How do you feel about Novella roleplay?
- Thread starter Dark Half
- Start date
ApfelSeine
Murder by Numbers 🏳️🌈🖥️
I've been doing a smidge more discord dice based rps, which are closer to 1-2 line responses to match pace with other players. But when I used to do novella length rps, I found that no one gave much of a damn as long as I had a long enough, descriptive response that moved things along. So people let me get away with 2-3 paragraphs as long as I had something for them to respond to. That's what really counts is having a response that moves things along, while showing that you're putting in at least enough effort that shows you are invested in the game.
Some folks get annoyed thinking that those who write less are putting in less effort, but if you're invested in an rp and moving things along, their focus is on the rp, not checking your word count. Though if I play as a GM I get a bit crazy long with my responses
Honestly I take no issue with long responses, other than when it is padded it in a way that doesn't really address the post I made. Or doesn't leave me room to respond to all the questions a character asks, since I'm not a fan of rewriting the entire post another player just posted in order to address all the points they made (often it makes the rp look like gobbledygook). I like having room to respond.
One fun thing I like to do is go back and forth writing chapter responses with another player, but that requires a partner to know your character well enough to write their dialogue for you. Probably a weird way to go about it, since RPN tends to have a fairly classic forum style in most games. I do like the forum style too though.
In short, I kinda find minimum lengths to be fairly arbitrary as long as you're showing that you're invested in the game and making an effort. Unless a GM or player complains though, I tend to write the amount I want. I find if everyone tries to hit a word count it can leave certain points unaddressed, or disallow players from responding to what might lead to an interesting conversation.
Some folks get annoyed thinking that those who write less are putting in less effort, but if you're invested in an rp and moving things along, their focus is on the rp, not checking your word count. Though if I play as a GM I get a bit crazy long with my responses
Honestly I take no issue with long responses, other than when it is padded it in a way that doesn't really address the post I made. Or doesn't leave me room to respond to all the questions a character asks, since I'm not a fan of rewriting the entire post another player just posted in order to address all the points they made (often it makes the rp look like gobbledygook). I like having room to respond.
One fun thing I like to do is go back and forth writing chapter responses with another player, but that requires a partner to know your character well enough to write their dialogue for you. Probably a weird way to go about it, since RPN tends to have a fairly classic forum style in most games. I do like the forum style too though.
In short, I kinda find minimum lengths to be fairly arbitrary as long as you're showing that you're invested in the game and making an effort. Unless a GM or player complains though, I tend to write the amount I want. I find if everyone tries to hit a word count it can leave certain points unaddressed, or disallow players from responding to what might lead to an interesting conversation.
ashwynne
🌧 pluviophile 🌧 art: peritwinkle
I think this whole sub-argument going on here is a bit silly.
Stop thinking of it as "length requirements = bad" and start thinking of it in terms of artwork.
Some people want realism: a cabin in the woods that is exactly what you see. Others like abstract: a great deal more interpretation is needed.
It's not a perfect example but it's good enough to get the point across, I think lol.
Stating in a search thread that you have a paragraph/word minimum is no different than saying "I prefer abstract art over realism," it's simply a way of getting across your preferences to a stranger in the same field as you who may or may not be interested in working with you. It's a quick way to weed out who may or may not be compatible with you and has nothing to do with quality or elitism. Just like I wouldn't invite someone over for tea when they abjectly hate it and will only drink coffee.
RP is a hobby, not a profession, there is no objective right way or wrong way to do it. Just like there's no objective style of art that is better or worse than others. It's all subjective. And because you're dealing with real human beings and not unreasonable automatons... exceptions can often be made. A writer who prefers novella style responses may put aside their normal requirements for a partner who doesn't always meet them but can put in good quality responses.
The problem, I think, is that you (
Jet
in this case) are equating concise with 'best.' Maybe concise writing is what you prefer, but detailed writing has its place as an art form in and of itself. There's nothing wrong or unreasonable about people wanting to write with someone who mirrors their interest in detailed writing. It doesn't turn it into 'homework' or make it 'unreasonable' because no one is compelled to join or approach the person putting forth these requirements. The ones who are going to bite are the ones looking for similar things... and so a beautiful partnership is born lol.
Personally I see this "elitism" on both sides. Some people act like people who write incredibly detailed posts are aimless buffoons who can't figure out the point they're trying to get across. Other people act like people who write concisely have no capability for imagination or evoking vibrant scenes. Neither statement is usually true, they're just different stylistically and that's completely okay.
Stop thinking of it as "length requirements = bad" and start thinking of it in terms of artwork.
Some people want realism: a cabin in the woods that is exactly what you see. Others like abstract: a great deal more interpretation is needed.
It's not a perfect example but it's good enough to get the point across, I think lol.
Stating in a search thread that you have a paragraph/word minimum is no different than saying "I prefer abstract art over realism," it's simply a way of getting across your preferences to a stranger in the same field as you who may or may not be interested in working with you. It's a quick way to weed out who may or may not be compatible with you and has nothing to do with quality or elitism. Just like I wouldn't invite someone over for tea when they abjectly hate it and will only drink coffee.
RP is a hobby, not a profession, there is no objective right way or wrong way to do it. Just like there's no objective style of art that is better or worse than others. It's all subjective. And because you're dealing with real human beings and not unreasonable automatons... exceptions can often be made. A writer who prefers novella style responses may put aside their normal requirements for a partner who doesn't always meet them but can put in good quality responses.
The problem, I think, is that you (
Jet
in this case) are equating concise with 'best.' Maybe concise writing is what you prefer, but detailed writing has its place as an art form in and of itself. There's nothing wrong or unreasonable about people wanting to write with someone who mirrors their interest in detailed writing. It doesn't turn it into 'homework' or make it 'unreasonable' because no one is compelled to join or approach the person putting forth these requirements. The ones who are going to bite are the ones looking for similar things... and so a beautiful partnership is born lol.Personally I see this "elitism" on both sides. Some people act like people who write incredibly detailed posts are aimless buffoons who can't figure out the point they're trying to get across. Other people act like people who write concisely have no capability for imagination or evoking vibrant scenes. Neither statement is usually true, they're just different stylistically and that's completely okay.
Idea
The Pun Tyrant
As I've said, I did try that- but for the various reasons I outlined in my previous post it proved innefective. I really wish there was a better way, but if there is, I haven't found it yet.
Oh, no I understand what you're saying, believe me. My point with the reduction is that the requirements aren't arbitrary, they are a response to the patterns a person experiences, which was to build on previous point about them requirements being the means to an end and not the end in of itself.
A) Yes, a better writer needs less words, this does not necessarily mean they will use less words. However, even then, this is a better writer writing the same content. Writing requirements are meant to pull more content, not the same content with more words. I am well aware that, in practice, there are many supposed "novella" or "detailed" players who do in fact just pile on the same kind of content and bloat their descriptions. It's foolish to throw away the baby with the bath water though.
B) For someone who writes and asks for six paragraphs, yes, there are six paragraphs worth of content. I don't personally see that much, but in the same way I see more content in a situation than many people I know, I wouldn't be surprised to learn of many people who do see way more than I do. How much content you see in a scene factors in tastes, because those directly result in what elements of content one values. Someone who doesn't care about what characters wear will not think of describing it, even if it would fit the scene, because to them its worthless. But someone who loves architecture might spend paragraphs upon paragraphs detailing on the stone walls of a castle. Now, requirements don't usually pertain to anything this specific, but these were just examples of content one might miss.
I'll adress rapid fire dialogue in a moment, but rapid action there absolutely is a lot of content there to explore. In fact in an earlier response I even talked about it:
C) Judge what? You keep bringing up this idea of judging, but who's judging? I also mentioned this before, but I've seen maybe 2 people in seven years who made a direct, non-negative link between quality and length.
What's good in one style though, is not good for another style, because the styles have different goals and values. You put a high prize in efficiency (such as myself) don't put it that high in the priority list, it's not a strict isolated indicator of quality.
You're right, having a mature conversation isn't tyranical. It's very impractical. If I have to explain to ask someone they aren't advanced enough without any fixed criteria for doing so, every time they make a post that doesn't meet that spontaneous unspoken criteria we wouldn't do anything else in the RP (and, as I know from experience, even if I do have it fixed and written, it's often still quite impratical).4. Having a mature conversation about quality expectations isn't tyrannical. Forcing people to write six paragraphs interaction posts isn't tyrannical either, it's comical. Sorry, couldn't resist being toxic once in my post
What I do find tyrannical is when that conversation doesn't happen, and its just a GM demanding players increase their detail without havign given specific guidelines that are being infringed upon. When a GM ties their authority to their whim, making demands that players change their hard work for criteria they were never presented with.
I will concede that yes, the dialogue in novella roleplays isn't all that realistic. I do not find that to be a problem though. For example, people don't cram their dialogue full of "uh", "uhm" etc, literally called "filler words", a consistent thing that happens in every day speech in real life. Characters rarely just mishear what someone else said. You rarely see characters going to take a sh*t.
Realism isn't the end all be all, because this is a story, and there are other things which can take precendence. Of course, this really depends on one's threshold for their suspension of disbelief.
Personally, though the dialogue may be unrelealistic, it doesn't bother me. I enjoy the way characters talk and communicate in novella RPs (hardly shakespearean, at least in the sense that the dialogue itself is actually quite character-specific even if expanded), I think it communicates more and does so more meaningfully, and it also gives me more points to adress in my own response.
No, no I understand. I also sank way too much time into this, and frankly it's giving me a headache (happens whenever I have an argument for too long, nothing to do with you specifically).
Whichever the case, I hope there isn't bad blood between us, though we may heavily disagree on this topic. Best of luck, happy RPing, and have a great day sir!
Aerynth
Senior Member
I used to write novella-style posts. I don't do that anymore. Don't get me wrong, I'm still able to produce very long posts, but I only do it when such length is justified. My main problem with novella-style roleplaying is that when you write extremely long replies all the time, character interactions suffer. Maybe I was just unable to make it work, but I don't see a way to have a natural-sounding dialogue where both sides are able to react to what is being said when you roleplay like that. Usually, you get conversations within conversations and you have to return back in time to reply to every single question and your partner does the same and suddenly, too many things are being talked about at the same time and it's awkward. The progression just doesn't seem natural. Either that or you just end up with the characters not really talking at all because the scenery is evolving constantly, new things are happening and they just don't have time to talk in depth. The logistics of it is a nightmare to me.
I have nothing against those who roleplay like that, of course, but it isn't for me.
I have nothing against those who roleplay like that, of course, but it isn't for me.
M.J. Saulnier
Semi-Retired User
It's important to remember timing. Timing is everything in novella RP. Yes, you can write paragraphs upon paragraphs, imitating your favorite writers by dressing it all up with artsy wording and sometimes even filler. But you don't have to drone on in certain situations.
If we're in the middle of a fight, and you open every post with a long, winded breakdown of everything your character is feeling, thinking, and planning, there is no bigger annoyance and turn-off.
Or if five characters are in the middle of an important conversation, and people are writing three paragraphs of filler just to put up one line of dialogue, you're being a giant, cold, wet blanket.
Novella is the best, when done properly.
If we're in the middle of a fight, and you open every post with a long, winded breakdown of everything your character is feeling, thinking, and planning, there is no bigger annoyance and turn-off.
Or if five characters are in the middle of an important conversation, and people are writing three paragraphs of filler just to put up one line of dialogue, you're being a giant, cold, wet blanket.
Novella is the best, when done properly.
Last edited:
ApfelSeine
Murder by Numbers 🏳️🌈🖥️
I agree a lot with Loco Mofo here. Even in a solo written story, fight scenes tend to be kept shorter to keep the story from getting bogged down, as well as to give the illusion of things moving quicker in the scene. At least, that's been my experience with the better written novellas. It takes a bit of work to make something so long feel like the perfect length for every response, and sometimes that results in scenes that drag, or take significantly longer to construct. (Though I have seen some players do it really well, so probably it comes down in part to what a player is used to doing and their experience with it.)
My experience with players who aren't used to long posts tends to include scenes where my character would have reacted in a certain way to a question but didn't have the chance because their character asked 5 different things. Or I have to read through an extensive description of thoughts or surroundings before getting to the point I care about in a fight scene.
With players who are more accustomed to long posts, they know other ways to move a scene along without everything being a soliloquy. Then for group rps, you tend to get a mix of both, which always feels a bit wonky to me, as well as resulting in many interactions that some players have a hard time reaching the required word count for.
Basically, I'd say versatility seems to be my preferred way of doing things on forums because it allows things to flow more like a story does (though I can understand why some people get peeved about having to carry an entire rp themselves because they don't get much content out of another player). I do feel that some players are better adapted to longer responses than others, and it's a bit of a shame to miss out on the creativity of those who post shorter responses. I personally tend to match pace so I can experience all manner of players, but I can see why a lot of players/GMs put in a word count requirement. There really is a sort of irritation that comes with other players not keeping pace. But needing all posts to meet a minimum can complicate a lot of scenes, and even though a post might not hit the word count requirement, it may just overall sound better as a shorter, more focused post. It would make the most sense to have an approximate goal for post length. That's kinda wonky to say though isn't it? I don't expect to see that phrase adapted anytime soon.
My experience with players who aren't used to long posts tends to include scenes where my character would have reacted in a certain way to a question but didn't have the chance because their character asked 5 different things. Or I have to read through an extensive description of thoughts or surroundings before getting to the point I care about in a fight scene.
With players who are more accustomed to long posts, they know other ways to move a scene along without everything being a soliloquy. Then for group rps, you tend to get a mix of both, which always feels a bit wonky to me, as well as resulting in many interactions that some players have a hard time reaching the required word count for.
Basically, I'd say versatility seems to be my preferred way of doing things on forums because it allows things to flow more like a story does (though I can understand why some people get peeved about having to carry an entire rp themselves because they don't get much content out of another player). I do feel that some players are better adapted to longer responses than others, and it's a bit of a shame to miss out on the creativity of those who post shorter responses. I personally tend to match pace so I can experience all manner of players, but I can see why a lot of players/GMs put in a word count requirement. There really is a sort of irritation that comes with other players not keeping pace. But needing all posts to meet a minimum can complicate a lot of scenes, and even though a post might not hit the word count requirement, it may just overall sound better as a shorter, more focused post. It would make the most sense to have an approximate goal for post length. That's kinda wonky to say though isn't it? I don't expect to see that phrase adapted anytime soon.
Idea
The Pun Tyrant
I would like to, at least from a personal level, disagree with the idea that a continuous providing of a character's emotions, thoughts, plans and the like, in such a way that it delays the fight's primary actions, is something which detracts from the experience of a roleplayed fight. Now I wouldn't really recommend these be frontloaded, but being mixed in with the action. The reason for this is that they provide context. Context of the character's motivations, their experience of the fight, and the reasons for their particular actions, helps understand why take those actions and give weight to their stakes in the fight itself.
Furthermore if you are like me, seeing the other character's reactions and the other player's take on your content is a gratifying experience itself, and knowing the plans of the other characters gives a planner like me a better sense of comfort with my partner and allows me to provide a better experience for them as well, say by allowing me to create better concessions (maybe their strike didn't land, but they still manage to get closer to their plan, or conversely, maybe their strike did hit, but the plan was set aback by consequence).
Furthermore if you are like me, seeing the other character's reactions and the other player's take on your content is a gratifying experience itself, and knowing the plans of the other characters gives a planner like me a better sense of comfort with my partner and allows me to provide a better experience for them as well, say by allowing me to create better concessions (maybe their strike didn't land, but they still manage to get closer to their plan, or conversely, maybe their strike did hit, but the plan was set aback by consequence).
M.J. Saulnier
Semi-Retired User
Divulging plans in a fight is just about the worst etiquette in combat writing. I don't want you to tell me what you trying to do...I just want you to do it. It tends to completely destroy the mood and atmosphere of a fight for many writers. It also baits meta gaming for inexperienced fighters. If you tell them you're trying to edge your way toward that food cart to knock it over, flooding the setting with footing obstructions, rookie fighters will often try to prevent that from happening.
What makes a great fight experience, is not knowing what's going to happen next.
What makes a great fight experience, is not knowing what's going to happen next.
Well said. If someone told me what they were going to do in a fight, I would quit. I don't want to know either. I want to be able to see it when it happens that way I can have my character figure out what they are going to do.
Idea
The Pun Tyrant
I mean you call it ‘etiquette ‘ but that one really is your personal taste. A taste shared by many, no doubt, but just a preference nonetheless.
Crayons
Iconoclast
If you have to change the way you want to write because players might meta-game, then you're playing with the wrong people. Just don't play with meta-gamers, and you won't have that problem.
In my experience RP combats are always about intention, because of the way writing combat works. If you attack, you can't auto-succeed so you need to state intention instead. “She swung a fist at his jaw. If he didn’t dodge, she would at least knock him back - maybe even out.” I don't see how you can RP combat without stating intention or using autos. Unless there's something I'm missing here?
In my experience RP combats are always about intention, because of the way writing combat works. If you attack, you can't auto-succeed so you need to state intention instead. “She swung a fist at his jaw. If he didn’t dodge, she would at least knock him back - maybe even out.” I don't see how you can RP combat without stating intention or using autos. Unless there's something I'm missing here?
Ngl, I feel like, in that example, it's obvious that the punch would knock someone back without necessarily having to state it. If you wanted to get across that this punch is particularly powerful and might knock the other person out, there's probably ways to do that without outright saying it. I just feel like outright stating what the attack might possibly do kinda takes the fun out of it, but that ight just be me.
M.J. Saulnier
Semi-Retired User
This is becoming a discussion about combat, but, this is something else that's generally frowned upon by combat writers (not writers who happen to fight sometimes). Nobody wants you to describe what an attack is going to do, if they don't do this or that. That's entry level god modding, because you're dictating for that person's character, and describing details over and over again that might not even have any baring on the flow of the fight.
"If you don't dodge this, you're going to get knocked out, losing your two front teeth and busting your lip open, dropping your gold pouch causing a riot in the crowded, lower class bazaar."
Just let me decide where and when I'm going to get knocked out, if my stance is such that I will lose my footing from one punch to the face, or if I'm going to block your punch and counter with a leg kick.
Combat is a tricky beast when you get really into the science of it. I'm very picky because I did it for a very long time, I used to instruct it, and I boxed in real life for 6 years.
Crayons
Iconoclast
I see what you mean,
N
Nue
. But stating intent is still important. Maybe a better example is if you are taking aim at a certain person/part of their body. You will need to state that so that the person can react to it properly.
Well
M.J. Saulnier
, you're exaggerating my words and misconstruing ... I didn't go into details about what might happen, just explained intent of the actor. Of course that example you gave would be ridiculous.
Anyway since this is going off-topic I will say no more about it.
Well
M.J. Saulnier
, you're exaggerating my words and misconstruing ... I didn't go into details about what might happen, just explained intent of the actor. Of course that example you gave would be ridiculous.Anyway since this is going off-topic I will say no more about it.
M.J. Saulnier
Semi-Retired User
Crayons
Any intent is uncalled for and presumptuous. It's dictating outcomes, and when you have to do it post after post after post, it gets exhausting for your opponents.The only thing you need to do is describe your actions with more detail. Detail is what controls the dimensions of a fight. Where are you at in the setting? What stance are you in? What form of guard are you using? When you punch, what kind of technique did you use? Was it quick, or labored, left or right?
You do not need to tell us what we should do, and describe the consequences if we don't. It's a god mod loophole.
ashwynne
🌧 pluviophile 🌧 art: peritwinkle
I think it depends on the type of combat we're talking about. Most of my roleplays where characters have fought were ones in multi-paragraph style roleplays and we could still make it work. It's not as punchy as it would be in short form, but neither me nor my partners were the types that enjoyed one or two liners even in the context of a fight. If you're writing in third person there's the ability to describe the setting etc. without god-modding or breaking from your character which does allow for some added length (you can describe the reactions of people around you, the general atmosphere of the scene etc). It's definitely not everyones cup of tea and not even necessarily my favourite method of combat, but it's ultimately a stylistic choice that's perfectly acceptable if both parties are into it. That said... fight scenes still tended to be shorter in length overall. If we'd average 6-10 paragraphs the fight scenes would usually be down to 3-4.
When it comes to the fight itself I think
Crayons
is not talking about intent in the way you described,
M.J. Saulnier
, but rather something like "she swung the sword at his left shoulder where the leather armour seemed weakest." Obviously assuming the weakness of the leather armour in that spot has been established previously. That's still a form of intent but leaves the fight scene open to the other person to react however they choose. I don't see how that's god-modding, but I'm always happy to improve my own combat writing if you see something there that I'm missing.
All that said... in long form RP my favourite way to write combat is for my partner and I to move to something like Google Docs. There we can compose our post in tandem and add that element of 'real time' to it without having to rely on one liners and waiting for the other person to reply. The whole thing gets posted by whichever person was slotted to go next and the flow of the rp isn't impacted.
When it comes to the fight itself I think
Crayons
is not talking about intent in the way you described,
M.J. Saulnier
, but rather something like "she swung the sword at his left shoulder where the leather armour seemed weakest." Obviously assuming the weakness of the leather armour in that spot has been established previously. That's still a form of intent but leaves the fight scene open to the other person to react however they choose. I don't see how that's god-modding, but I'm always happy to improve my own combat writing if you see something there that I'm missing.All that said... in long form RP my favourite way to write combat is for my partner and I to move to something like Google Docs. There we can compose our post in tandem and add that element of 'real time' to it without having to rely on one liners and waiting for the other person to reply. The whole thing gets posted by whichever person was slotted to go next and the flow of the rp isn't impacted.
M.J. Saulnier
Semi-Retired User
The way it was described was very much, "If you don't dodge, you would get knocked back." That's essentially lite god modding. Not committing to an outcome, but dictating it.
Targeting weak areas of an armor is perfectly acceptable, no different than targeting the weak aspects of a stance, or adjusting your style and strategy to match a fighting style or form of guard. This is the very essence of combat RP. Otherwise you're just going back and forth until someone decides they can lose the fight.
It's all about how experienced and knowledgeable your opponent is. Knowing when you should logically be able to dodge or counter something, and knowing when they've got you dead to rights with a move. This is why most communities have an active, dedicated combat element. So there is a source of knowledge and practice for people who really enjoy combat to hone their style and game.
Targeting weak areas of an armor is perfectly acceptable, no different than targeting the weak aspects of a stance, or adjusting your style and strategy to match a fighting style or form of guard. This is the very essence of combat RP. Otherwise you're just going back and forth until someone decides they can lose the fight.
It's all about how experienced and knowledgeable your opponent is. Knowing when you should logically be able to dodge or counter something, and knowing when they've got you dead to rights with a move. This is why most communities have an active, dedicated combat element. So there is a source of knowledge and practice for people who really enjoy combat to hone their style and game.
Last edited:
WildHairedOne
The pessimistic optimist
If I'm really into it and have a partner that meshes well I tend to like it. I like being descriptive and detailed in my writing and find it stimulating to write a bunch of paragraphs. As I said I have to really be into it and have the time of course. It's always easier to write 6+ paragraphs if you're into the plot and have the right partner!
Last edited:
silvercharizard
New Member
I enjoy reading it but personally I suck at writing it lol
Dutch
Ta Reine
Honestly in a PVP heavy rp I implement basic HP & Damage systems.
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
