The worst type of RPers?

[Andy Samberg]

This can include anything, from OOC talk to in-game talk.


For me it's either people who create characters (especially in war rps) that match something that you would see in CoD. And not like the good ones, I'm talking like CoD Ghosts. Like the all powerful wardogs that probably have no backstory and were made by a 12 year old and maybe the backstory was there but it was like 'i lerd how to shoot a gun at 12 yeers old. i joined the militaree wen i was 18 and i killd 100 peepl and i'm the best pew pew' 


Or it's the characters that move too fast for the RP.


Like they don't listen to the GM or anything, they just kinda move the story forward in a way that it whouldn't be. Take for instance the person who tries to include all of the characters at once in one place. Maybe he was the first to post, and put player's characters where they shouldn't have been. Or maybe it was something like you go to ride the bus (in the Rp) And he just HAS to be on the same bus as you.


What does it for you guys? 

 

[Autumn McJavabean]

I dislike it when everyone must rely on a GM to do everything to the point whoever the GM is, they have to post to get people to post. A lack of motivation. IMO, for some roleplays at least, the GM is to maintain it and progress the story but not be the crux for every post.


I also dislike uninspiring post writing. Short post, focusing on, for this example, how your character was raped in almost every post. Bothers me. I think it can be a wonderful tool, but it needs to be executed. I just find character with PTSD being a prime focus in every post to be a turn off, personally.


When it comes to combat, and we'll use anime-esque style for this, I highly get put off by people who make their characters unrealistically or just ridiculously overpowered and dwarfing everyone. If you want to get to that level, great, but maybe work for it some how?


I also don't like it when people have to have combat to make things interesting. You can do more than love and romance and combat. Do an arduous adventure where you live in the wild and force the mind to be the enemy. That sounds nice, for me at least.

 

[Thalia_Neko]

I dislike it when everyone must rely on a GM to do everything to the point whoever the GM is, they have to post to get people to post. A lack of motivation. IMO, for some roleplays at least, the GM is to maintain it and progress the story but not be the crux for every post.

This.. This is me so much. Every rp I GM ends up like this. >m< Sometimes others progress stuff, but they ultimately leave quickly and just leave it to me to always push everything forward. Then, when I finally do after like 5 days to a week or more of stalling the plot, they either dont respond, or get annoyed that I left their character behind.


It can be real painful.


You also noted a few other things in your response that I deal with, but nothing that resonated with me like that.

 

[KRONOS]

I also don't like it when people have to have combat to make things interesting. You can do more than love and romance and combat. Do an arduous adventure where you live in the wild and force the mind to be the enemy. That sounds nice, for me at least.

The thing about most role-players these days Is that they don't take the Initative to put themselves Into the world they're role playing In. Besides that, some have even gone so far as to become overly reliant on the rp leader to shepard them throughout every little thing; to me thats a major deal-breaker/flaw of the roleplayers I've seen thus far; I find It to perferable when a role-player creates a character they really understand and take the Initative to venture out Into the rp world to walk there path (Not have someone else hold there hand through and through the entire journey  B/ .) 


....but who knows maybe my expectations are too selective. I just perfer It when rpers are actually rpers.

 

[Umbrie]

This can include anything, from OOC talk to in-game talk.


For me it's either people who create characters (especially in war rps) that match something that you would see in CoD. And not like the good ones, I'm talking like CoD Ghosts. Like the all powerful wardogs that probably have no backstory and were made by a 12 year old and maybe the backstory was there but it was like 'i lerd how to shoot a gun at 12 yeers old. i joined the militaree wen i was 18 and i killd 100 peepl and i'm the best pew pew' 


Or it's the characters that move too fast for the RP.


Like they don't listen to the GM or anything, they just kinda move the story forward in a way that it whouldn't be. Take for instance the person who tries to include all of the characters at once in one place. Maybe he was the first to post, and put player's characters where they shouldn't have been. Or maybe it was something like you go to ride the bus (in the Rp) And he just HAS to be on the same bus as you.


What does it for you guys? 

Absolutely no Way a 12 year old is learning to fire a gun. i would Veto that backstory based on those grounds. include some common sense, if you want to play a Soldier who has some Experience under their belt. how about you make them 30? how about you balance that veteran combat skill with some flaws? and i don't mean social ones either. it doesn't have to be PTSD or Shellshock, but maybe your 30 year old soldier isn't as spry as they used to be due to being 30 and slowly exiting their physical prime, but is still physically fit enough to do their job. maybe that muscular soldier is a large target who favors strength over agility and prefers to hit things with force instead of precision. maybe your elite officer spends more time pushing papers than fighting and has lost a bit of their physique.


in fact, if you want to play a Seasoned Soldier in a zombie apocalypse. make them an age that can actually be considered worthy of being seasoned. like 30. while anyone can be a fairly decent soldier by 22-24ish. most of the officers and elite soldiers are over 30, and most of them balance that extra training and specialization with extra years tacked on to their age. they do not teach 8th graders how to shoot a gun. sure, a 12 year old can probably pick up a gun and pull the trigger without much practice, but they aren't formally educated on the finer details of aiming, bracing yourself against recoil, and learning the various firing modes to manage ammunition expenditure. it takes about 2 years of training to do most of that at a reasonable capacity and takes longer to excel at it. and there is more to being a soldier than shooting a gun, you have to have a proper build suited for the battlefield, have to carry your own burden without complaining, have to follow orders, have to be able to cooperate with others, and have to discern different task types. by the time you got good enough at these tasks to be a career officer, you are likely in your thirties. and not everyone joins the military at 18. 18 is just when you can take the test to qualify, which determines you branch, which determines how long you train. and higher branches require longer training.


if you want to play master chief or john mclain in a zombie apocalypse. i expect your character to be at least 30 years old and to have a reasonable level of training and experience for their age. none of this "i learned to shoot when i was 12" horse bile. there isn't anyone that would provide a gun to a 12 year old. and if you were going through school like every other modern child, you probably weren't learning any combat skills for the first 18 years of your life. unless you dedicated yourself to martial arts classes at a public dojo and if you did, it probably started to cut into your free time, either way, those unarmed martial arts you learned as a child are of little practical use on the battlefield. military teaches their own practical styles for hand to hand combat but most of the time, using a knife is going to be more effective than punching somebody. i mean sure, you have your main arm, your side arm, and your emergency arm. but those do better than punching people. the reason unarmed martial arts were invented in most countries, was to get around weapons bans, and most people there would rather have a weapon. sure, you might know tae kwan do or kenpo, but you need to relearn unarmed combat if you intend to join the army. and they will teach you how to weed out the moves that are impractical. remember that kenpo class that taught you to be flashy? now you have to deliberately tone down the flashiness and learn what works in a real fight. when you are up against a real opponent that threatens your life, you have to learn what works.

 

[Inner Power]

Those unwilling to see that roleplaying is effort of either two people or a group, one person alone can't be the only one to contribute. It takes a team to put characters in a plot and setting where everyone will enjoy it and have fun.

 

[call me rae]

well two worst types


as has been mentioned the type of people who don't play well with others. whether that manifests as being unable to let go of a creative vision enough to allow other people to give input or where they sort of just sit like a lump on the ground and expect you to physically carry them through everything. or the people who have such rampant insecurities that they spend the entire time jumping down your throat because of precieved criticism OR they brag incessantly about their own accomplishments to the point where it just becomes blatant attention grabbing.


so basically if you are not the kind of person i would want to be stuck in an elevator with for five minutes chances are your not the kind of person i want to make a roleplay with either.


but my all time least favorite roleplayers is erotic roleplayers. now to clarify this is not people who just do erotic roleplays for fun and are content to take direction from their partners on how where the limit is drawn. i have nothing against people who choose to enjoy themselves by writing erotic content. more power to you.


the problem i have is when the erotic roleplayer basically shoves smut down your throat. it doesn't matter what the rules say. or what the setting is. at some point ( usually in the beginning ) they begin to pressure you to bring some kind of sexual component to the roleplay.


+ bonus creeper points if these are the type of erotic characters who assume you are the person your playing and try to get you to essentially have cyber sex with them. 

 

[Truthblade]

People who can't (or refuse to) cooperate with other players. If everyone else doesn't like what they're doing, they just don't care, it's either their way or no way. (Especially after a recent incident of mine.)

 

[Count Gensokyo]

(Especially after a recent incident of mine.)

Well, that sucks.

 

[Inner Power]

People who can't (or refuse to) cooperate with other players. If everyone else doesn't like what they're doing, they just don't care, it's either their way or no way. (Especially after a recent incident of mine.)

I think I know what you are talking about. You have my apologies.

 

[Truthblade]

I think I know what you are talking about. You have my apologies.

Uh, what did you do again?

 

[Inner Power]

Uh, what did you do again?

Not me

 

[Susanoo]

What I don't like is people making unbalanced ass characters, and people who try to one post without giving others enough time to respond.


People that have over powered abilities like vector manipulation.

 

[Inner Power]

Every thread you do with someone they want a romance between the two characters even though one of the characters admits they have no interest at all in love.


Roleplayers that want to be in a relationship with the antagonist.

 

[TPBx]

Absolutely no Way a 12 year old is learning to fire a gun. i would Veto that backstory based on those grounds. include some common sense, if you want to play a Soldier who has some Experience under their belt. how about you make them 30? how about you balance that veteran combat skill with some flaws? and i don't mean social ones either. it doesn't have to be PTSD or Shellshock, but maybe your 30 year old soldier isn't as spry as they used to be due to being 30 and slowly exiting their physical prime, but is still physically fit enough to do their job. maybe that muscular soldier is a large target who favors strength over agility and prefers to hit things with force instead of precision. maybe your elite officer spends more time pushing papers than fighting and has lost a bit of their physique.


in fact, if you want to play a Seasoned Soldier in a zombie apocalypse. make them an age that can actually be considered worthy of being seasoned. like 30. while anyone can be a fairly decent soldier by 22-24ish. most of the officers and elite soldiers are over 30, and most of them balance that extra training and specialization with extra years tacked on to their age. they do not teach 8th graders how to shoot a gun. sure, a 12 year old can probably pick up a gun and pull the trigger without much practice, but they aren't formally educated on the finer details of aiming, bracing yourself against recoil, and learning the various firing modes to manage ammunition expenditure. it takes about 2 years of training to do most of that at a reasonable capacity and takes longer to excel at it. and there is more to being a soldier than shooting a gun, you have to have a proper build suited for the battlefield, have to carry your own burden without complaining, have to follow orders, have to be able to cooperate with others, and have to discern different task types. by the time you got good enough at these tasks to be a career officer, you are likely in your thirties. and not everyone joins the military at 18. 18 is just when you can take the test to qualify, which determines you branch, which determines how long you train. and higher branches require longer training.


if you want to play master chief or john mclain in a zombie apocalypse. i expect your character to be at least 30 years old and to have a reasonable level of training and experience for their age. none of this "i learned to shoot when i was 12" horse bile. there isn't anyone that would provide a gun to a 12 year old. and if you were going through school like every other modern child, you probably weren't learning any combat skills for the first 18 years of your life. unless you dedicated yourself to martial arts classes at a public dojo and if you did, it probably started to cut into your free time, either way, those unarmed martial arts you learned as a child are of little practical use on the battlefield. military teaches their own practical styles for hand to hand combat but most of the time, using a knife is going to be more effective than punching somebody. i mean sure, you have your main arm, your side arm, and your emergency arm. but those do better than punching people. the reason unarmed martial arts were invented in most countries, was to get around weapons bans, and most people there would rather have a weapon. sure, you might know tae kwan do or kenpo, but you need to relearn unarmed combat if you intend to join the army. and they will teach you how to weed out the moves that are impractical. remember that kenpo class that taught you to be flashy? now you have to deliberately tone down the flashiness and learn what works in a real fight. when you are up against a real opponent that threatens your life, you have to learn what works.

Though it also depends like lets say that this is a setting where child soldiers were a thing. Then I'd be more inclined to believe that X OC is a bad ass after surviving more years of grueling combat experience than others he fights against. And its not like thats out of the ordinary as American Rednecks already spend years sport shooting prior to joining the army, making them very effective marksmen before basic. Not to mention ROTC and Junior ROTC programs that prepare young people to be physically fit and combat ready way before they are eligible to be in the military. Or another example would be the British Gurhkas whose entire culture prepares them for man to man combat well before they join the army, making them one of the deadliest killers on the planet in a close range melee (look up stories on these guys, they're insane.) There are quite a few exceptions to the whole "too young to hold a gun" argument.


However, what you say is correct if X Character joined the military when they were 17-20 with no prior experience.

 

[TPBx]

I dislike it when everyone must rely on a GM to do everything to the point whoever the GM is, they have to post to get people to post. A lack of motivation. IMO, for some roleplays at least, the GM is to maintain it and progress the story but not be the crux for every post.


I also dislike uninspiring post writing. Short post, focusing on, for this example, how your character was raped in almost every post. Bothers me. I think it can be a wonderful tool, but it needs to be executed. I just find character with PTSD being a prime focus in every post to be a turn off, personally.


When it comes to combat, and we'll use anime-esque style for this, I highly get put off by people who make their characters unrealistically or just ridiculously overpowered and dwarfing everyone. If you want to get to that level, great, but maybe work for it some how?


I also don't like it when people have to have combat to make things interesting. You can do more than love and romance and combat. Do an arduous adventure where you live in the wild and force the mind to be the enemy. That sounds nice, for me at least.

Forgive me Lord for I have sinned.