Elitism and its repercussions.

[Death_Jester]

Greetings All,

Recently a friend was telling me about his gaming group and their trials in finding new players. While I was talking to him I was putting myself in his shoes and thinking about the things that he would have to consider. As we know there are players all over the place but finding the right group of people to make a party work is sometimes difficult. He and his GM knew lots of people that gamed but couldn’t figure out which ones would work well together so they created a little questionnaire to help the process. They sent it out and only a few of the people they knew responded back. So that helped to limit the amount of people they had to consider.

My first question is how would you (the players and GMs on this board) feel about getting a questionnaire for a game?

Later he was telling me that they had made a decision of two people out of all the respondents. The thing that worries me is how do you keep from burning bridges here with those people you didn’t feel where right? I know if I spent my time answering someone’s questions and then come up with nothing based on my answers to those questions I would be upset (but then again I get upset pretty easily :-D).

So my next question would be how would you keep from burning bridges behind you when you didn’t choose someone for a game after having the fill out a questionnaire? Or better yet how would you let them down gently, without hurting anyone’s pride?

This isn’t like a job interview where you can just not call the person back and they know they didn’t get the job. These are people that you share common ground with and could be seeing for quite a while, like in the future at other gaming related events. It seems that it would be real easy to become the bad guy in a situation like this and hated for being elitist, while are you really want is to have fun. It would be my intention to minimize the sting when someone is not chosen in this situation but I would like to hear what the members of this board have to say about it.

So my last question would be how would you keep a friendship with someone after something like this?

I can see both sides of the situation and it doesn’t look like a win-win proposition no matter how you slice it. Gaming is fun but it is a small community and unforgiving for those that make mistakes in it. If you get a bad reputation people know about it and avoid you like the plague. I have seen it happen in two gaming societies that tried to get started in Louisville a while back. So I’m asking you (the gaming public) how would you feel or react to this these questions and situations and how do you make it less painful for those involved.

Thanks for your time

 

[Nathal]

Greetings All,

So my last question would be how would you keep a friendship with someone after something like this?

Sending a questionnaire to a "friend" who enjoys gaming only to inform him later that he didn't make the cut is uncivil. I would be annoyed. Better to get to know which of your friends are most compatible with your DMing style over several one-shot games, and then after a short break bring selected players into a new group. The exclusions do not need to be made so blatantly as when using a screening process.

 

[Malakye]

I had a similar problem in my gaming group that may help you out. We had one person who was really conflicting with the rest of the group and nobody wanted to play with him anymore. We had tried talking to him about some of the issues but it was really more of a personality conflict that was causing the problem and eventually the only option was to ask him not to play. This was very hard to do becuase we are all co-workers and friends outside of playing DnD. I just explained to him that we still liked him as a friend and wanted to do stuff with him outside of DnD but it just wasn't working in the game. He was hurt but he understood and we are all still friends. He is now thinking about running his own game with some of his other friends and has even asked me for help in developing it.

I think what it comes down to is being honest and resolving the issue through dialogue rather than ignoring it. I don't know what is on the questionaire you are talking about so it is hard to say if it is a good thing. Regardless, those people who aren't chosen should be told why. I think everybody wants to play with people they are compatible with so it shouldn't be a huge issue. Of course, some people can't take rejection at all and are very immature but that is more their problem.

Hope that helps.

 

[ichabod]

Several years ago I ran a GURPS campaign that was ruined by a bad player. The details are not necessary, but it made me consider these very issues. So when I started up my 3rd edition campaign, I decided you would have to come play one session with the group, and then the group would decide if they wanted you to join permanently. This did not work out. The group was uncomfortable making such decisions, I was uncomfortable making such decisions, because unless you were an obvious jerk there was no good reason to reject someone. And if you were an obvious jerk we wouldn't have invited you to play the first time.

The whole questionaire thing you describe sounds even worse. I have come to the conclusion that while this is a real problem, it cannot be dealt with proactively (beyond obvious jerks). My current strategy is that if there is room and someone wants to join, I tell the other players. If no one has a problem with this person (that is, if no one thinks he's an obvious jerk), then we let them play. No questionaires, no trial sessions, just let them play. If they do cause problems, then you deal with it. I (the DM) say "look, this thing you're doing is keeping people from having fun, and I would appreciate if you tone it down." If something can be worked out, cool. If not, they get booted. At that point it is their problem.

 

[Zhure]

Harrumph. A questionnaire indeed. In my day we didn't even have paper and all gaming had to be done with rocks and sticks and if you broke either one it came out of your party split.

Frankly I wouldn't game with anyone sending me a questionnaire about my play style. It's not in my play style.

Usually I've found it easiest to do the Third Party Invitation (tm). It works like this:

Dave the player wants his friend, Bob, to join the group. Dave pitches it to the DM, describing briefly Bob's high points. The DM decides if he has room in the game.

Then Dave asks Bob to join.

If the DM doesn't want Bob to join for any reason, he can "pull the plug"(tm) right then and there. Bob doesn't find out because he never gets asked thus Bob's feelings are spared. If Bob doesn't work out, it's Dave's fault and up to him to correct the problem. Mature dialogue tends to help.

"Bob you suck" or "The DM says your style is too different from ours" tends to work rather well.

I'm sad to say we've also done the old "change when/where the game rather than deal with Problem Boy" tactic. Since then we've gotten either luckier or more discerning for picking out compatible gamers.
Greg
No actual Bob's or Dave's were harmed in this example.

 

[der_kluge]

I don't know, I would be ok with it.

Our general policy is to go out to dinner, or to just meet the person first. And let them understand *up front* that you may or may not accept them on the basis of what kind of game they like to play, or the kind of gamer that they are. Believe me, if someone were inviting me into their group, and they decided I wasn't a good fit because I liked to role-play, and they liked to roll-play, I would be grateful for not being put into a bad situation.

 

[nHammer]

I wouldn't fill out any question form. Not because I find it insulting or even wrong, I just thinks it's stupid.

If you have 1 opening for a player, and a few choices, just pick one. Any one. If that person doesn't work out, tell him so and pick somebody else. If anybody gets mad about your choices, tough ta-tas. That person needs to grow up and get over it.

 

[Sholari]

Probably, something as formalized as a survey is not required. If it is a friend I tend to have a pretty good feel of whether they will work in a gaming group. For someone I do not know, what I have done is talk to the person over the phone to get a sense for their gaming style, availability, lifestyle, and viewpoints on different gaming issues. Not that we agree on every single issue, but my current gaming group is probably the best that I have ever had and really nice people to boot.

The one time I circumvented this whole process for expediency sake, we got a really interesting player that tried to railroad the game. First time I had ever seen a player try to railroad a game, btw. He also had some other odd quirks that made at least a couple in the group feel not entirely safe around this guy. Suffice to say we then went through the much more difficult process of having to remove this guy after I had already let him into the group. It would have been much easier to have screened upfront.

 

[d20Dwarf]

It's definitely good to screen players before adding them to your game. The questionaire bit sounds like a justification for not having to make a subjective decision (i.e. "well, the questionaire says he's not compatible, what can we do?!"). I usually meet up with people before hand, or at least have email correspondence. You can usually tell enough about people through that to know whether or not they'll fit with your style. I'm pretty harsh, I guess....if I have a bad feeling about it, I probably won't be calling, even if I can't pinpoint it.

Last time I had a call for gamers, I had way too many people respond, so even some that I wouldn't have minded gaming with had to be turned away, sadly. But, I have a good group and we've been playing together for about a year now, so everything's worked out.

EDIT: Also, I don't think this is elitism, it's simply common sense. You don't want to spend your leisure time with people you don't like or who make you feel uncomfortable. Elitism is a whole different thing entirely, and for the most part is a justifiable and even beneficial social construct.

 

[fusangite]

I think a questionnaire is a terrible idea. It seems like an instance of real social amateurishness. That said, you have got me curious. What would someone put on such a questionnaire?