PbP "Going through the motions" ?

[RedMax]

I may be alone in this, but sometimes I join a PbP and it just feels like everyone is just going through the motions. What I mean is, it happens (in my experience) when there are more than three players, and is really prominent when there are six or even more players.

In the "going through the motions" phenomenon, a GM will describe the situation, everyone chimes in with a move, a roll, a quip, and then the GM plays out the scene and we're on to the next room. The game feels like you're playing a video game like Baldur's Gate and then you throw in a comment and that's it.

The GM feels more like they are checking in on the thread and doing the motions and then disappearing for a week.

When I join a game and there are only a couple of people, I get excited, I build my character, and then after that I see another five or six are added to the party, and I get that sense of dread that it's going to be a "going through the motions" exercise.

The problem is that it always feels like it's going to be an intimate little group, and then it explodes into this unwieldy number. Am I wrong that PbP generally gets more this way as the numbers increase, and that at 6 or more it is inevitably this?

I am asking this because I want to hear solutions and exceptions to this phenomenon, or a complete refutation would also be fine. : )

 

[Lord Foul]

Based on my own experience with PBP games, I think it is far more about the level of engagement that individual players (and GMs) bring to the game than the number of players involved. So long as you have at least one GM and one or two players who are active... and pro-active, then the game will usually be fun and exciting and gain a sustainable head of steam.

The problems occur when you have several players who are either very intermittent, or very slow to respond, and the GM feels obligated to wait a 'reasonable' time for them before moving the game along, which can result in stagnation and those who were interested losing some of the fire. Another thing I've noticed is the seemingly large proportion of PBP players who just won't engage with other player characters in the game, so there's no discussion or conversation going on between the party members; it's all focussed on respondig to the GM's posts in isolation. I don't know why that's a thing, but it certainly seems to be a common ailment.

I'm afraid I have no useful solutions to offer, except to encourage people to be more pro-active, and to play their character as if it is an actual person (or whatever) in an actual group... so actually talk to other people!

 

[Vladim]

1 hour ago, Lord Foul said:

Another thing I've noticed is the seemingly large proportion of PBP players who just won't engage with other player characters in the game, so there's no discussion or conversation going on between the party members; it's all focussed on respondig to the GM's posts in isolation. I don't know why that's a thing, but it certainly seems to be a common ailment.

This has sometimes been my experience as well. Some things get trickier with many PCs, for example dialogue, where it can feel like 6 characters interrogating a NPC in a way that feels very unnatural and strange. Basically if the players don't co-ordinate or have some ground rules about posting etiquette, it can easily devolve into the players basically playing 6 games in parallel, and the GM just struggling to keep up and having no time or energy to do anything else.

The medium itself has its flaws, so I wouldn't blame it entirely on the players (or number of players) or GM. Some etiquette guidelines could help, but that presupposes that players would actually read them and follow them, which is not always the case.

When you break it down, things like this is why some groups work and others don't, even when there's strong interest in the game.

[RedMax]

56 minutes ago, Vladim said:

This has sometimes been my experience as well. Some things get trickier with many PCs, for example dialogue, where it can feel like 6 characters interrogating a NPC in a way that feels very unnatural and strange. Basically if the players don't co-ordinate or have some ground rules about posting etiquette, it can easily devolve into the players basically playing 6 games in parallel, and the GM just struggling to keep up and having no time or energy to do anything else.

The medium itself has its flaws, so I wouldn't blame it entirely on the players (or number of players) or GM. Some etiquette guidelines could help, but that presupposes that players would actually read them and follow them, which is not always the case.

When you break it down, things like this is why some groups work and others don't, even when there's strong interest in the game.

Yes, this is is huge symptom. Five different people responding in an interrogation, and it seems like none have read any of the other posts. It is strange. I guess this is what I'm getting at--how do we work with this situation? Or, do we cap at 3 or 4, and have strict ground rules? Like, you could say, "If a person has already responded to the situation, you can build on it but you can't do something different or contradictory."

It's kind of like, heck, it's a lot like the rules of improv, and it makes sense, because there are always elements of improv in rpg. Anyway, in improv, you can't contradict or deny anything that the last person says, you can only make a response of "Yes, and..."

Edited January 8 by RedMax (see edit history)

[Vladim]

It's probably a side-effect of video games (cRPGs and the main character attitude in them) and playing with internet strangers (since ttRPGs are designed to be played with friends that should-at least in theory-have a good group dynamic already).

In terms of practical tips, I like bolded text for dialogue as a courtesy to the GM and fellow players; in a sense, that's the tl;dr of my post for most occasions, so if folks need to skim through, they can focus on that part. Same for declaring PC actions and intent in short OOC spoilers or something like that.

There's also an unspoken rule of "GM posts, then all players have to post before the GM posts again" in many games, but I think this is not conducive to naturally-flowing dialogue. When I GM, I prefer to write shorter but more frequent posts so that dialogue can flow better. This is not without its caveats, of course: sometimes a single PC might dominate the interaction, which can be a problem. But basic courtesy and common sense should address this.

Small groups are good too (I prefer 3-5) but not without their own problems. A smaller group is more fragile to ghosting, and some games assume a party size of 4+. The player dynamics on a 3-person game can also become a little tricky.

There's no one-size-fits-all answer here. Usually I just run a one shot of sorts for 6-12 months and if the group is good I continue GMing, otherwise I just run another until I find people I mesh with well.

[Malkavian Grin]

I think it comes down to a sense of the player losing interest in the game, or never really had that much interest to begin with. Maybe they just don't understand the true art of PbP.

I've seen it multiple times. Everyone's just talking at each other instead of interacting with one another. No one's building onto the story of anyone else. Just a bunch of solo players that happen to be in the same game.

This problem seems mostly prominent in the more popular systems; d&d and pathfinder. But you're right in that it tends to happen more in full games (but I've seen it in very small ones too!).

I wish i had more insight into it

[Vladim]

It's also hard to blame players for not taking an interest in other PCs when character creation is done in such a disjointed fashion for most PbP games (with the average application system). In a face-to-face game with a group of friends, the players and the GM would probably gather around the table and discuss ideas and generate PCs in a more collaborative way. This way of collaborative char-gen might be more helpful for fostering interest in all the characters (instead of just one's own), and make the hobby a little less egotistical / self-focused for the players.

Some games, like Fate, have aspects of collaborative char-gen baked into the system-I think that's probably helpful too. But again, this approach is not without its caveats in a medium like PbP.

[Malkavian Grin]

@Vladim I've almost never had anyone come to a game (face to face) not knowing what kind of character they were going to play. Only on very rare occasions did my group collaborate with one another (much to my chagrin).

[Michael Silverbane]

This discussion puts me in mind of the many, "Why do games die?" threads.

 

A thing that players can do to help keep a game alive is to make a concerted effort to engage with the other players. The GM can, of course, encourage this behavior by pairing up players that have common elements in their backgrounds, or pushing players into more intimate cooperation or into minor conflicts, and so on. But primarily, this is going to be something that does just hinge on the players to take upon themselves.

[cailano]

I hate to say it, but this is where the game demands something of the Gamemaster.

I'm not saying the players aren't important because they are but a good GM brings the best out of players like a good director brings the best out of actors.

You can't make a great sculpture out of muck, but most players aren't muck.

I like to think I'm a pretty okay GM. For my RPG brethren, I would suggest the following:

1. Post regularly. The GM determines the pace of the game. I try to post multiple days per week, with five being the goal even if I don't always get there.
2. Know when to get out of a scene and do so at the earliest opportunity
3. Work on your writing. You don't have to be Hemingway, but if you write evocative posts, your players will tend to follow suit. If you do the bare minimum, so will they.
4. If you use modules, use good ones. For fantasy games, Goodman Games and Paizo are the best in the business, IMHO.
5. Let your players drive the story and leave plenty of room for them to do awesome stuff.
6. Make your games dangerous. The threat of defeat should be ever-present.

 

For @RedMax, I suggest starting a game and showing them how it's done. Be the hero you're waiting for!

[Basil_Bottletop]

I'm with Grin on this one... I've rarely been at a session Zero f2f/Discord game and felt like the group made a cohesive effort to pre-plan multiple ideas and then come together on a unified concept or smaller duo link-ups. It's mostly just one player (or two) with some ideas (maybe even with research), one player resting on their laurels as the token [insert style/class] player, and then the others just pretending like they can just fill in the gaps with 'whatever'.

Narrator: Rarely do the gap fillers ever feel like they are as invested, in my experience. It happens on occasion, but more often than not they bring the same amount of enthusiasm to the game as they did the session zero.

MW's application process is weirdly more in-depth and substantial than any live game session zero I've ever done. This fact hurts my heart every time I'm faced with it's reality.

But I digress...

Back at the subject at hand.

I really dislike the 'everyone asks the NPC questions all at once' that happens in tabletop gaming. At the table, it can be mitigated by the GM (or the player playing the bombarded character) simply interrupting further questions and conversations and then making eye contact with the player when it's their turn. PbP doesn't have that and it's not easy to simply wait your turn when there's a real chance that the scene may move on before you get a opportunity to play out a back-and-forth. I've been known to post nothingburger posts just to ensure I'm still actively in the scene in case it moves onward and I don't want to explain gaps. This might feel like I'm not invested, but I'm simply avoiding doing something -bombard the NPC- I truly dislike.

I have gone so far as to pop into the OOC and said: "If it's possible, I have follow-up questions for this NPC after they answer the questions already posted."

Another thing is that some players are simply not interested in the deeper investment of the character or the writing involved in it. I'm in and have been a part of dozens of games on MW where players were happy to one-line post and would be content to do that for years of a game. They still get their enjoyment out of the hobby. As someone who's on the other end of that spectrum of gaming style, it makes it very difficult for me to engage with their character because there isn't substance there to react and respond to, but there's not much I can really do about it. The same may apply to them; they may hate having to read my paragraph post because they simply want to get to the conclusion of a scene or something.

I also dislike when a pbp scene is playing out between 2-3 individuals with some flow between them and someone feels its necessary to simply insert themselves into it without adding anything of substance but also disrupting it (double whammy!). I get that they want to post, but the freedom of pbp is that you can post doing something else (or simply existing nearby) without breaking the flow of the scene. It can be hard to read though, especially in a new game with players you're still getting a feel for and learning their habits.

Think about a live table where two people are doing stuff and one guy shouts at the GM: "Johnny is going to get drinks at the bar!" The scene may pick back up, but the disruption likely murdered whatever train of thought the two players had. In PbP, it isn't as much of a disruption.

But that also has a negative connotation if you decide not to engage in the scene because you think the active players have a nice scene flow going...

Grin and I are in a game together where a small portion of the player pool and the GM posted very quickly and multiple times, spanning the exploration of a map and IC time. Suddenly the rest of us were unwillingly minutes behind in the scene without any chance of including ourselves without retconning. For some folks -like me- I then feel like I need to explain why my character went comatose for five minutes instead of assisting, exploring, reacting to the things as they happened. It feels like a lot of catch-up and can get tiresome after a few times.

This is more obvious when there are horror/mystery elements in a game too, for what it's worth. Positioning of characters may be important, rolls might need to be provided, etc. Obviously there are scenes where the leashes of the character are far more free and one person over in that corner doing something doesn't really mess with what someone else is doing in the opposite corner.

Being mindful of posting rate is about the only way I've figured to combat this particular issue, unfortunately. Trying to post in set timeframes -agreed upon by the group- is also helpful. One character doing something that takes 30 minutes while the others are in a much smaller time frame means that in reality that longer task shouldn't suddenly be complete just because it's their turn to post again.

Communicate in the OOC too, but that's a given. I know I've just ranted on about a few of my PbP grievances, but I see a connection to the 'uninvested player' syndrome. I believe all of these are ways to connect players and characters better to the story at hand from the position as another player. Cailano did a good job outlining how the GM can also help, but sometimes it takes the players to wrangle in the rest of the player pool and make a better game.

 

 

Edited January 10 by Basil_Bottletop (see edit history)

[cailano]

@Basil_Bottletop brought up an interesting point about over-the-table games vs. PbP games. Those points are exactly why PbP and online play have become my preferred methods for playing RPGs. While I still believe that the best RPG experience is a good group playing together in the same room, the reality is that those groups are very hard to find and maintain. I've had much better luck with PbP campaigns. Part of that is having a deep group of players to draw from, and part of it is because PbP is just so dang convenient. I love gaming most days without having to set aside an entire evening every week. I also find prep is much easier in PbP because you can look stuff up whenever needed.

One more tip for my fellow GMs: don't wait on slow players! Decide on the pace you want for a game, and if a player can't keep up, move on. NPC them for a round of combat or simply leave a scene. If they don't like it, they can be more attentive. Usually, that's exactly what they end up doing. That's part of how GMs control the pace of a game.

To be fair, I have had players leave my games because they move too fast. In fact, it happens so often that I commonly recruit one or two more players than I need in a group, assuming that I'll have some churn. That usually covers it, but another benefit of playing here on Myth-Weavers is that we can always open up another recruitment.

[Basil_Bottletop]

A commentary on the topic of Pace for GMs new to Myth-Weavers or PbP in general:

Timezones are a very real thing. As are posting habits. Joan may post before bed GMT but Garth posts over lunch CST. They may have the ability to post far more frequently than they are actually posting because they are waiting on the overlap of their fellow player's post. The overlap could be two days worth of waiting. It's why I tend to hesitate when GMs set a hard 5/week posting rate or something equally as unrealistic.

A player that doesn't log in for an agreed-upon-ahead-of-time period? NPC them. A player that posts pretty regularly but hasn't in two days and now you really want to see the conclusion of this scene so you just push them forward? *sad Pac-Man noises*

[RedMax]

16 hours ago, cailano said:

For @RedMax, I suggest starting a game and showing them how it's done. Be the hero you're waiting for!

Fair. :) But in my defense, I am running PbP on other sites at the moment, just not here. I have run PbP on here (beginning to end), a Champions 6e and a Star Frontiers, and so I think I have the Myth Weavers creds to make this observation. ;)

I'm being held back by my experiences on Myth Weavers. Not bad experiences, just informative. My two successful games on here allowed me to see what works well (for me) on M-W and what doesn't. For me it would be to keep the roster down to three and to pick a game that fits well with PbP.

My purpose in posting this thread was to raise the awareness of what I see are the obstacles to making PbP closer to a tabletop experience. I thought I might be wrong in my observations, but some people seem to be having similar experiences. I think I'm hoping to help change the atmosphere and expectations at M-W so that when I do start a new game, everyone is already on the same page.

[RedMax]

17 hours ago, cailano said:

 

Know when to get out of a scene and do so at the earliest opportunity

Yes. By God, yes. This is really important. This is why these threads are important: insights like that.

How many games have you been in that have been killed by the GM letting a scene drag on too long? This might even be the MAIN killer of PbP games.

For heaven's sake, GMs of the world, pretend you're in a Star Wars movie and do a wipe to the next scene. I do this all the time on PbP, and in tabletop I do it too. I sometimes even say, "Star Wars screen wipe, and you're outside the bunker, three days later." Do we have to do the whole horse journey from Hommlet to the ruined castle? ;P

Edited January 10 by RedMax (see edit history)