What exactly do people look for in a player?

Hey folks. I've played D&D for a number of years and have a lot of experience at this point with both Pathfinder and 5e. I've been on roll20 for close to a year now I believe and i'm playing in one game and DMing two others. The games i'm DMing have been going on a number of months at this point and everyone is having a good time. I like to DM, but I also like to just relax and be a player sometimes, but I find it is almost impossible to get accepted into a game on Roll20 but i'm clueless as to why this is. I always fill out the apps as they are posted, i've tried writing them in character, i've tried writing them like technical documents, i've tried using humor, i've tried just being straight, it seems like regardless of the approach most DMs seem to skip over any submissions I make without a word and i'm just curious as to why. I'll even include what little world information they provide in their posting into the character's background story. Nothing seems to matter. When I read through the apps they did select, it looks as if they were just chosen completely at random. Personally, as a DM, I look for people who seem creative, seem fun or friendly, who submit a character that would help balance out a party, and seem mature and not childish in the way they portray themselves. I usually submit apps to games under the same general idea and I always check to see what the party already has and what it still needs to help balance out the party, and often even submit a couple of character possibilities. So I was just wondering if some people have really strange, off the wall methods for selecting players or if more people run into this sort of thing where they aren't accepted to a lot of games they app into.

I posted in the other thread, but I aggregate for my games. It's not enough that you post a concept, and be willing to work with me, but you have to be able to deal with the community that you're going to be invited into. If you're offensive, or perhaps, overly serious, or have a rude tone, I have several people who are willing to straight up tell me they will not get along with, or feel like there will be a clash at the table with this player. I also look for players who are always willing to work with me, and who don't try to defend every position and choice they make on a character. If I voice concern over X, you better not double down on X, but instead try to find a way that we can either make it work, or be willing to get rid of it. A fine example comes to mind that I made a helpful suggestion to not play monks in a Pathfinder game, having provided several other reasonable options. A player posted his monk concept, and when I suggested to use one of the other classes, he doubled down on monk, and provided me with an infinite attack super-monster. I outright denied the player on the spot. His response was "I didn't want to play anyway, you [removed]." Entitlement is always bad, I find. That said: I don't recruit for the most common games anymore. I don't play Pathfinder, I don't play D&D, I don't play OSR, I don't play Dungeon World, I don't play D&D derivatives. I play games like Exalted, Shadowrun, L5R, World of Darkness at this point. Some of which invite players to play less mature, or gross concepts initially, and I've found that players tend to like to either push boundaries (14 year old with all of the sex charms in Exalted), or take no risks whatsoever (Generic Street Samurai 101 in Cyberpunk) in these games. As a result, a lot of players end up never registering on my radar - players who intrigue me are more likely to pass initial applications and get an interview than someone who decides to be yet another breaker of chains, or just another wheelchair decker.

I call up my inner kindergarten teacher when I post games, which is not too often as my players are mostly pretty stable. I tend to put "Send me an email at link ." as the first sentence in the listing. All of the people who PM me and/or just post in the forum get "Send me an email at link ." as the only reply. If they can't follow the simple directions in the ad, I know I will have problems down the road with them. I have run games semi-continuously since 1977, one game has been running for 24 years, ported to Roll 20 almost three years ago. I also use the "Mature Content" tag on all of my continuing games. There is virtually no mature content in reality, what I am looking for is mature behavior which is often lacking in even some people in their forties. I also listen to my players, if they have a problem with a new player I will speak to the player and give them the thumb if the behavior is not resolved.

Some DM will do first come first serve. Others will want only players with verified hours on the table. Some will accept one or two new players while others will accept anyone Use mythweavers to build a viewable character sheet so the DM can see that you really put effort into creating your character.  I myself am keen on this.  If I see that your able to at least build a character without me having to tell you what's missing that's a big bonus in my book. Write a good character backstory Offer to play any role Present more then one character concept, in a variety of roles Other then that don't build a bad reputation for yourself.  I actually keep track of bad DMs and Players I wish to avoid do to them playing in a cheesy manor, very rude, or are just insufferable twits. Don't be a rule lawyer.   Other DMs I've meet after having our games, have actually asked me to join future campaigns.  Example I just recieved an invite from a gamemaster I played with year before last to join a strahd 5e game. I don't just read, i actually skype my players to actually interview them to see what their attitude is like.

I look for players with a pulse - Ok a DEDICATED pulse. So often players say they will commit to a game and then after a few session they will stop communication. Even in my BEST games where everything seems to be clicking and every player swears on a stack of bibles that they are having a good time about 1/2 of my players drop in the first 5 sessions of a campaign or mini campaign. Even my one shots have only had more than 50% attendance once. People have created interesting characters ahead of time. They get along well in play. They jump through all the hoops.  They seem to enjoy themselves...  then they Just...Stop...Coming.... These people are nice, good people. I doubt they would ever be this rude in real life. But online it is easy to forget and be rude. as a GM I communicate and let people know if  cannot attend well ahead of time. Then again I don't play D&D so I have to scrounge for players....

Michael B. said: Then again I don't play D&D so I have to scrounge for players.... First of all, ^this^. But I do OCCASIONALLY play D&D so I guess I have something to add. When I get a page worth of applications, it's honestly pretty rare that I even read the full applications before my "initial weeding process". Overall there's a few stages: 1: Initial Weeding Process. If there's any indication that a player and I won't get along (or they won't get along with any established players), drop 'em. If they can't spell or understand words above high school level education, drop 'em. If they're professing to be some kind of genius and/or stepping on my toes as the GM before the game even begins, drop 'em. Wheat from the chaff yo. Wheat from the chaff. 2: Psychological Player Profiling. Once I've gotten rid of anyone that's an obvious detriment (whatever that means for an individual GM), I start looking at applications. If there are too many people saying "I want to experience the stoooory!" then drop the ones with the shortest backstory. If there are too many people saying "I want to kill everything!" then drop the ones that are just too minmaxed. Just keep dropping them until you get to the few who balance out the game as players, not as PCs. 3: Other. As far as I'm concerned, any mechanical balance is completely irrelevant. If something is obviously, alarmingly wrong, you may not have done step 2 correctly. Assuming you have generally reasonable people in your game at this point, they'll usually work out any perceived mechanical imbalances with each other or they'll hire an NPC cleric. Whatever. I think the most important takeaway is that every GM - and subsequently every campaign they may decide to run - is different. Tailoring your application is always a good idea, but maybe it's a matter of knowing WHAT to tailor, and that's pretty difficult to do honestly.

New to Roll20, so very limited perspective. My observations so far: Applying for games as a new player feels like throwing in at a raffle at best, and applying for extremely competitive jobs with no experience or references at worst. It's completely reasonable for GMs to be as selective as possible with new players, but the app process here feels like it's probably underwhelming on both sides. Any of us who have GM'd, know the pain of bringing "the wrong player(s)" into a group, and how it can kill a campaign before it even begins. Even great players with different ideas of how RP should be played can turn out to be frustratingly incompatible with the wrong group dynamic or setting. I have no doubt that eventually, I will apply at the right time with the right game and be accepted into groups for some amazing games, but for as active as the community seems to be - it feels like accessibility is particularly cumbersome for new joiners. It would be nice to have a communal area on the forums where we could discuss active games, character ideas, homebrew, etc. in an informal open-topic setting; meet like-minds on the same site that connects us to play (get to know people, then set up the games). As of now, the forum layout seems to actively prohibit that style of community from forming, which seems quite odd and frankly like a massive missed opportunity.  Either way, still less logistics involved than playing in person, which is a step in the right direction for me! Best we can do is keep the chin up and keep rolling out apps. The right games are sure to come along eventually.

1. Common Sense. No Billy, no one wants to hear you sexual innuendos. Stop trying to get into a sex roleplay. And god damn it Billy, get those Doritos off your mic. 2. Humility. You are not the main character. No one is the main character. You are ants, act like one. 3. Respect. The GM used his precious time to get you guys together, don't miss sessions and stay attentive to what he says. Your other players are not NPCs to exploit, treat them as you would like to be treated by them. 4. Ability to read between the lines. Laugh and cry with your peers, follow the mood. Don't make fart jokes when attending Sir MacGuffin's funeral. 5. Communication. A message a day fuels the GM's willingness to keep the game going. Silence make the GM a sad panda. I play GM in a round robin way with over 100 people IRL at my Call of Cthulhu monthly conventions, never I have had a problem with the players because everyone has agreed to the above... and maybe because they are Japanese and they have a completely different upbringing than the rest of the world, but I digress. I am afraid these are qualities are rare online because they do not reward you if you are the only one to have them. Educating people is harder than getting the infrastructure of a game together. Allow me to bring you an example as following: If you have played any online game where communication via mic with the players is possible, you would have noticed a high tendency of background noise that is erasable with minimal effort from the offender. I brought Billy's Doritos in the the italic text above. An adult with common sense would think to themselves, and say "Hmm, maybe my chewing is causing trouble to the other guys, I should mute my mic or stop eating". However someone with no common sense will keep at it. He will eat Doritos, he will burp, he will fart, he will talk on the phone, he will get into a quarrel with his mother for living in a basement. A good player always thinks to himself about his actions and considers whether they are disruptive to the other players and the GM. A good player knows he is standing out too much and should give more spotlight to the others. A good player does not undermine every single action the GM does, instead he helps the GM. A good player knows when it is time to laugh and when to start acting serious. A good player always responds to his GM's notifications. And so on and so forth. This in turn means that the GM should also do the same things and we could start an entire thread on *what makes a good GM*, however that is best left for another day.

In a player, I'm really looking for: Someone who is dedicated to the group .  This isn't to say you can't miss a game, but if you begin missing every game then it's an issue. Someone who is on time for our sessions.  Being late here or there is fine, but generally be early or on time. Someone who communicates with me.  Missing a session?  Running late?  Cool!  Just let me know! Someone who pays attention!   Roll20 is online, meaning you could be alt-tabbed watching Netflix -- don't.  Pay attention to the game! Someone who is 'fluid and flexible.'  I look for people who are flexible and can roll with whatever punches come your way, in-game or out.  If I rule that you can't do what you want to do, suck it up and drive on.  Figure out a different way to do it.  Don't argue and fight because you didn't get your way.  Not only is that disruptive to the group and a waste of time, but it just shows you're too childish to play with our group. Someone who can laugh!  This is a game, right?  We're here to have a good time, so laugh!  Enjoy the game and each others company.  Something happen you don't really like?  Suck it up and laugh it off.  If it's a real problem talk to me after the game. Someone who is honest.  You want to cheat?  Fine, but do it elsewhere.  Someone who is a team player.  I need you to be OK with not always being in the spotlight.  You'll get your turn.  Give others their turn too. Role Players vs Roll Players.  I want role players.  If you're here to crunch numbers and power game and min-max, then my group isn't for you.  I like bards, I like characters that don't always make sense, or characters that are focused on social aspects rather than pure combat.  I also like players that role play their characters, especially in speech.  If I ask you to make a diplomacy check, don't just roll a dice.  Give a diplomatic speech!  Get into the game!  So if you're dedicated, you show up on time, you pay attention, and you're generally a pleasant person who is enjoyable to be around (or at least just not a dick) and you enjoy role playing, then you'll do well.  If you're a rules lawyer, you want to argue with the DM during the game, you're alt tabbed playing DOTA2, or you are only interested in min-maxing your character to be able to easily defeat everything I throw at you, etc., then you're not going to be a good fit and you should probably play WoW or something similar. And frankly I think most people can agree with me on the above.  I don't think this is too much to ask for.

This is really a great topic.  I laughed out loud as I read the first part of Brother Sharp's post.  There is a lot of truth there.  DM Tim also has great points.  The one that really resonates with me is the fact that this is a game so the players (and the GM?) should be able to laugh!  I think that the original topic had more to do with *why* applications might be dropped, but there is a lot of good insight and common sense here as to what it is to be both a good player as well as a good GM - and it really does go both ways.  I find that flexibility is key on both the players' side and the GMs'.  While GMs appreciate players that will roll with the other players and the GMs leading, players also highly value GMs who tend to weave their player's styles into the game.  I personally think that is a hallmark of a great GM - being able to see the potential in a player, no matter what style he/she has, and use that to motivate the player to get in to the game and to engage and to cooperate with the other players.  Unless a player is being a total jerk, there is usually a way to be able to find out what motivates them the most and use it to encourage good role play.  GMs also often find creative ways to deal with disruption through the story arc and then gradually reincorporate the erstwhile disruptive player back into the game in a more focused and less unruly way.  In city adventures, NPC guards and other peace-keeping enforcer-types are a boon.  A disruptive player can suddenly find himself/herself locked in a cell and separated from the rest of the party for a 'time-out' and then the GM can give that player an interesting opportunity to role play again by introducing a possible opportunity for escape, or further intrigue, etc, using the attention that the disruptive player tends to crave to focus his/her attention constructively back into the game.  I find that players who don't respond to such opportunities for redemption tend to rule themselves out, and other players, when given sufficient motivation and opportunity can develop into team-players, and in often surprisingly colorful ways end up contributing to the group and overall campaign.   Kudos to DM Sha, DM Tim and Brother Sharp for your observations! It is really nice to meet some like-minded gamers! Cheers, MP