Earlier today I was informed by our city's Venture-Captain that "as far as [this city] is concerned", I am ejected from Society play. He cited past behavior problems (caused by mu bipolar disorder, for which I am considered disabled) as the reason for the ejection, and that 'several' persons have come forward to him stating that as long as I was present at any Society event, they would not be willing to play with me at the table or be willing to attend at all. I accepted the decision at the time, but have come to question it.
First of all, I know for a fact that there are Society players who will accept me and enjoy my presence at a table. Similarly, I know for a fact there are Society GMs willing to have me at their table, including our Venture-Lieutenant. When I brought this up to our Venture-Captain, he dismissed it by saying, "They don't know you like I do." This smacks of a personal vendetta against me. If an event is being coordinated by the Venture-Lieutenant, or another GM who is willing to let me play, I should be allowed to play.
If I am being ejected from the Society, then it should be from the Society in general, not just in this city. Also, I am taking steps to control my disorder (which, as I said, is a disabling condition for me), so events in the past should not reflect against my future behavior.
I enjoy Society play very much and have very few opportunities for social contact; depriving me of this activity would unfairly rob me of a necessary outlet for socialization with my peers. Is this judgement against me legal, by Society rules? And is there a higher authority that I can appeal to?
|
I'd wait for Mike to chime in but I'm fairly certain Venture Captains have no such power.
Actually they do.
@ John, As Thomas and Paul have said, you may want to contact Mike Brock about it directly if you would like to make an appeal. Bringing it directly to the boards makes it look more like you are trying to get even than trying to get the decision overruled, though I doubt that was your intention. Good luck!
|
I have this much to say:
- You have my sincere sympathy.
- I'm autistic and obsessive-compulsive.
- I've found myself on both ends of this sort of thing - I'd elaborate, but it wouldn't be terribly helpful. Ordinary people can be exceedingly mean and stupid - on the other hand, I know that some people are simply born damned.
- Dealing with people in real life can get such random results that I'd swear there's an actual d20 roll involved. You can be a god-king in one venue and persona non grata in others. I've never been banished from an entire city, per se (and I doubt anyone can actually do that unless it's some kind of cult-like small town rather than a real city), but I've lost several battles in my time. However, I'm presently a rather celebrated figure at my local Pathfinder Society (it helps to be recognized as the best rules lawyer they've got).
- Tabletop and online gaming come with some pitfalls, especially in the present era when gaming appears to have coalesced into an organized culture, a fact I abhor. Keep in mind you may never have very many friends - I don't, and I honestly think the truth is that most friendships are illusory. Small minds will always hate you whether you deserve it or not - but as long as you have reason to believe you're worth something, don't give up.
Venture-Agent, Colorado—Colorado Springs
|
I'd wait for Mike to chime in but I'm fairly certain Venture Captains have no such power.Actually they do.
It's definitely within the prerogative of any event coordinator (which need not be a VC) to exclude/ban/fail to invite/ask to leave any person he doesn't want participating in their event. But no one, to my knowledge, can ban a player from participating in events they did not personally coordinate. It would be like saying "no you can't come to my party this weekend, or go to any other party, or throw your own party... ever, unless you move far, far away." No one has the authority to do that (except perhaps reps of Paizo, who could presumably ban a player world-wide, not just from a specific area).
@John-Andre, I agree with the general notion you should contact Mike Brock for advice/guidance/clarification on the issue. Otherwise, look for other events in your area or start coordinating your own.
|
"Power" or not, I respect my VC and other VL enough to tell me that if a guy is disruptive/cheats, he ain't welcome at any event I'm coordinating.
The needs of the many...
That having been said, we're not just a collection of PFS numbers - we're human beings. Human beings need to be dealt with compassionately. I'm not there. I don't know the situation. VC has to worry about his player base leaving him over one guy. Simultaneously, PFS doesn't need a "inhuman" label when dealing with a legitimate medical condition. I'd like to think VC took all of this into account and made a tempered decision.
Maybe there's a way for OP to earn his way back in, gradually over time. Finding players isn't easy. Dismissing one outright is an extreme measure.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm sure there are many reasons and many considerations that were a factor in this decision that we are a online community will not and should not be privy to.
This isn't something that we can debate and hash out on the boards guys. The correct chain of command has been suggested and we should really just leave it at that and not try to hash out what should or should not happen on the boards as we'll never have all the information or all the thought processes on this decision.
|
Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator
|
Actually they do.That would be news to me.
Mike, would mind clearing this up?
Yes a VC or VL has the right, and repsonsibility, to do what is best for the game days they organize, up to and including banning someone from the game day they organize. That does not prevent someone from establishing their own game day if they choose to do so.
John, feel free to email me at mike.brock@paizo.com me to discuss your specific situation further.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, I am taking steps to control my disorder (which, as I said, is a disabling condition for me), so events in the past should not reflect against my future behavior.
This is a great theory, and the Americans with Disabilities Act might agree when it comes to workplace conduct etc, but the simple truth is that human beings don't spontaneously forget about past behavior simply because someone is making an effort to change. And yes, I do--I really do--understand having a mental disorder affect your behavior in ways you can't control (believe me, I really do)--but you can't just ask people to ignore that.
What it comes down to is this: People are trying to have fun, and if your behavior prevents that from happening, that's bad. The fact that you're legally disabled doesn't give you the right to prevent other people from having fun, just so you can.
So, while I applaud your decision to "take steps to control your disorder"--that's not sarcasm, I know it's a huge first step, and I'm glad for you that you're taking it--you do need to keep in mind that beginning this process isn't a blank-slate button.
|
Yes a VC or VL has the right, and repsonsibility, to do what is best for the game days they organize, up to and including banning someone from the game day they organize. That does not prevent someone from establishing their own game day if they choose to do so.
Just so we're clear, banned from gamedays organized by any specific person does not include 'state-wide' as the Venture-Lieutenant above seemed to be implying?
|
Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator
|
Yes a VC or VL has the right, and repsonsibility, to do what is best for the game days they organize, up to and including banning someone from the game day they organize. That does not prevent someone from establishing their own game day if they choose to do so.Just so we're clear, banned from gamedays organized by any specific person does not include 'state-wide' as the Venture-Lieutenant above seemed to be implying?
Im not sure what was unclear about my statement. A VC or VL cant restrict a person from organizing their own game day. If a person chooses to set up a game day in their own home or other venue, in the same state, that the VC or VL has no participation in, then no, a VC or VL can't strict that from happening. However, a VC or VL does have the right to oversee and manage game days they coordinate and organize.
|
|
Im not sure what was unclear about my statement. A VC or VL cant restrict a person from organizing their own game day. If a person chooses to set up a game day in their own home or other venue, in the same state, that the VC or VL has no participation in, then no, a VC or VL can't strict that from happening. However, a VC or VL does have the right to oversee and manage game days they coordinate and organize.Yes a VC or VL has the right, and repsonsibility, to do what is best for the game days they organize, up to and including banning someone from the game day they organize. That does not prevent someone from establishing their own game day if they choose to do so.Just so we're clear, banned from gamedays organized by any specific person does not include 'state-wide' as the Venture-Lieutenant above seemed to be implying?
So, this is the best answer. The OP can organize his own event and invite those people who dont mind playing with him. Or get one of those folks to do it if he lacks the capacity. VOs perma-banning people from gaming anywhere and in any event within their area seems like a huge overstep in authority.
|
Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, this is the best answer. The OP can organize his own event and invite those people who dont mind playing with him. Or get one of those folks to do it if he lacks the capacity. VOs perma-banning people from gaming anywhere and in any event within their area seems like a huge overstep in authority.
This is the best answer. It isn't a huge overstep in authority. If someone is driving other players away, and causing store owners to not want to host PFS in their stores due to the actions of said players, it would be irresponsible not to take action. Taking no action would cause the playerbase and GM base to dwindle to nothing more than the problem player. That isn't conducive for growth. A lot of time, a VO has taken this very rare course of action because the store owner has requested it. VOs aren't out banning people willy nilly as it is being made to sound. They are banning people because of very real problems, and usually multiple incidents and warnings have happened before a banning takes place.
As far as I am aware, only one player has been banned during a first time incident and that was because of physical violence that occurred. Every other banning has occurred after no less than three warnings. If a player cant take corrective action after he or she has been given three or more warnings, then yes, they need to g form their own game day or event. VOs are taking responsible actions to ensure the continued growth of PFS in their area and I fully support that.
|
|
John as a veteran that has had some similar mental issues I feel for you and can empathize with your situation. I have found it is easier for me to start my own games and be a bit more selective of who I spend time with so that I can keep my own issue under control. I wish you good luck and hopefully you can find the right group of people that can give you the space you need, and hopefully you are getting the treatment you need to become more stable.
|
|
To my knowledge no one has ever been banned entirely from Pathfinder Society Organized Play, but that doesn't mean it couldn't happen. Mike Brock does have that power. And I imagine it might be used for someone who caused real harm to others or someone who disregarded the rules to an extreme extent. Such as creating false records for the purpose of obtaining unearned GM stars or outright cheating at every table, or posting their Paizo watermarked PDFs online for others to download. But I imagine the offense(s) would have to be extreme.
As far as banning someone locally, Mike has answered this. I'd go so far as to say that venture officers can ban someone for any event they oversee, not just the events they set-up personally. I say this because events that fall under the "umbrella" of a lodge, those organised by a store liaison under the direction of a venture officer, bring a certain level of similar expectations to those run directly by the VO.
It's really that the person is being ostracized by the group, not so much being banned from playing PFS.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
my question here is, what are the instances that would motivate a VC to go to this extreme. We're all looking at whether he could or couldn't do it, but why would he do it.
There's alot that's not being said here. I've known several mentally challenged people. You know what I don't hear when they discuss situations that've occurred with others? Their condition. They don't bring it up. They speak about the problem with the person, not what their condition made them do.
The OP has my sympathy that it has come down to this, but from what I see, the OP may have instigated the situation after several conflicts with other players. No, I don't think the VC should have castigated you as such, but he may have to disallow you attending events because let's face it, suddenly have a game day fall apart because four or five people take their friends and leave.
The VC's job is to promote a positive venue. While there's obviously a mitigating circumstance, it does not fall to him to ignore the discomfort of the many. You are doubly responsible for conducting yourself at these events because you know for a fact there's an existing issue. As you, and another poster in the list have said, the 'normal' people expect you to act like 'normal' people. Getting violent, angry, even deleriously happy or depressed makes them uncomfortable. If you've gone as far as doing this with other players, i'm not surprised they're asking the VC to ensure you don't attend.
I understand what you have is a great burden, but I also don't believe you may use it as an excuse. If it's that bad, there's medication. If you don't make that extra effort to comport yourself at a public event, then this situation happens.
Thats all personal information and probably something to be kept in private messages Shadow.
There many people with social related issues that have shown up at my local gaming store and some are more disruptive than others, and peoples reactions vary greatly whether they know the issue or not.
I do wish you the best of luck with whatever, I know its hard to deal with those things sometimes and when your emotions are a little out of control it makes it even harder to deal with the problems life is already willing to give you.
This thread popped up pretty close to autism awareness day btw.
Venture-Captain, Washington—Spokane
|
I'm sure there are many reasons and many considerations that were a factor in this decision that we are a online community will not and should not be privy to.
This isn't something that we can debate and hash out on the boards guys. The correct chain of command has been suggested and we should really just leave it at that and not try to hash out what should or should not happen on the boards as we'll never have all the information or all the thought processes on this decision.
I completely agree. The OP has his course of action and, I believe, his questions have been answered by Mike Brock himself. This really should be left in the hands of the OP and Mike. Well there's my 2cp worth.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As VC I "officially" had to support the banning of two players. It does happen, and there are often good reasons for doing so.
The most heinous of the two was at a game day I made a surprise "hello, you weren't expecting me, but I'm going to play today." The GM then proceeded to make two racist remarks (one anti East Asian, and one anti Arab which was combined with an anti-Semitic remark). At the time I was still new at the position and didn't bring the ban hammer as fast as I should have, and I still regret that. I should have stopped his game on the spot and taken over GMing the table. The good news, he left our region soon thereafter, but I have his GM number and I do watch our local sign-ups just in case he makes an appearance again.
So while I cannot speak to the situation at hand, nor will I, I can tell you that there are times that a VC can (and should) have the authority to ban players.
|
|
I would suspect that VC, VI, and Mike Brock have the power, and have used it far more often than anyone realizes because it is not talked about. To do so would be a completely different issue. RPers tend to be filled with passion and sometimes that passion lets out in the wrong ways, and if it does...well, I can see bans happening. Heck, I have people I have played with in home brews that are CERTAINLY not someone I would ever bring or invite to a PFS.
|
|
To my knowledge no one has ever been banned entirely from Pathfinder Society Organized Play, but that doesn't mean it couldn't happen.
In the RPGA, there were a very small number of people (no more than a handful) who managed to earn bans from RPGA play. Several earned multi-year bans for extensive forging of campaign documents (imagine someone making a bunch of forged PFS campaign boons, and you get the general idea). I know of one person who got a lifetime ban, for a physical assault during an RPGA game.
|
|
This is the best answer. It isn't a huge overstep in authority.What I'm getting is that the VC in question didn't just ban the player from their venue, he was essentially told that he was not permitted to run or play in any events in that geographical area.
That's what i took away from the OP also... that he was being banned from playing with a geographical area, instead of certain sanctioned events...
Earlier today I was informed by our city's Venture-Captain that "as far as [this city] is concerned", I am ejected from Society play.
Also, based on the OP's comments, there are some people willing to game with him, which calls into question whether it's a consensus of people find him disruptive, or a few vocal people find him disruptive.
-Skeld
|
|
This is the best answer. It isn't a huge overstep in authority.What I'm getting is that the VC in question didn't just ban the player from their venue, he was essentially told that he was not permitted to run or play in any events in that geographical area.
In this particular case I know of no event which the local VC isn't the Organizer/Lead GM at. So it is essentially the same. Tho Andre is certainly welcome to (and I know he has the capacity to) organize his own games.
|
|
I feel as a GM you have the right to ban people from your table. I warned a player that if I catch him cheating again or if he inapproptiately touches another player again at my table; I would no longer let him play at any of my tables.
I DM so we can have a game out of obligation for the group, or for friends. I do not spend the money and effort to have one person wreck the entire game for me or anyone else from poor behavior.
I have yet to GM for someone that has crossed other boundaries at my table. It is usually after or before the event that some people get stupid.
|
|
There's alot that's not being said here. I've known several mentally challenged people. You know what I don't hear when they discuss situations that've occurred with others? Their condition. They don't bring it up. They speak about the problem with the person, not what their condition made them do.
For what it's worth, a lot of people who have mental situations are very reluctant to talk about it beforehand because of the stigma attached to mental illness. They have good reason IMHO. I remember reading a business magazine a couple years ago which 'suggested' without putting it into those words, ways avoid hiring people with ADHD for example.
That said, I live in an area where the VO's are often not the lead at a given event. If this person is playing is playing in such an area, can such a ban be enforced?
That said, the language of 'they don't know you like I know you' suggests that VC was personally offended by the OP. That could mean either an annal/vendetta driven VC or an OP who doesn't get how offensive he has been.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hi guys,
I work with adults with disabilities of all levels for my career and have done so for 5+ and before that with children when I was an art teacher.
I can't say exactly if John-Andre's banning was appropriate but in my line of work sometimes folks with disabilities do get banned from places for their behavior regardless of that behaviors is caused by a disability or not. Just last month one of my clients got banned from a gas station for begging for soda from other customers. He received several warnings from the management. When he continued to beg (he has more money at his disposal than I do) the manager enforced her warning.
Real-world consequences do, and should, happen.
For instance maybe this situation was what finally led John-Andre to decide to finally get the help he needs. That is a good result from an unfortunate situation.
Now, with that in mind if John-Andre is getting his bi-polar disorder in-check like he says he is then there should be a trial period but I would wait for a time for tempers to cool and memories to haze over a bit.
|
|
That said, I live in an area where the VO's are often not the lead at a given event. If this person is playing is playing in such an area, can such a ban be enforced?
I believe that Mike has already confirmed that VCs/VLs have no power over games they are not running/organizing. In this way, they're no different than anyone else.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
That said, I live in an area where the VO's are often not the lead at a given event. If this person is playing is playing in such an area, can such a ban be enforced?I believe that Mike has already confirmed that VCs/VLs have no power over games they are not running/organizing. In this way, they're no different than anyone else.
We have nicer shirts.
|
|
We have nicer shirts.That said, I live in an area where the VO's are often not the lead at a given event. If this person is playing is playing in such an area, can such a ban be enforced?I believe that Mike has already confirmed that VCs/VLs have no power over games they are not running/organizing. In this way, they're no different than anyone else.
You might, as a VC. I dunno about mine. :/
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In the RPGA, there were a very small number of people (no more than a handful) who managed to earn bans from RPGA play. Several earned multi-year bans for extensive forging of campaign documents (imagine someone making a bunch of forged PFS campaign boons, and you get the general idea). I know of one person who got a lifetime ban, for a physical assault during an RPGA game.
You jump up on a table and kick another player in the face, I think you have earned a lifetime ban.
|
|
In the RPGA, there were a very small number of people (no more than a handful) who managed to earn bans from RPGA play. Several earned multi-year bans for extensive forging of campaign documents (imagine someone making a bunch of forged PFS campaign boons, and you get the general idea). I know of one person who got a lifetime ban, for a physical assault during an RPGA game.You jump up on a table and kick another player in the face, I think you have earned a lifetime ban.
Maybe he was just roleplaying REALLY well? ;)
I'm dotting this thread.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You might, as a VC. I dunno about mine. :/We have nicer shirts.That said, I live in an area where the VO's are often not the lead at a given event. If this person is playing is playing in such an area, can such a ban be enforced?I believe that Mike has already confirmed that VCs/VLs have no power over games they are not running/organizing. In this way, they're no different than anyone else.
Now Now Seth.. just keep saying this.. 'At least we're not red shirts'. I've seen VCs break out in a rash after that comment. :D