Free to choose?

[rounser]

It's no secret that a lot of gamers are introverts, and as such may not always be the best communicators or great at resolving conflict. Maybe some "stuck" gamers have trouble expressing their feelings about a "bad" campaign? Maybe it's somehow easier to endure a bad game than to say what they really want, or quit gracefully.

You may well be on to something there...although I think that a lot of introvert gamers will quite happily make excuses for not turning up if a campaign becomes a drag, and that I doubt many DMs would change their style even if you made some suggestions. Reason why I say this is that on occasions I've been in groups for a discussion on a "what do you want in the next campaign" session, and next campaign, it's more of the same style that you associate with that DM.

I'd also venture that extroverted people seem to be just as quick to give up on someone's ability to perform a task in a matter they consider satisfactory, and will quite happily write them off without feedback for a chance to improve...that's simply most people for you, I think...assertive is probably the word you're looking for, as that implies a lack of aversion to confrontation. I guess the trick there is for said assertive person to present the message in a diplomatic, sympathetic fashion.

 

[RFisher]

Are you "stuck" in your game? What I mean is, if your DM wanted to run a game that you weren't all that interested in, would your choices be between "no gaming" and "gaming I don't enjoy"?

There's always: "Offer to DM."

But for me, as long as I like the people I'm gaming with, I've never found gaming that I don't enjoy.

 

[EricNoah]

There's always: "Offer to DM."

And oh how I wish more people would step up to the plate and do exactly that!

--

Ok, so now for my situation: I DM one game and am the player in 2 other games. All are fun, and if one suddenly became "not fun" I would probably a) try to talk to the DM about it because my DMs are also players in my game, and try to see if I could explain what I would prefer, and b) I would have the luxury of just dropping out. Though I might lose a player if I did that; I would hope that if I left someone's game they'd still want to be in mine but who knows...

 

[Ottergame]

For a long time, I'd play at any cost. However, with the internet I can find a group of people to play with online. I've been in to many really bad sit down games to settle for less, so I'd rather spend the time to find a good online group. Yeah, you lose a big something when you play online, and the pace is usually awful, but role playing is so much easier when you don't have people sitting there watching you.

 

[dreaded_beast]

I started a thread on a similar topic I believe a month or two ago, something along the lines of "gaming with people you don't like".

I would look for a link to the thread, but I don't think I can go back far enough, heh.

Although not exactly the same topic as this thread, I believe it deals with the general idea of "playing with a group that you are no longer having fun with".

To make a long story short, after staying with this group for over 4 years, I finally left and haven't looked back.

 

[Wycen]

Are you "stuck" in your game? What I mean is, if your DM wanted to run a game that you weren't all that interested in, would your choices be between "no gaming" and "gaming I don't enjoy"?

Here's my theory: most players don't know enough DMs (or have connections with enough gaming groups) that they really have the luxury of picking and choosing. So when it comes down to it, rather than not play at all, they sometimes get stuck in games they don't like. That's not a good situation sometimes!

...

I play in 1 regular, or weekly game, another that would like to be regular and a third which will probably be weekly or twice a month is trying to start up.

The weekly game is people I know only through gaming. The third started as gaming but now they are friends, which leaves the middle group.

The middle group are friends and gamers. Unfortunately, a third of the group, (meaning 1 person and by default her boyfriend), is not interested in anything that isn't fantasy d20. She doesn't want to learn anything else.
So, this means we are stuck playing 3E, which I don't mind that much. But it does lead to the next problem, the current story arch is character driven, that is, certain characters in the group have taken it upon themselves to perform a deed and the DM is happy to oblige. Unfortunately, I couldn't care less about this crusade and thus I have sat through more than one session asking the DM, "can I run a bad guy in this fight?"

It seems to me talking to the DM in this case is moot because I've sat through enough boring, to me, events that we should only have to deal with this once more.

What Eric said about not confronting a DM about a game going off in what you think is the wrong direction is a good question. In the past I've avoided confrontation, and when things get crappy I simmer and sit through it hoping it'll go away. Sometimes it does, but more likely I get more annoyed.

The other two groups are different. The DM in the weekly game constantly wonders if we are having fun and can pick up on your negative vibes and will ask you about it. The other group, which wants to start a Mage storyteller game, is trying to figure out what we want from the game still.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Both.

I've known enough GMs to have many options open to me, but at the same time, they don't always want to GM.

When I'm in a situation where the GM is bad, I have enough options that I'd rather go gameless and pop in the games for the X-box, catch up on the reading, do some online gaming, paint some miniatures, etc...

 

[Mark]

Ah, you've hit something there: You almost never hear of a GM "stuck" running something he doesn't want to run, but you often hear of players stuck playing something they'd rather not play. Theory: GMs have the power because they are a rare commodity!

I think "power" is a poor choice of words. It suggests an adversarial relationship that I've never believed is ideal.

It's rather difficult for a player to suggest a GM do hours and hours of working building a setting (or even preparing to run a premade setting) that the GM isn't interested in building or running.

In more cases than not I'd imagine that GMs are a rare commodity because it is a lot of work to be a GM. Granted, GMs like to do that work, it's just more likely they'll do all of that work if it is toward a goal they personally desire.

 

[DMScott]

Ok this might be a little bit of a touchy subject, but I'm curious...

Are you "stuck" in your game? What I mean is, if your DM wanted to run a game that you weren't all that interested in, would your choices be between "no gaming" and "gaming I don't enjoy"?

Here's my theory: most players don't know enough DMs (or have connections with enough gaming groups) that they really have the luxury of picking and choosing. So when it comes down to it, rather than not play at all, they sometimes get stuck in games they don't like. That's not a good situation sometimes!

Curious to hear your experiences...

Hmm. I play with a group of friends, always have - role playing games are something we enjoy, but not the sole basis of our friendships. So the idea of shopping around for different gaming groups seems weird to me; so does the idea of a DM running something players might not enjoy. When I run a game, I talk to my friends and we all figure out what would be fun; same when somebody else runs a game. That only makes sense to us, since it's in our best interests for everyone to enjoy themselves.

Reading about groups in which there's some sort of adversarial relationship between players and the DM always kind of weirds me out. The moreso because I'm moving across the country in a couple of months, so I'll be in the market for a brand new group - is it really that hard to find groups where a bunch of friends play to have fun?

 

[Altalazar]

I've never really been in that situation - perhaps because the people I've known who DM have always played games I was interested in - which is D&D. Though I have also played Runequest, various Hero systems, even TMNT. I've only run Shadowrun.

When it comes to what to run within our group, we usually come to an agreement pretty quickly. We all just enjoy gaming and have fun.

Of course, lately, I haven't had any time to game and the various people in the group have moved, so this all becomes moot.