Player / GM rating/ranking system

Hello, Basic idea: 1) After each played session allow players to rate 1.1) Each other 1.2) Rate the GM 2) After each played session, allow the GM to rate the players The "vote" can be called by GM or better should be automatically sent to the e-mails of all the participated players of the session (for the cases when the sessions are in the evenings and players are not going to bother to fill in the evaluation). What for: 1) For GMs to learn more about the players, when looking for players for the campaign. Information left by another GM about a player should be visible for other GMs. 2) For players to learn more about the GM, when looking for a campaign to join. Information left by a player about a GM should be visible for other players. ============= Option 1. Other players/GMs 1.1) leave a comment about other player/GM 1.2) could +1 or -1 or thumbs up/thumbs down a comment left by other GM/player or maybe 1.3) pick a certain quality/category from advantages or disadvantages from the Roll20 made list: i.e. Goes off-topic Makes noises (burps, dishes, farts, whateveR) Bad microphone (low quality sound) Heavy accent Immature Does not read rules Rules lawyer Cheater Easy-going Ragequitter Leaves without warning etc ============= ============= Option 2. It could be something simple as: Did you like to play with this player? Yes/ No Did you like to play with this GM? Yes / No And then the GM/player could see that .. 2/8 (25%) GMs/players didn't like playing with this player/GM. ============= The GM/players should be able to leave information regarding the player/GM for other players/GMs to use. Basically, as a GM i would like to warn other GMs out there that certain player can a) skip the session without warning or b) constantly keep mic on and make noises or c) is rude/impolite to other players d) misbehaves etc or quits, etc. I want other GMs to know that this player is capable of those things and I want to learn of other GM's experiences about the player that is now enlisting into my campaign, etc. On the other side, as a player, I would like to see what the other players think about the GM that is currently running a campaign. The voting/rating could be anonymous, or it could be open. Either way, there should be some system to point out the positive or negative quality of the player. Regards!

They did this on neverwinter nights connections for years and it was a mess of sockpuppets and fake accounts of Ego driven DMs, claiming their games were best. How they were number 1, holding fake sessions nightly for the same groups that was all them. Voting how it was epic storyline. Then they'd Be "Rid" of all the losers, but with Rep Established then go out and recruit. Puffing up their own games, and destroying other games by logging in to other games, starting trouble, and he said she said kind of arguments on the forums later about who was more of a propblem, the player or the GM. Then new fake accounts. Anyone who was there back then recalls this. What does it gain? IF IT WORKS, you can get an idea of who wants to play who is gonna be fun. Yet, I say that's already happening, it just takes longer, without a formal system. I'm not saying the idea is bad. It's just that what do you do with people rated unworkable. Some styles will be unworkable for some, yet workable for others. As roleplayers we're already sort of slid to the side of the gutter, and stepped on. In the larger sense, Who decides what is legal and who is a criminal? It varies by the powers in charge. and here nobody is in charge. The community is supposed to be happy, helpful, and hopeful, all the time, 24/7, yet it doesn't work out like that in all cases. But I think it would make some problems worse or create other ones that will be difficult. It puts a number on people, to be judged. I am not saying don't have rules, don't have restrictions. I have a lot of restrictions for players, and behavior, etc. but I do not generally share that with other people whom those things might not bother. I am loathe to agree with something that smacks of "We don't want him there, he's not cool enough. he's not strong enough tall enough, she's not pretty enough, he's too fat, she's too smart." High School. no thanks. We're all gamers. Some more hard core than others. But ranking? I vote no. That does not make it invalid as an idea or system. It needs to be discussed. If there is a solution, heck yeah. But it's complicated by the fact that it's all internet nobody knows anyone and luckily it seems to this point, not many have taken advantage of that to cause trouble.

I believe that a system which allows you to see what other players/GMs someone else gamed with before might help, it might help as long as you can privately ask those players/GMs about the player. But then again, if someone is interested enough to do that than he is interested enough to chat with the guy for 1-2 hours and figure that stuff out. As far as rating system go, they are useless. It's not like we are all playing the same game here or even similar games. A GM might be running a 4e campaign and get a 5/5 rating on it, that still doesn't mean he will be a good Dark heresy DM. A player might are a GM 1/5 because he doesn't enjoy the system, yet he might be a terrific GM. Right now I run a 2e homebrew campaign and ran some 2e homebrew one-time games, from the feedback I gather I understand that the player are more than pleased with the games. Yet I am pretty sure that 90% of the people here would dislike the game, and I believe that is true for most games here. Even if you were to rate by system this would still remain a problem, because things such as story, pace and scope for a campaign can vary greatly even if you are using the same "core rules". The best method for player selection is to talk with them and/or ask them to submit some form of "application", no system can automate that process and if you try to do so it might result in more harm than good.

George that is all good points. It's not like we are all playing the same game here or even similar games. I missed that and you are on target. I didn't even think that way. Right now I run a 2e homebrew campaign also. and some would like it, many would not. Just like I can't stand superhero games, or games with vampires. not my taste. On my old server I wanted people that would put energy into it, more than roll a PC and showe up. so after running it a year I asked people to give me a one page history, background and hooks, all of it. that screened out those who weren't motivated. but those who did, man they were exactly the people I wanted, always. People who took the historical docs i had and tied it in, prophecies lists were used to borrow locations and events. my work generated theirs and back until it was some epic good stuff. A rating system won't do that. Right on target.

Been discussed before. Not likely going to happen.

James and George you all have valid points. Maybe I should have phrased my suggestion differently. I do not want to make charts with top players/gms - no. My main problem is people leaving halfway through, in the middle of the campaign, or picking real-life things over the game, etc. I want to protect myself, yes, and my players, too. Leaving/quitting is usually revealed just couple of days before the session thus freezing/pausing the campaign to find a replacement and then the story is repeated again. I believe that seeing some track or history of player's previous games or sessions could allow us make more informed decisions when inviting/ picking over one or the other player. Players can tell you different things to your face, but seeing their track record or being able to talk to their other GMs would help a bit. My current solution was to cut the party size, thus removing the need to find additional players and wait for replacements to show up. James, I have used your method - asking people to invest their time to write session summaries or write plots/stories developing their characters outside of the sessions stuff, but.. just one of them did. At this point I am lost, yes I want that particular player in the campaign and all following hooks and whatnot, but what do i do with the other players? Initially, when inviting people, I was basing my decision on the applications and amount of questions answered and what and how players were responding, but it still left me with more quitters than i personally was prepared for. Thank you for your thoughts and opinions!

run with what you got, whoever drops replace them. We are all going through it. the cool thing is, you are still getting applicants. Many of the games I start nobody applies for a month, so i kill the concept and start fresh. I agree if we could share attendance records that might help, but I have been the victim of a bad DM who did all sorts of things weird, I quit his game, and he smeared me to the community to the point of years later, people in my games told me, oh I am surprised at how fun this is, I was told you were X some years ago.. by that guy. that's my concern, and with ratings it gets all competetive. The idea and need is there, I'm just not sure how to work it without it making things worse.