Gut-feelings and new players

[TheNovaLord]

Everyone i currently game with I met as a gamer first and then became friend afterwards (to the extent of being best man and ushers at weddings and stuff). One i have known 21 years, another 18, both of whom i met at gaming clubs. Two others i met jointly about 3 years ago via uk.games.roleplay. The latest edition to our group, who has playeed twice, i met via a post on enworld.org!

I wish i had some of the hatchet powers described by pogre and teflon billy as one of the players we met 3 years ago is beginning to grate. He has been a player for 20+ years i think but just does stupidest things down the dungeon, has insulted any number of potential ally NPC, insists on taking every table and chair and bit of rag out a dungeon to sell, every session ( and i mean this) casts spells that will not work against intended targets, just cant get that u dont get 3 scorching rays when u pick up the spell at 3rd level, never wants to give any treasure to NPC's or taxes or tithes etc.....it drives most of us to despair cos of the repetitivesness week on week.
Last session the very new guy cast a web at this chap to try and stop him doing something stupid. it didnt work and two rounds later the character was being munched on by a dragon, who was a potential ally (party are all LE and LN).
One of the guys who i have known for 20 years left the group cos he can no longer be around this player. I still him socially but not for gaming.

Thing is gut feeling on meeting the difficult chap was that he was keen, but not superkeen, had played lots and varied stuff and seemd just like the rest of us (same age, social status, married etc)....

Any clues what to do

JohnD

 

[Glyfair]

I understand, and even experience first-hand, the need to give everyone a fair chance. So just to make sure that, in over three decades, my gut-feeling isn't wrong this one time, I do the following:

Wow, you actually have people who are willing to go through this to play in a campaign? Sounds worse than most job interviews.

I can't imagine being forced to sit through 3 games as a specator just to play.

 

[boredgremlin]

Nope, not me. I've made the mistake of allowing myself to be talked into overruling my gut-feeling, but I've always had a following "I-told-you-so" conversation with my telempathic digestive tract.

I understand, and even experience first-hand, the need to give everyone a fair chance. So just to make sure that, in over three decades, my gut-feeling isn't wrong this one time, I do the following:

1. Campaigns are by invitation only. This helps prevent the "My friend is here for the weekend and wants to play" syndrome.

2. If you want an invite, you have to sit in on three sessions, minimum, as a spectator. This ensures that a) the person is really interested in playing, b) gives them a chance to check us out and make sure they're not going to be bored to tears, c) gives us a chance to check the person out and spot most problems before they blow up in our faces, and d) gives everyone a gradual introduction to a potential new friend rather than dumping them all together at the table.

3. If everything goes fine in my opinion, I ask the existing players their opinion. Yes, I may decide No, Not In My Game before asking the players. That's part of the social contract for playing in the game I'm running - I can deny someone a seat at the table. By the same token, if even *one* of the players says, No, I don't want to play with the new person, then that's that. I value my players' trust. And I trust them to tell me if they've got a problem that affects their enjoyment of the game.

4. If the players say OK, an invitation is extended, along with a copy of the House Rules, Table Rules, and writeup of what I expect as a DM. I want to set the expectations for good manners, good play, and good gaming up front. This is based on the principle that not everyone has the same background, so it's unfair to expect them to follow a standard they don't know about.

5. Exceptions: I run one-shots, events, and open games on occasion. Anyone with an interest is invited to these, with preference given to new players or new gamers. It makes for good recruiting, and introduces new people to the hobby.

With all of this, it has only reinforced my gut-feeling. It has also prevented trouble when my gut-feeling is on vacation at a Carribean beach, and isn't answering its cell phone.

i have been gaming for 13 years and as much as i love gaming i have to say that if i had to watch anyone do it for 4 or 5 hours without having anything to do i would tell you to take a long walk off a short cliff and leave. I could be spending time with my girl and kid during those hours each week. And honestly anyone who felt so elitest that they needed 3 games to check me out is someone i wouldnt want to hang out with anyway.

But since i am a DM and have been most of my gaming time i will say that i let anyone game once. I had a player last session who subscribed to my yahoo group, never posted an intro, never said he was coming, just showed up at the appointed time (its posted each week so we can all relate any scheduling conflicts). I let him play, chatted and we were both freindly, i dont think our styles mixed well but the session was still fun and no one had to feel left out. He had a session my style, i dont think it worked for him and i doudt he will show again, but everyone was nice and he did a good job that game.

I have had more experiances with decent gamers who just dont like a certain DM's type of game and move on then really terrible gamers. As a DM i have no issue with that. We all play a certain way and the game is designed to enjoy our time off from the real world and relax. If one persons fun isnt anothers fun thats no biggie. Thats why we have different genres of video games, movies and music. Different strokes for different folks. But give them one session at least. One session cant possibly be that destructive.

 

[shilsen]

I don't trust gut feelings. They're usually gas. If I have a new player who I think might not be a good fit, I'd let him play for a couple of sessions. If it didn't work, I'd politely tell him that and thank him for the time and effort.

Simple, really.

 

[BlueBlackRed]

Here's something funny.

I usually get a pretty good read of people when I meet them. Unfortunately, I worry that I can often give off the wrong impression.

For instance, in the game I'm joining tonight, the DM seems a little weirded out by me, and was sort of hesitant about letting me join the game. Hopefully I can win him over with the plethora of Monty Python jokes that I'll make every few minutes during the game. I hope he's as much of an anime fan as I am, cause I could talk about that stuff all night!

Maybe I should just talk about my extensive collection of swords and knives instead...

This post actually caught the attention of one guy in our group.
Basically he thought that Anti-Sean might be the prospective player I was hesitant about.
This guy loves Eberron. So does Anti-Sean. I made it clear to the guy that we would never play in Eberron.
This guy likes anime and has a website devoted to it. Anti-Sean has the comment above about anime.

But the cherry on top of it all is that my name is Sean.


And as for the game last night, the guy didn't show up.
I wonder if he read this thread...

 

[Arashi Ravenblade]

Im taking a break from playing and Dming for awhile. Just plain burnout. But when i come back i have already told the group not to invite people that cant come every week if they have nothing better to do. It gets rediculous, i can have 4-10 people depending on who decides to show up and the excuses i have to come up with as to why their character is back gets a little stupid.
So just the regular group is invited back for my next game (well and maybe my ex, if she can behave herself).
But generally i have probelems and concerns about players who instantly want me to change editions or want to use house rules from other DMs games.

 

[ValhallaGH]

It's always a bad sign when someone comes in and says that they have a character ready. Then they ask what you're playing.
That's the point when I simply say, "Sorry man, table's full."

On the other hand, one of my favorite players was a walk-in; he played an illiterate russian gunman in my modern investigatory game. He was effective, interesting and a good team player with lots of 'woops' moments due to things like not being able to read English. Unfortunately the player moved to take a new job and that was that, though I've still got his character sitting in NPC limbo, waiting for me to unleash him.

 

[merelycompetent]

Wow, you actually have people who are willing to go through this to play in a campaign? Sounds worse than most job interviews.

I can't imagine being forced to sit through 3 games as a specator just to play.

(shrug) Different play styles, and different experiences. It could be that there is a higher problem player/good player ratio where I'm at. It could also be that I've had too many bad experiences, and have become very, very picky about who I DM for when I'm investing time in a full-blown campaign. I certainly don't *force* someone to sit through three sessions - the U.S. laws on kidnapping are quite clear on tying people to a chair and setting them in a corner . Basically, if a potential joiner is willing to wait and watch, and get to know us, then I know he or she really wants to play and that they're likely to fit in. If they hear the requirements and say, "That's too much for me," then that's okay -> I'm not the DM for that player.

In any case, it works for the group I game with. YMMV.

 

[merelycompetent]

i have been gaming for 13 years and as much as i love gaming i have to say that if i had to watch anyone do it for 4 or 5 hours without having anything to do i would tell you to take a long walk off a short cliff and leave. I could be spending time with my girl and kid during those hours each week. And honestly anyone who felt so elitest that they needed 3 games to check me out is someone i wouldnt want to hang out with anyway.

Well, I guess we can stick to just politely posting on Enworld then.

...But give them one session at least. One session cant possibly be that destructive.

Yes, it can. Total Party Kill because the newbie turned out to be a PKing psychopath, deriving most of his joy from causing as much strife as possible by sneak attacking the cleric in the middle of a major fight and taking him down. Required booting the player, resetting the game back to the start (and incidentally pretty well ruinning several surprise twists in the plot), and picking it up next week knowing that we'd still have a bad taste leftover from the previous experience. DM spent 6-8 hours preparing for the game, plus 4 hours playtime - all pretty much down the drain now. Add in the 4 hours of play time for each player (5 total): 30 hours of our free time wasted by one bad player.

In the group I DM for, we looked at that wasted time, noted that if we'd gone through a 2-3 session screening we'd probably have avoided it. 30 hours of our time vs. 12 hours of the potential player's time. For me, and also for the group, that's an easy decision to make.

Now, if I'd just been running a one-shot, an event, or an open session, it wouldn't have been such a problem. I let just about anyone who doesn't give off a dangerous vibe into those, and they serve as an excellent substitute for the campaign screening I described in the previous post. But in a campaign... sorry, I need to get to know you first and so does the group. I and the other players have sunk too much effort into it to want to see another session ruined by a disagreeable individual. Again, this doesn't work for everybody. It does work for us. YMMV.

 

[merelycompetent]

One of the guys who i have known for 20 years left the group cos he can no longer be around this player. I still him socially but not for gaming.

Thing is gut feeling on meeting the difficult chap was that he was keen, but not superkeen, had played lots and varied stuff and seemd just like the rest of us (same age, social status, married etc)....

Any clues what to do

That depends:
1. How many more players are you likely to lose because of this one person's actions?
If the answer is greater than 0, you need to boot the player. Do it politely, and do it with dignity and grace. After you do it, tell the player who left because of the bootee that he's gone and that you'd like him (the good player who left) to rejoin.

2. How much are you enjoying the game with this one player in it?
If the answer is you're not enjoying it, or you're enjoying it less, then see above.

Booting a player from a game is the worst part of being a DM.

I hope this helps.