A forum-based RPG (some help, please)
Nah, from what I've experienced while roleplaying on muds, it's usually way more fun if the involved parties decides on the outcome themself..gives it more of a "telling-a-story-feeling".
Author
And I too enjoy games without dice and random numbers. I just so happened to be discussing aureliarpg.com with a friend and he was telling me how I could have this intriquite system of numbers and stuff and he would definitely play it - then I realized he just wanted MY site how HE wanted a game. Bastard.
Well there is something I would like to add, but I'm not sure how to execute it. I'd really like the players to have a sense of their character, so maybe they should have, duh, a character sheet. Since numbers and randomness are out of the question, to the left in their avatar box I would list their class, class-specific abilities, and their traits. I created the traits so that people could role-play characters that seemed a little more real.
Basically, for each class you can choose a certain amount of positive traits and a certain amount of negative traits.
The big strapping warrior might specialize with javelins but he can't fight up close very well.
The mage with the ability to memorize almost anything can't stand the color red, or is a terrible fighter, or is allergic to animals.
I'm trying to bring the characters alive a little and, hopefully, promoting more people to come play!
Well there is something I would like to add, but I'm not sure how to execute it. I'd really like the players to have a sense of their character, so maybe they should have, duh, a character sheet. Since numbers and randomness are out of the question, to the left in their avatar box I would list their class, class-specific abilities, and their traits. I created the traits so that people could role-play characters that seemed a little more real.
Basically, for each class you can choose a certain amount of positive traits and a certain amount of negative traits.
The big strapping warrior might specialize with javelins but he can't fight up close very well.
The mage with the ability to memorize almost anything can't stand the color red, or is a terrible fighter, or is allergic to animals.
I'm trying to bring the characters alive a little and, hopefully, promoting more people to come play!
Yeah, on further reflection, I started to think that using dice -- or randomized conflict resolution, really -- is probably not your best bet. As soon as you introduce that sort of element, you shift the emphasis towards "game" and away from "roleplaying."
Your "Getting Started" page, now that I've had a chance to read it, puts me off a bit. I'll go through and tell you my reactions, so you know why at least one potential player isn't signing up.
First paragraph: This is your first impression, at least for me. Not a particularly good one, at least for me...
"The first thing you should know about creating a character is this: creativity. The second thing, is this: creativity."
I'll agree with the first, but repeating it as the second (and last)? Don't you have anything else to say about it? And you don't elaborate on "creativity," either. You're right, but you're not being very helpful about it.
"Aurelia is not a game for those who are accustomed to being entertained. Rather, it serves as a challenge to those who are used to being the ones entertaining."
This implies, to me, that anyone who isn't already used to your style of play is unwelcome. I also think that roleplaying is about both entertaining and being entertained -- though you do get to that in the next sentence, it sort of contradicts what you're saying here.
"With a diverse group of writers and role-players here you should find the challenge -of- entertaining quite, well, entertaining."
The diverse group of writers and roleplayers would be... you, yourself, and you again? I checked the forum index, and so will any other new players. Be honest. Sell us on the possibilities of getting in on the beginning of a grand adventure, not the fine qualities of your nonexistent established userbase.
Moving on... "Avatar Badge"
Okay. You're putting this first, when to my mind, it's the least important aspect of a roleplaying board. And I'm an artist who probably would get around to drawing & scanning my characters, eventually.
Putting it first isn't a good idea, but making it a requirement is a terrible idea. You are excluding the people who don't have the graphical savvy to create a "150wX300h no ifs, ands, or buts" image. You are tacitly encouraging people to rip off other artist's artwork. You are setting up a situation where people will be judged, at least in part, on the quality of their portraits rather than their roleplaying.
And for what? "Your badge is important to the game because it helps people know who is posting."
If you're playing a web-based roleplaying game, presumably you can read. I repeat: This is a terrible, terrible idea.
Next up: "Your Class"
"I know you know what this is, just let me explain its uses here."
Not necessarily. Assuming that your players are familiar with the same game systems as you is usually not a good idea. Assuming your players are making the same assumptions about your setting is definitely a bad idea. I wasn't, which was the only reason I got as far as I did...
"For example, a monk is someone who studies the art of the body, so naturally a monk weilding a large axe wouldn't make sense. Likewise, someone who is a mage wouldn't be very proficient with weapons."
Oh. Look. It's another D&D rehash. Allow me to go quietly bang my head against that wall over there...
You asked for ideas on how to make a fun, playable game?
Creativity. Oh, yeah, and creativity.
But getting back to the specific topic at hand. Classes. Well, I just found out that they're optional, by reading "Read this first" on the classes & traits board. Of course, I actually read "Getting started: Creating a Character" first, which is where that information should be. Tell people that classes are optional before you even start talking about classes... although I'm not convinced they're actually necessary. That could be because you don't have a complete example yet, though, let alone a complete set.
Hopefully that will allow you to rethink the whole D&D-esque generic medieval fantasy thing, since you haven't invested much time into it.
Finally: "Traits."
"Traits are almost like a class, but they are not class-specific."
What?
Perhaps you meant "traits are similar to class benefits and restrictions, but they are not class-specific."
"There are two kinds of traits: Positive and Negative, usually under the pros and cons categories, respectively."
Usually? Where are they otherwise? And where are "the pros and cons categories?" (Presumably they will be in the classes and traits forum, but you might want to say so.)
"If classes are a way of describing your character, then traits would be a way to shape and finalize their personality."
Fine... except that you proceed to give an example that has nothing to do with personality: Fishing. You're obviously combining what I'd call "skills" with what I'd call "traits" -- things like "hot-tempered" or "honorable," things that don't fall into you "above average, skilled, or excellent" classification at all.
I think you need to rethink this a bit.
"Excellent traits might look very appetizing, but there is a small catch to all of this: for every trait you have (there should be a total of three so far), you need to have an equal and opposite trait. That means that if you have Above Average Thing1, then you need to have a Below Average Thing2."
I understand what you're trying to do with this, and in theory it's a good idea... but in practice, I think I'd find the implementation annoying. What if I want to have an "excellent" trait, and two "below average" traits? If you insist on doing it this way, at least set up a point-buy system, i.e., an "excellent" trait costs four points, a "below average" gives you two points, or something along those lines.
Oh, one more thing: "The Template"
"<bio, if any>"
If you're going to require anything, that's what you should require. It relates directly to roleplaying, and it's the best way to gauge a propective player's writing skill and roleplaying style, short of actually seeing them roleplay. If someone is writing an obvious "hero" character with no real flaws and improbable skills, it'll show in their bio. You'll be able to explain why that isn't appropriate to the game, and ask them to revise it. It's a lot harder to revise your game's continuity once a player like that has mucked it up.
"<race>"
If you're including race, then you need to describe your races somewhere...
"If somewhere in your past you were beaten and tortured by orcs, then you probably wont take a liking to half-orc players."
Oh, that's right, you're using Tolkien's races, as channeled by Gary Gygax. *coughCreativitycough*
*sigh*
Fun, playable game? Start with a fun, playable setting... and try a little of your own advice. Creativity: It's not just for players. :P
Your "Getting Started" page, now that I've had a chance to read it, puts me off a bit. I'll go through and tell you my reactions, so you know why at least one potential player isn't signing up.
First paragraph: This is your first impression, at least for me. Not a particularly good one, at least for me...
"The first thing you should know about creating a character is this: creativity. The second thing, is this: creativity."
I'll agree with the first, but repeating it as the second (and last)? Don't you have anything else to say about it? And you don't elaborate on "creativity," either. You're right, but you're not being very helpful about it.
"Aurelia is not a game for those who are accustomed to being entertained. Rather, it serves as a challenge to those who are used to being the ones entertaining."
This implies, to me, that anyone who isn't already used to your style of play is unwelcome. I also think that roleplaying is about both entertaining and being entertained -- though you do get to that in the next sentence, it sort of contradicts what you're saying here.
"With a diverse group of writers and role-players here you should find the challenge -of- entertaining quite, well, entertaining."
The diverse group of writers and roleplayers would be... you, yourself, and you again? I checked the forum index, and so will any other new players. Be honest. Sell us on the possibilities of getting in on the beginning of a grand adventure, not the fine qualities of your nonexistent established userbase.
Moving on... "Avatar Badge"
Okay. You're putting this first, when to my mind, it's the least important aspect of a roleplaying board. And I'm an artist who probably would get around to drawing & scanning my characters, eventually.
Putting it first isn't a good idea, but making it a requirement is a terrible idea. You are excluding the people who don't have the graphical savvy to create a "150wX300h no ifs, ands, or buts" image. You are tacitly encouraging people to rip off other artist's artwork. You are setting up a situation where people will be judged, at least in part, on the quality of their portraits rather than their roleplaying.
And for what? "Your badge is important to the game because it helps people know who is posting."
If you're playing a web-based roleplaying game, presumably you can read. I repeat: This is a terrible, terrible idea.
Next up: "Your Class"
"I know you know what this is, just let me explain its uses here."
Not necessarily. Assuming that your players are familiar with the same game systems as you is usually not a good idea. Assuming your players are making the same assumptions about your setting is definitely a bad idea. I wasn't, which was the only reason I got as far as I did...
"For example, a monk is someone who studies the art of the body, so naturally a monk weilding a large axe wouldn't make sense. Likewise, someone who is a mage wouldn't be very proficient with weapons."
Oh. Look. It's another D&D rehash. Allow me to go quietly bang my head against that wall over there...
You asked for ideas on how to make a fun, playable game?
Creativity. Oh, yeah, and creativity.
But getting back to the specific topic at hand. Classes. Well, I just found out that they're optional, by reading "Read this first" on the classes & traits board. Of course, I actually read "Getting started: Creating a Character" first, which is where that information should be. Tell people that classes are optional before you even start talking about classes... although I'm not convinced they're actually necessary. That could be because you don't have a complete example yet, though, let alone a complete set.
Hopefully that will allow you to rethink the whole D&D-esque generic medieval fantasy thing, since you haven't invested much time into it.
Finally: "Traits."
"Traits are almost like a class, but they are not class-specific."
What?
Perhaps you meant "traits are similar to class benefits and restrictions, but they are not class-specific."
"There are two kinds of traits: Positive and Negative, usually under the pros and cons categories, respectively."
Usually? Where are they otherwise? And where are "the pros and cons categories?" (Presumably they will be in the classes and traits forum, but you might want to say so.)
"If classes are a way of describing your character, then traits would be a way to shape and finalize their personality."
Fine... except that you proceed to give an example that has nothing to do with personality: Fishing. You're obviously combining what I'd call "skills" with what I'd call "traits" -- things like "hot-tempered" or "honorable," things that don't fall into you "above average, skilled, or excellent" classification at all.
I think you need to rethink this a bit.
"Excellent traits might look very appetizing, but there is a small catch to all of this: for every trait you have (there should be a total of three so far), you need to have an equal and opposite trait. That means that if you have Above Average Thing1, then you need to have a Below Average Thing2."
I understand what you're trying to do with this, and in theory it's a good idea... but in practice, I think I'd find the implementation annoying. What if I want to have an "excellent" trait, and two "below average" traits? If you insist on doing it this way, at least set up a point-buy system, i.e., an "excellent" trait costs four points, a "below average" gives you two points, or something along those lines.
Oh, one more thing: "The Template"
"<bio, if any>"
If you're going to require anything, that's what you should require. It relates directly to roleplaying, and it's the best way to gauge a propective player's writing skill and roleplaying style, short of actually seeing them roleplay. If someone is writing an obvious "hero" character with no real flaws and improbable skills, it'll show in their bio. You'll be able to explain why that isn't appropriate to the game, and ask them to revise it. It's a lot harder to revise your game's continuity once a player like that has mucked it up.
"<race>"
If you're including race, then you need to describe your races somewhere...
"If somewhere in your past you were beaten and tortured by orcs, then you probably wont take a liking to half-orc players."
Oh, that's right, you're using Tolkien's races, as channeled by Gary Gygax. *coughCreativitycough*
*sigh*
Fun, playable game? Start with a fun, playable setting... and try a little of your own advice. Creativity: It's not just for players. :P
Quote:Original post by Logodae
Your "Getting Started" page, now that I've had a chance to read it, puts me off a bit.
You beat me to it, but this was my first impression. I'd strongly recommend getting rid of the word "crap" and anything crude like it. When you're asking people to risk being embarrassed (creativity except for the really gifted always has this risk at some level) you want to create an inviting atmosphere; so I'd get rid of any judgement laden words you can find.
Quote:
"Aurelia is not a game for those who are accustomed to being entertained. Rather, it serves as a challenge to those who are used to being the ones entertaining."
This implies, to me, that anyone who isn't already used to your style of play is unwelcome. I also think that roleplaying is about both entertaining and being entertained -- though you do get to that in the next sentence, it sort of contradicts what you're saying here.
I also agree with this, it's very judgement laden and unfriendly. If you're not careful, it will convey that this is how people will be treated when contributing.
Quote:
It's another D&D rehash.
...
Hopefully that will allow you to rethink the whole D&D-esque generic medieval fantasy thing, since you haven't invested much time into it.
While I don't see anything wrong with giving people another serving of what they really like, I do have to agree with this: What are you doing that will give players something they can't get somehwere else. Now I know alot of freeform folks play using IRC or chat rooms. Can you give them something different and turn the lack of real-time interaction to your favor?
What spin can you give on the traditional medieval world that others haven't done, or that has been done rarely? I'm not a fantasy guy, so alot of my suggestions may be lame, but what about making everyone dragons, or making the setting a mix of underground oceans and islands, or drawing from non-European mythologies to help offer something new?
Just some thoughts.
Author
Wow... That was a lot to read. And a lot to soak in.
I suppose I fell into the whole "wanting to be up and running before I put on my clothes" thing. Know what I mean? Yeah. I think I need to work a bit.
Thank you both.
I suppose I fell into the whole "wanting to be up and running before I put on my clothes" thing. Know what I mean? Yeah. I think I need to work a bit.
Thank you both.
Well, I just came back to this thread thinking I should probably rephrase my comments a bit, so I'm glad my tone didn't completely put you off. Honestly, I can see why you'd think that avatar badges were a neat idea, although I do stand by my objections. The appeal of generic fantasy is still a mystery to me, but that's just me... I know there are lots and lots of people who apparently can't get enough of it. So maybe you are better off using such a setting. You'll probably find more people willing to play in it than oddballs like me who'd be delighted to find a completely original setting. It's quite possible that the average player wouldn't want to absorb that much new information, anyhow.
Either way, you do have your work cut out for you -- and I entirely sympathise with your desire to get things "up and running." You might consider recruiting some help, because once you've figured out the basics of your system, you're still going to need a lot of words -- even beyond races, classes, traits, you're probably going to want to set up locations, NPCs, and some history. As an added advantage, anyone involved in creating your world (or city, depending on how ambitious you are ;) will probably be pretty interested in playing in it, too, giving you a core group which can then get actual roleplay up and running, too.
For some higher-level questioning-of-assumptions, you might check out The Forge. (The forums look to be pretty active, too.) I only recently discovered it myself, but it looks interesting. Definitely more focused on tabletop, but honestly, I think play-by-post would probably work well with more of a tabletop feel. Too often when I've seen (and participated) in it, the lack of a GM has seemed to be its downfall. I'm not saying that cooperative play is a bad idea, or that the GM should have to narrate every instance of conflict resolution, but too often people were sitting around with nothing to do, or starting plots that went nowhere, and/or revolved around themselves, with few hooks for other players.
Anyhow. I hope at least some of this is helpful, and that your game turns out well. And by "well" I mean "something you'll enjoy running and people will enjoy playing" not "free of any hint of derivitive concepts." ;)
Either way, you do have your work cut out for you -- and I entirely sympathise with your desire to get things "up and running." You might consider recruiting some help, because once you've figured out the basics of your system, you're still going to need a lot of words -- even beyond races, classes, traits, you're probably going to want to set up locations, NPCs, and some history. As an added advantage, anyone involved in creating your world (or city, depending on how ambitious you are ;) will probably be pretty interested in playing in it, too, giving you a core group which can then get actual roleplay up and running, too.
For some higher-level questioning-of-assumptions, you might check out The Forge. (The forums look to be pretty active, too.) I only recently discovered it myself, but it looks interesting. Definitely more focused on tabletop, but honestly, I think play-by-post would probably work well with more of a tabletop feel. Too often when I've seen (and participated) in it, the lack of a GM has seemed to be its downfall. I'm not saying that cooperative play is a bad idea, or that the GM should have to narrate every instance of conflict resolution, but too often people were sitting around with nothing to do, or starting plots that went nowhere, and/or revolved around themselves, with few hooks for other players.
Anyhow. I hope at least some of this is helpful, and that your game turns out well. And by "well" I mean "something you'll enjoy running and people will enjoy playing" not "free of any hint of derivitive concepts." ;)
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
