Discuss RPG creator's level of involvement

[terra]

(After writing the post, I found it was a little rambly, so if you want the one-line summary, skip to the end.)

I was wondering what the happy (hopefully) citizens of the Adventure [strike]Arena[/strike] [b]Square[/b] thought about how much the creator should be involved in moving the plot along.

My, that was a convoluted sentence.

Anyway, my point is. In some RPGs the creator of the game has almost complete control over the plot. A good example of this is Kill Adam, in which James lets the members know exactly who is posting and most of what's occurring. Obviously he still gives them a good amount of artistic freedom in how whatever happens happens, and the tone of their post and whatnot, but he exerts a good amount of control over the plot.

This may happen in other RPGs too in a less blatant way, like the creator moving the plot along its way without quite stating it in the way the chapters of Kill Adam are set up. However, in my experience this doesn't work quite as well and can end up with a lot of confusion among the players, who don't exactly know what's going on.

But in still another category of RPG, the creator of the RPG has almost no prior idea of what the storyline will be, and allows the game to just carry on in whatever fashion it desires.

My question is, which method do you prefer? And which do you think is best?

I ask this mostly because of an RPG I have in [strike]Recruitment[/strike] the Inn right now, Prophecy. I've left it really open for now, and I'm not sure which way to go about it ... I do have a storyline involving all of the characters in mind, but perhaps it would be better to let members do whatever they want as long as we're all bearing the same premise in mind. So if anyone who signed up for Prophecy wants to let me know what their opinion is on which route they'd rather go, they should also feel free to let me know :) (by PM or in here, whichever).



In conclusion:
[b]How much do you think the creator of the RPG should be involved in moving along its storyline?[/b]

[Balmon]

Personally - I think an RPG runs best with someone firmly at the reins. While the level of control over the plot is debatable - I think someone who introduces NPCs, creates world-altering events, etc., etc., is necessary for... reasons which I cannot give a proper word to. I always feel more comfortable with something when I know there's SOMEONE out there who at least gives the pretense of being in charge, and in control, and aware of all things, and can solve any problems that may come up.

I also think it's essential for someone to just keep things in check - such as to prevent others from altering the set parameters of the universe in which the RPG inhabits.

[Domon]

[COLOR=DarkSlateBlue][SIZE=1]Personally I think that the creator of the rpg should have as much control as needed. I say this because I myself have had bad experiences in some of my rpgs where I can get the jist of what I want to most members via one way or another, but one memeber will not be availible or totally ignore it and just screw the entire story up. And of course then there's the member who will cause major trouble for the rpg.

So basically just do what you think is right, and now that we have the Arena Underground, rpgs will be able to last much longer. So my hats off ^_^[/SIZE][/COLOR]

[Corey]

[size=1]The level of involvemnt the creator has in a RPG is completely up to that person. I've participated in RPGs of both types and have had both good and bad experiances with both. A good example is the Black Horizon RPG I wrote. I exerted a minimal amount of control over the story and allowed it to grow on it's own. True we stayed with a general plotline, but there were so many things that happened that I did not expect and it changed the RPG for the better. I can't rmember the names, but I've also played several RPGs where the creator had complete control.

Another extreme factor is the people that are in the RPG. If you have people that like to write and expand the RPG beyond it's original peramiters, a strict RPg won't work. Same thing if you recruit a gaggle of conformists, an open ended and highly expansive RPG won't work.

When you are recruiting, it's good to check up on the people that you don't know about. Also carefully read their signups and asess how they are as a writer. There are some people that are better suited to write different styles of RPGs. It's good to be able to tell the difference.

My two cents and then some.[/size]

[Solo Tremaine]

[COLOR=#503F86]When I create an RPG, I usually have a decent idea of where I want it to go and how I want it to end, kind of like a film. I don't direct every character and situation, but I know where I want to take it if things get out of hand or too far from the story. So it's more of a gentle control than a tightly-gripped rein, unless there's something specific I've planned out.

There have been times when a post of mine has been about five pages long because I've had to sort out messes that have steered the RPG in completely the wrong direction, or if a lot of people have lost interest and I want to move the story along quickly. I feel a little guilty about taking the adventure away from everyone else, but sometimes you have to do something to keep it going.

I tend to prefer having a sort of control, otherwise I find myself at a loss for what I have to do. I personally need some kind of direction, otherwise I end up just being carried along by other people and I don't like that. I find that the ones with greater amounts of control tend to have a greater sense of purpose and direction, and can be much more exciting to play along to. But I've not been in many open-ended RPGs. I suppose it'd be quite nice just to have a character to play and not have to worry about being shepherded into an adventure straight away.

I've tried to make Anime Stereotype High School as much the participants' RPG as I can, so I've not decided how everything'll plan out. I have certain story events keyed in already, but it's entirely up to the players how they get to them ^_^ It's quite different to anything I've tried making before, but should be good fun.[/COLOR]

[James]

[color=#707875]I think that this question really depends on one thing; do you want the RPG to end?

Most RPGs -- probably a good 95% of them -- never actually "finish". Nobody writes what could be considered a [i]final post[/i] in the story. And I personally think that this is due in part to the dynamic nature of RPGs. When one story arc finishes, the next begins. And, more often than not, there are multiple side stories going on all at once.

I think that if you want to end your RPG and have some kind of beginning, middle and end, you're going to need to have more creator involvement. The creator might be able to provide some basic direction/guideline for the overall story.

But that doesn't mean that there can't be plenty of flexibility when it comes to giving each person a major role in the story. There are plenty of RPGs starting up at the moment, which are trying to strike that balance.[/color]

[Katana]

[QUOTE=James][color=#707875]Most RPGs -- probably a good 95% of them -- never actually "finish". Nobody writes what could be considered a [i]final post[/i] in the story. And I personally think that this is due in part to the dynamic nature of RPGs. When one story arc finishes, the next begins. And, more often than not, there are multiple side stories going on all at once.
[/color][/QUOTE]

You forgot to mention that most RPGs just die. People don't post in them anymore, expecting other people to, and it withers away because people are waiting for others to, persay, pick up the slack.
I'm not quite sure which RPG control-level I prefer, because I have never been in one where the creator is in (almost) complete control (don't get me the wrong way, I'm just saying words that sorta describe the Kill Adam way, or at least what it said to me). In fact, the only RPG I've been in that's actually finished was Rurouni Kenshin: River of Time.
That's a pretty good example of an RP going through tons of stages. There was an uneasy stage for the first three pages or so, then it got more entertaining, and then we had about three pages of climax, leading up to the "big boss level". There were some questioning posts here and there *coughs loudly*, but the rest of the posters managed to squeeze out the good stuff. ^^;
RK is also a good example of a sorta freelance RPG. Sure, there was the basic plotline, but just how we made it from point A to point B was entirely in the air, and the creativity of my fellow time-travlers really shined brightly. After the "boss" fight, there was another story arc for about six pages before it ended with us going home. Conna_da_fox made the last post, and though it may not be considered a closer, it definetly wrapped up what the rest of us wanted.
As of now, I have to say I liked the freelance option. It's a good way to show creativity and prove to others that you can be a good RPer. ^^

[terra]

Hm, you guys have brought up a lot of interesting points, thanks for all of your input.

I guess my preference for RPGs is always that they have some definite ending. To me, it just seems a little pointless if everyone's not heading toward some sort of finish. It never occurred to me (oddly enough) that some people actually might not mind if their RPG never finished ... I really like conclusions.

So it bothers me sometimes when the creator isn't taking quite as firm a hand with the reins (that was a metaphor gone bad ...) as I think s/he could. It often gets to a point where I'm thinking, "Oh, it's getting close to a major turning point in the plot, but none of us are quite sure of what should happen next, and one of us needs to make a decision." I think those decisions should be made by the creator if no one else has stepped up. I know that personally, in RPGs where I'm only a participant, I sometimes worry about putting in major plot twists because I'm afraid it will interfere with what the creator originally had planned.

As for when I'm creator of the RPG ... well, I've always sort of had a skeleton idea planned out from start to finish, but most of mine haven't made it far past "start" so I don't know how it'd work out yet :p.

[Arcadia]

[quote name='terra'] I know that personally, in RPGs where I'm only a participant, I sometimes worry about putting in major plot twists because I'm afraid it will interfere with what the creator originally had planned.[/quote]
[size=1]That's always bothered me, and part of it I think is because of the lack of communication between the different participants and the creator. PMs are the best way to ask about ideas and get permission for new story arcs, but it still boils down to a familiar choice - how much do you want reveal about the story already? Do you want to keep some things as a surprise and keep in mind the possibility that your plans could be slightly altered because of it, or do you want to have a much tighter control over the story by introducing each new plot?

Since I've only created one RPG here so far, it's kind of been my guinea pig as far as all this is concerned. I know that I'm a control-freak, so there's no getting around that. But I think because of that, I try to back off a little too much some times so that the different participants don't feel restricted in what they can and can't post. It can be hard to balance out at times.

When it gets down to it, though, I like more control because I know that there's a definite plan and the story isn't going to dwindle into nothing. You've a better chance of actually reaching the end that way, and like terra, that's always been my main goal. Yay for control-freaks. ^_~[/size]

[Ben]

*eases into a rocking chair*

I remember back in the earlier versions of OB, Recruitment and RPing were both in the same thread. People would simply insert a "Can I play?" into the middle of the story, and generally the answer was "yes." Things were very relaxed back then as far as RPGs go, especially when compared to today.

People just seemed to be much more at ease about the RPGs, and didn't worry about changing the plot. A lot of times, the plot developed from the posts of the participants. The creator of the RPG was just another participant, not always exerting any more control than any other RPer. Heh, in one of my first RPGs, the participants often overruled the creator in favor of a more workable plot.

Unrestricted RPGs can go one of two ways, I think.

#1. With no inhibitions concerning plots, mature RPers can develop their own story and delve deeply into their own characters. They're not as concerned with introducing new NPC's and scenarios of their own. Cliffhangers wouold often be left to allow someone else to carry the story on from that point in their own fashion.

#2. The RPers are too free to do as they please, or are not mature enough to handle the freedoms granted to them. Their characters may receive g0dly powers accidently, or somehow they discover the secret to saving the universe when nobody had in ten thousand years. SOmething screwy happens, and everything goes to hell.

Unrestricted RPGs can be fun, but they're not always the best. :p

[The Harlequin]

[font=gothic][color=darkslategray]Having a vague storyline idea is good, simply so you know where to push the rpg if it starts to stall. However, having a very set storyline in your head often fails, unless you're in very close contact with all the participants. And then people are hesitant to post because they don't want to ruin the storyline (the main reason for rpg deaths, in my studied opinion). Just letting things run doesn't really work either though, as it often degenerates into either filler posts that eventually trail off, or, given the type of rpg a series of fights or romances that don't really go anywhere.

Another note in this regard is that I'm yet to see an rpg where the creator plays a "DM" style role really work that well. So I'm very interested to see how Torment turns out.[/font][/color]