Help me save gaming at my FLGS - difficult situation

[dd.stevenson]

Operating hours aren't arbitrary. There's a very real cost in terms of staff and utilities, especially if the extra time means you need to staff an extra shift or pay overtime. There might also be local laws limiting the hours businesses of certain types can be open.

Of course from the owner's POV store hours are not arbitrary.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

It sounds like the folks who are upset want the benefit of gaming in their living room while not requiring them to actually have said living room.

Yes, a bit.

 

[3catcircus]

I have mentioned the other factors to the owner, and they're things that he can't easily do anything about. For example, the players want to be able to drink beers at the game;

This is a lawsuit waiting to happen. Does the store have insurance for when one of them decides to wrap his car around a tree (or plow into another driver) after drinking at the store?

they want to be able to play later in the evening (which would last an hour or so beyond the store's closing time);

So - they want his (or his employees') time for free? Or would they be paying a salary for the employee who has to stay late to babysit their dumb asses?

they also do not like the change in format of Encounters when they started adding D&D Next into it.

How the heck does this have any relevance whatsoever? Don't like the game? Don't play it, regardless of where the game is being held.

Mostly, this is tabletop RPGs that the walkout has affected, with the biggest impact on Encounters. He had only about 4 people willing to DM (including Lair Assault, etc.), and those DMs have walked out of the store (again, for a combination of reasons).
I don't know if banning a few obnoxious gamers will be enough for him to revive the tabletop hobby at his store, and it might backfire on him if he gets a reputation in our small town for playing favorites.

It sounds like he should be banning the "cool ones" instead. He has a group of people who are older (i.e., generally likely to have more disposable income) who continue to come back to the store every week. He has a bunch of malcontents who are complaining about free stuff and driving off other potential players. Are they paying for table space at the store? Even though D&D encounters is free, if they are hogging all the table space, they're driving away people who might want to play other games (and who would be spending money on new product in the process). Are they making it so that potential players are made to feel unwelcome? That's another potential lost sale.

Any FLGS owner needs to make it abundantly clear that players are allowed to game there based upon his good-will. In the case of D&D Encounters, WotC supplies the kits so that FLGS can increase their business (which in turn, increases WotC's business) - anything that negatively impacts the store's bottom-line needs to be addressed - and in this case, it means telling the "cool players" to get their act together.

 

[Nytmare]

Also, as a side note, I've seen some of my favorite game stores close because they tried to make the jump from being a store to a club house with business hours.

 

[delericho]

It sounds very much like the issues of the 'cool' players are such that they're probably not coming back regardless of any bans.

That being the case, the owner really shouldn't bother with the bans. They won't help.

The first option he should probably consider is whether or not he can tackle the other issues of the 'cool' players. Based on what the OP has said, this seems unlikely, but if he can find a way to make it work then that might be worth going with.

Assuming that's not possible, his only real option is to let the 'cool' players go. Leave the door open for them to return... but operate on the basis that they won't. And at that point, he needs to consider whether he can recruit new players to make up the difference, whether he can continue store gaming in the absence of those players, or (in the worst case) whether his store even remains a viable business in the absence of those players.

But if his strategy is built on the basis of those players coming back, where there are significant issues that haven't been (possible can't be) resolved, it's almost certainly a losing strategy.

(Oh, and FWIW, I'm none too impressed at those 'cool' players. As someone else said, it sounds like they want all the benefits of gaming in their front room, without actually having to have a front room.)

 

[Retreater]

Ok. Let me clarify about the situation. They aren't demanding the store owner change anything. They left to game at one of the other player's apartments. This is a group of about 5 players. There are other players who dropped out too who aren't a part of the "cool" clique.

They are actually open to gaming with most people. There are three players that I know of that they did not want to game with at the store. The first came to Encounters and constantly berated 4E - and we later found out he was a registered sex offender - which was not good considering the number of kids in the store. The other two is the middle aged couple.

First, the two of them have NEVER purchased a thing in the history of the store. They come in and sit all day and don't buy anything (neither of them work, which is not really an important detail, except to say they are loitering for a long time.) They come up to the customers and follow them around the store, trying to make friends. It does creep out some of the customers. In fact, they have followed us to a restaurant post-game one time and wanted to sit with us and drink water.

The players who have defected to play at their home do not plan on coming back. They have found a better place to game. I do not think the owner should expect them to do so. But he is concerned that the strange couple are driving away new potential customers and players.

 

[Nytmare]

Abandon ship.

 

[dm4hire]

I was against banning them until you pointed out that they don't buy anything. The owner needs to confront them and point out that his store is for paying customers. I understand not everyone who comes into a store on a given day will buy something, but most players will eventually buy from the store to support their habit of gaming such as dice, a game book, mini, etc. Short term it doesn't seem like much but added up with all the others it equals sales that keep the store open. If this couple is not buying products then he needs explain that they are not welcome in his store. Also mentioning customer concerns about their behavior is definitely a must as it is bad for business.

As for extended hours I know many stores who have extended hours for their gameroom, which is usually separate or can be locked down to keep people out of the merchandise after hours. If it's possible to keep the gameroom open past store hours then that's an option. If not, finding an employee willing to stay late one or two nights a week is a good option.

For the separate gameroom option I've seen two approaches which seem to work. One approach is it can only stay open as long as a responsible adult is willing to stay and watch over everyone, basically if they leave everyone leaves kind of situation. The other option is finding a quasi-employee or leader of a gaming group willing to maintain order till the gameroom closes, with the quasi-employee usually getting store credit in return.

The final option is to just let them all go. Player dynamics change over time and your friend may have to ride out the change in the store's social dynamics and work to try to bring new players in. Either way getting rid of the couple still needs to happen or get them to change their habits.

 

[Morrus]

The "cool" players don't sound very cool to me. Is there something other than being "middle aged" that these people are doing wrong? I mean, I'm nearly 40 - does that mean I would be unwelcome at their game, too, and that they'd boycott any store which allowed me to play?

 

[Baron Greystone]

The store owner's business depends on five 'cool' players? Time to get out while he can.