Pokemon Roleplay Discussion

My experience with other forums (mostly Subeta and Neo) has been that one-on-ones are just as popular as group roleplays.
Click to expand...

OMG Neopets nostalgia. Give me a moment to recover.

... Okay. Yeah, I don't know about the roleplayer population here on PC - it seems to be fairly substantial, but not huge considering the size of the forums. Still, a one-on-one thread doesn't seem like it'd be too much trouble. Just create a simple form to fill out, with roleplay preferences, genre interests and contact info (if you're comfortable releasing it to the public, and if you're not you can simply ask prospective partners to PM you about it), and you're good to go.
 
There had been a private rp here before hasn't there? I think it actually had three people that already discussed everything.
I think one on one roleplays could easily just go with the rest as long as you mark in the title that it's one on one. PC doesn't have enough of them right now to actually have a whole section for them.

I, myself, have participating in some one on ones and they are a lot of fun, there's just the issue here that no one's doing it.
 
Luigi-a said:
There had been a private rp here before hasn't there? I think it actually had three people that already discussed everything.
I think one on one roleplays could easily just go with the rest as long as you mark in the title that it's one on one. PC doesn't have enough of them right now to actually have a whole section for them.

I, myself, have participating in some one on ones and they are a lot of fun, there's just the issue here that no one's doing it.
Click to expand...

Not sure. I haven't been here long enough to know.

I might participate in one if I'm invited and/or it's an interesting RP.
 
On the subject of rare RP types (at least on PC), what do people think about RPs with the GM acting like a traditional GM - describing the scenery, controlling NPCs, railroading when need be - as opposed to controlling their own character?
I may have simply missed them, but I haven't seen any like that around. Anyway, I wonder if running an RP like that could increase longevity and quality as the GM could focus more on what the participants are doing rather than his/her own character.
 
Shen said:
On the subject of rare RP types (at least on PC), what do people think about RPs with the GM acting like a traditional GM - describing the scenery, controlling NPCs, railroading when need be - as opposed to controlling their own character?
I may have simply missed them, but I haven't seen any like that around. Anyway, I wonder if running an RP like that could increase longevity and quality as the GM could focus more on what the participants are doing rather than his/her own character.
Click to expand...

Wow.

Interesting concept there.

I've never been in an RP like that, either.

Sounds interesting enough, though.
 
Shen said:
On the subject of rare RP types (at least on PC), what do people think about RPs with the GM acting like a traditional GM - describing the scenery, controlling NPCs, railroading when need be - as opposed to controlling their own character?
I may have simply missed them, but I haven't seen any like that around. Anyway, I wonder if running an RP like that could increase longevity and quality as the GM could focus more on what the participants are doing rather than his/her own character.
Click to expand...

The problem with those is that you can completely miss out on character to character interaction. Long story short, a d20 or DnD game is hard if not impossible to roleplay out in an advanced format. It's either long and drawn out to the point it's a chore to read or it's too short and not enough happens.

They also don't tend to last long. The rps that I've been in since I joined PC four years ago that lasted the longest were because the person 'running' the rp only losely ran it. He let the members help decide what was going on, using a very lose frame for the actual roleplay plot.

It's a great idea in concept but it's very hard to execute.

Randomization of rolls, things like that, how do you do accurate percentages that are fair to everyone? In the real world, you use a d20. How do you propose you do this in a forum based rp? Require everyone to use the Wizards of the Coast dice roller? How do you make sure they don't cheat?

All in all...yeah.

I'm really big on character interaction that includes the GM. When you don't have it, the roleplay can and will die. The GM can lose interest and things like it much quicker than he or she would with a normal game. :/
 
Shen said:
On the subject of rare RP types (at least on PC), what do people think about RPs with the GM acting like a traditional GM - describing the scenery, controlling NPCs, railroading when need be - as opposed to controlling their own character?
I may have simply missed them, but I haven't seen any like that around. Anyway, I wonder if running an RP like that could increase longevity and quality as the GM could focus more on what the participants are doing rather than his/her own character.
Click to expand...

I've seen a number of RP's like that around the site. In my Rp 'A New Professor In Town' for example, I don't play a role in the RP itself outside of a few select NPC's who help move the plot along. The 'play your own character' RP seems to have taken over a bit recently, but there are still a few RP's I've seen with what you term 'traditional' GM's.

As to whether a GM will improve the longevity of an RP, I think that's difficult to say. While an active GM can help move an RP along, I think it can be more down to the RPers themselves than who's running the RP thaty can determine if an RP survives. If you've got no RPers, you've got no RP :/.

I've seen both types of RP survive and be run successfully. Both my RP and Mira's Uprising RP have been going over a year. I run mine as a GM, whereas I believe Mira plays a character in her RP. This shows that both types of RP can survive, as long as they are run well and have a good group of RPers involved. On the same token I've seen both types of RP fail before they really get going, so I guess it works both ways...
 
Obviously, the key to running any RP are dedicated participants. A GM can lose interest in an RP whether he's controlling a character or not and I'm not going to argue about which is necessarily better as such a thing is subjective.

On interaction, NPCs are the usual stand-in for a GM's character and can become important mainstay characters that travel with the group for a time or simply recurring characters. They can be as deep as any normal character with a little effort. Also, because the characters are NPCs and therefore entirely disposable (hey, fact of life), characters won't be so tempted to suck up to GM through them.
It also works the other way and should keep a GM from giving his/her character unfair traits (hell, if an NPC gets them it can work very well. They can either focus on getting better than the NPC or can rely on the NPC....so the GM can get rid of them and leave the PCs in a tight spot).

On rolls, one must remember that this is a forum RP, not a tabletop one. The way things go can be decided as a normal PC-using GM would decide. Mulling it over though, it would be interesting for the GM to decide on outcomes based on an RNG to simulate a d20. But it's not entirely necessary.

I agree that they would be harder to execute than a regular one though.

@YHMAH: come to think of it, I think I did read your OP a bit after it had started. Props to you.
The thing to consider however is that PC GM RPs are a lot more common and, as mentioned before, easier to do. People may simply not want to join or create harder RPs which could reflect in their lack of great success (inexperienced participants or players moving on to something easier to name a few). However, the fact there are only two highly successful long-running RPs on the forum and one of them is run like that compared to the ratio of the two types only supports my theory.
If that made sense at all.
 
God...

I hate being picky when it comes to Pokemon RPs.

Here's the type of RP's I usually like and tend to participate in:

I hate having to start from scratch, which means I really don't like have to choose a starter pokemon and start from scratch.

I like being able to choose whatever pokemon I want, obviously as long as they're not legendaries and the RP master allows it.

Basically... I don't like a lot of restrictions when it comes to choice of Pokemon(s).

Yeah... I know... I'm picky... >_<
 
Anybody mind if I join in? :3

The Mega Champion said:
I hate having to start from scratch, which means I really don't like have to choose a starter pokemon and start from scratch.
Click to expand...

Gah. I hate it when an RP with a really interesting plot comes along, and then at the end it stuffs a list of starters into your face. It's not necessarily that I hate starters; you can have a very interesting RP with a generic starter-plot. But there's just so many RPs out there lately with this plain basic "you are a new trainer with a starter out of these choices" idea to them that it's not interesting any more. If I want to control a new trainer with a starter I can play the video games. The idea was never original, and even if you come up with a few clever options for starters besides the regional trio and a Pikachu or Eevee, it's still just too generic and overdone for me. If you're gonna have a trainer RP it's much more creative and lenient to have already-established trainers with teams of their own, I think. Like The Mega Champion said, restrictions on Pokemon are just not very fun, and there's only so far you can go with a newbie-trainer-with-a-starter plot.

As for the "GM RPing a character of his own" discussion, I see nothing wrong with it really. What keeps an RP living is the plot's progression and the dedication of its members. Whether or not a GM gets bored with/without his own character to play around with really depends on the GM. Some GMs may lose interest in their own RP whether they've got a character or not. They may work better with a character, or worse. Depends on the person. =/

What I don't like, however, is when a GM's character is somehow superior to the other characters... Or worse, central to the plot. Now an NPC isn't a big deal, since they're usually necessary and don't do much besides one simple task (Professors dispense starters, Nurse Joy heals your Pokemon, some wise old man on the road gives the characters advice...). But when the GM makes a written SU for his character and that character is like... the main point of the plot, that just comes of as self-centered to me. Not to mention it reeks of Mary Sue. At least try to make an RP where every character is equally important, rather than making yours the one who's particularly special and shiny.
 
iLike2EatPiez said:
But there's just so many RPs out there lately with this plain basic "you are a new trainer with a starter out of these choices" idea to them that it's not interesting any more. If I want to control a new trainer with a starter I can play the video games.
Click to expand...

Yess. I hate this too. There's so rarely a reason for why the characters are all beginner trainers who've never owned Pokemon. Never mind that they're going to bring down a criminal organization and save the world from destruction. They HAVE to start with a lv. 5 Pokemon. And, as soon as you see that list of starters, you just know it's going to be a chaptered journey roleplay, going through each route and battle step by step, with little to no character interaction. I just can't account for the popularity of these things.
 
Rabbit said:
Yess. I hate this too. There's so rarely a reason for why the characters are all beginner trainers who've never owned Pokemon. Never mind that they're going to bring down a criminal organization and save the world from destruction. They HAVE to start with a lv. 5 Pokemon.
Click to expand...

That too. I've seen way too many RPs out there with a "your characters have been chosen to save the world" plot... yet these characters have never even held a Pokeball, and have yet to obatin their starters. That's just illogical if you ask me. Why choose a bunch of kids with no experience to save the world from iminent destruction (or worse) when you could choose a group of experienced trainers that know what they're doing? I guarantee you a kid with a Torchic is gonna be a lot worse off against whatever is threatening the planet than a guy with a full team of tried and trained Pokemon, no matter which way you try to justify it. Sending newbies off to do a skilled trainer's job needs a very good explanation in any RP. D:
 
iLike2EatPiez said:
That too. I've seen way too many RPs out there with a "your characters have been chosen to save the world" plot... yet these characters have never even held a Pokeball, and have yet to obatin their starters. That's just illogical if you ask me. Why choose a bunch of kids with no experience to save the world from iminent destruction (or worse) when you could choose a group of experienced trainers that know what they're doing? I guarantee you a kid with a Torchic is gonna be a lot worse off against whatever is threatening the planet than a guy with a full team of tried and trained Pokemon, no matter which way you try to justify it. Sending newbies off to do a skilled trainer's job needs a very good explanation in any RP. D:
Click to expand...

YES. THANK YOU.

I pretty much agree with everything stated in the above quote. lol.

^_^'
 
You Had Me At Hello said:
I've seen a number of RP's like that around the site. In my Rp 'A New Professor In Town' for example, I don't play a role in the RP itself outside of a few select NPC's who help move the plot along. The 'play your own character' RP seems to have taken over a bit recently, but there are still a few RP's I've seen with what you term 'traditional' GM's.
Click to expand...

Actually, that would be looking at it the wrong way around. Play-your-own-character RPs without the tabletop elements are the ones that have traditionally been the norm here on PC; it's the puppet master GMing that's the new kid on the block.

Eh, I will not lie, I'm still not fond of the concept. It's like importing all the inconvenience of DnD into a setting that doesn't fit its pacing to begin with.


That aside, there is absolutely nothing preventing people from running one-on-one or invitational RPs; all you need to do is state as much and fulfill the usual criteria required of any RP here. That being said, however, they are a clear minority so they don't warrant their own subsection. It's hard enough just to keep both PRP and ORP alive. If you want something more exclusive, my suggestion is starting a social group and playing it out over IM.


As for the resource situation...well, for the record Mika's guide was actually submitted, approved and posted. In an effort to cut down on stickies, as has been policy here, I just ruled to have all guides posted in a single sticky (namely, this one); you can go right ahead and read. Seems it just got left in the subsection when PRP and ORP merged, though, so I can see why you would miss it.

And yes, it's shameful it ended up the way it did (so much for initiatives...huu...). Myself, I realized I couldn't write a new guide to completion before I had figured out more things about RPing, go figure. XD

Might get back to it one of these days, but I won't hazard promising a deadline yet. And yes, I very much support the notion of people contributing guides for the section, including collaborative efforts. People just seem...rather reluctant to do that, really.
 
GM: Puppet Masters... I'm in that kind of RP and it is attracting many. I think it will be a fun, interesting approach buecause of it's uniqueness. We'll just have to see which is better, because, as you said, Ego, it's new. We can't really determine which is better at the moment...


And I might create a guide. I've got a 97 average in English class, so my teacher thinks my writing is great (even though we don't do that much writing, I wish we did more). I'll create a guide on, um, maybe a how to write more than four dang lines or improve your grammar.

A tout a l'heure for now, amis.

-Infinite Meditation
 
Alter Ego said:
Actually, that would be looking at it the wrong way around. Play-your-own-character RPs without the tabletop elements are the ones that have traditionally been the norm here on PC; it's the puppet master GMing that's the new kid on the block.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, I can only base my opinions on what I've seen since joining the forum. As I'm still relatively new, I've seen mostly the GM style RP's. I actually decided to run my RP in that format because I considered it to be the norm on these forums. :/
 
@ Infinite I was also thinking about working on an improve your own grammar guide. It's funny how I was just thinking about perhaps working on guides for this section when this topic came about @~@

I've experimented with all sorts of RPs @~@ I'm personally fine with either one... but, I've somewhat dabbled in those text-based RPGs where someone is telling you what's there and the such.

Meh... RP writing has never been my problem... It's always been getting them to post -.- That's why in my next one... I'll beat them with a stick O:< *laughs manically*
 
-sulk- Most of the roleplays have closed applications... I hope something new shows up soon.

You know who should be beaten with a stick? GMs who abandon their own roleplay to join another's.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top