Most NRPs tend to be short lived affairs, but it does seem some attract a lot more players than others. Why is that? Is it a matter of GM loyalty or a matter of the NRP having very loose standards?

we personally have found that it often is rooted in lacking planning for the setting. Considering how much has to be done for a sheet in one, how many aspects are involved, a GM either needs careful control over what each puts in, or strict rules to ensure a modicum of balance. The latter of those requires a lot of planning before launch, the former a lot of work after it is released.

Having an overarching plan tends to improve an NRP. Without a "mission" to the NRP, it'll often stagnate due to not enough players being good at initiating engaging plots.

that's how we see it, at least.

<- Speaking from someone who hasn't NRP roleplay before

Personally I believe that any roleplay that wishes to survive should have some aspect of motivation, something sandbox RPs lack. Not only that but an NRP is really just an RP with multiple characters, something that many experienced roleplayers will be skilled at creating.

I'll give an example from a game of Odin Sphere. The game is about 5 characters from different races all trying to control an item known as the Cauldren. Some want it for power, some want to protect it, and some want to use it to bring back dead loved ones; however each race fights for this item and it continually changes hands. If this was to be turned into an RP you could easily use the races as 'nations' and each nation would fight for this item. Throw in some aspects of deceit, underhanded deals and misdirection. Maybe one nation is after it to prevent their race from dying out, maybe one used it and was cursed.

Pretty much an NRP can be treated like a larger version of an RP and the story you create just has to involve multiple people per nation.

I'm of the oppinion that it's helpful to have a certain level of freedom for NRPs. So I'd lean towards it being a Sandbox. That way hopefully the writers have the chance to try on their shoes and make it fit before going out if they haven't already. But then for those who might have trouble getting started it might help then for there to be something central. I hesitate to ever describe this as 'the plot' because that sounds too rigid, but I'd call it a concept for the people involved to associate with or orbit around as they write.

Failing that, then I would say it should be the responsibility of the GM to act as this central premise his or herself when a central story pretense is absent to act as the anchor that brings players together to interaction. Whether or not that's the nation that's the most politically central to the world, the strongest, or the one on the warpath (or diplomatic or economic warpath) to whip up points of conflict. The key thing in politics internationally is the interaction between nations in the diplomatic sphere and the blocs which they act through to act and respond to one another; if any sort of interaction even in a sandbox NRP that doesn't become relevant to everyone in some way is gone then so will the purpose.

On one hand, I'm inclined towards creative freedom by nature. On the other hand, simple human nature tells me that without extreme vetting, a clearly defined, though perhaps not extremely specific structure is best (though at that point we get into recruitment issues...).

.

@catchamber
I can agree with all of that, especially bloat. In a few rps that I've been in there have been elements that are so fine and non important that it detracts from the rp. Long lengths of history, character's and creatures that are never mentioned in ic but described in ooc, maps, etc.

While being creative is one thing there has to be a line where you say enough is enough and any more is just not necessary. Pretty much if someone has to ask questions about your rp in the OOC, aside from the general enquiries, then maybe you need to reevaluate how you are projecting your ideas and information.

.