Quitting a group & starting anew..ground rules?

[ThirdWizard]

Kind of like going out on a first date with someone who rattles off all the shabby stuff her ex did, then says "so you won't do any of that stuff, right?"

That's exactly what it sounds like. And that's exactly what it is. Backlash controlling nature built on baggage from bad experiences. You say it won't be so harsh in practice? What gurantee do you give of that? Why write it down if you arn't going to be so harsh? Presumably, so that you can become that harsh if you feel it necessary.

You can't force people to have fun. People should level up their characters becuase they want to, not because they know they won't be able to play if they don't. People should be into the game because its exciting, not because the rules say that they have to be. I think the rules cause more problems in the other direction as what you're used to. There's a happy medium that needs to be found here, and you create that not with documents but with comraderie.

I'm all for table rules, house rules, amd game rules documents. All for them. I think that they should focus on play styles instead of "laws" though.

 

[Starglim]

Neither A nor B, really. I find a great need for table rules and a better game when they're in place, though I wouldn't use most of your rules specifically.

Threatening to kick out a player is generally counterproductive, because it's a very easy option for the player to take your ruling and storm out, claiming to be the victim in the case.

In the case of lack of preparation, lack of attention or non-compliance with simple instructions, I'd rather make it clearly understood that if he hasn't made the effort for the game in this instance, his character will be moved along for the good of the group, and in ways that he might not appreciate. I try to foster the sense that players have a lot more creative control if they put in some thought and work with me and the rest of the group rather than otherwise.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

1. Everybody fills out the potential player questionaire (email me if you want it) and NOBODY invites anyone else without the whole group's permission.

I would be fine with this. I've played in too many games with people I know to be disruptive or just plain irritating, included only because the DM didn't feel comfortable excluding them once they found out about the game, or because another player invited them in.

2. People are either here to game or are not welcome here. If you're not here to game, you're in the wrong place so g.t.h.o.

Honestly, I think this depends upon the people involved. Some people are perfectly capable of watching quietly and enjoying it without being disruptive. I think this is a rule which only makes sense if someone at the table has a problem enjoying the game with spectators around.

On the other hand, interpreted as an injunction against showing up when you're not in the mood to play the game, it makes sense to me.

3. Nobody sits at the table until their character is finished and has been reviewed by the DM (that includes levelling). You didn't get it done by game time and had the last 2 weeks to do it? Oh darn. Go home and stop wasting everyone elses time.

I'd be perfectly happy with this rule.

4. Players police their own. That means that the DM is not a baby sitter. The DM assigns 2 or more players to set the offending player straight or the game is over. Peer pressure is our rule.

I'm not clear what offences this rule refers to. Cheating? Disruptiveness?

5. Nobody questions the DM's rulings during the game unless it would mean instant death for someone's character otherwise and they've already looked up the rule and have their finger on the actual paragraph and are about to read it out loud. If it's abiguuous, the DM's ruling stands [period].

Excessive argument is a problem, or can be, but I think this goes too far.

6. Players who create stupidly munchkin characters can expect a stupidly short life and not at the expense of the other PC's lives.

This depends entirely upon what "stupidly munchkin" means. I fancy I create capable and efficient characters (when they're supposed to be, anyway), but they also have a personality and a history and everything a Real Roleplayer could want. I couldn't agree to this if "stupidly munchkin" meant "well-built".

7. Time is of the essence. We don't take smoke breaks. We don't stop to order food.

Ridiculous and unacceptable.

8. Want x.p.? Participate. All x.p. is given anonymously via email and will vary 10-50% from the next PC's.

Depends on what "participate" means. I'm comfortable with penalising disinterested and detached players, but quiet or shy people aren't necessarily shying away from participation.

9. Nobody is a 'permanent' member of the group. You can be 'voted out' at any time. Nothing personal. It's just gaming.

I prefer a different approach to setting up groups - then again, I'd leave gracefully if people were sick of playing with me.

10. Every couple months we review some of this stuff and come up with new rules.

Sensible.

11. Every player can expect to have their character die at some point.

Expect meaning "they definitely will one way or another", or expect meaning "be prepared for the possibility"? If the latter, I'm strongly for it. Plot immunity is for jerks.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Here are our ground rules:
1. Everybody fills out the potential player questionaire (email me if you want it) and NOBODY invites anyone else without the whole group's permission.

2. People are either here to game or are not welcome here. If you're not here to game, you're in the wrong place so g.t.h.o.

3. Nobody sits at the table until their character is finished and has been reviewed by the DM (that includes levelling). You didn't get it done by game time and had the last 2 weeks to do it? Oh darn. Go home and stop wasting everyone elses time.

4. Players police their own. That means that the DM is not a baby sitter. The DM assigns 2 or more players to set the offending player straight or the game is over. Peer pressure is our rule.

5. Nobody questions the DM's rulings during the game unless it would mean instant death for someone's character otherwise and they've already looked up the rule and have their finger on the actual paragraph and are about to read it out loud. If it's abiguuous, the DM's ruling stands [period].

6. Players who create stupidly munchkin characters can expect a stupidly short life and not at the expense of the other PC's lives.

7. Time is of the essence. We don't take smoke breaks. We don't stop to order food.

8. Want x.p.? Participate. All x.p. is given anonymously via email and will vary 10-50% from the next PC's.

9. Nobody is a 'permanent' member of the group. You can be 'voted out' at any time. Nothing personal. It's just gaming.

10. Every couple months we review some of this stuff and come up with new rules.

11. Every player can expect to have their character die at some point.

jh
..

The ones I put in bold I'd be very leery of unless the GM was top of the game including providing a place to play, food to eat (since there's no stopping for food), miniatures for the group, battle matts, etc...

Player's policing their own? What, looking over their character sheets? I hate that crap. Don't worry about what my character is doing, worry about your own character. And what's a munchkin? Is it someone who knows the rules or someone out to screw the other party members? My characters can very from complex to simple efficiency but I'm not going to NOT use the rules so that the other players can keep pace with me.

Some important rules might be those not listed.

1. Players should know the rules before game play starts.

2. At the end of the session, each player will note which rules were a problem and study those rules for future game play.

3. If the person laying down the rules gets voted out, it's not personal.

 

[Hitokiri]

well, while I can agree to the spirit of most of those rules, if a Dm ever handed me a list that was worded even close to that I would get up and walk out then and there (and yes, I have done that to DMs before for similar things). The only rules I would take exception to are the ones about no food and character death. frankly, I see D&D as a social event, I don't go someplace to play D&D so much as I go play D&D to hang out with people I like and who share a common interest. Food is pretty much a staple at every game I've been in, either in the form of a meal break or a snack run built into the gaming session. It's a good way to let people socialize and chat outside of the game, and can help keep people from doing so inside the game.

as for PC death, I have no issue with PCs dying (I've lost 2 in the last three weeks), but to word it like that seems like you are telling players that their PC's will die and there is no way to avoid it. IMHO, that is just setting up a DM vs. player attitude that asks for trouble. Also, why would I, as a player, want to invest a lot of time into creating a well rounded and unique character if I know that I am going to have to do it all over again before too long? It's so much easier to roll up fighter goon #1 than it is to create Thideus Pruett the wizard/rogue who collects unusual magical knickknacks. Death should be a possability, not an innevitability.

All that being said, if you and your players all agree to these rules and have fun while using them, then who am I to tell you guys how to play.

 

[siege72]

The only rules I would take exception to are the ones about no food and character death. frankly, I see D&D as a social event, I don't go someplace to play D&D so much as I go play D&D to hang out with people I like and who share a common interest. Food is pretty much a staple at every game I've been in, either in the form of a meal break or a snack run built into the gaming session. It's a good way to let people socialize and chat outside of the game, and can help keep people from doing so inside the game.

I can understand the reasons for not wanting to deal with food breaks. They're a distraction; more than once an hour has been spent trying to decide where to order from (and there's a ton of places near me). If you're playing on a weekly basis, losing an hour isn't a big deal. My D&D groups only play every two weeks, so every hour is precious.

More problems can come up people aren't reasonably intelligent and mature. I've seen players who:
* Assume that the DM is providing food and drinks
* "Forget" to bring money and can never pay
* Mooch from everyone else's food and snacks
* Cannot/will not agree on one place
* Are so picky they can't agree on anything, or need their order to be "special"
* Have so many food allergies or other problems that things can't be shared, so it's impossible to bring anything.

I've also run into a lot of problems with people thinking that "game time" is "social time". I'm not opposed to folks having a good time, but we're there for gaming -- not telling funny jokes, stories about work/kids, etc. It's unbelievably frustrating to run six-hour sessions that only had about two-three hours of actual gaming, because some individuals wanted a "social gathering" as opposed to "gaming".

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Focusing on the subject "DM" and the modifier "like those described" It gets a heck no from me. Those rules would make me leave a group, phrased anything like that. As a DM, I will however have a planning session with a new group discussing play style, prefered game flavor, (If I'm DMimg, 'no evil characters' isn't that negotiable, but I'll work with other quirks) and some table issues. Formalizing this into a social contract is an idea thats grown on me. Your list of demands? No way, in both tone and some of the content.

 

[Wombat]

Well... none of your rules are inherently too harsh, but in writing they come across too harsh in my opinion.

Gotta agree here.

Some of the rules you give are strictly common sense. Others are more play-specific. Some (like the ordering of food and "don't waste time") are a matter of taste and group.

All of them, however, come across as "Guilty Until Proven Innocent". Personally, even though I would be someone who would abide by most, if not all, of these rules, I would never sign up for such a game -- way too much anger, way too browbeating.

Games for me and my group are about having fun, first and foremost. We are in our 30s and 40s. We work hard all week and want to be able to blow off steam. And, yes, we have "internal rules" for how we conduct ourselves. But we are there first and foremost because we are friends.

If those rules came to my group in their current written form, I'd probably lose every single one of my players.

 

[Psychic Warrior]

Crap - clicked the wrong button. Meant to vote option #3 (Heck no) not #2.

 

[hexgrid]

If it's abiguuous, the DM's ruling stands [period].

Oh, so that's what that little dot is called- a "period." I've always wondered.