Am I really supposed to make a new character concept for every game I try to join?

A lot of these posts are like, "I made a new system in a novel world. Here is a wall of text explaining everything. Tell me what character you want to play in my world, and I'll tell you if you can join." Am I really supposed to go through that much effort for a chance at joining a game? I personally don't even care about what type of character I play. I believe every character concept can be fun if roleplayed well, so if left to my own devices, I'll randomly pick a character that will fill a role the party is lacking. Should I just explain that? Do you have any tips on finding a game?

To be honest Brian, if you are applying to a lot of games then your honest and open approach would serve you well. A DM wants to know that you will put the required effort in if you get accepted so as long as you can sum that up in a polite message most will entertain you as a potential player. If reading the wall of text inspires you you could hint at a potential concept without wasting hours going into depth. Otherwise just keep applying, there are so many more players than DM's.  This thread discusses what makes a good application and might help make things a bit clearer on what you would be expected to supply as a minimum show of interest?

You could always try having a "stock" character and then tweaking it slightly for each game you're interested in. I am fortunate in meeting most players I have GM'd for through other outlets first, and having established the sort of person they are I'm ready to put in the time and effort to entertain them and commit to telling a tale together. If I were to just open up for "applications" to join a game, I'd need a way to find people who will like the same sort of game styles I enjoy.  Asking what kind of character you'd like to play is a good step towards determining that. Likewise I want any person I'd GM for to know a bit about what game I'm preparing to run.  I don't mean mechanically, but thematically.  A "wall of text" world description might be one way I'd do that. As Ziechael says above, anyone who engages and seems likeable enough is probably someone I'd consider, so approaching me with a honest post that still shows you read and were intrigued by my wall of text is good enough to go through to that maybe pile.  If someone came and said "I didn't read your ridiculous novel of background world info, but I like roleplaying and I'll just be whatever" then I'd reject them.  They might be a good fit, but I honestly couldn't tell. That's my approach/reasoning, I hope it helps you decide how you'd like to apply to games in future.  Good luck!  Hope you find a game/GM/group that fits like a glove.

I dunno, man. I don't think you can determine how people will play until you play with them. I always read the DM's background info. It usually barely affects the game. When DM's specify they favor roleplaying to combat, it typically means sessions will consist of roleplaying 5 minutes of combat over 3 hours. I'm not saying players are better. Character backgrounds are typically lip-service that is forgotten after the first session. After that, you're left with a general idea like: "I'm a selfish rogue." Also, no one mentions how on-topic they're gonna be during the game which greatly changes the game's dynamic. I'd rather see trial sessions.

Not sure if you have much GM (therefore roll20 recruiting experience) under your belt, but you're quite accurate on the small amount of combat that usually comes with GMs who say they prefer non combat. But you can definitely get a feel for players by their written word and short interviews.  Of course actual game play can override those first impressions. As for having a char prepped, it depends. When I recruit I ask what people want to play as, it rarely affects my decision, I look more to if they seem eager and humble.  I do see a lot of GMs ask for more in depth info though...  Anothert thing you can do, is make sure you read the GMs instructions when applying, sometimes they hide obvious things to screen people. 

I think that part of the problem is that, especially when it comes to the more popular games, there is a much greater demand then the number of available GMs

YMMV of course. I'm running a game of Dungeon World on Roll20 at the moment. &nbsp;Part of the background story is that there's a lack of sunlight, which has led to us using Roll20s dynamic lighting, and making light a big part of the game and darkness a very real danger. &nbsp;It's been a continuing obstacle, and the encroaching dark is mirrored in the slow inevitable collapse of the social order as time goes on and the crisis deepens. So one player decided to play a cleric and as his background he said that there's been this increasing divide between the king's loyalists and the clerical orders. &nbsp;The king blames the gods for the darkness. &nbsp;This seed in his backstory has spun out tales of the religious faction usurping a town, the player staging a "miracle" in order to reignite the faiths in the capital city (leading to riots) and a three way conspiracy to assassinate the king and take the throne. Another player has taken that "Selfish rogue" persona and run with it right up until one of the other characters stood up for him when he had done something wrong. &nbsp;Nobody had ever fought his corner before, and it led to him being able to open up a little more, forge real bonds with the others, and show a capacity for self-sacrifice. &nbsp;He's still a selfish piece of work sometimes, but he's slowly becoming a better person because of the others. And sure, there's groups who stumble through combat after combat for the XP alone, but conflict is at the heart of many stories. When one of the party sacrificed himself in combat we stopped and ran a scene where death came for him, and offered a bargain. He'd be brought back to life, but at the cost of a binding agreement to ensure the sun stone they were after never made it to the elven forest. There was a palpable silence around the VTT as all the other players came to the realisation that his honour wouldn't let him agree to it. Characters took turns to mumble words of respect over his hastily dug grave before we pressed on. Many months later they still mention him around the camp fire sometimes. &nbsp;The combat was fast and brutal (I love the powered-by-apocalypse rules for that simplicity of narrative combat), the outcome more about the RP. I can heartily recommend watching Adam Kobel's Roll20 Presents.... <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7GSTudpZx8" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7GSTudpZx8</a> I guess I'm trying to convey that Roll20 can accommodate most stories and play styles and accordingly, if you search around, I think you'll find them. &nbsp;First session's always a trial, whether explicit or not, I think...

Let me give you some insight from the recruiter's (DM/GM) point of view. Depending on the system, you will get a large amount of players interested in joining your game. You will have to sort out who will get in and who will not. What's the best way to do it? Give them a wall of text about your world and have them create a character concept! Jokes side, the amount of effort you put in applying will translate most often into the effort you put in showing up into the game. If you want to join games with just a "I would like to join. Period." then the recruiter will not be very happy about it. From your point of view what they hand over might be a wall of text, but from their point of view it's their own creation they would like people to read and accept it. Although a little rough, this guy in reddit has covered nicely what you have to do to join a game <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Roll20/comments/42iutd/th" rel="nofollow">https://www.reddit.com/r/Roll20/comments/42iutd/th</a>...

Brian M said: A lot of these posts are like, "I made a new system in a novel world. Here is a wall of text explaining everything. Tell me what character you want to play in my world, and I'll tell you if you can join." Am I really supposed to go through that much effort for a chance at joining a game? I personally don't even care about what type of character I play. I believe every character concept can be fun if roleplayed well, so if left to my own devices, I'll randomly pick a character that will fill a role the party is lacking. Should I just explain that? Do you have any tips on finding a game? You might be happiest looking for games where the GM supplies pre-generated characters. &nbsp;One-shot games are often your best chance for getting to play with no fuss, no muss.&nbsp;

Brian M said: I'd rather see trial sessions. This is why good GMs speak to you before the game. If they don't, and pick you based on character only, the game's likelihood of persisting is incredibly unlikely. Look for games with either an interview process, or with pre-gens. If you don't like to read settings, can't come up with basic ideas, and don't want to write a character to play in a game, then the minimum amount of work would be to find a GM who's running APs with pregens so you don't have to do any of that. Actually, reading back the rest of that post: Stop playing with bad players and GMs. If you're roleplaying combat for 3 hours, then find a different game. If you find that backgrounds are irrelevant, stop playing Adventure Paths, or with GMs looking to tell their story, instead of yours. If you can't get players to stay in-character, or who abandon their character as fast as possible to play a caricature, find new players. That seems... really obvious to me.

With a range of great ideas from both sides of the coin I'm going to go ahead and close this thread. You'll find your niche Brian, I'm sure, and once you have that golden group just don't ever let it go ;) As for the future, take a look at the thread I linked, heed the advice of your peers and tailor it to suit your individual aims and the world is your shellfish of choice!