Why do you review?

[Eclipse]

In light of Ishmayl's thread, I thought this might be a good discussion.

Essentially, what turns you on/off to reviewing a setting. Do you not like reviewing settings that make heavy use of links to other sites? Do ones with massive blocks of text in the thread turn you off? Do you like ones with heavy use of IC quotes, or do you find that irritating? What about ones that use almost no tags, and just are large blocks of text? Do you like settings that use traditional fantasy elements, or would you rather see Gralthin over Elves? Etc.

Also, what would make you want to review more? Is there anything an individual poster of a setting could do to encourage your interest?

I have my own thoughts, but I'll share those after I hear what you guys think.

[Stargate525]

It really, really depends. Both on my mood and what the content is.

What I like is very clearly defined organization. This, then this, then this. What I don't like is having to constantly figure out where the author wants me to shift gears as he rambles through the setting. For example, if you're going to detail a city, please don't start with the city, then do a guild or two, define the mayor, another guild, then do a map. Give me a description of the city and the guilds that are in there, and give the guilds their own description post.

I also, oddly enough, don't enjoy huge stories and blocks of text. If I've got to scroll down to get through the ic block, I'll more than likely skip it. It's odd, becuase my entire history in my setting is made up of ic blocks, though I've tried to keep them short.

spoiler. blocks. cannot. be. overstated. It keeps the thread clean and neat, and lets you 'block out' whatever you're not reading. Which helps quite a bit when you're trying to wade through for a reveiw.

[Jharviss]

Use double enters two seperate paragraphs.  Why do people not understand this?  Two enters seperates a paragraph online!  One enter between paragraphs makes the entire thing look like a giant block of text with no entrance.  It's scary.

That said, I like seeing portions of a world.  I skip around a lot when I'm looking at settings; with small settings I see what the person has posted, but with large ones I'm just everywhere sporadically.  I was looking over Urbis (Jurgen Hubert's mondo-setting), and I would go from page 5 to page 120 to page 40 of the pdf like nobody's business.  Sometimes I'd just open it randomly.

If you want reviews, post specific things and ask for guidance on certain areas.  That seems topnotch.

[Lmns Crn]

Oh man, I could write a small novel about this subject, I think. It's been on my mind on-and-off for a little over a year, and I used to have long AIM conversations with ElDo about it (back when I still had AIM, I guess.) This is an important subject to consider because it is a two-way street-- understand why people do and don't read and review things, and you'll understand ways to make your own work more accessible to others (and increase the amount of response you get.)

There's a multi-step process at work, I think. Writers can do some wonderful things to make their work interesting, unique, and memorable, but none of that means a darn thing unless people read it. We all know about certain writers whose work is very good, but ends up underappreciated because something about its presentation makes people not want to invest the time and energy it takes to read it.

So. A well-presented world (like any creative work) needs to:
1.) get me to read it
2.) get me to care about it

That's the tough trick, in a nutshell.

Reading

I read things for a variety of reasons. Often, something catches my eye for some reason, or I notice that it's new and short enough to read quickly. Sometimes, I just read whenever I am bored. As a general rule, I (like many people) am more likely to read short passages than long ones, so people with large settings (like my own) need to take care to present their work in ways that make it more manageable to the reader. That's just the way it is, it seems.

I think that longer settings can benefit if their authors take their cues from other media. Organize your information the way it's organized in successful published works-- color when possible, pretty illustrations to draw and keep the eye on the page, and a logical system of organization (and navigation!) to make it easy to parse the information in intuitive and useful ways. For examples, I like to point out the Eberron setting book (which is visually quite good-looking and very browsable), and Wikipedia (which makes it easy to navigate freely between diverse topics, and to follow links for more information on particular ideas.) Simply barfing up a setting into one big page full of text (which I do all the time, silly crayon!) is really not good enough.

Caring

This is all about having original ideas. This does not mean that everything you write about has to be cut whole-cloth from totally unique fabric (not many people do that, anyway!) But you really do need to put a unique spin on your ideas, or they will not be interesting. If I feel like I'm just reading the same clichés I've read countless times before, I'm not going to be compelled to keep going. (And really, it only takes a little kink here and there to put a fresh face on the old clichés with which we're all familiar. So in answer to your specific question,

Do you like settings that use traditional fantasy elements, or would you rather see Gralthin over Elves? Etc.

Do you like ones with heavy use of IC quotes, or do you find that irritating?[/quote]This one really only bothers me when it breaks the fourth wall (as I recently alluded to in somebody's review thread or other, I think.) If you want to give your world a broad overview or a sales pitch, do that in your own voice, as the writer. It rarely makes sense to do that from the point of view of a character, although in-character commentary can be a valuable tool for smaller-scale issues.

Fish do not talk about the ocean, because that's all they know-- they don't have any outside knowledge to compare against. Nobody goes around talking about planet Earth and what a fascinating world it is and how it's full of weird creatures and scheming factions and dangerous adventures, and if they did, we'd call them crazy.

[beejazz]

I like a mixed format, with some notes quotes and spoilers. Best if this is done in such a way as makes the setting navigable.

Beyond that, I tend to get bored of stuff I can already do with an existing game or setting. DnD variants I'm not looking at so much for the setting's sake as for the sake of nifty mechanical things.

Infodump about nations and guilds and stuff is... I don't want to say it's a bad thing. It's useful and in fact necessary. It's just one of those things I would prefer spoilerized, as it's not what I'm looking for in the initial reading.

[Eclipse]

Use double enters two seperate paragraphs. Why do people not understand this? Two enters seperates a paragraph online! One enter between paragraphs makes the entire thing look like a giant block of text with no entrance. It's scary.

or your Gralthin (what are these?)[/quote]
For the record, Gralthin is a made up word just to represent a random homebrewed race.

[Matt Larkin (author)]

Part of it has to do with the mood I'm in, though that's not something the writer can control. For example, if I'm not running any RPGs, or working on my own setting much, I'm less likely to want to read settings.

Like LC mentions, I'm more likely to browse short new ideas than well-established settings for a simple reason: most of the time when I get on this site, it's just in my spare time and I've got five or ten minutes to kill. If it would take me an hour to get through the setting, I probably won't, or at least won't for a while.

Also, if I catch a new setting before it has many responses, I'm more likely to read and respond. If it has 30 replies, I tend to think someone has probably given you good feedback and move on to someone else lacking replies.

Some things the writer can do, which have mostly been mentioned:

Break things up (and do so logically). Use bold or whatever for headings. I'd say use spoilers (if using the forum), but only for stuff that's more optional or complex than main issues.

Put breaks between paragraphs and don't use enormous paragraphs to begin with.

If your setting has gotten large enough it really needs a separate discussion and content thread, I'd prefer to see it as a wiki/website, with a discussion thread, rather than having to link back and forth. But this is just my preference, and many actually like separate threads.

A strong intro can do wonders to get me to keep reading, but it has to be concise. If you setting is large, a guide (like LC's "Start Here") can be a boon. I glance at most new settings, but if something doesn't draw me from Word 1, I probably won't look a second time.

[Lmns Crn]

Here's a thing:

Also, if I catch a new setting before it has many responses, I'm more likely to read and respond. If it has 30 replies, I tend to think someone has probably given you good feedback and move on to someone else lacking replies.

I do this, too, sort of. I do my best to review things with no comments already, because I don't like to see someone post their work and get zero feedback on it.

But I do like to chime in when other people have already had their say, and sometimes I am led to respond to other responses, while I'm responding to the original post information. I think it's pretty awesome when a person's work takes on the kind of life that inspires other, unrelated people to discuss it (or argue about it) amongst themselves, and I think that subconsciously, I am trying to will that into happening.

[Eclipse]

But I do like to chime in when other people have already had their say, and sometimes I am led to respond to other responses, while I'm responding to the original post information. I think it's pretty awesome when a person's work takes on the kind of life that inspires other, unrelated people to discuss it (or argue about it) amongst themselves, and I think that subconsciously, I am trying to will that into happening.

Actually, that's something interesting I've noticed. The dialogue about a setting tends to be two way only - between the creator and the reviewer - very rarely amongst the reviewers. Sometimes a reviewer chimes in on a response the creator made to another reviewer, or quotes another reviewer to reiterate the point, but rarely do reviewers dicuss the setting itself amongst themselves, the way published settings are discussed.

[Epic Meepo]

Like many other members, I'm more likely to review a setting that is just getting started than to review an established setting. Established settings usually have everything set in stone. If there is some specific element that remains undecided, it should probably get its own thread to ask for input.

Also, I will rarely (if ever) review a setting that uses its own unique game mechanics. A new class or race or two are fine, but if I have to learn a new game system just to figure out what's going on, I'd much rather skip to the next world. I'm here to be inspired by other members' creative use of fantasy tropes in a game-related setting, not by the game itself.

Nobody goes around talking about planet Earth and what a fascinating world it is and how it's full of weird creatures and scheming factions and dangerous adventures, and if they did, we'd call them crazy.

I disagree. People who do this are called anthropologists, and they get paid to do just that.

[Eclipse]

I disagree. People who do this are called anthropologists, and they get paid to do just that.

use M&M - it's the closest d20 version of freeform, since you can do pretty much anything[/broken record]. Also, it can be fun to see people use old fantasy tropes, but personally, if you're using old races, I want to see them in a whole new envrionment - give me elves in the wild west, orcs in space*, halflings in the streets of new york, etc. That'll get my attention.

But that's just me.

*Orcs in Space would be a great name for a band.

[Epic Meepo]

I agree with you on mechanics. I prefer the familiar if at all - I'll just skim over a races stat block to get to the information about their culture. That's why I use M&M - it's the closest d20 version of freeform, since you can do pretty much anything.

world[/i]. That happens much less often than tinkering with rules.

*Orcs in Space would be a great name for a band.

Or a Mel Brooks movie.

[Lmns Crn]

Nobody goes around talking about planet Earth and what a fascinating world it is and how it's full of weird creatures and scheming factions and dangerous adventures, and if they did, we'd call them crazy.

It's true. You have got me there!

[beejazz]

The main thing for me is that a poster doesn't waste time explaining lots of rules. Every group I've ever gamed with has generated heaps and heaps of new rules. I've been there, I've done that. I want to see someone make a clever world. That happens much less often than tinkering with rules.

That makes me sad, given my penchant for writing new systems from the ground up.

[Epic Meepo]

That makes me sad, given my penchant for writing new systems from the ground up.

Well, some people obviously disagree with me. Otherwise, all the new system threads wouldn't receive nearly as much traffic as they always seem to get.