RPing with Everybody (or not)
-
@MisterBoring said in RPing with Everybody (or not):
You must have stopped reading when I mentioned “often times become hostile when asked to join RP / plot”. I have politely approached a duo like this and asked them if they’d like to come join a plot, as they were nominally part of the same faction as myself, and received a rather angry response. I’ve seen staffers on other games politely send a duo like this an invitation to a plot event and get told very plainly to get bent for trying to force them to play the game the staff intended to run. I’ve also witnessed these people throw tantrums when they were suddenly touched by plot they refused to be a part of.
Then that goes back to the part where I said: “Unless they are engaging in other problematic behavior” (paraphrased). If someone’s being rude to staff or throwing a tantrum or whatever, then talk to them about their inappropriate behavior and/or show them the door. Otherwise, they’re not actually doing any harm sitting their in their private room playing with each other. It’s not like the game is charged for the bandwidth of their bits (at least on any normal modern server).
@Trashcan said in RPing with Everybody (or not):
Best for the community of players that make up “the game”, which is all a Mush really is. The good of the community, of which all players participating in the game are a part, absolutely is the responsibility of each individual player.
We’ll just have to disagree then. When I join a game, I’m not signing up for any sort of responsibility to the greater good of that game, nor do I expect that of any players that join a game I’m running. It’s just a game. Players should be free to engage with it in whatever way meets their needs / playstyle (within the bounds of the rules of course).
-
When I join a game, I’m not signing up for any sort of responsibility to the greater good of that game, nor do I expect that of any players that join a game I’m running.
I agree but I think this is a really interesting topic. We talk about what people expect of staffers a lot, but what about the average expectation of players? I’d like to know if there are more folk that think that if you app into their game, you’d better get your ass out of your room with your pal(s) and dig into the plot.
Personally I could not be happier when I see a few folks on my games kinda’ doing their own thing, being chill, not causing issues. Less overhead for me, and someone’s enjoying themselves in a framework I built. I would rather have them than not have them!
-
@Yam I think the difference there is Staff have an expectation on them because they chose to either make a game or take a title of responsibility on said game. Setting expectations of players past the ‘follow game rules’ could make it seem like people have to earn the privilege to be on a game.
People don’t have to run or staff games. Players don’t have to play them. One choice gives you more control and influence in the overall dynamic though.
That being said, there’s some aspect of common sense. No you don’t have to play in scenes or participate or attend events. However, also don’t be the player that doesn’t do those things and then complains when your char doesn’t get certain plot/results/interaction.
-
@Faraday said in RPing with Everybody (or not):
@MisterBoring said in RPing with Everybody (or not):
You must have stopped reading when I mentioned “often times become hostile when asked to join RP / plot”. I have politely approached a duo like this and asked them if they’d like to come join a plot, as they were nominally part of the same faction as myself, and received a rather angry response. I’ve seen staffers on other games politely send a duo like this an invitation to a plot event and get told very plainly to get bent for trying to force them to play the game the staff intended to run. I’ve also witnessed these people throw tantrums when they were suddenly touched by plot they refused to be a part of.
Then that goes back to the part where I said: “Unless they are engaging in other problematic behavior” (paraphrased). If someone’s being rude to staff or throwing a tantrum or whatever, then talk to them about their inappropriate behavior and/or show them the door. Otherwise, they’re not actually doing any harm sitting their in their private room playing with each other. It’s not like the game is charged for the bandwidth of their bits (at least on any normal modern server).
Yeah. The example here isn’t problematic because a couple players sit in a room and only RP about each other. They’re problematic because they act nasty to people for extending an offer of RP/plot and get mad about plot impacting the game’s setting.
-
I think the couple or trio who only RP with one another are fine. If anything, it’s a matter of neatness. Having RP rooms available for unapproved pc-bits takes care of it.
It’s more an issue of what the gamerunner or GM rewards and what failings they rescue which characters from.
If Abelard RPs with everybody, he’ll probably find out a lot of stuff. After a month or so he knows that the Secret Code is Jon Bon Jovi’s shorts size, he heard it from Harold, who was there when Ignacio found The Letter. Abelard knows the shorts size because he got there and looked just before Evil Edith and Feral Faith burned down the Rock and Roll Underwear Museum. Bridget and Camille and Darius have the Useless Haliburton Attache Case and are looking desperately via +request to learn the Secret Code to open it, but Bridget, Camille and Darius only play with one another unless it’s an ST-run faction event. Is Ghormengast doomed because they’ll never figure out the code to the case, or will they learn it from Enrique the NPC and save everybody?
Or if plot drops are even split, did the ST give Bridget, Camille and Darius The Letter and the Useless Haliburton Attache Case?
-
I’m going to just quickly point a spotlight at another variant that hasn’t been mentioned so far (from what I saw): The player who wants to RP with everyone but can’t.
Whether it’s social anxiety, bad health, busy life – at least on Keys, we have a couple of folks who never or almost never actually RP. When they do, it’s one on one, with only a few chosen folks.
They’re not harming anyone, though. They just want to be part of the OOC community even if for whatever reasons they don’t have spoons to actively play. They hang around and chat, and in that, contribute to a friendly, welcoming atmosphere.
I think Roadspike put it well above; if the player isn’t hoarding plot or otherwise obstructing things for others, they’re still a gain for the game.
Any pronouns. Come to Chincoteague. We have ponies. http://keys.aresmush.com
-
@Yam said in RPing with Everybody (or not):
When I join a game, I’m not signing up for any sort of responsibility to the greater good of that game, nor do I expect that of any players that join a game I’m running.
I agree but I think this is a really interesting topic. We talk about what people expect of staffers a lot, but what about the average expectation of players? I’d like to know if there are more folk that think that if you app into their game, you’d better get your ass out of your room with your pal(s) and dig into the plot.
I don’t agree. The gamerunner has created a place for people to play on their terms, and players have an obligation to do that when they choose to show up there and continue showing up there.
Let’s say a person invites friends and acquaintances over for a board game night. Snacks and games are provided, just show up and have a good time. Most people come in, find a table, and join a game or start a new one with a few others. People are migrating between different games, pairing off in some cases for smaller games, getting up to get snacks and chatting in the kitchen, and generally socializing together.
One couple shows up, takes an Uno deck and a bag of popcorn, and adjourns to the basement. They stay down there most of the night, and occasionally other attendees overhear them talking or laughing but they’re not making a scene or anything. Is that a crime? No, of course not. Is it rude to the host and the other guests? At least a little, yes.
Of course there is an expectation that players behave a certain way and engage with the MU in a certain way. You have to accept the MU’s terms of service to even create a character on an Ares game, and by default maintain a certain level of activity to avoid the idle sweep. Every Ares game I can remember looking at has policies listed on what they expect from players. That obligation may be small, but it is not zero. Whether it compels anyone to behave a particular way is a personal matter. There is no active harm in not doing so, and I am not advocating for bans or repercussions for it. People are allowed to eat only candy if they want to. It’s better if they eat some vegetables, to use Yam’s phrasing.
I’m also not trying to say that people aren’t allowed to RP with their favorite people, or that they shouldn’t RP with them “too much”, because that’s stupid and toxic, and I’ve experienced that firsthand. I am only saying that if you show up and receive the benefits of the game (structure, etc), then perhaps you owe something in return, however small.
he/him
this machine kills fascists -
@L-B-Heuschkel said in RPing with Everybody (or not):
Whether it’s social anxiety, bad health, busy life – at least on Keys, we have a couple of folks who never or almost never actually RP. When they do, it’s one on one, with only a few chosen folks.
… I think Roadspike put it well above; if the player isn’t hoarding plot or otherwise obstructing things for others, they’re still a gain for the game.This 100%. The person who is only minimally participating is still participating! They are still bringing value, and they have the chance to participate more in the future if they choose to.
@Trashcan said in RPing with Everybody (or not):
Let’s say a person invites friends and acquaintances over for a board game night. Snacks and games are provided, just show up and have a good time. Most people come in, find a table, and join a game or start a new one with a few others. People are migrating between different games, pairing off in some cases for smaller games, getting up to get snacks and chatting in the kitchen, and generally socializing together.
One couple shows up, takes an Uno deck and a bag of popcorn, and adjourns to the basement. They stay down there most of the night, and occasionally other attendees overhear them talking or laughing but they’re not making a scene or anything. Is that a crime? No, of course not. Is it rude to the host and the other guests? At least a little, yes.
I don’t think that’s rude in the slightest. You even said that people were “pairing off in some cases for smaller games”. How is that any different from what the people in the basement were doing??? Unless the basement was off-limits for the party, or the people in the basement got snarky or rude when someone came down to see how they were doing, what on earth is the problem? They came, they played board games, no one was harmed. If I had a board game night and that happened, I’d be happy they came and had fun. Why do we need to wrongfun them for being less social?
-
@Faraday said in RPing with Everybody (or not):
Why do we need to wrongfun them for being less social?
Some people build games with specific expectations for players, specifically that they play socially with the rest of the players on the game (with exceptions for no-contact list people), and someone joining a game to play Uno in the basement with their BFF has either missed the cue that the game owner is trying to build a more social storytelling experience, or noticed the intent of the game owners and willfully chose to ignore it.
The people who miss that cue can sometimes be brought around to recognize that the intent isn’t to just let people do whatever (as with a lot of sandbox games) and aren’t wrong, they’re just out of place, or misdirected, which can be remedied with a casual conversation between them and staff.
The people who willingly ignore the intent of the game (to be a focused social plot driven story) are being rude to the staff and rest of the players, and definitely are wrong.
In any case, I think the point is that it’s perfectly acceptable for Staff to set expectations for play on their games. It’s perfectly acceptable for a player to look at Staff’s expectations, go “This isn’t for me” and leave. It’s also perfectly acceptable for Staff on a game to see players who aren’t meeting their expectations, and approach them politely and discuss the matter, and if they’re not able to reach an understanding, ask them to leave.
The big problem in my experience happens when Staff has expectations that they run with, players come in operating with no regard for that, and Staff doesn’t have the confidence to have that polite conversation. Then eventually you end up with a lot of players operating outside Staff expectations, Staff getting more and more frustrated by players not playing the game they’re trying to run, and it leads to rapid staff burnout and game closure.
Proud Member of the Pro-Mummy Alliance
-
@Trashcan I think player policies (rules) is different different from your version of player engagement, which you haven’t actually defined. I’d like to hear the cold hard requirements that you might expect from players and how you plan to enforce them. Hypothetically.
And if what you’re truly talking about is Wrong Fit… I mean, that’s it’s own discussion!
-
@Yam said in RPing with Everybody (or not):
And if what you’re truly talking about is Wrong Fit… I mean, that’s it’s own discussion!
I think that’s absolutely what’s being discussed.
The players who choose to play with only one or two others and ignore the entire game that’s going on around them are often a Wrong Fit for a game in my experience.
People who suffer from social anxiety type stuff (HI! I’m one of those people.) that often struggle to expand their regular RP circle can still contribute to a game in wonderful ways.
-
@MisterBoring said in RPing with Everybody (or not):
It’s also perfectly acceptable for Staff on a game to see players who aren’t meeting their expectations, and approach them politely and discuss the matter, and if they’re not able to reach an understanding, ask them to leave.
It is. On Keys, the requirement is, don’t idle out. Other games have tighter restrictions. Set it up the way you want your game to work. Much as I’m a laidback nature, it is on the potential new player to read your terms and conditions. The social contract they’re agreeing to, if you will.
-
I’d basically like someone to explain to me why having a truly, TRULY neutral player who generally RPs with 1-2 people is a NET LOSS to a game. I’d argue that this is even better than a solo player who just lurks. For THAT, you could make the case that they’re just farming XP or something, but personally I wouldn’t care. From what I can understand, ya’ll want a No Dead Weight policy, which seems like it’s usually applied to staffers.
If they are doing anything that somehow reaches you and informs you that they hate the theme and the setting sucks and everyone else sucks, that’s a player problem, not an engagement problem. As ever, it always comes back to the player problem.
I think we can all agree that it is perfectly acceptable for staff to create their own rules. I’m just trying to figure out why games might think a player engaging in this specific manner is a net loss, like they’re somehow taking up a slot that someone else more engaging would be utilizing.
-
@MisterBoring said in RPing with Everybody (or not):
someone joining a game to play Uno in the basement with their BFF has either missed the cue that the game owner is trying to build a more social storytelling experience, or noticed the intent of the game owners and willfully chose to ignore it.
If you’re going to expect players to somehow guess at your intent in creating a game, I think that’s inherently misguided.
There’s nothing wrong with setting expectations for your personal game based on your personal preferences. People can judge whether that’s the right game for them.
Like if you set up a board game night where you say “We’re going to play Settlers of Cataan together” and then someone wants to go play Uno in the basement - sure, that’s more of an issue. (Though there may still be a good reason, such as due to disability or neurodivergence - communication and understanding are key.)
But players aren’t psychic. And there are PLENTY of games out there that have no issue whatsoever with players who are just merrily playing by themselves and not causing any trouble.
-
@Yam I’m going to venture a guess that at least some of the reasoning is habit from the 1990s when it really did matter how many people were connected.
The MUD I played back then lagged to the molassis and random disconnects point when more than 50 people were online. So the guys standing around doing nothing were not in generally in favour with the rest of us.
However, this is not an issue today as far as I’m aware.
Any pronouns. Come to Chincoteague. We have ponies. http://keys.aresmush.com
-
@Faraday said in RPing with Everybody (or not):
If you’re going to expect players to somehow guess at your intent in creating a game, I think that’s inherently misguided.
I would never have them guess. In any future game I run, my intent will be documented in the game’s documentation, and pointed out on the front page of the game or in the initial room upon connection.
-
@MisterBoring said in RPing with Everybody (or not):
@Faraday said in RPing with Everybody (or not):
If you’re going to expect players to somehow guess at your intent in creating a game, I think that’s inherently misguided.
I would never have them guess. In any future game I run, my intent will be documented in the game’s documentation, and pointed out on the front page of the game or in the initial room upon connection.
OK but this thread as a whole is not about players who are willfully ignoring clearly stated rules of a particular game. We’re talking about general, tacit expectations for behavior in the broader MU community.
-
@L-B-Heuschkel Yeah, for me what comes to mind is RPI muds. I recall having to salute my captain on channel every time I logged in. It was just in the rules. I signed up for those rules. I can also sign up for enforced engagement (I think?) but the reasoning intrigues me.
-
@Yam said in RPing with Everybody (or not):
I can also sign up for enforced engagement (I think?) but the reasoning intrigues me.
I think the reasoning for some level of required player engagement comes out of home RPG games, or small group games. For example, you run a Star Trek game and invite 6 people to play. When it’s time to play you begin to tell a story of the crew of a Federation diplomacy vessel making headway into the Delta Quadrant. Five of your players engage with the story and the setting, while the sixth immediately walks into your den and starts talking about how his character is a Klingon warrior uncovering dishonorable criminals in the First City on Qo’noS. He isn’t technically hurting anything by doing so, but he is a distraction.
-
@Yam said in RPing with Everybody (or not):
I’d like to hear the cold hard requirements that you might expect from players and how you plan to enforce them. Hypothetically.
I don’t plan to enforce them and I don’t think that attempts should be made to enforce them. I’m arguing that it is better (for the game community, of which each player is a part) if individual players choose to RP outside of their core group of friends than if they do not. I’ve said a couple times that it’s not a crime, and I’m not sure that I’d even “have a polite conversation” with someone about it. It’s somewhat rude and people will notice it, but it’s not an infraction (unless specific game policies are being violated) or an indictment on their presence on the game.
