📢 Linking game details and the tavern

Most new users will find games from the "Join a game" link. That's what the site promotes - it pushes people down that route from the homepage and the My Games page.

Many of the games listed aren't really open - they've just not been closed.

For the real open games, best practice is to visit the Games Tavern or PM the GM. Good adverts include these links in the description, but those links can be easy to miss in favour of the big "Apply to Game" button.

Objectives

1. Automate some of the best practice as shown by @qralloq in his game creation video.
2. Help new users follow the process for applying to games
3. Not change too much for existing users.

Changes

1. Closed by default

Make it so that games are Closed for recruitment by default. If opening a game for recruitment is an active decision (and it usually is) then it allows GMs to get their game details ready before applications come in, and reduces the number of spuriously open games.

2. Allow GMs to link the game to the tavern thread



I'm restricting it to just the Games Tavern. I don't want people being pushed out to any old thread. I did think about having a button to just create the thread - but I just know people will click it to see what it does, and we'd get a lot of junk in the Gamers Tavern.

3. Encourage application through the tavern

If there's a linked tavern thread, then we change the application section for open games by making the Games Taven and PM links larger, and shrinking the "Apply to Game" button to a link-button.



4. The tavern thread

If a tavern thread is linked to a game then we enrich the first page of the tavern thread with the game description, tags (not user-defined tags yet), and a link back to the game details.

---

I think these changes make it easier to properly advertise a game, reduces the number of spuriously open games, and makes the experience of finding a game less frustrating for new users.

Number 3 is b-e-a-youtiful. I think it will make things easier, more streamlined and less confusing. Game tavern button? ❤️ Send PM to GM button? ❤️✖️🔟

I wonder how many existing users use the Join a Game. And how many of them would object to changes.
This page does not appear to work at all well. I think it needs a complete overhaul and we should not let trying to avoid change get in the way.

Can also prevent the site from sending emails when a user creates a game. Especially if it not set as Open. People may not be happy with their Private games being advertised to everyone.

When the user goes to set the game as Open, they should be prompted as to whether they want an advert email to be sent, and also possibly whether they want it to be listed on the front page.

We should respect the users' Privacy setting.

Judging from myself, they either do it by accident or when the want a preview of what is coming. E.g. me checking out Len's upcoming game. Can you elaborate on your last sentence? I don't quite understand it.

Does the page work the way you want it to?
Would it disrupt your workflow if the page changed the way it works?
Should we be careful about making changes to that page?

Which page?

Join a Game

I think it fulfils a use case, specifically "what games are open to new players like me?" - it just doesn't fulfil it very well at the moment because it dumps the user on a game page which probably isn't recruiting and wouldn't accept a new player without some sort of interaction first anyway.

I agree that the "join a game" page could/should be improved (and perhaps we could open a new thread for that).

But it tells people the games which are open for recruitment and have active GMs. It has the name of the game and the system. I think it should be made prettier (as it's one of the first things users see) and it could have direct links to the Tavern thread too (if this feature gets blessed).

After being an idiot on Discord and not understanding for way too long, I now approve of this

Given that two people interpreted my "Introductions" post in ways that I didn't intend, I think perhaps the blame lies in my powers of communication.

From now on I shall communicate only in emoji and screenshots.

🍄🏗🎷🎷🎷

It's early and I'm only on my first cup of coffee. I was reading your post while my daughter was arguing with my wife about the significance of the first vs second vs third bell at school. It's very likely I was not reading with full comprehension :P

---

ANYWAY, I'd like to share an opinion that could cause a fair amount more work: I think the "Join a Game" page should not be on the site at all.

No one (or very few people) joins games that way. If I were a DM and got a random application from someone who I didn't know, my response would waver between "DM them" (which an applicant should do first out of courtesy anyway), and "Ignore it outright." I'm not saying we can't have a repository of currently running games. Perhaps we can add a toggle that shows "Games open to applications only" or something along those lines so users can still pursue that avenue, but I think "Join a Game" as a separate page draws folks away from the Games Tavern as a primary entry into a game.

When I first got into PbP, I found that page and started DMing people who had games that seemed interesting. I think I only got one or two DMs back out of the dozen or so I sent out, and those two didn't seem interesting in some random newbie hopping into their game using the backdoor.

Agreed. I always have some form of "Interact with the recruitment thread before requesting to join" clause on my game's detail page. I don't much like the PM system we have here, and don't want to be saddled with the responsibility of initiating the dialogue with every random who RTJs.

But, removing a page might be a bridge too far.

Yes. And this functionality is a recognition of these facts. It doesn't remove the Games Tavern. It celebrates it and pushes users towards it.

I totally approve of all of this. Putting a thread number in the Games Tavern is way safer than allowing a URL, and was my thought, too.

As to the functionality of Join A Game, as we spiff it up, get GMs to alter their settings a little, we can change the culture to use it more, and push new users through that funnel. At the moment, as Adam said in his intro, its a weird place to look for a game, because they're not really games open to recruitment at all. It's a neglected space that GMs don't pay any mind to.

This really fixes it, I think.

I should also mention the thread id only works if the game's GM created the games tavern thread. Otherwise, any random person could create a game and just hijack a games tavern thread.

Getting caught up. I'm not proficient enough with the site in some ways to have an opinion on some of these things... I don't even know where to go to see this Join a Game page. I know it was something I stumbled across when I started to dive in a little, but it certainly isn't a way that I personally find games. I've actually always found it kind of rude if I'm running a game and a RTJ suddenly arrives out of the blue with no PM in front of it.

I also think this:

Might be confusing to new members. Apply in the Games Tavern vs. Apply to Game... huh? What's the difference?

I'd vote for treating that Join a Game page as a Search for Games page instead. Lots of cool filtering, the ability to PM the GM (but not apply to the game cold), etc.

I haven't wrapped my head around what you're thinking of doing with the Tavern, maybe because I've always seen the GT as a mishmash of things -- interest checks, recruitment, looking for game, advice, templates, etc.

Sorry if this isn't helpful. I still haven't fully grokked some of the underlying structure of the site, and that's impeding my ability to make sense of some what's being proposed.

Header bar; games>all games>join a game.

It's pretty much what you want it to be, a search games page with filtering. The point here is to have the game details point the user to apply through the linked tavern thread or contact the GM via a PM. The link at the bottom (plain apply to game) could be used from pre-generated groups that use GP to play, since the GM needs only to invite them alone. I hope I made some sense.

Arr, I do too - although the rudeness is rarely intentional, the site leads people down that path. That's why I'm trying to encourage people into the tavern or using a PM.
I agree that it's confusing, but I don't want to remove any existing functionality (yet). I'll just de-emphasise it for now. Different words are possible if anybody has any ideas - "Rudely attempt to barge into game"?

I think the usual route will be the GM inviting the player (rather than Apply to Game). But there might be reasons to keep that button for Games Tavern linked games (e.g. until recently there was a bug that meant certain players couldn't be invited to games, they had to apply).

I do like having the default be that GMs must Invite players. That forces some form of interaction to happen at the start.
Chatting about it and then not Inviting a player feels, somehow, less rude than rejecting a player's RtJ (Request to Join). Especially since there is no way attach an explanatory note to the rejection. The conversation is important.
I recall a bug where they players names did not auto-fill in the dropdown list. But that just meant the GM had to copy/paste them, which is what I do anyway. Too many times there is a player with a similar-starting name and it autofills that one by mistake without the user noticing.

The 'Closed by Default' policy also means the GM needs to handle the Invite. They can Open it if they have to accept RtJs. This is a culture shift, though, and if GMs assume they have to Open a game as part of the recruitment, then players will assume they can not talk about being Invited to Closed game, and we will need a new mechanism aside from Closed by Default.

The previous bug meant you couldn’t invite anyone called "Adam" even if you copy/paste it. Although some might have said it wasn’t a bug, but a feature.

Who would want to invite someone called Adam? ;-/

That is a strange one. Was it rejecting real names? Surely it was not a length issue?

Maybe calling it "Request Forum Access" would make it seem less like "This is how I apply" and more like "Okay, now I got accepted, I have to get access to the forum"

I'm sure there's better phrasings but this is the first that came to mind

You had to select a name from the dropdown and for some shorter names, the name wouldn't appear on the dropdown if there were too many names that included the full name, was the problem I think

Yes. That's it and it didn't prioritize exact matches, so if your name wasn't on the list then you couldn't be invited.

There were a few of us who couldn't be invited to games.

Urgh.
Having an active community that reports and fixes such bug is such an important part of making this work.

Thank you so much, Adam.
(I merely dabble, leave me out of it.)

The Bowl of Greens Quoth:
I mentioned in Discord today that I'd voice some related concerns / issues once things had died down. One of them relates to what a game -is- on GP... and to Bowl's comment above. Virtually anyone coming from elsewhere has no idea of the difference between a game and a game forum. I know it took me a minute to grok. So talking about applying and getting access to the game, and then the game forum, is I believe a recipe for further confusion from new users.

This is not to say I think it should stay the way it is, just that if I were King I'd have the Game be be the object / thing we all reference and talk about and apply to, and the forums just happen to be the play area -- which I would have visible on the game's home page. But now I'm getting far enough afield that all of what I'm talking about is probably better addressed in V2.

Last unhelpful note: there's far too much going on in the Games Tavern, which is one of the things Aironfabio was trying to say on Discord today. Rather than Games on Offer | Looking for GM | Interest Check type division of threads, all of that and more is in the one spot. The fact that's it's all one stew complicates, I think, the topic this thread is actually about -- finding games to play in.

I think a conversation that we've tried to have is what should the game system look like. We can manage the current process with small tweaks, but the big one mile high stuff is hard to grok.

I think Adam and I have a sort of shared vision (this thread is a part of that), but without building the whole thing to demonstrate it, and the huge data clean up that goes along with it, and then see what isn't working and adjust, it is going to be difficult to convince anyone.

Agreed. Can the page be built alongside the current one(s) without that 'data cleanup'? That way we can test it while not breaking anything.

The data cleanup should be done anyway. Mostly it's poking the GMs of all "Open" games to verify that they're open, or to use some Admin db-level magic to close all of them (that are older than say, a month), then prompt the GMs and have them choose to open them if they truly want them open.

Ah. That sort of 'data cleanup', not in the database. User facing stuff should not disrupt anything.
Then running the new page alongside the old page sounds like the way to go.

Not to mention that as a developer it’s terrifying working without a safety net. I’ve asked @Keleth how difficult it will be to run the new code on a different url (but with the same db) before release - like a preview. VagueGM discussed this before, but it was thought to be too difficult for v2- but for v1 and v1.01…? Dunno. It might be possible. Cross your fingers and make righteous offerings to our lord and most beneficent saviour, Keleth.

I don't even know what difference you're talking about. Applying and getting access to the game is the same as getting access to the game forums, isn't it?
Subdividing the Tavern further would only make it more annoying to navigate, for me personally at least. Maybe GP could profit from having "post flairs" like on some subreddits. In the Tavern, you could flair your thread with one of these [Games on Offer | Looking for GM | Interest Check], in game forums, you could flair threads as [IC | OOC | Reference] or something.

I dunno, they were your words I was quoting! ;)

Maybe there's something around being granted access to the game, but the forum threads themselves can have additional security, yeah? Regardless, ignore it.

I really think the dog's breakfast in the Games Tavern is an impediment to new users finding games to join, or finding where to post their own games. Especially since lately I seem to be unable to find that "Find a Game" link as well. It's personal preference to a degree... but don't power users like you, bowl (and me) just use 'All Latest Posts' anyway -- which surfaces stuff from every corner of the site? (Meaning it wouldn't be more annoying to navigate, as you aren't really navigating it, are you?)

Yea, I'm not navigating it often, only if I'm looking for a specific link. Maybe it wouldn't be more difficult but the whole forums are organized so confusingly, I can never find a specific thread I'm looking for in the subforums 😅 So I'm just worried that making even more subforums would be complicated. And to be honest, I like the games tavern as it is. Formalizing everything too much might make the site feel cold. If it is confusing to new users, then it does warrant change, though.
I see. I thought you were talking about some difference that the site has. Maybe just Request Access then. To me, it's pretty clear but I'm not a new user. And a lot of things that I've seen other people say they were confused by when they joined the site were immediately clear to me.
Maybe the fact that I never used another pbp site helped as I didn't come in with any other notions 😄 Anyway, it was just my first suggestion to make a clear distinction that this is not a "With this I apply to the game" button but just an "Okay, I'm in. Let's get access to the actual game" button. I'm sure we can come up with something better

Maybe it could have a little popup, like the Retiring a Game button does. When you click it, it asks you if you have contacted the GM through PM or forum and tells you to do that and then you have to confirm the application.

We do that manually already. Having a defined feature for how to do it might help, even if only with standardisation and searching.

So long as they are not a fixed set of 'flair' tags that the user can not change.

Me too.

But this is a standard forum problem everywhere. The way they are formed is organic and, while it might make sense when a subforum is being formed, does not follow a logical pattern.

That does sound like a different issue. One that we can maybe look at. We can reorder the structure of these forums and subforums, but that can be very disruptive. Maybe save it for v2?

I don't think the question of access permissions has come up as a problem.

The fact that people are left on the Game Details page instead of the Forum page might be. The fact that they can not find the Forum page (at all before the are Accepted, and they not with ease) contributes to this confusion.

Flairs would be more visible and uniform, which I think would be neat.

If possible, ideally I'd like fixed tags so that they stay the same for everyone, but then also the option to make a custom tag.

Just speaking my ideal here. I have no idea how complicated those things actually are

Would this not depend on the GM's policies? I can't see why, but I had it intimated to me that some GMs don't engage first, they just take the first applicants.

I have had fairly good results with stating on the Game Details page that people must 'talk to us first'.
I am considering trying to keep the game Closed and handling application through Invites, but there are currently difficulties with that that may need to be worked out.

Yes.

We can then note how often each 'Custom Tag' is used and turn the popular ones into Fixed Tags.

Maybe not then. Was just a random thought.

We'll figure out a good solution to this one day!