What issues should a new group settle up front?

[Sigurd]

The world is for the players.

Inside of the available world players should be able to find something that suits them all if they compromise, primarily with each other.
From the available options players my do anything they choose. The DM will not stop a player from using their free will even if it is a suicidal act. Players may eat glass, jump off cliffs, or leave a region and a plotline anytime they want so long as they can face the ramifications and plot results. If they are in a party however they intend to treat each other fairly.

They promise to abide by the rules as they understand them and share that understanding with the DM.


The rules are for the DM.

From the available rules the Dm should be able to find something that enables the whole world to 'work' especially if he\she compromises, especially with the players.

Eventually the players must accept a DM's judgement on the physics and nature of the game world at large. DM's make mystakes too and polite players may ask if particular house rules are still in place. Players have to agree to abide by the DM's judgement and their best natures and behaviors.

They will have far less work to do, or facts to balance than the DM. They may request a written ruling and any confusions clarified. But they agree not to harp on a firm decision.

The DM wants everyone to have fun.


The dice fall as they may.

It has happened that harsh rolls are modified but that can not be relied upon.
Die results, as the DM understands them, are observed by the characters. Any confusion see rule 2.


In General

Since all possible issues cannot be dealt with before play players and DM agree to have fun, assume confusion before corruption and look to have fun. Every session is a new day in the journey.


Sigurd

 

[mhacdebhandia]

Good stuff already. I would also add:

- Depth of character immersion

In this connection, I'd be asking whether it's factual or mechanical. I have no problem speaking in character as much as possible, but if a group I'm playing with expects me, the player, to "inhabit" the character in any sense, to pretend I am the character, then I want to know about it so I can bow out immediately.

Different people mean different things by "immersion" - it's important to establish common terms. In fact, a lot of these different suggestions resolve as "find commond ground and stick to it".

 

[Glyfair]

One I notice overlooked a lot:

What do you do when a player can't show up? Who runs the character? Does he fade in the background? Does he earn experience? Can he die?

 

[Jdvn1]

I think this thread:
http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=115318
Is useful to get ideas on what to work out.

 

[tetsujin28]

I hate questionaires with a passion. But using something like Universalis to work out all those things before a game starts? Genius.

 

[jdrakeh]

I doubt you ever will because most people think it comes down to what the GM wants rather than the player.

So very, very, sad - but also very, very, true. The old 'DM owns the table' paradigm should have died years ago, but a large number of self-obsessed individuals keep it very much alive, caring only about satisfying their own wants rather than catering to those of their players. I quit playing for a good, long, while because of GMs like this. I didn't get involved with RPGs to act out somebody else's pre-scripted fantasy.

 

[tetsujin28]

It's funny. I only ever get any joy out of GMing if the players are having fun.

 

[Aikuchi]

I believe some players have a strong preconcived idea that the 'GM rules ALL', so any suggestions that make and was shot down was because of the 'want's of the GM to his/her own particular mood/story arc and awhat-nots.

Those players fails to see the amount of time some GMs put into carefully deliberating whether such suggestions actually alter and unabalnce the overall campaign. If the world of crafted uniquely with some house rules in place, and it differentiates from the RAW in the book, some things have to be taken into consideration.

Some of my players felt I was trying my best to consider the other players request to keep the class unchanged in the campaign. Much of this stemmed from the Mystic Thuerge and Geomancer issues. I know I couldnt be completely inane about my suggestions since the other half of the table was agreeable with the changes. For class altering decisions, I make sure all players realize the changes because it may inversely affect them as a group. - ALL before the campaign begins of course.

Their callback and retorts were often in an exaggerated exaspertaion of *paraphrased* "Well, the GM controls everything anyways. Players have no say in anything". If such was truem, I would not have spent hours tryign to explain the ramifications of their keeping thei class untouched in a uniquely altered world.

In the end, it is true.
I did have some power.
I had to ask them to quit the game. It reinforced their idea of "The GM clearly control who can and cannot play in the game because he's on a power trip" but it was just as clear they were invading into the gaming experience for the rest of the players. (I have consulted with the other players - they were harsher and told me to not accomodate to their demands ... Scolded by players for not having a backbone ... ouch!)

I should have slapped them. (sigh)

-

 

[Aikuchi]

((hugs))
.
THats exactly how I feel!
There's this little part of me that sparks alive everytime I hear about players talk excitedly about what happened in game and mostly it not because of what I did, but what they atttempted.

 

[Hand of Evil]

The defintion of evil - what it is and what the DM rules & views are

The group tresure breakdown - how is it divided and given out

Their WILLS - yep, this is what happens in the event of death...this could be and should be a plot element...maybe the character wants to be brought back and has made arrangements, maybe he want to be burned on the top of mount doom or his family plot, his goods go to his family, his mother needs to be told...

House Rules