The first post is exciting since you get to test out your character for the very first time!
You had a respectable reply overall but this sentence and all subsequent points were most striking to me, mainly because my knee jerk response is that this shouldn't be the case. Would it not come across as deceiving to a game master to come in one character concept and end with another? Why don't players have a stronger grasp of the character they're introducing to a roleplay
beforehand?
Foxrally said:
I can, one hundred percent, guarantee that every single long-term character I've written has strayed away from the core of their SU by the second (and sometimes even first) post, with the effect only getting stronger with time (see: Dust, Gunpowder). Sometimes I have an idea of how the character would behave in the SU, yet once it's time to put pen to paper (or fingers to keyboard) it just doesn't click, and most writers can understand the feeling.
Fox expressed similar sentiments, and again I'd like to pose an inquiry:
where does the difficulty of adhering to a sign-up ultimately stem from? On one hand, what a player envisions could fail to match an end result, but on the other, there should be methods set in place to prevent a falling-out or an out-of-left-field transformation as a player struggles to embody their original ideas.
Oddball said:
After awhile the ideas fade away and i'm stuck trying to remember what my original plans were. I'm the kind of person who doesn't like to stray too far from his plan, but that's inevitable so eh.
This is essentially what Oddball expressed and I can wholeheartedly sympathize. Kiyo mentioned being able to immediately become invested with his character for Cornered At the Market, Cicaro, but it was the opposite for me and Rina whose first post came quickly but, as soon as the situation at Forget-Me-Not shifted in a direction I hadn't anticipated, I was struck with the reality that Rina couldn't become the antagonistic force I had planned; she was overall too immature and insecure to fit that intended role. While my personal lack of foresight played into the resulting disheartened feeling towards my character, I also feel as if there had been better work-shopping conducted for Cornered--the time provided to do so, rather than the need to hustle to put an app up first to get a spot--the situation would've gone smoother, so I ultimately place the blame on the sign-up process. The "first-come-first-serve" method of accepting sign-ups is too disadvantageous on many fronts and the fact that the sign-up itself didn't necessitate actual insight into a character as a whole, essentially requiring face-value essentials like how the Pokemon looks and what moves she or he knows, some stand-out past experiences, as well as where the Pokemon was from, and personality traits.
I'm of the opinion that a coherent "Personality" is arbitrary, not telling of a character in a long run. I would say it's nice to keep track of a few characteristic details but, ultimately, as Fox worded, characters transform when the requirement suddenly becomes to actually breathe life into them. I think what I conclude, in the end, is that the sign-up process should be scrutinized more, but at the same time, sign-ups themselves shouldn't be relied upon. Characters change, so instead of listing out details about how a player imagines them in the present, a overall
concept should be communicated, what impression a player wants to give and what role amidst a cast that character may be attributable with.
As far as I remember, most RPs ask for either a link to a previous work showing that you are in fact a competent writer or they ask for you to write a post as the character. I believe the better practice is to write that day in the life of your character rather than coping out and using something you've already done..
I think experimenting with a character beforehand is very useful, so I would not only agree that writing "a day in the life" when given that sort of option for the "Roleplay Sample" approach many RPs here have taken is the right way to go, but also that "Roleplay Sample" sections of that variant should be abolished entirely to
require in-character responses of that nature because of how ultimately helpful it is. I also believe that brainstorming and discussing with others is a fascinating way to build a better grasp of one's character, as well as that character's standing within a larger, interconnected, and dynamic cast.
BIG shout out to
Off The Menu, which I'm super excited for, which explicitly encouraged discussions and trading feedback revolving in-progress characters. Kiyo himself is already providing criticism and commentary, both which are especially useful, on sign-ups, unfinished or otherwise. I'd say that's exemplary game master behavior: openly helping players bring characters to life.
Regarding Fox's additional point about game masters having a responsibility to provide a tangible objective from the beginning, I strongly agree. Like a good story, a roleplay should never start out during a dull or uninteresting moment, as I see it. Even arriving at the main location can be more than just "unboarding the boat and reflecting on why you're here". Immediate investment leads to long-term investment! Give players a purpose to post!
I also liked YDV's sentiment: being first and worse. I will concur that game masters should always leave a good impression for their players to follow.
