The Fine Art of Quitting a Bad Game

[jeffh]

A few days after the "backbreaking straw" game session, I e-mailed the DM: "Thank you for having me in your game, but I'm going to drop out of it now." I decided to not elaborate because when I brought up my concerns in the past, he just entered a debate mode instead of seriously considering what I was saying.

What do you mean by "entering a debate mode instead of seriously considering what you were saying"? To me, that sounds exactly like seriously considering what you were saying; certainly it is for me. (The other things you mentioned, on the other hand, do sound like legitimate signs of a sub-par and not-very-self-aware GM).

 

[Whimsical]

"entering a debate mode" = "working to win the discussion" instead of considering why I was bringing up what I was bringing. The fact is that he is a very witty guy and I'm not. Thus, I was not able to put my points in a manner that overcame his defenses and countermeaures. I would have appreciated it if he instead took some time to seriously consider what I was saying instead of coming up with a counterpoint halfway through my statement.

 

[Agent Oracle]

Thanks to everyone who offered advice, I'm taking a little from everyone, in order to try and get out of the bad game. My next meeting is on Thursday, but...

Well, on saturday, I went to my local game store, and discovered another game where they had just started. the GM filled me in on everything, no house rules, everyone started at 1st level and were just barely at 2nd level now. I join next week at 5 on saturday.

So, i'm changing games. I'll try to convince the two good players that our current GM is no good for us, I'm not sure on how well it'll work though. Again, thanks for all the great advice!

 

[Barak]

Re: Pay for play.

What about the following situation?

A few years ago, I was in a gaming group with an excellent DM. We played at a FLGS (we were all friends of the owner, who also played in the game). The DM got laid off, was in a tight spot, and decided to try offering his DMing for pay at the same gameshop (with, obviously, the blessing of the shop owner). Note that the game we were in remained free, as it was before.

Me and another player had free time, and free money, and really enjoyed the game, and the DM. So we decided to buy an "extra" game night. Is that bad? Would it have been better for us to loan the DM (who was also a friend) money, while knowing that he most likely wouldn't be in a position to repay us? Is it that much different from hiring a friend who happens to be really good at plumbing, yet not a licensed plumber, to fix your pipes?

There's nothing inherently wrong with the idea of pay for play.

 

[Wraith Form]

In defense of this in theory, it can be quite annoying to be the GM in a ongoing long-term game and be expected to buy everything. Buy all the supplements, buy the miniatures, buy the battlemats, etc. when the players get the PHB, maybe a splatbook or two and their PC. The DM is doing all the work, spending a lion's share of the expenses and everyone else is benefiting.

Sometimes it's quite reasonable for a group to set up a "help supply the game with materials" kitty to help defray these costs. I wouldn't expect a new and possibly trial member to jump in with two feet, though.

Agreed--totally agreed--but asking for a 'per game fee' is a little different from what you just described, lol--I'd be happy to give money in a situation like what you mention.

 

[Glyfair]

So, i'm changing games. I'll try to convince the two good players that our current GM is no good for us, I'm not sure on how well it'll work though. Again, thanks for all the great advice!

I'd recommend trying to avoid this. This can easily backfire.

Don't convince them "the GM is no good for us." Just convince them they want to play in a different game. Let them come to the conclusion that the other game's GM was the problem.

 

[Keifer113]

A reply from this game's DM

If someone isn't having fun in a game group, leave. If someone doesn't understand something, ask for an explanation. If you disagree, fine.

Don't go onto a board and post an attack on the group without putting out all the facts. That is a cowardly act.

Specific points to address : 1st ed conversions to 3.5. There was one, a finely played paladin who earned her holy avenger. I mean really earned it.

I did not allow players bringing in newcharacters to buy magic items, as I want to control magic somewhat initially so no game breaking items are brought in. I have a list of items the players will earn to make them on par with the established characters.

A +4 defender sword is overpowered? To a player who whined about not having any magic items????

No players were pushing for heavy houseruling in their favor. One player, siding with me about not using a grid in combat, mentioned that he was good at eveballing things without a grid.

I explained why I give slow XP advancements. It is ok to disagree with why I do so. The impression I got from Agent Oracle's complaints were that he wanted to level up as fast as possible so he could have an uberpowerful character.

I give a nice XP bonus for character fluff, because that makes for a good character. Characters are not just numbers rolled on a paper. Fluff like a background and a picture make a character breathe. I feel if you put hard work into a pic and a story, you should be rewarded for that.

I have been playing DnD for ages. I was on Eric Noah's boards when they first went up with news on 3.0. I also work for a gaming company and have to know 6+ gaming systems. I also have a real life and don't sit every night reading every sourcebook that has come out or memorizing every rule in the game.

I don't charge people to play. We are a game club, we have dues. Dues are used for gameclub purchases, not for enlarging my mini collection. All dues and expenditures were kept on a tracker on our website. I spend hundreds of dollars and spend dozens of man hours on buying mini's to enhance our game, out of my own pocket. I never ask anyone to help me with that. If a club charging dues is a bad thing, I suggest writing The Knights of the Dinner Table comic and telling them they are a bad example of a gaming group cause they do the same thing. ( that's a joke, son).

I will not sit here and type out the numerous things that Agent Oracle did wrong at our gaming table. I just want, before everyone else reads these posts, for people to remember there are two sides to every story, and before you empathsize with someone, try and find out all sides to the issue. As an end note, we were trying to find a nice way to let Agent Oracle know he was not a fit in our game club, and that his social and gaming skills needed alot of work.

 

[Keifer113]

Thanks to everyone who offered advice, I'm taking a little from everyone, in order to try and get out of the bad game. My next meeting is on Thursday, but...

Well, on saturday, I went to my local game store, and discovered another game where they had just started. the GM filled me in on everything, no house rules, everyone started at 1st level and were just barely at 2nd level now. I join next week at 5 on saturday.

So, i'm changing games. I'll try to convince the two good players that our current GM is no good for us, I'm not sure on how well it'll work though. Again, thanks for all the great advice!

I just saw this post. I suggest thinking before you post. It is against gaming etiquette to steal players from a game just because you disagree with the other players and the DM and are not having fun.

 

[Montague68]

Specific points to address : 1st ed conversions to 3.5. There was one, a finely played paladin who earned her holy avenger. I mean really earned it.

I did not allow players bringing in newcharacters to buy magic items, as I want to control magic somewhat initially so no game breaking items are brought in. I have a list of items the players will earn to make them on par with the established characters.

Interesting. Was the holy avenger the 1st edition, uber 50% magic resist kind or the 3.0 kind?

While indeed there are two sides to every story IMO I do see some warning signs that would be offputting to me. You allow this paladin to start play with one of the most powerful weapons in the game, but yet new incoming characters are not allowed any magic items at all. While she may have earned that Holy Avenger fair and square how is that fair to the other players who may have fairly earned magic items in their own right?

Instead of allowing characters to pick and choose starting magic items, you have a predetermined "list" of magic items that new characters will earn. If you want them to have this list of items in the first place why don't you simply just give them to the character at creation? This has the effect of putting new players into "apprentice mode" where they are considerably less able than your regular players.

While the OP may have some problems of his own, you come across as rather control-freakish and biased towards your regular players. You even admit in your other post about "hazing" new players. You are the first DM I have ever heard of that does anything other than making new players as welcome as possible.

 

[Keifer113]

Interesting. Was the holy avenger the 1st edition, uber 50% magic resist kind or the 3.0 kind?

While indeed there are two sides to every story IMO I do see some warning signs that would be offputting to me. You allow this paladin to start play with one of the most powerful weapons in the game, but yet new incoming characters are not allowed any magic items at all. While she may have earned that Holy Avenger fair and square how is that fair to the other players who may have fairly earned magic items in their own right?

Instead of allowing characters to pick and choose starting magic items, you have a predetermined "list" of magic items that new characters will earn. If you want them to have this list of items in the first place why don't you simply just give them to the character at creation? This has the effect of putting new players into "apprentice mode" where they are considerably less able than your regular players.

While the OP may have some problems of his own, you come across as rather control-freakish and biased towards your regular players. You even admit in your other post about "hazing" new players. You are the first DM I have ever heard of that does anything other than making new players as welcome as possible.

What would you value more, a sword that a DM gave you, or one you earned through a mighty fight with some watertrolls? What makes for a better story?

The players only went through 1 session before I started handing out the magic items. I needed to see what the power levels were and what they needed in terms of magic so that they could all be pretty equal. Thus, the paladin got her Holy Avenger, so I could adjust things for the players. Its working out pretty well. Agent Oracle reminds me of a baby who wants all the candy in a bag now.

I don't haze players. One of the other players joked about it, and in the session during a lull some of them drew a pic of the player and put funny sayings on the shirt...like, I rolled a 1 for penis size. I let it go cause it was harmless in my eyes. When AO started getting upset they stopped and later apologized.

At the end of that session, I'll note, AO said it was a good one and he had had fun, before leaving.

Am I control freakish? I think all good DM's are, to an extent. You have to control the game or it gets out of hand and fun for no one. If you have ever read Knights of the Dinner Table, look at BA. He's totally pushed around by his players. Look at Brian though...he is supposed to be a legend at DMing, and he is a control freak. So is Nitro. Are these bad examples to use? I dunno, but I think they reflect the experience of the KODT writers as to what a good and what a bad DM are like.

If I were a control freak, I would have said no to the paladin and the monk being used. I want people to have fun, and play what they want. I think the Knight class is a joke, but I let AO play it because he wanted to. <shrugs>