Hey all. I'm hoping for some thoughtful discussion, and maybe real-world examples, of how to handle filtering players who do not match what you are looking for as a DM in your Play-by-Post game.
Caveat! Before you call me names, I know how this sounds, very elitist and like I'm a jerk. And I will agree to that as long as we all accept the following stipulations: 1) I want to have fun while gaming, and 2) some players are no fun to play with. Also, this is not in response to any games I am playing in or have played in. This is purely speculative about future gaming opportunities. Now you can call me names. :)
What do I mean by "no fun to play with?" I mean they don't match the style of player you want to DM. So, if you want a fast moving game and they post infrequently, they don't (or do, ymmv) like role-playing, you have a solid plan and they refuse to follow obvious plot hooks, you make reasonable rulings and they argue DM decisions, they insist on using yellow text on a white background no matter how many times you ask them not to... etc.
The inherent difference between PbP and IRL Clearly, in real life, you probably already know the people you are adding to a gaming group, or someone you know is vouching for them. But online, especially with open Recruitment posts, you'll get a ton of people you don't know at all. Many will be awesome. But some will be no fun to play with. This is the nature of the beast.
Players who drop out are to be expected and not the issue And also, clearly, players will drop out. This is a game, and real life sometimes rears its ugly head. Letting players go is cool, and adding new players mid-stream will be necessary. Even players who have been with you for several adventures may have a life change that causes them to suddenly disappear. This is different from players who sign up and never show up, or show up once a week.
The obvious answer: filter from the get go Clearly, the start of the game is the place to begin. Clear communication of play style expectations is paramount in helping players to self-select. That should easily cut the number of false positives. But we know how desperate we all are to play the game, and we may gloss over these expectations for the opportunity to play. In other words, we may lie. There must be an understanding that if we do lie, we should expect to be booted when we are found out. We don't need a contract for this, but maybe a syllabus would be helpful.
My question - finally What would you put in such a syllabus? The granular content is easy: you are expected to post x number of times per y. You will create characters that fit these requirements. You will post OOC here, and in game here, and we will/will not use private DMs. Etc. But what would you include, besides the catch all "You are playing at the will of the DM, and can be booted for any reason they deem sufficient."
What lessons have you learned in selecting (and keeping) players? What worked or did not work in setting expectations? Have you had to boot a player? Why? How did it go? (No names, please) What would you include/not include in a campaign's syllabus?
Thanks.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
ey/em/eirs, or they/them works, too (just not he). Role-playing since that keep on those borderlands. I love it so.
Roleplaying NEEDS to be fun for everyone, DM included, so if you are not having fun with the people you currently have in your group, there is no shame nor blame in admitting it and looking for other people.
That being said, what I would include in a campaign presentation for the recruitment are:
Seriousness required: strict (very little joke-time permitted); average (if you have a good joke and the situation allows, go for it); lax (make fun of everything and anything you want)
Possible race/class limitations or social changes due to setting (elves hate everyone by default, casters are actively hunted and the like)
Required X post in Y time, with obvious case-by-case allowances
Decency and netiquette rule apply
Again, I see no shame in making very clear what you are looking for, it helps the players as well find a game they are more.confident is what they want to game in. I also want to believe that, with such a layout, as much as someone wants to play they would think twice in losing their and everyone's time by joining a game they are definitely.not interested/a match for.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Born in Italy, moved a bunch, living in Spain, my heart always belonged to Roleplaying Games
LeK is right - Clear communication is probably the best way to get this done. Talk about what kind of game you want to play, what type of players you're looking for. This narrows things down a bit, and then just chatting early on can give some hints as to whom you'd get along with.
Also, I find that being up front with some table and setting quirks tends to filter things a bit. Like, for example, using milestone leveling tends to cut down on the people who like certain playstyles, and encourages other playstyles.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hey all. I'm hoping for some thoughtful discussion, and maybe real-world examples, of how to handle filtering players who do not match what you are looking for as a DM in your Play-by-Post game.
Caveat! Before you call me names, I know how this sounds, very elitist and like I'm a jerk. And I will agree to that as long as we all accept the following stipulations: 1) I want to have fun while gaming, and 2) some players are no fun to play with. Also, this is not in response to any games I am playing in or have played in. This is purely speculative about future gaming opportunities. Now you can call me names. :)
What do I mean by "no fun to play with?"
I mean they don't match the style of player you want to DM. So, if you want a fast moving game and they post infrequently, they don't (or do, ymmv) like role-playing, you have a solid plan and they refuse to follow obvious plot hooks, you make reasonable rulings and they argue DM decisions, they insist on using yellow text on a white background no matter how many times you ask them not to... etc.
The inherent difference between PbP and IRL
Clearly, in real life, you probably already know the people you are adding to a gaming group, or someone you know is vouching for them. But online, especially with open Recruitment posts, you'll get a ton of people you don't know at all. Many will be awesome. But some will be no fun to play with. This is the nature of the beast.
Players who drop out are to be expected and not the issue
And also, clearly, players will drop out. This is a game, and real life sometimes rears its ugly head. Letting players go is cool, and adding new players mid-stream will be necessary. Even players who have been with you for several adventures may have a life change that causes them to suddenly disappear. This is different from players who sign up and never show up, or show up once a week.
The obvious answer: filter from the get go
Clearly, the start of the game is the place to begin. Clear communication of play style expectations is paramount in helping players to self-select. That should easily cut the number of false positives. But we know how desperate we all are to play the game, and we may gloss over these expectations for the opportunity to play. In other words, we may lie. There must be an understanding that if we do lie, we should expect to be booted when we are found out. We don't need a contract for this, but maybe a syllabus would be helpful.
My question - finally
What would you put in such a syllabus? The granular content is easy: you are expected to post x number of times per y. You will create characters that fit these requirements. You will post OOC here, and in game here, and we will/will not use private DMs. Etc. But what would you include, besides the catch all "You are playing at the will of the DM, and can be booted for any reason they deem sufficient."
What lessons have you learned in selecting (and keeping) players?
What worked or did not work in setting expectations?
Have you had to boot a player? Why? How did it go? (No names, please)
What would you include/not include in a campaign's syllabus?
Thanks.
ey/em/eirs, or they/them works, too (just not he).
Role-playing since that keep on those borderlands. I love it so.
Roleplaying NEEDS to be fun for everyone, DM included, so if you are not having fun with the people you currently have in your group, there is no shame nor blame in admitting it and looking for other people.
That being said, what I would include in a campaign presentation for the recruitment are:
Again, I see no shame in making very clear what you are looking for, it helps the players as well find a game they are more.confident is what they want to game in. I also want to believe that, with such a layout, as much as someone wants to play they would think twice in losing their and everyone's time by joining a game they are definitely.not interested/a match for.
Born in Italy, moved a bunch, living in Spain, my heart always belonged to Roleplaying Games
LeK is right - Clear communication is probably the best way to get this done. Talk about what kind of game you want to play, what type of players you're looking for. This narrows things down a bit, and then just chatting early on can give some hints as to whom you'd get along with.
Also, I find that being up front with some table and setting quirks tends to filter things a bit. Like, for example, using milestone leveling tends to cut down on the people who like certain playstyles, and encourages other playstyles.