Thread Roleplay Prefixes

[Sen Pai]

I am aware of the fact that the prefixes for the thread roleplays were requested by previous role players but I would like to suggest that we remove the roleplay level prefixes.


Instead, I say that the prefixes should be the usual Accepting, Need More Members, and Closed. There's probably others that I missed but you get the gist. Of course, I can assume a few reasons for the level prefixes and people might still want that so I would say that there should be a part where the authour must fill in the suggested roleplay level but not as a prefix.


If a roleplay's level is a prefix, it's pretty much keeping everyone in cages unless they fond themselves confident enough to move up a level or so. Also the definitions of one's ability is often hard to decipher. In my opinion, you need to roleplay with those better than you to improve and such.


So, to recap, I would like to suggest that we remove the roleplay level prefixes and perhaps add a part where the author must fill in the roleplay level. And, uh, yeah. Thank you for reading this and have a good day.


Feel free to state your opinions. I'd love to hear what others think.


(This does fit the suggestion prefix, right?)

 

[Elle Joyner]

I actually really like the idea of the prefixes being based on quality level... I know it sounds a little snobby, but I know when I was a beginner RPer I wasn't comfortably playing in RPs that were over my head, and it's only fair to give people a warning, ahead of time...


My issue is, HOW do you change/add the prefix?

 

[SkyGinge]

I agree wholeheartedly with this. Having a tag for suggested level is handy for some reasons, but from my experience in RPing, I've never really felt like there was a need for them. It is of course useful to know the level of detail (and experience) expected for an RP, but most RPers put that in their overview sections anyway without issue. Tags like 'Open' and 'Needs More Members' seem far more useful imo.


Alongside Pai's excellent points, I can see people using the intermediate (I think that's its name) tag a lot simply to avoid scaring off people who would be too modest to consider themselves expert, and vice versa too. These tags can immediately put people off of RPs without a fair assessment of ideas and level of detail that you can normally get just from reading the overview.


As an RP creator, I like to let anybody into my RPs, as long as they are willing to write, and I can distinguish this fairly successfully through character application. Thus I wouldn't want to limit my RPs to only a single, relatively vague catogory. Another thing is that a lot of the people in my current RP joined the site just to join the RP. Would that make them beginners, even though they consistant provide excellent quality posts? I find that RP levels change depending on the RPers involved too.


So yeah, essentially I back up good-chap-Pai in a slightly more confusing way xD

 

[Captain Hesperus]

I suppose a way Roleplay Creators can 'assess' a prospective player's writing ability would be a PM conversation in a pre-game setting, for instance. Imagine a discussion between the prospective player's young mage and a barman after they arrive at an inn or between the freshman and the form master prior to lessons starting. If the Creator can give the player an idea of the length and detail they expect from IC posts prior to the game starting then that can be beneficial. And it wouldn't require 'labels' for the level of skill of the RP. Of course, this would be something that would potentially add more onto the plate of the Creator, but then it depends on how much effort they are willing to put in to have their game be successful.


Captain Hesperus

 

[Elle Joyner]

Actually - I find it easy just to have an added section to my character sheets, where I require a writing sample (it doesn't have to be from the application character, but can be from any writing material). It's definitely helpful in gauging whether the applicant will fit into the general writing style/quality.

 

[Sen Pai]

To be honest, as creepy as this may sound, I tend to look at the roleplayer's past posts. In addition, their character applications say more than enough when I'm reading through them. If they're new and don't have any or their posts aren't up to the quality that I would like them to be, I simply ask them and so on. The latter of the two isn't very reliable but at least I have their word that they will do their very best in the roleplay.


"I didn't sign up for this!"


"Yes, you did. I have it here in writing."


However, having prefixes that state the accepting status of a roleplay would be much more convenient. What if you come across a roleplay that you like, read through all of the information, and then discover that it's not open? It's much more easier to sort through roleplays if their accepting status is shown so that we don't have to waste our time crying in a cornerless box.


Of course, since people would still want to have the "roleplay level" stated, there should be an add on as I said before. That way the roleplayer can say, "Oh! This roleplay's open, I wonder what it's about and what level it is?" Which is much more easier than playing the guessing game of accepting and not accepting. For you slow internet people out there, this can be quite bothersome since you waited for, what, ten minutes for the page to load.


Reinforcing SkyGinge's point about humility and different ideas of roleplay quality, I made a roleplay in the thread section called Stereotypical Fantasy Roleplay. I didn't know what roleplay level to put it to so I left it blank. Looking through the roleplays, it seems that most of them are blank and not everyone is utilizing the level prefixes unlike how they used the accepting prefixes.


To be honest, I don't search for roleplays through the thread roleplay forums anymore. It's much too difficult to play the guessing game. I simply look through the recruitment section instead. However, there are many great roleplays out there that haven't put up a recruitment thread and they're completely ignored.


Also, it's hard to catch my eye. With little to no prefixes, the roleplays that do catch my eye are usually the ones with a prefix since it stands out over all of the blank ones. It's hard to attract possible roleplay applicants like that. However, if it is an accepting status, the roleplay authours are guaranteed to use it, and it'll be easier to scroll through and search for roleplays. (-w-)b

 

[Emperor Shadow IV]

[QUOTE="Darth Pai]I am aware of the fact that the prefixes for the thread roleplays were requested by previous role players but I would like to suggest that we remove the roleplay level prefixes.
Instead, I say that the prefixes should be the usual Accepting, Need More Members, and Closed. There's probably others that I missed but you get the gist. Of course, I can assume a few reasons for the level prefixes and people might still want that so I would say that there should be a part where the authour must fill in the suggested roleplay level but not as a prefix.


If a roleplay's level is a prefix, it's pretty much keeping everyone in cages unless they fond themselves confident enough to move up a level or so. Also the definitions of one's ability is often hard to decipher. In my opinion, you need to roleplay with those better than you to improve and such.


So, to recap, I would like to suggest that we remove the roleplay level prefixes and perhaps add a part where the author must fill in the roleplay level. And, uh, yeah. Thank you for reading this and have a good day.


Feel free to state your opinions. I'd love to hear what others think.


(This does fit the suggestion prefix, right?)

[/QUOTE]
Aye.

I agree wholeheartedly with this. Having a tag for suggested level is handy for some reasons, but from my experience in RPing, I've never really felt like there was a need for them. It is of course useful to know the level of detail (and experience) expected for an RP, but most RPers put that in their overview sections anyway without issue. Tags like 'Open' and 'Needs More Members' seem far more useful imo.
Alongside Pai's excellent points, I can see people using the intermediate (I think that's its name) tag a lot simply to avoid scaring off people who would be too modest to consider themselves expert, and vice versa too. These tags can immediately put people off of RPs without a fair assessment of ideas and level of detail that you can normally get just from reading the overview.


As an RP creator, I like to let anybody into my RPs, as long as they are willing to write, and I can distinguish this fairly successfully through character application. Thus I wouldn't want to limit my RPs to only a single, relatively vague catogory. Another thing is that a lot of the people in my current RP joined the site just to join the RP. Would that make them beginners, even though they consistant provide excellent quality posts? I find that RP levels change depending on the RPers involved too.


So yeah, essentially I back up good-chap-Pai in a slightly more confusing way xD

Aye.

[QUOTE="Darth Pai]To be honest, as creepy as this may sound, I tend to look at the roleplayer's past posts. In addition, their character applications say more than enough when I'm reading through them. If they're new and don't have any or their posts aren't up to the quality that I would like them to be, I simply ask them and so on. The latter of the two isn't very reliable but at least I have their word that they will do their very best in the roleplay.
"I didn't sign up for this!"


"Yes, you did. I have it here in writing."


However, having prefixes that state the accepting status of a roleplay would be much more convenient. What if you come across a roleplay that you like, read through all of the information, and then discover that it's not open? It's much more easier to sort through roleplays if their accepting status is shown so that we don't have to waste our time crying in a cornerless box.


Of course, since people would still want to have the "roleplay level" stated, there should be an add on as I said before. That way the roleplayer can say, "Oh! This roleplay's open, I wonder what it's about and what level it is?" Which is much more easier than playing the guessing game of accepting and not accepting. For you slow internet people out there, this can be quite bothersome since you waited for, what, ten minutes for the page to load.


Reinforcing SkyGinge's point about humility and different ideas of roleplay quality, I made a roleplay in the thread section called Stereotypical Fantasy Roleplay. I didn't know what roleplay level to put it to so I left it blank. Looking through the roleplays, it seems that most of them are blank and not everyone is utilizing the level prefixes unlike how they used the accepting prefixes.


To be honest, I don't search for roleplays through the thread roleplay forums anymore. It's much too difficult to play the guessing game. I simply look through the recruitment section instead. However, there are many great roleplays out there that haven't put up a recruitment thread and they're completely ignored.


Also, it's hard to catch my eye. With little to no prefixes, the roleplays that do catch my eye are usually the ones with a prefix since it stands out over all of the blank ones. It's hard to attract possible roleplay applicants like that. However, if it is an accepting status, the roleplay authours are guaranteed to use it, and it'll be easier to scroll through and search for roleplays. (-w-)b

[/QUOTE]
And Aye.


In my opinion the RP Overview renders the skill level prefixes rather irrelevant. Before we even had the custom RP system that GgAcE implemented and just the plain old "Accepting" and "Closed" prefixes, some RP authors would state what skill level you had to be in order to join the roleplay. As good-chap-Pai does, they'd go and check your history of posts, but unlike good-chap-Pai, if you didn't meet their standards they simply wouldn't accept you. It may have seemed discriminatory, but it's understandable at the same time.


With these prefixes it's the same as the old fashioned way of limiting which users may join your RP only more inconvenient, because, as the others said, the classic "Accepting", "Closed", etc. prefixes are absent. If there is any real need for the skill level prefixes, I believe the RP author will indicate the skill level and requirements you must meet to join their RP in the Overview. Again, as Pai said, I think the classic prefixes would be far more useful, and I'm sure they would make the RP section far less intimidating for the new folks.

 

[Miz]

The change that was performed was requested to the Staff several times, but because reactions have been mixed, there is a discussion to change it back.


Of course, there is a possibility we could do an addon to handle "the skill level" of a roleplay. Such a solution has been presented in this thread. We hoped that such a thing would be handled by a thread tags addon (as someone could just label their sub-genres and skill level if they wanted), but that addon did not install properly in the last site update and only produced errors. The issue though with building an addon is that such a request would have to be commissioned and certain things that seem simple might be more complicated in the back-end. Speaking that these developers get paid sometimes for 50+ dollars per hour, it might be a bit difficult to really provide that option. We have contacted the thread tag (it works similar to the forum tag option we had custom developed) developer, but until those issues are resolved we are left to our devices. However we will keep anything on the table for now.


Just to throw in some admin stuff, its not like we just make changes without discussing them. However we are wanting to gauge public opinion which does seem torn. So if anyone has an opinion, we would like to hear about it.