|
A previous thread got me thinking about rule zero.
Being married with children and working with the public I, by my nature and training, am a diplomat. The concept of "my way or the highway" works well for my wife but not for me (for you younger folk, the key to a happy marriage is two simple words... "yes ma’am" =).
So with that foundation, my variation of rule zero is "have fun". I feel everyone, including myself, should have fun at a table. Now mind you, everyone’s version of fun is different. Some folk like rules lawyering, some like being in character, and some just like the company. I feel it is the job of the DM to mediate these various versions of fun so everyone is entertained.
In the previous thread, the player version of rule zero was mentioned as the right of a player to leave the table. I was a bit bothered by this revelation. The idea to leave a table, and the few times I have been a player I have sat at some pretty weak tables, I never once even broached the thought of leaving. Something about being rude to counter a rude never settled right with me (That, and being a bit on the tenaciously stubborn side, make it very difficult for me to quit anything =).
My version of player rule zero would be... Surprise, have fun. Those times I mentioned above, I made the best out of the situation and had fun. In all instances it was still rather unpleasant but at least it was a slightly more entertaining and funny unpleasantness.
And yes... The grass is greener on the other side.
I still want to see you carry over what you had intended at your other thread, dagnabbit! :P
[hand waves]
these are not the secrets you're looking for.
[/hand waves]
I'm all in favor of what you are saying, but sometimes things become quite impossible, even if you are stubborn enough to hang on, there comes a time when it's more of a hindrance than a boon, then it's time to change, or leave.
We had that problem in one of my tables this month. Twqo players were messing with the table, not paying attecntion, joking around a lot, not letting anyone else have fun. We gave them an ultimatum, and they behaved at our last session. Those guys have 10 years less of experience than me and reallyu 10 years less than me, I don't see a problem with it. But if I didn't see any evolution in playstile, I would be bound to leave, and do something more fun with my time, there's nothing wrong with that.
I think a group would have to be pretty awful for me to leave the table.
I could see myself not coming back for the second session, but unless something deeply offensive happened, I don't think I'd walk out on people.
As a GM, if a player stood up and walked away, I'd be pretty upset.
I would be upset to but I can see styles not meshing. I also don't think the player should waste their time, so I normally give them a description of how I DM.
|
|
I agree about impossible situations. The worst infractions have been at my long term home games. Players having a bad day, or even worse, really too jovial, were the main causes, and in those cases I have simply called the game. We then either played a different type of game (Munchkin is a favorite default), hung out, or played some kind of outdoor game.
As for individually obscene players. I have had to, on multiple occasions, make a hard fast ruling with the addendum to the player that we would discuss and research the matter after the game (At my home games it is understood that this includes a dollar bet which the winner claims).
I have found that the way to deal with really annoying metagamers is to simply give them their hearts desire. Last year I had a player who was really pushing the envelope in a Star Frontier/Fantasy themed game. He wanted to have a magical shocking AK47. With his feats and maximizing everything he could possibly maximize he was doing hundreds of points damage per round. It was ugly, really ugly. The other players still had fun doing their part and making fun of the metagamer. By the third game the PC and his weapon was retired because "it wasn't fun".
It's interesting that you are referring to Rule Zero, since Paizo adjusted that in Pathfinder to be "The Most Important Rule", which essentially is "Have Fun" (while encompassing the old, "these are the guidelines, you make the rules" philosophy). I think it was expressed more directly on the boards at one or more points.
As for table-walking, I've been close once with a group of really obnoxious players for a game I was sitting in on as a favor to the DM - the tide turned a bit right as I was getting ready to stand and go.
|
I would be upset to but I can see styles not meshing. I also don't think the player should waste their time, so I normally give them a description of how I DM.I think a group would have to be pretty awful for me to leave the table.
I could see myself not coming back for the second session, but unless something deeply offensive happened, I don't think I'd walk out on people.
As a GM, if a player stood up and walked away, I'd be pretty upset.
I think the big thing for me is the appropriateness of the timing. Waiting until a mid-game food break and then approaching me and telling me why they're not enjoying themselves is one thing.
Much different than what has been discussed previously - standing up and leaving as soon as something doesn't go in your favor.As I said before, I wouldn't leave abruptly unless something/someone had seriously offended me. Even then, I'd try to do so without making a scene. I guess since I wouldn't do it, I'd feel upset if someone did it to me.
I still say it's rude to just up and leave mid session. If you wait until the end and hopefully even explain your problem to the host, then you can claim to have acted with decorum.
Maybe I misread into some of the posts. I wasn't calling anyone out, and I agree it should be obvious that leaving mid session is bad form. I'm not disagreeing with a player's right to leave, I just want make sure people are considerate at least of the people that hosted and invited the player to the table in the first place.
If my post came across as too "lecture-y" then I apologize.
|
|
It's no more rude to leave the table than it is rude to not eat broccoli because you don't like broccoli.
I don't think those are comparable.
If you sit down to a meal with friends/acquaintances and then leave in the middle of the meal because you don't like the food, that's rude.
Replace "meal" with "game" and "food" with "play style".
Your idea of not eating broccoli because you don't like it is a decent comparison to what I would recommend - sit through the meal/game, enjoy the parts you do like, and try to "eat around" the parts you don't.
Once the meal/game is over, you can easily decide not to go back to that restaurant/table if you really didn't like it.
But walking out in the middle is rude to your friends and fellow gamers.
(All IMHO, of course - no offense meant :) )
|
You are the DM, you make the world. Players allow you to have a game, but parameters need to be set, e.g. thematic elements, restrictions, general knowledge, etc.
If a player presents something that is too incompatible with your world, and a compromise cannot be reached, say no.
If a player becomes agitated over such restrictions, there are other games. I understand it is more difficult if it is a friend, but the game need not be changed for one guy.
I would be upset to but I can see styles not meshing. I also don't think the player should waste their time, so I normally give them a description of how I DM.I think a group would have to be pretty awful for me to leave the table.
I could see myself not coming back for the second session, but unless something deeply offensive happened, I don't think I'd walk out on people.
As a GM, if a player stood up and walked away, I'd be pretty upset.
I think the big thing for me is the appropriateness of the timing. Waiting until a mid-game food break and then approaching me and telling me why they're not enjoying themselves is one thing.
Much different than what has been discussed previously - standing up and leaving as soon as something doesn't go in your favor.As I said before, I wouldn't leave abruptly unless something/someone had seriously offended me. Even then, I'd try to do so without making a scene. I guess since I wouldn't do it, I'd feel upset if someone did it to me.
OK. I assumed a more civil leave was being discussed, but yeah an abrupt leave would probably disrupt the rest of the night.
|
|
You're making a couple of assumptions which aren't necessarily true. I've been in pick up games with people I didn't know who were a~%@%*@s. I had one GM who had a couple of guys in a bar take my 1st level Wizard out and force him to play catcher to a donkey's pitcher.
The fact is there are times when the best way for one to have fun is to get up in the middle of the session and walk away from the table.
Having said that, I've certainly given you no reason to believe that I think getting up and walking away mid-session should be something done regularly.
I concede the point on assumptions - I generally only game with friends and family, and occasionally with a friend of a friend. I rarely play with folks I don't know, and I was assuming that was the situation being discussed.
That bit with the donkey...well, that's brushing up against what I would consider offensive, and as I stated before, I wouldn't be opposed to walking away from a group that really offended me.And no, I haven't gotten the sense from your posts that leaving a table is/should be a regular event. :)
To change the discussion slightly: what would cause you to walk away from a game mid-session?
OK. I assumed a more civil leave was being discussed, but yeah an abrupt leave would probably disrupt the rest of the night.
See, I think it would be hard to do a "civil leave". Even being as polite as possible, you're still sending the message of "I don't enjoy playing with you" which can be hard to hear, especially on a GM. Maybe it's my non-confrontational side coming through, but I'd sit through a bad game session, leave as soon as the GM calls it a night, and then not come back rather than risk causing an upset mid-session.
Several years back, I walked out (ok, stormed out) of a cheating DM's game. I found out later that he had previously been spreading all manner of lies about me and calling me a cheat. In fairness, I had corrected several of his willful mis-interpretations of the rules, called him on several dirty stunts, defended those he picked on and had done similar provocative actions. So, I guess I deserved it.
If you are not being given the respect you deserve at the table, consider leaving. If you are being mistreated, leave.
I had a player leave once in the middle of a session, but he said he wasn't feeling well, so I didn't think too much about it. I do think he was upset about something at the table but he didn't want to talk about it at the time and it was several years ago so I don't remember the specifics. He may have been upset about it because he wasn't feeling well. He was back for the next session and he is one of the most regular attendees.
My biggest problem is that my players really only have any interest in what is going on when it is their turn or they're getting attacked, and they come to sessions without enough sleep. Last session, two of my four players took naps during the game, and these two players routinely sleep during the sessions. (They express interest in playing between sessions and then it never seems like they're committed while they're at the table.)
I have one player who shows up about 40% of the time, maybe less. I really wish he'd concretely say he's not interested in continuing the campaign so I could look for someone to more permanently fill his seat.
Anyway, I'm veering off-topic. My point is, I think I'd actually like if some of my players with different views on what the game should be would "walk off," or at least tell me definitively that they're not coming back. They're not really doing enough to bother me at the sessions for me to throw them out, but they don't seem like they're enjoying themselves very much to me.
I know at least one person I'd like to try to work into my game but can't because I can't guarantee seating.
Anyway, sorry if this veered off-topic.
My rule 0 is "the DM is always right." I want everyone to have fun though, so my "always right" is pretty accommodating. I wish they would roleplay more, but there's no concrete rule for that.
I had a player leave once in the middle of a session, but he said he wasn't feeling well, so I didn't think too much about it. I do think he was upset about something at the table but he didn't want to talk about it at the time and it was several years ago so I don't remember the specifics. He may have been upset about it because he wasn't feeling well. He was back for the next session and he is one of the most regular attendees.
My biggest problem is that my players really only have any interest in what is going on when it is their turn or they're getting attacked, and they come to sessions without enough sleep. Last session, two of my four players took naps during the game, and these two players routinely sleep during the sessions. (They express interest in playing between sessions and then it never seems like they're committed while they're at the table.)
I have one player who shows up about 40% of the time, maybe less. I really wish he'd concretely say he's not interested in continuing the campaign so I could look for someone to more permanently fill his seat.
Anyway, I'm veering off-topic. My point is, I think I'd actually like if some of my players with different views on what the game should be would "walk off," or at least tell me definitively that they're not coming back. They're not really doing enough to bother me at the sessions for me to throw them out, but they don't seem like they're enjoying themselves very much to me.
I know at least one person I'd like to try to work into my game but can't because I can't guarantee seating.
Anyway, sorry if this veered off-topic.
My rule 0 is "the DM is always right." I want everyone to have fun though, so my "always right" is pretty accommodating. I wish they would roleplay more, but there's no concrete rule for that.
You could try rewarding roleplay through xp or action points or something. People that are focused solely on combat should make the connection that if they don't invest themselves in the rest of the game they won't be as effective in combat when they're one or two levels behind.
I'd talk to your 40% attendance player. Mention that you've got someone more reliable that wants to play and that he either needs to commit or find another game.
I think AT LEAST 50% of XP MUST be Roleplaying. Without it it's just a board game, and there can be a winner, so there is no need for XP.
My point is, if you have those guys that don't roleplay as much or as well as they should, there is nothing wrong with giving them less XP. If a guy don't show up, he doesn't get XP for that session, if a guy cheats, disrupts, argue and so on, and so forth, he shouldn't get as much as the good player. If that makes them feel bad, it's their problem, good roleplaying should be rewarded, and with time these players either adapt or are replaced.
You're making a couple of assumptions which aren't necessarily true. I've been in pick up games with people I didn't know who were a~%@%*@s. I had one GM who had a couple of guys in a bar take my 1st level Wizard out and force him to play catcher to a donkey's pitcher.
The fact is there are times when the best way for one to have fun is to get up in the middle of the session and walk away from the table.
Having said that, I've certainly given you no reason to believe that I think getting up and walking away mid-session should be something done regularly.I concede the point on assumptions - I generally only game with friends and family, and occasionally with a friend of a friend. I rarely play with folks I don't know, and I was assuming that was the situation being discussed.
That bit with the donkey...well, that's brushing up against what I would consider offensive, and as I stated before, I wouldn't be opposed to walking away from a group that really offended me.And no, I haven't gotten the sense from your posts that leaving a table is/should be a regular event. :)
To change the discussion slightly: what would cause you to walk away from a game mid-session?
OK. I assumed a more civil leave was being discussed, but yeah an abrupt leave would probably disrupt the rest of the night.See, I think it would be hard to do a "civil leave". Even being as polite as possible, you're still sending the message of "I don't enjoy playing with you" which can be hard to hear, especially on a GM. Maybe it's my non-confrontational side coming through, but I'd sit through a bad game session, leave as soon as the GM calls it a night, and then not come back rather than risk causing an upset mid-session.
I would sit through it also. I might even show up again hoping things would improve, but if not I would contact the DM and let him know why I did not return. What I would not like is being given a flimsy excuse.
I have only once in my life walked out on a game mid session. Generally I agree it is better to try to resolve the issue peacably. I totally agree with the OP that you should try to find the fun in a game even if it isn't exactly what you want, and then try to discuss the issue with the dm away from the table. I dont think anyone should argue with the dm at the table itself. The one time I did leave the table, it was because I felt that there would be an argument if I stayed. I do however think if as a player you are not having fun (for whatever reason) and you dont believe it can be settled you shouldn't stay just to spare the DM's feelings. Certainly dont storm out in a huff, if you can do it during a break in the game great, but in the end, if you are truly not enjoying yourself at the table, you shouldnt be there.
|
|
I tried a experience point reward system for a public game awhile back. I gave a set amount of experience for showing up, participation, and even had a small bit for anyone who could provide a journal entry or picture that summed up the last game (I used both to help newbies settle into where we were at in the campaign).
The interesting thing I have found about roleplaying is that there is a steady degradation of roleplaying as the player becomes more experienced. The only players that seem to retain the RP part of the game over time are DM's (My favorite types of players). The decline that occurs is natural as the player gets a better grasp of the rules, but it definitely has an ironic phase when they bust your chops on rules while their character knows everything about monsters, what to expect from spells, etc. =).
I tried a experience point reward system for a public game awhile back. I gave a set amount of experience for showing up, participation, and even had a small bit for anyone who could provide a journal entry or picture that summed up the last game (I used both to help newbies settle into where we were at in the campaign).
The interesting thing I have found about roleplaying is that there is a steady degradation of roleplaying as the player becomes more experienced. The only players that seem to retain the RP part of the game over time are DM's (My favorite types of players). The decline that occurs is natural as the player gets a better grasp of the rules, but it definitely has an ironic phase when they bust your chops on rules while their character knows everything about monsters, what to expect from spells, etc. =).
I have seen the xp reward system. One of the dms in my group tried it a while back. Everyone got XP for encounters, then about 50% of the xp for an on level CR encounter for roleplaying and story awards. If you actively roleplayed (stayed in character, avoided metagaming etc) you got 75% instead. And for particularly good roleplay performances you got 100%.
The problem with that was, there were people who are just better at it then others in the group, and they would stand out. Certainly anyone could hit the 75% mark if they tried, but the truly great RP moments were for the most part distinct to a couple players in the group. It ended up where party members ended up spread across several levels. And in my experience that is a headache i never want as a dm. It's hard enough making encounters at the right difficulty for an equal level party, trying to do so when part of the party is considerably stronger then they other is alot more work. Now adays I split xp evenly even RP xp, the party rises and falls together.
Also amusingly enough, I have found the reverse. When I first started, I found it difficult to focus on roleplay because i was worried about my grasp on the rules. And given how long i've been playing, i'd done just about everything mechanically that I want with a character. In the last few years particularly, I've found myself more interested in the actual character I am playing instead of less.
There was a time for instance when i was so worried about getting my spells or attack rolls right, that i didnt offer up any description of my actions besides the basic, move here, whack that guy. Now that I am more comfortable with the rules, I find I have more time for descriptive and fun things to do outside the rules, like making up magic words and hand gestures for spells. Or describing my attacks in a more interesting way. I also have more time to think about what my character would do instead of what I would do (in combat i mean), since less of the time between my turns is occupied checking rules, spells and attack bonuses.
This kind of keeping in character in combat helps me keep the character in mind throughout the session. Where before combat would almost turn off roleplaying for a while, and then I would have to get back into it, it stays more fluid now, instead of start and stop.
Interestingly enough though, this grasp of the rules, and increased focus on roleplay has corresponded with an increase in dming, so maybe you are right, maybe getting behind the screen is helpful in allowing yourself to get into the story. I certainly think it is good for everyone to both DM and play occassionally, if only to keep things in perspective.