Here are some common things I'm starting to see that are really starting to annoy me about the GMs here.

• Taking one small group of like four questions or a single character concept and judging a peorson of that single responce wanting nothing to do with them at all in any game if it don't please them.
• Similarly judging that a person dose not fit there game based of the character idea presented, not even willing to entertain the idea that you might be able to produce a more fitting character.  (This is particularly bad when little information on the setting is given in the first place to try and fit into)
• Ignoring a RTJ that they do not like rather than responding to it. (because we all know the best way to make something to go away is to pretend its not there, rather than say IDK..... say telling/asking it to go away)
• Thinking spelling and grammar is the only true judge of a persons intelligence, and that if you are not exceptional at both you are an invalid incapable of the level of thought required to play imaginary people like three year olds do.........  yah.  You don't need to be smart to rp well but it dose help, however one skill like spelling don't constitute intelligence. There could be and idiot savant with perfect spelling and grammar, and Einstein's was bad and his math skills wouldn't have got him out of middle school math class....
• And more of a pet peeve than a real problem... not giving information on a setting, even if there not expecting a well thought out character...take some consideration for people who will only play well thought out characters.

Ok so some of that is fumeing (oh dear lord what the auto correct tried to make that).... but I see much of it as a real problem

Problem is, depending on system, GMs are getting a hell of a lot of RTJs, and they need to figure out some way of determining who gets in and who doesn't? Would it be better if they gave you no reason just "You didn't get in?" Ignoring the fact that the reasons they have are still the same, you just don't know them?

I know your intention was not to be ironically correct in your statement, but it turns out that is indeed what is actually happening here. Thing is though, a person who reads that their RTJ will not be accepted without all the required information, and still fills out one without all the requred information deserves to be ignored. I'm not calling you out. I've never dealt with you to know that you do this, but be warned, I don't acknowledge anyting that doesn't have what I require on it. In fact, other than that one particular line, you can have anything else you want on your RTJ and if it's complete garbage, you have higher odds of being accepted, or even acknowledged than someone who doesn't have that one line.


I'm no perfectionist, but there are things within your first post on this topic that would make me not want you in my game. Particularly getting the correct "there" wherever you decide to put it. I snipped a comment where you should have said "their"... Just sayin' (and before you bag on me, contractions are a valid grammatical choice for informal writing).

To be fair, considering the wide range of spell and grammar check, if you submit an RTJ to me full of grievous errors beyond the usual, I'm going to assume you didn't care enough.

And if you do care enough, stick to words you know how to spell, intelligence is best conveyed not in the words you can write, but in the concepts you grasp. It will show if the idea is a good one.

And often, if I do judge someone on one concept, it's because they've shown some measure of themselves that will be problematic, such as a desire to be the lone wolf who everyone stands in awe of and is always right, or being the only one allowed nice things on the group ("I know it's an agent game, but can I be Green Lantern? Checkmate did it!" . . . I would allow Greg Rucka who wrote it to play that, not some powergamer on the internet)

The toughest part about putting together a game is finding a group of players who click and have good chemistry.  It's tough to do, but when you find a group of players like that, the games can be fantastic.

Part of that has to do with playing and posting styles.  Some players like to post only one or two lines, whilst others like to write entire chapters at a time.  Most players fall somewhere in between.

As a GM, if I get an RTJ that doesn't use capitalization or punctuation and misspells many words, I'm not going to accept that submission unless there's something about the player that overrides my initial objections, and I'll try to let the prospective player know in the kindest way I know how.  Being aware that a player is dyslexic is a good reason not to have perfect grammar, of course.  I don't demand 100% correct posts, and I make mistakes myself.  I have a friend who really struggles with grammar and spelling, but I'd still play with him in a heartbeat because I like playing with him and I know his situation.

As a player and a GM, I don't want to play in a long term game with someone who doesn't use basic standard English.  It's painful reading their posts, and other forms of RPGs are much more suited to a person who struggles with writing.  My friend, for instance, usually LARPS, and he doesn't have to worry about spelling or sentence structure during a LARP weekend.

In reply to Sir_Chivalry (msg # 4):

Your last paragraph illustrates a point that I seriously hadn't considered, but now that I look at it, I realize that it is a completely valid point. I have fallen into the trap of unwittingly allowing a player to enter a game I was GMing on the premise that a lot of their stuff was flavor text of abilities they actually bought. I thought it was a cool idea. It was a canon character from an anime that wasn't even related to the game. I hadn't seen it, so I figured she'd play nice and only go for flavor text. I find out she's trying to throw down some major divine power because the other character had said power. So I try to let it happen and put serious negs on it. From that point her entire involvement in the game was about preserving her powers and waving them in front of all the other players. At one point I got her to very strongly imply such. It was terrible. I'll never make that mistake again.

In reply to Mad Mick (msg # 5):

You have another friend that LARPs but you don't know him personally, and I'd say he's adequate. :D

   And yet, spelling and grammar are essential tools to master in order to be able to communicate with the written language.  Using a fixed set of rules to convey what you want to say in a way that others will understand you cannot be ignored.  No matter the level of your thought processes, if you cannot express them any better than that three year old you have mentioned, how is anyone to know?

I'm not sure about anything else, but I do see the point about GM's that do not respond to rejected RTJ's.
I can see the GM's stance on this, as well. Every RTJ that you want to reject has the capability of being the driving force behind the party, or the glue that holds the others together. It's exceedingly difficult to type that post in that finalizes the player's rejection. It's like any interpersonal relationship, you don't want to say 'go away' until you're absolutely certain this isn't someone you might want or need later on.
But it's like my father always told me, 'if you might love someone, set them free, if they're not there when the time is right, dial the number scrawled on the wall next to the payphone'.

The bit about Einstein is actually a fallacy.  He was brilliant at math, even at an early age, but he disdained memorization, which is what his classes prioritized.  He wanted to work out everything rather than memorize material.

If a player has problems with spelling, I recommend getting a good dictionary and looking up words. Like I said before, a player needn't have perfect spelling, but I appreciate players who make an effort.  Another friend of mine from high school struggled with dyslexia, too, but she really worked hard to do her best.  If someone has dyslexia, it might be a good idea to be upfront with that in the RTJ, just to let the GM know.

More on Einstein and math here.  It's good reading, particularly for people who hate rote memorization.  =)  http://www.todayifoundout.com/...thematics-in-school/

Are you sure we're not talking about the same person?  =)  I kid, I kid.  =)

I'm gonna defend the aspect of spelling just for a second.

Not everyone -can- spell. There are reasons some people can't. I'm not going to make assumptions based on someone's use of spelling or grammar as to their intelligence. It also is not indicator of whether they care enough.

Having said that, unfortunately, I would have to say poor spelling is a red flag to me; just because PbP is so much about writing that poor spelling/grammar makes it hard to sometimes interpret what a player is saying.

Oh I'd just like to say also that I've made no comment against spelling. My comments were against the wrong word being used, even though it was spelled correctly.

In reply to steelsmiter (msg # 6):

Years and years ago I belonged to a college gaming group that met once a month and GMs would offer one session games for people to play.  One GM usually offered Call of Cthulhu, the original 1930's setting.  We had for a while a player who without fail, would try to get the GMs to accept his Pashtani (spelling?) which was a blue furred humanoid feline; especially into settings that didn't fit at all...  Like CoC and other modern settings.

The CoC GM let him make up a character, but told him that he had to follow all the rules for character creation straight out of the book.  He also told him that his character looked human and had totally human attributes, and that his Sanity would be half of what it normally should be since his character was under the delusion that he was really a blue furry cat-man.  The player agreed but throughout the game kept trying to claim that he could use certain magical powers; all of which the GM nixed from really happening and kept having the player make sanity checks.  Needless to say the player didn't stay in the gaming group for very long.

Sometimes the GMs just have to say "No.  You can't play in my game."  It's not always nice, but as it has already been expressed, not everyone's play styles mesh.

In reply to steelsmiter (msg # 3):

Explaining why there not being accepted can be short and simple, and if they won't take no for an answer that is what the moderators are for...ignoring someone just puts of people who could have been good additions to the game with a little guidance (has been the case with one char in my mage game...and also the bane of it with another but that other was my fult for being TOO nice and helpful)... and it don't put off the people who are going to be persistent and troublesome

While I am not actually dyslexic its easier to say I am because its similar and people know what dyslexic is and I don't even think what it got has a name lol.....I have worked my brain raw grinding what spelling and gramor I do have in...my academic skills where graded all higher than 97-99.9% of kids my age in middle school with the accepting of math (Barkley affected high 80), and social studies/history (only slightly above average in the 70s) because the affect it has on me remembering names and formulas. Spelling and gramor? Internet other end of the spectrum. 73% where better than me I got 27. U.U

So you can imagine why it is a hot button topic for me. Yah I may not meet there high standard of there gauge for intelligence but what I have is a good 300% improvement over where I was 10-15 years ago. Thats something that can't say they have done with anything likely...and I know I'm likely smarter than them anyway....

>.<

So frustrating.

In reply to steelsmiter (msg # 13):

Yeah, I know you didn't. Funnily enough, I have a lot more patience with the wrong word being used, as I don't know what nationality someone may be; and the differing use of the same words spelt differently may be one of the last things you get from studying english; which is the -worst- language to learn as a second language. Even latin is easier.

What bugs me is when I apply to a game, and rather than being told up front, "A lot of people are applying so you may not get in" I am strung along(5 messages from the gm, getting a whole bunch of questions answered that built up the background for the character, and then get told, with not once being told how I could better make my character fit(which I always say, that I can change or shift my idea):


While that is nice, I rarely see a game open up to new players that I applied to at the start. More often I see games die off before accepting new players, with only the occasional game that actually does that.

In reply to Sir_Chivalry (msg # 4):

Not everyone makes chars that are personas. Generally this is true, but some times they make chars they think will fit in what they know of the setting, or just something they want to try for the heck of it.

The more important thing, even if there char consent dose show some trait of theirs that is in conflict, it dose not mean they can not control that trait or even that it is a predominate one at all.

Well I agree with some of what Azraile said.
The first two points are really up to the DM. You can get a TON of requests so just because you weren't picked doesn't mean one of those is true.

Ignoring a RTJ: A pet peeve of mine. I don't ask for much, just a "sorry, game filled up" or a quick reason. I've had RTJ's sit because I asked a question I needed answered to complete the RTJ and since I didn't put all the info in they ignored it. :P
To steelsmiter, I often find several pages of info/rules to read and a separate RTJ thread. Then the 'required' info is some secret phrase hidden in the middle of all that. By the time I finish the character I forget that little blurb. It depends on how much info you're throwing at the player and how obvious the required info is. If it's something like an age statement in an adult game I could understand your stance. Even so, no reason to not put some kind of reply.

Spelling/grammar: I'm not a Nazi about it and will overlook general mistakes. If the post is SO filled with errors that It's painful then it's an issue.

Not giving information on a setting: This is another peeve. I'm cool with a game being like on setting but I'm puzzled by one that also asks for extensive background. How am I to form more than a generic background without knowing the world I'm in?

Actually what bugs me even more than that; is when I'm not told that I -did- make it in; and only if I check the game because there's new messages do I see it.

I usually do keep people in mind; but a lot of the time, I've found that if they haven't been accepted within the first few months of being given that offer, they wander away and don't respond to an offer.

In reply to chaosninja (msg # 17):

Well, assuming you were going good, responding well to questions, etc . . .

It might just be you had a good idea, but didn't make the cut. Nothing wrong with you, but not something the other person could know until the end really.

In reply to Azraile (msg # 18):

But still how they present that character and how well they paid attention to the rules I set out for RTJs are both important in knowing the player.

And I must say, no they can't control themselves. The internet does not tone people down, it distills their innate traits. If someone seems like a jerk in the RTJ, I've found they are always more of the same in play.

In reply to steelsmiter (msg # 3):

Seems a little harsh. If someone spends an hour writing an awesome back story which looks like an interesting and intriguing character to add to someones game, isn't it a little harsh to not even acknowledge them if they forget to add; Species: Elf. I'm not sure your standards but I know for my RTJ's I just don't acknowledge RTJ's if it looks like they spent less than five minutes thinking and writing combined.

History: She is a tormented girl from New York. She is also really wealthy.

Age: 19

Physical Description: Beautiful blonde and tall.

In reply to willvr (msg # 20):

Oh yes this!  I hate it when I get accepted into a game but the GM doesn't reply to the RTJ PM to tell me.

In reply to Dara (msg # 14):

LOL that is an AWSOME GM!!!

That is what I am talking about.... ok you have a char that you want to play, and you REALLY want to play it, but it don't fit the setting.  Ok, lets make it fit the setting.

And the guy playing the char might have been well aware of the rules of the setting, and was just playing out the insanity of his char and the consept.... or he could have just been really stubborn or dense.

Ether way though, the GM handled that like a pro.



In response to others, that is exactly my point... there are people to whom good spelling and grammar is not something they are capable of. It's not a lack of trying or caring, it's not a lack of intelligence, it's just the way there brain is wired. No matter of anything is going to fix that.... ever. Unless we learn to rewire peoples brains, and that's not the most appealing prospect for various reasons. >.>

In reply to chaosninja (msg # 17):

In the game I ran I did just that. I got a lot of RTJs. Some I rejected as I really didn't like the char concept and/or had concerns about the writing skills/style of the player, while others I kept on file in case players dropped out, which happens a lot in PBP no matter how good the fame.

Sure enough after a while we lost a couple of olayers is I went back through the list of possible players I had left 'on hold' and asked if they wanted to pick up an abandoned player. Some said no, others said yes and others didn't reply at all - all of which are fair responses in that situation.

Rejected an RTJ is hard to do, just like rejecting a job application. Saying 'I think you are crud' is really hard to do so I will always try to be nice, even if I end up telling a little white lie like 'we got a lot of interest so sorry you missed out this time'. I try to be as honest as I can without hurting the feelings of a stranger.

If a rejectee asks for more feedback I will try to be as honest as I can, but don't usually enter into a long dialogue as that will never end well...

Aah but I have put right in the RTJ requirements, the explanation for why they're not being accepted. Anyone who doesn't include what I want (say for example, because they were either ignoring it or because they were ignoring what I wrote in the first place) is not a 'good' or even a 'worthy' addition to my game. Straight up. I have no respect for people who don't pay attention. I won't pretend to. So let's get something straight: I want people who ignore my requirements to play the game to be 'put off'. Ignoring them works perfectly for that.


Wrong again, I also warn that protesting the full requirement will get them banned from the game, and possibly put on my ignore list. They have no choice but to not be persistent and troublesome.

In reply to Sir_Chivalry (msg # 21):

If THEY seam like a jerk, thats one thing.  If there char seams like a jerk, that's another and that is what I am talking about.

Judging a person ONLY on what there consent is and nothing else. (except perhaps the way they word it, again not something that is always there fault.. I know people who for the life of them can not explain a character or describe how they look but once they start RPing them they are mindbogglingly good. )

In reply to Azraile (msg # 24):

Yeah, and I sympathise, but on the other hand, if it's so bad that I have to spend 20-30 minutes interpreting what's written? That's just not going to end well.

I'm not saying that's the case with you; I don't know, I haven't been involved in games with you. But if it is, I'm not going to put myself through that just because the player has legitimate reasons as to why their spelling is bad.

In reply to Azraile (msg # 24):

Sorry to say, the player wasn't playing up the insanity.  He was trying to play his pashtani in spite of what the GM said.  He was frustrated and the GM was frustrated and so were all the rest of the players.

I don't care.

---

Spoiler for My Requirements: (Highlight or hover over the text to view)
As an adult game requests to join must include:
I <username> I am xx years old, born xx/xx/xxxx and it is legal for me to view adult materials in my current residence.

quote:
GMs should also not allow the players to get too creative with these statements, as changing its wording can make it invalid for our purposes.


quote:
Partial statements, and obviously false statements, should not be accepted.


If you argue over filling out the complete form, I will not be accepting your RTJ.

---

This message was last edited by the user at 04:58, Mon 14 July 2014.

In reply to Jarodemo (msg # 25):

Honestly, I would rather be told my idea is bad, and here is why it will not work for that game. I just dont want to waste days or weeks writing for a character that will never be played.

All told, I was very nice about the whole thing, as I try to be with all GMs because they are the ones doing most of the work really. And should I hear from them about a opening, I look forward to it.

In reply to chaosninja (msg # 31):

I think the problem is that while you might be happy with an honest response there are a lot of PBPers out there who can't handle an honest response and may then try to enter into dialogue that will be difficult, acrimonious and even downright nasty. As a GM trying to set up a new game do you want that level of grief? No, you just want to find a handful of players who will hopefully be good and get your game running.

So it is easier to give a bland rejection rather than a detailed rejection letter that ultimately has no value to you as a GM and might lead to hassle.

I try to avoid spending a great deal of time crafting an RTJ unless i think I have to (say, the GM has a really long RTJ form and requires a lengthy in-character sample response).  There are so many games on here that if you can't find the game you're looking for, just wait a while.   Also, some GMs create games, advertise for them, and then disappear.

However, if I see that the GM has a great track record and I really love his or her writing, I'll make an extra effort on the RTJ.  I love GMs who accept writing samples from other games, though.  That really reduces the workload on applying to a game.  Likewise, I really appreciate GMs who ask potential players to hold off on crafting character sheets and just submit pitches for characters.  If my dwarf bounty hunter idea doesn't work out for one game and system, I can pitch it again sometime for another game or system, and I don't need to bother with filling out a Pathfinder or GURPS character sheet, just to see the idea shot down by the GM.

However, like I said, if the GM looks like he or she is worth it (or if it looks like the game's going to get a ton of RTJs), I will put a lot more effort into the RTJ, but it does stink to spend hours on the RTJ, just to be told the game is full or that actually the setting doesn't include either dwarfs or bounty hunters.  =)

In reply to Dara (msg # 29):

That is a shame, still the GM handled it well.

In reply to steelsmiter (msg # 30):

That is different from any of this, and isn't harsh at all.... it's just as simple as telling them to re-post it properly and if they won't then they don't want to play do they? It's not a misunderstanding, it's not something they can't do, it's not being unreasonable or non-empathetic. It's a site rule you have to follow too and you need them to if they are going to play.

No, in fact, it isn't.  On no account should anybody contact us to deal with what is, essentially, an in-game interpersonal problem.  You need to sort it out among yourselves (hint: GMs, if a player doesn't seem to understand the message that he's not welcome in your game, you have a ban button.)

In reply to Azraile (msg # 27):

I am fully able to differentiate if the person is not a jerk because they'll be acting in such a way usually as to show this, even if the character is flawed.

And interestingly, I've got two very nice players who play jerks, and it oddly enough still makes them a handful for other players to play with because they stay in character. So sometimes I should in fact judge the character too.

And though I'm the kind to ask for someone to repost if they forget the age statement (in a new request), I wouldn't blame steelsmiter. Rarely has someone who didn't send the age statement right the first time proven to be a good player.

@bigbadron, ah thanks I wasn't sure about that (thought I read that but I couldn't go back and check easly on a phone). I didn't know we had a ban button to stop people from requesting access. That's good to know.

I really need to take some time to look through all the options I have available some time, IRL is so stressful as of late and keeping me so busy the past two weeks I've mostly been accessing this on the phone. >.<

On a side note I find it funny that I made a Poor RTJ response thread and a satire bad character idea thread in the same week.

In reply to steelsmiter (msg # 30):

After looking at the requirements, I'll make one point. You don't have to have both age AND date of birth. Some don't like to give out DOB as it can open them up to tracking so I can understand not wanting to give it out. 'I <username> I am xx years old and it is legal for me to view adult materials in my current residence.' is a valid statement for RPOL.

So if it's JUST not adding DOB, I'd still find it overly harsh.

I've had the same experience. If a character is a jerk; occasionally, they won't work within a game. SOmetimes they can; other times they can't.

And even putting aside the age request; I wouldn't blame anyone for not responding to someone because they don't fill out the entire RTJ form. Whilst it'd be nice to always be told you're not in; and why, I'm not going to question why if they don't respond (though that might make it less likely I go for another of their games); or if they just want to give a bland statement. There are other games.

In reply to Mad Mick (msg # 33):

That is another good point too, if your looking for a game and trying several different games you don't always feel like or have the time to make anything but basic RTJ's in games until you get more details on the game. Making snap judgements on passing, "Hey whats going on here?" kinda RTJs is another good way to miss out on good chars. Not everyone has time to commit to shinning gold star RTJs to every single game they are checking out.


In reply to Sir_Chivalry (msg # 36):

I totally agree. Still I don't think you should make judgments only by there char. You can simply say, I don't want a jerk in this game, or we have enough jerks already. Then simply say, "Is there any other character ideas you have?" or see if they are willing to alter the one they have.


And I don't see why anyone would ban some one because they didn't quite get the age statement right. Mistakes happen, it don't mean there trying to circumvent the system, give them a chance to fix there errors...



In general I say give them a chance to fix anything wrong, and TELL THEM WHAT IS WRONG!!!!  >.<

Here's the thing though... if I'm looking for a party of 5; and I get 15 RTJs, why should I ask one that isn't quite right now, to make it right, when I already have, for example, 7 or 8 who could easily fit, and I already need to say to 2 or 3 players that I wouldn't mind at all having in the game "Sorry, you missed out."

If I have to readvertise, then they can reconsider a different concept at that point to maximise their chances.

No it isn't. I specifically stated failure to include it bars them from the game, and your peeve is ignoring players.


Telling them that again is both redundant and annoying. If they fail to comply the first time I tell them (that is in the RTJ Requirements thread) then they don't want to play, or their desire to play is only exceeded by their willful ignorance. I will not acknowledge willful ignorance in any way, even if it means they are offended by my ignoring them.


A liberal application of this takes the stress away :D


Oh and part of me ignoring them gives the side benefit that they can catch their mistake and post it on their second post. I'm totally willing to work with a player that does that :D

In reply to elecgreystone (msg # 38):

I don't care.
This message was last edited by the user at 05:31, Mon 14 July 2014.

In reply to steelsmiter (msg # 42):

If they make a mistake in an age statement and you you discount them that is rather harsh. Like I was saying mistakes happen. If they show they are unwilling or incapable of doing so, that's one thing.... but if they slip up once um... no

I don't agree with any "one strike your out" policy of any kind, period.

It isn't quite one strike and you're out. Like I said, if they catch their mistake, and they fix it in their second post, I'm fine with that. Thing is though, I don't care if anyone doesn't agree with any 'policy' I have. They would know the risk if they'd read the requirements. If they didn't, I don't want them in my game. If they did, and didn't do it anyway, I don't want them in my game. Again, the exception being if they fix it. Until they do, their RTJ sits there lonely, for reasons they'd already be informed of if they read my RTJ. Simple.

In reply to steelsmiter (msg # 42):

*Shrug* Up to you in the end. Not sure why you need more than is required by the site though.

Oh, and if they ask why I'm ignoring them, I'll inform them it's because they ignored me.

How can someone make a mistake in a statement of age? Simply cut & paste the original phrase and replace the XXX with your name, age, etc. as requested.

The age statement HAS to be correct in the first communication with the GM to access an adult game. This is not the GM rules, it is a RPOL rule.

I also agree with Steelsmiter. Why should the GM be responsible for making sure that the applicant actually bothers to read the RTJ information if it is clear in an open thread in the game. If you are interested in the game, read the content and then apply properly. If the GM wants a writing sample then provide one, or anything else asked for. If you don't want to do it then don't apply. If you do and he doesn't respond then forget him ,move on to the next game and never apply to his games again.

Sure a nice polite and helpful reply to an RTJ is welcome, but if you can't be bothered to RTJ properly then why should the GM bother to reply. There is a big difference between 'sorry you didn't make the cut as I had 20 great RTJs for 6 PC slots' and 'sorry you are rejected as you didn't bother to even send it half the information I asked for'.

What you might have missed is that he's asking for more than the site requires. So someone could post an RPOL acceptable age statement and he'd ignore them.

I have two quotes within my standard requirements that clear that up. I've found that liars tend to slip up with bad math. There is literally no reason any individual can come up with for including a partial birthdate and age. I've had someone claim the risk of identity theft, and as far as I'm concerned, if you want to claim that as a reason, I'll be sure to PM you where you can stick your RTJ, because that reflects a lack of trust in me, and that's immediate cause for a banhammer.


And you did miss that the site asks that RTJs stay the same as the GM requested.


This message was last edited by the user at 06:23, Mon 14 July 2014.

a type-o I would imagine or they just paraphrased it.

The sight don't require a word for word, letter by letter response (don't think because I seen a LOT of different age statements from GMs), but a lot prefer it to be safe.

And you will find older people get there age wrong some times, a lot really. Because they don't keep track of it.... they don't want to, a lot of them it bothers them. Heck I'm in my early 30's and I don't like to keep track of my age and time in general... >.>

So getting your birth-date right and age wrong is VERY common

I used to be bothered about giving both my age and DOB in an RTJ, but I'm ok with it now.  Some GMs ask for both an age and year of birth just so they're covered in case a minor gets into an Adult game, which is one of the most serious violations on RPOL.

Also, if a GM posts requirements that you're not happy about, like an age statement for a Mature game, just don't RTJ to that game.  In the same way, if a GM makes a game Adult, and you don't like to give age information out online, then don't quibble with the GM about changing the rating.  There are more than enough non-adult games and games that only require an age and the statement that you can view adult material in your place of residence.  Some GMs are just extra careful, and that's ok.

Just a general rule of thumb:  if you're asked to provide an age and a DOB, make sure they match.  The reason behind age statements is to keep minors out of games, and if a player can't remember his or her age, that's a red flag.  =)
This message was last edited by the user at 06:25, Mon 14 July 2014.

I'll just go ahead and ignore this bit because I added the FAQ quote to my last post, probably after you responded. The FAQ post is certainly relevant to this issue.


People who do that are not people I want in my games.

Totally ninja'd you :D

In reply to elecgraystone (msg # 48):

Not missed at all. If the GM has asked for something in the RTJ then you should comply and provide it. If you don't want to then don't apply in the first place. The GM owns the game and so can set the rules, as long as they don't contravene RPOL rules. You, as a potential player, are free to ignore the game and find another one.



Exactly! Warning bells going off. If it is a genuine error then tough! Get it right first time...

Mad Mick: LOL I can't remember my age because it just never comes up in my life. It's a big deal when your young but now that I'm older it isn't something worth the time to keep track of it. Now my DOB I can rattle off without an issue. If someone quickly remembers their age it's actually a red flag that they are young not old. :P

steelsmiter: You can find someone with a first name and a DOB. Is it really unreasonable to not totally trust someone you just met on a website with your address? Myself, I couldn't care less because if someone is motivated enough they can track you down one way or the other but I can understand not wanting to easier.

Jarodemo: Yes it's totally up to the GM, I understand that. I also understand the other side too. It's the ignore part that bugs me. Myself, if I had an issue with a game I'd just ask instead of sending a RTJ after modifying it. But it sounds like he'd ignore that too.

I am not saying they can't remember there own age, that's just stupid. I'm saying they don't keep up with there age, it's all blurred together and they don't realize there birthday has passed or forget it's a new year.... simply slips there mind at the time because they prefer not to think about it. You would be amazed how much the brain can fool itself. Particularly about things it don't like and things it is use to seeing. We have built in defenses that our minds push things out that bother us. As for the other, well your brain can only handle so much at once... and it takes in a grate many times what it can actually handle, so anything redundant is ignored and assumed to be the same.

Anyway people make mistakes, ignoring them because they do is rather Juvenal. You made a rather blatant mistake in the interpretation of what i said that is even cleared up in the quote you made. If you don't tell people they have made a mistake they can't correct them and they won't improve anywhere near as much as if you would.

You are basically saying... I hate this, so I ignore it and pretend it isn't there rather than do anything about it.

Or least that's MY interpretation, which while may be somewhat true can't be enterly correct. People can't even be enterly accurate about there own views on things... so how can anyone else be.  Heck people are often more wrong about themselves than other people are about them. lol

No Azraile, I don't remember my age most times. I don't really celebrate birthdays and my family isn't around so it never comes up. I use an age calculator online if I need to make sure what it is. It just isn't important to me.

Actually the ease that an age calculator can be found makes requiring DOB as a check pretty dubious. I guess it'll filter out the young AND stupid though...

In reply to elecgraystone (msg # 55):

YES!!!   lol

Age never ever comes up, DOB.... anytime you talk to anyone that wants to confirm anything x.x to the point your rattling it of like a zombie trance even before they ask it.

And age checks are easier to get right than wrong, if they get it wrong it was a mistake....   anyone can just make up a date.   Half the time I go to a sight I just put like 1/1/19xx something a long time ago....  random crap because no one cares and it's just faster than entering anything accurate.  When it matters like some place like this I give accurate information, but just stuff with age blocks there just so they can't be sued?  eh... they don't really care and nether do I.

But here people can do the same thing and unless it's something questionable like 1/1/1991 you have no way of knowing.

So in all honesty I would be more trusting of someone who got there age check wrong the first time. It means it was a simple mistake. A person trying to fake one would put to much care into getting it right.

Eh but I over think things.... lol

EDIT

VERY true....

But it's required by law, and they have to take it very very very very seriously. As do the GMs if they want to run an adult game.

So you live with the means you have.

If everyone dose there part, the GMs and the site is free of responsibility if a kid lies. As long as they do everything possible to weed them out.
This message was last edited by the user at 07:00, Mon 14 July 2014.

At the end of the day, how a GM responds, or doesn't respond, to any RtJ is entirely up to them.  Nobody has any right to tell them that the method they've found works best for them is wrong, any more than they have the right to tell anybody else that their method is wrong.

As for my views on the original post:

But that's the only information I have to go on.  If I have six places, and ten RtJ's, then I'm going to favour the six that look best straight off the bat.

Same here.  Usually have more RtJs than places, so tend to favour the most promising character concepts.  Since I usually give some idea of setting and/or acceptable characters, there really is no excuse for that elf ninja-space marine RtJ in my game set in Renaissance Florence, so if you sent that one in, then clearly you didn't read all that stuff I spent hours/days/weeks working on.  Bye.

Totally agree with this - there's no excuse for rudeness.  Never ignored an RtJ personally.

Sorry, but if the spelling and grammar are so bad in the RtJ that I can't actually understand what the person is trying to say (spelling I can usually handle, thanks to being a keen follower of LOL Cats, but using completely different words is another matter) then it's getting rejected immediately while I move on to read the RtJ's that I can actually understand.  If they can't create a legible RtJ, then I'm not going to give myself a headache trying to understand game posts written in the same "style".  While it's not the only thing I consider important, it is way up there with a lot of other stuff (but not as high as reading the RtJ information and proposing a character suitable for the game).

Have always given some information, not necessarily on the setting (because sometimes it's nice to surprise the players - no sense telling them that the game entitled "Happy Smiling Summer Camp Adventures!" is actually a deeply disturbing Lovecraftian horror story -  much better to let them discover that when the Whatelys are dragging them out of their bunks for the human sacrifice), but I will at least explain the sort of characters I will accept.  Which doesn't stop the occasional elf ninja-space marine showing up, but then I feel no guilt for rejecting them without a second chance.

Actually, no.  A surprisingly large number of them really are people just making stuff up off the top of their head (also known as: "lying about their age"), and admitting to it when asked.
This message was last edited by the user at 07:15, Mon 14 July 2014.

Depends whether you want to play my game.


That's wrong. Or at least for anyone with any level of attention to detail who can look over their RTJ, Look over my requirements, and connect dots. If someone doesn't have that level of attention to detail, I don't want them in my game.


You started a thread about things you hate. I said fine, here's the things I hate that you're doing. If you can't take it as the creator of the thread you shouldn't create the thread. I'll go ahead and say that yes indeed, your interpretation is entirely correct,
This message was last edited by the user at 07:08, Mon 14 July 2014.

In reply to Azraile (msg # 58):

You misunderstood. I'm saying age + DOB should only filter out the "young AND stupid". I totally understand they have to ask for it, just questioning the ability to determine a lie by comparing age + DOB.

Well I guess I won't play in your games, though if you at least respond and let me know that was your problem with my RTJ, then I could save us both trouble in the future by pretending your games don't exist. (cause I refuse to state my DOB on the internet in any form. I bank in person to avoid it even.)



You are assuming that what requirements you wrote mean the same thing to everyone else. There are plenty of times that the author of a sentence and the reader of a sentence have wildly different ideas of what that sentence means. In fact I'm in college right now and take all my essay questions and speak to a teacher to answer them, because my attempts at writing an answer always end up inadequate.

So while major things can be reasonably expected to not occur if the requirements are read (such as not submitting an elf when the game is humans only) there are still plenty of cases where the person could easily have thought you meant something else when they read the requirements.

Generally I find the best test to discover if someone read your requirements is to ask for a special text color for the RTJ. That is easy, simple, and even if they don't get the idea perfect, it will still be noticeable that they read that requirement and attempted to follow it.

I also get bugged when the RTJ is ignored, but I will either PM again to ask if I will get a response or forget it and move on. No sense getting stressed about it! :)

I try to do that but it irks me as I see the game sitting in my 'games I peruse'. I'd just like a short reply to let me know I can dump it off my list.

WOW.... really?  That's a huge supprize to me, kinda goes agenst common sense. You would think if they are trying to fake an age they would go through the trouble of making sure it's actually correct.


As for only being able to go off the RTJ.  Well I can't agree for that on one reason. It's lazy.  If you don't like the character how hard is it to tell them that, maybe explain why.  If don't have enough to judge them on in an RTJ other than there char, talk to them......  Just going, I hate your char... you suck, go away.  That's not a good way to handle a RTJ and that's what I am talking about.

Not that I've ever seen something quite like that, but I have ran into rather the same thing. I sent an RTJ that was NOTHING but a character, and they said I don't think YOU will fit into this game. That makes no sense, so I asked them what was wrong about the char and what kinda chars they were looking for. They just insisted they never answered and just ignored any contact after that.  There was nothing there to judge me on, save a char they didn't like.... one that I said was kinda out there and I wasn't sure on, but was something I wanted to try.


Not being able to understand some one is understandable, but what I am talking about is people who are just griping because you forget to punctuate a sentence or something isn't capitalized. Maybe 1/100th of your words are misspelled. The people that won't let you in unless every conversation, every transcript, every... everything with them, even totally informal, would get an A in a collage English class.

There is a RIDICULOUSLY number of people like this.  x.x  A lot of them see dyslexia and the like as just an excuse for the person to be lazy and that they are just marked that because they never tried.   Generally it's people who took a lot of collage English, ESPECIALLY English majors. As a heavy RPer and some one with a sever language disorder, I have dealt with it a long long long long time, and I am STILL supprized just how many people are a jerk about this... and ALL of them think it makes them better than you, and that you are stupid. Even when you explain something like n-dementinal sciences, how scientists are making things exists in two places at the same time on the macro scale and why that's a big deal, and memenomic theory to them and blow there mind.  They will just be speechless for a moment..... and then correct your spelling and grammar errors and laugh at you.

I know generally these are people you want to have nothing to do with, but some times they are a part of a very interesting setting or with people you like.

Not at all, it's practical.  If I have six places in the game, six good RtJ's, and one RtJ with a character that is never going to fit, then should I hold up the game on the off-chance that the player might eventually come up with a character who fits better?  Then tell one of the players who already created a good character that I'm not accepting them?

Or do I tell the player to create a new character, and then reject him anyway because his better character is still not as interesting as the other six?

Better, from my point of view, to run with the good characters I already have and tell the other player, "Sorry, game is full."

I have no problem letting people with dyslexia into a game, my own spelling isn't always perfect, but I do need to see that they are capable of producing a readable post, and are prepared to make that effort.

I'm not assuming anything of anyone, I'm simply stating that if:

"As an adult game requests to join must include:
I <username> I am xx years old, born xx/xx/xxxx and it is legal for me to view adult materials in my current residence."

means anything other than:

"As an adult game requests to join must include:
I <username> I am xx years old, born xx/xx/xxxx and it is legal for me to view adult materials in my current residence."

I don't want that person in my game. I will go so far as to ignore any RTJ that fails to include it. That's all.

Keep in mind that it's not just a grammar issue.  Sometimes the writing style of someone just doesn't mesh with what a GM is looking for.  Some RPers love purple prose, verbose descriptions, detailed descriptions of what's going through someone's mind in a second of combat.  I'm not really into that.  Also, if someone submits an entire wall of text, say 500 words in one paragraph, I'm not really going to be that enthusiastic about playing with that person unless the writing's compelling and interesting.

If writing really is an issue with a GM, I'd recommend checking out a good college English text book.  Look at guidelines for description and narration, or how to write dialog.  Strunk and White's Elements of Style is one place to start.  For instance, here's #16:  Use definite, specific, concrete language.

Compare "He showed satisfaction as he took possession of his well-earned reward" with "He grinned as he pocketed the coin."  The former is vague (Showed satisfaction?  Took possession?  Well-earned reward?), while the latter is clear and specific.  That's what I'm looking for in a game, whether I'm the GM or a player.  If I'm going to be playing with someone long-term, I want to be able to enjoy what they're writing and how they're writing.  A writer needn't be amazing, and we all have stories to tell.  We can learn things like how to be specific.

Other useful guidelines from Strunk & White include "Omit needless words," "Write with nouns and verbs" (not adjectives and adverbs), and "Do not overwrite."  The bits on style are quite good.  Anyway, that's just one example of guidelines.  Here's another guide to writing that takes material from a couple of different sources, including Strunk & White:  http://joshuasowin.com/archive...ide-to-writing-well/

A GM I play with looks for people who could make a C in a college writing class.  I think that's pretty reasonable, and if a particular player has trouble with that, there are plenty of games where the GMs aren't as picky.  RPOL doesn't categorize games based on the writing level of the players, and many GMs aren't really worried about it.  You can get a good feel for what the GM wants by checking out his or her games, and frequently, the GM will spell out exactly what they're looking for ("no lengthy posts," "2-3 paragraphs", "no one-liners").  Many times it's just a matter of matching up one's RP style with a compatible GM.  The main thing is to have fun, and to find other players that share the qualities you're looking for.  We have a large userbase here on RPOL, and there's a little something for everyone.  =)

Your not getting what I am saying.

I am talking about not giving people chances based off things.

I am not talking about sitting there and holding there hand and guiding them through making a char, no one expects a GM to do that unless they want to.

I am saying if they give you something you don't like, tell them you don't like it and why, that's it. If they go through the trouble of presenting you with something else, then look at it... they went through the trouble, it's the least you can do is see if you like the changes.

If you are telling some one what you don't want want and they keep showing you that again and again, don't bother with it!!! I don't expect anyone to do that!

But if they are showing progress and there is room for more in your game, and it is looking like they might work out, give the person a chance.



You don't even have to go that far.  Least give some one a second chance, talk to them, misunderstandings are a common thing over text mediums. Heck over any medium.

"One strike, your out" policy is what I don't agree with here.

That and the spelling thing....  seriously people.... some people can't help it, and some people who are not doing well, that is them having worked there butt off for years to get there.  Hard to imagine, I know, but it is! I use to be way way way worse.  I would say I have made a good 3~500%+ improvement over a decade, that is not something many people could say... unless you know they just started at something.

So just think.... take away spell check (I have to check about 5~10 words a paragraph depending on size) and make my spelling and grammar 3~5 times worse.

o.o

Yah I've worked hard on it. So do other people with the same problems.

Azraile, you have to understand that it's the GM's game. If something in your post turns them off they don't need another reason to give it a pass. That really isn't a bad thing. I find games with nitpicky rules and RTJ's are the less likely to be a good fit for me. For instance, I see "must post in this tense" and I'm gone.

I don't even mind the "One strike, your out". If that's the way they want to be, that's fine. Again, I most likely wasn't a good fit. I just think a simple reply isn't too much to ask.

Nope, the least I can do is not even read their RtJ, and I always read RtJs, and reply to them.

But since I've already told people what I expect in the way of an RtJ, which will specifically include sections of bold red text saying things like, "No Ninjas!", or "No Psionics!", then I'm not seeing why they deserve a second chance after sending in a psionic ninja character.

Because, frankly, if somebody can't comprehend and follow a few simple instructions about character creation, then what are the odds that they'll be able to understand and respond to posts in the game?

Sorry, but I have other applicants to spend my all-too limited time on.  Ones who are capable of following instructions.


This is very true.  Any GM is free to refuse any applicant to his game, for any reason (or for no reason at all).  There is nothing anybody can do to change this - access to a game is at the GM's discretion.  If the GM decides he's only going to let people join if their used names begin with "C", then no matter how good our RtJ is we aren't getting in without a name that begins with "C".
This message had punctuation tweaked by the user at 10:21, Mon 14 July 2014.

In my opinion poor spelling is excusable; poor manners is not.

I rarely have the luxury of turning people away, as my games tend to be non-standard, with few applicants. However, if I had a hundred applicants I would reply to them all.

Why?

Because it's polite.

If someone has complimented my game by sending a RTJ which, in and of itself, says that they find my game idea interesting and appealing, it would be impolite to ignore that compliment.

I will, therefore, reply to them, thanking them for their interest, but telling them that their RTJ wasn't in the top five. If there was a glaring problem with their RTJ I will inform them so that they can improve their chances next time.

If they argue, however, my politeness will rapidly evaporate.

Having said that, although I am fairly tolerant of errors in posts, there are limits. If the posts are so bad that I have difficulty in interpreting them, I probably won't want that hassle day after day and week after week. However, I've seen nothing above that I would reject out of hand. All of the above posts are intelligible.

Regarding personal information, it's not a matter of distrusting the intended recipient, though that is a separate issue, it's simply a matter of the entirety of the internet being about as secure as CB radio. It's the hackers earwigging on the side that worry me.

I will send what I believe to be adequate information in the hope that the GM will see merit in the rest of my RTJ and will accept me into their game. If they're pedantic, there are plenty of other games.

I agree with the OP that some GMs are very narcissistic about their own games. They seem to think that players are going to sift through pages of background information and Chargen material, looking for trick words to include in the RTJ, and spend days formulating a perfect response, just so their application can be rejected along with twenty others.

Get real, guys, your game isn't that important to anyone else but you.

That is admirable, and I try to do the same myself. However, some games will get dozens and dozens of applicants for maybe just 3 or 4 slots. While it would be nice for the GM to enter into a dialogue with every RTJ about how it could be improved, why should they? If they have 6/7 good ones they will explore those further then select the 4 they want. If you are no.50 on the list and your RTJ is poor then the GM gains nothing from entering into dialogue with you, just the potential for hassle.

A simple 'sorry you didn't make the cut' is polite and IMHO all that is needed without having to give a critique on the pros and cons of the submitted character concept.

An RTJ is very much like a job interview.  A GM that accepts you is going to have to want to see your face for the next several months / years as the game progresses.  If your spelling and grammar are painful for the GM to read, then why would they subject themselves to that torture?

However, keep in mind that every interview works two ways.  While the GM is interviewing you, you're also kind of interviewing them.  If they give you RTJ requirements that you don't like... consider that a warning sign.  If they don't communicate sufficiently... consider that a warning sign.  I've applied to and even gotten into a few games where the GM and I just didn't mesh.  It happens.

I find that the quickest way for a player to get bonus points with me is by using good formatting.  Even if it's just a bit of bolding, I like folks that clearly understand how to make things readable on RPOL.

In reply to bigbadron (msg # 71):

Again you don't get what I am talking about, I am not talking about reasonable responses here. If you have big red letters saying no ninjas and some one sends you a ninja then yah stop right there and be like... did you even look at the rules?

Heck you can simply reply "no ninjas" and be done with it, copy past and ban if needed due to hard headedness.

I am talking about people rejecting or not responding to some unspecified factors only in there head, some times from games that haven't had any settings or rules set forth yet or ones that arn't clear.

You are talking about reasonable reasons to turn people down, and people that clearly arn't paying attention to your rules.

I am talking about people doing everything the GM said, but the GM making rash judgements on what isn't enough to judge some one on.

icosahedron152 has a good understanding here....  It is just plain rude.

If they took the time of day to read over everything you typed out, and put a thoughtful response forth. Then you should be able to take the time of day to at least give them a helpful and polite response. Even if what they put forth is completely unexceptionable, if they keep in line with what rules and info you gave them then there is no reason to not let them try again if they wish too.

If some one is not reading what you put out, not listening to what you tell them, and the like that is a totally different thing.

But if some one is working with you, and listening to you, then there is no reason you shouldn't give them a chance. It don't take much effort to skim over a RTJ and look for unaceptable things.

I have a disorder in written language, reading can be slow and tedious some times. Particularly when there are large paragraphs to go through. Yet I will still go through every RTJ reply as long as a person is trying.

And I agree, I am pritty much talking about the GM being a Jerk and generally it's a sign you don't want to RP in there game anyway.

But it's the principle of the thing, how hard is this really to just ... well not be a jerk about it?  There really isn't an excuse for it if you ask me, not that anyone did.

Azraile, your idea to "not be a jerk" sounds nice, but it's so subjective. What you may think as rude, another gamer might think of as civil, or clear and direct, or condescending, or needlessly apologetic. A lot of it could depend on the mood of the recipient of the message. If there's nothing in the rejection that would violate the RPoL Rules/Policies, then take your NO and move on.

Sometimes, I'll reject a player during character creation. Things seem nice in the RTJ, but then seem wrong as we start to talk to each other.

Recently, I rejected a concept and asked the applicant "What else do you have?" He/she only had the one concept. I still said no. I got a message back, something like, "I can't believe anyone would so hastily dismiss..." And I thought, This is supposed to win me over? Please! Don't be mad at me for not liking your one idea. Be mad at yourself for only having one idea!

I almost sent that in a reply back, but then I was distracted by cool RTJs and the bad one went out of sight/out of mind.

I like clear and direct lol

The RTJs that prompted this were not what anyone seams to think they were.

Like I said I sent one in, it was a very short char concept and all it was doing was asking if it would fit in there setting or if they wanted it. I even said I didn't expect it would. They responded saying not the the char was unacceptable that I was. I had not given them anything to go off of BUT the abstract idea that even I said was weird and just something I wanted to try out. I asked what they were looking for in a char, or what was wrong, they just ignored it.

A few of the, you fail at English, kinds.

One or two where I never got ANY response.

One "Sorry, we are full" when they were still looking for people, even talking about it in an OOC thread.  (Seriously a simple rude no and ignoring is better than being lied too)

and similar stuff.


I've only gotten 5 reasonable RTJ responses. One I didn't care for the game idea when it was explained apon request. Another were we just couldn't work things out due to the fact I have no idea about anything DnD 2nd Ed it seams, and they were every helpful in trying. Two others, simply put I'm in the games. And the last we got off on a rather bad foot, but they were polite and talked about things and now we are working things out and I will probably be in that game.

Everything else has been wholly unprofessional.


And, yes.... that is there prerogative... it's there game they CAN be Jerks if they want to be.  I am just saying we should try to be better than that sorta stuff.

This isn't me whining hoping something will be done about it. Just starting what I think is a problem too few people just let slide, and a good way to do something about it is to talk about it.

Talking about it dose, if only a little, help as it gets views out there to people and people get to see what other people think about things. Communication always leads to learning.... just not always relative information lol

IE, Eggy.... Call me a big fat hippy. lol XD

From my own experience, many Notices aren't fully thought out and described in the Players Wanted thread. The GM may have a good idea in his head, but doesn't always convey this in the description of his game.

Yes, it's frustrating to get little or no feedback with a rejection. But, I've learned to follow-up by checking the progress of those games. My unstatistical feeling is that such GMs often have high player attrition rates, resulting in an early demise for the game.

Another problem, of course, is that some players who write the best RTJs also are the ones who are the first to disappear- without notice. It's almost that they know they are good and can afford to be picky. There are plenty of games out there from which they may choose, and the grass is always greener...!

As a GM, however, I want decent spelling and grammar. I use a dictionary all the time, and care enough to edit/correct my posts if I see an error after the fact.

My feeling is that if a player can't be bothered to check his/her posts, how can they be good for my game? And, if one has dyslexia and wishes to PbP, that does make it harder.

But we all have issues in RL and have to deal with them as best we can.

I really like your response.  You are exactly right in what you said. BTW, just so you know, I'm borrowing appropriating stealing this.

Just as a general question... how many of the people complaining about a lack of feedback for rejection directly ask for it?

I did, but that is a good point. Some people do espect the right answers with out asking the right questions.

On occasion, there are actually reasons not to let someone 'try again.'  In my experience it seems that the longer you GM (or RP in general) the more you get an idea of who is going to be compatible with you or your other players right off the bat.  It doesn't mean there's anything 'wrong' with someone who's not compatible, they just aren't and no amount of trying again with character concepts is going to change that.  People don't tend to take it well when you tell them they're not going to work in your RP; especially if you can't point to one single thing and say 'this is why.'  Sometimes it's just an overall feeling, and seasoned GMs don't want to have to deal with putting the time and effort in to get someone into their game who they already know won't work out for whatever reason.

I myself once got tangled up in an unfortunate cycle of letting someone 'try again.'  The player was referred by another player so I didn't want to turn them down, but what they were giving me for the character was just not what I wanted to see.  The RTJ PM ended up at over 50 posts of me trying to prompt more than a few lines out of them for their character background and whatnot, and pointing out that the stuff they were giving me really didn't make sense.  I expected a certain amount of research for character background (though no more than what you would find on, say, wikipedia or other relevant online wikis) and the player apparently didn't want to do it.  Eventually the player got upset and felt that they were being picked on, so I, feeling bad about it, just let them in the game and said we'd keep working on the character after the fact.  Big mistake.  The player started posting while still not entirely certain of their concept, other players were noticing and getting annoyed that I let this person in the game.  Eventually I had to just outright say that they couldn't stay unless they put A LOT of work into their character to bring it up to the level of the other players, and they opted to leave.  I knew from the beginning that person probably wasn't a good fit, but I went through the whole rigmarole anyway.



Once again, sometimes there just isn't a good answer for why someone is deemed 'unacceptable' for a game.  I don't think there's any excuse to be rude, but I also think that people tend to complain about what GMs do without actually understanding their position.  Once you've dealt with a lot of belligerent players trying to drag you into arguments after you've said 'no thanks', sometimes it becomes the more stress-free option not to follow up with those not accepted once you've decided who gets in the game and who doesn't.  Most of us RP to de-stress, not to add more stress to our lives.  I know from experience that it's incredibly unpleasant to log on at the end of the day knowing that you have yet another message waiting for you filled with negativity and complaining.

I'm all about being polite. But not so much about being helpful. Aside from the practical concerns of giving every applicant a full-blown critique, it's not my job to assume responsibility for anyone's improvement. I agree that DM's should reply to every RTJ. And I do. Even the incomplete ones get my cut-and-paste 'Thank you but I went another way' response.

And if someone asks why, I usually fluff them off with a non-answer (so many applications, so few spots, had a few wonderful RTJ's that made the perfect party, just bad luck, so sorry, see you out there, good luck).

If they persist I'll try and be more specific, but I try hard not to be. Because, as other people mentioned, 100% of the time when someone asks 'Why' they don't like the answer. And it leads to arguing. 100% of the time. I've never once, ever, in all the years I've been PbP role-playing. Had someone ask why I didn't accept them, and say 'Thanks man I appreciate your time and effort' when I told them. Not once. I always get either no response or a lot of reasons why I'm wrong.

So I just don't do it any more.

The spelling and grammar thing is tougher. I don't like being an elitist, but this is a text-based medium. It's the only way I have to know you and to interact with you. So while I would give some latitude to someone with dyslexia (or any other non-specific LD), it would only be a little.

If someone wanted to come to my weekly table-top game who smelled bad, even if it wasn't their fault, even if they showered and wore deodorant, I'd be apprehensive about that too. Regardless of intent, the impact is the same.

And final note, I always read RTJ's for players, not characters. Even if the application is only about the character, I'm looking for a certain kind of person, who talks a certain way, thinks a certain way, interacts a certain way. And I can totally pick those people out from an application. And the few times I've ignored my instincts, I've regretted it.

In reply to Silver_Cat (msg # 83):

Yah but it is kinda hard to make that kinda judgment on one post shorter than one of the quotes you just made. I can understand if there is reasonable amount to work with or some conversation. But not off of three lines of text, one of which kinda says "you probably won't like this but it don't hurt to ask." Making such an RTJ is not something you should make a final judgement off of. A person can't read your mind and know if you are going to be ok with something or not,and no... It shouldn't hurt to ask

And wow 50 posts that is some Buda like patience there. O.O

As someone who was used to very few RTJ's i'm not used to saying no to an applicant, but when i opened my first WH40k game i had a ton of applications and it's not easy to do more than, "sorry, the party has who we need in it" or "Sorry we're full" I have the players to deal with, so i'll respond but don't expect a full length review on the whys and why nots of your application.


As for spelling and grammar, i'm sorry but unless there is a decent reason why you don't do it well (Dyslexia, second language, etc.) You should at least try to do it correctly. I didn't believe spelling and grammar mattered when I was 12, so if you have no reason as to why you have poor grammar, then you're just not trying. It's like if you spoke very poor english at a face to face game, Unless english wasn't your first language or you had a speaking disability, then you both look like you don't care enough, and make it harder to get the point across. I'm not saying be a perfectionist since i'm not, but small grammatical errors don't get me, obvious ones do, so if you're being rejected due to poor grammar it's not little tiny mistakes, it's big ones that turn people off from bringing you in a game.

In reply to truemane (msg # 84):

Hu. I have only been here a while and I've had it happen, several times. Ok so only one person actually thanked me for saying why it don't work, which btw he is an awesome guy....best player I have ever had in any game ever. But usually when I say, no this won't work here's why, I get an "ok cool, how about this"  I only had one guy who I had problems with who insisted he was playing a vampire (and a brokenly my powerful one) in my mage game. I told him you are aware the sun is AWAYS in the umbral sky in space, and then I explained to him in the setting there was only one clan of vampires in space and if he was going to be one he had to be of there bloodlines. He keep trying to find reasons for his incredibly broken cross clan vampire to exists and be in space in my setting. I further explained these people have near complete control over organized crime and any vampire who isn't of there blood line and is in space would be hunted to the ends of it and killed. Things when's on like that till he gave up and stopped trying.

Everyone else has been understanding when I tell them strait up no and why.

The only problem I had otherwise was one.... 'Slow' player who just could seam to grasp some simple things and it got to the point where to many of the players shanked him out of them game so I had to remove him, he really liked the game and was not happy to say the least about it. But at the point he pulled out a gun that he no longer owned, called for covering fire from a person that wasen't there, kicked down a door that didn't exists, and take aim at attackers that we're not there... All because some one said "I'm not feeling too well' and collapsed (so naturally some one shot her!!! >.>) people had enough.

And no, I am not exaggerating it..... It happened.  o.o

Oh I am not saying flat out saying your full when you are is bad, but doing it as a way to get rid of people sucks, least just tell them flat out no instead.

As for spelling yah, if your not trying then that's different, but just because some one isn't trying in a chat don't mean they won't try in the game. You can say 'well I will aspect better grammar from your in game posts than this' and that has happened to me. Just as of today, I was not trying because I was info lay just chatting it up and using stuff like lol. I showed them me trying and the were quite satisfied.

Point is, try talking to a person before you throw them out of the game. This is not like a job application, it's like nearing someone new and trying to get to know them. Treating it like a job application you may get some info you are interested in, but your not going to get to know them if you just look at there 'application' and show them the door with out talking to hem. Heck most job applications have a part where you just sit down and talk, unless it's a place where they have or want a high turnover rate. Do you want your game to have a high turnover rate?

In reply to Azraile (msg # 88):

Well chatting and game are different, if you talk fairly poorly in OOC but maintain decent grammar in game, i don't really care, since the game is where your typing really matters.

This varies based on the type of game.  With PF or any other high demand game, you could not be more wrong.  When you RTJ to a game, it is exactly like sending your cover letter and CV/resume to a company.  If they look at it and are immediately repulsed by your lack of effort and ability to present yourself, you are never getting an interview.  If you send a resume showing your vast experience as a salesman in a design job, you are never getting an interview.

Az, since you want feedback, I'll tell you straight up that your misuse of "there"/"their"/"they're" and use of text speak would annoy me severely.  If you sent me an RTJ with that in it, you'd better have gold plating on the rest to get an interview.  Different people have different standards of communication, but I've been writing things for a living for a decade and it really grates on my nerves.

In reply to swordchucks (msg # 90):

Although, in fairness, he claims to have a learning disability. That makes everything harder.



As someone else said, an RTJ process is very much like a job interview. There are more applicants than spots and each applicant has a relatively small about of space to impress upon someone that they're better suited for the sport than anyone else.

I don't have the time or the energy to get to know everyone. That's why I have an application process. The RTJ is meant to give me all the information I need to make a good decision. If I find that my process is not giving me the people I need, then I need to change my process. Just like, if I kept hiring bad people at my day-job, I'd look to beefing up my interview techniques.

But if I find that, the majority of the time, I get the right people for my games, then my process works.

In reply to truemane (msg # 91):

+1 I agree with this, for me that's exactly how I would handle it and, its a fair way to oversee the process of a RTJ

And I can not start to tell you how sick myself and others like me are so so very sick of that one.

Particularly because a lot of stuck up "I am so much better than you are" English major nazzies beleave that NO ONE has a learning disability... that it's just an excuse to be lazy. That psychologist are stupid and just throw labels like that on people to explain things that they don't get, like people lying through there teeth at them.

It so ridiculously frustrating for those of us who put so much work into getting to and maintaining the level we are at, and constantly working to improve it. To just have people throw crap like that in our faces, over and over again.


As for being like a job application, you shouldn't treat it like one when you read a RTJ if you don't treat it like one when you make the RTJ thread/requests.

If you want to treat it like a job application you should take some responsibility yourself and make an RTJ thread, and PUT an actual application for them to fill out.

And a lot of people do, but if you don't... then don't judge the RTJs you get like you did. That's all I am saying when I talk about that.

If I see an application, I will fill it out and send it in. If I don't then I will address them in the RTJ like I would any conversation.

I agree with some of the posts you've made Azraile, but for the most part I think you have a fairly altruistic idea of how the process should run. Which is nice, it's sweet even, but a lot of long time GMs, especially long time GMs on RPoL would likely disagree with. Indeed, it seems many have, for one reason or another.

You might judge Steelsmiter to be harsh. I would say he's strict, but not unfair. He knows exactly what he wants in a game, and he's not going to compromise his own standards for anyone. Frankly, I think that speaks of a certain level of integrity.

And in the end, it still all boils down to the fact that every GM is free to address the situation however they feel appropriate.

Now, I agree that ignoring someone outright is a little rude. I don't do it. I will respond to every RtJ, even ones that I know aren't going to go anywhere. I can't tell you how many times I get an opening PM that says something like "Hey! I want to join your game!"

Then when I ask for the age statement before anything can begin, I never hear back from them. Side note: Maybe we should start a thread about truly reprehensible applicant behavior which has jaded so many of RPoL's GMs.

But regardless, I will acknowledge and reply to ever RtJ, but like most of the comments that have been made, it's just not worth it to go into detail over why you're not letting someone in. Most of the time it results in whining or argumentative behavior, sometimes truly nasty comments and name calling. Now here's the flip, I'm guilty of it. I just recently had a really bad encounter with a GM, and I still feel justified in my ire, and my response to him. But in the end, it's his game, and he has the right to refuse me for any reason he sees fit. He's also entitled to his opinion and perception, however flawed it may be in MY opinion and per MY perspective.

A lot of us having been doing this for a long time, and we've seen the potential downfall from all sides. Nobody likes to be the player who is playing in a game with a character that a 'too easy' GM let in in the hopes they'd get better. And as a GM, it always makes it more painful to have to kick that player out later. I've had this happen numerous times in the past. Letting someone into the game because you think you can overlook those personal issues, and then it blows up in your face.

And I'm sorry, but I feel that I can judge a person by their character. Even a short pitch. I've been writing long enough, and dealing with people long enough, that you get a sense for the type of person you're dealing with. As someone else mentioned somewhere, the internet distills a person's personality, it doesn't hide or cloud it. I may play a host of different personality types, but each one is going to give some insight into who I am. Most of my friends who roleplay with me frequently can spot my characters in a game. Because they recognize the pieces of me that are in those characters.

Also, while any GM COULD put in more work, more time, more consideration or allowance, it's not fair to say that any should. To use the blue cat creature reference from earlier. You say that GM handled it like a pro, and I don't completely disagree, but it was likely also a headache and ran the risk of souring ALL of the players in the game on the game itself. Or souring the GM on running the game in the first place. No GM should ever feel obligated to take that sort of lengthy approach to dealing with a difficult player. I've had games collapse because of negative interaction with a player that just ruins my desire to run it. There is no reason a GM should risk that kind of negative impact on someone who, as you say, they don't even know.

The way I look at it. I'm trying to run a game of intelligent, creative people. Something that inspires me to write, and inspires me to read. I'm not advertising to make new friends. While friends may come of it, that isn't the primary purpose. So I don't care about who a person is, or what potential may be locked away in them that I could potentially pry out. I want solid players, who meet my standards, and if you don't meet them, then I don't want to spent an inordinate amount of time trying to make you someone who does. Especially when, in my experience, most of the time when you do put in that effort, it still doesn't come to any fruition.

I agree with not ignoring people, and I agree with being honest. But being detailed is another matter. If someone isn't going to work, I'll tell them simply. "I'm sorry, but at this time we don't feel comfortable allowing you into the game."

You might get hung up on the 'you' but I stand behind it. I can tell from someone's character if it is just the character idea I have a problem with, or the character and the player behind it. And I will adjust my rejection accordingly.

In regards to spelling and grammar, I don't like to be too strict, because I'm not perfect. I use way too many commas, and forget to use the proper end punctuation at times. But spell check can at least make sure spelling errors are for the most part found, and when in doubt, dictionary.com and thesaurus.com are right there for any questions I might have.

While you might have a legitimate learning disability, and may have taken great strides to overcome that disability as much as you have, and that is great and inspiring, it does not mean that any GM is obligated to put up with the consequences of that learning disability in their game. Callous, perhaps, but true. I've known many people who are physically handicapped, and they are really nice people. But I wouldn't want to run a marathon having to push them in front of me the entire way just so they can feel included.

I can tell you right now, that if your in game posts contained the spelling errors, the incorrect words, and the improper uses of there, their, they're and your, you're etc... you probably wouldn't get accepted to one of my games. Because it is a pet peeve of mine. It causes me nearly physical distress. And my OCD is just as legitimate a condition as your learning disability.

In the end, I think while your approach might be nice, it's a little too idealistic. In actual use, it has far too high a potential to backfire and just make the GM's life more complicated and difficult. If you have the patience and compassion to put up with that, more power to you. But it's not fair to expect that from everybody. At the end of the day, it's all about finding players and GMs who are compatible with your personality, your ideals, and your standards. Getting upset over every GM who doesn't handle the situation to your liking is inviting too much stress into your life.

In reply to UnseelieLord (msg # 94):

An excellent post...

Daww, that's sweet! I got back from Medical S*** Monday and find that someone understands whether or not they agree, at least they accept it, and it warms my heart I tell you! Warms it to the very core! :D on that note, I really wish emoticons worked on RPOL, but completely understand why they don't.

Frankly, I've tried the more idealistic approach, when I first started. I am more strict now, to avoid the headache.

Not quite so strict as you, mind, but I understand the reasons why you would be. Happy to warm the heart!

I am altruistic to the point of martyrisum at times, but it has only blown up in my face the one time. Other than that the worst I get is people who stop halfway through sign up.

I am not saying though this is some high standard that must be sheared to or I expect people to change their ways. I am just stating these are things I'm seeing a lot of and have a problem with.

It is an opinion and just as valad as others, I am not arguing here I am trying to clarify what I am talking about.

I really do not understand why every one always asumes that they are in an argument when a discussion starts.  But them again my brain don't work like most peoples do. lol Though my friends say my brain works the way they wish peoples brains worked. I would have to disagree to many thoughts at one going on up there, makes relaxing difficult at times and communication harder (on top or language problems!!!!) when you mind is like 5 run away trains of thought all out of control and jumping back and forth from one to the other. X.x

In reply to UnseelieLord (msg # 94):

The point I made earlier about it being a two way street still applies.  The RTJ process is also a chance for a player to decide if they want to game with a GM.  If the GM's requirements are too harsh, not well thought out, or raise any other kind of red flag for me, that's valuable info for me as a player.  I particularly avoid folks that want me to write a book of backstory in their custom setting and don't tell me what their timetable is.  I've been bitten on more than one occasion by a hugh RTJ getting rejected because the GM was using the oh-so-effective method of "first come, first served" for player selection.
This message was last edited by a moderator, as it was inflammatory, at 05:12, Tue 15 July 2014.

In reply to UnseelieLord (msg # 94):

Nice post.

The other thing is, of course, that most of the times, in the past, when I've put effort into helping players improve/revise their initially rather poor character concept, they've generally vanished without trace about three weeks or a month later.

Without so much as a, "So long, and thanks for all the fish."

Kinda put me off doing more than telling them the game is full and turning them away.

In reply to swordchucks (msg # 99):

You sir win.

The internet...or least the thread ....least so far.....   Eh. screw it.  That was awesome lol

Yah I have to agree most of the things I'm talking about I take as a sign of a bad gm, but like I said topics like this or that other such subjects need to be talked about or nothing will change on ether side of the equation

In reply to Azraile (msg # 98):

Your opinion is indeed valid, because this entire topic is entirely subjective. Believe me, I'm not treating this as an argument. I'm far more cruel and insulting when I argue. I would consider this more a lively debate of mutual opinions, some which share aspects and don't others.

bigbadron raises another good point, because I've dealt with that a lot too. If I'm trying to run a game, I don't have time to take a personal interest in one struggling player, just to have him disappear for whatever reason. That's time I'm taking away from players who deserve the attention, and the game as a whole.

Swordchucks, what you fail to realize is that I am incredibly comfortable giving out pictures of my most recent colonoscopy. I give that to all prospective GMs, whether they ask for it or not. I find it forms a really solid bond that lasts a lifetime.

But I do agree that the RtJ process is a two way street. Like my mentioned recent issue. Just as the GM I got into it with is justified in not wanting me in his game for whatever reason, I found a GM who I never want to have to deal with in a game for what I perceive as unmeshable personality traits. There are certainly behaviors that are counterproductive to a strict outlook.

If a GM wants you to write a fully fleshed out character, with a novel for a history, but gives you nothing to work with, and then criticizes you for it... well that's not really fair. Which is part of the reason that I don't mind getting a pitch for a character beforehand. Because I do demand a lot of detail as a GM, but I try to be sure that the players have all the information they need to do that.

I also feel your pain, Azraile, on the brain not working like other people. It's a chore just to get my brain to stop for any length of time. Having a ridiculously genius IQ is a blessing, and a curse, to quote one of my favorite neurotic television genius savants. And having a genius IQ comes with so many other social issues that can get so annoying to deal with, but are apparently just our lot in life. Alas, in the end, it is still nicer to be able to say that you are in fact a genius. I value my vast intellectual potential, and it makes it easier to contend with the rest of it. After all, I'd rather be a tortured genius than a blissful idiot.

I fell the other way at times, rather be like everyone else would be so troubled mentally buy all that I know of the world, and I would not have been so abolished through my life, nor would I have been psychologically abused as much with the lack of the ever present impossibly high standards that was exspected of like the 3rd or 4th smartest kid my school had ever seen. ( which really isn't that big a deal it's sticks ville I don't think the highest broke 200 as far as IQ goes.  I'm only like 147 or 174 yah big dice acne but I honestly don't remember but I am rather shire it was the 147).  It has been utter hell and I have multiple learning disorders which makes things a pain, but that just makes the psicologest and the people doing those inteligence test tell people that my test scores are much lower than they should be because the tests don't take account of such things..... Which only raises peoples exspectations even more redicolously high. They treat me like I got a 250 or something ....  Geez

That and the classes that I didn't have some brain disorder with we're sssssoooooooooo boring I set in the back and drew or went to sleep and still got As heck US school system is a joke, even the clases I have disorders with I could get Cs and Bs with out putting to much effort,  so I got to be bored and treated like crap by everyone for 15 years yay.  No ones that big a jerk in collage but it is still boring, the only reason I can't get through collage is the stress. I am incapable of prossesing it correctly anymore. The classes.... I got a high C with multiple missed tests (from being to stressed to go inside around poeopke that day) and generally sitting in the back playing with my game boy ignoring the class. I even was  passing English WITH the teacher judging my spelling and grammar. O.o before they told them they couldn't grade me on that and I sure fly had A+s on every other paper, and got a B missing tests and not putting much effort into it.

All that dose though is get people hating me or mad at me, I am such a waist they say or it's not fair some lazy apple like me is so 'gifted'. Meanwhile stiff like that has me darn near agoraphobic.... Er no that's being outside..... Whichever one is being around other people. And having nervous brake downs screaming uncontrollably in the car because I can't go inside to work/class.

And then there is the frustration of dealing with stupid close minded people. Which outside of communities like this born of geekdom is quite the magoritity of people. I understand most people seam a little slow to me when I start talking about the big brain things that interest me, but I got use to overlooking that, but the sure rediculasly large amount of poeople out there that are willingly and stubery ignorant (republicans.  Hehe, no but yah some live in there own little world where they believe everything there told by republicans and anything non-republican is liberal brainwashing and should be blocked out.  Eh u.u THOSE people) the kind who don't know what they are talking about, know they don't, and insist that they are right even if you who've there face in erifutable proof...... How can there be so many people like this?!?!?!?!?

How did a generation like this get raised ..... And then made an even more stibernly ignorant generation!!!!



Weeeeew. Ok I'm ranting and I'm going to shut up now

When a GM opens an RTJ they have only your application to figure out whether they want to play with you or not, and it is you they are trying to figure out. If there is anything wrong or missing from your RTJ or character then you have to accept it could be rejected.

There is no reason not to spell-check your RTJ. It doesn't have to be perfect, but
There's no reason not to take the time and check it for there/their/theyre errors.
There's no reason for your RTJ to lack information asked for in the RTJ/Rules threads.
There is even less reason for you to miss an adult age statement for an adult game since this is now an RPoL notice which appears in all adult games. If you apply to an adult game without including an age statement, then do not be surprised if the GM refuses to accept a second RTJ.

If you don't take the time to look your best in your RTJ then you have to be prepared to be rejected on that basis. "It's only a game" but you're applying to spend a lot of time with the GM and their players and to submit to their rulings. You have to convince them that they want you in.


If you get all of these things right, but your character concept gives the GM the impression you as a player are going to be a pain then fixing the concept won't work.



That said I will work with players to fix their concept and get them ready for the game. I don't hold an iron rule on spelling and grammar so long as it's correct enough to be coherent. I will sometimes even give a player who looks awful a second chance to submit a less ego-stroking character. But when you get enough problems with the players you thought were going to be cool people, why in the world would you let in someone whose RTJ makes them look like an applepie?

I also check if the applicant has old games and if they have threads like this one. Old games let me know if I like the applicant's style. Failed games tell me what some of their interests are and that they were willing to give it a shot. Community Chat lets me know if I am willing to be bothered with the applicant's pet peeves and attitude. Sometimes I find nothing, but I've never felt wrong for checking. When an applicant's name seems familiar before I've even read the RTJ, it's usually not for a good reason.
This message was last edited by the user at 10:57, Tue 15 July 2014.

Besides manually searching how are you suppose to tell what games some one was in?

I've not found any option to do anything like that.

Eggy was specifically referring to games they GM. That can be found by typing their name in the GM Name search field.

You can find out what games they've run by searching for their name in Wanted - Players, or on the main menu search.

To find out what games they played in, you can always try asking them.

Az, a piece of general advice is that you should never talk about IQ, especially your own.  IQ is a relatively meaningless number and most of the people that talk about it are kind of doughnuts.

That said... you're far from alone in being miseducated by the system.  The very smart kids tended to have it the worst (it took me years to unlearn bad habits from my challenge-free high school years).  Having disorders on top of that just makes it worse.   Heck, the amount of autism spectrum disorders in my family is staggering (I have it, both of my kids have it, and two nephews have it).

Having a disorder sucks.  The world, frankly, doesn't care.  It's not their job to care.  It's your job to rise above it.  I had always had trouble interacting with people conversationally, until I spent a few months working telephone tech support and was forced to overcome it.

The only valid excuse for all of the homophone errors you make is that you need to use voice recognition software because of a handicap.  If that is the case, politely mention it in your RTJ and a lot of folks will cut you some slack.  A lot of others won't.  That is their prerogative.  However, that first contact in the form of an RTJ should be the best you can do.
This message was last edited by a moderator, as it was against the forum rules, at 21:10, Tue 15 July 2014.

This message was deleted by a moderator, as it was moot, at 21:11, Tue 15 July 2014.

But if you over came it is it still a disorder? or was it a problem that you overcame.

I myself, have had several issues over my life time that I had to over come. During my youth it wasn't called a disorder is was called 'pay attention', 'don't be lazy' and 'sit at the front of the class room not the back'.

By the way, that's what was told to me, .... not my option.

By todays standards I have several disorders and do very well for myself in RL, and will be 80 and still RPing away with my grandkids, lol.

BUT I do agree,

One of the language disorders (have have like 3 or 4 >.< ) has to do with the fact as a child I had a large part of the underside and tip of my tongue cut off.  This was during the time I was leaning to read. I couldn't speak understandably hardly at all after that but I went into speech therapy and learned to talk normally (mostly some times my r's and w's sound the same... though I think I've completely worked that problem out now, just took much longer)

But something to do with the fact I had to learn to talk again at the same time I was learning to read and write, at the age where your brain forms it's most lasting patterns, gave me multiple crisscrossing pathways (I assume) for a single sound. So my mind has an exstreamly hard time with phonic spelling and homophones.

The there/their/and what not problem I was not even aware of... I am rather glad people pointed it out, It it something I can focus on... try and do my best to remember so when it pops up I can go "HEY!!! wait, did I get that right?" and check, until I can work out the problem and fix it.


And mental disorders you don't overcome and they stop being a disorder. You are stuck with them. You can work at them to get to the point you can function at a normal level but it is still there, you just have worked out lots of little tricks or worked hard to form paterns in your thoughts that work agenst the problem.
This message was last edited by the user at 21:18, Tue 15 July 2014.

I get what you're saying, but ASDs really don't work like that.  I've learned how to interact with others in a normal fashion, but it's never been natural or easy.  If I have to deal with a lot of people in a "normal" setting, it is mentally and physically exhausting for me.  If I'm free to act like myself (typically around fellow gamers), then I have no problem at all.

Someone in one of the threads was talking about how boring a "slice of life" type game concept was to them, but I get it.  Folks that have to work hard at human interaction often have to approach it as a skill rather than a natural thing.  The founder of Facebook, in fact, was like that.  Facebook is a result of his hard work into understanding human interactions.

I'll admit the fact that I've had to put so much work into communication skills has soured me on poor communication from others.  If someone is working on it and clearly doing their best, I salute them.  It may not be something I want to personally deal with in my games, but I salute them for their effort.  Az, part of the reason I've been hard on you is because I originally thought I detected a "well, I have a disorder, it's just the way it is" vibe, which I hate.  My son is pretty far down the spectrum and he uses his disorder as an excuse to be lazy every chance he gets.  I've been working hard to stamp that attitude out of him, but it's like working a Rubik's cube with all the colors peeled off.

Anyway, the flat truth of the matter is that you're going to have people that want to work with you and people that won't.  You'll have all sorts of different people in your life and work.  The most important thing is that you give the absolute best effort that you can, learn what you're doing wrong, and take the steps that you can to correct it.

In light of the recent discussion, I think the whole thrust of the thread makes more sense.  I think you really are working hard to address your challenges, and that is good.

To that end, my suggestion is this.  If you apply to a game and don't get in:

1) If the GM sends you no kind of notice, then consider yourself lucky.  That GM was rude and you may well have saved yourself a headache down the road.  One of the hardest lessons you'll learn is that there really are things you should pass on, even if you like the idea.

2) If the GM replies to you, with no reason (which almost no one will give, aside from being full), then message them back.  Explain to them that you understand that that they're full and you aren't asking for them to reconsider.  Then tell them that you have some social and learning issues and you are working to correct them and would appreciate an honest assessment with what was wrong with your RTJ.  Not everyone will respond, but some will.

I do this.


I don't do this.

Instead, I'll PM some of my GM friends and say something like "I love/hate this RTJ. It reminds me of [character]'s style. Do you know [username]?

I also check the Lost Souls.
This message was last edited by the user at 00:12, Wed 16 July 2014.

That seams to be peoples first assumptions sadly
Oh your just just making that up to be lazy
Oh you are just lazy I you tried you would do fine you disorder can't be that bad
Or that though that no one has any such things and they don't exsist ... Sad thing there are doctors who insist this

But it can be so entertaining when they lie.  :)

Funny story: back in the days when GMs were listed on the Main Menu under their in-game alias, rather than their user name, I once had a player who told me, right at the start of his RtJ, "If you want to see examples of my writing, I play (Character X] in [Game Z], and have done for about five years."  Which was interesting, because I was/still am the GM of [Game Z], and according to the GM Menu, [Character X] is played by a completely different player.

Oh, how I laughed.  I laughed so hard and so long that my wife thought I had become insane... and then I rejected his application without reading any further.  And banned his lying apple pie from the game.

Ah... good times.  :)

Would have been funnier if it was your character. lol

....

That's just tragic.

I don't always create a new writing sample; but I'll do a copy/paste rather than directing them to the game regardless. But stealing writing samples; or lying about who you play...

Gaah. My mind doesn't comprehend.

People not only steal that but they steal peoples characters.

Not only do they steal there characters but they also steal there personas too.

Heck people steal other peoples whole online identity with all that along with it.

Stealing characters is in a different ballpark. ANd just weirder.

I would like to point out as a GM, I don't steal characters. The moment they entered my game, I'm able to use them even if you quit. One of the reasons I no longer let players craft their own leaving posts IC, since I've found most are vindictive and selfish about it when the plot must go on whether or not.

In reply to Sir_Chivalry (msg # 121):

I had someone that tried to dictate what happened to her character after. That player is part of the reason I'm so strict.

Well, I didn't assume Azraile was talking about a GM turning a former PC into an NPC. I'll also give new players old PCs if the original player leaves me hanging.

No thats not what I was talking about.

I only had one person so far who deleted their character when they dropped out, since then I have used the 'User Editable' feature. At first I didn't see the need for the feature but after that deleted character and the hassle of re-creating it, I now use it.  The PC was the current leader and I needed to finish the storyline, which took sometime due to the fact we were in the middle of the adventure.

As far as RJT, thanks to this chat I cleared my RTJ up and detailed it, so that there is less confusion. In fact I have taken 4 conversation about these types of topics and added then to my thread so that these things get handled ahead of time. Trying to be as proactive as I can, it actual saves me time.

Got a nice rmail just yesterday


Super nice that this member posted that, makes me feel good about the effort my Co-GMs, Players and myself have put into the game.

So not only GMs may/can take the time to reply, (regardless of the answer) but some players like above will also notice. I think it's important to comment, without such comments it makes it much more difficult to improve a game.

Also as we well know players for a wide array of RL issue drop-out, keeping a running list and replying can lead to quick replacements when you need one. I personally would be excited if a GM remembered me applying even if its months later.

I recently had a character die, and the GM gave me the option of taking over a character left behind by a player who quit.  I read the player's background and discovered it was word-for-word from a player I had created in a different game.  Turns out the departing player was the GM for the game in which I had originally created the background.

I was flattered.

Another point that comes to me is that I usually give extra consideration to RTJs from GMs I like.  If you run a few good games, you're bound to attract some positive attention that will benefit you later.

In reply to swordchucks (msg # 127):

And a third is the way you comport yourself here in the public boards. I don't post out here very often, or on anything super important, but I've had a couple of GM's mention that they recognized me and my posts from Community Chat.

From this thread I decided to put a couple sentences about my GM style in my recent IC thread. Hopefully that will actually help with this issue. If it does perhaps other GMs can do the same thing to better judge how much interest there will be in their GM style.

Funny you say that because I use the Character Description to put info on me (as GM), for the same reason. I also ask my Co-GMs to do the same some players can get a feel for those that they will be playing with.

Except that is only available after the game is made. I generally do less popular stuff, so the idea is to get a better idea of how many will actually play before making the game.

In reply to DarkLightHitomi (msg # 131):

I understand, :)

In reply to Lord Caladin (msg # 130):

This is actually really interesting. Not that you wrote a description, that I've seen a few times, but that you actually posted what games you are currently GMing and what games you are currently playing in. I really like that.

I don't know whether it is good GM etiquette to ask players what games they are currently playing in. I certainly wish there would be an option for me to see that on rpol, because sometimes it would be so much easier to decide on a player by just seeing him/her in other games, see their character descriptions there and so on...

In reply to shinanai (msg # 133):

That's actually why I did that, by the way TY for the comment.

I figure it gives the player stuff to read, if they really what to check on me. It gives me another ave to plug my games. Any if some rmail me with maybe a games that I may like.

I know its bad manners here to rmail without a reason, so this kinda give someone that reason, and maybe I will get a recommendation to a game based on my interest and my play style.
This message was last edited by the user at 03:28, Sun 20 July 2014.

Charater background and story is important to intigrate them into the game. Some games with heavy psicological mechanics or plot points make it dubbly so.

I have found over the years that the best thing you can do here is offer bonus to there charater sheet bassed of how good there background is, with-in some limitations. I like to make it clear after about three pages I stop giving any bonus, so your graded on those first three if you send more.

This gets you the information you need with out getting a freaking novel. People want advantages, even with an intentionally handycapped character a few exstra points makes them happy.

Infer there the game by giving them bonus to make the character match the background more. They have little points dedicated to picking locks but there background indicates a lot more exspiriance: well depending on the game I'll give them dots in security, ranks in disable devise, or un-typed bonus to the skill or something akin to that. I've even given items and the like. Fittingly with WoD most the bonus are background points. lol

This dose a good job incuraging players to show there best to you.

I'll be honest... after running games here for entirely too long, I don't put much stock into people's backgrounds.  Unless it's a person that I've known a long time and trust to keep up the game, of course.  I've had too many people drop on me for me to want to weave games around one or two bits of background.  It is nice if I can work in some small things to mesh with backgrounds, but I don't kill myself doing it.

In general, I don't ask PCs to give me a whole lot of background material, either.  I typically ask for a paragraph long background/concept and then ask a few "if I posted this, what would you post" type questions.  There is a huge difference between someone's ability to write a static piece, such as a background, and their ability to keep up on the game with active, meaningful posts.  There's also a big difference between putting up a lot of words and being a good contributor to the game itself.

As a player, I also don't have the faith in most GMs to sit down and write them three pages of text on a new game.

I don't get me wrong I don't want them to, a few paragraphs is all I ask. But there are some out there that will write you a whole book if you give them the chance. >.< Trust me I know... I asked for a background once IRL and some one brought 15 pages in 8 point, in a binder.... with a cover page.  x.x

But some one taking the time to think up a background and write it out shows some commitment to the game that makes it more likely that they won't drop out. I have only had one person drop out who had a good background, and that was because there life got in the way.

I had tons of people with great and even amazing backgrounds who then either dropped out of the game or couldn't really play out their concept as it was written (like an assassin who has absolutely no clue about how to do anything remotely assassin-like) or after giving me a amazingly long and detailed character concept went on to post one liner after one liner after one liner.

I tend to post one liners, but mostly it is because I tend to be reactive to what is going on. I don't game to tell a story, I game to explore and discover, thus I don't write very much about what I'm doing. It is very noticeable on PBP, but not so much in person. Being autistic with much poorer written communication skills then verbal skills makes it worse.

Just saying, it isn't always because they are a bad player. It is probably just a poor medium for them.

Unfortunately, some of us don't have the option in person games.

In reply to bigbadron (msg # 116):

And this is where he gets the bigbad from in his name!

To be honest though, yeah if you're a straight up liar, most GMs will eventually find out and remove you from their game. No one likes a liar in their game.

You can tell a story or explore and discover with an effective one-liner - taking shots every round in combat, casting a spell (even something simple but subtle like an oil slick or something to help someone else with combat), asking a meaningful question or three to move the story along, or even interacting with other players in a more RP-centric scene.  It doesn't take much, no matter what difficulties a player might have.

There's a difference, though, between an effective one-liner and a BS, useless one-liner that accomplishes nothing more than standing in a corner providing absolutely no meaningful input, even in the 'explore and discover' vein.  Unfortunately, I'm in the game with the second player Shinanai mentioned - and their posts fall into this latter category.

---

@Sleepy/BigBadRon - totally agree.  My personal favorite is when a player gets banned from one game someone runs (usually for not following rules or being a general disruption) and then asks to join another game run by the same person...or even by someone else who was in the game and recognizes a player tag or character description.

Funny story though - last time this happened the GM (a personal IRL friend) almost accepted the invite just to engineer a very, very morbid demise for the requested character.

In reply to DarkLightHitomi (msg # 139):

Well, you see, but writing a long, elaborate background for your PC is actually telling a story.

In this case -- and without wanting to attack you, just to be clear -- how exactly do you explore if you don't describe what you are doing? You gotta at least write something like "I am looking around the room." because otherwise how am I as the GM supposed to know that you are actually looking for anything?

@Prowler.Jeff: I would actually divide the one liners into several types.

There is of course the occasional one liner post that we all get into eventually, whether it is because you are RP-ing out a conversation and not every response during a conversation will consist of elaborate inner thoughts and feelings. Sometimes a player just has to confirm something and/or ask a simple (even task oriented) question.

Personally, those don't bother me so much, because as Prowler.Jeff mentioned, even one liners can be thoughtful and plot advancing.

Then there is the one liner type of players who are not so much into the RP side of RPGs, but more into combat and mechanics in general. They prefer to roll dice and do very short and pragmatic posts.

That is a type of player that I fully understand, but do not prefer in my own games, as my games tend to be rather RP heavy.

The third type is one that I don't really understand no matter how often I see it and that is a type of player who basically keeps posting the same thing over and over again. Not only do they not RP anything, but they become very quickly very useless all together. They don't participate in combat, they don't participate in legwork, they don't participate in personal interaction. They just keep posting the same things over and over again.

And sometimes those come with very elaborate character backgrounds and descriptions.

That's the type that I don't really get, because sometimes it seams like that kind of player actually doesn't want to play, but rather just read along but instead of requesting lurker access they make these elaborate characters that sadly never get to be played out. At. All.

I read your post and was rather puzzled.  What could a player possibly lie about?  So I went back and read bigbadron's post.  Ah, puzzle solved.  Why a person would lie about something like that, I have no idea.  That's just incredible to me.  Most of us don't know anyone here.  The chances that someone we talk with will know that other person in real life or are in a position that bigbadron was in are remote, but it's still possible.  Craziness.

@Shinanai

I was meaning story exploring vs story writing.

Some players want to write a story including all the cinematics a drama that are common to storytelling.

Others like me, want to discover what the story is, as our characters discover it. To be confronted with puzzles and challanges and to actually try to figure them out and get past them, rather then simple talk about how my awesome cool character did so.

That is what I mean by exploring, to discover a story, to be the protaganist.

Honestly I do tend to come up with good bgs, but mostly cause I simply see possible connections, and building that way takes no effort. (That is why I gm by building stories around what the players do instead of playing through a predetermined story. Ironically, the type of player I am is not the best type of player to be in my games.)

======
As for the third type of one-liner you talk about, I think of them as players who want to be lurkers with benefits. Also, it might just be two other things, perhaps they are just used to rl games where you "play" a character just so you can lurk the game, or they might do it because some people need to participate, even if poorly, because they know they will never come back if they try to be a mere lurker. (I know people that fit each of the above)

And I fully respect that.  That is not the type of character/player Shinanai and I are referring to.  I play and GM a very similar way - I love when characters of mine come up with something really cool (I have a general overall story, but I have no problems splintering off on tangents if they are cool).

I spent hours working on stuff for a game typing out documents and various RtP stuff all with plenty of encouragement from the GM and after all this time after finishing the charter he deleted everything and said do it again

When I protested he laughed joked and said I should have been more concise.......

The IRL equivalent of sitting there and nodding in agreement to everything a person says about there char, acting like you read it over, and let them work on it all day.... and when when they hand it to you... nod... and burn it and say do it again.


.....................................


yah........ If I was allowed to share the name I would >.>
This message was last edited by the user at 04:25, Thu 24 July 2014.

Wow, that's terrible.

Yah I'm so plantained off.

Don't help it was a good sounding idea, though seamed it was because it was bassed off a better idea lol

And before that some one had an awesome idea about a KotE game that would run across history but he apparently didn't like my energy or lack of formality in the RtJ and don't want to have anything to do with me. Even though like I talked about I only gave him the char concept, informal posting, and quick short posts from a phone to go on. That is not enough to judge a person on.... x.x

I would like to think anyone that looked at the game I got running that they would like what they see, the players all have anyway. Only got three games, one is just starting and the other I should have done an interest check first on before I wasted all the time working on it.
This message was last edited by a moderator, as it was against the ToU, at 17:28, Thu 24 July 2014.

That's pretty foul. I will argue for a GM's right to choose RTJs however he pleases; as long as it's transparent though.

Agreed. Nothing was upfront about what that GM did. Like at all. It's almost like Azraile was stalked on comm chat, and information posted there was held against him.

your rtj posts ARE all an ST can judge you on.  It's on you to make them count.  If you come across as unwilling to accept alterations to character ideas, or have a character concept that seems very outlandish or lends itself to power gaming, the gm is well within his rights to simply say no thanks.  Expecting them to basically give you the benefit of the doubt if they don't know anything else about you is going too far.

Eh the other game seams to just be a whole mess of a LOT of missundstandings, the KotE one... not the god game with the delete everything you have worked on for the past 11 days.

In reply to Azraile (msg # 146):

What a smeghead! While I support the right of any GM to decide how they select players for their game I don't see the need to be a jerk about it and belittle someone just for the fun of it.

Hopefully he/she will treat many others like that and then suddenly realise they have no players who want to be in their games. They are sure to get blacklisted a lot and their reputation will spread, even if they can't be named publicly in forums.
This message was last edited by the user at 05:42, Thu 24 July 2014.

well he's on my list for sure... and guess I am on his not that I care lol

Don't let it get you down. GMs like him are a dime a dozen.

In reply to PsychoJester (msg # 155):

True. The A&E a lot of bad GMs out there, just as there are a lot of bad players. Finding good ones is the key!

Keep kissing those frogs!!!

Having taken into consideration my mistakes from last year, nowadays I look at three things when deciding on who is going to be in my games.

1. Is the character concept something I want to see developed? Am I, as an observer, interested in what will happen to this character?  With all the time I'll be spending with the players' characters, I need like the players' characters as much as the players do.

2. Do I get along with the player in our communications?  Do we have a natural rapport, or is speaking with the player a chore?  Generally, I like to speak to each person who has sent me a RTJ, to know more about their character, or to help their characters better fit into the setting.  It's easy to figure out who is going to min-max and who's going to be a stick in the mud during this process-as well as who is going to be fun to play the game with.

3. Does the player want to tell a good story?  How collaborative are they in the RTJ process?  If the player isn't willing to help tell the story I want to tell, then they belong in a different game.  And I encourage people who don't get into my games to join together and create their own games.  Here's a bunch of people who want to play X setting, why not?

If the GM I'm applying to don't synch for whatever reason, I move along.

Now I will be honest, when I saw this threads title I was excited to come in here and share my feelings or a relatively recent issue between myself and a GM through a RTJ. However, after reading the first page and some of the seventh I got to thinking. Why come in here and post something negative that will likely not have an impact on said GM or on me other than allowing myself to vent.

So I come here asking for help instead. I am the type of player that wishes to fill out a group, be that cleric the group needs or that skill monkey, and make the group functioning. That isn't to say I don't produce characters I will enjoy but rather I evolve with the interaction of others rather than posting a several page long RTJ. Now I have often lost out to other players with no input or suggestion of editing to my concept by the GM. Thus I continue on using the same method and accept my failures with my success.

So under my circumstances GMs I ask you, what should I do to increase my success. Should I stop trying to improve a game at character creation and instead be self-centered in my concept. When you all are looking at the RTJ do you wish to see a character concept multiple paragraphs for personality and background. If this is what you all want I shutter at the thought. Not because it is something beyond me but rather because I create character for each game to best reflect the theme. While I can only assume that anyone else that post that much is either A) putting way too time into a RTJ they might not get picked for or B) copy and pasting old material with little or no attention to the campaigns theme.

Note: I by no means believe I am the best writer or that my grammar is perfect. Probably far from it, but I try and do my best.
This message was last edited by the user at 22:47, Thu 07 Aug 2014.

I'm not a fan of the writing sample. I'm not a fan of characters created before hand. What I am a fan of is concepts; and I choose based on which are the 6 or so best concepts that will work together well. This isn't a multiple-paragraph requirement; it's usually only a couple of lines.

Having said this, I run games which always have multiple requests; so I need to draw the line somewhere. If I was running unpopular games, I'd be a lot more open. But it does no good in 3.5 for example, to be flexible, when I know that I'll have at least 2 requests for each of the main character types.

In reply to FergoTheBrute (msg # 159):

I think as a GM I would say your doing it right already. Just your question on this thread says to me you have what it takes.

I would not do that much work to join a game. I only say that because to many have failed for me as a player. As a GM I just want an active player that will stick with it or drop early on.

In reply to FergoTheBrute (msg # 159):

It's going to be hit and miss with your sort of approach.  If you literally give me nothing then I'm not going to pick you.  If you say that you're happy to fill in whatever the party needs, then I'm going to be looking at the general way you're talking to decide whether you're going to communicate well with the other players and fit in.  The problem is that if I get decent applications from a full group who don't have a 'gap', I don't have many reasons to pick the gap-filler.

What I'd probably suggest is that you outline 2 or 3 concepts, very briefly, that you'd quite like to play, then mention that you're adaptable to fit the party.  That gives me a better idea of who I'm talking to and still gives you a shot at getting into my game if there are applicants for all sorts of roles.

In reply to pyrosorc (msg # 162):

I agree with pyrosorc. It's good that you want to adapt to the group rather be specifically one thing, but that means GMs have no idea what you're like as a player. They haven't got anything to make a judgement on.

I understand that is can be easier and more satisfying to build your character based on their partners, but the RTJ is how GMs figure out whether you're a good fir for their game.

Giving two or three concepts and explaining that you're happy to fill any role in the party at least shows something about the way you think when it comes to creating and playing a character.

By no means do I leave the RTJ blank, I filled it all out with the expected material (name/race/class/personality/background). But before that I will write a short message thanking the GM for the opportunity and then that if my character concept isn't exactly what the game needs but there is another spot I could adjust my RTJ. I think it is key to setting up conversation with the GM so you can possibly get more information about the game than is previously posted. The last game I went for I posted two separate characters and even was open to writing up a third one if the first two were niches were taken.

The GMs responded that it looked great. Then a few days later he sent me a message that I didn't make the cut. Like, come on you can't say someone's work is great then drop them like a wet newspaper without at least explaining why.

In reply to FergoTheBrute (msg # 164):

Sure you can. Your work was great, however there were six slots and six other people who gave me the characters I felt would best work. That's implied in "Your work was great/you didn't make the cut".

In reply to Sir_Chivalry (msg # 165):

By 'you can't' I mean 'you shouldn't'. Obvious because someone did it makes it possible.

If a person puts quality effort into writing up a RTJ you should say more than "Thanks for coming, now shove off." That's not saying everyone that puts a good RJT means they should be in your game. But it should be common courtesy to put an effort in relaying why someone of note was not selected. If not for the continuing fact that more often than not people back out within the first few weeks of a game starting. It is always good to have secondary players lined up. Offer those players to watch (become lurkers) and have an opportunity to play if a spot opens.

In reply to FergoTheBrute (msg # 166):

Common courtesy would be accepting you didn't get in and politely leaving. The GM owes you nothing unless he expressing led you to believe you were getting in, which is not what "your stuff looks good" means at all.

In reply to FergoTheBrute (msg # 166):

I understand you feeling the way you do, but you shouldn't judge on your standards of how others should be. Their game, their way, and Yes its the high way if they want it that way.

I'm not that way but many are. I kind of feel it's a dead topic, I don't think anyone reading this would change their mind, either way (good, bad or indifferent)based on the comments so far.

BUT hopefully someone will think it through next time when they give a reply to a RTJ :)

On the contrary, it is courteous to acknowledge someone's efforts for you, and an RTJ is for the GM considering it has to follow the RTJ requirements and such.

It is rude to have a fit over someone else's lack of courtesy though.

Thus the GM should acknowledge RTJs, but also players should just walk away if the GM doesn't. Any kind of conflict over it will only make things worse and basically burns any bridges that may still have been built later.

Funny thing, almost every time I have had to remind a gm that I had an rtj, I got accepted. Coincidence? Probably.