Advice/Help A little new to this whole text-based roleplaying thing! How do y'all come up with plots?

[AstralAcademyStarla]

This might seem like a totally silly message. My bad if it does~! But, I feel totally lost when it comes to all this!

For some context, my roleplaying background is exclusively from tabletop games (like D&D but, not that system specifically!) where the heavy lifting of 'plot making' is done mostly by the game system, and the conflict of the roleplay is driven by say, a GM, or the dice rolls. Soooo, when it comes to something that isn't that...

Do people tend to come up with vague ideas like pairings then plot out a story to play through? Or is it more like improv? And how much of a story do people usually like from posts asking for roleplay? (so I don't sound totally unprepared when people are hoping for a full idea!)

Thanks in advance for any replies~!

 

[spookie ayumi]

This might seem like a totally silly message. My bad if it does~! But, I feel totally lost when it comes to all this!

For some context, my roleplaying background is exclusively from tabletop games (like D&D but, not that system specifically!) where the heavy lifting of 'plot making' is done mostly by the game system, and the conflict of the roleplay is driven by say, a GM, or the dice rolls. Soooo, when it comes to something that isn't that...

Do people tend to come up with vague ideas like pairings then plot out a story to play through? Or is it more like improv? And how much of a story do people usually like from posts asking for roleplay? (so I don't sound totally unprepared when people are hoping for a full idea!)

Thanks in advance for any replies~!

well usually most people will give a starting scene or you and ur rp partner while think of a nice starting scene after talking about what characters and or OCS you'll be using for sid story then usually from the starting plot its improv. and sometimes you can ask like in parentheses (like this when your talking out of character in an rp) about any ideas you would like to happen or you think would be cool for the plot.

 

[spookie ayumi]

or sometime2 separate chats will be made one to talk about the rp and one for the rp and any thing you think would be cool you send in the chat that talks about the rp while the chat for the rp is strictly the rp so no confusion happens

 

[spookie ayumi]

also if you wanna get more practice I don't mind doing a short rp with ya just to get ya started!

 

[Charismeur]

Welcome to text-based Roleplaying!

(*＾▽＾)／

None of your questions are "silly", so I hope that can put your mind at ease. I've spent many years in text-based Roleplaying, so I can't imagine how Tabletop works. Kudos to you for branching out! To answer your actual questions, the simple answer is that it varies. I've seen some folks on here just list fandoms or pairings (usually in 1x1 ads) while others have fully fleshed plots (usually group ads from what I've seen, but there are some in 1x1 too!) with lore and all. I truly don't think there is a "wrong way" to go about it, but maybe taking some looking at Interest Checks here could help give you a better idea of what you wanna aim for?

 

[Idea]

For some context, my roleplaying background is exclusively from tabletop games (like D&D but, not that system specifically!) where the heavy lifting of 'plot making' is done mostly by the game system, and the conflict of the roleplay is driven by say, a GM, or the dice rolls. Soooo, when it comes to something that isn't that...

As someone who has done both tabletop roleplaying (from player and GM side) and does text-based/play-by-post/forum roleplaying, the differences are smaller than you might think.

Perhaps it will help to think of things this way:

1x1 roleplays (this is a roleplay between two partner players and nobody else) are pretty much a homebrew campaign where both players are pretty laissez-faire GMs. Both players have the power to control the world, NPCs, events, outcomes, and pretty much everything else except each other's characters (specifics may vary but I'll get to that). As a general rule players can make whatever happen and at most they may want the partner's approval for certain things.

Group roleplays can vary a bit more, but they are again largely like a homebrew campaign - they have a GM and players within a game they run. Now the degree of control a GM exerts can vary a lot, and GMs having a character themselves is not as uncommon not as frowned upon in forum roleplaying as it is in tabletop. Still otherwise things are very similar.

Either which way, you still have a GM or at least GM stand-ins that come up with the plot in a way that any homebrew GM would. The main difference in terms of plot development is the lack of a system to guide or restrain possibilities (normally). These will usually be added in the way that one would when writing a story. Rather than mechanical constraints and pre-written enemies or dice rolling, you'll usually find grounding/realism/rule-of-cool approaches, worldbuilding, information sources like character sheets or lore threads, and player interests dictating what can and does happen or exist and how.

Naturally this isn't the end of the differences though, but many differences will be down to the specifics of how the roleplay is set up and preferences of those involved. Some of these will be closer to what tabletop roleplaying is typically and others more distant. I already talked about how GMs often have a character in their own RP, but this isn't always the case. Another example is response pacing: Some RPs play out in sessions, with quick-fire responses that have the live organic improvisation that you'd see at a table (or group chat for the online equivalent), while many others play out slower with responses not expected to come immediately or even necessarily soon but in term taking more time to think about and formulate them.

If any of this sounds intimidating (though I assure you it isn't nearly as complicated as it sounds. It's like describing the precise process of walking - it's a simple thing that's complicated to properly describe) there are several things you can do. For example, you could start with something simpler like a small fantasy RP where two characters go on a typical adventure. Very small, simple, contained plot and setting that can be expanded if you start feeling more comfortable with it all. Another possibility is just joining a group RP with a more hands-on GM. Be on a look out for interest checks with GMs that give a lot of lore info and respond to questions quickly and thoroughly. Lastly you could aim for specifically RPs that use a tabletop system you are familiar with. RPN does have a dice subforum and even outside of it plenty of people use existing or custom tabletop systems for their RPs, so it could get you used to this roleplaying format within a roleplay with which you are more used to.

Do people tend to come up with vague ideas like pairings then plot out a story to play through? Or is it more like improv? And how much of a story do people usually like from posts asking for roleplay? (so I don't sound totally unprepared when people are hoping for a full idea!)

Hopefully the way I described it before already conveyed how things can play out, but to add to it, there's a general rule to have some kind of premise in terms of roleplay. This can vary, sometimes it's literally just some vague context about how two characters meet (e.g. "in a bar") sometimes the pitch is a pairing or fandom someone wants to roleplay. It's typically better received to have at least a small premise actually plotted out though. You're pitching your idea to someone: You at least want them to know what the premise it's about, what's fun about it and what else may be important. Beyond that though people do things very differently and there's hardly a "right" way to go about it (as Charismeur mentioned), though I'd advise to keep in mind who you are trying to appeal to. You're going to have a hard time appealing to very descriptive players if the extent of your input isn't even a handful of lines.

Hope this helps. Best of luck and happy RPing!

 

[Chiester]

I dislike the idea of pairings as i find it too simple.

When coming up with plots I try to think of a general concept, like a popular trope (hounted school, isekai, magical girls, murder gone wrong), and just try to put a twist to it thats interesting to me.

The idea just comes out naturally after.

 

[spookie ayumi]

I dislike the idea of pairings as i find it too simple.

When coming up with plots I try to think of a general concept, like a popular trope (hounted school, isekai, magical girls, murder gone wrong), and just try to put a twist to it thats interesting to me.

The idea just comes out naturally after.

i think wed be a good rp partner for me! can I dm you and maybe we can think of an original plot to rp!

 

[Chiester]

i think wed be a good rp partner for me! can I dm you and maybe we can think of an original plot to rp!

Heck yeah. Hit me up!

 

[Dragonearuss]

As someone who has done both tabletop roleplaying (from player and GM side) and does text-based/play-by-post/forum roleplaying, the differences are smaller than you might think.

Perhaps it will help to think of things this way:

1x1 roleplays (this is a roleplay between two partner players and nobody else) are pretty much a homebrew campaign where both players are pretty laissez-faire GMs. Both players have the power to control the world, NPCs, events, outcomes, and pretty much everything else except each other's characters (specifics may vary but I'll get to that). As a general rule players can make whatever happen and at most they may want the partner's approval for certain things.

Group roleplays can vary a bit more, but they are again largely like a homebrew campaign - they have a GM and players within a game they run. Now the degree of control a GM exerts can vary a lot, and GMs having a character themselves is not as uncommon not as frowned upon in forum roleplaying as it is in tabletop. Still otherwise things are very similar.

Either which way, you still have a GM or at least GM stand-ins that come up with the plot in a way that any homebrew GM would. The main difference in terms of plot development is the lack of a system to guide or restrain possibilities (normally). These will usually be added in the way that one would when writing a story. Rather than mechanical constraints and pre-written enemies or dice rolling, you'll usually find grounding/realism/rule-of-cool approaches, worldbuilding, information sources like character sheets or lore threads, and player interests dictating what can and does happen or exist and how.

Naturally this isn't the end of the differences though, but many differences will be down to the specifics of how the roleplay is set up and preferences of those involved. Some of these will be closer to what tabletop roleplaying is typically and others more distant. I already talked about how GMs often have a character in their own RP, but this isn't always the case. Another example is response pacing: Some RPs play out in sessions, with quick-fire responses that have the live organic improvisation that you'd see at a table (or group chat for the online equivalent), while many others play out slower with responses not expected to come immediately or even necessarily soon but in term taking more time to think about and formulate them.

If any of this sounds intimidating (though I assure you it isn't nearly as complicated as it sounds. It's like describing the precise process of walking - it's a simple thing that's complicated to properly describe) there are several things you can do. For example, you could start with something simpler like a small fantasy RP where two characters go on a typical adventure. Very small, simple, contained plot and setting that can be expanded if you start feeling more comfortable with it all. Another possibility is just joining a group RP with a more hands-on GM. Be on a look out for interest checks with GMs that give a lot of lore info and respond to questions quickly and thoroughly. Lastly you could aim for specifically RPs that use a tabletop system you are familiar with. RPN does have a dice subforum and even outside of it plenty of people use existing or custom tabletop systems for their RPs, so it could get you used to this roleplaying format within a roleplay with which you are more used to.




Hopefully the way I described it before already conveyed how things can play out, but to add to it, there's a general rule to have some kind of premise in terms of roleplay. This can vary, sometimes it's literally just some vague context about how two characters meet (e.g. "in a bar") sometimes the pitch is a pairing or fandom someone wants to roleplay. It's typically better received to have at least a small premise actually plotted out though. You're pitching your idea to someone: You at least want them to know what the premise it's about, what's fun about it and what else may be important. Beyond that though people do things very differently and there's hardly a "right" way to go about it (as Charismeur mentioned), though I'd advise to keep in mind who you are trying to appeal to. You're going to have a hard time appealing to very descriptive players if the extent of your input isn't even a handful of lines.

Hope this helps. Best of luck and happy RPing!

This is the kind of thing I do wish was sat down and explained to me ages ago in my life. I had some bad rp experiences, so I tried to move on to dnd thinking it would go better. All of my experiences in both were very negative due to who I was with, to the point of my understanding of both of these concepts being HEAVILY skewered and not well understood. I was never given control or the ability to discuss two-sided by my partners or DM/GMs on what was going on. Usually got told 'your idea is stupid' if I even DID get some feedback. I'm not even getting into half of what my games even boiled into as it isn't relevant here.

No wonder I'm so big about trying to communicate nowadays.

Anyway, for a more relevant answer; personally? Talk it out between your partner (or partners.) I hear some of the best experiences are people piling on top of ideas they already had and were interested in. I also suggest the chatter-channel ordeal. If you have two people who have a good interest aligned the both of you will find a good amount of creative juices and get something going. Or at the very least, get a framework to work with. I find my ability to interact is sometimes capped by the emotions or capabilities of my character and know I have some weaknesses when I am out of that so I'll experiment sometimes. Try not to take it TOO serious or you will be disappointed - it's a group activity after all. I'm still getting used to my own swaps too.

 

[Idea]

This is the kind of thing I do wish was sat down and explained to me ages ago in my life.

May I ask which part you mean, specifically?

 

[Dragonearuss]

May I ask which part you mean, specifically?

All of it?

If I had to be more particular,
You made loose comparisons to already understood concepts in tabletop ( ones that people take pretty seriously in my experience - at core DM/GM position is shared for one.) This one was, when I made my first steps in that kind of area, one of the most difficult and daunting distinctions in roleplay. Who does what.
That you both come up with things as long as you aren't restricting each other and can talk it out on the side.

I had a lot of 'power imbalances' put on me and I was usually dragged through the mud with my partners - I at some point thought you were SUPPOSED to have one person who just does everything and you just have to sit and take it and that was normal. These obviously sound like red flags now but it's not something I understood or ever was taught or recognized or had any basis on with those I first interacted with. And for me, it wasn't just one place or one person.

I don't really feel like making a whole essay but I hope that helps...?

 

[Chiester]

Oof. I hate that you had to go through that.

The power imbalance thing is so real...

 

[Idea]

All of it?

If I had to be more particular,
You made loose comparisons to already understood concepts in tabletop ( ones that people take pretty seriously in my experience - at core DM/GM position is shared for one.) This one was, when I made my first steps in that kind of area, one of the most difficult and daunting distinctions in roleplay. Who does what.
That you both come up with things as long as you aren't restricting each other and can talk it out on the side.

I had a lot of 'power imbalances' put on me and I was usually dragged through the mud with my partners - I at some point thought you were SUPPOSED to have one person who just does everything and you just have to sit and take it and that was normal. These obviously sound like red flags now but it's not something I understood or ever was taught or recognized or had any basis on with those I first interacted with. And for me, it wasn't just one place or one person.

I don't really feel like making a whole essay but I hope that helps...?

It does. Thank you and sorry if I dragged out some bad memories. Just wanted to be sure of what you found most relevant since it's the kind of thing that's pertinent if the opportunity to hand out this kind of advice ever comes up again.