Future of the RPG Forum Contests

[Lara White]

Lots of great feedback, and lots to consider.I think one of the key things is to not make things too complicated. I'm very wary of staggered contests with some RPGs running while a new contest is going on and things of that nature. I understand your concerns about not having enough time to ramp things up, although it seemed to work just fine in the past - what do you feel has changed?

I don't feel anything has changed. I simply feel like this has been a problem we now have a chance to address.

 

The idea of anonymity during the entry period is interesting. I guess it depends on if you prefer to get feedback or if you prefer reputations to be removed from the contest.

I think we could still have people review the entries if they were made visible somehow in the entry topic--perhaps posted by a proxy or something. If not, I think we should at least see how anonymous submissions do before discarding the idea.

 

[Black Six]

 

The idea of anonymity during the entry period is interesting. I guess it depends on if you prefer to get feedback or if you prefer reputations to be removed from the contest.

I think we could still have people review the entries if they were made visible somehow in the entry topic--perhaps posted by a proxy or something. If not, I think we should at least see how anonymous submissions do before discarding the idea.

 

I think that goes into the territory of 'making things too complicated.' I don't want to have to deal with constantly updating RPGs during the entry period as feedback comes in.

[Dual Cee]

Well after all these Ideas, I'd still prefer the shortening of the revival date and after a RPG dies, the 4th in the contest can start , it's simple, but would be very effective...

[Mr. House]

Anonymous entries is something I'd support.

[ToaKapura1234]

I'd support anonymous entries too. And what about having a group of "emergency staff"? They would take over any RPG where the GM had to leave so it wouldn't be GMless.

 

Any thoughts?

[otter]

That sounds like it could go horribly wrong horribly fast.

[ToaKapura1234]

How so?

[Dapper-Sama]

I believe(though I may be wrong) that the RPG staff could offer tips and maybe even tutorials to help out the GMs of TBRPG Contest winners. Again, I might be wrong about this, as the staff might be too busy, but it might work really well.

[The Lorax]

I believe(though I may be wrong) that the RPG staff could offer tips and maybe even tutorials to help out the GMs of TBRPG Contest winners. Again, I might be wrong about this, as the staff might be too busy, but it might work really well.

 

This is a very good idea, especially if the winners are first-time GMs.

 

How so?

 

Well, for a start the winning GMs would need to tell all their secret plans and plots to the emergency GMs right at the beginning so that they would be able to keep running the game should the first GM fail. Knowing how everything was supposed to turn out would sort take the fun out of playing the games for the emergency GMs, so they probably wouln't play the games. That would mean less players and less activity, the very problem we are trying to solve.

 

That's just one way, and I'm sure Grochi had more in mind,

[otter]

Let alone the fact that people always like to jump the gun. The GM might be gone for a couple days, the emergency guy takes power, normal one comes back, emergency guy goes "nuh-uh", problems start...

 

Or emergency guy says "I can run this better than you" and a fight starts

 

Really, I'm too lazy to list ways that it could go wrong

 

Just know that there are far too many

[Mr. House]

Which is why we have the staff that actually run the RPG Forum. They can easily step in and stop the offender,

[Legolover-361]

I personally would prefer the idea of letting a runner-up RPG run if one of the victors becomes inactive.

[Eyru]

I personally would prefer the idea of letting a runner-up RPG run if one of the victors becomes inactive.

That won't stop the runner-up RPG from becoming inactive too, though; the core issue (inactivity) would remain unsolved.

[Legolover-361]

You're right that the core issue of inactivity would not be solved by the runners-up system: It would only draw the curtains over inactivity. However, having runners-up replace inactive winners would, even in a period of high roleplaying activity, potentially allow more RPGs a chance at the limelight and prevent "dud" RPGs from hogging a spot for the entire duration of that RPG season. I believe the system would be a good feature for the RPG forum whether it is active or not.Solving the core issue of inactivity is a problem whose load is shared not just by the RPG contest format but by RPG creators. If there is enough incentive to play good RPGs, they will be played. We just need determine what that incentive, or those incentives, should be.

[Simulacrum]

One of the largest problems, in my humble opinion, with online roleplaying, is group size. Frankly, it's the process of mashing dozens of unrelated characters together, and then barely holding them together with an underlying plot/storyline that can in no way or form be actually controlled by the GM, unless he can actively interact with the unwieldy number of players.

 

The first problem I listed, the mashing of characters together, is perhaps the most understable. It is also potentially the most harmful. It seems to me (and hopefully is not as it seems), that an average player chooses another character to interact with solely because they recognizes the other character's player, and thus do not have to leave their "comfort zone" when interacting. This leaves new (and somewhat-new) players without interaction. Interaction is the vital first step of roleplaying, a form of direct mentoring, that I am sure every person on this forum is immeasurably grateful for. The most oft-repeated piece of advice given to the few players who ask advice before joining an RPG seems to be "find a veteran of the RPG, watch what they do, and take notes". This is all fine and dandy when said; but how many players actually contribute to this mentoring? While the person who answers the call for advice with this question may not consider themselves veterans, or somehow unsuitable for mentoring directly, they should be willing to directly help this potential newcomer to the roleplaying world. This sounds dreadfully time-consuming, and I myself have not done so in the past, but I believe it is a huge problem, especially in the RPGs that result from BZPower's Bionicle RPG Contest, and even more importantly, a problem caused by the players themselves, often subconsciously, but still with damaging aftereffects.

 

Now, the storyline problem. A roleplaying game works best when the Game Master can actively work with his players, asking for advice, using their feedback, and, at every step, actively trying his hardest to create a world not by himself, but with his players' help. The RPGs that players introduce their characters into in this forum are described in around a page or two of text, created by anywhere from one to three persons, and hardly ever modified in any extremely significant way. This is sadly required for roleplaying groups of extremely large numbers, and, in my opinion, never a good thing. There is a reason that large groups of roleplayers often split into smaller groups. After all, the BZPRPG isn't one massive party of characters, its a complicated web of plotlines and character groups, all of which seem extremely personal and are modified by all that are contributing to them. Few of these individual plots fall apart in a few weeks, especially those that are well made. Occasionaly such individual plot lines will be founded in the Contest-produced RPGs, and, if you notice, the players involved tend to last longer.

 

I'm probably wrong about all of this, and I'm sure my half-coherent ranting is anything but constructive critiquing, so I'll hurry up and state the whole foundation for my argument: The online, text-based roleplaying games found in the Bionicle RPG forum of BZPower are drastically too large, and thus do not allow for players and game masters to work together to contribute to the worlds they have created/invested in, do not, due to their impersonal nature, grasp the player's attention, and become unable to provide something personal (and thus fun) that players want to return to (at least, not the new players). There are thousands of other problems group size creates, but that's the base of my argument.

 

However, I'm relatively new here, and have never been very active, so I'm probably completely wrong concerning everything I posted, seeing as this forum has been around a long time, without out too much apparent trouble. I've stated my rusted, outdated, and possibly counterfeit two cents, and I apologize for all the eye-rolling and cries of "What an uninformed cool dude!" they will undoubtedly incite.

Edited June 3, 2013 by Replicant

[BBBBalta]

Hm, guess I'll throw in my two cents. My opinion probably isn't worth much in this area, as I currently only actively participate in the BZPRPG and haven't consistently played anything else in the past, but oh well.

 

I think one of the biggest problems is that, as others have said, the RPGs in this forum run for such a short period of time. It's very difficult to draw players in, set up and complete a plot, and deliver a meaningful, engaging experience in only a few months. This short window really doesn't make much sense to me - this is (or was) primarily a Bionicle site, and yet BRPGs have a very short timespan compared to RPGs about other LEGO themes and stuff that doesn't relate to LEGO at all. These, of course, can run indefinitely. I'm not familiar with the history of these contests, so I don't really know why this limit was established in the past, but it's certainly not helping things now.

 

The solution to this problem, of course, is to lengthen the timeframe of BRPGs. A year might be appropriate, but that introduces other questions. A year is a long time - what happens if the RPG dies? What about other RPGs that could be really good but didn't win and don't get to run for a year? Others have suggested answers to these questions - some viable, some convoluted beyond usefulness. My personal opinion, though, is that the easiest way of solving this would to be have an approval system similar to the other RPG forums'. If it dies, it dies. New ones will take its place. This also gives players who want to try their hand at being a GM the opportunity to do so without having to deal with what some have called a "popularity contest."

 

Regarding themes: Judging by the highly adverse initial reaction to the theme in the new contest, themes are clearly dangerous ground. I'm not completely against the idea of themes, though - themes like the ones used in the FFFCs, themes that consist of only a word or two and are very open-ended in interpretation, could work very well. Another idea, one I'm particularly partial to, is that players could vote on and possibly suggest themes before a contest begins.

 

So yeah. Just my observations.

[LewaLew]

I know the contests themselves get advertising on the main page, but I've noticed that the winners don't. Unlike the winners of, say, the flash fiction contests there's no message on the homepage saying "hey come look at this thing that a lot of people liked!"

I'm not sure how much that would to bring in players, but it would certainly be a start

I've found that anytime we spotlight anything on the front page, in can go a few hours with 20 or so users (not always members, many of them guests) viewing the topic. I believe it's worth a shot, and would be happy to give a spotlight to the winner of the next contest on my news day.

[Toa of Dancing]

Just to scatter my brains on the floor, I personally think the multiple host requirement would definitely help activity. Pretty much everyone here could likely attest to the failure of Beat and Rhythm, whether they tried to save it or sat back from the outside. If I had a reliable co-host, it might have lived. Alas, I left it to die (which I still regret), and didn't choose the correct person to help me. However, a co-host would still be a good idea. Possibly a system of RPG coaches could be started, where a group of veterans offer their services to help newbloods in their creation and running.

 

Also, I believe the reduction and enforcement of the revival rule would be ideal. That would really help clear inactive RPGs. Two weeks sounds like a good number for that.

[Grantaire]

Wow, I didn't realize the impact of this until I skimmed all the current RPGs. they're a far cry from what I remember. And meanwhile the BZPRPG seems to be kicking along without loss...

 

Regarding themes: Judging by the highly adverse initial reaction to the theme in the new contest, themes are clearly dangerous ground. I'm not completely against the idea of themes, though - themes like the ones used in the FFFCs, themes that consist of only a word or two and are very open-ended in interpretation, could work very well. Another idea, one I'm particularly partial to, is that players could vote on and possibly suggest themes before a contest begins.

As someone who has done a lot of theme oriented writing, I agree wholehearted with this: there is a difference in the freedom, most certainly. However, it's also true that a very loose theme really would be pointless considering how much you can bend a one word theme: I once wrote a story for the wrong theme, edited it to fit the current theme, and later edited it to fit another.