Do you haze n00b's in initiation to your group?

[Dragon Snack]

Being in a fraternity and knowing the actual current legal definitition of "hazing", I bet some people who voted no may be surprised to learn that they may, in fact, be doing things that could be interpreted as "hazing", whether they realize it or not. It has become quite the legal catchall...

That said, I was going to vote "No - never really thought about it", then I realized that we kind of DO haze new people in my group.

Not that we set out to haze them, it's just that I DM a very deadly game of D&D (and so do the others who DM in my group, although I'm currently the only one allowed to DM). Looking back, I think a lot of new players have had their charcter killed off rather quickly. I'm sorry that your 1st level Expert with a +5 LA (technically a cohort, but still an actual character someone came to the table with) didn't survive his first encounter because he had no chance to live even if he had made his save against the Flame Strike. Even if they don't get killed, they usually want to change characters once they get the feel for my game.

 

[diaglo]

We audition them. Hazing? No, not so much.

Cheers, -- N

ditto.

a series of tryouts. via emails, meetings for lunch or coffee, chatting online, etc...

 

[Glyfair]

Being in a fraternity and knowing the actual current legal definitition of "hazing"...

This made we wonder so I did some quick google checking. Of course, like most legal definitons it will vary from area to area. A U.S. legal site had this definition:

Hazing is defined as an abusive, often humiliating form of initiation into or affiliation with a group, including:

1. Any willful action taken or situation created which recklessly or intentionally endangers the mental or physical health of another.
2. Any willful act by any person alone or acting with others in striking, beating, bruising, or maiming; or seriously offering, threatening, or attempting to strike, beat, bruise, or maim, or to do or seriously offer, threaten, or attempt to do physical violence to another made for the purpose of committing any of the acts.

The term hazing does not include customary athletic events or similar contests or competitions, and is limited to those actions taken and situations created in connection with initiation into or affiliation with any organization. The term hazing does not include corporal punishment administered by officials or employees of public organizations when in accordance with policies adopted by their respective organizations.

I think some might consider the very act of roleplaying to "recklessly endanger the mental...health of another."

 

[Mycanid]

Actually - never really thought about it to be honest. :\

 

[Dragon Snack]

While the "mental health" aspect certainly contributes to the broad strokes that constitute hazing, "endangers" is also loosely defined. While I cannot quote it exactly, the ordinance I've seen defines it as "endangering a person" by "causing mental or physical anguish" ("willful action" is definitely NOT a prerequisite).

I'm too tempted to go off on a rant about the technicalities of enforcement, not to mention the double standards when applied (or rather NOT applied) to sports teams, if I continue...

 

[Keeper of Secrets]

I want new players to stay and have a good time. I would do nothing to make new players feel uncomfortable.

 

[thalmin]

I would not tolerate such actions. (I have censored the rest of my comments.)

 

[The Lost Muse]

If by hazing you mean make them play the cleric, then my answer is... sometimes.

Just... awesome

 

[ZombieButch]

I game with friends. I'd like to keep them that way. So, no.

 

[Mort]

Yes, hazing. Do you haze your n00b's?
jh

When I DM (which is usually) one of my biggest goals is to make sure that while everyone has fun no one has fun at the expense of anyone else. Hazing explicitly violates that, and as such I would never even consider it.