Follow TV Tropes
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
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 OCs), 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
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.
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.
To clarify, I'm not saying that OCs 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 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
Um, update the 'threads for that' list? Two of three lead to deleted conversastions.
edited 20th Jun '11 5:44:47 AM by Plumbum
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?
I also have a question of my own: What does ITT mean?
"In This Thread". An ITT thread is a game where the constraint set in the thread title is supposed to apply.
Tip: ITT threads are commonly used for quasi-RP threads, "We're in X" kind of threads, but it is not always the case.
How good are these thread ideas:
I may soon create the first one...
I don't really see what the point of the second would be, personally.
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
@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.
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.
Can I have it stickied?
I think your 3rd sentence is left incomplete.
edited 31st Mar '12 11:42:40 PM by Trivialis
I'm sorry, I totally did not see that!
Is reviving dead threads encouraged, or should you just start a new one?
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.
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...
Given that I've seen two here, I would say yes.
I've added the "one avatar per post rule" in the OP. Apparently it's not prominent enough in the Forum Rules.
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
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.
Community Showcase More