We did lose a chunk of our membership when the site went down, this is true, but hey, give it time, drag people kicking and screaming to the Fonz's sacrificial alter, and people will return, we'll get new folks, and so on...
...So long as the site doesn't sporadically drop dead again.
Brovo Member
- Last Seen: MIA
- Old Guild Username: Brovo
- Joined: 12 yrs ago
- Posts: 1116 (0.25 / day)
- VMs: 0
-
Username history
- Brovo 12 yrs ago
Status
User has no status, yet
Bio
User has no bio, yet
Most Recent Posts
I've been in both categories since 2008, so I'll put it as plainly as I can, whilst still retaining every detail I think is relevant.
Casual is a section dedicated to a more games-like atmosphere. Language comprehension varies from basic to post-secondary though tends to average out around junior high level. Its main strength is the versatility it can bring to the table: You can see anime RP's, fandoms, original content, fantasies, sci-fi, tabletop-inspired, and so on, all playing out side by side, with few to no conflicts whatsoever. Its greatest weakness though is its versatility: It often doesn't know what it exactly is between the wide range of tastes and literacy levels, and ergo, you see Balkanization terminology pop up from time to time. ex: High Casual, High Free, Low Advanced, etc. (I've seen all three used.) It can be isolating to new people and create unnecessary divisions.
tl;dr
+Fantastic variety.
+Wide range of literacy levels...
+Widely accepting of many kinds of players.
+Moderate pacing.
+Low barrier to entry makes it easily accessible for both the new and the old alike.
...
-Doesn't understand itself more often than not.
-...Wide range of literacy levels...
-Can suffer systemic voluntary Balkanization.
-Moderate pacing is not well suited towards those with busy lives.
-Low barrier to entry often means both GM's and role players have only rudimentary literary knowledge.
Advanced is a section dedicated to a more literary-like atmosphere. Language comprehension tends to fluctuate between junior high to senior high levels. (7th-12th grade), and averages out around high school level. Post-secondary level is surprisingly about as common here as it is in casual from my personal observations. Posts are long and extremely descriptive, which is both a positive and a negative, depending on what you're looking for. There isn't as much variety here as in casual, but it tends to understand itself better: You don't see the Balkanization terminology here in general. Its greatest strength is its connection to having larger posts which are more descriptive, more can be fit into them, which can be a breeding ground for more complex characters and rich dialogue interspersed between metaphor, ideologue, perspective, and emotions. Its greatest weakness is its larger posts: It can drone on about things that ultimately are red herrings, unfired checkhov's guns, or worse still, nothing at all.
tl;dr
+Greater literary comprehension...
+Characters and plots tend to have greater depth with longer posts...
+Larger posts allow for more content at a slower pace, making it easier for people who have restricted posting schedules to keep up...
+I roleplay here more often than anywhere else because I'm an advanced author!...
+Fewer regulars here than in casual means that people tend to quickly gain their own "crew" to stick with them, which increases survival odds.
-...That is still only in the high school range, but often thinks itself greater.
-...Or, sometimes, they're just writing meaningless tripe that is the equivalent of textual masturbation.
-...At the price of making the barrier to entry higher than in casual, sometimes to the point of scaring people away who would otherwise fit in just fine.
-...A perfect example of the elitism that sometimes still wreaks sufficiently to drop role plays dead straight away in advanced!
-...Can also mean that if you don't like what's currently popular, it may take upwards of months before you'll see something you would want to play in as a player.
That's 'bout it really.
Oh, wait, one last thing! For people who are scared of advanced!
Casual asks for one paragraph or more, advanced asks for two or more, both ask for basic to intermediate levels of language comprehension. The difference in "skill level" is one paragraph more, so if you're scared to give advanced a try, don't be. Just remember that the atmosphere of casual is more games-like, whilst advanced is more literary-like. This means that casual's characterization tends to be based in action while advanced's characterization tends to be based in dialogue and biography.
It's the difference between an actor and a screen writer. The actor is remembered for what he physically does. The screen writer is remembered for the storyline he wrote, the metaphors, the emotions, the thoughts, and the dialogue. (Though the two do cross realms sometimes. tl;dr: It's complicated but nothing you really need to worry about, it's pretty easy to pick up on without knowing much.
)
Casual is a section dedicated to a more games-like atmosphere. Language comprehension varies from basic to post-secondary though tends to average out around junior high level. Its main strength is the versatility it can bring to the table: You can see anime RP's, fandoms, original content, fantasies, sci-fi, tabletop-inspired, and so on, all playing out side by side, with few to no conflicts whatsoever. Its greatest weakness though is its versatility: It often doesn't know what it exactly is between the wide range of tastes and literacy levels, and ergo, you see Balkanization terminology pop up from time to time. ex: High Casual, High Free, Low Advanced, etc. (I've seen all three used.) It can be isolating to new people and create unnecessary divisions.
tl;dr
+Fantastic variety.
+Wide range of literacy levels...
+Widely accepting of many kinds of players.
+Moderate pacing.
+Low barrier to entry makes it easily accessible for both the new and the old alike.
...
-Doesn't understand itself more often than not.
-...Wide range of literacy levels...
-Can suffer systemic voluntary Balkanization.
-Moderate pacing is not well suited towards those with busy lives.
-Low barrier to entry often means both GM's and role players have only rudimentary literary knowledge.
Advanced is a section dedicated to a more literary-like atmosphere. Language comprehension tends to fluctuate between junior high to senior high levels. (7th-12th grade), and averages out around high school level. Post-secondary level is surprisingly about as common here as it is in casual from my personal observations. Posts are long and extremely descriptive, which is both a positive and a negative, depending on what you're looking for. There isn't as much variety here as in casual, but it tends to understand itself better: You don't see the Balkanization terminology here in general. Its greatest strength is its connection to having larger posts which are more descriptive, more can be fit into them, which can be a breeding ground for more complex characters and rich dialogue interspersed between metaphor, ideologue, perspective, and emotions. Its greatest weakness is its larger posts: It can drone on about things that ultimately are red herrings, unfired checkhov's guns, or worse still, nothing at all.
tl;dr
+Greater literary comprehension...
+Characters and plots tend to have greater depth with longer posts...
+Larger posts allow for more content at a slower pace, making it easier for people who have restricted posting schedules to keep up...
+I roleplay here more often than anywhere else because I'm an advanced author!...
+Fewer regulars here than in casual means that people tend to quickly gain their own "crew" to stick with them, which increases survival odds.
-...That is still only in the high school range, but often thinks itself greater.
-...Or, sometimes, they're just writing meaningless tripe that is the equivalent of textual masturbation.
-...At the price of making the barrier to entry higher than in casual, sometimes to the point of scaring people away who would otherwise fit in just fine.
-...A perfect example of the elitism that sometimes still wreaks sufficiently to drop role plays dead straight away in advanced!
-...Can also mean that if you don't like what's currently popular, it may take upwards of months before you'll see something you would want to play in as a player.
That's 'bout it really.
Oh, wait, one last thing! For people who are scared of advanced!
Casual asks for one paragraph or more, advanced asks for two or more, both ask for basic to intermediate levels of language comprehension. The difference in "skill level" is one paragraph more, so if you're scared to give advanced a try, don't be. Just remember that the atmosphere of casual is more games-like, whilst advanced is more literary-like. This means that casual's characterization tends to be based in action while advanced's characterization tends to be based in dialogue and biography.
It's the difference between an actor and a screen writer. The actor is remembered for what he physically does. The screen writer is remembered for the storyline he wrote, the metaphors, the emotions, the thoughts, and the dialogue. (Though the two do cross realms sometimes. tl;dr: It's complicated but nothing you really need to worry about, it's pretty easy to pick up on without knowing much.
)I will review more characters when I get home from work tonight, and after a couple more days should be getting ready to unveil the first mission(s)!
Nathaniel Hawthorne. Approved.
Daniel Ezekiel Anders. Approved.
Bruce "Brucey" McFoster. Approved.
Chris seems unfinished? But approving, as all the necessary details are there. (Shotgun has no details?) Also, fyi: If he is shot in the face with a LAS-Mod Shotgun, he's a goner. Just so you know. ;)
@Everyone else: When your sheets are finished post in the OOC again to let me know and I'll review them.
As for missions, it's on a "wait and see how many come" business. As it stands, don't be afraid to use your abilities in unorthodox ways. I might also create a character, but I will wait until I get the general sense of numbers here, who is playing as what. :p
Daniel Ezekiel Anders. Approved.
Bruce "Brucey" McFoster. Approved.
Chris seems unfinished? But approving, as all the necessary details are there. (Shotgun has no details?) Also, fyi: If he is shot in the face with a LAS-Mod Shotgun, he's a goner. Just so you know. ;)
@Everyone else: When your sheets are finished post in the OOC again to let me know and I'll review them.
As for missions, it's on a "wait and see how many come" business. As it stands, don't be afraid to use your abilities in unorthodox ways. I might also create a character, but I will wait until I get the general sense of numbers here, who is playing as what. :p
@Sevaree: Interesting. To me, there is a certain degree of professionalism required in any format of collective assignment if you wish to be taken seriously and be respected, and return such expectations. Role plays have responsibilities, some require certain levels of skill in one way or another, and so on. Even if the agreement itself is unwritten, when one signs up to join an RP, it's generally recognized that they have thus agreed to the responsibility to post in that RP, follow the rules, and attempt to stay in character while typing posts in the IC. Players should treat each other respectfully and follow the GM's rules (not unquestioningly, but when the GM puts their foot down, it's generally considered poor practice to spit in their face and fight them on it anyway), and so on. This creates a cooperative and amicable environment.
That is, I have a certain series of expectations of players who wish to join my role plays. They don't have to be master writers (au contrairé, I love to teach anyone willing to learn), nor do they have to be the greatest role players of all time. I've even accepted the occasional Mary Sue if I saw even a little promise in it. It's the attitude of the player that matters a lot more to me. People who easily succumb to rage and impatience likely won't work in a format where openly constructive criticism and long posts prevail over slanderous compliments and rapid fire posts.
So, to me, it -is- basically a business agreement. If someone wants to pull out of it all they have to do is mention it, but they shouldn't be surprised if I'm wary to enter into another agreement with them, at least in the near future, due to their failure to uphold their own responsibilities on their end. (Extreme circumstances notwithstanding, like if a tornado blows up your house or both your parents were brutally murdered, I'm not going to expect you to post or stay in the RP, nor hold it against you, because... Well... I'm evil, not completely monstrous.
)
That is, I have a certain series of expectations of players who wish to join my role plays. They don't have to be master writers (au contrairé, I love to teach anyone willing to learn), nor do they have to be the greatest role players of all time. I've even accepted the occasional Mary Sue if I saw even a little promise in it. It's the attitude of the player that matters a lot more to me. People who easily succumb to rage and impatience likely won't work in a format where openly constructive criticism and long posts prevail over slanderous compliments and rapid fire posts.
So, to me, it -is- basically a business agreement. If someone wants to pull out of it all they have to do is mention it, but they shouldn't be surprised if I'm wary to enter into another agreement with them, at least in the near future, due to their failure to uphold their own responsibilities on their end. (Extreme circumstances notwithstanding, like if a tornado blows up your house or both your parents were brutally murdered, I'm not going to expect you to post or stay in the RP, nor hold it against you, because... Well... I'm evil, not completely monstrous.
)Ruby said
Wisdom, Kestrel!In either case, thanks for sharing Brovo. <3 That's what RP discussion is for, and I'm sorry if you felt attacked. Please don't let it keep you from offering your takes in the future!
I won't. As I said, I was offended, that doesn't make you wrong.
My being offended is no reason or justification for censoring you or ignoring your points in the same way that I would expect the opposite to be true.Society just doesn't function if being offended is a legitimate reason to censor free speech and the right to question people.
Tick said
Ha. :] Congrats on getting an RP discussion thread going. Sorry if you were offended/felt attacked by the discussion (I wasn't involved, but I know that sucks). And I get how the comments on your actions were perceived as translating to yourself. But this sentiment does not work. It ends up: "Don't criticize me." If you can't question a person's actions or analyze the actions and make a critical conclusion, what can you criticize?The common point about debate is to criticize an individual's actions and ideas, not their character. This makes the former equate to the latter. They're not calling you twelve, or a nazi. People have right to evaluate your actions as wrong.
Brovo said but my being offended by no stretch of the imagination means that you were in the wrong to call me out, or wrong to point out how you felt about my methods.tl;dr: Sometimes it's okay to be offensive if your intent is to try and point out something that is wrong to you, just don't then claim that you were, somehow, not offensive. It actually doesn't help things.
...
Miss Gallagher said Eh, people, let's keep egos in check. Agree to disagree, please. Peace in the thread.
As you wish. I'll just leave a final, clarified statement then, as to what I had intended to say, but which was obviously lost in translation... Somewhere.
2) To give someone a piece of criticism on their sheet at random--and no, this isn't impossible, no sheet is perfect--then asking them to repair it. Then don't check back for a couple days. If they handle the criticism well (ex: defend it in a civil manner, change it, etc,) then they pass. If they don't, then they can find another RP that will better accommodate their needs and you can find a role player to better accommodate yours.
That is all I really ever meant to convey.
Also, I suppose a quick correction to Jorick and Ruby about the textbook definition of manipulation: "Exerting shrewd or devious influence especially for one's own advantage; "his manipulation of his friends was scandalous"". It has inherently negative connotations--that I'm using someone for my own advantage--instead of what it truthfully is: That I'm giving them a test and seeing how they react to it. That's not manipulative: I'm not using shrewd or devious influence, I'm committing to an act that is not based within a slander (you can reject someone for no reason, or for reasons you find otherwise minor--that's not slanderous), the nature of the act is not devious, nor is it shrewd. Therefore, it's not the textbook definition of manipulation.
I suppose, in hindsight, the confusion could have come from the line "bullshit reasoning", wherein some might interpret that to mean non-existent errors, that would be slanderous, but bullshit reasoning to me was simply any reasoning at all: Slanderous or not. So hopefully the cleaned statement makes it clearer that I'm not manipulating people.
Oh, and one final thing before I do agree to the amicable "agree to disagree" just to help Dervish and Ruby in the future with their communication skills: When you question a person's methods, you are questioning the person's character. When you call my methods cruel, or disturbing, you are in turn by extension calling me cruel, or disturbing, versus if I were to critique a fictional character: A person who does not exist, a physical work, an object, a thing, the result of a method, not the method itself.
Your intentions were not malicious, ergo why I didn't react with maliciousness in turn and instead using sarcasm and dry wit, but to claim that it wasn't offensive is nonsense. It was offensive: It was unavoidable attacking me as a person, but my being offended by no stretch of the imagination means that you were in the wrong to call me out, or wrong to point out how you felt about my methods.
tl;dr: Sometimes it's okay to be offensive if your intent is to try and point out something that is wrong to you, just don't then claim that you were, somehow, not offensive. It actually doesn't help things.
EDIT
Anyway if either of you would like the closing word, it's all yours, I'll read it and keep it in mind but otherwise not continue the discussion as the thread creator requested. I just felt this final response might be useful to clarify a potential error of mine and see if the repaired statement does not improve upon what I had meant to convey. Also to clarify a couple other things, like what manipulation means.
Ruby said
Didn't read it. I have your earlier text to go off of. And you originally wrote:If the above is true, I stand by my opinion. If it isn't, I guess I don't care that much. =)
Alright. Let me highlight a piece for you.
Brovo said Bonus points in that it also works against people who cannot stand criticism
Criticism. The test is one to see if you can handle having your character criticized. Now whether this means you change your character, or you explain, calmly, why you think the character is good enough and try to defend it, either way, you pass, because you handled the criticism well.
It's the people who can't separate criticism of a fictional character from criticism on themselves that don't usually pass.
I apologize if that was unclear. I hope that clears it up nicely.
Ruby said
None with partners recently. But then, 1x1's tend to have more problems finding partners. Especially with a page of rules and, let me guess, only accepting one gender behind the writing? So no kidding you're frustrated.You can rationalize this however you want, it is manipulative and dishonest. But each GM treats players differently. This is just a rather disturbing window into how you treat your players. ^_^
Uh... I further clarified what I do already above, but I suppose I can repeat myself again.
I give a random critique to a fictional character to see if the player in question can handle criticism. The fact that you find that disturbing, says volumes.
© 2007-2026