Viewpoint Hot take: Multi-paragraph posts are unproductive

[Dov]

I wish I had that fortitude, I'm too easily disappointed. I really get my hopes up when I see something I think I'll like. Still not over your tiny suit shark btw. I need one of those in my life.
My all or nothing reasoning both benefits me and screws me over. I want to play with people who mean what they say, but the reality is that most people don't have preferences so completely formed. This thread's a great example. I consider myself fairly aware of what I do and do not like in an rp, but the more we talk about one particular concept, the more exceptions I notice. Ironically, a very long interest check with painstaking clarity would probably result in a better writing partner for me.

 

[rae2nerdy]

I wish I had that fortitude, I'm too easily disappointed. I really get my hopes up when I see something I think I'll like. Still not over your tiny suit shark btw. I need one of those in my life.
My all or nothing reasoning both benefits me and screws me over. I want to play with people who mean what they say, but the reality is that most people don't have preferences so completely formed. This thread's a great example. I consider myself fairly aware of what I do and do not like in an rp, but the more we talk about one particular concept, the more exceptions I notice. Ironically, a very long interest check with painstaking clarity would probably result in a better writing partner for me.

It's a dollmaker so you can make your own version : Icon maker｜Picrew.
In the end it's up to you. I think I've just been around long enough that I don't stress the minor details anymore. But as long as you are enjoying yourself it's all good.

 

[BasiliskVeranda]

On one hand, I can agree, but mostly because sometimes people 'lamp' and fill up posts with non-interactions that don't give anyone anything to work with. No dialog, or at least not directed at anyone, no actions.

On the other hand, writing a few paragraphs about the character and where they're at [so to speak] leads to more immersion.

What is the character thinking? What are they seeing? Did they look at someone/something?
What does it feel like, how do they feel? What are they hearing?

Writing isn't just about dialog, and the human experience isn't just actions or words. We experience the world through sensory input. We have our own internal universes. The best way to craft strong characters, is to write characters like people. Not only that, but the tapestry of our characters exists before, above, and beyond them. There's interesting context that doesn't come from just 'jim did x, jim said y', and can't be found through just actions and dialog.

I think it's worth trying to flesh out internal worlds.

 

[rae2nerdy]

I think it's worth trying to flesh out internal worlds.

Seriously the only reason I roleplay is to flesh out worlds. My roleplays don’t really have action or even really plots. It’s all about fleshing out a specific corner of the world through character exploitation of said world.

So for me shorter posts just miss the whole point of why I’m roleplaying. Because they are confined to strict reply/response formats which doesn’t really expand on any part of the world itself.

 

[BasiliskVeranda]

Seriously the only reason I roleplay is to flesh out worlds. My roleplays don’t really have action or even really plots. It’s all about fleshing out a specific corner of the world through character exploitation of said world.

So for me shorter posts just miss the whole point of why I’m roleplaying. Because they are confined to strict reply/response formats which doesn’t really expand on any part of the world itself.

I agree with you. But I can also offer a contrary point; I had a co-GM way, way, way mad long ago, and they would do 3 paragraphs max. But they threw so many curve-balls, and were so ingenious/gave so much, that it didn't really matter. Quality over quantity.

 

[rae2nerdy]

I agree with you. But I can also offer a contrary point; I had a co-GM way, way, way mad long ago, and they would do 3 paragraphs max. But they threw so many curve-balls, and were so ingenious/gave so much, that it didn't really matter. Quality over quantity.

Oh I was talking about me personally. I don’t really care how long my partners posts are, well as long as you get a few sentences out. I will have a rage stroke if you reply with something to the effect of “Sally listened to Jan and said ‘Ok.’”.

I mean I tend to like my worlds enough I will just keep fleshing it out by myself and you can post whatever. Now these aren’t my top favorite roleplay but they don’t actually bother me that much on their own.

 

[Tulik]

I have followed some golden rules that I follow over the years after I’ve adapted my writing style. Whether it be with one person, or many.

1. If you are having a conversation the post should be concise and allow breathing room for others to respond to. If there is action coinciding with the conversation, it should be action that allows people to react to it. You are pointing to something, walking, working on something, etc. it should all be for the benefit of others, because that’s why we roleplay, right? To have a fluid experience with others.

2. If you are focusing on actions: the action should be detailed, but not overly so. Fighting is even more so. Blow by blow can be fun to reply to, but sometimes that can be a labor as well. It can be a double edged sword, no pun intended. It all depends on the actions, and discretion.

3. Depending on whose in charge of the story and setting: environments should be as detailed as you require them to be, and not overly so. If you’re inside a manor do you require the floors to be described by their specific type of wood and the grain of them? Stuff like that. I’ve seen people describe walls down to the marbling and I don’t see why other than to pad out their writing.

some people enjoy doing in depth writing, and there isn’t anything wrong with that. But if that’s what you’re focusing on? You’re losing a lot of the aspect of role playing, where the purpose is to bounce off your partners, and build an engaging story with one another. If you gotta read through seven paragraphs to only get two sentences worth of substances? In my opinion you’re doing it wrong.

 

[Idea]

You’re losing a lot of the aspect of role playing, where the purpose is to bounce off your partners, and build an engaging story with one another. If you gotta read through seven paragraphs to only get two sentences worth of substances? In my opinion you’re doing it wrong.

I respectfully disagree. Neither is the story any less engaging with the quote "more in depth writing", nor is substance lacking from that writing. We do bounce off our partners, but we do it on a different scale, and while we do add more contact than what you might consider substantive, our horizons on what "substance" is are broader, many things you might consider fluff or not even consider at all we find to be pretty relevant content.

If I may, I'd like to take your example to show what I mean:

I’ve seen people describe walls down to the marbling and I don’t see why other than to pad out their writing.

Now, I can't say exactly that the people you've seen do that were doing it for any of the following reasons, or any reasons at all besides padding, however plenty of possibilities do exits:
-Worldbuilding
-Foreshadowing
-Character or Player personal interest
-Creating atmosphere through a more complete visual of the environment
-Underlining a character's feeling of boredom through their attention on seemingly random things

Now, these things may not matter to you (especially the second to last one), but for us who like longer or more detailed posts, they can be pretty relevant.

 

[Tulik]

I respectfully disagree. Neither is the story any less engaging with the quote "more in depth writing", nor is substance lacking from that writing. We do bounce off our partners, but we do it on a different scale, and while we do add more contact than what you might consider substantive, our horizons on what "substance" is are broader, many things you might consider fluff or not even consider at all we find to be pretty relevant content.

If I may, I'd like to take your example to show what I mean:



Now, I can't say exactly that the people you've seen do that were doing it for any of the following reasons, or any reasons at all besides padding, however plenty of possibilities do exits:
-Worldbuilding
-Foreshadowing
-Character or Player personal interest
-Creating atmosphere through a more complete visual of the environment
-Underlining a character's feeling of boredom through their attention on seemingly random things

Now, these things may not matter to you (especially the second to last one), but for us who like longer or more detailed posts, they can be pretty relevant.

The relevancy comes with the narrative of the story, not the person. Perhaps in a one on one you might like that. But its not a novel. Many people are involved sometimes. If your trying to get the point across that the room is that if an angry king who beheads people for simply looking at him wrong, is that info about the walls still relevant? It would depend on what else is happening. Perhaps if you entered an empty room that may be of importance.

when you want to convey something, you should convey it as clear as possible. If it’s the room you want to convey? Then by all means, marble up those walls. But if it’s not? In my opinion you shouldn’t focus on the walls, but rather the man in the throne whose face is twisted with the wrinkles of age and anger who is ready to decapitate you with the slightly abused and rusted axe at his side that’s seen countless individuals laid beneath its blood stained head.

 

[Idea]

The relevancy comes with the narrative of the story, not the person. Perhaps in a one on one you might like that. But its not a novel. Many people are involved sometimes. If your trying to get the point across that the room is that if an angry king who beheads people for simply looking at him wrong, is that info about the walls still relevant? It would depend on what else is happening. Perhaps if you entered an empty room that may be of importance.

when you want to convey something, you should convey it as clear as possible. If it’s the room you want to convey? Then by all means, marble up those walls. But if it’s not? In my opinion you shouldn’t focus on the walls, but rather the man in the throne whose face is twisted with the wrinkles of age and anger who is ready to decapitate you with the slightly abused and rusted axe at his side that’s seen countless individuals laid beneath its blood stained head.

Again, I disagree. Relevancy does not come only from the story, and even if it did, something can be irrelavant to someone else without being padding (that is, if padding is something one includes for the mere purpose of increasing length without adding substance. The reason why I say something can be irrelevant to others without being padding, is because if I include something because I'm personally interested in bringing it up, I didn't put it there with the intention of increasing length).

There are many things which one can find relevant that are completely detached from the story itself. The immersion, the worldbuilding, one's self-expression and thematic exploration, among many other things. If you value only what is in the story, or directly pertaining to it, then you will not find things which add content beside it relevant, but for those who do value those others things, adding such content is relevant, and the way we'd really be missing out is when we or our partners lack those things.

 

[Tulik]

Again, I disagree. Relevancy does not come only from the story, and even if it did, something can be irrelavant to someone else without being padding (that is, if padding is something one includes for the mere purpose of increasing length without adding substance. The reason why I say something can be irrelevant to others without being padding, is because if I include something because I'm personally interested in bringing it up, I didn't put it there with the intention of increasing length).

There are many things which one can find relevant that are completely detached from the story itself. The immersion, the worldbuilding, one's self-expression and thematic exploration, among many other things. If you value only what is in the story, or directly pertaining to it, then you will not find things which add content beside it relevant, but for those who do value those others things, adding such content is relevant, and the way we'd really be missing out is when we or our partners lack those things.

I suppose it really comes down whether you’re leading the story or not. World building can be a part of the story, and therefore not padding. Padding is when you fill out the length of the material for the purpose of creating a resume sized entry that no one stands to gain from. While yes, you might gain from that bit of knowledge you think everyone should know, is it knowledge that fills the story with a forward motion? Especially in times when the story should indeed be taking precedent. If there is down time to reflect on events, or take in the surroundings I would say whole heartedly describe your surroundings. But when you are face to face with a conflict, or a tense moment. I fee those moments should be the star of the show.

again, my arguments aren’t against the length and details, but rather FOR fluidity and keeping the story pressing along in a manner which everyone can enjoy. Because I assure you, a good story is remembered. And no one is gonna remember the fine print details of the counterclockwise column motifs over the battle that is happening in the throne room once you spurned the king and his guards.

 

[Crayons]

While I'm more of a mid-range writer (300-800 word posts normally) I'd rather have too much detail than not enough. When people fail to describe anything in their posts, it makes me lose immersion, because I have no idea what my character is seeing/hearing/smelling/whatever. People not describing stuff adequately in their posts is extremely irritating. What am I supposed to do, guess? Or just assume my character is completely unobservant?

Example from an actual RP: in a place where magic is exceedingly rare, my character who had never really seen anyone do magic at all, except healing, is working with an ally he hasn't met before who has several water mages in his employ. Player of said character just wrote "the mages with him put out the fire" (paraphrasing but basically just that). Like... what am I supposed to do with that pathetic amount of info. It's likely that MC is going to be extremely impressed and interested watching these mages but I don't even get a description of how many, what they look like, where the water is coming from, do they magic it from nothing or does it come from the river/the air/their bodies, how they put the fire out. I'd rather have a thousand words of purple prose, so at least I and my character know what the eff is actually happening.

 

[Idea]

is it knowledge that fills the story with a forward motion? Especially in times when the story should indeed be taking precedent. If there is down time to reflect on events, or take in the surroundings I would say whole heartedly describe your surroundings.

See, when it comes to my own writing and others with styles similar to mine, whether something makes the story move is the wrong question. Of course, every post should move the narrative along, I think on that much we can definitely agree. However, I find that there is more that can be done.

Let's take a really tense scene, say, the character is being chased by a group of supernatural assassins. They could be hiding anywhere, and they have a bone to pick with the character, so they want to kill them slowly and painfully. In such a scene, I imagine your instinct would probably be to focus on quick writing and short sentences, to show the character frantically trying to escape their pursuers, writing about how the character constantly glances over their shoulder and what they do in their attempt to stay alive. This is great writing, and almost sure to invoke feelings of thrill if done well.
A writer like me, however, would focus on an experience of dread over thrill. I'm less interested in the action (which is not to say I completely disregard the action) and more interested in showing the weight and mindset of that action. I'll probably still use shorter sentences, but among the character's attempt to escape, I'll probably employ repeated use of "they glanced over their shoulder" to show the character's obsessive compulsion to do so. I'll have the character stumble and show how dark the environment is to emphasize the danger that could come from anywhere. I will include stray thoughts where the character imagines what could be done to them, or about the things most important to them.

Yeah, there are times where the story takes precedent, but even in those times a writer like me does not find it something which could eclipse the surrounding context of the action. When the action amps up, those elements are going to be reduced to the more relevant narrative-wise at the moment.

again, my arguments aren’t against the length and details, but rather FOR fluidity and keeping the story pressing along in a manner which everyone can enjoy.

Sure, absolutely. The issue is when fluidity comes in conflict with the things people are trying to get from those details and from that length. The length in particular isn't an end in of itself, but an indicative sign of the presence of content people want to see.

To phrase in another way: there is no manner which "everyone can enjoy". What you gain in fluidity, to us can come at the expense of context, meaning and immersion. One can absolutely value such things over fluidity, and they'll be missing out when they don't have that, nomatter how fluid or otherwise well written a post may be.

Because I assure you, a good story is remembered.

Again, agreed, but we do have different ideas of what a "good story" is.

And no one is gonna remember the fine print details of the counterclockwise column motifs over the battle that is happening in the throne room once you spurned the king and his guards.

You'd be surprised. Plenty of partners I've worked with remembered very peculiar details about some of the worlds we worked on together, and characters we've encountered, long after the death of those RPs. Plus, given so many RPs die so early, is it really fair to suggest only those things which absolutely have long-lasting impact should ever be included, when in fact the majority of the people have 50% to something akin to 2% control over where the story is actually headed?

 

[Tulik]

See, when it comes to my own writing and others with styles similar to mine, whether something makes the story move is the wrong question. Of course, every post should move the narrative along, I think on that much we can definitely agree. However, I find that there is more that can be done.

Let's take a really tense scene, say, the character is being chased by a group of supernatural assassins. They could be hiding anywhere, and they have a bone to pick with the character, so they want to kill them slowly and painfully. In such a scene, I imagine your instinct would probably be to focus on quick writing and short sentences, to show the character frantically trying to escape their pursuers, writing about how the character constantly glances over their shoulder and what they do in their attempt to stay alive. This is great writing, and almost sure to invoke feelings of thrill if done well.
A writer like me, however, would focus on an experience of dread over thrill. I'm less interested in the action (which is not to say I completely disregard the action) and more interested in showing the weight and mindset of that action. I'll probably still use shorter sentences, but among the character's attempt to escape, I'll probably employ repeated use of "they glanced over their shoulder" to show the character's obsessive compulsion to do so. I'll have the character stumble and show how dark the environment is to emphasize the danger that could come from anywhere. I will include stray thoughts where the character imagines what could be done to them, or about the things most important to them.

Yeah, there are times where the story takes precedent, but even in those times a writer like me does not find it something which could eclipse the surrounding context of the action. When the action amps up, those elements are going to be reduced to the more relevant narrative-wise at the moment.



Sure, absolutely. The issue is when fluidity comes in conflict with the things people are trying to get from those details and from that length. The length in particular isn't an end in of itself, but an indicative sign of the presence of content people want to see.

To phrase in another way: there is no manner which "everyone can enjoy". What you gain in fluidity, to us can come at the expense of context, meaning and immersion. One can absolutely value such things over fluidity, and they'll be missing out when they don't have that, nomatter how fluid or otherwise well written a post may be.


Again, agreed, but we do have different ideas of what a "good story" is.


You'd be surprised. Plenty of partners I've worked with remembered very peculiar details about some of the worlds we worked on together, and characters we've encountered, long after the death of those RPs. Plus, given so many RPs die so early, is it really fair to suggest only those things which absolutely have long-lasting impact should ever be included, when in fact the majority of the people have 50% to something akin to 2% control over where the story is actually headed?

You make some valid points? And I’m not against any of them. There comes a point when you look at the page that you’ve written and you must ask yourself is it too much? I settle for four to six paragraphs of light informations that keeps things going. If each paragraph has four or five sentences that is still a lot of information you can relay. I’d even argue you could go down to strictly four paragraphs. To tell your portion. There is really only so much a character can say and take in before it becomes less about what you are trying to convey, and more about your ability to convey that information.

your fellow being chased by assassins may be filled with dread and trepidation, watching every alleyway he sprints past for the blurs of potential death, but do you need three paragraphs explaining that, where one would suffice? I see many people fluff up info with as many words that mean the same thing, or posts with info that says the same thing in a different way three times over. It’s these moments that People look at, and not the introspective ones that tell a compelling narrative of a character that people complain about.

a good story is a good story is a good story. And your partners may indeed unravel the web of words from their lexicon to tell something magical, but that isn’t the norm, and far to often people with buffer their paragraphs with meaningless dribble and point to them as evidence that they are quality role players. The norm is what people complain about, not the minority of people who can weave intricate deluges of fanciful tale from their works.

 

[Tove]

While I'm more of a mid-range writer (300-800 word posts normally) I'd rather have too much detail than not enough. When people fail to describe anything in their posts, it makes me lose immersion, because I have no idea what my character is seeing/hearing/smelling/whatever. People not describing stuff adequately in their posts is extremely irritating. What am I supposed to do, guess? Or just assume my character is completely unobservant?

Example from an actual RP: in a place where magic is exceedingly rare, my character who had never really seen anyone do magic at all, except healing, is working with an ally he hasn't met before who has several water mages in his employ. Player of said character just wrote "the mages with him put out the fire" (paraphrasing but basically just that). Like... what am I supposed to do with that pathetic amount of info. It's likely that MC is going to be extremely impressed and interested watching these mages but I don't even get a description of how many, what they look like, where the water is coming from, do they magic it from nothing or does it come from the river/the air/their bodies, how they put the fire out. I'd rather have a thousand words of purple prose, so at least I and my character know what the eff is actually happening.

Well said.

 

[Idea]

There comes a point when you look at the page that you’ve written and you must ask yourself is it too much?

Sure, but that point has wild variations between writing styles. Furthermore, even if we presume there is a maximum threshold for good content that says nothing about the primary topic of this thread (post length minimums) nor of the point in which I first disagreed with you, the idea that us who do want these longer posts are missing out on something or necessarily creating insubstancial posts.

There is really only so much a character can say and take in before it becomes less about what you are trying to convey, and more about your ability to convey that information.

While I agree with the overall idea that there is only so much one can add which will still carry meaning, and that at some point your own inability to convey a post with less lengthy content begins to express itself over it
A) That threshold is again very dependent on writing style as I mentioned above.
B) The manner in which something is conveyed also affects length and can carry meaning. Just telling that a character keeps looking over their shoulder might convey that the character is displaying paranoid behavior, but making use of repetition by having the character look over their shoulder periodically can convey that AND put us in the shoes of the character as they do those actions, thus conveying the emotion of the act as well as the fact of the act. One of these methods is clearly more lengthy than the other.
C) One's lack of ability to fully convey the information in a shorter amount doesn't translate into a lack of necesstiy for a longer post than what many are willing to deliver.

your fellow being chased by assassins may be filled with dread and trepidation, watching every alleyway he sprints past for the blurs of potential death, but do you need three paragraphs explaining that, where one would suffice? I see many people fluff up info with as many words that mean the same thing, or posts with info that says the same thing in a different way three times over.

I am not a proponent of the idea that "less is always more". There is no inherent difference in saying something with more or less words when it comes to quality. Saying something with more or less words, with longer or shorter sentences invokes different emotions and experiences. Do you need three paragraphs when one would suffice? If I'm reading a wikipedia summary I don't, but what I'm reading is part of the story, and thus the way something is written helps my immersion and connection with the narrative.

Which is not to say there aren't plenty of people who fail at this and still write long posts (more on that in a moment), or that there are no people who prefer having no length requirements and wouldn't write me consistently great posts that I would be able to immerse myself with, but those are the exceptions. The very very rare exceptions from exceptionally good writers. And I can tell you, even those woudl probably still have to deliver consistently lengthy posts for me to enjoy myself in a long-term commitment with them.

It’s these moments that People look at, and not the introspective ones that tell a compelling narrative of a character that people complain about.

a good story is a good story is a good story. And your partners may indeed unravel the web of words from their lexicon to tell something magical, but that isn’t the norm, and far to often people with buffer their paragraphs with meaningless dribble and point to them as evidence that they are quality role players. The norm is what people complain about, not the minority of people who can weave intricate deluges of fanciful tale from their works.

While I can't say exactly who the majority is, I would the majority of actual proponents of length minimums are not the kind of person who buffers their paragraphs with meaningless dribble. However, there are plenty of people who do put their paragraphs full of pointless fluff.

Those people, however, mostly think like you I find. Allow me to explain: As I have been telling you in my responses, a good part of what results in length has to do with a person's style. In turn, one's mentality and values are what creates their approach to writing and as such, their style. From my experience, it is usually the players who are trying to write posts like a detailed roleplayer but have a casual roleplayer mindset who fill their posts with pointless fluff. They think only in terms of what directly contributes to the narrative, to their character's actions, to moving the plot along, and as such fail to grasp why and how people such as myself use the things we do in our writing. A player like that will look at me using the repetition with the glancing over the shoulder and think that I'm only doing that to pad the post with the same sentence, and thus they end up padding their post with the same sentence but without an actual point. A player like that will look at someone giving a detailed description of a palace to express how that palace is so wealthy and really give an alien feel to it, and will then proceed to describe every pot in their little house and the material of the walls without having actually thought of why they might be doing that.

Furthermore, it seems to me like there is a standard here that is way higher for people doing long posts. I'm sure you don't mean it like this, but it seems to me that the implication of "The norm is what people complain about, not the minority of people who can weave intricate deluges of fanciful tale from their works" is that "if you cannot perfectly deliver a masterpiece with your long posts, then you have no business preferring that method of writing". Again, I don't think you mean it in this way, but long or short posts there will always be unskilled writers and many more which do have some skill but still plenty to learn.

In the end of the day, I have yet to see a single person complaining about people who prefer long posts or who ask for post length requirements who was able to correctly identify why people like that length or like that degree of detail, be it because they are complaining over people who only did it because of obligation and not because that is what they actually want out of a roleplay, or because they failed to notice other aspects that a detailed writer values and they happen not to.

 

[Asteria]

As my girl Melpomene pointed out, it all comes down to preference. I write multi-paragraph posts. My partners write multi-paragraph posts because that is why we have decided to roleplay together in the first place. Do we find them unproductive? Of course not, because that is our preference. BUT if I were to write with someone that preferred a more fast-paced roleplay, they would probably find my posts rather unproductive. That is why we actually we put out minimum paragraph requirements in our search threads or simply state what the usual length of our posts are -- we connect with people with similar writing styles and avoid unwanted misunderstandings.

Deciding to start a debate from a subject that stems from someone's preference is a lost battle in itself.

My definition of an ideal roleplay is not the same as yours, for example. I don't see roleplay as a quick back-and-forth between me and my partner. I see roleplaying as a means of writing a collaborative story. That means that our focus is more than the interactions between the main characters. Depending on the characters involved, the interaction can't even take place properly (imagine mute characters, characters from different regions that have to work out a way of communicating, etc.).

There are also many ways a dialogue could go. For me, dialogues are more than simple interactions. I flesh characters and a world through them. Maybe your character makes mine remember something through what they have just said. Maybe the memory is painful and my character grows quieter. That leads to further interactions, as your character wonders what the heck is going on all of a sudden. When (most) people write paragraphs in a dialogue scene, it doesn't mean that they take away from the organic conversation, they just add something to their characters, to the world.

I also hardly believe some multi-paragraph posts can point out everything that there is to a new setting, scenes or characters right off the bat. That should be gradual. Nothing can really be established, especially when you work with someone else. Maybe you have established something OOC, but the characters see it differently IC. There is always something new to discover (especially through interactions and dialogue) or there should be, at least, to keep things interesting.

As far as what I understand from your other posts, your issue is not the length itself, but the quality of the post. Your partner's post lacked quality, that is true, and gave you nothing to work it in the long run. That has nothing to do with length, however. You can very well write long posts and explain every single detail of the room (there is no issue there if her character finds such things relevant) and still give your partner something to respond to.

 

[Tulik]

Sure, but that point has wild variations between writing styles. Furthermore, even if we presume there is a maximum threshold for good content that says nothing about the primary topic of this thread (post length minimums) nor of the point in which I first disagreed with you, the idea that us who do want these longer posts are missing out on something or necessarily creating insubstancial posts.


While I agree with the overall idea that there is only so much one can add which will still carry meaning, and that at some point your own inability to convey a post with less lengthy content begins to express itself over it
A) That threshold is again very dependent on writing style as I mentioned above.
B) The manner in which something is conveyed also affects length and can carry meaning. Just telling that a character keeps looking over their shoulder might convey that the character is displaying paranoid behavior, but making use of repetition by having the character look over their shoulder periodically can convey that AND put us in the shoes of the character as they do those actions, thus conveying the emotion of the act as well as the fact of the act. One of these methods is clearly more lengthy than the other.
C) One's lack of ability to fully convey the information in a shorter amount doesn't translate into a lack of necesstiy for a longer post than what many are willing to deliver.


I am not a proponent of the idea that "less is always more". There is no inherent difference in saying something with more or less words when it comes to quality. Saying something with more or less words, with longer or shorter sentences invokes different emotions and experiences. Do you need three paragraphs when one would suffice? If I'm reading a wikipedia summary I don't, but what I'm reading is part of the story, and thus the way something is written helps my immersion and connection with the narrative.

Which is not to say there aren't plenty of people who fail at this and still write long posts (more on that in a moment), or that there are no people who prefer having no length requirements and wouldn't write me consistently great posts that I would be able to immerse myself with, but those are the exceptions. The very very rare exceptions from exceptionally good writers. And I can tell you, even those woudl probably still have to deliver consistently lengthy posts for me to enjoy myself in a long-term commitment with them.



While I can't say exactly who the majority is, I would the majority of actual proponents of length minimums are not the kind of person who buffers their paragraphs with meaningless dribble. However, there are plenty of people who do put their paragraphs full of pointless fluff.

Those people, however, mostly think like you I find. Allow me to explain: As I have been telling you in my responses, a good part of what results in length has to do with a person's style. In turn, one's mentality and values are what creates their approach to writing and as such, their style. From my experience, it is usually the players who are trying to write posts like a detailed roleplayer but have a casual roleplayer mindset who fill their posts with pointless fluff. They think only in terms of what directly contributes to the narrative, to their character's actions, to moving the plot along, and as such fail to grasp why and how people such as myself use the things we do in our writing. A player like that will look at me using the repetition with the glancing over the shoulder and think that I'm only doing that to pad the post with the same sentence, and thus they end up padding their post with the same sentence but without an actual point. A player like that will look at someone giving a detailed description of a palace to express how that palace is so wealthy and really give an alien feel to it, and will then proceed to describe every pot in their little house and the material of the walls without having actually thought of why they might be doing that.

Furthermore, it seems to me like there is a standard here that is way higher for people doing long posts. I'm sure you don't mean it like this, but it seems to me that the implication of "The norm is what people complain about, not the minority of people who can weave intricate deluges of fanciful tale from their works" is that "if you cannot perfectly deliver a masterpiece with your long posts, then you have no business preferring that method of writing". Again, I don't think you mean it in this way, but long or short posts there will always be unskilled writers and many more which do have some skill but still plenty to learn.

In the end of the day, I have yet to see a single person complaining about people who prefer long posts or who ask for post length requirements who was able to correctly identify why people like that length or like that degree of detail, be it because they are complaining over people who only did it because of obligation and not because that is what they actually want out of a roleplay, or because they failed to notice other aspects that a detailed writer values and they happen not to.

I like everything you have said to me. In the end it does just come down to opinion. Some people can create a compelling narrative in short, and some do it in long. Neither is lesser. I simply find fluidity of narrative to be most important, while others do not. Suppose I would need to find a partner who fits the descriptors you’ve given to understand what you speak of. I’ve only seen what I can only describe as the humble brag of posts when it comes to what you describe. People attempting to one up one another in size and scale.

I do not think there is a minimum requirement to providing a good experience, nor do I think there is a maximum. I do however think that there is a tolerance threshold, and a burnout one. I think those who post obscenely long replies are more susceptible to these. And viewers of them even more so. When a story is being read, people can have issue with reading so much if they want to know what’s happening in a story. And when you get a person whose writing filler reply after filler reply, it can become tiresome when you want to roleplay with a person whose only interest it to see their own writing, and not participate in the role play as a whole.

the reverse can just as equally be true, where a person provides too little, and gives other nothing to go off of. There elate extremes to both ends of the spectrum, and to say thatit might only be a preference to some degree I feel is disingenuous. To say that no post is ever to long, or that no post is ever to short isn’t the question. The question is really “is what I’m providing quality content.” And while one might argue that quality is a preference as well, I would disagree with that. Not every author becomes a best seller. So when does the quality of the post begin to dip in correlation to the length is the question that should be answered, and not whether or not the length is the problem.

because if too lengthy was an issue, people wouldn’t enjoy novels, or reading in general. Quality over quantity.So what “quantity” is over the threshold, and how do you know it when you’ve come to it? Is based on the person? The group? The story? Is it when a point has been belabored, or when not enough info can be gathered from a paragraph that’s telling of a situation?

we can both agree that writing is never a problem, but it lengthy or otherwise.If that’s the case, why are there complaints? Is it their preference, bad experience, or is there truly a point when the amount of words on the screen becomes irrelevant because you’ve gotten lost in the sauce?

 

[Idea]

I like everything you have said to me. In the end it does just come down to opinion. Some people can create a compelling narrative in short, and some do it in long. Neither is lesser. I simply find fluidity of narrative to be most important, while others do not. Suppose I would need to find a partner who fits the descriptors you’ve given to understand what you speak of. I’ve only seen what I can only describe as the humble brag of posts when it comes to what you describe. People attempting to one up one another in size and scale.

I do not think there is a minimum requirement to providing a good experience, nor do I think there is a maximum. I do however think that there is a tolerance threshold, and a burnout one. I think those who post obscenely long replies are more susceptible to these. And viewers of them even more so. When a story is being read, people can have issue with reading so much if they want to know what’s happening in a story. And when you get a person whose writing filler reply after filler reply, it can become tiresome when you want to roleplay with a person whose only interest it to see their own writing, and not participate in the role play as a whole.

the reverse can just as equally be true, where a person provides too little, and gives other nothing to go off of. There elate extremes to both ends of the spectrum, and to say thatit might only be a preference to some degree I feel is disingenuous. To say that no post is ever to long, or that no post is ever to short isn’t the question. The question is really “is what I’m providing quality content.”

Absolutely agreed. On a sidenote, I'd like to thank you for how civil you are being despite our disagreement. Regardless of a different in beliefs, I do really appreciate it when a productive conversation can be had like this, with both parties keeping an open mind and remaining respectful to one another.

And while one might argue that quality is a preference as well, I would disagree with that. Not every author becomes a best seller. So when does the quality of the post begin to dip in correlation to the length is the question that should be answered, and not whether or not the length is the problem.

Quality isn't a preference (or rather, people universally prefer more quality over less), but one of two is true:

A) If quality is a subjective matter, then one's own values determine what quality is, 100%. If it is subjective, then discussing whether something is of quality or not becomes an absurd discussion.
B) If quality is an objective matter then it cannot translate to appeal - after all, it would have to be there regardless of what people think of it. Jumping a bit outside of the realm of writing, take the Captain Marvel movie. Two factors in it, outside of the movie itself, had an impact on audiences coming to see it or not: The political controversy of Brie Larson's statements and the fact that the movie was depicted in marketing as necessary to fully comprehend the upcoming Avengers Endgame movie. Regardless of one's stance on either of those matters, the fact is that those matters greatly influenced the success or lackthereof of the movie, and they don't necessarily translate to any loss or gain of quality as an inherent property of the work of art.

As an aside, personally, I believe that quality is an objective component of art, which has to do with its functional components.

I would argue that the perception of quality is in this case more important than the actual quality itself in terms of what would make people happy, and the perception of quality is determined by what one personally values in writing.

because if too lengthy was an issue, people wouldn’t enjoy novels, or reading in general. Quality over quantity.So what “quantity” is over the threshold, and how do you know it when you’ve come to it? Is based on the person? The group? The story? Is it when a point has been belabored, or when not enough info can be gathered from a paragraph that’s telling of a situation?

It is indeed a very hard question, with an answer I think too complex for an individual to ever be able to give a satisfying and all-encompassing answer to it. Still, that is pretty much why there are length minimum requirement: We want to find people who would give similar answers to ourselves to those questions. We want people who enjoy writing what we want to read, and want people who enjoy reading what we want to write.

we can both agree that writing is never a problem, but it lengthy or otherwise.If that’s the case, why are there complaints? Is it their preference, bad experience, or is there truly a point when the amount of words on the screen becomes irrelevant because you’ve gotten lost in the sauce?

While I agree that there is a point where the amount becomes too much, again there is a lot of variation there between writing styles, precisely due to the thing I mentioned, different writing styles value different things. In colloquial terms "one man's trash is another man's treasure".

It would be presumptuous of me to label every single complaint out there under the same reason. There are plenty of reasons for complaints. Still, gun to my head, I would suggest that one of the biggest ones comes from two sources.

The first of those sources is the illusion of elitism from the part of us who prefer longer posts. Once upon a time, I hear, people who liked longer posts had arrogant and elitist attitudes against the people who didn't write posts as long, regardless of whether either group could write well or not. While this is absolutely no longer the case, there is still a lingering impact of people assuming that others still think longer posts are necessarily better, and either have a reaction of hostility to it, or feel that they are obligated to join the perceived "elites", leading to the second source...

Said second source is the sheer number of people who have what I call a "casual mindset", but try to roleplay in roleplays built with a "detailed mindset" in mind. I brought this up in a response earlier, but when this happens this person is not usually able to understand the other style of RP, and ends up creating what can only be described as a parody or a shadow of it, unintentionally of course. They do fill their posts with fluff because it isn't in their nature or their style to write posts that long, but they try to force themselves because they think it will make them look better, or because they really wanted to join that one RP despite not being able to sustainably keep up with the requirements.

And so complaints often end up being from
> People who are upset a given roleplay or group of roleplays had people asking for length minimums
> People who want to protest the imaginary strawman who still says longer posts are inherently superior
> People tired of seeing all that fluff

The solution, I believe is simple but requires self-discipline. It requires that people make an active effort to understand their own writing style and realize where they fit in terms of length. It is not, primarily, a matter of skill level, but a matter of matching people who would actually be happy to work together.

 

[Tulik]

Absolutely agreed. On a sidenote, I'd like to thank you for how civil you are being despite our disagreement. Regardless of a different in beliefs, I do really appreciate it when a productive conversation can be had like this, with both parties keeping an open mind and remaining respectful to one another.


Quality isn't a preference (or rather, people universally prefer more quality over less), but one of two is true:

A) If quality is a subjective matter, then one's own values determine what quality is, 100%. If it is subjective, then discussing whether something is of quality or not becomes an absurd discussion.
B) If quality is an objective matter then it cannot translate to appeal - after all, it would have to be there regardless of what people think of it. Jumping a bit outside of the realm of writing, take the Captain Marvel movie. Two factors in it, outside of the movie itself, had an impact on audiences coming to see it or not: The political controversy of Brie Larson's statements and the fact that the movie was depicted in marketing as necessary to fully comprehend the upcoming Avengers Endgame movie. Regardless of one's stance on either of those matters, the fact is that those matters greatly influenced the success or lackthereof of the movie, and they don't necessarily translate to any loss or gain of quality as an inherent property of the work of art.

As an aside, personally, I believe that quality is an objective component of art, which has to do with its functional components.

I would argue that the perception of quality is in this case more important than the actual quality itself in terms of what would make people happy, and the perception of quality is determined by what one personally values in writing.


It is indeed a very hard question, with an answer I think too complex for an individual to ever be able to give a satisfying and all-encompassing answer to it. Still, that is pretty much why there are length minimum requirement: We want to find people who would give similar answers to ourselves to those questions. We want people who enjoy writing what we want to read, and want people who enjoy reading what we want to write.


While I agree that there is a point where the amount becomes too much, again there is a lot of variation there between writing styles, precisely due to the thing I mentioned, different writing styles value different things. In colloquial terms "one man's trash is another man's treasure".

It would be presumptuous of me to label every single complaint out there under the same reason. There are plenty of reasons for complaints. Still, gun to my head, I would suggest that one of the biggest ones comes from two sources.

The first of those sources is the illusion of elitism from the part of us who prefer longer posts. Once upon a time, I hear, people who liked longer posts had arrogant and elitist attitudes against the people who didn't write posts as long, regardless of whether either group could write well or not. While this is absolutely no longer the case, there is still a lingering impact of people assuming that others still think longer posts are necessarily better, and either have a reaction of hostility to it, or feel that they are obligated to join the perceived "elites", leading to the second source...

Said second source is the sheer number of people who have what I call a "casual mindset", but try to roleplay in roleplays built with a "detailed mindset" in mind. I brought this up in a response earlier, but when this happens this person is not usually able to understand the other style of RP, and ends up creating what can only be described as a parody or a shadow of it, unintentionally of course. They do fill their posts with fluff because it isn't in their nature or their style to write posts that long, but they try to force themselves because they think it will make them look better, or because they really wanted to join that one RP despite not being able to sustainably keep up with the requirements.

And so complaints often end up being from
> People who are upset a given roleplay or group of roleplays had people asking for length minimums
> People who want to protest the imaginary strawman who still says longer posts are inherently superior
> People tired of seeing all that fluff

The solution, I believe is simple but requires self-discipline. It requires that people make an active effort to understand their own writing style and realize where they fit in terms of length. It is not, primarily, a matter of skill level, but a matter of matching people who would actually be happy to work together.

I think the matter does indeed weigh heavily on people’s ability. Both to absorb the content and to provide it. I can provide on both these examples in spades, but I doubt any would alter opinions, and that wasn’t my intention in the first place. Rather, I enjoy seeing the differing views of someone who does on the regular decide to roleplay in a manner that I don’t usually partake in.

quality is begat by preference, which is begat by experiences both positive and negative. where you have found positivity in those longer roleplays, others found the opposite. And perhaps that has made their quality in the longer lesser, which in turn makes them more hostile towards it. and trying to recreate what they have, they provide instances for people like myself who see it and scoff at the veiled attempt, which again puts off an individual from attempting to get into the longer narrative, and continuing a cycle.

but like it was said earlier, to argue opinions is a folly. To say one persons opinion is lesser than another is silly. However a discussion behind opinions? I can get behind that.

 

[Dov]

I think the point of relevancy is really being quashed by the word 'preference' here. Going back to the marble walls idea, I agree that it can be relevant for some reason. If it's a foreshadowing element, or something your character is genuinely interested in, or they're expressing boredom, then it does make sense to describe some small, seemingly unimportant detail like that. But if none of those are the case, then describing that facet of the setting in detail not only doesn't add anything, but in fact detracts from the story by confusing the focus. So it's not a matter of preference for length or detail, but preference for relevance, focus, and flow. If one feels compelled to tell me a lot about a tiny detail, I now have to assume that it's important. If the story goes along and I can't figure out why somebody elected to describe that, I'm still sitting there wondering when it'll be important, trying to remember that detail and all the others. If I give you 10 pieces of information in a post, all 10 pieces mean something. Maybe they don't all mean something equally important, but all of it's there for a reason. That being said, if I can accomplish clearly conveying that information in a sentence or three paragraphs, I'm gonna go for the sentence. That way I can maintain focus.
So say I decide to describe the marble wall. If it's my first time my character is in the palace and he's just completely floored by the extravagance, then I'd spend more time describing the wall to put focus on the grandeur it represents. If my character is visiting royalty, I'd note the marble wall to convey the information that my character acknowledges that the palace is grand, but not spend much more time on it because the character's focus would be on the enemy potentially turned ally and his feelings about that relationship. That character wouldn't organically notice the details of the wall because he doesn't care as much. So I guess for me, I'm writing from the view of my character's experience.
I've been thinking a lot about 100 Years of Solitude. That book has a lot of what seems to be fluff and repetitive language, but it's not really fluff. All the carefully described tiny points end up being important, and the repetitive language is there to emphasize the over-arcing situation wherein people manage to live the same lives and not learn from the past. Details aren't inherently fluff, it depends on the context. Details can very easily be fluff and fluff is inherently bad because it detracts from the focus and flow of writing. Thoughts on fluff?

 

[rae2nerdy]

So I think you did hit the nail on the head Dov it ultimately comes down to what you consider fluff.

I personally don’t consider anything other than paraphrasing to be fluff. So if your post is basically just a paraphrase of my own post than it is unnecessary fluff. I already gave all that information I don’t need it parroted back at me.

I was in a group where that was how someone attempted to get around the post requirement. They basically copy pasted other people’s replies and added in one or two word replies at the end.

At the time I was the Co-GM and I took it upon myself to rewrite multiple replies for them in an effort to show them how to organically make the requirement. But it eventually became clear to me and everyone else that the person just wanted attention. They wanted the roleplay to cater to them and weren’t interested in participating on equal footing.

I think a lot of requirements are born out of similar experiences.

And in my mind those kind of replies are fluff. It isn’t that they have extra details it’s they have no details at all. It’s doing the bare minimum of work so you can pass the buck to your partner. I hate that shit with a fiery passion. I would honestly rather you write three paragraphs describing a marble wall. At least that will give me something to work with for my own characters reply. Even if it’s just - oh this is an important bit of setting, how would my character react to it?

 

[Idea]

I think the point of relevancy is really being quashed by the word 'preference' here. Going back to the marble walls idea, I agree that it can be relevant for some reason. If it's a foreshadowing element, or something your character is genuinely interested in, or they're expressing boredom, then it does make sense to describe some small, seemingly unimportant detail like that. But if none of those are the case, then describing that facet of the setting in detail not only doesn't add anything, but in fact detracts from the story by confusing the focus. So it's not a matter of preference for length or detail, but preference for relevance, focus, and flow. If one feels compelled to tell me a lot about a tiny detail, I now have to assume that it's important. If the story goes along and I can't figure out why somebody elected to describe that, I'm still sitting there wondering when it'll be important, trying to remember that detail and all the others. If I give you 10 pieces of information in a post, all 10 pieces mean something. Maybe they don't all mean something equally important, but all of it's there for a reason. That being said, if I can accomplish clearly conveying that information in a sentence or three paragraphs, I'm gonna go for the sentence. That way I can maintain focus.
So say I decide to describe the marble wall. If it's my first time my character is in the palace and he's just completely floored by the extravagance, then I'd spend more time describing the wall to put focus on the grandeur it represents. If my character is visiting royalty, I'd note the marble wall to convey the information that my character acknowledges that the palace is grand, but not spend much more time on it because the character's focus would be on the enemy potentially turned ally and his feelings about that relationship. That character wouldn't organically notice the details of the wall because he doesn't care as much. So I guess for me, I'm writing from the view of my character's experience.
I've been thinking a lot about 100 Years of Solitude. That book has a lot of what seems to be fluff and repetitive language, but it's not really fluff. All the carefully described tiny points end up being important, and the repetitive language is there to emphasize the over-arcing situation wherein people manage to live the same lives and not learn from the past. Details aren't inherently fluff, it depends on the context. Details can very easily be fluff and fluff is inherently bad because it detracts from the focus and flow of writing. Thoughts on fluff?

Speaking personally, I don't think 'focus' is really what ultimately matters. It does have some weight, but I wouldn't say it is the end-all be-all, even just in this particular discussion. If nothing is being added sure, it's fluff and that's bad. We're in agreement there. However, I would say that to me there are still things that are important but which once again are not part of what directly pertains to the story, or directly pertains to the character. Worldbuilding in of itself is valuable, description for atmosphere too, for instance.

 

[Kazami42]

"It's called world building, and it's art."
This is the story all about how world building flipped life upside down, so I'mma take a minute to stop y'all right there, and tell ya all about how world building is the fresh prince of universal air.

Worldbuilding is an art form. Long trashed by the passage of time in both reality to some degree, but more commonly in a roleplaying spectrum where character dedicated players, or even casuals, either tend to dominate in number or generally have a lacking care for it as it doesn't at least appear to contribute to the story. Sometimes even RPing in a bland void of nothingness. Therefore, disregarded and neglected for a "come on, go go go" style.

While it may not be your cup of tea, worldbuilding can even be used to destroy you, an enemy in of itself or a challenge to overcome. A vast hill surrounded by water, a mountain with surrounding land so wet and unstable that more than five people next to each other forms sinkholes. A rift in the space time continuum caused by random fuckery by black holes, that now enables the antagonist to force everyone else to the negotiating table to fix it. World building is an art form, a neglected ancient ritual, and it contributes the most to a universe than most of any type of physical or verbal interactions ever will. Outclassed merely through physical god fights, godfather dialogue, and sweet, sweet, psychological warfare, manipulation, and conveying an emotion so well that grown men cry.

This has been your daily dose of relevant and true memes, brought to ya by logic virus: When you need a way out of reason, apply directly to the forehead.

 

[Dov]

I wish there was a dislike button. Establishing the setting: good. Over-establishing the setting: boring. Why would you assume that not going deep into every irrelevant facet of a setting means one doesn't establish the setting sufficiently? That's a completely false dichotomy, a completely straight-forward logical fallacy, oh great logic human.