The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
[Play-by-Post] Should there be a limit on open recruitment threads?
SkyCaptain
IndianaRegistered User regular
IndianaRegistered User regular
Recently, a great number of threads for D&D pbp games have been posted and even a few existing games have had to recruit fresh meat. I`m worried that some games, including mine own, will suffer because of this glut of recruiting for these games. Players interested in playing will likely apply to many, if not all of them and possibly over extend themselves and be forced to drop out of one or more games they get accepted to. This in turn has the chance of disrupting or outright ending some games due to no more available players.
The RPG Bestiary - Dangerous foes and legendary monsters for D&D 4th Edition
SkyCaptain on
0
Posts
No.
My answer was "no".
You had a paragraph of stuff afterwards with your thoughts but I did not see a question there.
And my game is even dead from a lack of participation (well sorta, I could try recruiting more if I really wanted to), clearly from the insidious effects of no limits on pbp threads.
Some people do apply to more games than they can handle or otherwise take on more than they can chew. It's up to the players and GMs to figure out how to mitigate this without trying to determine some draconian game limit, with the inevitable clusterfuck of trying to figure out how to admit new games, which GMs are "worthy" of hosting. Consider altering your recruitment policies to favor players playing fewer games if you're really worried about this. Even better, make it clear in your OP how much of a time commitment you expect from them so they can make their own informed decision on whether to join.
(you may already do one or even both of those suggestions, I haven't read your game thread.)
Also, it's the summer, so people be doin' stuff. It will get better in the fall again.
I have been in quite a few games that died prematurely. Both PbP and RL. Because the GM didn't want to play anymore. Because the players didn't. Because of game system burnout. Game system switch. Players fighting. Players dating. Players being the flakey people that they are. So I don't think it's fair to blame lack of player involvement on the glut of recruitment threads. The games that are engaging and more fast-paced don't have as many problems keeping players.
And I remember a couple months ago when there weren't any PbP threads recruiting. Sooo....
TL;DR: No. :P
Zithra Melitch in Star Wars: An Empire's End
Jellica in In the Shadow of Zeus
Because CF is getting pretty crowded these days.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
I mentioned it to Jacobkosh when we switched over (mainly as some other high traffic forums had recently gone from one combined forum dominated by PBPs to shoving the games into a sub forum and found that suddenly it was a wonderland of discussion). He said he'd bring it up again in the secret mod castle, but it seems like it's a pretty closed case. So we shouldn't hold our breath.
You want more engaged players then be more selective. To be more selective you likely have to offer a better game. Free Market!
More realistically, people are going to flake. The quantity of games is just a handy excuse.
The question was in the subject. The post was a discussion of my answer... aka why I am in favor of a limit on recruitment threads. This is a discussion forum and we're not allowed to do polls... so the implication there is that your answer would be accompanied by an explanation of why you answered that way.
Implying that the lack of a limit is some how insidious is ridiculous hyperbole. The lack of a limit merely encourages players to use the shotgun approach and apply to all the games. I feel that this reduces their interest in any one single game and can lead to them overexerting themselves.
This isn't an attempt to determine who is worthy or anything like that. I simply believe that a limit on open recruitment to give each game it's fair chance to recruit players will favor player retention for those games. I think that a limit of two open recruiting threads for new games only is reasonable, with a week long recruiting period. After the period is over, recruitment ends and if the game didn't garner enough interest to fulfill all the requirements for the game to start, they go to the end of the list and wait for the next time they can recruit. Recruitment opportunities would be on a first in first out sign up list.
The only problem with this is that the players and the GM don't know what games they will be in if there are numerous games with open recruitment at the same time.
The problem you specifically seem to be pointing at is a problem of player quality. And that stems from a couple of factors
-the default behaviour on this board being first come first served for recruitment
-a large userbase (meaning its hard to remember how committed a given player will be)
Limiting the choice players have does nothing to address this. I suppose if you're a crappy DM offering a crappy game then yes, you are more likely to get desperate players in a drought. That is not a good thing. Not at all.
If you want to know if any of your players are likely to be over-extended you can ask them how many other games they are currently in or have applications in for or you can stagger your decision date so that they find out about the other games first and you can pick the ones in fewer games. However, I have to agree that when I have seen players drop out of the games I have played in, they stopped posting on the boards all together.
Zithra Melitch in Star Wars: An Empire's End
Jellica in In the Shadow of Zeus
To answer the question, I think it's more the time of year, as dani has mentioned. After some of the pbp recruitment threads I've lurked in the past and having seen like 20 submissions in a couple days, I was worried about mine as well. But, yeah, it being summer now makes sense to me.
http://4e.orokos.com/sheets/3395 <-- Built and exported from the Online Character Builder
i mean, i don't tend to have this problem personally because i've developed friendships on this board with people who generally share my tastes and want the same things, so premature death for me is kind of rare
maybe you should do the same? i don't think imposing some arbitrary limit is the way to go, it's not like we're all competing for adspace or something (but then again you run 4e stuff so i dunno)
This board is first come first served for recruitment? That's news to me.
In answer to the OP question: No.
In response to the OP: Across both my games on this forum over the years, the primary source of player turnover is RL consuming their times in some fashion; some for the better (getting married/better job/baby), some for the worse (getting divorced/lost job/etc). The same as a RL game.
If you are recruiting and it is during a season where many games are recruiting or starting, what games and how many games a person has applied to is something that you really should take a look at before making a decision on adding the player to your game. If there are multiple recruitment threads going, wait for the others to end before making your decision on a player. Seems simple enough.
As far as CF getting crowded, I'd say it feels that way now because the new forum is a little more busy in the colors and icons department, and lacks a "blue dot" that will allow you to easily find the threads you care about mixed in with all the others without using bookmarks.
edit: Hell, limiting how many recruitment threads are active at one point would pretty much exacerbate the "problem" that you've observed... as now everybody that wanted to play in a pbp game is able to choose from a limited pool of options. o_O
I'm not really sure what else to say in this thread. I'm not sure I can view your statement that having fewer options would make players value more games as anything more than a value judgment, and even if it was true I really wouldn't want people valuing a game I hosted higher because of a scarcity of games to apply to. Also, while some players may use the shotgun approach, I personally have never applied to more than one game within the same small period of time. And for me, personally, it would really suck if my own options of games to apply to were limited because people wanted to control the choices of these players who take a shotgun approach to games. And for the many reasons that others have brought up, I question whether this change would have the effect you imagine.
Other GMs really don't care if people are in and/or apping for multiple games, because they don't see it as a problem.
So I guess: No, but feel free as a GM to make rules about not playing in other games if you're worried about it.