Roleplay Prefixes Idea

[Dugym]

<p>


Maybe something exactly like Simple, Casual, and Detailed, but without post requirements?


</p>

 

[Dugym]

These could be added:


Casual w/o post rules


Detailed w/o post rules

 

[LegoLad659]

Simple, Casual, and Detailed really are the post requirements :/ RpN defines them as such.

 

[Dugym]

Pretty sure there are other factors involved.


See here: INFO - Prefixes List

 

[LegoLad659]

"Simple Roleplays are games for people who just want to roleplay and for people that are not interested in meeting post requirements."


"Casual Roleplays expect posts that are about a paragraph (1+) long minimally."


"These games expect posts that are at least three plus (3+) paragraphs long."


So yes, post length is part of the prefix definitions.

 

[Dugym]

I didn't say that. I am just saying that there are other factors besides posting requirements. I would want people to develop their characters and such, but I wouldn't want to put post requirements. See what I mean?

 

[LegoLad659]

That would still be a Simple roleplay, I believe.


@Moderators, confirm or deny?

 

[Dugym]

That would still be a Simple roleplay, I believe.
@Moderators, confirm or deny?

If this is the case, there should probably be a "Really Simple" prefix without any rules. This would be good for new roleplayers. Not that I am, like I have said I have experience, but I am trying to think of everyone here.

 

[DemonKitten]

I mean if you want a lot of detail with out the stress of post requirements casual is the best. Simple are really never quite detailed and, though you don't want post requirements, roleplays that are very detailed or have a lot of building involved in them are usually brought together with roleplayers that post at least a paragraph.


I don't like scaring people with post requirements either so I usually go casual because it is the safest for what I desire

 

[DemonKitten]

Also, remember that there is a huge update coming and it might answer what you are asking like putting detailed for the content but simple for the requirements

 

[kibou]

You dont have to strictly follow the post requirement in your rp either. You could make a detailed rp,and make it clear in the rules/overview what your post requirement is, if any, but that you expect people's quality to be on a detailed level and that you expect people to plot/collaborate/participate in a "detailed" manner. Or you could do that exact same thing with a casual prefix, technically you could justify putting an rp like that in either.


Our prefixes aren't super strict and while the prefix might be changed by a mod (which doesn't happen very often) you won't get in trouble for using the wrong one at all.


As long as you're basing some part of the label on actual components of your rp it's probably fine. (E.g, just dont make a rp with no post requirement or level of involvement or any sort of hard requirements for accepting a CS, etc, and put a detailed label on it to make it look "cool.")

 

[Dugym]

@Ghost The problem with that is that people might think "oh, it has a post requirement, I won't join it". I can relate to that, because unless a Detailed roleplay is very interesting, I won't join it, and if I do, I'll only join one. Because while I am a good writer, I am not so good I can do 3 paragraphs every post.

 

[Grey]

FWIW, I list everything as Casual and just vet my players. I completely ignore the post requirement part and will often note that in my interest checks.


I don't want artificially inflated post sizes. I want a few dozen good words, not a thousand crap ones.


Please do not think good writers write more paragraphs. I find the opposite to be true.

 

[call me rae]

As has been stated I find that people typically make up their own requirements for what they want in their roleplays. I've seen roleplays without any kind of rules at all listed as casual or detailed and ones listed as simple that still managed to at least have some investment by the players.


I would think it's up to you to look at the roleplays individually rather than just going by the prefix. Because to be honest 9/10 they're misleading anyway.

 

[kibou]

@Ghost The problem with that is that people might think "oh, it has a post requirement, I won't join it". I can relate to that, because unless a Detailed roleplay is very interesting, I won't join it, and if I do, I'll only join one. Because while I am a good writer, I am not so good I can do 3 paragraphs every post.

Well like I said, you don't necessarily have to have a post requirement as long as some other part of the rp fits the prefix. People tend to look at a rp's overview/interest check before deciding if they want to join or not, instead of just looking solely at the title/prefix, so if you have the information in a spot they're likely to look at (interest check/overview) most potential players will see it.


And you can use either the casual or detailed prefix in this situation like I said, you don't have to meet every requirement for a prefix. So if you want you could just use a casual prefix.


Also this isn't really related, but like grey said just because you can't write as much as 3 paragraphs a post doesn't mean you're any less of a writer than someone who can. ^^ What you say > how much you say when it comes to writing.

 

[MISTER UN. 0W3N]

Prefixes... :I Never been a fan of them, and I don't believe that's going to change. I personally read the thread just to see what the GM specifies in their posts, profiles, and what not.... if there is any. I am big on thread owners posting exactly what they want to see out of the users that attempt to join/are interested in. With these tags, it's more like a sort of "eye catcher" to try and lure users in moreso than stating what you're going to "normally" see. As stated in this thread, most of the prefixes for threads are misleading in terms of RPNation's basic expectations and what not.


Though, one thing would be cool is a sort of genre prefix... though, that's a shit load of work to do and the threads are already divided up pretty well. There's also the tags... but man... to have a spoopy "horror" prefix attached to the title of your thread... = w =