Adventurers League, Home Play, and Public Play for Out of the Abyss characters

[skerritthegreen]

The fact is that the OP's primary complaint ("most grievous of all") is that other people at the table used language at the table of which he did not approve, which given his later comment about polyamory we can quite easily read to mean casual conversation about a personal identity he doesn't approve of the existence of. We can certainly go on with discussing table limits and how to work properly with the Organizer system, and that's to the good, but calling "specifics of that sub-discussion" (could you be any more squeamish about writing around it, by the way?) not really relevant to the discussion over all seems like a very odd reading of the OP's original and subsequent posts in this thread.

I guess I read it he was not comfortable about side talk about personal lives versus focusing on the game. As for that trying to direct away from discussion of who is poly and focus on the original thoughts, I will thank you not to make any judgement about me, my personal life or what I think I about it or anyone's personal life. I am greatly offended that you assume I am squeamish and trying to erase anyone. You ascribe motives to me that are simply not there. I will do my best not to ascribe motives to you and why you feel the need to point a finger at someone.

 

[IlluminatedSeraph]

@skerritthegreen

I'm going to stand on my statement at the end of my post: that makes for a very odd reading of the OP's post and comments, and one that doesn't match the tone of his remarks at all, which sits very awkwardly with your suggestion that we "focus on the original thoughts." His original thoughts are very directly about his personal definitions of offensiveness and his reaction to interacting with people he obviously didn't care for - not just in their running of the game, but personally. A certain amount of side talk is going to be part of any game, which is natural and not a problem as long as it isn't excessive, and the attitude of the OP suggests that his measure of excessive on polyamory or other topics he doesn't approve of is likely to be "more than zero." The emphasis he places in his remarks on the "disgusting" and "profane" nature of the conversation makes it seem like he'd have a lot less of a problem with it if people had been having a side-chat about when they were getting their copies of Fallout 4, and that goes pretty directly to Pauper's comments about bringing a hostile attitude into the space.

As for your offense, I'm going to paraphrase Roland Barthes - the author is very much dead on the internet. Whether you personally are squeamish, have a problem with poly people or are trying to engage in erasure, I don't pretend to know and make no assumptions about. What you wrote, however, is squeamish (in that in engages in distancing language and refuses to even name the issue under discussion) and tries to remove the personal experience regarding AL gaming and the stuff the OP is discussing and identities of people in the thread from conversation as irrelevant or not fit for discussion (which is erasure). That's there in what you wrote, regardless of how you meant it, and if you don't like the implications.... well, that's difficult for you and I'm sorry.

Anyway, you and I can continue this in PM if that's important, but back to the OP: a store that fronts one or more AL games obviously has an interest in the tone and character of the people they choose to use as DMs, so the expectation that one is going to get not just one but multiple chances to run AL games is probably not a good one to have. Conversely, a store that routinely has more players looking than people it can seat has a problem. While taking anyone willing to run may not be the solution to that problem, it isn't a sign of a strongly organized OP site. The fact that the DM in question then took the bulk of the gaming group home for more of the same session and/or more gaming - and that the store doesn't seem to have a problem with this - suggests that the store is less interested in having an organized play game or set of games going than it is accommodating a group of patrons who've expressed an interest. Altogether, not a great set-up.

That being said, the OP is probably best off looking for a different store regardless and we're probably best off taking his feedback with a grain of salt.

 

[skerritthegreen]

Whether you personally are squeamish, have a problem with poly people or are trying to engage in erasure, I don't pretend to know and make no assumptions about.

Why are the only options that I have done something wrong and am obviously at fault? Why is my original reading obviously "odd" and less valid than yours? I don't understand and would love for you to educate me.

a store that fronts one or more AL games obviously has an interest in the tone and character of the people they choose to use as DMs, so the expectation that one is going to get not just one but multiple chances to run AL games is probably not a good one to have. Conversely, a store that routinely has more players looking than people it can seat has a problem. While taking anyone willing to run may not be the solution to that problem, it isn't a sign of a strongly organized OP site. The fact that the DM in question then took the bulk of the gaming group home for more of the same session and/or more gaming - and that the store doesn't seem to have a problem with this - suggests that the store is less interested in having an organized play game or set of games going than it is accommodating a group of patrons who've expressed an interest. Altogether, not a great set-up.

Why is it after telling me about my problems, you can then focus on exactly the part of the discussion I was trying to focus on (the part we can actually comment on as opposed to people's personality issues)? Why am I wrong to focus on that and you are not? I think I must call troll on you sir/madame/individual.

 

[IlluminatedSeraph]

@skerritthegreen

I'm reasonably certain that we were just having a disagreement about the appropriateness of other people's comments in the thread. I'm also reasonably certain that we disagree still. But since I happen to think those people (Pauper and Tia, I'd give you more XP if I could!) did a very good job of covering why the OP's comments on poly are problematic and I've articulated why their thoughts are important to the discussion, I don't feel a burning need to add more of my own.

And frankly, I would have thought the other stuff was well covered anyway, but since you seemed to urgently want to talk about everything in the OP's posts except poly, I thought I would oblige you in the interest of showing some deference to your point of view. That you chose to view that as me somehow trolling you is... honestly baffling to me. We can actually comment on the whole OP, because it's the OP - what else would the thread be about but that? The personality issues in question are obviously pretty central, but they've also been well-covered, and I probably wouldn't have posted at all if you and Capn hadn't come charging in trying to declare that what Pauper and Tia were talking about was off-topic and generally off-limits. I'm pretty sure we still honestly disagree about that, right?

The fact is that yes, I think your post was out of line, and your reading was less valid because it ignored a salient issue on the basis that we somehow "can't" comment on it - as if the personalities and conversations were somehow less reliably reported than the description of the store in spite of coming from the same person. I really do think your reading is odd, considering.

As for educating you, that would be off topic. Seriously, PM me if you want to go on at length with this.

TLDR: Our actual point of disagreement seems to be the appropriateness and relevance of other people's posts. I've said my piece and you've said yours, so can we stop sparring with each other and let the thread continue?

Addendum: It's ma'am, since you asked.

 

[skerritthegreen]

I would very much like to focus on things that the AL could actually do something about and not what it can't (and thus my original post). I am also quite fed up today with a large number posters pulling the "I'm right, you are wrong and a ****-ist because I will make assumptions about you, and if you disagree, feel free to message me in private so that the last public word is that you are a horrible person." Its been happening all to frequently (not specifically to me) and I've decided that I don't like that kind of bullying.

You took the "most grievous of all" phrase from the original post where the OP spoke about the DM violating the code of conduct in regards to swearing and making people feel unwelcome, and instead claimed that it was about the DM's poly relationship (which was not brought up until the OP's 3rd post further down the page.) You assume that the swearing and the discussion of polyamorous are the same and that I am really referring to the poly when I just want us to go back to the original post about how to deal with a table when the DM and store owner are not responsive to your feelings.

Back to the topic at hand, the original poster brought up that he/she was having a difficult time at their store because:
a) They started the season late and characters are of various levels.
b) The number of games being played is off. (and the DM seems to be running some games at his house for select players, advancing them faster than others)
c) The poster was not always allowed to play due to the number of players.
d) Only some people are allowed to DM by the store.
e) The tables were using voting to determine if other players were violating the Code of Conduct (swearing).
f) The store owner is not responsive to complaints

It is not until the OP's 3rd post that he brings up the side discussion issues (in this case referring to the DM telling the player that he is poly but I think more in refeence to he other commentary of a; possibly e). I would very much like to keep the focus on the original discussion (where I was originally) about how to deal with a store where you think shenanigans are in play or you do not feel welcome, as opposed to the side discussion that popped up about the players hang-ups with his/her DM's sex life (seeing as that is not something the AL has any control over and we're not in the business of giving out advice on how to work on one's emotional/psychological issues).

 

[Tia Nadiezja]

Well, I'm back. Thanks, Skerritt, for pulling me back into a conversation where I thought I was don because I thought my point was made.

I'm not going to wade into the "was my first post germane?" argument because that, quite frankly, is a distraction from every single topic in the thread. When an argument about whether or not something is germane has taken over an entire conversation, that is, deliberate or not, a successful bit of derailing behavior.

Instead, I am going to go back to the meat of what I intended to say with my first post - to give advice to anyone who is in the position the OP felt like he was in.

Roleplaying games are an intensely social and, for some people, an intensely personal thing - they are an opportunity to showcase parts of ourselves that it is often impossible or painfully impractical to let out. They are things we like to do with people close to us, and sometimes they make us think of those people. Table talk is a reality, and when people talk details about their lives come out - details that each person at the table has precisely the same right to feel comfortable talking about as each other person (meaning that if you, the happily married straight monogamous person get to talk about your wife and kids at the table, the bisexual poly girl next to you gets to talk about her boyfriend and her wife).

In a home game, you can curate who joins and thus avoid people whose lives make you uncomfortable. But at a public play game in an organized play setting, one thing you give up is that curation - meaning that if there are lives and relationship structures that make you uncomfortable, there is a chance you will run into them - and given the intensely social, intensely personal nature of roleplaying games, you might even hear about them.

Perhaps, if you can't handle that, public play organized gaming isn't for you. But I hope, instead, that you can self-examine and become someone who can handle hearing about it, because that's personal growth and will make you better able to participate in things like the fun that is Adventurer's League.

I hope that's something we can all agree on.

 

[Tia Nadiezja]

as opposed to the side discussion that popped up about the players hang-ups with his/her DM's sex life (seeing as that is not something the AL has any control over and we're not in the business of giving out advice on how to work on one's emotional/psychological issues).

I feel a need to respond very specifically to this... well, sentence fragment. I know I'm quoting part of a sentence and a parenthetical, but please bear with me, because there's two details here I want to deal with.

1. "DM's sex life." No. Just no. Seriously. Is it talking about someone's "sex life" when they bring up their wife's job, their children's grades? Both those things imply that, yes, sex has happened at some point in their lives, and with a specific partner, but... no, it's not talking about their sex life. Neither is a poly person talking about their partners, and it's frankly offensive when people immediately jump to "this is about sex!" when poly folks talk about the same day-to-day life stuff monogamous people do. I don't know the details of what the OP's DM talked about, and neither do you, so jumping immediately to "sex life" is neither good nor accurate.

2. "Not in the business of giving out advice..." I think that the fact that AL as an organization is, quite rightly, not in that business makes public conversations of this nature, among players and DMs who will have to deal with the gritty moment to moment realities not of rules and guidelines but of what happens when you sit down at a table with dice and character sheets and actual living breathing human beings who bring their lives with them to the table, all the more valuable. I don't speak for AL. I never have, I don't have to, and that in and of itself means that I - and others in this forum, including people who don't agree with me - can offer that advice, can tell people good ways, based on their own experiences, to handle situations at the table that they might find uncomfortable or difficult. Because these situations will come up, and people having read advice about them before walking into them will make what happens at the table when they do more easily resolved and more amicable.

 

[skerritthegreen]

My only request was that we focus on one thing in a thread. If you would like to speak about inclusiveness in gaming, I think that great and we should totally do that as the DnDAL is a big supporter of inclusivity. I just didn't want the original post and what we might learn from that to get lost (instead of ignoring it because of the original posters later comments). I am just trying to encourage to talk about things in threads that are labeled about what the thread is actually covering.

 

[kalani]

Honestly, I think that this thread has derailed from it's original point. When the OP started speaking negatively about a lifestyle he was uncomfortable with (without going into any specifics - only veiled allusions), it kind of gets people defensive. I myself have been in polyamorous relationships in the past. It rarely comes up at the table, but should the conversation touch on the subject - I would hope that I could mention it openly, in a general way, without feeling condemned for a lifestyle choice (indepth discussions take away from game time, while graphic discussions are CoC violations as AL is very PG and public play events may have children in attendance).

Inclusiveness in gaming is a must. I for example, give each character and NPC I run (even in Expeditions) a handful of minor quirks (usually a voice, and one or two defining personality traits). Sometimes, that involves a different lifestyle choice, sexuality, racism, or whatever comes to mind at the time. I never draw attention to these details overtly, and instead roleplay these traits naturally. In respect to lifestyle choices, the only time this might come up is in respect to PC interactions - a gay character for example might make a few flirty comments at someone who takes their fancy, while that character might get advantage on charisma checks. On the other hand, I tend to downplay negative traits (such as racism), usually having the character seem irritated or annoyed by the character and giving them disadvantage on charisma checks, and maybe the odd comment such as a muttered "Halflings".

Were a player to have strong opinions on the subject of GLBTI characters or characters with varied lifestyle choices, I would ask that they leave those opinions at the door. I always make such traits as a minor element of the character, and tend to downplay its significance at the table. In my eyes, I draw as much attention to the GLBTI characters I run as I do to the monogomous heterosexual characters - I.E, it rarely comes up but might be alluded to if the situation presents itself. I use these characters for several reasons, the least of which is inclusiveness and representation.

It doesn't have to be a big thing, but whenever straight characters would engage in harmless flirting (such as with a barmaid), the GLBTI character would engage in flirting with a character of their preference. A wink, and maybe a sly comment and that is as far as I take it before moving on with the adventure. If something like that were to offend a player at my table, that individual needs to grow up IMO, as everyone deserves representation, and my reference to such is rarely more than a fleeting remark, or an ambiguously gay voice and manerisms.

Tonight for example, I was running DDEX 2-5 Flames of Kythorn. In that adventure, I created a throw-away NPC in the cloak room which was ambiguously gay. His sexuality never came up, but the voice I used was an effeminate take on your stereotypical upper-class butler, and he was a little flamboyant in his manerisms. The party loved the character, and after ~5 minutes of trying to get out of checking their weapons and armor (such as one PCs great axe), we moved on with the adventure without skipping a beat.

 

[kalani]

In respect to the original post
Not all stores schedule regular games. This is unfortunate, but it does occur. It is also unfortunate you have been unable to play.

While I understand that only some players are allowed to be DMs (this is the store's perrogative as we don't police game store politics), is there a possibility of splitting the group into two smaller groups or is there a space issue?

Regarding CoC violations
If you feel that the DM is not performing their job of monitoring CoC violations, your best course of action is to raise your concerns with the Store Organizer (if any), or a member of the staff. If they are unwilling to address your concerns, or if you feel you need a second opinion, your next course of action would be to speak to your Local Coordinator (if any), or failing that - your Regional Coordinator. While the LCs/RCs cannot police stores, they might be able to offer suggestions for how you might address the issue, or (depending on location), may even make a personal visit to touch base and see how things are going.

You can also contact Wizards Customer Service and lodge a direct complaint regarding the conduct violations during sanctioned AL games. Depending on the severity of the violations, such complaints may prompt wizards to contact the store (who is acting as a representative of D&D when running these events), as this reflects poorly on AL and WotC in general. It might even result in the store losing their WPN privileges, Preferred Status (if any), or access to promotional materials in the future.

Ultimately however, your best solution is probably to vote with your feet and find another table/store to play at, start an AL game at home, or perhaps even join the D&D AL online group, and play games via the comfort of your own home with players around the world (usually via fantasy grounds or roll20).