I have written a few myself, but I wish I had access to some of other peoples rules and guidelines, it would be nice to see some ideas that work and maybe don't work that well.  Maybe someone even uses a dieroller in theirs;) If this is in wrong section I don't know where to put it...

It comes down, ENTIRELY, to the DM/GM/Game-Host needs/wants.  Nothing further.

If you look around at other discussions, you will see topics regarding RtJs all over the place, and how various people like to handle them.  You will see a wide-range from "give me age statement and a character name" to "give me the aforementioned + your life story + your gaming style + a writing sample" and so on and so forth.  The range is endless.

The only real guideline I can offer is this:

READ.  If it's a game where they want/need the age statement: get it done right in the first post, or don't be surprised if you don't get a reply.

If you're applying to a horror game and write-up a steampunk character background; don't be surprised if all you get is a O.o ?

Do you want ideas on how to construct an RTJ for a game you are running, or on how to write a good RTJ for a game you apply to?

It's tough to say what you should include in an RTJ when you are applying aside from "what the GM asks for" as GamerHandle said.

If a language isn't your native language, or you're new to the rule set, it's good to mention those facts. Good spelling and grammar never hurt anyone's chances either.

To be honest I was going to plagiarize some of other peoples work, I have seen a lot of good ones.  Basic tenets of gaming, manners, and such.  If people are going to be absent please advise.  Stuff like that, I am capable of writing an RTJ, I really just think some people have already done it and did it better than I ever could.  It would be nice to construct a basic template to use in all my games.  And for adult games as well, I notice the basic write up but some people post general Rpol rules.  And hey maybe there is something I have never seen, it happens from time to time;)

When I throw open RTJs, I usually look for these criteria:

1) Can they actually read and follow directions?
2) Do they type in a manner that doesn't want me to kill them?
3) Do I get a feeling of "character" from their application or is it just a "I want to be a fighter!" mechanical thing?
4) Do I know them from somewhere, and is that good or bad?

If I am only selecting a few applications, the tiebreaker usually ends up being whether or not the person used formatting in their post.  Just a bit of bold for emphasis or a numbered list can make the difference.

If you have requirements, state them clearly.

There are probably a few things that are generic to most games and details that could be useful.  For example:

New people to the game system ok, experienced people only, or open to all levels of experience?

Personally, I think being clear on posting requirements/frequency and availability of the GM is important.

This is the single most important detail for putting together RTJ information.  Telling your players what you, as the GM, need from them in order to work well with the way you're running your game is the first, best method of sorting out players.

Now, since GMs are all unique individuals, there is no single standard for what makes a good RTJ.  You, as the GM, have to determine what you want people to have...what's important to you.  Do you want people who have experience with the system/setting you're running?  Do you want people who are highly literate and can articulate themselves well in writing?  Do you want people who will post at a specific rate, come Hell or high water?  Do you want people who are coming into the game without any preconceived notions of what it's going to be, so you can help them craft a group that will work well together?  Do you want people who are really eager to play but maybe not necessarily proficient as writers?

You're the only one who can judge what takes precedence for you.  The more stringent you are about your criteria, the less likely you are to have a lot of players apply.  Those players, however (the ones who follow the RTJ requirements, at least) will come to the game with a clearer vision of what you intend to run, which (hypothetically) makes it more likely that they'll be on the same page as you when it comes to how the game runs.

I'd give specifics...but I can't, really.  I've joined games where the GM presented you with a hypothetical situation and wanted a page-long writeup of how your character would deal with the situation.  I've joined games where the GM specifically said 'no character concepts at this point, we'll put characters together as a group once I've selected players.'  A lot of GMs are adamant about NOT wanting a writing sample.  Some GMs insist on age statements, even though the game they are running isn't Adult (they just want to make sure they've got mature players, and even though age doesn't necessarily equate to maturity, your odds improve with older players).

So, very seriously, what to include all comes down to what you consider to be important and relevant.

In reply to facemaker329 (msg # 7):

Thanks to all the input was helpful and would make a great FAQ.

That's part of it, but there's another reason for me.  If I have any question in my mind that I might want to bump a game up to Adult, I go ahead and ask for the statements because it's a pain in the apples to get them later on.  You literally have to kick your players out and make them reapply with statements of age.  Then you have to shuffle everything around and it's just a pain.

In reply to swordchucks (msg # 9):

Exactly.  I do this in all of my games as well as a 'just in case'.

Yeah, there is that, as well...I was just aiming for the most arbitrary reason, to highlight the point of each GM having their own criteria/agenda in putting together RTJ info...

This has been touched on, but give an idea of the level of the game.  I realize this applies most directly to D&D and similar, but it applies to some extent to any game.  Do the characters need to be heroes already?  Have a lot of experience fighting/stealing/whatever?  Be well equipped with the tools of their trade plus protective items?  Or are they just leaving the farm/equivalent, with a few basic items?

That's actually a very valid consideration, and I'd extend it far beyond D&D or other level-based system games.  I'm in a semi-freeform game, with a sci-fi military setting...and we keep having new players coming into the game thinking that they can somehow be cooler than Neo, Snake Plisken, and Ethan Hunt combined, when even the veteran characters in the game aren't good enough to do some of the stuff they're attempting.

Or, in another example, a superhero game I was in (long since folded up tents)...there's superheroes, and then there's superheroes, and it could have been tempting (and probably happened a few times) that someone proposed a character that could have passed for a well-trained member of the X-Men, or the Justice League...but the characters were all supposed to be high school kids who had only just discovered their powers.

Some people enjoy playing the novices who are just learning how to get by with their slightly-better-than-average abilities...others prefer playing the established hero who spits in the face of danger and laughs at the threat of death.  If you're setting up an espionage game, should players expect to play James Bond?  Or Maxwell Smart?

I suppose, technically, this should be addressed more in the general game information writeup than in the RTJ info...but it certainly won't hurt any to touch upon it again in the RTJ section.

I've taken to putting my RTJ requirements in the middle of my general game information.

-Game concept
-GM style and post rate
-RTJ requirements
-Conduct & House Rules

At the very least it means people (should) have read the first two before they find the RTJ info. When you put the RTJ info in a separate thread, not everyone reads the other threads.

*dry laugh*  Even when you have the RTJ info in its own thread, people don't necessarily read it, much less the game info.

Not said in criticism...this definitely falls under the heading of GM preference.  *grin*

I usually have ...

an Introduction thread
a Policies and Expectations thread (both player and game master)
an RTJ thread (very straight forward)

The RTJ thread explains what I am looking for and why.

And a statement similar to this ... "Please do not tell me that you will only play if you can be a psionic using unicorn riding Anti-paladin, or Gandolf, or Drizzt Do'Urden ... those characters are all taken, they do not want to trade and do not like competition. If you make such foolish requests, I will fail to even bother responding from that point out."

WARNING - Back stories - There are no lost princes, bewitched princesses, unloved wanderers brooding about unrequited love or a missing parent or sibling, no one in THIS group is heir to anything ... except derision from the DM. All those haunted youths are in another group with another DM. Consider this your last warning.

Note that I have received a RTJ for the psionic using unicorn riding Anti-paladin, and too many unloved wandering missing princes brooding about unrequited love.

In reply to facemaker329 (msg # 15):

I know. There are some people who will apply to anything. I have had people apply with an RTJ which looks like it's for a different game altogether. I have had people RTJ with "this looks awesome, can I play" and then never actually supply a character concept after I reply.

But as many people have said, the quality of an RTJ doesn't relate to finding the right GM/player chemistry. So these days I just try to introduce my game concept and GMing style up front, and turn the RTJ into a chat to hone character concepts. If I feel the player is iffy (or if they wander off without following up) I don't add them.

One thing to remember about an RTJ is that it serves two purposes - it supplies you with information about the applicants and it supplies them with information about you.

While you're asking your questions, bear in mind what those questions say about you.

A demanding and fussy RTJ is probably written by a demanding and fussy GM.
A laissez-faire RTJ is probably written by a laissez-faire GM.
An RTJ that requests age statements 'just in case' probably reflects an indecisive GM.
A bullet-point RTJ probably reflects a strict, no-nonsense GM.

There are exceptions to every rule, of course, but experienced players will probably take one look at your RTJ and decide instantly whether they want to play under your direction.

I'm not suggesting that you should manipulate your RTJ to give a false impression of yourself - that would guarantee getting the 'wrong' players. Rather, if you're borrowing ideas from others, make sure that those ideas fit with who you are and how you want to run your games. If your RTJ doesn't match your style, neither will the players who reply to it.

Personally, my RTJ is little more than a set of game info Notices and 'ask me to let you in'. I then get to know the players during chargen. Apart from the fact that I'm usually desperate for players since my games are seldom mainstream, I'll let you decide what that says about me - you will anyway. :)

I don't think I actually agree with any of those.  "Possibly" is the strongest I would go with any of them.

The phrasing of the examples may be in question, but I know that they style in which the GM presents information strongly influences how I feel about wanting to join that game.  And, from bitter experience, I have to say that he occasions where I ignored those impressions because the game sounded intriguing?  The results were not good.

Pick and choose what sounds good to you.  Write it in your own words.  There will, as mentioned, be players who apply to anything that even remotely catches their eye...but if you present your information and yourself the way you'll typically be operating, you're more likely to get responses from players who mesh well with that style.  And that, in my experience, is the key to a successful game.

In my experience, doesn't matter how good your RTJ is in choosing the players that mesh well; you'll always have a while of having drop-outs and having to replace them.

But I've usually found after a month or two; you've got a solid base; of players who will stick by you even if you have downtime for a while. If you're lucky, they'll even always look for games by you because your style meshes with theirs so well.

See, I like to use that as a way to weed out potential problem players. I'll post an RTJ thread with rules for filling out an application (and a tag that clearly states---usually in caps---READ THIS FIRST), and include a tag that they need to include in their RTJ. If the prospective player can't follow easy directions to join the game, the odds are that they won't follow directions once in the game. It also makes it easier for me to put those RTJs at the bottom of the pile if I get a ton of interest.

It might sound like trickery, but I teach and am pretty unsympathetic for people who don't follow directions. It's usually a point I try to hammer home to my students early on. If they miss it, I have to keep trying to explain it to them. I don't want to have to do the same in my hobbies.

In reply to willvr (msg # 21):

Your RTJ won't guarantee that you get players with whom you'll mesh well...but it can certainly do a lot to discourage those with whom you won't mesh at all.  There are so many variables in play that I don't believe there's anything that can be done to guarantee that your players will all work out well...even when you personally invite people, stuff can still go wrong.

JxJxA--I've joined several games that take that approach...again, it can improve your odds, but it's no guarantee.  I've seen a few people who obviously followed the GM's 'catchphrase'...and then got into the game and promptly ignored about half of what the GM had posted about the game.

But partial screening is better than no screening...*grin*

Fair point; and I don't even disagree with it. As long as anyone reading this thread for ideas on how to make a perfect RTJ requirements thread is aware; that they'll likely get drop-outs no matter what.

My first game I had a whole heap of drop-outs at first; a lot of the players who've stuck around now; say they'll break their usual rules if it's a game run by me; so my comment was more a warning for "Don't give up just because you might lose 3 out of your first 6 players that seemed to be great". Patience is a key when first starting a game I think. Though; I see how it could be read otherwise.

Yeah, I've been in a frustrating number of games where the GM gave up after, say, four of the original six players dropped out, even though the two of us that were left were still very enthusiastic for the game to continue and would have waited around for a few more people to go through chargen (although, in the GM's defense in one case, it was a system that was designed to have all the players go through chargen together, so having two completed characters set aside with a fresh batch coming in kind of complicated the process...)

I've also been in games that all but died due to players dropping out, and the GM kept advertising the game...and new blood came in and things picked up again.  I'm in a game that's been running for close to four years, now...and at one point, there were two active PCs that weren't GMPCs.  That went on for about three or four months...and then one, and two, and three players came in...some came and left again, but many of them stuck around.

So, yeah, even if your initial results with your RTJ give you players who are perfect at everything except sticking around for the game, you shouldn't necessarily give up and start over from scratch.