Experiences How much lore do you prefer?

[MDL]

For a RP with a custom setting, how much lore do you prefer there to be (assuming it's well written) and how do you prefer it's presented?

 

[Chachalotte]

If the world you're building and its habitant possess the knowledge, I expect lore to be there. But if you commit to a roleplay where things are shady and kept as a secret purposely, I rather have the lore being thrown at my face as the RP keeps going in order to make me gasp as the story unfolds. Do you want to reveal the appearance of the villain right of the bat, just to fool me and my comrades by a revelation that proves we were wrong all along? If everything is put correctly and revealed smoothly, it can totally work. In most cases, I love it when there's lore accessible at the beginning. This way, I can work on a character with more depth and in accord with the GM instead of just trying to fit my character in hopelessly, only to find out he doesn't match and ended up unhappy with the results. In my opinion, if the lore is well established, people will be able to have a crystal clear idea of what they can work on, as well as offering an interesting background with fewer plotholes. However, this really depends on what settings the RP is focused on and as I said before, it totally depends on the GMs what they want to provide at the start and what they don't want.

As an example, let's take the fantasy trope which I think is the setting who mostly needs it more than the others. If we count the races, the lands, the factions, the equipment, ... You've so much to work on! I've seen many fantasy roleplay fell off, probably because there wasn't enough information or the lore was simply not worked on enough, which made people lost interest quickly. It takes time to find ideas that fit together, which isn't a problem so take your time if it's necessary. I dare to say lore is the first step of any roleplay, where people will get hooked or not.

In the end, it can be quite troublesome to find how much lore is necessary. The thing to keep in mind is that you have to give enough for your roleplayer to work on their background, otherwise you may be surprised, and not in a good way. Be proactive, think in advance on what people may ask themselves or what they wouldn't understand from a newcomer point of view, think of all the outcomes that could happen based on someone's actions and find the paths in advance so you will be able to keep me entertained without any break. If it makes sense, there's more chance you will gather interest.

 

[MDL]

Do you want to reveal the appearance of the villain right of the bat, just to fool me and my comrades by a revelation that proves we were wrong all along?

Do you mean that this is something good or bad to do?

As an example, let's take the fantasy trope which I think is the setting who mostly needs it more than the others.

Why do you think fantasy needs it more than other settings? Is sci-fi more easily to just know without common reference? How do you mean

I've seen many fantasy roleplay fell off, probably because there wasn't enough information or the lore was simply not worked on enough, which made people lost interest quickly.

So, was it because there was confusion among the players? Or they left the game out of no interest. Or was it the ST who couldn't keep the story together. Would love to hear some examples of this if you can remember.

 

[Beckoncall]

I like it to be THERE, but not a book to read before I can play. The whole “show, don’t tell” thing. But when I have questions it MAKES THE GAME to know there are ready answers...

 

[Idea]

When it comes to "how much" I prefer, my answer would be "a ton". There are various reasons for this, chief among them is that I'm the kind of person who works better the more information I have about something. More information means there is more room for me to explore, which means I can work on better ideas and ideas that are more appropriate for a given situation, thus allowing me to create smoother transitions and better links between things as well. Even seemingly minor details can be, if one is smart on how they go about it, explored to great effect and potentially even become major plot points or character elements. Plus, as someone who really likes playing around with interesting magic systems and always trying to make my own thing, getting more information means there may be more unexplored angles to really find my niche.

Furthermore I find consistency, of both consequence and internal logic, to be a fundamental aspect of good writing in general. I make sure to ground my characters into the setting as much as possible, and I find that a solidly built setting- one with at least clearly defined fundamentals, and the more is fixed the better- to be pretty important as well. Having it then revealed to the players is a matter of option, but from a pratical sense, the lore at least existing well-defined in the GM's head or writing is important in keeping things making sense, feeling connected and even helping to provide more potential routes to explore or ideas for plot points. Even for Gms that don't like the idea of guiding their players as much, having a setting more well-established means there is less of a chance that your players will run off to some place where you have nothing to show, or that their decisions will feel like they didn't really have an impact.

And for people like me at least it also has a psychological boon: When you put your very complex and well-developed lore out there, for us that shows you've at least really put thought into what you were making, and effort. That doesn't automatically mean it will be good- but it does encourage me to give more of my own work and trust back. Like Beckoncall said, it can be great to "know there are ready answers".

So yeah, overall, to me the more information the better. If my characters wouldn't know the information or have access to it, and some plot point may hang on us not knowing the information, then I suppose that might be an exception, but exceptions aside, the more information I'm given the better.

WITH THAT SAID...

There are better and worse ways of presenting your information. I'm personally not a fan of "show it through the RP" because that excludes the information from helping to inform the design of the character, which squanders a lot of the point. Unless I retcon the backstory or personality, I can no longer create ties to explore aspects of the lore alongside my character, the powers I thought worked one way might not work that way at all, thus potentially rendering my ideas useless etc... And I certainly don't want to be a part of an RP where retconning backstory or personality is considered a normal thing.

I believe those presenting the information should make an active effort to make it simple to look up specific bits of information from amongst the available lore. If I want to know the fundamentals of the magic system, or where a certain species lives/lived or who X important person was, and that information is available, I should be able to find or be pointed to where I can find that information, without it being so lost in the paragraphs that it becomes easy to miss it (or it taking me hours to find).

Lastly, it's best if there is a lore thread or even a simple site like world anvil that makes it easy to know "this place is the place for lore". If your lore is scattered around, that will make it difficult to track down the information I may want. But the worst is when the lore is info dumped in the interest check. When that happens, that's a red flag for a roleplay in my eyes, as it is usually an indicator of someone whose priorities are majorly focused on their setting or lore, and thus not actually in line with trying to create a good RP.

 

[Nue]

On like a low-medium-high scale, I'd say medium.

If there's a ton of lore upfront, I think it can be hard to take in, and it also just personally makes it a bit daunting to me - I don't wanna accidentally conflict with something in the lore that I've forgotten, for example.

But if there's barely any lore, it's like.. there's nothing to really go off. Making a character is going to be difficult because you know barely anything about the world they're supposed to be living in.

So I think a medium amount is good. Not overwhelming, but not barely there. Gives you a lot of room to do interesting things with your characters, without worrying it goes against the lore and such.

 

[Chachalotte]

Do you mean that this is something good or bad to do?

This depends on how well the revelation was brought. If it doesn't feel forced this open room for interesting interactions, but I only experienced it once and it didn't feel bad. Instead, many of us were greatly pleased with how things turned out as we had to make new decisions. The GM gave us a message, which I took as " Bad guy doesn't really exist". Ever since then, I've been able to see better if the characters were worked on or just made right of the bat without any depth, and also making them able to perceive things better and evolve them as the story progress.

Why do you think fantasy needs it more than other settings? Is sci-fi more easily to just know without common reference? How do you mean

This part is the most biased on my post. I meant that usually, fantasy has a whole new world to build upon right of the start in most cases. I've participated in a few sci-fi roleplay, but not so much since Fantasy and modern roleplay are where I usually delve into although I still got some experience from it. You do make a good point, sci-fi's lore can be huge has it possess the universe in itself. However, apart from the advanced technologies, the sci-fi roleplay I've been in were working their lore directly as we were going. The discoveries of new planets and civilizations were awesome and I feel like we were making records, discovering everything before anyone else. I think of it like this : fantasy's lore is like a book with many histories, and sci-fi is an exploration that will never cess because the universe is infinite. Nonetheless, there are exceptions and some RP stands out thanks to the freedom we all have by making settings that are different from usual.

So, was it because there was confusion among the players? Or they left the game out of no interest. Or was it the ST who couldn't keep the story together. Would love to hear some examples of this if you can remember.

There were multiple causes of course. The lack of answers and activity from the players can be caused by many reasons, except one where the lore was the main problem.

I had a case where I've worked on a character, asked for several questions and received ambiguous answers and the GM kept adding new characters that were not linked at all. It felt like they were copied and paste from somewhere. Despite my best to follow the GM pov, I quickly gave up since we were going nowhere as he kept adding lore before the roleplay even started and it made less sense each time. I was baited from his first idea and ended up wasting my time. Since I'm the type of person to make a character from scratch, it hurts me a lot to start each time.
There was another case where I was the GM myself with a clear idea of what I was doing. The RP lasted for about four months before it collapses, although it was my record and we were all in accord to stop. Why? I've made fewer characters than usual, more complete with an accessible storyline for anyone. I matured and understood that lore was way more important and shouldn't be rushed on with just the main plot in mind. Every time I fail, I glanced back at my project to see where things went wrong, but I won't step in it too much otherwise I will go off subject.

 

[MDL]

Plus, as someone who really likes playing around with interesting magic systems and always trying to make my own thing, getting more information means there may be more unexplored angles to really find my niche.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean. Wouldn't more established information mean less unexplored angles?

Even for Gms that don't like the idea of guiding their players as much, having a setting more well-established means there is less of a chance that your players will run off to some place where you have nothing to show, or that their decisions will feel like they didn't really have an impact.

That's a great point.

I'm personally not a fan of "show it through the RP" because that excludes the information from helping to inform the design of the character, which squanders a lot of the point.

That's true, didn't consider that.

When you put your very complex and well-developed lore out there, for us that shows you've at least really put thought into what you were making, and effort

But the worst is when the lore is info dumped in the interest check. When that happens, that's a red flag for a roleplay in my eyes, as it is usually an indicator of someone whose priorities are majorly focused on their setting or lore, and thus not actually in line with trying to create a good RP.

I get both of these points. But how do I consolidate both of them together? Shouldn't a lot of lore in the interest check then show you that a lot of effort has gone into the RP? And I don't why a lot of lore would show that the ST is not interested in trying to create a good RP?

If there's a ton of lore upfront, I think it can be hard to take in, and it also just personally makes it a bit daunting to me - I don't wanna accidentally conflict with something in the lore that I've forgotten, for example.

Could this be solved with an ST that is active in communication and open to summarize lore through PM? Ready for quick questions without referring to reading some long document?

I like it to be THERE, but not a book to read before I can play. The whole “show, don’t tell” thing. But when I have questions it MAKES THE GAME to know there are ready answers...

So I think a medium amount is good. Not overwhelming, but not barely there. Gives you a lot of room to do interesting things with your characters, without worrying it goes against the lore and such.

So Beckoncall and N Nue , how about if the interest check presents a short summary of the lore and the plot and then links to a resource where all of the other lore (let's say its a lot), but the ST states that this is not required reading and exists for the world to be consistent. How would you react to that?

 

[MDL]

fantasy's lore is like a book with many histories, and sci-fi is an exploration that will never cess because the universe is infinite. Nonetheless, there are exceptions and some RP stands out thanks to the freedom we all have by making settings that are different from usual.

I do get your point. But sci fi doesn't necessarily need to be an infinite universe. It can be future earth, without the presence of space. Or it could be a region of space that has specific characteristics. I think what you're getting at is that there is typically more variation in fantasy and in sci fi, everyone has a few common references for what sci fi traditionally is. Or cyberpunk, for example.

I had a case where I've worked on a character, asked for several questions and received ambiguous answers and the GM kept adding new characters that were not linked at all. It felt like they were copied and paste from somewhere. Despite my best to follow the GM pov, I quickly gave up since we were going nowhere as he kept adding lore before the roleplay even started and it made less sense each time.

This is an valuable experience to share I think. So was the writing and planning of the lore the main fault? Or was it just too ambitious, the GM taking on more than he/she could chew?

I matured and understood that lore was way more important and shouldn't be rushed on with just the main plot in mind. Every time I fail, I glanced back at my project to see where things went wrong, but I won't step in it too much otherwise I will go off subject.

I had the exact same experience many times, I can relate to that very much. The reason why I'm doing such immense preparation for my upcoming RP, working every day on world-building (20 pages so far), is precisely because of these experiences. So now I want to know how to deliver it, what people prefer. Thanks for the insight!

 

[Idea]

I'm not sure exactly what you mean. Wouldn't more established information mean less unexplored angles?

Quite on the contrary. An angle where information isn't established yet isn't an angle to explore, it's one that doesn't yet exist. Granted, when the information isn't there you just have to fill the gap, which means there is more freedom to it. But a game having rules doesn't mean there can't be an individual strategy you can play within those rules or exploiting a given rule, that is different from how others do it. What you focus on, and make use of, can be different, and the more rules there are, the bigger the chance that there is some rule others have yet to attempt to exploit.

For an example, let's say there is a magic system run on fossils, where different species affect the kind of magic resulting and the size of the fossil affects the scale. Players may have already figured out maybe some form of combining magic, or some cool magic they want their specific fossil to do , and so on.... But by looking at the rules I may say "hold on, maybe if I break the fossils up, this will let me cast more spells, though at a lower scale" or "if I find some shrinking magic, I can make their spells harmless". I might even find a way to use magic without fossils by finding how the magic defines a fossil, and then exploiting some loophole there.

For a setting like the one you are making, this dystopia, more information on how everything came about might for instance influence what kind of backstory my character has- maybe they got rich as information brokers regarding the shifting markets while various companies where growing, for instance. This could influence what kind of connections, enemies and allies they would have, as well as their skills and to an extent their values.

I get both of these points. But how do I consolidate both of them together? Shouldn't a lot of lore in the interest check then show you that a lot of effort has gone into the RP? And I don't why a lot of lore would show that the ST is not interested in trying to create a good RP?

The answer to this falls into the aspect of priorities. Yes, when you have a lot of lore, especially when it is well-developed and well-connected, that is something that shows you put in that time, effort and dedication. However, where you place can be revealing of whether you prioritize the setting you've made or the roleplay you're making on that setting. When you put the lore in the interest check, or better said, if you info dump in the interest check (just putting a little bit of lore is fine, as long as it is pertinent to the roleplay's appeal) it shows great attachment to your lore- to the point where you considered a wall of text potential players have yet to be sold on to be a central part of the appeal to a roleplay.

I do not, therefore, doubt that you did put in the effort- I just can't trust that my needs as a roleplayer will be respected when in conflict with the setting. The GM wants to show off the setting (which isn't bad in of itself) without having enough interest in what the players will be doing within that setting. They will take the opportunity to show off the setting and all the great things it has to offer, but forget to really involve the players, to explore the player's contributions and stories. A player's content will be disposable, and used as a vehicle for the exposition.

You may think I'm exagerating- and certainly there are alternatives. Maybe it's not that the GM has such a focus and attachment on their setting. But if that's the case, then two possibilites remain- either they are unable to find the core of the idea, meaning they have an incredibly shallow understanding of their own idea, or they don't have anything specifically appealing to show. Were either of the three options not the case, the GM would be able to narrow down the lore presented to just the part that is appropriate for a pitch.

Using your setting again as an example, the appeal of your RP would be towards "a dystopian future where every market is a monopoly". You will want to increase beyond that sentence for the sake of atmosphere, but if you're telling me the exact history of how the setting came to be, chances are I (who had no prior investment) may not actually pick up on what the appeal is suppose to be. You can loose me right there. That said, because of my beliefs and my detailed tendencies I actually tend to read more into things before making my judgement than a lot of people- most people would just be so bored by the innitial exposition they would leave right there, or be intimidated into leaving. Hence, if I see it present, the three reasons above- attachment, lack of coordenation and direction, and the lack of actual appealing content in the idea as a whole- become the possibilities to consider.

With that said, I do have to correct one thing you misinterpreted from what I said. None of this means the person isn't interested in making a good RP. They definitely are, most of the time. However, in their thinking, consciously or otherwise, the setting comes first. As I mentioned, it's a matter of priorities. There is no ill will, not even desinterest in the RP- but if you prioritize setting, then it's a given the things below the priority list will be paying the price for that.

 

[MDL]

Quite on the contrary. An angle where information isn't established yet isn't an angle to explore, it's one that doesn't yet exist.

Ah. Yeah I see what you mean.

For an example, let's say there is a magic system run on fossils, where different species affect the kind of magic resulting and the size of the fossil affects the scale. Players may have already figured out maybe some form of combining magic, or some cool magic they want their specific fossil to do , and so on.... But by looking at the rules I may say "hold on, maybe if I break the fossils up, this will let me cast more spells, though at a lower scale" or "if I find some shrinking magic, I can make their spells harmless". I might even find a way to use magic without fossils by finding how the magic defines a fossil, and then exploiting some loophole there.

Alright. So when people are interpreting systems like this ("extending them" perhaps is fair to say?). How do you establish this kind of freedom without players exploiting systems and using them unfairly to the detriment of the game?

if you info dump in the interest check (just putting a little bit of lore is fine, as long as it is pertinent to the roleplay's appeal) it shows great attachment to your lore- to the point where you considered a wall of text potential players have yet to be sold on to be a central part of the appeal to a roleplay.

So highlighting the main aspects of the RP before everything else.

Were either of the three options not the case, the GM would be able to narrow down the lore presented to just the part that is appropriate for a pitch.

Ok. I can buy that.

I do have to correct one thing you misinterpreted from what I said

Please don't excuse your phrasing for me misinterpreting. I asked you to clarify and you did, I didn't misinterpret anything.

 

[Idea]

Alright. So when people are interpreting systems like this ("extending them" perhaps is fair to say?). How do you establish this kind of freedom without players exploiting systems and using them unfairly to the detriment of the game?

You can't avoid players exploiting the system. Someone will always find a way to exploit whatever system you created. However, what you can do is limit the damage such exploiting can do. You have three main options here:
1. Make the roleplay in such a manner as to have the unfair exploiting of the system work for your advantage (In other words, rather than trying to stop players from exploiting the system, making it so it has IC consequences, like someone who becomes too powerful being hunted down by the powers that be due to being a threat for example).

2.The safer but also harder to execute option, design the rules so that exploitation that do exist cannot have such a major impact, either by having the system as whole deal with a more limited scope, or by the design of failsafes.

3.Create the system in such a way that "patches" are possible. If you happen to be unfamiliar with the term, "patches" are updates to games, usually meant to fix bugs and balance issues. Because they change the system, they can't always be logically fit, but when you can do it IC they are a useful tool for getting rid of unforseen exploits without breaking the player's suspension of disbelief or motivation.

So highlighting the main aspects of the RP before everything else.

I suppose. Mainly those which express what is in it for the player or convey the aspects that are meant to be the interesting point for the players. Your interest check is your sales pitch for your RP.

 

[Bone2pick]

For a RP with a custom setting, how much lore do you prefer there to be (assuming it's well written) and how do you prefer it's presented?

For the roleplaying experience that I most enjoy, the more lore the better. I don't just want to invest in the character(s) I create, I want to invest in the world they're in. And I can only do that if the setting has a certain level of depth.

As far as how it's presented – there are several ways to do it smartly & successfully. My preference is to have most of the setting information available before the roleplay starts, so players can utilize it during character creation.

 

[MDL]

As far as how it's presented – there are several ways to do it smartly & successfully. My preference is to have most of the setting information available before the roleplay starts, so players can utilize it during character creation.

I see, that seems to be recurring in this discussion. But there is the issue raised about info-dumping too much in the interest check. Can the lore be presented in between the interest check and game start, but not actually in the interest check? Your take on that?

 

[MDL]

1. Make the roleplay in such a manner as to have the unfair exploiting of the system work for your advantage (In other words, rather than trying to stop players from exploiting the system, making it so it has IC consequences, like someone who becomes too powerful being hunted down by the powers that be due to being a threat for example).

So if I'm going to do that. Do I communicate those conditions beforehand? Like as a rule in the RP? Or do I communicate that to the person once their character has become to powerful? Or do I just go for it. But I guess that could lead to them feeling targeted?

3.Create the system in such a way that "patches" are possible. If you happen to be unfamiliar with the term, "patches" are updates to games, usually meant to fix bugs and balance issues. Because they change the system, they can't always be logically fit, but when you can do it IC they are a useful tool for getting rid of unforseen exploits without breaking the player's suspension of disbelief or motivation.

Seems difficult and a lot of effort just to fix a system. Better to just change it and tell everyone that now it works differently for whatever reason. Unless that's the kind of plot you actually want for your game.

 

[Bone2pick]

But there is the issue raised about info-dumping too much in the interest check. Can the lore be presented in between the interest check and game start, but not actually in the interest check? Your take on that?

The most common solution to that problem is separate threads: one for the interest check, and one for lore. The interest check will usually have the broad strokes of the setting, its primary conflict(s), player-character types & roles, GM expectations, and other similar info. Interest checks (ideally) communicate the roleplay's tone, premise, and themes, similar to a movie trailer.

In contrast, a lore thread is a space for those who judged your interest check interesting to dig into the depth of your setting. And obviously folks not impressed with your interest check are spared from having to read it, which makes it a clean solution imo.

 

[MDL]

In contrast, a lore thread is a space for those who judged your interest check interesting to dig into the depth of your setting. And obviously folks not impressed with your interest check are spared from having to read it, which makes it a clean solution imo.

And you would say that putting it in separate tabs with bbcode wouldn't have that same effect? I could imagine that to be true.

 

[Idea]

And you would say that putting it in separate tabs with bbcode wouldn't have that same effect? I could imagine that to be true.

Tabs do help separate information, but making it on a separate thread gives the possibility to use different posts, limiting what you need to pour into just one post, allowing for jumps and so on. Furthermore it helps not having to make as many tabs so that it doesn't look overly...I'm missing the word...stuffed? Piled on? And people are used to the idea of there being a thread for the lore.

These are ultimately minor reasons (and I know the question wasn't aimed at me, but on this regard I did have something to say so I thought I'd add my two cents to the conversation), but the benefits are definitely there nonetheless.

 

[Idea]

So if I'm going to do that. Do I communicate those conditions beforehand? Like as a rule in the RP? Or do I communicate that to the person once their character has become to powerful? Or do I just go for it. But I guess that could lead to them feeling targeted?

As long as it isn't forced, but a natural result/consequence, this shouldn't need to be communicated. A player should expect that their actions and choices have consequences from their impact on the story and setting. If you feel like it may be unfair for the player, I suggest in this case trying to do some foreshadowing. Show their attempts at exploiting power to get people talking about needing to do something, have some people getting scared or just plain producing negative consequences from their abundant power (like if someone can create these impossibly powerful explosions, actually have NPCs, maybe even an important NPC, caught in the crossfire).

Note: I just want to quickly point out here, that in this response I am assuming the context of you, as I was suggesting on that first strategy, using the unfair advantage to enhance the story through the creation of consequences and impact on the world. This is an exclusively IC endeavor therefore- when it comes to actual OOC rules of the roleplay my stance is that you should always communicate them to your players and avoid changing those rules without agreement from the players or absolute necessity.

Seems difficult and a lot of effort just to fix a system. Better to just change it and tell everyone that now it works differently for whatever reason. Unless that's the kind of plot you actually want for your game.

Well the thing is that you can't randomly change a system normally, not outside of this "patch" strategy. I'm not sure where you're getting the complicated part out of it, because it is the simplest one, where you can actually reliably change things without it infringing on the IC continuity.

The catch with patches is that you do need a plot and setting that uses them.

 

[Bone2pick]

And you would say that putting it in separate tabs with bbcode wouldn't have that same effect? I could imagine that to be true.

That would also get the job done. Roleplay organization largely boils down to personal preference. My preference is to have a separate thread strictly for lore, and to keep interest checks engaging and streamlined.

 

[MDL]

I just want to quickly point out here, that in this response I am assuming the context of you, as I was suggesting on that first strategy, using the unfair advantage to enhance the story through the creation of consequences and impact on the world.

Do you have any examples of this actually working? Any game you played that you can recall?

The catch with patches is that you do need a plot and setting that uses them.

That's exactly my point, seems like a lot of effort just to make sure people don't abuse a system. Doing something they shouldn't be doing in the first place. And adjusting a setting for power-abuse will of course effect the IC experience.

That would also get the job done. Roleplay organization largely boils down to personal preference. My preference is to have a separate thread strictly for lore, and to keep interest checks engaging and streamlined.

I do certainly see the impact-value of doing that. I'll be sure to keep it in mind.

 

[Idea]

Do you have any examples of this actually working? Any game you played that you can recall?

Hmmm... depends on the threshold for 'working'. I haven't been in many roleplays that went all the way to the end, in fact I've only been in 1 on this site, and it was 1x1.

However, if the threshold is just that it cleared the problem of power abuse, I can think of at least one example, though to be honest it's not a great one. It was an RP set in a fandom setting where there are these "ghoul" beings that hide among humans and are only able to feed on humans. They also basically have a form of 'superpowers' you could say. Humans, on the other hand, have an agency that kills ghouls, extracts their "hunting organ" that gives them those powers, then uses those for weapons.

So, what happened when a player playing a "ghoul", started using nuances about their kagune and rule-laweyring their way into new 'powers'? They got a good chunk of that organization on their ass. It's not a great example, cause it's kind of built into the setting already, but it's there.

Perhaps more interesting, I've done the strategy myself, though as a player not a GM (as a GM I usually take the route of the second strategy, that of building the rules with contingencies in the first place). In one instance I recall of doing so there was this virtual reality fantasy RPG setting, and this other player approaches my character to form a party. Now, for context, this was a game world with a lot of established, fixed elements: a number of mobs gave an amount of experience points which increased level and therefore power. There were fixed values for health and damage and all that stuff, just like in a game. What there wasn't, however, was fixed timing for those. You needed a given number of hits to kill a goblin depending on the skills you used, but you could use any number of hits in a given post so as to not bog down the RP. So, while most of us understood the unwritten rule that this meant we had to regulate our pace, this other player is pratically committing genocide on the enemies every post. If my character attempted to organize a strategy, he would single-handedly take care of the entire thing entirely disregarding everything and barely allowing me a word in edgewise.

What I did in response was having my character get fed off with his in-universe. Of course she wouldn't work with someone stealing all the kills and without any respect for a plan done between them. I don't exactly remember how I figured out this person would be sensitive to losing this interaction, but the results showed, and they attempted to reign in their character for a while.

And adjusting a setting for power-abuse will of course effect the IC experience.

I'm not suggesting you adjust the setting post the start of the RP though. The point of that strategy is precisely that the setting doesn't have to be changed for there to be fixing adjustments.

 

[MDL]

I'm not suggesting you adjust the setting post the start of the RP though. The point of that strategy is precisely that the setting doesn't have to be changed for there to be fixing adjustments.

I don't understand how writing a setting that works for "patches" is not adjusting your world-building to "patches"? Like the ghoul setting for example. There is an established paradigm there of an force that can go after abusers.

 

[Idea]

I don't understand how writing a setting that works for "patches" is not adjusting your world-building to "patches"? Like the ghoul setting for example. There is an established paradigm there of an force that can go after abusers.

It's not adjusting, because you're not supposed to change the setting to accomodate the patches- you simply are either using a setting that can host patches in the first places or you aren't. The ghoul setting is not a setting where patches makes sense, so it's not a setting where the strategy can be used, plain and simple.

 

[rae2nerdy]

My thought is that Lore is usually more for the original creator than the players. As I can spend months and multiple roleplays fleshing out lore, a vast majority of which will only ever be seen by me.

As such I feel like having a document or some location where you dump all the lore you have is imperative. I use google docs. I have a drive full of documents dedicated to various world ideas that I flesh out with partners or on my own.

When starting a roleplay I usually only send a set of tabs with the information relevant to the plot.

Ex- If it’s a farm roleplay about raising unicorns than I send a tab explaining how farms and unicorn work. I don’t link the entire 35 page document on all the magical creatures I’ve made up NOR the twelve page document that goes over everything from government to fashion.

Now if my partner requests access to full documents I will link them. Or if they have specific questions I will either link what I already have or write up an answer on the spot.

I also always make sure to tell them I’m open to feedback or critique. As sometimes someone else has a better handle on how something might work than I do.

So I guess in short ; keep everything written down somewhere but only share information as needed or upon request.