A Measure of Success

[Formendacil]

Originally Posted by Nogrod

I'm getting to like Form's suggestion more and more, especially after his clarifications on it.

But I'd also like to put some flesh on the bones here by way of asking a few questions. So where would you put the following RP's?

I'm actually going to answer all of these--not because I disagree with your guesses (though I've not looked at them in detail), but because this is a really excellent opportunity to explain the distinction I'm trying to make.

]1) "I have this idea that a bunch of people should try to get into place X to warn the king about the on-falling war brewing. I have a few obstacles laid out for you guys so let's see can you overcome them?"

I would say this is a Doriath game: the motivating idea is the plot, which is driven and known by the game owner, and the "I" in "I have a few obstacles laid out" is crucial.

2) "I have this idea that we'd collect these bunch of people escaping from enslavement and then let them meet with some fugitives from an opposing race both in as bad condition: then we could see how they would relate to each other if they had a common enemy."

This looks like a Rivendell game, because the main interest is in the interplay of characters, and its very open-ended in terms of what things will go. Its description pretty much begs for full player interaction to move the story along--the plot is contingent on characterisation.

3) "I have this idea we take this group and they go wandering about the forests to see if there is any adventure brewing. Anyone with a good idea about an adventure should come forwards."

This could go either way. Probably, if I were a mod, I'd nudge it in the direction of Rivendell, since the person suggesting it clearly doesn't want to run things that strongly. On the other hand, this might just be someone with an idea looking for a co-mod to work with in Doriath.

4) "I have this idea of a Mead Hall where anyone could come and go but as not to bore ourselves by just playing only social relations like those morning-soap operas in TV let's invent some plots in there every now and then to liven things up?"

Hey! I actually know what this one is. I'd call it a grandfather-clause exception to the rules, really--but agree it belongs in Rivendell. The mod is very much a facilitator in Rohan, rather than a game director, and the players are all very much involved in the direction the game take and the ownership of the game.

5) "I have this fan-fic story of mine I would like to make you perform. I'll tell you what to do and how to write and then you do the writing under my supreme control. Anticipate me correcting your posts if I don't like them."

Well, phrased that way, I can't imagine wanting to join (actually, not true... I'd be tempted if Fea or maybe Elempi were running it), but aside from that off-topic reality, it would clearly go in Doriath. Even though this could as easily be about character as plot, the game owner clearly intends to run things. As said, even this could be fun, with the right owner.

6) "I have this idea of a game where this odd bunch (previously unrelated an different characters) would be thrown into a shipwreck being the sole survivors. Let's see then how they would get along with each other and how they would try to get themselves back to the land?"

Strikes me as another Rivendell story, because the "game owner" (for lack of clear, accurate, synonym) is proposing the idea rather than planning to run it. Once again, the emphasis on characterisation is a good shorthand way of telling that this will be a player consensus game rather than a owner-rule game.

7) "I have this basic storyline concerning the very first Atani getting over Morgoth's trickery and reaching Yavanna & Oromë. Do you think you're up to the challenge?"

I'd call this a Doriath game in the absence of any more info, but it would depend. There's a clear, defined plot that, to me, suggests the game owner plans to be in charge of the overall arc, nudging things in the right direction... but this could also be run with as a Rivendell game, where it's put forward as a game premise.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

I don't think the length should be a decisive factor. The one initiating the game should tell others whether s/he's looking forwards to a long one or a short one - and the others could make their decisions to join or not also based on that.

To me, length isn't decisive, but I do think it needs to be considered, particularly in "Doriath" cases. My reasoning is that when a game's creator is going to have a strong guiding hand in his/her game, then the players should have a clear commitment from that creator to be around for a defined period of time. In "Rivendell" this may be less crucial, since the whole game isn't as dependent on a single leader, but I think it's still fair to have an expected timeframe.

In other words, I wouldn't consign short games to Doriath and long ones to Rivendell (or vice versa), but I do think that Doriath games (at least) should have a planned timeframe. These can always be extended, but whether it's two weeks or two years, telling players how long a game is likely to last is an act of commitment on the part of the game owner, and given the responsibility an owner has in Doriath, that seems fair to me.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

But what I see coming through from these examples loud and clear is that the Doriath games would be much more dependent on the gameowner while the Rivendell ones could be more collectively led.

But that is no way a "writing-quality"-issue! I could see a bunch of creative and involved writers making a great story from 7) even if the gameowner had the basic outline of the story already planned - and I could see big egoes and non-co-operative players ruining story 6).

Exactly the idea! I have no problem against particular games being invitation-only, either in Doriath or Rivendell, and if the game owner/proposer wants (and can get!) the best of the best writers, it will be a joy to read... but we don't need a separate forum for it.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Also, from the form I deliberately took up there with my examples you can see that I do think we should open the ownership of the RP's to anyone. Anyone could suggest a game by opening a thread and if there were enough players interested in it the people interested could play it. And if there was not, then the game would not go on.

Agreed--and this was an implicit assumption in my proposal.

Originally Posted by Nogrod

Okay, I can see a problem lurking here... With a new ruling given there might be a burst of new games offered and there could be something like a beauty or popularity contest involved.

I... would love to see that. My own bet is that we'll be lucky to have a few ground-breakers to pave the way. As excited as well all are, our numbers aren't dense, and most of us have been around so long (and might be too jaded) that we might not want to go first. Additionally, I think enough of us have played WW that we can see the benefits in "taking turns" to an extent (though we need to be one game at a time, I doubt anyone is up for playing in more than two or so at a given moment).

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Formy, I really think it would be better to move away from the idea that a game needs to be approved--or nodded at--by a Moderator, because I think the entire atmosphere needs to be changed whereby people take ownership for their rpg-ing. Your "as a formality" is quite different from what I think is the case now with it's character bios and extended plot lines. I mean, right now animal characters are not allowed at the Meadhall. Where does that put the game My Crow Management, which was a Rohan game, where all the characters were crows?

Insofar as you're quite right that my "as a formality" is intended to be quite different from the status quo, I have no problem with moving away from the idea that a game needs approval. Personally, I think it is still helpful to run game plans by someone else--and having a mod gives you someone with an "official" standing whose job is to listen to such schemes--but insofar as it was only a formality I had in mind, it's easily dropped. My main thought about it was to safeguard the right of the forum mods to close or veto games, and that it would save people embarrassment if this happened before a thread was started, rather than after. If, however, that still smacks too much of the current regime, I (at least) have no problem with post-thread-starting moderation. As has been said, it does seem to work elsewhere on the Downs with little enough problem...