So I was more or less kicked out of my D&D group

[drnuncheon]

That said, you hit one of my BIGGEST pet peeves as a DM. Not paying attention. There's a couple of differences between bringing up a CCG that everyone plays, and flipping through a book.

You know, a lot of people have said this, but if I were at a game where everyone kept breaking off to talk about other subjects, I would assume "Hey, the DM doesn't really care if we pay strict attention and stay on topic."

In fact, I'd be a little - no, a lot annoyed if the DM expected me to pay strict attention and then continually went off on tangents with the players. So I understand DarkCrisis' reaction perfectly: "Why is what I'm doing wrong? At least I'm not sidetracking the game for everyone else."

The people who talk about the 'social contract' of the group need to remember: if it's an unstated social contract, then all you have to go on is the behavior of the other people - and they sure didn't act like paying attention to the game was important.

J

 

[Jolly Giant]

The DM sounds like a two year old.

Agreed. But then, so does the player... Seriously, you're whining about not getting a cut of the loot, when you're entire contribution was being rescued by the group?!?

Other than that, I won't comment, as I only have a decidedly one-sided version of the story...

 

[Aaron L]

Skimming a book during game bad? I don't know about you people, but a round in our games can take 15 minutes for everyone to go through their actions, and I sure as heck am not going to sit there staring at the wall (or DM) until it's my turn to act again.

 

[Deadguy]

Skimming a book during game bad? I don't know about you people, but a round in our games can take 15 minutes for everyone to go through their actions, and I sure as heck am not going to sit there staring at the wall (or DM) until it's my turn to act again.

It really does depend on your gaming contract. Some groups require close attention, others are more lax. But I suspect that all groups get annoyed with a player that needs reminding of things because his nose is in a book!

I happen to game with someone like that. He reads comics and magazines whilst gaming, whenever he's not directly involved. Now he's reasonably good at staying on top of what's going on, but even so he sometimes needs bringing up to speed when he's questioned as to his character's actions. He also cannot understand that other people might find his habit annoying - and we do! It does feel like he's snubbing the group, not interested in what anyone else thinks or is doing.

DarkCrisis may ahve brought some of this on himself but it doesn't alter the fact that it really appears his old DM is childish too. He's still probably better off looking for a group that will treat him better.

 

[WanderingMonster]

Skimming a book during game bad? I don't know about you people, but a round in our games can take 15 minutes for everyone to go through their actions, and I sure as heck am not going to sit there staring at the wall (or DM) until it's my turn to act again.

A 15 minute round? Yikes! I'd have to take up knitting.

 

[Pielorinho]

DarkCrisis did say he called ahead of game to let them know he wasn't going to be there. That's way different than just not showing up.

Too bad. Miss Manners says there are two excuses for missing a social engagement: the death of a close family member, or your own death. "Wanting a quiet evening at home" doesn't qualify.

This is my pet peeve. While some of my adventures don't spotlight particular characters, I do try to arrange storylines so that every PC gets a chance to shine. One session might involve the cleric making a difficult choice between his God and his family. Another evening might be a chance for the shadowdancer to learn more about the mysterious founder of her school of fighting. On a third evening, the adventure might take the shape of the wizard's old rivals showing up in town and raising Cain.

I do this because I think it's fun for the players. And when a player cancels on me at the last minute for a crappy reason (and "I have too much homework" is a crappy reason -- wanting a quiet evening at home is a downright sucky reason), it can ruin my plans for the evening, ruin the scenes and the plot advancement and the stats I've written up and everything.

DarkCrisis, your DM didn't handle your ill behavior with grace or aplomb. But you should consider the following things in the future:
* In a social situation, pay attention to other folks' cues. If they're annoyed at you for not paying attention, try paying attention.
* Once you make a social commitment, backing out is weaselly and uberlame. Keep the commitment unless somebody dies. If you MUST cancel it, do so with as much notice as you can. (e.g., if your grandmother dies on Sunday, call on Sunday to cancel your Wednesday game).
* In many RPG groups (mine included), player-knowledge and character-knowledge are kept separate. The characters don't know that the new forsaker is played by the same guy who played the dead rogue; the players therefore would be perilously close to cheating if they gave all the rogue's loot to the forsaker.
* In many RPG groups (mine included), people with new characters enter at a lower level than folks with current characters. This is a small reward for people who help story continuity by keeping the same character over the long haul.
* In many RPG groups (mine included), people are expected to create characters that can work well within the group. Your choice of a Forsaker may have been inadvertent; once you realized that you weren't going to be able to participate in the group, it would've been a good idea to create a different PC.

I'm sorry you had such an unpleasant experience. I do think that you can make some changes in your gaming behavior that'll help you avoid such experiences in the future.

Daniel

 

[ThoughtBubble]

You know, a lot of people have said this, but if I were at a game where everyone kept breaking off to talk about other subjects, I would assume "Hey, the DM doesn't really care if we pay strict attention and stay on topic."

In fact, I'd be a little - no, a lot annoyed if the DM expected me to pay strict attention and then continually went off on tangents with the players. So I understand DarkCrisis' reaction perfectly: "Why is what I'm doing wrong? At least I'm not sidetracking the game for everyone else."

The people who talk about the 'social contract' of the group need to remember: if it's an unstated social contract, then all you have to go on is the behavior of the other people - and they sure didn't act like paying attention to the game was important.

J

Well I for one try to discourage tangents as I DM. However, when we do tangent, we're still all paying attention to each other. So if I say "anyway, the room is made of solid stone blocks, about 30 feet by 30 feet," my players will hear it.

But I hear your point, and it's very good. I do get annoyed in the campaign I play in when I pay attention as my DM continually goes of on tangents with the other players. But if I stick my nose in a book, when the chance comes along for me to do something, I'm going to miss it. And if I'm not enjoying the game enough to pay attention, then it's time to leave.

But we have a few people who will have a conversation while the DM is talking, then be very perplexed when it's time to make decisions. It's about the same thing.

One other thought about books is body language. If you're looking in a book I can't make eye contact. And even if you're paying all the attention to me in the world, it'll feel like you don't care. And at least with my gaming group, our posture is a very powerful indicator.

After all's said though, I appreciate the other angle on the book thing. Hope that's the only thing I've said that's worth disagreeing with.

 

[ReiDuck]

Unfair?

It seems as though your DM is a tad anal. All of the DMs I've ever had only care about "paying attention" if you're actively ignoring the group when your character is supposed to be in action. (Example: One member was reading the PHB spell list, and failed to notice that his character was going to be the general in the upcoming battle between a rebel city and its mother country. We won the battle anyway.)

The best policy I've seen on player missing games is fairly simple - if you're not there, your character either tags along but doesn't do anything, or is mysteriously stricken with illness. In extreme cases, the character will be left behind. A more generous DM has decided that if you warn us in advance that you won't be at the game, then your character gets XP as well.

Still ...

 

[jdavis]

Skimming a book during game bad? I don't know about you people, but a round in our games can take 15 minutes for everyone to go through their actions, and I sure as heck am not going to sit there staring at the wall (or DM) until it's my turn to act again.

It's generally not a good thing neither is cancelling at the last minute, but they are not major wrongs, We have people skimming through books all the time when we play, it can be annoying but normally isn't, they know when to put the book down and pay attention, I have gamed with a person who read comic books during the game and that was real annoying. Yes it was wrong to be skimming a book during the game, but it wasn't a offense worth running somebody out of the group over.

My group is pretty lax with people missing but we try to always give ample notice, last minute ditching is a pain in the butt, of course it seems this wasn't something he did on a regular basis. A bad thing but not that bad.

If a DM killed my character off while I wasn't there then I would quit the game right then and there. That's just vindictive and shallow behavior. Anything past that in this discussion becomes a mute point for me as from then on out it is obvious the DM was trying to make him leave, not run the game, not keep things exciting, but he had a vendetta against the player, that is just bad for a DM to do, I really don't care if he was chained to a wall for 5 hours or didn't get a share of the loot, the DM did these things to run the guy off not for gameplay purposes. He could of picked any character class and I bet the same things would of happened. I don't guess people agree with me on this one, I guess DM's killing off characters when the player isn't there is ok with people, it's these little nitpicky things that are important. The DM spent 5 hours ignoring the guys character, worked him in at the end (and screwed with him) then told him not to bother showing up the next week. Why was not getting a share of the treasure important? Would it of mattered if he had picked a better class? The DM hosed him and ran him off, heck he was probably mad you didn't get the point when he killed your character off. I'm sure there is more to this, it's just not a proper response to minor offenses, the DM had it out for the player, he was dropping some pretty big hints that you were not welcome in his game anymore, that's a big step from I was skimming a book. There is more than meets the eye here.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

If someone at the table can't get there becuase of his girlfriend of wife, or becuase he just doesn't feel good I'm not going to make an issue about it. Now if he's constantly not there I'm going to remove his PC from the group of course. But I'm not going to get pissy about it, if he's got something more important to do than play the game what can I do? I don't think you can expect a player to make the game his number one priority every Monday night when he's got more important real life stuff to deal with on occasion. When I get back in school this summer I'm sure there will be the occasional night where I won't be able to run the game due to homework and stuff like that. They can get as mad as they want, they won't in my case, but some things have a higher priority than a RPG.