|
I know this will sound rather formal and is not for most groups...
Most groups have a rappor and an keen understanding of this tacity.
I find that due to recent events in my current campaign and previous attempts that a written out exposition of the Social Contract between GM and Players can only help.
While it may scare off the timid or the flighty, a clear description of my expectations as a GM and responsibilities of both Players and GM as a minimum standard of behavior and conduct becomes more and more necessary with the diminishing of etiquette and protocol in this day and age.
Things that I was raised with as the most rudimentary and elemental (pun intended) concepts of decency I find need to be explained over and over again to a group of my so-called "peers".
As such, I find that this written exposition is vital, and kick myself for my nonchalance in not drafting up and formalizing earlier.
I was wondering if others have had success with this, and if so, what did said contract entail?
I will be posting my rough draft of this shortly...
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Not a written contract, no.
But part of my "first session" of a campaign is a discussion of goals and ground rules. Not "house rules" for the game (like, 'all criticals confirm' or something) but what Monte Cook calls "table rules", as in 'no playing video games at the table when it's not your turn.')
For me, ‘the diminishing of etiquette’ is due to my gaming circle changing. Earlier in my gaming career, my gaming circle consisted entirely of close friends I taught to game. Now, I frequently find myself gaming with complete strangers.
It is no wonder there are cultural clashes.
Not a written contract, no.
But part of my "first session" of a campaign is a discussion of goals and ground rules. Not "house rules" for the game (like, 'all criticals confirm' or something) but what Monte Cook calls "table rules", as in 'no playing video games at the table when it's not your turn.')
I have a set of written rules that I posted and update. Among them is "no laptops at the table". I put this rule in because one of the players was playing WoW when it wasn't his turn, and talking to the guy beside of him (who also plays WoW) about it the whole time.
Most of the rules have to do with the game mechanics and character creation though. Being too heavy-handed will discourage people from playing at all.
I also posted the DM/Player contract from Heroes of Horror with our rules so players could be aware of it since I am trying to employ horror elements in the game.
Really, though, the group doesn't pay that much attention to what I've posted there. They know a few rules that apply to them and really that's all that matters most of the time.
My biggest problem tends to be with players canceling without giving advanced notice, which is incredibly rude if you ask me. If it's an emergency, I can understand, but if it isn't then call as soon as possible.
|
|
Being too heavy-handed will discourage people from playing at all.
...
My biggest problem tends to be with players canceling without giving advanced notice, which is incredibly rude if you ask me. If it's an emergency, I can understand, but if it isn't then call as soon as possible.
I strongly can relate to this part.
I find myself in the unenviable position of having to potentially cancel the current game. There's been all kinds of whining and snivelling after a ludicrous series of cancellations. Very much the scenario you present, without decent notice because of events that a player claims is "outside his control".
We are talking common sense issues that could easily have been nipped in the bud if said individual communicated effectively with myself and others in his life.
It leads me to the unfavorable and potentially unfair lines of questioning like "How are you this much of a trainwreck at age 28???" etc. We are talking MONTHS of delays.
The point being, I have now an "image" of being too heavy handed after months of quietly tolerating and then slowly speaking up about this...
Somehow I am still the bad guy.
Said individual is no longer a member of my game, which is a shame as that causes easily as many problems as it fixes, but to add insult to injury this has lead to feelings of resentment and uncertainty... even though the other players acknowledge what has been done as necessary.
I suppose I could have been all smiles and cotton candy and said so nicer, but frankly DM's are human beings too, and subject to the same frustrations.
How did you deal with it, in your campaign?
You inspired me to write up my Social contract (well what I could remember off the top of my head).
It follows below if anyone cares to examine it.
Social Contract
Attendance
• Cancelations/MIA without a reasonable explanation/warning in short time period:
o 1st time: is free;
o 2nd time: something bad happens to your character (sickness, kidnapped, etc);
o 3rd time: your character is dead/retired
• Cancellations with a reason (emergencies, family obligations, etc) are understood to be a part of life.
Experience
• If you are not at a session you do not receive experience for that session.
• Experience is granted based off of the challenges faced (combat and non-combat) and the role-playing of the players.
Morality
• Good and evil are definitive concepts. Good is selflessness and Evil is selfishness. Deal with it.
• Though it can be fun to play a darker character, all characters are required to be Good characters unless approval is sought from and expressly given by the GM.
Created Characters
• PCs must be able to function within the group. They have to get along more then they disagree. This is a team based game and infighting should be avoided.
• Just because you create a character does not mean that your character will become part of the group. If the PC group does not accept your character then you must write up a new character.
• If you chose to go a dark, kooky or otherwise other ‘off’ route the GM or other players may ask you to write up a new character on the terms that it is interfering with the mood of the game.
• The more you make your character fit the game being played the more fun you and the GM will have. Cooperation brings rewards.
Magic Items
• Magic items are rare and wonderful things. Appreciate them when you receive them.
• You may ask for a specific item but do not expect it as your right.
• Magic items of over a thousand gp value can not be bought. They can be made, bartered for, quested for and/or stolen though.
In Game Actions
• The world turns is the type of game I run. This means that if the characters choose to retire for a year that the NPCs do not also retire for that time period.
• Actions have consequences. This does not mean that every thing you do comes around to bite you. This does mean that actions (major and minor) have a ripple effect proportional to their initial act. People the next village over may hear of your fairness or you robbing the general store. Your name may be praised far and wide for ending the evil king or it could be cursed as the slaughterer of villages. The reaction depends on your actions. Think before slaughtering.
ArchLich, I like your Created Characters section.
Because it is what your character would do is not an excuse to be a jerk at the table.
Archlich:
In dealing with your morality and character concept sections, I would have to disagree. The major emphasis should be on group dynamics and less on alignment. I have had evil campaigns go off without a hitch b/c at the start I always explain that even though you are evil you have to work together. I usually frame it as: "you can be good or evil; just remember that good guys stick together with other good guys, i.e. good npcs; however, if you are evil, then you're against everybody so you better stick together."
I have had people who have taken the idea that playing an evil character means being selfish and have no love for them. I find that putting the little phrase I just said into your opening statements concerning a campaign helps a great deal.
In essence, the evil campaign is one in which one can use morally unjust ends to accomplish group goals. It often helps to have the pcs go through something to bring them together or include it as a backstory; ex. escaping prison together, last remnants of an evil organization, etc.
I think a statement that evil alignments must be approved would be appropriate. If a pc can give a statement close to "group focused idealism but with 'end justifies the means' ideology," then you're probably ok.
|
You inspired me to write up my Social contract (well what I could remember off the top of my head).
It follows below if anyone cares to examine it.[spoiler]
Social ContractAttendance
• Cancelations/MIA without a reasonable explanation/warning in short time period:
o 1st time: is free;
o 2nd time: something bad happens to your character (sickness, kidnapped, etc);
o 3rd time: your character is dead/retired
• Cancellations with a reason (emergencies, family obligations, etc) are understood to be a part of life.Experience
• If you are not at a session you do not receive experience for that session.
• Experience is granted based off of the challenges faced (combat and non-combat) and the role-playing of the players.Morality
• Good and evil are definitive concepts. Good is selflessness and Evil is selfishness. Deal with it.
• Though it can be fun to play a darker character, all characters are required to be Good characters unless approval is sought from and expressly given by the GM.Created Characters
• PCs must be able to function within the group. They have to get along more then they disagree. This is a team based game and infighting should be avoided.
• Just because you create a character does not mean that your character will become part of the group. If the PC group does not accept your character then you must write up a new character.
• If you chose to go a dark, kooky or otherwise other ‘off’ route the GM or other players may ask you to write up a new character on the terms that it is interfering with the mood of the game.
• The more you make your character fit the game being played the more fun you and the GM will have. Cooperation brings rewards.Magic Items
• Magic items are rare and wonderful things. Appreciate them when you receive them.
• You may ask for a specific item but do not expect it as your right.
• Magic items of over a thousand gp value can not be bought. They can be made, bartered for, quested for and/or stolen...
I approve. Very nicely done. There can be a million and one variants upon this idea. The key is to have enough social awareness as a GM/DM that the act of facilitating a game, a good game, is knowing how to communicate with players. Good expectations will keep players returning to your table, especially when the guidelines you set forth are adhered to and not wontonly broken.
It's funny, but I was thinking of adding something like this to the beginning of a Player's Guide for the players in my next campaign. Honestly, my gaming circle is pretty good, though some of them can be quick to get off topic, or can be lazy. Still, they're all friends, and we're down with playing D&D with one another.
And that's really the biggest issue. For the OP, I would recommend thinking about if you genuinely want to play D&D with one or any of these guys, if you feel like they're not reliable. We've had a couple of guys in our groups, who've been either difficult to schedule with, or just unreliable, and it is frustrating. It's okay to still be friends with them, but maybe not play D&D together. A game shouldn't ruin a friendship, but that doesn't mean that friends must always play D&D together. Either way, good luck with it.
Still, as for social contracts, since it's something more than one person I've known playing has brought up before, here's the one I'm thinking of pitching:
DM/Player Agreement
In the interest of providing an enjoyable and balanced game environment for all players present and devoted to spending their spare time playing Dungeons & Dragons, a few ground rules must be established and agreed upon by the DM and players.
1. Game Balance—The 3.5 Edition of Dungeons & Dragons has a wide and diverse sea of options available for players and dungeon masters alike; these options—taken as a whole—are unbalanced. Many of these options were introduced late into the lifespan of 3.5 D&D, and may have been introduced with the intention of drawing in new players, breathing life into old classes, or ramping up the power level to keep the enthusiasm high for continuing gamers. Whatever the reason, many of these spells/feats/abilities/etc. are not appropriate for party play, as it affords one player’s character gameplay advantages over that of the other players’ characters, while forcing the DM to cater encounters toward that player’s character specifically. As such, many new options are presented to afford all players options to empower their characters on an even playing field, and other options limited to certain classes/races/etc. are not available. Furthermore, if the DM/players feel that an option need to be discussed with relevance to its power level, and its inclusion/exclusion in the Darkmoon Vale campaign, that topic is open for discussion during the Pre-Game Warm-Up/Post-Game Wrap-Up, or—in extreme situations—interrupting Game Time.
2. Session Structure—Each weekly or bi-weekly gaming session is time dedicated by each player present to enjoy a game of Dungeons & Dragons. In order to better enjoy this time dedicated to this hobby, a session structure can help retain focus, and allow the players and dungeon master to make the most out of that time. Each session begins at the designated time, and allows for fifteen minutes of Pre-Game Warm-Up. This discussion can be related to any topic, but once the fifteen minutes have transpired, the players and dungeon master proceed into Game Time. Game Time—while variable—should probably not exceed four hours, with three hours being the most appropriate. There should be a fifteen minute break taken at some point within the Game Time. During Game Time, all player/DM conversation should be relevant to the immediate situation in game at hand; rules questions/discussions should wait until the Post-Game Wrap-Up. The DM goes around the table, and alerts each player when their turn comes up. Each turn, the players move their pieces on the board—when applicable—or take actions appropriate to their situation. Players wishing to participate in actions occurring on another player’s turn should hold their actions until their turn arises. Players should come to game prepared with a short list of items they would like to purchase with their treasure to expedite gameplay, and should have their characters preemptively leveled up when the opportunity arises. Finally, after Game Time, is the Post-Game Wrap-Up. During this time, the players and dungeon master can converse about anything they like, but might be better served by questions/concerns/rules discussion that have been held until the end of the night. There is no expressed limit on how long the Post-Game Wrap-Up can be, though no player should feel compelled to stay during this time.
3. Punctuality and Attendance—A time to start the weekly/bi-weekly session of the campaign should be agreed upon by all players prior to beginning the campaign. Starting times should allow for difficult weather, and other factors beyond the control of the players, and afford each player the opportunity to participate in the Pre-Game Warm-Up. Players are expected to attend every session, though in extreme cases, exceptions should be allowed. Players who are running late are expected to contact the DM and to give an estimated time of arrival. If a player no longer feels they can regularly attend on time, it would appreciated by the other players and DM if that player alerts the DM as soon as possible, so the DM can make appropriate arrangements.
Archlich:
In dealing with your morality and character concept sections, I would have to disagree. The major emphasis should be on group dynamics and less on alignment. I have had evil campaigns go off without a hitch b/c at the start I always explain that even though you are evil you have to work together. I usually frame it as: "you can be good or evil; just remember that good guys stick together with other good guys, i.e. good npcs; however, if you are evil, then you're against everybody so you better stick together."I have had people who have taken the idea that playing an evil character means being selfish and have no love for them. I find that putting the little phrase I just said into your opening statements concerning a campaign helps a great deal.
In essence, the evil campaign is one in which one can use morally unjust ends to accomplish group goals. It often helps to have the pcs go through something to bring them together or include it as a backstory; ex. escaping prison together, last remnants of an evil organization, etc.
I think a statement that evil alignments must be approved would be appropriate. If a pc can give a statement close to "group focused idealism but with 'end justifies the means' ideology," then you're probably ok.
I completely agree. It just happens that some of my current players have not shown the level of maturity to play that type of campaign. Heck, if you understand it well enough, you can even mix good and evil in the same group.
I completely agree. It just happens that some of my current players have not shown the level of maturity to play that type of campaign. Heck, if you understand it well enough, you can even mix good and evil in the same group.
I have had players in recent memory that were like that. I gave the opening statement, watch them act in their own selfish interests, threw them through a couple of hells (literally; you can't set a Red Wizards pavillion of fire and not expect to suffer the consequences), and ultimately killed the whole party b/c I kept my word (evil campaigns are the group against the world as opposed to good campaigns being the group against some of the world). The next campaign I did with that group worked much more smoothly. Sometimes it takes a game session or two to show people that you mean what you say. It's important to also reward the group focused behavior not just punish unwanted behavior.
I do not have a written contract, but I have some oral table rules which I share at the beginning of a new campaign:
1) Players who are not present at a session, do not get XP and treasure for that session.
2) When at least 1 player turns up, a session will continue.
3) Players are expected to co-operate, no matter which alignment the characters are. The players should decide on a motive for working together as a group.
4) No rules discussions before or during the game. After the game is OK.
5) Everybody brings his/her own food/drink.
6) Every player is responsible for the actions of his/her own character.
7) An origin story for a new PC is expected.
8) No in-game conflicts between PCs.
9) Special rules, classes, feats etc. have to be pre-approved by the DM. Special magic items as well.
I agree that an evil PC campaign can work as long as the group works together. However, it does require the GM to run a different type campaign. I think it is perfectly acceptable for the GM not to run that type of campaign.
|
|
A Brief note on evil campaigns - I've run them, they're very efficient and yes it requires more mature players who can get -behind- the philosophical reasons of alignments and argue mature rationalizations and the merits and flaws thereof. That being said, this leads to dangerous ground, as I have a friend who continually uses a "Jack Bauer" delusional spin on Neutral Good to explain and resolve actions to players in his campaign, old and new for one alignment, equating Neutral Good to "terrorist good" and justifying it as "The character will forgo any personal feelings and tendencies towards law or chaos, using any means to pursue the agenda that they feel does the greater good".
This leads to characters in the campaign often regurgitating the same dogmatic rhetoric and role that Samuel L. Jackson did in "Unbreakable", and is to me a far far cry from Neutral Good by any interpretation. That being said, there are merits and flaws to that kind of thinking and while the philosophy of analyzing the D&D alignment system can and does open venues for interpretation that allow mature adults to portray an "evil" party or even an anti-hero dystopian campaign with the ability to work together as bretheren a la "Knights of Takhisis" or use and manipulate each other like a coterie from "Vampite - The Masquerade" or anything in between ... there's something to be said for nailing down the alignments as defined.
Wiggle room does often lead to a slippery slope, sadly. However it does
allow for much more depth, and every foray I've had into running my
evil campaign all parties seem to have found a deeply rewarding experience. Which leads me to more or less agree with what's been said already on this thread in that regard.
To bring this back to the original topic:
I have resolved most of the attendance issues by removing the single worst offender from the game and having it be an amicable parting of ways. Kudos and thanks to those who provided constructive response in that regards. It gets very easy to get overzealous, and overwhelmed by the time commitment this endeavor is taking, and when my scheduling is not maintained with common courtesy, it becomes very difficult not to take such carefree lacka-daisical attitudes as a disrespectful slight.
That being said, I will edit or supplement this message with the actual contract-proper, but here's what I am going to enumerate as topics the contract will address:
Scheduling
Attendance Policy
Fair Notice Clause
Cell Phone Policy
Intraparty Conflict
Rules Questions
"Office Hours"
Initiative
Etiquette during "Down" or "Hold" time
Cross-Chatter / External Conversation
Warm-up period
Recaps
Character Generation Guidelines
Points of Contact and Group Coordination
"Common Sense" Metagame-IG clause
Withdrawal from Campaign
Player Responsibilities (expansive lists)
My Responsibilities (Even larger expansive list)
Game - Related Disputes
Nongame Disputes Immediately Prior or During Game