TV Tropes Org

Forums

search forum titles
google site search
Total posts: [135]  1  2
3
 4  5 6

The Super Serious Forum Game Rules Thread:

 51 Artemis 92, Sat, 18th Jun '11 11:33:31 PM from contemplation
Cogito Gratia Cogitan
[up] Pfft, if you think the Avatar Arena blurs the lines, you ain't seen nothin' yet (ask me about this in a month or two, and I'll have already answered you... hopefully).

As far as moving to RP, I think I'm actually starting to lean somewhat in the opposite direction as of late. My plans are, as ever, shifty as sand, but uh... yeah.

ON-TOPIC EDIT: I think a big part of the distinction between RP's and, well, non-RP's, is whether or not there's a fixed amount of players, and/or what the process is for joining it. The Avatar Arena is, for all intents and purposes, wide open to new players. A Game Of Gods, by comparison, is... not. Well, close, but not. How involved the game is in the story is a factor too, but to a lesser extent (consider The Green Manalishi).

edited 19th Jun '11 12:05:15 AM by Artemis92

Ponders too much; thinks too little. Currently goes by Knowlessman.
Well yeah. That's kind of what I mean.

It does not mean games cannot have some sense of coordination. Some threads are spontaneous, look at post/troper info directly above you. But some are more organized, having multiple steps, and having a person (usually the OP or the round winner) calling the shots for the round. But it doesn't make it an RP.

IMO, R Ps should require original characters (even if you use, say your avatars, you have to officially make them your O Cs), have signups (either fixed or anytime join) and accompanying discussion threads. There should generally be a sense of actual membership and a little bit of commitment, along with plot progression, so that the thread is built up by those that signed up. Forum games by contrast are free-for-all, not expecting those.

I don't agree with moving threads just because there's "roleplaying" and some involvement. There's too many. If you get liberal enough, you might end up moving a page's worth of threads. And I don't think the posters in RP section will be happy when their formalized section gets clogged with those casual half-RP threads.

If need be, people can make identical threads, but one clearly designated as RP and following the RP structure, and the other completely open and requiring no formal coordination.

edited 19th Jun '11 4:22:59 PM by abstractematics

Now using Trivialis handle.
 53 Artemis 92, Sun, 19th Jun '11 12:58:32 AM from contemplation
Cogito Gratia Cogitan
Okay, I'm just gonna say that not all RP's are OC-only. There're at least a couple that are fictional character-only. Also, the avatar rule itself smells like FG to me. Granted, We Are Our Avatars and its spinoffs kinda aren't casual games (in my largely-uninformed opinion), and they qualify as RP's.

The commitment thing, I wish I'd thought to bring up.
Ponders too much; thinks too little. Currently goes by Knowlessman.
 54 Plumbum, Sun, 19th Jun '11 4:04:05 AM from Chichester, England Relationship Status: is commanded toŚ WANK!
The Black Rose
WAOA started as an FG if I remember right. But yes, that seems to be a good distunction. You can't hop in or out of an RP, or at least an RP I run without taking some serious narrative damage.
20% cooler than the average brony.
To clarify, I'm not saying that O Cs have to be completely original. But, they do have to be designated. So if you decide to participate in an RP thread with your avatar, that avatar has to be your OC. You have to designate the character and its information in a signup thread. A thread where people just come in with the avatars they have currently would not count as a formal RP.

Like [up] said, formal RP does not have random thread-hopping. The important thing is sense of membership.

edited 19th Jun '11 4:24:42 PM by abstractematics

Now using Trivialis handle.
 56 Plumbum, Mon, 20th Jun '11 5:39:52 AM from Chichester, England Relationship Status: is commanded toŚ WANK!
The Black Rose
Um, update the 'threads for that' list? Two of three lead to deleted conversastions.

edited 20th Jun '11 5:44:47 AM by Plumbum

20% cooler than the average brony.
 57 Borasclerk, Tue, 28th Jun '11 8:48:00 AM from RIGHT HERE! FOOLS!
Don't diss me!
I want to make a character profile page.

Basically people give me ideas for characters and I put them in a story

Where would I put that?
Lets get this party started!
Still Forecharmer
[up] Good question.

I also have a question of my own: What does ITT mean?
 59 Madrugada, Mon, 5th Dec '11 9:39:08 AM Relationship Status: In season
Zzzzzzzzzz
"In This Thread". An ITT thread is a game where the constraint set in the thread title is supposed to apply.
'He strutted across the bedroom, his hard manhood pointing the way' sounds like he owns a badly named seeing-eye dog. 'Sit, Hard Manhood!
 60 Trivialis, Wed, 7th Dec '11 5:19:35 PM from contemplation
Happiness
Tip: ITT threads are commonly used for quasi-RP threads, "We're in X" kind of threads, but it is not always the case.
I don't need praise, I need help.
Soul Power!
How good are these thread ideas:
  • Forum Game Recommendations
  • General Forum Game Discussion Thread

Help, anyone?

I may soon create the first one...
I'LL SAW YOUR HEAD OFF!

Formerly Shadow Bender.

Wiki Talk Subforum
I AM NOT A TREE
I don't really see what the point of the second would be, personally.
NO TREE FOR ME (ALSO LOVES HER BOYFRIEND)
 63 Trivialis, Fri, 30th Mar '12 11:42:32 PM from contemplation
Happiness
One metathread is good enough, IMO. This one could stay, though, just to emphasize the rules.

edited 30th Mar '12 11:42:53 PM by Trivialis

I don't need praise, I need help.
Soul Power!
@Aiko Because of the cuddlepile, correct? It's too clique-y, a problem it has.

This is strictly for Rules discussion, the way I see it.

The general discussion thread would be for... well... general discussions.
I'LL SAW YOUR HEAD OFF!

Formerly Shadow Bender.

Wiki Talk Subforum
 65 Trivialis, Sat, 31st Mar '12 12:59:06 PM from contemplation
Happiness
Huh? Any "discussion" would be handled in-game with OOC comments, spoilers, etc. And there's usually not much to discuss, anyway. Recommendations thread would be fine, I think.
I don't need praise, I need help.
Soul Power!
Done.

Can I have it stickied?

I'LL SAW YOUR HEAD OFF!

Formerly Shadow Bender.

Wiki Talk Subforum
 67 Trivialis, Sat, 31st Mar '12 11:39:15 PM from contemplation
Happiness
Sure.

I think your 3rd sentence is left incomplete. tongue

edited 31st Mar '12 11:42:40 PM by Trivialis

I don't need praise, I need help.
Soul Power!
I'm sorry, I totally did not see that!

Thank you.
I'LL SAW YOUR HEAD OFF!

Formerly Shadow Bender.

Wiki Talk Subforum
Is reviving dead threads encouraged, or should you just start a new one?
Definitely not a weirdo
Unless the old one devolved into a hopeless mess, or some amount of flaming, it is preferable to revive the old thread. Raise dead is a first level spell on these forums.
 71 Collen, Tue, 17th Jul '12 4:04:04 PM from it is a mystery
vilent waler
Hi. I have a question. Are text-based adventures allowed? I assume they are, because they're not RPs and don't belong anywhere else...

 72 videogmer 314, Tue, 17th Jul '12 7:21:20 PM from that one place Relationship Status: Who needs love when you have waffles?
Given that I've seen two here, I would say yes.

 73 lu 127, Thu, 16th Aug '12 9:28:40 AM from the Capital of Light Relationship Status: Loves me...loves me not
I've added the "one avatar per post rule" in the OP. Apparently it's not prominent enough in the Forum Rules.
迷子の足音消えた
代わりに祈りの唄
 74 Mr Mallard, Sun, 16th Jun '13 10:04:41 AM from Australia, mate Relationship Status: A teenager in love
Artibi
I have a couple questions for those familiar with this board and its games from 09-10, as it concerns a forum game I want to reboot.

The game is called Kill Yourself in 25 Posts. It was a small but semi-popular game with 2 threads, both eventually locked presumably due to the user "cuteanime" disregarding rules and derailing the game. Yes, both times. I like the look of it and reckon it'd be fun.

However, due to the nature of both threads being locked, I felt I should enquire about it. I can't verify it was due to that user as there was no mod hat post; it may have just been offensive - people tend to get sensitive over the term "Kill Yourself" after all.

So, here are my questions. 1: If answerable, why exactly were the threads locked? I understand this is a bit of a tall order, explaining why I'm asking for a seasoned user or moderator to explain why. 2: Is it okay to revive the game in a new thread?

edited 16th Jun '13 10:05:01 AM by MrMallard

One day, House was walk into his House.

"It is good to have House House!" say House, as he walk into House House.
Wait, resurrecting old forum game threads is not okay now? I thought neither using an old thread nor creating an identical new thread is considered bad form.

Total posts: 135
 1  2
3
 4  5 6


TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from thestaff@tvtropes.org.
Privacy Policy