Multiple IC Threads

[Shades of Gray]

I'm all for multiple IC Threads, in case you have two groups or something. However, certain recent games in the IC games section have far more than two. Two specific games, The Neverending Dungeon and The Endless Dungeon, have a combined total of 42 threads for two games. These games take up a lot of space on the list and push other games back to the second or third pages. There are better alternatives to this ridiculous number of IC threads.

1) Myth-weavers: Recommend that they move the game to Myth-Weavers. Most people have an account there to keep their sheets, and it's easy to make an account there if you do not. They have proper tools for handling games like these.
2) Spoilers: Simply putting your posts in spoiler tags might help. This would also make characters isolated from one another, and would stop them from peeking at other characters in the same way that multiple threads does now. This would let you stay on Gitp. In addition, it save the DM the trouble to locating all ~20 games.

[Prime32]

Brilliant Gameologists (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/) has private subforums as well, though really there's not much reason to move there unless you hate Myth-Weavers. :smalltongue:

[kamikasei]

Is trying to find an IC thread on the IC forum actually a real problem? Any games I've played here have gone recrutiment thread -> OOC thread -> IC thread, with each linking to the next as it goes up, and the players subscribing to them rather than hunting through the relevant forums. The recruitment forum is the only one where I see visibility being an issue.

[The Dark Fiddler]

And the recruitment section only has one thread for these.

I always bookmarked my threads, and thought everyone did something similar.

[Bayar]

2) Spoilers: Simply putting your posts in spoiler tags might help. This would also make characters isolated from one another, and would stop them from peeking at other characters in the same way that multiple threads does now. This would let you stay on Gitp. In addition, it save the DM the trouble to locating all ~20 games.

Spoilers wont do any good since it goes by the mutual trust rule. And that leads to paranoia situations. Plus, the DM would have to either multipost, either spend a heck of a lot more time to reply to each player in the same post. And that is a bad thing.

And DM's have threads subscribed. Makes it easier to see which game had a reply and stuff.

[Mordokai]

And the recruitment section only has one thread for these.

I always bookmarked my threads, and thought everyone did something similar.

Yeah, that's what I do, when I find myself in one of these. Or put the links in my signature, so I always know where to find them. Makes it easier for me and creates some publicity for the game :smallbiggrin:

[Thelas]

2) Spoilers: Simply putting your posts in spoiler tags might help. This would also make characters isolated from one another, and would stop them from peeking at other characters in the same way that multiple threads does now. This would let you stay on Gitp. In addition, it save the DM the trouble to locating all ~20 games.
I'm helping DM one of these games, and it's much easier, IMO, to look back through a characters' entire history using one thread per person, because with spoilers I'd have to look through 20 people's posts * the number of posts I'm looking back (which can often be 10 or more).
(Also, I'll speak with Tyndmyr about possibly moving the threads to mythweavers, either now if a mod requires it, or after each PC finishes their first floor (that way the DMs won't have to keep switching forums, since combats won't go over multiple floors or anything.))

[Kasanip]

As someone who does not have subscriptions, it is a problem.
Really, I wouldn't be overly concerned with it if it wasn't the fact that said games in question are 1 player & 1 dm games.
It kind of has the feeling of when someone is taking a whole bunch of tables that can seat many. I think I would feel differently if each of the threads was a full party...

Obviously one could lay the fault with me and say "well, silly Kasanip! Why don't you use subscriptions? :smalltongue:" but I've never had the need to use them before.

It is a difficulty to wade through the IC thread looking for updates (and especially when games are updating quickly), and the style of organization large-multi-thread gameplay uses isn't really efficient on these boards.

Shades' comments are reasonable in regards to that - Mythweavers would be able to handle the same game with much easier organization for all parties, and using spoiler tags even would work to reduce the clutter. The argument that spoilers don't do any good because it relies on mutual trust isn't a very strong one, as there is nothing preventing someone from clicking the mouse button to look at another person's thread if they wanted to cheat. Again, mythweavers and other sites have ways of completely eliminating the problem, if the problem is trust.

In regards to your valid point Thelas, I would agree the organization for the DM is also important...but I think there may be more useful tools available for large thread control at mythweavers or another site too. I cannot speak for certain - I have never tried to DM a game there :smallredface:

Thank you for your willingness to compromise as well! It's certainly no easy endeavor to run a game with that many players, and I hope it works out beneficially for everyone :smallsmile:

[Mando Knight]

Is trying to find an IC thread on the IC forum actually a real problem? Any games I've played here have gone recrutiment thread -> OOC thread -> IC thread, with each linking to the next as it goes up, and the players subscribing to them rather than hunting through the relevant forums. The recruitment forum is the only one where I see visibility being an issue.

My games always cross-link each other just in case, and I always subscribe to game threads I'm involved in...

[Roland St. Jude]

Obviously one could lay the fault with me and say "well, silly Kasanip! Why don't you use subscriptions? :smalltongue:" but I've never had the need to use them before.

But now you do, right? Why not use the built-in mechanism for tracking threads you care about? Or if you don't like it, save a copy of the link elsewhere (in your browser, in a link in your signature, in a document, in an email).

It had never occurred to me until this thread that anyone would scroll through the IC subforum looking for something. Why would anyone do that? The sheer volume and frequency of updates, leaving aside the existence of Neverending/Endless Dungeon threads, would seem to make that needlessly difficult process.

If these games are truly separate games, with different players, then separate threads seems appropriate.

If people want to take their game elsewhere, I don't think we have any official objections, but there's something...unseemly, I guess, about one poster telling others to take their games elsewhere - especially for personal convenience.

[Bayar]

But now you do, right? Why not use the built-in mechanism for tracking threads you care about? Or if you don't like it, save a copy of the link elsewhere (in your browser, in a link in your signature, in a document, in an email).

Or search for all threads that you started (if you are the DM).

[Kasanip]

But now you do, right? Why not use the built-in mechanism for tracking threads you care about? Or if you don't like it, save a copy of the link elsewhere (in your browser, in a link in your signature, in a document, in an email).

It had never occurred to me until this thread that anyone would scroll through the IC subforum looking for something. Why would anyone do that? The sheer volume and frequency of updates, leaving aside the existence of Neverending/Endless Dungeon threads, would seem to make that needlessly difficult process.

Well, thank you for making me feel great about myself.

To answer your question, maybe because some people may be unaware about functions the board has. I had heard mentioned once before there was a way to shift through the threads you want, and I thought perhaps this was the Search Function. It was, as you may expect, not the wonderful saving-grace I had been led to believe, so I went back to the normal process. Since that's worked for me for years across different boards. Really, if I couldn't find the thread in the first three or four pages, I could just use the Search Function to find it.
Yes, I have saved links to documents, etc as well. But it was much nicer to leave the thread and do other things and not have to click the refresh button every few minutes to see if there was an update.

And yes, it may seem to be a needlessly difficult process, but I suppose ignorance is bliss, until something sparks awareness. Really, I never needed it before, and I'm still not sure I do now.
The games were described by the Original Poster as being 2 games with 42 threads, though it looks at a glance to be 42 separate games - or are they all linked? I'm not sure, I'll have to look up the ooc or recruitment thread to find out. Just going off the fact they share the same name, and the issue of trust was brought forth, I assumed that they were interrelated, in which case I question the need for so many threads.
Thelas made the point in favor of organization for the game, which I believe, but there are alternatives in the quest for efficiency (much like my own, apparently - I can use subscriptions to more efficiently manage the games I'm in, but a DM running a series of 42 threads also may have other more efficient tools to use).

I would like to say that my comments never were for the purpose of telling people to leave, and certainly not solely for my personal convenience. I am not sure what the best solution to the organizational issues surrounding the number of threads and the issues such as player trust that can be offered besides the two that were given here -
1) Keep Going as Normal
or
2) Consider alternatives that may be easier and more efficient.

I'm not in the game, and I was just addressing it from the viewpoint of someone who does see it as cluttered and inefficient (ironic maybe, since I am so obviously inefficient myself, as I know now).
That's all I have to say about this, I'm off to try out these 'subscriptions.'

[Tavar]

The games all follow a similar theme: you're alone, dropped into a dungeon. Survive.

The dungeons appear to be the same, but each character can take a different route, and deal with the challenges in any way they see fit.

[sofawall]

But now you do, right? Why not use the built-in mechanism for tracking threads you care about?

Because the damn thing refuses to work, and I do not know why. :smallmad:

[Zherog]

Because the damn thing refuses to work, and I do not know why. :smallmad:

Elaborate? I'm sure somebody here can offer you assistance once we know what the issue is.

[Bayar]

Because the damn thing refuses to work, and I do not know why. :smallmad:

In the thread you want to subscribe to, click Thread Tools in the upper right part of the first post, select Subscribe to this thread, select the Notification type and click Add Subscribe.

To get to your subscriptions, go to User CP in the left side of the bown bar, click on the List Subscriptions tab, refresh when needed.

[sofawall]

I know how to get there, it just won't update. I have to actually click on every subscribed thread and check if there is a new post.

And yes, I cleared my cache/cookies.

[Zherog]

Do you have notifications turned on? Is your registered e-mail account accurate? Have you checked your spam folder in your e-mail to make sure they aren't going there?

[sofawall]

Yes, yes, and yes, I have tried to mess around with settings to fix it.

I've noticed others having trouble with subscribed threads as well.

[Prime32]

I get a lot of threads losing their unread status randomly - it's probably related.

[Cubey]

Thread subscriptions work for me just fine (but I had once a player for whom they didn't - I don't know if it was a forum issue or was she doing something wrong). However, they require me to log in, enter the User CP page, enter the subscriptions page and see if there's been an update. While normally I can just enter the subforum and see if there's an update or not.

You call it "just convenience", but the forum has actual rules about convenienice: you can't have too large a signature because it inconveniences other readers. Creating two threads on the same subject is, likewise, not allowed. I believe the administration should take a stand on whether convenience is an important part of this forum or not.

[MikelaC]

Thread subscriptions work for me just fine (but I had once a player for whom they didn't - I don't know if it was a forum issue or was she doing something wrong). However, they require me to log in, .

Click on the Remember Me button, and you dont have to log in....

[TheSummoner]

You do if you check from public computers or more computers than one.

I check the forums at school sometimes, I dont want it remembering me there.

[Cubey]

Click on the Remember Me button, and you dont have to log in....

I use more than one computer, and I'm not the only person who has access to them. I don't want to be logged in all the time.

[banthesun]

I just browse through the sub forums. :smalleek:

It's never been a problem for me (I just look for the ones with the already visited colour), but I do realise it's technically not allowed. But so's J-walking, it only becomes a problem when it happens really excessively. And that kinda seems to be happening with those threads. One on ones could easily be combined into a single thread in my opinion. Just my two cents.

[Shhalahr Windrider]

I know how to get there, it just won't update. I have to actually click on every subscribed thread and check if there is a new post.

And yes, I cleared my cache/cookies.
Actually, clearing cookies would not help in this case. The "New Posts" in the browser are tracked via cookies.


However, they require me to log in, enter the User CP page, enter the subscriptions page and see if there's been an update.
Pro-tip: Cut a page load out of the flow by using the "Quick Links" menu Subscribed Threads option.


Creating two threads on the same subject is, likewise, not allowed.
If you've got two or three separate groups that never really meet, but just happen to be in the same dungeon, how much of the "same subject" is it really?

[Cubey]

If you've got two or three separate groups that never really meet, but just happen to be in the same dungeon, how much of the "same subject" is it really?

It's not technically the same subject, but it's still kinda rude to other forumgoers to run your game like that, with every thread for a different player. It could be done in a better way.
And I'm not talking about two or three groups, that much wouldn't be a problem. I'm talking, like the OP said, about 42 different threads for two game scenarios. Make that an average of 21/game scenario.

[Icewalker]

It's not technically the same subject, but it's still kinda rude to other forumgoers to run your game like that, with every thread for a different player. It could be done in a better way.
And I'm not talking about two or three groups, that much wouldn't be a problem. I'm talking, like the OP said, about 42 different threads for two game scenarios. Make that an average of 21/game scenario.

I don't see how this is rude. That's the reason for the subscription system. Even without threads this active, it's incredibly more useful than searching the subforum every time. And by asking for some change on their part, you make things significantly more difficult for those involved, whilst refusing to use a method which will make things simpler for you, regardless of what other people are doing.

If you're having trouble with the subscriptions, that's a different issue, as the answer is never "don't use the subscriptions." If they work for some people, then they aren't working for you because of a technical problem on your end, or between you and the forum, and post about that and people can try to help fix it.

[Roland St. Jude]

...I believe the administration should take a stand on whether convenience is an important part of this forum or not.

Sheriff of Moddingham: Convenience is one factor in forum administration, but it isn't the only one, of course. So to the extent your comment that we, "should take a stand on whether convenience is an important part of this forum or not" is really intended to mean we should "decide whether we really care about convenience or not" or that this issue should be resolved in the way you'd prefer because it's more convenient, it doesn't really work that way. Of course we care about convenience of our posters, and we've made some decisions with convenience as the primary concern. But, there are often competing conveniences and other factors that weigh in.

As an initial matter, the threads in questions don't appear to violate any rules. They're created for separate games and don't seem to be done for any spammy purpose.

Importantly, to the extent that they cause some inconvenience, there exists both forum-software specific and many other options to access threads directly. Some of them might require a poster to log in, others to keep a file on hand or a link posted somewhere, but there are plenty of options to allow a poster to pick the least inconvenient.

In order to make it more convenient than these options, we would have to: 1) merge a ton of unrelated threads into a massive spoilered thread that would be inconvenient to all involved; 2) tell a whole group of people to take their otherwise rule-abiding activities elsewhere; or 3) create a new subforum just for one group of games.

None of these creates a net convenience or efficiency. Nor are they anything we're interested in doing.

I think it was quite reasonable for the OP to ask. It's possible the threads violated the rules or could be dealt with in some manner that consolidated them. As it turns out, in this instance, the best solution we can offer is to use the built-in tool intended for the purpose or one of the many work-arounds that exist.

[Rawhide]

Just to add an alternate option for those DMing/playing to consider.

If the thread is truly a one on one affair, you could hold the games via PM. You could then use the export to csv file option and the Offline PM Viewer to store/search the games.

If you would then like other people to read your games, when the game is complete or reaches a certain point, you could collate the PMs and post them to a single thread or multiple threads as appropriate. This has an added benefit of preventing certain types of cheating until they are posted.

As I've introduced a new discussion point to an already closed thread, I'm going to re-open it for the sole purpose of allowing the possibility for people to discuss that point (and that point only).

[Tavar]

The issue there is that it's multiple players for one dm, and also that the timezone's don't overlap well in alot of cases. Really, doing it as a play by post mitigates both of these facts, and otherwise I doubt the games would happen.

[TheSummoner]

Posting them on the forums does nothing more to help the timezone issue than doing it through PMs would. It has the added benefit for the players that they can see it right at the top of the window when they have a new PM and the added benefit for the rest of us that there aren't 42 extra threads to wade through because of two games.

[Tavar]

Ah, my mistake, I read it as IM, not sure why. In any case, does the dice roller work on PM's I thought it only worked in the gaming board. And, really, it's no more the same game than any games run by the same person are. Heck, we're getting more DM's at the moment, so it really won't be the same game.

Also, I still sometimes manually go through the forum looking for my games, and it really doesn't seem bad. Just hit ctrl f and search for the name of the game on each page. There, problem solved, and it was about the same effort even before the massive dungeon crawls started.

Also, while there are few Dm's, this would easily run up against the 100 PM limit, thus hampering the games.

[Rawhide]

To be clear, what I am suggesting is an option, not a requirement. I don't know the unique circumstances, but I think that it could work quite well, probably better than the current arrangement not just for those not interested in the games, but those playing/DMing.

The 100 PM limit is easily to overcome by exporting for use in the Offline PM Viewer then deleting those stored on the site. This may be enough to make the idea feasible.

[Douglas]

Play By PM might work for a small number of players, but in cases like the games that prompted this thread the DM's inbox would fill up to overflowing extremely quickly. Additionally, the forum software only shows PMs one at a time in isolation, making it quite a nuisance to try to go back and review the game's progress or search for the one PM containing a specific detail. The DM, in particular, would be forced to constantly copy all PMs to a separate location just to maintain each game's record without hitting his PM storage limit.

While it might be workable for just a few games, the sheer number of them actually going on would force a frequency of exporting and deleting PMs so high that I think it would seriously negatively affect the DM's ability to run the games.

[Rawhide]

The offline PM viewer, Personal Message Viewer v1.1a, downloadable here (http://www.phpbb.com/community/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=281925&start=45#p4650965) and discussed here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=53603) solves all of those problems.

[sofawall]

Can you do rolls in a PM?

[EleventhHour]

Appearntly not.

But you could have a single thread in the Roller section for it.
(And mass spoilers)

[Rawhide]

Ah, no, not with the forum software. You would need to use a dice rolling thread or something like invisible castle.

[sofawall]

Ah, no, not with the forum software. You would need to use a dice rolling thread or something like invisible castle.

Could get a tad tricky. Seems PMs might not be the best solution, although a reasonable one.

[Icewalker]

While that downloadable PM deal would technically stop the limited PM problem, it's still a big hassle. That program isn't the most elaborate, it works, but if you need to sort through large varieties of things, and export your PMs on a regular basis, and keep them sorted PM by PM rather than export by export, it would be a significant additional hassle than just running them as threads.

[Bayar]

Reviewing each separate game by pm viewer wont be too much hassle for players that use 1 pc all the time. The dm's and those like myself that use 2 home pc's, a cell phone and about a douzen other different sources would find the task nigh impossible.

[Tanaric]

Speaking as one of the DMs in question, I have to wonder why you'd want to make my head hurt more by taking these to PMs. I have thirty (!) subscribed threads for this game, currently, all of which update multiple times per day. Am I really supposed to dump my PM box every hour, then sort through all of that whenever I want to know which tripwires have been triggered and which haven't? Really?

My head's liable to explode as it is. Adopting the PM proposal would finish the dissolving effect on my brain that taking the task on in the first place started.

I'm sorry if the threads are really such a distraction, but like Roland said... who sorts through the IC forum by hand, anyway?

If these were separate aspects of the same game, yeah, it'd be pointlessly spammy. But they're not. And asking me to track thirty (again, !) games by PM is just... guh.

[Mangles]

i have never visited the IC or OC forums yet. Just subscribe. and if you can't find them the search tool works a treat as long as you know what your game is called. There is a reason I join games here and don't just sit on myth weavers. I love the giant so much more. subscribe takes three clicks (two screens) to set up and then you have a one stop shop for all your threads,

[Tyndmyr]

Hey, Im the DM for the Endless Dungeon, and just found out about this thread. If the end verdict ends up being that a large quantity of ongoing game threads is a problem, I do have my own server, and I can certainly toss another forum on there for general use.

My current system basically involves subscribing to the game threads, which works pretty well, but I also have a table linking to each character sheet and it's associated game thread in the master, OOC thread. In this way, it's relatively easy for me to keep track of the nearly 30 individual adventurers. Trying to DM for them all in a single thread would be quite difficult and confusing, spoilers or no, due to everyone being in different areas, taking different tactics, and all that sort of thing.

Likewise, trying to DM by PM has the limiting factor that I can have a mere hundred PMs in my inbox at a time. In addition to the fact that I'd likely hit my limit inside of 24 hours, it'd make shared DMing impractical, and it'd be very hard to keep track of each ongoing adventure.

If it ends up being decreed to be a problem by the admins, I'll shift the game threads off-site, but as it stands, it seems kinda tacky to recruit players here, then send them elsewhere to play, yknow?

[Zeb The Troll]

@Tyndmyr and Tanaric
To be clear, what I am suggesting is an option, not a requirement. I don't know the unique circumstances, but I think that it could work quite well, probably better than the current arrangement not just for those not interested in the games, but those playing/DMing.It's okay, you can relax. :smallcool:

[Rawhide]

You can also see the official stance in Roland's response when he originally closed the thread.

We are definitely not mandating that any of these games be held off-site or in PM, nor are we asking anyone to. My comment (and the subsequent reopening of the thread) was merely to provide an option that may not have been immediately obvious, an option that would work well for some but not for others.

[hustlertwo]

Huh. I don't do subscriptions, am involved in a pile of different threads at any given point, and I'm still pretty much completely fine with this. Even with the Endless and Neverending threads, I figure you only have to go back, what, 4 or 5 pages in the IC board to find threads that aren't even from today? Most people here probably are able to scan through that in a minute or two. Somehow, it seems like all the suggestion on here, particularly downloading wholly separate programs just for the pleasure of having a massively overstuffed PM inbox, are a good deal more complicated than just skimming around the forums. Or, of course, looking at your most recent posts. In the end, by asking other people to move their games in order to keep from inconveniencing your own gaming time, you are essentially putting your needs and desires higher than those of the ones involved in the infinite dungeons. Which doesn't make you a horrible person, of course; it's simply human nature. But of course, in that vein the most natural response from the people involved in those games is to politely ignore your requests and continue as is. Why should they be willing to sacrifice their convenience for that of others, when the notion clearly is not reciprocal?

Yeah, on a philosophical bend today. Goes well with toaster pastries and milk.

[Rawhide]

The reason I reopened this thread has been discussed and it has gone off-topic again. This thread will therefore be closed again.

To summarise:

As Roland St Jude has stated, the games can continue as they are.
Keep in mind that a program for storing, sorting and searching PMs offline exists and consider that as an option depending on the game you are running. No one is asking you to use it, only suggesting that it is an option and may be a better one for your game that you may not have been previously aware of.
As long as the games are kept reasonable and within the rules, no one has to use PMs or the software and no one has to take their games off-site.
Thread closed.