Quitting a group & starting anew..ground rules?

[Kahuna Burger]

It's like sitting down at a blackjack table at a casino instead of sitting down on the card table with some beers and pretzels. In the first, you are sitting with other people who share your interrest in gambling and playing cards. In the second, you are sitting down with your poker buddies. The first requires rules to keep everyone in-line and following proceedures (no cheating, no yelling, no throwing cards at the dealer, etc.), while the second just relies on the unspoken rule of "hey, we're all friends and let's have some fun."

I have sat down at a blackjack table at a casino. There was no sign saying "no cheating". No one first told me "we use inside voices and if you don't g.t.h.o." No one felt the need to tell me not to throw cards at the dealer. It was a public, open casino there for anyone over 21, and they served drinks at the table. No one at the table was my friend, and yet we got by without an upfront list of cranky rules insulting us in advance for even thinking about doing things wrong.

I think your analogy fails.

 

[fusangite]

If you're coming into my house, I"m going to present you the ground rules for my house.

Really? I can't remember this ever happening anywhere in my social circle since the demise of smoking indoors in the early 1980s. I can't think of any time I have ever entered someone's house in the past 20 or more years that I have been told a set of rules.

I guess I don't see how anyone can be offended because they go over with you what you can and can not do at their house.

I would be offended because it would indicate to me I'm viewed as stupid or socially inept to the point of requiring remedial attention.

I have a big sign that says take off your shoes at my house.

So, you don't find subtly mentioning to people who forget to remove their shoes that "the shoes go there" is sufficient? I find that even that is a bit of a sledgehammer approach; usually once someone notices everyone else is shoeless, he remembers to take his shoes off the next time he visit. And, in my experience, people who wear shoes indoors typically keep their shoes pretty clean. I would find it rather creepy to enter someone's house and be greeted with a big sign. About anything.

One guy walked in with his shoes on and didnt take them off, I asked him about it and if he saw the sign. I then through him out of my house.

Did he refuse to take them off or something? Or do you just believe that people who don't notice large signs should never be permitted in your domestic space?

My thing is its my house and my game.

Nobody disagrees with that. It's just that our solution is to socialize with people who don't need to be hit with rolled-up newspapers in order to behave correctly.

If you don't like the rules, no hard feelings adios.

If people need written rules for behaving like civilized beings, they don't belong in my home in the first place.

Sorry the rational that he is a contro lfreak because he has rules is silly. I consider myself liberal but I don't think my freedoms are being reduced because the guy wants me to concentrate on gaming while I'm at the table, because he doesn't want power gamers at his games nor does he want to waste an hour ordering food during his game time. Heck, when I"m interviewing for a game with a dm, I have a list of questions I bring him, and some of these things would be on that list of questions.

Again, what is at issue here is whether certain things should need to be spelled-out. It is pretty easy to tell whether people are house-trained or not when you meet them. If they're not, don't ask them to join your game.

I realize there is another reason I wouldn't want to join a game with these kinds of posted rules: it would indicate that the host was so devoid of social inituition that interpersonal conflicts would likely arise with unnecessary frequency.

IMO, most of the people that focus on the proposed rules as being part of a "control freak" nature probably only game with friends and known acquaintances. Some of us haven't had that luxury (or wouldn't touch it ever again for certain reasons) and instead game with people more in line with how you would expect to game at a convention. In other words, putting an ad up and getting together with previously unknown people who share the common interest of roleplaying (and maybe nothing else).

I don't really buy this. Don't you interview potential players at a neutral spot before they show up? I recruited four players from messageboards and the like this year; simply meeting with them was enough to establish whether they were basically socially functional.

 

[Odhanan]

I think you hit the biggest issue on the head with the friends comment. IMO, most of the people that focus on the proposed rules as being part of a "control freak" nature probably only game with friends and known acquaintances.

I can confirm that for myself. Like I wouldn't go partying with people I do not at least know and like a fair bit, I wouldn't play RPGs with people I do not want to play with in the first place. I've been in conventions, played/ran games in conventions and would do it again. It allows me to know other people, to meet new people and so on. But I wouldn't become friends with people just because I've played with them, and therefore wouldn't propose a regular game with these people unless I liked them in the first place.

If I'm not lucky enough to have friends in the region I'm staying in, I make friends, socialize first. Then I would propose RPGs to these new-made friends.

 

[DonTadow]

And obviously there are a large number of gamers who would not tolerate being given a list of rules at the door which include not taking breaks.

We should be tarred and feathered for feeling that would be insulting.


Some? Why not all?

I don't have a problem with asking questions - I have a problem with being given a list of rules to live by. If I wanted that I would join the Army or visit a Rave cinema, where I can be told specifically to not put my feet up on the chairs in front of me. That's nice if I were 8 years old, but insulting as an adult.

Are you not noticing that a good number of responses here from fellow gamers say that this is insulting in the least? It's not a question of having rules, but how those rules are presented - this method is over-the-top for me and apparently many others.

the oddest thing about this thread is that we're talking about dungeons and dragons... a game that has a ton of rules... that we all have to follow to play the game... l

As far as rules, you guys all have been indited with rules, maybe as soon as yesterday. It's all about how they are presented. In huge public settings its not cost effective to present the rules to everyone, but if you walk into a casino, signs are posted as to certain behavior that isn't tolerated. There are posters about cheating, getting addicted to gambling and suc. I bet if he had a nice colorful flyer with some humor in it this thread would have ended page one. There are commercials about smoking, drinking, overeating and illicit sex, things that mosto f us would think would be understood, but they are presented. When you walk into someones house, they verbally give you a list of things they don't accept. No smoking in the house, please use coasters, remove yoru shoes, use these plates and not these. In some instances this is obvious but people still reiterate them.

I've walked into restaurants and seen signs that say be mindful at others. There's a big push on the west coast where restaurants are posting signs telling parents to mind their children.

I can see if someone only told you this rule, yeah I'd feel insulted then. But if he's presenting this to everyone (hey I know we're all adults, but please don't do abc). At the gaming table its a bit more regid and this is because these are people whom are not close friends.

Again, I'm glad you have never met people whom need these rules, but I"ve met more than my share whom do, and obviously so has the OP and others. If you've only gamed with close friends, I honestly don't see how anyone can contribute to this opinion because they can not fully understand the situation. Whereas we are thinking about people we don't know, strangers ect. you guys are reading the post and thinking about long time friends, gfs, and family.

I'm sorry, meeting with somone for an hour can not determine if they are socially functionable. You've just got lucky.

 

[GQuail]

Hmm, a lot of back and forth on this threat, but it's all very interesting never the less.

I almost always run the games I play and I have almost always played with people who were either friends, or friends of friends (and tended to become friends quickly when they wanted to find out what prestige classes were available ;-) )

The only times I've run for randoms, it was one-off games for my University's gaming group. Even then, through the power of such groups I was able to quickly assess someone's personality by a sideways chat with other people I knew.

Sure, if you run for people you've only met because they answered your advert for gamers, by all means you might wanna be crystal clear as to your groups ground rules. But the exact wording of these rules does seem very adversarial to me, and it would make me wonder a bit about the game and it's chequered past.

My own game, we don't have formal rules, but I have spoken to the PCs (either in person, over IM software or through my blog, which features weekly "infodumps" recapping the past plot as well as other campaign related stuff) about some issues that have come up: such as when I was worried our start time had crept forward about an hour, and was starting to notably shrink our sessions, especially because some people were leaving earlier as well. In that case, there were other factors (people with new jobs/I had moved flat and was less central/some people were using public transport rather than their own cars) and we as a group talked about it: and everyone agreed it was a problem and we tried to find a way to solve it. I may have suggested things, but I invovled all the PCs in the situation, and now we kick start aftr 1830 once we have 4 or more players.

What am I saying? I guess I'm saying "Your rules come off a bit brash, but there's nothing wrong with setting down in writing some of your groups rules, especially if you have a constant stream of new players who may need to catch up with them." Like others have said, if I walked into someone's flat and was greeted with "Hey, welcome to our game, by the way you;'d better wash your hands after peeing or you're outta here", I'd get a bit worried about the kind of atmosphere I'd be in if I hung out here.

I also specifically think that "no food breaks" is a bit draconian, but my own group did have some problems with this as well: because our start time crept forward, people were getting hungrier earlier into the actual play time, and people seemed less likely to bring food with them as they did before because I literally live right outside a good but busy take-out place: a good solid Scottish fish & chip shop. ;-) Plus, my girlfriend (who also plays with us) doesn't like frozen pizzas or similar "quick fix" foods, so when she got hungry it involved a full-on meal preperation, which can add up to quite a lot of lost time. So, I made sure there was a dedicated "munchie break" mid-game people could aim for, and simply took to either me or my girlfriend making food before the session, or ordering something in.

I guess we all get our pet peeves from previous games, though. In my current one, our main time-waster is PC's havering over decisions. I intentionally wanted to be less "rail-roady" so gave them the map of an area, showed their start/end point, and asked them how they were travelling. At one point, there was 2 valid routes to go to their target: a bridge over an undead-ridden river, or a swamp with a stone circle in the middle., They spent almost an hour talking about this, when they knew sod all abotu either and it pretty much came down to a coin toss anyway. But how do I create a rule about that without sounding unfair? "Don't worry about your characters?"

 

[Emirikol]

Having now also read your questionnaire, I think that might be part of your problem too. Quite a few of your "responses" are really complete strawmen...responses so ludicrously over-the-top that you really can't expect anyone to actually select them (though I'm sure you wouldn't want anyone who *would* choose them in your group).
Now, I'm guessing that you've had problems with people doing #3 and #4, and that's why
you have this question in here. Do you really think anyone will legitimately pick either of these, given the obvious slant of the responses?

Funny you should say that I save all old questionaires so that I know whether or not a person has re-applied. Let me relate some SAMPLES from the questionaires that I've gotten back (ACTUAL STUFF). Although we consider the 'whole' thing, some people we reject just because THEY DON'T KNOW BETTER THAN NOT TO ANSWER THE OBVIOUSLY INCORRECT ANSWERS:

"I only play halflings. If your world doesn't have halflings, I won't play in it."
"Good mix with a chaotic party? I'd like to play a Samurai Paladin"
"Other things I do besides gaming? Uhm, nothing."
"Occupation: none. It's a long story, but I just got out of doing some time."
"[all caps] THIS IS A STUPID )()(&*(&^ THING. I WON'T PLAY IN A GROUP THAT IS SO OBTRUSIVE ABOUT ME. CONSIDER ME NOT INTERESTED."
"I live in Akron/Vail/Fort COllins/Colorado Springs" [Although we play in the far western suburb of Denver, I've had people apply from locations that are 2-4 hour drives away..no offense, but we're looking for local gamers]
"Description of combat: F*(*& die, F(*(&*& die, die die!" [it was after that one that I added the 'cursing section' just for fun
"Notes: Is it ok if I bring some pot once in a while? I'd bring enough for everyone."
"Age: 13" [yes, too young; it's a CONAN game afterall]
"Can you provide your own transportation: I don't have a drivers license yet. I'd need a ride from Stapleton [the OTHER SIDE OF TOWN]"
"Notes: I WILL ONLY PLAY IF MY WIFE CAN PLAY WITH ME. I'm having a hard time getting her to want to play and I hope that she'll fill this stupid thing out. I'll let you know."
[multiple wrongs] "Roleplaying: not much; Character differential: about the same every time; Combat: numbers only; Note taking: none, the Dm can tell me" [Oooh, you seem exciting, please join my group! It was true. We actually interviewed this guy and he was a complete slug.]

Again, this isn't a 'test.' It's an evaluation device for gamer needs. We don't exclude people because they choose only one answer we don't like, but usually this helps get out the big three: losers, a55h01e5, and age problems. Some people REALLY are that stupid when they fill out these things and it has saved us a LOT of trouble over the years..My friend Todd Landrum, who actually came up with the questionaire about 7 years ago, still talks about the guy who laid into him on the phone for 45 minutes for actually having such an 'elitist' questionaire. Guess what? He didn't get the position...

Thanks for the feedback. Are there any questions you wish you'd have asked someone that didn't fit in your group that would have saved you some heartache?

jh
..

 

[Emirikol]

6. Players who create stupidly munchkin characters can expect a stupidly short life and not at the expense of the other PC's lives.
--Yes. Honestly, I'm an avid power-gamer. When I make a character based on a strong concept, they're going to be good. I, however, do my damnest not to shove my character into the spot light every single time, even if it's what s/he is good at! As a player, I get extremely frustrated when someone decides to make the 'uber-whatever' and take up all the game time just because 'they're that awesome'.
-P.C.

Exactly. We all want advantages for our character, but if we min/max, we don't go around flaunting it in the faces of all those people who didn't and then go monopolize the DM's time on killing sprees (THIS NEVER HAPPENS RIGHT? WRONG. ..AND I'M DAMN SOURED OF IT).

These of course are guidelines, not rules. When I started my new campaign 2 weeks ago, we went over this stuff. We didn't make people memorize it. We didn't hold a gun to people's heads. Nobody walked out. Nobody flinched. I told them how the game would be: It's HYBORIA. Characters WILL DIE in gruesome ways and be coup de graced AT WILL by the DM. Naked slave girls will be part of the world (as they are in the books). Much magic will be NON-D&D where the DM can bend it to his will (not to FU(* the party over, but to keep things interesting). I helped the players understand the the reason why we do this stuff is to keep the games consistently 'better' than the crap games that we've all wasted time on in the past. They all agreed and my veteran players simply nodded their heads and practically shouted AMEN to some of the episodes we shared.

People that see these as rules would be the kinds of people that might take them too personal (and again, wouldn't be the kind of person I'd want in the group..they're too serious about this crap).

jh
..

 

[Krypter]

Originally Posted by Steel_Wind
Do you have any idea how utterly bewildered and offended many of us would be to recieve such "rules" upon entering someone's home as a guest?

Yep. Because it wouldn't just indicate my host was a control freak with very poor judgement; it would also indicate I was in danger of gaming with people whose behaviour the list was written to regulate.

Yes, the questionaire is rude and insulting for anyone with a basic understanding of social etiquette. It may weed out the insane losers, but it also weeds out decent, well-adjusted people who don't like being preemptively hit on the head. That's definitely control freak territory, Emirikol.

It's like handing out an application entitled "Tell Me Why You Should be Allowed to be My Friend" to everyone you meet.


PS: You're not living up to your namesake, you know!

 

[DonTadow]

Yes, the questionaire is rude and insulting for anyone with a basic understanding of social etiquette. It may weed out the insane losers, but it also weeds out decent, well-adjusted people who don't like being preemptively hit on the head. That's definitely control freak territory, Emirikol.

It's like handing out an application entitled "Tell Me Why You Should be Allowed to be My Friend" to everyone you meet.


PS: You're not living up to your namesake, you know!

So what's the biggest risk... losing a few people whom may take offense, or taking in a few socially inept people.

 

[freebfrost]

the oddest thing about this thread is that we're talking about dungeons and dragons... a game that has a ton of rules... that we all have to follow to play the game...

Poker has rules, but do you sit down and hand your friends a list of "behavior" rules when you play some texas hold-em? This is a non sequitur.

I've walked into restaurants and seen signs that say be mindful at others. There's a big push on the west coast where restaurants are posting signs telling parents to mind their children.

And what is the public reaction to those? As I mentioned above, a theatre chain near me starting handing out a rules card for every show. I, as well as a large number of work associates, friends, and acquaintances now refuse to see movies there on the same principle.

I can see if someone only told you this rule, yeah I'd feel insulted then. But if he's presenting this to everyone (hey I know we're all adults, but please don't do abc). At the gaming table its a bit more regid and this is because these are people whom are not close friends.

How about an example then?

If you are going to continue to post in this thread then, I'd like you to observe the following:

1) Do not use slang, poor grammar, or bad punctuation.
2) Do not submit unacceptable language.

OK, so far, right?

3) Do not reply unless you quote just the specific part you are replying to in your post.
4) Do not use acroynms or broken constructions.

Still reasonable, and typically followed by most posters without being told.

5) Do not respond unless you first approve the post with me and the others who feel the way I do prior to posting.
6) Do not respond if your response is more than 10 minutes after mine.

Reasonable still? Like no breaks or being "voted" off? Or is it getting a bit intrusive?

I'm sorry, meeting with somone for an hour can not determine if they are socially functionable. You've just got lucky.

Interesting how I seemingly have this unending stream of luck that I wish I could focus to win that lottery!

The group I play in I only met about 2 years ago, through EnWorld, and only met them online before sitting in on a game. Didn't know anyone, and they are a phenomenal group. I do consider them friends - now, but not initially.

We recently lost a member to academia, and found a new member after a short meeting with our DM and another player - he's great. However, we also had another player who was a friend of one of the group, but he was disruptive and was not invited back. So friendship does not a good game necessarily make.

I find it hard to believe that you cannot find suitable players without a lock-step list of rules.