The Future of RPG Approval

[25K Now!]

Yes, contest RPGs can be resubmitted. However, very few RPGs these days even make it to the end of the three month mark.

 

They just die. And it's happened so many times that people have given up.

[Zox Tomana]

But will that problem even be mitigated by a new system of introduction? If people don't play side RPG's because they have given up on the idea that they can be good enough to commit to and that they can go longer than a week or two... Then a new system of RPG creation isn't going to change much. It'll just mean they're more frequent, not that they will have a better survival chance or draw greater interest. Sounds more like it is people that need to change, not the system in place. Either more optimism or more stubborn completionism XD

[25K Now!]

The thing is, when the RPGs die out, there will be a long wait between its death and the next contest.

 

While changing the approval system might not increase the amount of interest in the non-BZPRPG RPGs, a different system will at least allow for, to quote Ghosthands:

 

 

This would allow RPGs to rise and fall based on -demand-, rather than a thrice-a-year system that may not coincide at all with when people want to play a new game.

 

And I agree with him: the contests are too spread out, and there simply aren't enough players to keep them going for that long now.

[Snelly]

But will that problem even be mitigated by a new system of introduction? If people don't play side RPG's because they have given up on the idea that they can be good enough to commit to and that they can go longer than a week or two... Then a new system of RPG creation isn't going to change much. It'll just mean they're more frequent, not that they will have a better survival chance or draw greater interest. Sounds more like it is people that need to change, not the system in place. Either more optimism or more stubborn completionism XD

 

Optimism doesn't get prevent people you're interacting with from disappearing for various reasons. People have real lives outside of this forum and sometimes they need to drop out off whatever rpgs they're playing, or limit themselves to a few. So yeah while it would be nice if people could change they really can't, in the end these are just games. People shouldn't have to change in order for a game to work, it needs to be the other way around.

 

What we really need is a heavy increase in the amount of players, but that ain't happening either. So the only thing we can really do is change the current system to work better for the people we do have.

[25K Now!]

I'd totally change my mind to keeping the current system if our playerbase was bigger and we still got free sets as rewards though.

 

But the playerbase is too small.

[NorikSigma]

That's the issue. And really it seems a new system would -theoratically- improve the situation.

[25K Now!]

Indeed. Even if it does barely anything, it'll still be better than the current system.

[Samus Aran-Bounty Hunter]

Honestly, I don't have a preference as to whether things work one way or another, but one thing I would like to throw out as an idea is the possibility of just trying out the approval system. Switch, perhaps, the next contest period into a trial for the approval system, and once the next contest would've come around then we can look back at the last 4 months and see how things went. Hindsight is always more reliable than foresight, after all.

 

Another possibility is simply that of removing the time limit on the Contest RPGs. If one's active enough to live straight through to the next contest, sure, re-entering isn't all that tough, but simply the psychological idea that this wouldn't have a limit if it can keep activity up could have a major impact.

Zakaro

[Toa Levacius Zehvor]

 

But will that problem even be mitigated by a new system of introduction? If people don't play side RPG's because they have given up on the idea that they can be good enough to commit to and that they can go longer than a week or two... Then a new system of RPG creation isn't going to change much. It'll just mean they're more frequent, not that they will have a better survival chance or draw greater interest. Sounds more like it is people that need to change, not the system in place. Either more optimism or more stubborn completionism XD

 

Optimism doesn't get prevent people you're interacting with from disappearing for various reasons. People have real lives outside of this forum and sometimes they need to drop out off whatever rpgs they're playing, or limit themselves to a few. So yeah while it would be nice if people could change they really can't, in the end these are just games. People shouldn't have to change in order for a game to work, it needs to be the other way around.

 

What we really need is a heavy increase in the amount of players, but that ain't happening either. So the only thing we can really do is change the current system to work better for the people we do have.

 

I still can't see how it's the systems fault that players aren't playing. The idea of someone not playing because they don't like the system is much like a kid refusing to do his homework because the paper was in blue instead of red.

 

If we change the systems, it will not change the RPGs. They will be the exact same RPGs entered by the same people and played by the same people, only without the original limits.

 

 

Now, as I've thought on this, I actually have come to a serious idea. Considering that RPGs which fail tend to so after about a month, it might be better to do something like this -

 

Every other month, a contest is held to choose RPGs. For each RPG still active, there is one less spot available to start a new one; thus, if only one RPG is active, only the top two RPGs are chosen. This solves a number of problems - the amount of times between contests, the issue with a runner-up not necessarily being the RPG everyone wanted to play, the fact that some people might have problems with deadlines (waiting two months is far easier to manage then four, after all), and the fear that a succesful RPG could be shut down in its prime. Doing this meets all three of the requirements Black Six listed on the last page, as well; Judging only has a theoretical maintenance.

 

Since it seems a tad unreasonable to ask the same person to maintain a contest every two months, at least one other person from the forum staff would need to help make sure the polls and topics went up on time. But that's still a lot less of a change than the Judging system would entail.

 

At the very least, we need to bring down the number of months for the voting down to three. The tri-annual contest does not appear to have been a success.

 

-Toa Levacius Zehvor

[Silvan Haven]

 

Judging only has a theoretical maintenance.

 

It is not just theoretical. OTC has been doing it just fine for a long time with no more players than we have over here.

[Voltex]

I foresee this idea being shot down immediately, but since Bionicle has kind of been dead for four years now, and there seems to be a serious lack of attention being paid to the Lego RPG forum... why not merge the Bionicle and Lego RPG forums together?

 

The approval system and whatnot of Lego RPG/OTC RPG (probably the latter) could still be used, but rather than having three or four Bionicle RPGs active at once, there would only be one (or perhaps none if one dies and another has not yet been approved). This would not count the BZPRPG - I think the BZPRPG could be kept as it is, so there could theoretically be two Bionicle RPGs running at once (which would be more than the single RPG limit allows other lines).

[Toa Levacius Zehvor]

Judging only has a theoretical maintenance.

 

It is not just theoretical. OTC has been doing it just fine for a long time with no more players than we have over here.

 

It's theoretical until we actually test it out on this forum. The OTC player base is not ours, and despite your statements of the contrary, is actually larger than what we have for the Contest RPGs. I'm fairly sure X-Men alone has more players than our last contest did; at the very least, it's had more posts made in that same time period.

 

And remember, complete certainty that the number is being maintained is what we're supposed to be looking for, not "OTC has been doing it just fine".

 

I foresee this idea being shot down immediately, but since Bionicle has kind of been dead for four years now, and there seems to be a serious lack of attention being paid to the Lego RPG forum... why not merge the Bionicle and Lego RPG forums together?

 

The approval system and whatnot of Lego RPG/OTC RPG (probably the latter) could still be used, but rather than having three or four Bionicle RPGs active at once, there would only be one (or perhaps none if one dies and another has not yet been approved). This would not count the BZPRPG - I think the BZPRPG could be kept as it is, so there could theoretically be two Bionicle RPGs running at once (which would be more than the single RPG limit allows other lines).

 

Now, my opposition this idea stems first from the fact that I don't want there to be judging. But assuming we do switch over to judging, there's still a few flaws here -

 

The main argument behind those in favor of the Judging is that said system will "bolster creativity". Assuming that a Judging system does, in fact, bolster creativity, combing the forums actually cuts down on it. After all, if only one Bionicle RPG is allowed, what about all of the other players who want to make one? From there, we have two situations. In the first, the RPG closes. Suddenly, we have a bunch of submissions for the next Bionicle RPG. It becomes the judges decision, then, to pick an RPG; now, while I don't take offense to a judge approving an RPG, having them pick which RPG I'm allowed to play is something I'm not so hot on. On the flip side, assume an RPG stays open and does really well, going on for months. We return to the whole "creativity" issue - nobody gets a chance to make an RPG save that one person.

 

Now, the solution to this problem would be would be "allow more Bionicle RPGs". But then you run into the problem of increasing the number of RPGs on a forum past the manageable point, which could cause a decline in players. And the whole reason behind all of this was to increase player activity.

 

-Toa Levacius Zehvor

[Eyru]

 

Now, as I've thought on this, I actually have come to a serious idea. Considering that RPGs which fail tend to so after about a month, it might be better to do something like this -

Every other month, a contest is held to choose RPGs. For each RPG still active, there is one less spot available to start a new one; thus, if only one RPG is active, only the top two RPGs are chosen. This solves a number of problems - the amount of times between contests, the issue with a runner-up not necessarily being the RPG everyone wanted to play, the fact that some people might have problems with deadlines (waiting two months is far easier to manage then four, after all), and the fear that a succesful RPG could be shut down in its prime. Doing this meets all three of the requirements Black Six listed on the last page, as well; Judging only has a theoretical maintenance.

 

Holding more frequent contests won't improve the longevity of the winners. This doesn't really solve anything, unfortunately.

[Toa Levacius Zehvor]

 

 

Now, as I've thought on this, I actually have come to a serious idea. Considering that RPGs which fail tend to so after about a month, it might be better to do something like this -

Every other month, a contest is held to choose RPGs. For each RPG still active, there is one less spot available to start a new one; thus, if only one RPG is active, only the top two RPGs are chosen. This solves a number of problems - the amount of times between contests, the issue with a runner-up not necessarily being the RPG everyone wanted to play, the fact that some people might have problems with deadlines (waiting two months is far easier to manage then four, after all), and the fear that a succesful RPG could be shut down in its prime. Doing this meets all three of the requirements Black Six listed on the last page, as well; Judging only has a theoretical maintenance.

 

Holding more frequent contests won't improve the longevity of the winners. This doesn't really solve anything, unfortunately.

 

Judging won't improve the longevity of the winners either.

 

Note the section of my post detailing that if an RPG is still active, a new RPG does not take its place in the contest; how many contests can pass before it needs to be voted in would be another topic to discuss. Thus, if an RPG does show the potential for longevity, it can keep going.

 

The advantage here is that when RPGs do die off, they are replaced far more rapidly, allowing new RPGs to fill in the gaps and thus keeping the forum more consistently active - RPGs get a lot more activity when they first start, after all. If anything, the psychological impact of seeing activity would help bolster morale, giving those RPGs a better chance to attract players and stay open.

 

While RPGs may not be replaced as rapidly as in the Judging system, this is far cleaner, and avoids major overhaul.

 

I can tell you this, though - we've tried a longer period with no success; if we try a shorter period without success, that would finally be the proof I'd need to fully back a Judging system.

 

-Toa Levacius Zehvor

[Silvan Haven]

 

The OTC player base is not ours

 

A lot of it is. Many players are active in both BRPG and OTC.

 

 

I'm fairly sure X-Men alone has more players than our last contest did; at the very least, it's had more posts made in that same time period.

 

This would be because it went through the Darwinian process that everybody else was talking about and came out as a win.

 

 

And remember, complete certainty that the number is being maintained is what we're supposed to be looking for, not "OTC has been doing it just fine".

 

I have been using OTC as an example because it is a successful system that has been running for a long time with many of the same players as this forum. The only real difference is what the RPGs were being based off of.

[NorikSigma]

I think that it's worth a try, at least. If it really sucks someone will start complaining somewhere, probably in a new "Bionicle RPG" Discussion Topic. If it works, no one will complain and everyone's happy.

 

Either way, at least we find out which system of instituting new RPGs is better through trying it out, which yields observable results.

[sunflower]

Now, the solution to this problem would be would be "allow more Bionicle RPGs". But then you run into the problem of increasing the number of RPGs on a forum past the manageable point, which could cause a decline in players. And the whole reason behind all of this was to increase player activity.

 

-Toa Levacius Zehvor

Self-regulation, as the process goes, would find the limit on the number of RPGs that can be up and running at once. Yes, this might involve going past the "limit" for a time, though given the fact that we have a small playerbase, it wouldn't take long at all for us to go back down to a stable number of RPGs that this forum can support naturally. Rather than forcing an arbitrary and artificial limiter on the number of RPGs that can be run because "it looks like the right number", a free-form system such as this finds it's own limits.

 

No, the process wouldn't be pretty nor clean, but in the end it would allow for a much less forced and much more relaxed environment as whole here.

 

You seem to be of the opinion that the playerbase would disappear and/or be significantly weakened from first going over the "natural" limit of RPGs, correct?

[Toa Levacius Zehvor]

 

Now, the solution to this problem would be would be "allow more Bionicle RPGs". But then you run into the problem of increasing the number of RPGs on a forum past the manageable point, which could cause a decline in players. And the whole reason behind all of this was to increase player activity.

 

-Toa Levacius Zehvor

Self-regulation, as the process goes, would find the limit on the number of RPGs that can be up and running at once. Yes, this might involve going past the "limit" for a time, though given the fact that we have a small playerbase, it wouldn't take long at all for us to go back down to a stable number of RPGs that this forum can support naturally. Rather than forcing an arbitrary and artificial limiter on the number of RPGs that can be run because "it looks like the right number", a free-form system such as this finds it's own limits.

 

No, the process wouldn't be pretty nor clean, but in the end it would allow for a much less forced and much more relaxed environment as whole here.

 

You seem to be of the opinion that the playerbase would disappear and/or be significantly weakened from first going over the "natural" limit of RPGs, correct?

 

Yes, as has been repeated many times. And my argument isn't that it won't happen, it's that it isn't guaranteed to happen. Unless someone on the forum would like to make a claim of precognition, of course.

 

While it may not be as "forced," the proposed environment will be far from relaxed. It will be chaotic, as RPGs are constantly being born and then dying off. Or, worse, it will be static - it would be far too easy to assume that one or two RPGs could become large enough that bringing a new one into the equation. You said yourself that judging would help bolster creativity; taking this into account, I fail to see how.

 

It's not so much of an opinion as a fact. Though weakened would be a better word than disappear - the players would still be there, just spread out thin.

 

-Toa Levacius Zehvor

[Wyrd Bid Ful Araed]

Lev, for all your claims that a judging system will result in a flood of RPGs that drown each other out...you have noticed that in nearly three weeks there have been only four entries into the contest, yes? If the judges have to deal with submissions in similar numbers, thats hardly what I'd call a flood.

 

And if a new system did get new entries crawling out the woodwork in much greater numbers...they don't have to say yes to all of them. Thats why they're judges. The ones that have been rushed or poorly thought out get stopped before they ever get the chance to become competition to the others

[25K Now!]

Of course, I wonder.

 

What happens if an approved RPG dies and nobody else tries to enter an RPG for judging?

[Toa Levacius Zehvor]

Lev, for all your claims that a judging system will result in a flood of RPGs that drown each other out...you have noticed that in nearly three weeks there have been only four entries into the contest, yes? If the judges have to deal with submissions in similar numbers, thats hardly what I'd call a flood.

 

And if a new system did get new entries crawling out the woodwork in much greater numbers...they don't have to say yes to all of them. Thats why they're judges. The ones that have been rushed or poorly thought out get stopped before they ever get the chance to become competition to the others

 

I covered this here -

 

For the last few contests, we've averaged within the eleven range. Is that as many as we used to have? No, but it's still way more than the judging system could support. Before we're quick to judge (pun intended), we should look at the time. This is the month of May. Most players are in high school or college. For a good number of people, this is the month of finals, preparing for graduation, prom, etc. Not very much down time. Really, it's no big surprise that the number of submissions is as low as it is. I can guarantee that next contest will have more player simply because the players will have more time to prepare.

 

Normally, this contest is held in June. And even then, looking back, it never seems to be that active of a contest for whatever reason.

 

-Toa Levacius Zehvor

[Silvan Haven]

 

Yes, as has been repeated many times. And my argument isn't that it won't happen, it's that it isn't guaranteed to happen. Unless someone on the forum would like to make a claim of precognition, of course.

 

Sure its not guaranteed, not many things in life are.. Until we try out a different system in here all we have are theories and examples from other places. We do know that the current system is not working.

[Eyru]

Sure its not guaranteed, not many things in life are.. Until we try out a different system in here all we have are theories and examples from other places. We do know that the current system is not working.

 

Silvan hit the nail on the head: contests aren't working, so why not try something else? Yes: we don't know if judging will make things better, I'll admit that; but the possibility that it might is enough of a reason in my books to try it out. Our system is not working, so we need to try something new, or watch the current downward trend continue.

[The Lorax]

And if a new system did get new entries crawling out the woodwork in much greater numbers...they don't have to say yes to all of them. Thats why they're judges. The ones that have been rushed or poorly thought out get stopped before they ever get the chance to become competition to the others.

 

 

I was under the impression that the judges were only there to check that and RPG was well thought out and had potential to run successfully, not select the ones that (according to them) are the best of the bunch and should be allowed to run. I know for a fact that there are quite a few people on this forum who are capable of producing such quality RPGs and who also have a desire to run them.

 

In the case that a number of them (say six for sake of argument; not unreasonable given the number of authors and almost certainly too many for our little forum to support) all come to the judges with good RPGs that meet the requirements, what happens then? Do the judges stick by this principle of self-regulation and let them all run because they all meet the requirements, and so condemn all or most of the games to die by over-stretching the forum, or do they (quite reasonably) say that six is too many and disallow some of the games because of it? And then we get the problems of how they decide which games miss out. Do they call a poll?

[Voltex]

Of course, I wonder.

 

What happens if an approved RPG dies and nobody else tries to enter an RPG for judging?

 

This is where my merger idea could work best; if the current Bionicle RPG (or RPGs) died, it would not be entirely necessary for there to be a new one up and running immediately.

[Wyrd Bid Ful Araed]

I covered this here -

 

For the last few contests, we've averaged within the eleven range. Is that as many as we used to have? No, but it's still way more than the judging system could support. Before we're quick to judge (pun intended), we should look at the time. This is the month of May. Most players are in high school or college. For a good number of people, this is the month of finals, preparing for graduation, prom, etc. Not very much down time. Really, it's no big surprise that the number of submissions is as low as it is. I can guarantee that next contest will have more player simply because the players will have more time to prepare.

 

Normally, this contest is held in June. And even then, looking back, it never seems to be that active of a contest for whatever reason.

 

-Toa Levacius Zehvor

 

Sorry but I don't buy the argument that its the time of year thats causing low entries. Because its been about this low for several contests, and they weren't all in May/June.

And isn't this logic a bit self-defeating? If a certain month is too busy for people to make and enter contests, surely letting them enter whenever they like would help?

 

 

I was under the impression that the judges were only there to check that and RPG was well thought out and had potential to run successfully, not select the ones that (according to them) are the best of the bunch and should be allowed to run. I know for a fact that there are quite a few people on this forum who are capable of producing such quality RPGs and who also have a desire to run them.

 

In the case that a number of them (say six for sake of argument; not unreasonable given the number of authors and almost certainly too many for our little forum to support) all come to the judges with good RPGs that meet the requirements, what happens then? Do the judges stick by this principle of self-regulation and let them all run because they all meet the requirements, and so condemn all or most of the games to die by over-stretching the forum, or do they (quite reasonably) say that six is too many and disallow some of the games because of it? And then we get the problems of how they decide which games miss out. Do they call a poll?

 

Other than judging over the technical nuts and bolts of a submitted RPG, the OTC judges have a few other little rules. We occasionally make judgements based on the GMs past history (one of the reasons a rule about having to have a co-host was introduced), and we won't allow two RPGs based on the same property to exists at the same time (though I can't see this applying too much in BRPG, since everything's Bionicle).

So if it were going to work like OTC, once an RPG was put in the approval topic the judges would mull it over, point out any flaws or errors, and if those got cleaned up stamp their approval on it and it'd be ready to go. No need for polls

[The Lorax]

But there would be a need for polls or some other selection if there were clearly more good quality RPGs submitted to the judges than the forum could support. I don't think that is an unlikely situation at all. We have plenty of good GMs here who know how to write good games. And if technical nuts and bolts becomes the only thing needed for a game to run, I can see a lot of people wanting to put forward games. What happens when the judges have six good RPGs submitted by reliable GMs to mull over, and can see no obvious reason why any of them should fail?

 

It would be silly to approve them all at once; six is way too many for the playerbase to support. But if they don't do that, then there needs to be something or someone to decide which games go ahead and which are told to wait. That could be a poll, or it could be something else like B6's magic hat. I'm just asking how that situation might be resolved fairly.

[Toa Levacius Zehvor]

Sure its not guaranteed, not many things in life are.. Until we try out a different system in here all we have are theories and examples from other places. We do know that the current system is not working.

 

Silvan hit the nail on the head: contests aren't working, so why not try something else? Yes: we don't know if judging will make things better, I'll admit that; but the possibility that it might is enough of a reason in my books to try it out. Our system is not working, so we need to try something new, or watch the current downward trend continue.

 

And if the system works out worse? We both want the same thing - the success of the forum. And maybe you're right; maybe the judging would help it stay alive. But with no guarantee that it does, I keep faith to the system we have. I gave my two cents up above on the changes I think would make the voting system more adapted to the climate in terms of contest frequency and number, but until we've tried everything to fix the old car, I can't justify buying a new one.

 

Sorry but I don't buy the argument that its the time of year thats causing low entries. Because its been about this low for several contests, and they weren't all in May/June.

And isn't this logic a bit self-defeating? If a certain month is too busy for people to make and enter contests, surely letting them enter whenever they like would help?

 

Better to wait a few months to see an RPG with a chance for success (or one-two months, if we were to go with the idea I presented higher up on this page) than to have the RPG created in an environment where it's likely to fail, as far as I'm concerned.

 

And whether said argument is bought or not, you can't deny the fact that the numbers are dramatically lower this contest - not the one or two RPGs lower they've been in past contests. What we're seeing is an anomaly.

 

-Toa Levacius Zehvor

[Krayzikk]

I can't entirely agree, Lev. We don't know that this is an anomaly, not yet. If, in the next few contests, we see a return to previous numbers, then yes; It will have been an anomaly. But hindsight is 20/20; The simple fact is that we cannot afford to assume that it is an anomaly, when it could be indicative of the death knell for the current system of doing things.

 

To put it bluntly, the current Contest System is on life support. Leaving it this way will sentence it to a long, slow decline until it fails entirely. Do we have any way of proving that the Judging System will work? No, of course not. This is a hypothetical discussion, there isn't any way to prove much of anything. What we can do is rely on precedence, which gives the system a fair chance of success, if tried. I encourage you to look at how this discussion is organized, with regards to opinion, as well; Many more people are in favor of giving the Judging System a try than there are people who wish to keep the system the same.

 

You use the analogy of an old car; It's apt. You may try everything you can to fix that car, but eventually it's going to wear out, and one day, break down entirely, stranding you without transportation.

[The Lorax]

So better to replace a few parts in order to save the whole thing?

 

I think it's probably worth a try, at least. There are potential problems and it might well turn out to be a disaster, but if it does we can always switch back, and do so fast (we've already heard a lot about how a contest system would allow things that don't work to be quickly switched out). If the new system does turn out fine, that's great. If it doesn't, we won't have lost too much, and at least we can stop having this debate every few months.

 

On whether or not this contest is an anomaly, I can take a reasonably confident guess (though, as you say, Simon, not be completely sure) that it is. I know I haven't been around ,much the last few months, but it doesn't seem that we've had a mass exodus of players or something to cause such a massive drop. Most of the crowd who submit an RPG every few contests is still here. It could just be bad timing combined with a slow, downward trend and maybe a couple of other small factors that have all hit us at once.

And even if it is the new norm, we shouldn't take it as such for the same reasons as above. We'd need hindsight to be sure that it was the contest system giving up the ghost and so take immediate action to change it.

[The Lorax]

Neither the request topic not the planning topic seemed like the right place to post this, so it goes here, I guess.

 

With the introduction of the new judging system, will the judged games begin right away or wait until the beginning of October when the current games expire? Also on that topic, the current games will still get their four months, right? CitD should be finished up by then, but just in case I'll have to re-submit it to get that time, I wanted to ask here.

[GSR]

New games can begin immediately.  You're right in that the period for existing games isn't quite up yet; we'll let that run out, per the contest rules, but after that we'll likely be taking a look at these RPGs and asking the hosts to re-submit.  I've made this clearer in the request topic.

[25K Now!]

That sounds nice. Don't think Ultimate City can last another run anyway.

[NorikSigma]

That sounds nice. Don't think Ultimate City can last another run anyway.

Sadly

:'(