Question of the Day

This has happened to me over the years.

In general, I try and stay engaged, hoping that the bit I'm not engaging with is a road bump on the way to an interesting game, but it's not always the case. Sometimes, I've joined games that wasn't a good fit for me.

I don't want to take up space in a game that I'm not contributing to, and not having fun in. If I think this is the case, I'll make an excuse and leave the game. I feel like this is the best solution and avoids hurting anyone's feeling as much as possible. After all, it may just be me.

I don't want to leave a game by accusing everyone of "doing it wrong". So, I'll usually make a simple excuse and exit.

If pressed, I'll give an honest answer, but I try to phrase it as "creative differences". I don't want to exit throwing about shade and blaming others for me not enjoying the game.

Being boring is not the worst thing I've encountered in a Pbp game, and we're probably all guilty of it at some stage. Being engaging 100% of the time as GM or player is really hard.

Nastiness, bigotry, gratuitous stuff occasionally happens, and when that does, I'll head for the exist ASAP.

Oh, that's absolutely a thing. Most often it happens when the party is split, of course, but sometimes it even happens in the same thread. I'm not talking about GamersPlane specifically, but about PbP in general. The reasons can vary too: sometimes the ignored player writes in green font over yellow background. Sometimes the ignoring player simply doesn't like to read. And, obviously, everything in-between can be a reason too.

@emsquared and @cowleyc
I appreciate your take on this, but while It may seem like GM should fix those issues, if GM has to deal with problem players 24/7, that doesn't really advance the game. And if the game stalls for whatever reason, then everyone loses. In fact, GMing a game is already a service to the community — you don't have to also ruin your karma as a GM by being tyrannical to people whose harm you haven't personally experienced. Should the ignored player leave? Probably, but it shouldn't be framed like GM has failed at GMing. If anything, it demands a group reaction to such attitudes: "not reading is not cool, making text unreadable isn't cool either, and here's how you can improve your text". Think of it as a built-up immunity that the entire group develops instead of relying on GM's intervention.

I disagree with a lot of what you said. I think GMing can be a service to the community, but I don't think it should be. I GM because I absolutely love it, not because of any community needs. I view it as the GMs onus to allow or kick players from the table; what you see as tyrannical is to me, instead, intentionality. If there is something you dislike at the table, you need to communicate this with your GM! I've kicked plenty of people to keep a happy table, and my karma is just fine thank you very much.

As far as the bad color schemes, that's absolutely a problem to be addressed.

The GM is a leader. It's a leadership role. The GM generally sets expectations such as participation and activity in a recruitment thread. This is related to that.

So agree to disagree.

It's not being tyrannical to ask ppl to respect everyone else's time and effort, by also giving time and effort.

And it's not being neglectful to not read posts that your character has been excluded from. That is the flip side of being respectful of people's time - allowing them space.

Again, it's a balance.

Also agree with cowley it's not a service. I do it cuz I like to. Not because "someone's gotta do it".

All in all, sounds like your particular view and feelings toward GMing informs your view on how issues should be addressed.

Just like it certainly does mine.

🤷

I feel the same @Gearspark. I prefer to see/read everything that's going on in a game. If threads are hidden because "you wouldn't know what's going on" that's not really a game that's going to interest me.

I like a Ppb to be more like a social game at a table. For solo stuff I'd rather play a computer game.

For sure. If I was only interested in my story. I'd go play a single player video game, or read a book. This is a social game and it's everyone at the table that makes it special.

Two elements called out above really depend on the game for me.

First, regarding being able to read every post and keep up with various storylines... that's definitely my preference over hidden threads and generally being in the dark about the other group when the party splits up. But there's a big exception: games where mystery, suspicion, paranoia and/or compartmentalization are part of the point. Many horror, spy, crime and other games can be characterized this way, and in many cases the separation is purposeful and meaningful. It drives a certain style of play and a mood.

Second, the concept that every post should move things forward, even if only a little... I think this is good practice in many, many cases, but I do think there are times when games and scenes need to be allowed to breathe. To let PCs have real conversations with one another and NPCs. To build relationships, to explore concepts more deeply, to allow deep inner looks at things without needing to always move the ball. Like the first example, this depends on the kind of game that's being run, but I tend to find having these slower, more purposeful moments can be a ton of fun -- even when you're not in the scene if the players are skilled. Even the short, one and two-line posts of dialog can work if the people involved are responding quickly and smartly.

Anyhoo!

Thanks to all the GMs out there running games. It's a thankless job sometimes!

I'm pretty new here, but one of the things that attracted me most to this format is the ability to tell one, or some player(s), something without telling everyone. As a DM it's always a struggle to get players to interact with each other, instead of just the DM.

If the party enters a dark room, I only tell those with night vision what they can see for example. It's up to them to tell the others. Or, it's up to the others to ask. It can be hard to get the ball rolling, but when you do I think this is more immersive and fun. I want all the players to know everything that's going on in the story too. This is just a question of how they get that information. Do they get different bits in different ways? Or does 100% just get told to them by the DM?

This is definitely one of the biggest differences between playing by post vs. at the table. So I try to make the most of it.

DON'T SPLIT THE PARTY! Is the first cardinal rule of roleplaying I ever learnt and I have always followed it. But here, that rule isn't needed. Any device that can lead to drama or intrigue is worth trying in my book. It brings fresh, new, story telling options to a game I've been playing for almost 50 years! Thats amazing.

See, those things, to me, ARE advancing the story or informing the situation (which advances the story), which is what I said was important.

I don't like to do it, but sometimes I have to do it. I've run games with people who insist on coming to the aid of someone even when their PC doesn't know that said person is in trouble or they act on information that hasn't been relayed to them. The only reason they know is that I've shared it with everyone. One nice thing about GP is that I can then go back and un-hide it once everyone knows. I know that it doesn't work for everyone, and I've lost at least one player because of it, but what do I do? Not play with those people anymore?

In sci-fi games, communicators are typically available to PCs, so it makes it less necessary to hide things from the group when one/some are isolated (sometimes splitting up the group is necessary). But that option isn't available in fantasy games.

In a fantasy game a character with 18 Int can certainly deduce what is happening to another character. What they should do is role-play their reasoning convincingly before acting on it.

I don't think 18 Int equals clairvoyance, no matter how fantasy the game is.

I don't remember ever saying it did.

Players using information their characters don't have gets a lot of controversy, but I don't really buy into it. Maybe it's because I play more narrative games these days.

I want everyone GM and players to be participants and the audience to the game, and I don't mind using audience knowledge as long as it makes for a better story.

Everyone has their own view on what makes a fun game. I'd rather find my tribe and go into the sorts of games I'll enjoy and that probably means avoiding games where players or GM are going to use a lot of secret text.

Nothing wrong with using the tools, but not for me.

Question(s): it seems that retired games do not appear in search. Is that correct? I wanted to check out some past Vampire/WoD games to get some references on running combat. Are there any finished games on GP (yours or not) that are worth checking out?

Search doesn't seem to work for me at all.

Works fine for me, but only shows active games. I click the "Games" on the top of the page, then choose "My Games" from the drop-down menu. Then I click on the red "Browse Games" button.

You can also search for them through google!

Question:
What was the longest time that a PbP game you played in remained without any posts but then resumed and stayed fun or even got better after the pause?

I've had games pause for *years* before successfully resuming them. Perhaps even 5-10 years...