A lead Writer?

I posted this on the Google Doc, and I'll repost it here:

I think we should decide on a lead writer, to avoid the 1000 monkey syndrome. His/her responsibility would be to take in all the ideas, proof-read everything, but most importantly: be the final voice on saying what gets in and out. Of course, this individual would need to share his opinions on the matter with others and still try to go with the group consensus on certain subjects, and it must be someone who won’t abuse the position. I think having a lead writer would solve a lot of the problems that comes from having so many people submitting content and ideas to the project; their simply needs to be someone who is willing to say yes or no.

I know I just joined and this project is in its infancy, but I'd like to nominate myself. I honestly feel qualified to tackle a project on this scale. I am willing to put in the time and effort needed to make this a reality. I am also extremely open to ideas and suggestions, and won't simply be the only one coming up with ideas. Part of being a good Dungeon Master is listening to the players and giving them a campaign where what they want can happen, but ultimately it is still up to the DM to decide what happens in the game. I have a lot of experience as both a DM and a writer, and having run a campaign based on Broquest, I have a lot of ideas I can contribute, but NONE of them take precedence to any that would be suggested as alternatives. I'll present my opinions on the matter and always consider someone else's ideas. I wouldn't take advantage of the position.

If anyone else feels that they are also qualified for such a position, I invite you to step forward and make yourself known so we can compare resumes, as it were. Ultimately, I feel that this is something that the people and the community should vote on.

Thoughts?

Honestly I think you should have a small team of lead writers. Maybe a team of 3-4. This way you avoid any bias one person might have, and if something ever happens to one of the lead writers (they won't be able to show up for a bit, they quit the project, etc) you still have the others to continue his work.

I'm already doing some music and this takes plenty of time. I guess I'll stick to the sidequests.

However, I noticed that when we wrote about the many characters we all gave them different personalities. We should change that. We should have a clear list of at least 10 traits for every character.
That may be enough to have the basics to work, then the lead writer will make the text more consistent. The main thing is to avoid characters having multiple personalities by defining them properly.

Lurker wrote:

Honestly I think you should have a small team of lead writers. Maybe a team of 3-4. This way you avoid any bias one person might have, and if something ever happens to one of the lead writers (they won't be able to show up for a bit, they quit the project, etc) you still have the others to continue his work.  

Not inconceivable. The lead writers would need a system of checks and balances to ensure that they all agree on the work and the direction the story/characters/setting is taking. For example, they could all put their work in a Google doc, proofread it, make changes and then sign their approval at the bottom, and once all of them have done so, the work can be approved for the game?

Triptune wrote:

I'm already doing some music and this takes plenty of time. I guess I'll stick to the sidequests.

However, I noticed that when we wrote about the many characters we all gave them different personalities. We should change that. We should have a clear list of at least 10 traits for every character.
That may be enough to have the basics to work, then the lead writer will make the text more consistent. The main thing is to avoid characters having multiple personalities by defining them properly.

That's not a bad idea, coming up with a core list of personality traits, what they would and would not do, ect.

Nave the DM wrote:

I posted this on the Google Doc, and I'll repost it here:

I think we should decide on a lead writer, to avoid the 1000 monkey syndrome. His/her responsibility would be to take in all the ideas, proof-read everything, but most importantly: be the final voice on saying what gets in and out. Of course, this individual would need to share his opinions on the matter with others and still try to go with the group consensus on certain subjects, and it must be someone who won’t abuse the position. I think having a lead writer would solve a lot of the problems that comes from having so many people submitting content and ideas to the project; their simply needs to be someone who is willing to say yes or no.

I know I just joined and this project is in its infancy, but I'd like to nominate myself. I honestly feel qualified to tackle a project on this scale. I am willing to put in the time and effort needed to make this a reality. I am also extremely open to ideas and suggestions, and won't simply be the only one coming up with ideas. Part of being a good Dungeon Master is listening to the players and giving them a campaign where what they want can happen, but ultimately it is still up to the DM to decide what happens in the game. I have a lot of experience as both a DM and a writer, and having run a campaign based on Broquest, I have a lot of ideas I can contribute, but NONE of them take precedence to any that would be suggested as alternatives. I'll present my opinions on the matter and always consider someone else's ideas. I wouldn't take advantage of the position.

If anyone else feels that they are also qualified for such a position, I invite you to step forward and make yourself known so we can compare resumes, as it were. Ultimately, I feel that this is something that the people and the community should vote on.

Thoughts?

If you really are a DM i'll vote for you as lead writer all I wanna do is write sidequests

I can assure you that I am. Forever GM, as the expression goes.

My vote goes to you as well, you seem to have experience and clear ideas.
However, i think we need one lead writer and 3-4 "main" writers. The Lead writer should decide the path the story takes AFTER discussing with the other main writers, having the final word.

But it think that, what we need the most, is a definitive team. I don't know exactly who go "officially" in, but we should decide (maybe testing the candidates by giving them a little work; example: for a writer he could be tested by working on a sidequest/dialogue, for an artist by drawing a zone or a character expressing emotion in Swhig's style etc)

The countless ideas guys and contributors (who help to keep the project alive) should be heard then by the "main team", and the latter should decide if the idea/contribution can be integrated partially or totally, or not at all.

The only question remaining is: who's gonna test the potential main members?

That's a good question. I don't know at this time.

Croco Wizard wrote:

The only question remaining is: who's gonna test the potential main members?

Let's make a contest. The best become main writers.

While I do agree to having a clear list of traits that define each character, it might also make sense to have each writer focus on a specific few characters.

I don't know if it is necessarily more efficient but it is a thought.