I am a game tyrant, I would hope people would try to reality check me on behalf of players they have long term trust with.
This is something we discuss and aim for at my company, and maybe it offers something for online RP. And for online forums. Each builds on the previous. It can be found online.
Four levels of psychological safety
Belonging - feel part of the group, welcome
Learner Safety - able to admit not knowing, or making mistakes
Contributor Safety - to use their talents and interests to add in to the whole, suggest new things
Challanger Safety - able to critique or question why something is done the way it is
@hobos Sorta not really related but -- in a low code environment, you can lay out a variety of tasks with the necessary skill levels/rolls needed. You can get pretty detailed with that (it's the game play structure of the coded systems so you are halfway to it).
Older survival TTRPGs had charts etc for finding parts and materials and jury rigging, creating, maintaining, repairing various vital technologies.
One could do the same for things like "find allies, create a coalition" etc.
It still could use some record keeping and story adjudication but the pieces can be created. Super clever folks can even make those bits into RP, as opposed to just mechanically satisfying a thirst for success/validation.
@bad-at-lurking said in Gamifying Plots:
I'm more of a fan of presenting things as an option and letting people do what they want to do, within reason. Encouraging behavior is a less intrusive tool than demanding it.
It's not always the case, but typically players will focus entirely around whatever they can gain, regardless of how rewarding it is, or in theme.
Staff plots are assumed to have better chances of relevancy to the setting, and better rewards. Players will aim for them as if little else matters.
I want to hear well-spoken and crafted arguments on many sides of any topic.
I don't care if it changes minds, that is very rare. (Again, RL says 30% conversion rate would be stunning).
It may shape thoughts and expectations, or open new areas for thought in a reader. Sometimes that can take years to percolate through a mind, and it's still worthwhile.
I tend to ignore charged or pejorative language. It feels like begging the question too much.
I wouldn't want to see one specific topic be the only topic forever. And I am one of those dumb people who seems to ask a series of extremely similar questions because it helps me understand something.
I also happen to think (demand of myself) that people can disagree and be in the same place and not do damage to one another.
I think all that and am comfortable posting here. Whatever that means.
I think @Cobaltasaurus makes games she'd like to play. And that is the key to trying to make any game.
She just hasta share the core exciting parts with a few others, so the workload is lighter, and everyone, including her, get to play.
That's how I see it at least.
The One Dollar Mystery Campaign is as it says, a Kickstarter that for $1.00 gets you an undescribed at the start campaign setting.
The author is amusing to me. There are also some interesting ideas in the work so far, but the sample given today has a brief but interesting description of culture. Just thought I'd share.
I'd strongly suggest suspending posting in this thread for about 5 days.
I do not recommend permanent locking, ever.
At this point people are just winding themselves and each other up, and that adds no value.
Is that a thing? Suspend posting on a thread? Is it possible people can let something lie for a cooling off period?
Yes, I know how to turn off notifications for the thread. I also know how to just not log in for days or weeks or months.
I have a personal wiki. I jot down ideas on a page or two, use tags to get some idea of what a given page is about.
Sometimes an idea is more about how to approach something like player involvement or a generic way to handle resources. Those things go on their own page, but I make sure to keep a link up.
I also keep a small number of blue stickie note with me, and write down anything I think of, even if I've written it down before.
Its those stand out things that shine or draw you or excite you that you want to capture and try to retain.
Physical combat and its accepted model works fine because it has one end state: defeated (yield, unconscious, dead, etc). That result is typically dull to RP.
Social interaction should not be modeled after physical combat, because simplistic to say that all forms of social success "defeated" anyone. Social interactions have many possible outcomes, many of which all parties will actively go along with, very few of which are "complete domination of will and purpose".
MU* RP is more socially oriented than (almost all) tabletop for many reasons. Moreso than deadly danger, it should offer interesting choices, and make for an interesting story.
If it's not interesting, then you've wasted everyone's time.
I really, really like details and will design systems to show off where people are strong and weak, and that emphasizes all stakes so behaviors make sense, but no one online needs that much info. They need to know it was engaging and gave them something to make decisions about, pull up details from their character, and be a little inspired or surprised by. Everything else, people will walk away and stay away from.
(See endless combat, endless posturing or attacks from combat monster PCs, endless shiny special, endless trauma, endless drama, players will walk away when they see no engagement or fun for themselves.)
I personally dislike using real people for played bys. Too much baggage.
