When I read the title, I thought, "Oh great, another list that completely misses the underlying priority." My initial presumption was dead wrong. I stand behind this list.
Regarding point ten, I have never been a fan of back stabbing, but could never put my finger on why. My experiences have been exactly as yours. It just never works. One person enjoys screwing everyone else over and everyone else…well, too bad. Everyone comes to the game to have fun, not be one player's rube.
The best way to get points 1 and 3 to stick, write out house rules.
I have 3 unique classes in my campaign, a couple dozen feats, a few spells and monsters who's stats the players can see ( after the fact). I also encourage players creating things on their own. This way everyone feels involved and I'm recognized as rules arbitor. People quesion the rules when it works out in their favor. If they believe that questioning the rules is bad for them they won't do it. This can be accomplished by fear or respect.
I think we all can agree respect is preferable.
Captain Marsh, you command respect. My hat's off to you.
When I read the title, I thought, "Oh great, another list that completely misses the underlying priority." My initial presumption was dead wrong. I stand behind this list.
Regarding point ten, I have never been a fan of back stabbing, but could never put my finger on why. My experiences have been exactly as yours. It just never works. One person enjoys screwing everyone else over and everyone else…well, too bad. Everyone comes to the game to have fun, not be one player's rube.
This is a really good list. But, I usually play online via VTTs (a piece of technology which, IMO, helps immeasurably with immersing players in the setting). It'd be interesting to see a list like this for online play, since several of these points don't apply. And, at the risk of a horribly bad pun, I will point out, in regards to Point #4, that while I don't feed my online players, they do get lots of bytes.
Yes, backstabbing is terrible. Ever play Diplomacy? Even in game where backstabbing is the entire point, people still come away with some bruised egos.
I am curious about the bi-weekly 2 1/2 hour time limit that the OP mentions. Maybe I'm just a slow GM, but in our games, a single combat encounter will last way more than 2 1/2 hours. And, that's even after using extensive Pathfinder macros in Maptool to automate die rolling, initiative, etc.
Some friends introduced me to Diplomacy while I was living in Germany back in the 80s and it got ugly. I had a host brother -- a really very bright guy -- who was just simply viscerally gullible. If you looked him in the eye and said, 'This time it'll be different,' he'd buy it. And then he'd look at you like, 'Who is this Dark Lord who's living in my house?'
--Marsh
LOL ... oh, man, that's too funny. It reminds me of a joke in a recent Tom the Dancing Bug comic, which was a parody of educational comics newspapers sometimes print.
Did You Know ... that 'gullible' is not in the dictionary? Go ahead, look it up!
wow, getting much done in 2 1/2 hours with 8-10 people.
impressive
|
Yes, backstabbing is terrible. Ever play Diplomacy? Even in game where backstabbing is the entire point, people still come away with some bruised egos.
Quite a few games of Diplomacy and even Paranoia, in my experience, turned pretty vicious, with some unpopular people getting ganked egregiously for out of game reasons. (In Diplomacy, there's always the player who so dearly loves betraying other people that he'll screw himself just for a chance to 'get' someone. It's like the story about the scorpion, who can't help but sting the fox, even though it will drown the both of them. That perplexes me, and I've fallen for that sort of thing when it seemed like the person couldn't possibly betray me because it would be completely counter to their own interests to do so, only to find out that they don't want to win the game, they just want to stab some backs on the way down.)
On the other hand, a group of mature players in such a game can have great fun. One memorable vampire game ended with my character and another players character having finally each secretly blood bonded each other, at the same time (after over a year of playing in this game, and trying to enthrall each others PCs). Out of game, I realized what was happening a few minutes beforehand (the ST had no poker face whatsoever), but the character I was playing was far too egotistical to even consider that the other PC could have outmaneuvered him in this fashion, so I went along with it. The look on the other players face was priceless.
But gaming with people who aren't good friends, any sort of 'me first' game, like Paranoia, can lead to bad feelings. These games, IMO, are best played between good friends, or at conventions, where you don't have to see any of the suckers you turn over to the Computer to be executed as commie mutant traitors at the end of the session ever again. :)
|
Most of this is pretty solid stuff. I hadn't really thought of the seating arrangement thing, but that seems fairly solid. 2.5 hours is a very short period of time to play kudos for getting a good solid play experience in such a short time. I have a group that i run from 6-11 p.m. Every fortnight but when you put dinner and socialising into that time we're lucky to get 3 hours in. I've been using lots of techniques to speed up play.
Ditto to everything,
Plus no looking up rules...
Like the old gambler song, about counting money (or looking up rules) wait until after the game....and do it on your own time....
Besides any encounter should be able to go in the RP direction rather than the hack N slash.
And yes the DM rules at the time, if later you were wrong correct for the future and if you feel the urge explain that one instance (if not ignore it)...
No rule mongering/debates/etc (it takes away from that limited game time....
I disagree with most of this actually as long as it's within reason. If it results in having to look up rules every single combat, that can get excessive, but if it's once or twice per session, I see no problem with this.
As a player, it would be INCREDIBLY disheartening to want to try to do something that I know is within the rules but be told no by the DM because we had a "no looking up rules" houserule.
1. Our game table isn't a democracy. Whoever's DMing (it's usually me) calls the shots in terms of game structure, flow, etc. This puts a huge onus on the DM to be fair and fun, but he or she is the ringmaster. Players who aren't prepared, or who distract from game play, lose turns or are booted from the table for that session.
DM smacks down those who distract from gameplay? Wow.
The sessions in my groups are 50% laughing socializing and joking/ 50% actually playing the game. Wouldn't want it any other way.
2. Alpha players aren't allowed. Pathfinder is meant to be a chance to portray someone else. If 'meek' people wind up playing 'meek' characters, and 'alphas' wind up playing 'alphas,' where's the fun? So I'm careful to make sure that every player gets their moment to shine every round, free of bullying and pressure.
I disagree that players should be told what to play. If the meek player wants to play a meek character, they shouldn't be forced not to. A DM who forces his will on what characters a player plays is overstepping his bounds.
4. Feed your players. I bring sodas and chips to every game. If someone else brings something great, if not great. This costs me about $20 a month. It's supposed to be fun, a party, and without food it's not.
I've always brought my own drinks and snacks to games. Our current host puts out pop and chips - but I would feel guilty taking them after 25+ years of providing my own.
5. Come rested and happy. Again, this sounds basic but it can be hard to leave school, work and other stuff behind. As a DM you are the host of a party, one that's supposed to be really fun and vibrant. So try to show up unexhausted and unpeevish.
A good idea for any activity - but roleplaying isn't the most important thing in my life, so I don't worry about it too much. I guess for me, tired doesn't mean cranky.
6. Control the seating.
Wow.
In my group everyone likes each other, so nobody needs to be seated apart from anyone else.
7. Keep game sessions short and regular. We play every other week for 2 1/2 hours. In the old days we played until we were exhausted and things fell apart.
My group tries to play every other week - usually ends up being about 1 time per month. We're mostly family men these days.
As for not playing late - yeah, when I got old that happened to us too. We play longer than you do though. We usually start at 7 (Meet at 7 - chat for an hour, start at 8) then finish between 11 and 12.
9. Get players involved fast and frequently. How long has it been since everyone did something?
Agreed.
10. No backstabbing.
This is a rule thankfully I don't need. When we became adults, we stopped playing these types of games.
So - some different opinions. I get the sense my games are less structured than yours.
Haven't been playing 30 years yet though. I guess it would be 29. Maybe something will change in the next year :P
Most of these steps have to do with the organization of the event rather than the dungeon mastering of the game. It's still plenty important I guess.
In my games, we show up every sunday at 19:30 and play till about 24:00. We take a break at around 22:00 so we can order the pizzas (everyone chips in) and the players can get some fresh air/cigarettes. A short break does wonders and refreshes the group so you can play for longer periods of time. It also gives the DM a bit of time to organize the rest of the run if something unexpected has come up and he needs to make changes. Seating isn't set, but the players usually just find a seat and stick with it out of habit. I completely agree on the no democracy rule, although I always hear my players out if they have a suggestion/complaint.
Great post, CaptainMarsh. I don't necessarily agree with your list 100%... but where I don't, it's a matter of adapting to my particular group of players than yours (your guidelines are also in line with trying to keep things manageable in an 8-10 player group--I can totally see why you'd smack down distractors in that situation; in my group, if I don't let people goof off a little--it just gets worse down the line. But I have four players, not eight).
And I think there's an underlying guideline there: adapt to your players (and your players need to adapt to you). If you know certain things will set your players off to tangenting, or certain things that won't keep them interested, then you need to not do those things. It seems common sense, but I've seen groups flounder because the GM refused to recognize or adapt to the playing styles of the people at the table--and vice versa. One example: one game fell apart because a GM wanted to run a sandbox game--when the players were really wanting to go along for a heavily plotted ride. ALthough we all talked about it, the GM refused to add more story elements, the players weren't interested or able to interact with the environment the way the GM wanted them to/expected them to; everyone went home frustrated. This applies to various other aspects of gaming as well.
An interesting, minor difference: in my gaming groups, usually the GM is never expected to bring food. As established BY THE PLAYERS, they usually provide the food, since the GM is spending money on game aids and time on preparation. Now in my current group, we all try to bring food when we can. Everyone shares. I still admit to sharing the least, but it's usually when I can't carry a bag of food on top of my three bags of gaming stuff. When I do contribute food, I try to contribute nice things.
On GMing in general: I have a friend who refers to the "Player-GM Contract." It's an idea, not something explicitly written up of course, but it basically comes down to the tacit agreement players and GMs make to ensure everyone, players and GM alike, are having fun.
Players have to respect that, in the end, what the GM says goes. But when making final decisions, the GM has to take player concerns in mind, and ensure rulings are both consistent and fair.
Aside: Consistency I think is one of the most important things you can provide as a GM. Nothing is more frustrating than having house rules that change every week.
In the end: did everyone have fun? Then you did a good job.
If everyone went home pissed and frustrated, then something needs to be worked out between you and your group. EVERYONE needs to be willing to compromise. Communication out of character is essential, and passive aggressive "vengeance" through gameplay needs to be chucked out the window (nothing horrifies me more than seeing message boards like these where someone discusses a problem GM or player, and people advise dealing with it by causing problems for the GM or PC in-game). People need to feel free to give each other open, constructive feedback and find solutions that are amicable to everyone out of character.
And sometimes being a good player or GM is recognizing when a group doesn't mesh with your own expectations to a point beyond compromise, and needing to call it quits.
I've been playing since 1989 and running games since 1992.
Overall I agree with this list.
I agree with DeathQuaker that the GM should not bring food. The GM spends time preparing the session and the overall campaign, and usually buys more books.
There is something to be said for everyone chipping in and sharing a meal, helps de-stress from work issues before starting the game.
I have often had many characters run off all the time and do their own thing, this happens so much they barely interact with the rest of the party and it's stupid because the fantasy world is full of nasty stuff and it does not help group cohesion-interaction.
So at the start of every game I say 'Find In-Character reasons to hang around eachother, you don't have to be best buddies or siblings, but don't go off-the world is full of nasties'
Also I tell them if they decide they'd prefer a different campaign style/location with these characters, then find In Character reasons for the change, let me know and we'll make if happen. It's cooperative story telling, not a linear script.
Like Captain Marsh I also used to be involved in weekly 8-12 hour games, people used to buy the GM food to keep the game going. It was fun but its not feasible once you get older and have jobs/kids/spouses.
So now I get them to do leveling up stuff out of game, they can access the online guides so why waste game time.
Regarding Alphas, some people are more interactive and assertive than others, I ask them to encourage others to get involved, eg ask the meeker persons character to come along with whatever they are doing.
I think most people have 1 character type they love, and another they are not bad at, so I encourage them to try the second type sometimes so they are not playing the same character each game with just a name/race/sex change.
The faceless hordes thing can get tiresome, so I put in some odd things each encounter, maybe the chief ork has a lisp or the undead king likes to collect gems-obsessively.
Also throwing in non combat stuff like odd dreams for the PCs, cravings for food, a plant or animal acting in an odd way. Its a weird and wonderful multiverse, seems a shame to limit things to combat.
I too have had many games go sour because out of game friction or work stress has made players be total nobs to eachother. So I chat to everyone during non game time to keep track of how things are, and chat with people who rock up to game stressed.
As for backstabbing or Player Vs Player stuff, well that's what computer games with savegames and respawns are for, or we play Munchkin, its good for a laugh.
Rules... if we spend more than 3 minutes discussing something, I make a ruling. The point is for everyone to have fun.
Don't be hard on yourself dude.
My game probably has 20% goofing, 80% game.
Eg there were five encounters last game, one involved them dreaming of the teddybears picnic (with the music) and then the next day they saw some bears stalking a group of gnomes having a picnic and they could all hear the music. Two of the gnomes were related to one of the PCs.
Re gaming vs goofing, I kicked a player out who didn't want to play, they just wanted to socialise.
The players and I usually get together once per month for other things, like meet up for a meal or go see some cool film.
If people rock up stressed then I offer them a chance to chat as a group or in private, then we get on with the game.
When I first started gaming in the late '70s, a lot of our sessions were busts.
We all wanted to capture the feel of a fantasy adventure 'come to life,' but the reality was very different.
We spent most of our time squabbling, bored, rules-lawyering, backstabbing and so on.
Occasionally the games flickered to life, but those were the rare, tantalizing exceptions.
The last year, I've been running a big game (8-10 players) using 3.5 and Pathfinder and it's been great. As in, a totally superior experience.
So what changed? I've thought a lot about it and here are the 11 things that I think transformed our gaming experience.
1. Our game table isn't a democracy. Whoever's DMing (it's usually me) calls the shots in terms of game structure, flow, etc. This puts a huge onus on the DM to be fair and fun, but he or she is the ringmaster. Players who aren't prepared, or who distract from game play, lose turns or are booted from the table for that session.
2. Alpha players aren't allowed. Pathfinder is meant to be a chance to portray someone else. If 'meek' people wind up playing 'meek' characters, and 'alphas' wind up playing 'alphas,' where's the fun? So I'm careful to make sure that every player gets their moment to shine every round, free of bullying and pressure.
3. Know the rules. I know this sounds basic, but it's essential. If your players are running characters with weird or unique magic items or abilities, make sure they know how they work. Similarly, if you're running a special monster or running a unique game environment, know its abilities thoroughly. Nothing kills a climax moment more rules-lawyering.
4. Feed your players. I bring sodas and chips to every game. If someone else brings something great, if not great. This costs me about $20 a month. It's supposed to be fun, a party, and without food it's not.
5. Come rested and happy. Again, this sounds basic but it can be hard to leave school, work and other stuff behind. As a DM you are the host of a...
Very nice.
+1.
I have a few rules at my table too. (Most of them are like yours).
I seat the quieter players closer to me so they can hear the adventure while the players who like to carry on between scenes can chat without disrupting the game.
One of the biggies though is NO TEXTING! Absolutely. You are there to game with your friends. Obviously, responding to emergencies and such is OK. But if I catch you social texting you are gone. No debate, no second chances.
Because we play in a game store, disruptive players aren't as frequent as disruptive specataors and passers by. Especially the ones who want to butt in and interact with the game, kibbitzing and telling people what to do. Or worse, the ones who want to pretend to steal dice or scarf up the table food.
(And during week 1 of ROTR, we had one player from another game who, between Magic Rounds, would flick paperwads at one of my gamers whom he went to school with...That one made me lose my Cherub-like demeanor...)
But I like your rules so far.
|
One of the biggies though is NO TEXTING! Absolutely. You are there to game with your friends. Obviously, responding to emergencies and such is OK. But if I catch you social texting you are gone. No debate, no second chances.
This is a biggy for me too. Its highly annoying when someone's turn comes around and they are too busy clicking away at their phone to do anything right away, and then ask: "Okay, so what is going on?"
*FACEPALM*
Texting is banned at the table. We've got a "call only" policy for emergencies... and football game scores.
As a person and a DM I value my time and therefore attempt to start very promptly when everyone arrives. I do value my time with my players... so I really don't condonm too much socializing with the outside world; hence I do not allow too many to occur. If I am giving someone my time I would also appreciate it if they gave me the same courtesy.
If people want to do something dramatic in the game; I will let them. They are in control of the setting and what happens around them. I will ussually come up with some random encounters if I have to and I try to go with the flow of the game. Although the first couple of sessions are railroady to get the game going.
I find that we ussually go out for a quick meal after our sessions. This gives people a chance to ask questions and voice concerns that they may have.
As a group we tend to play once a week... from 6 pm to 10/11 pm. It seems to work out fine for us as some of us go to work in the morning. And it gives people time to do what they wish.
As long as people don't insult each other I do not have any issues with the way people play the game. If someone is too powerful I can ussually take em down with ease within the game. I ussually try to play to people's strenght's while hitting someone else in thier weak spot unless it's a final fight of a story arc... then it's all out war with near TPKs... :)
I prefer games with less goofing... ( 20/80) kind of goofing. I try not to nazi the game... although it's hard if I have to fight the player's to tell the story... as I am not a fan of repeating myself.
2. Alpha players aren't allowed. Pathfinder is meant to be a chance to portray someone else. If 'meek' people wind up playing 'meek' characters, and 'alphas' wind up playing 'alphas,' where's the fun? So I'm careful to make sure that every player gets their moment to shine every round, free of bullying and pressure.
Hrm. I play with a couple people who have difficulty using the tools they have effectively (mostly b/c they're not great at thinking on their feet). IOW, some people function much better with a bit of leadership. I agree that there shouldn't be bullying, but if you've got solid strategists at the table, let them organize the battle. And some people do simply enjoy a supporting role. YMMV.
4. Feed your players.
Players, feed the GM. I'm a player ATM, but I've GM'ed many a time and it's front-end heavy compared to PC creation and maintenance. The GM shouldn't have to provide the food on top of all the work.
5. Come rested and happy.
Amen. Though it never seems to happen (the rested part).
10. No backstabbing. I know some players insist that "chaotic neutral" means this is a really clever and funny thing to do at the table.
So true. "Hey, I'm the CN trickster character that's going to make life hell for everyone! Whee!" Boot-To-The-Head. If you want to make people's lives miserable, please-please target the NPCs of the game, not the PCs! Or just don't.
Keeping games short and tight, though, probably cuts down on the boredom that usually prompts such stupidity.
There is something to be said for everyone chipping in and sharing a meal, helps de-stress from work issues before starting the game.
I game with (thankfully) a bunch of NON-cheapskates, who mostly bring far more food to the game than we can eat. But I've been in game groups where shared meals are HELL due to the arguments over what to get, people who didn't bring any/enough money, or simply don't chip in their fair share (often after eating more than their fair share).
Not to mention post-meal lethargy (aka 'Food Coma') can kill the first hour or so afterwards. Starting a game roughly 2 hours after a regular meal-time is good; people are alert but still capable of snacking without being voracious.
So at the start of every game I say 'Find In-Character reasons to hang around eachother, you don't have to be best buddies or siblings, but don't go off-the world is full of nasties'
This is good. My last campaign I ran (Ars Magica), I basically had people build their characters together (by that, I mean we had an entire game session where character creation was the focus - character creation sometimes being called 'our favorite game'). This helps cut down on character clashes and overlap.
Plus, our current GM's style is to make it fairly clear to us that there are times when we should run away, and we should learn to recognize when those times are. And that we should probably err on the side of caution when doing so. Cuts down on the wandering off...and, to be fair, these times do come with enough warning signs that it's fairly obvious.
3. Know the rules. I know this sounds basic, but it's essential. If your players are running characters with weird or unique magic items or abilities, make sure they know how they work. Similarly, if you're running a special monster or running a unique game environment, know its abilities thoroughly. Nothing kills a climax moment more rules-lawyering.
I agree with this for the most part, but I do allow some leeway. The rules are complicated and I don't have a photographic memory. So, looking up something, like whether a spell is short range or medium range is OK. Arguing over application is not. That being said, I agree 100% on the second half of this rule. The GM should be prepared, with an adequate knowledge of the NPCs' abilities.
...most "DM guides" offer very little in the way of guidance for how to deal with this stuff.
I think one, it is a fairly new concept. It is new to me, so maybe it has been around a while. Two, a lot of people may file this away in the common sense department. How many times have I seen someone post, "Player A is doing B." When you ask them if they would tolerate such behavior in a friendly poker game, you can actually see the light bulb go on.
"1. Our game table isn't a democracy. Whoever's DMing (it's usually me) calls the shots in terms of game structure, flow, etc. This puts a huge onus on the DM to be fair and fun, but he or she is the ringmaster. Players who aren't prepared, or who distract from game play, lose turns or are booted from the table for that session."
I mostly agree with this. For me (as a player or DM) the one running the game has the final say. If the player wants to make a point, sure, fine, give me a couple seconds of explenation (yeah, they erattad that not too long ago. I don't have it printed out, but it works like this...) and I'll tell you what I think, but if I rule against you then leave it at that. We can talk after the game if there's still an issue. Of course, I try very hard not to play favorites, or shut people down rudely. I'll normally say "Alright, how about we talk about that errata after the session. For tonight though, we're going to play it like this..."
"2. Alpha players aren't allowed. Pathfinder is meant to be a chance to portray someone else. If 'meek' people wind up playing 'meek' characters, and 'alphas' wind up playing 'alphas,' where's the fun? So I'm careful to make sure that every player gets their moment to shine every round, free of bullying and pressure."
I agree everyone should get their time to shine...but I don't agree that meek people playing meek characters is always bad. Part of the problem is you and I might not have the same definition of meek or alpha. I don't like overly domineering people at my games, and someone who talks over everyone else, and tries to hog all the spot light will be told to leave...not sure if that's what you're refering to.
"3. Know the rules. I know this sounds basic, but it's essential. If your players are running characters with weird or unique magic items or abilities, make sure they know how they work. Similarly, if you're running a special monster or running a unique game environment, know its abilities thoroughly. Nothing kills a climax moment more rules-lawyering."
I'm forgiving of this in the foreplay period of a game. For my group, Pathfinder is completely new to all but two people (myself and our newest member). I don't expect everyone at the table to know how exactly to run a grapple/dissarm without referencing the book. I would however expect it to be looked up less and less as a campaign went on, in which the rule was being used. If someone needs to look up the range of magic missile every time they cast it, I'll probably have a talk with them, and suggest they write up some spell cards or something.
On a related note, summoned monsters, companions, and familiars need to be statted up before the game...not half way through combat. Being that I'm the only one with the bestiary at the moment, I'm not going to be a complete fassiest about it...but it is a pet peeve of mine. "I summon 1d3 dire rats! so uh, what's their attacks?"
"4. Feed your players. I bring sodas and chips to every game. If someone else brings something great, if not great. This costs me about $20 a month. It's supposed to be fun, a party, and without food it's not."
If that works for you, great. I bring doughnuts sometimes, but that's about it. If we played at my house I would be willing to make an occassional special dinner...but that would have more to do with the fact that my girlfriend likes to cook, and would feel good being involved, than my feeling I need to feed my players. As has been stated before, I buy the books, convert the adventures, and organize the schedual...Anything more and I would require cash payments.
"5. Come rested and happy. Again, this sounds basic but it can be hard to leave school, work and other stuff behind. As a DM you are the host of a party, one that's supposed to be really fun and vibrant. So try to show up unexhausted and unpeevish."
I think this is good to keep in mind, but I would never lay it out as a rule. I do however require people to leave their &*%$ at the door though. Did your boss fire that hot chick at work before you could get her number? I don't care. Are you upset because your boyfriend dumped you for your little brother? Again, I really don't care. If you need an escape from all the frustration of every day life...killer, that's why we game. If you want to set arround and complain about said frustrations, then don't show up to my game, cuz there's nothing quite like feeling like crap and being told to shove it.
"6. Control the seating. I know, I know - I'm comin
g off a real Nazi. But in my group there are some players who don't get along and others who get along too well, kind of cloistering up. People who throw dinner parties know that seating can make or break a gathering. My players don't seem to mind. They kind of get that I'm trying to end the out-of-game social vibe and create an in-game social vibe."
I can sorta see this in a group as big as yours...sorta. I would have to know your group to totaly understand. As a general rule for all games...this doesn't work for me at all. Of course, I don't normally play with people I don't get along with...and when I do I either try my best to suck it up and enjoy the game...or I leave. If this is actually an issue...well, in my opinion you should cut down the group and cancel the people who are causing problems.
"7. Keep game sessions short and regular. We play every other week for 2 1/2 hours. In the old days we played until we were exhausted and things fell apart. Now we get together often enough that the continuity is sustained and long enough each session to really grab some action. But we always leave wanting more, talking about what will happen next. Also, DMing is hard. I would argue that after 150 minutes, your best is behind you."
Yeah, in highschool we did all nighters a lot...and looking back, those were some of the wackiest games I've ever heard of. They were fun at the time...but beavis and butthead was funny at the time too. There's been at least once sense third ed came out that we played like that. Every 6-8 hours we switched games, and some people would leave or join, though me and I think two others stayed for the whole thing...I think we played close to three days straight. Necromunda, D&D, and Shadowrun primarily...though there might have been the scattered game of magic.
Regularity is very appreciated. We try to play every other sunday...but it rarely works out. My entire group (save for one guy who made a character, and has never shown up) consists of college students, some with jobs, some without. Things come up, and it sucks. We do what we can to stay consistent though...and people who can't give me some sort of comitment don't play (the guy who never shows, isn't called any more, and if I do ever hear from him I'll explain why).
"8. Go big every game. We don't spend our 2 1/2 hours fighting hordes of faceless orcs, ever. I always have at least one encounter (Mammy Graul, the big black dragon, a battle on a crashing airship) that has the potential to go epic. Sometimes it's the setting, sometimes it's the opponent."
I've been in plenty of campaigns where I wish this would have been implimented...or at least thought of. "I know this is going to take a while, but it makes sense, with the campaign I wrote up, that you guys would have to fight seventeen hobgoblins"...yeah, it makes sense that Dr. Spock has read War&Peace...but they didn't exactly put every thrilling second of that into the movies now did they?
"9. Get players involved fast and frequently. How long has it been since everyone did something? Since they made a meaningful decision, rolled some dice, shaped the story? This is more important than keeping track if initiative. Boredom is the game-killer and the quickest solution is to give your players a chance to act."
With big groups this definately becomes a problem. This is one gripe I have with the summoner class, and casters who rely on summoned monsters in general. I haven't had to break down the order of initiative yet (only have 6 players), and would dearly like to avoid it...Combat seems to go alright...it's the investigative/roleplaying area where I notice eyelids start to flutter from time to time.
In a recent adventure where the party was investigating a farm house where several scarecrows had been replaced by living people, and undead, my party split into two groups. One investigating the actual house, another inspecting a near by scarecrow. I tried very hard to build up a little tension with one group and then switch over to the other.
"10. No backstabbing. I know some players insist that "chaotic neutral" means this is a really clever and funny thing to do at the table. It's not. Ever. I have never in thirty-plus years of gaming found that it improved the story to have the PC party disintegrate in violence. In every case (really, every one) the in-game violence reflected out-of-game social stuff. Solution simple: It's banned. In fact, my players can't even injure another player's PC (with an area affect spell, say) without asking permission."
Part of your problem here is you're thinking of the party "disintegrating" into violence. Yes, quite often as a DM you built up a plot where the party is a group of "good guys" who need to work together to solve some problem...and a group of juvenile twits who can't keep from picking eachother's pockets and killing eachother would completely ruin all your work. I hate to break it to you, but if their immature enough to act like this...laying down a decree that they can't attack eachother isn't going to fix the problem. Character on character violence isn't the problem. Immaturity is. If they can't fight eachother, they'll start molesting the NPCs, when you tell them they can't do that, they'll start verbally abusing eachother and the NPCs. You tell them they can't do that, and they'll start looking for other ways to derail your story.
My advice, game with people who can play like adults, involving their characters with the exsisting story, and working to further it. Are two characters fighting because their players are not getting along? Or is it because the personalities of the two characters clash? If it's the later, can you make that part of the story? Personally I think it's laziness on the part of the DM to decree that it's not worth investigating. When I set down at a table, and the DM gives his little soap box rant about how inter party conflict is baned for this reason and that...I'm put in the exact same mood as when I set down at a game and hear the DM tell us that we all already know eachother, for the sake of getting things started, and we're starting in a local tavern...
11. When it's good, let go...for a moment. In every game there's at least one moment of happy organic chaos. Players are arguing raucously over their next move, they're laughing at something, someone's doing a ritual dice-rolling dance. Put bluntly: They're into it, it's really come to life. So let it happen, enjoy the moment you helped create. But then give the reins a tug and move forward again."
I agree here quite a bit. I try to run gritty games more often than not, right now I've got one player who's running a summoner completely with an eidolon named Smoosh, who has a sin spawn head on a stick named bob...who he asks advice from. There's another player running a rogue who has developed a penchant for lighting random fires to get the party back "focused". It's not really what I wanted...but people are enjoying themselves (the players running the odd ball characters as well as the rest of the group). Sometimes it does get a little hokey, and I've had to pull in the reigns a bit, but not as much as I would have thought.
The summoner in my group is a halfling obsessed with death, who cut off his own nose to look more skeletal. He has dreadlocks, braides, filed teeth, and body paint. In our last session the party was looking for signs of the Sandpoint Devil, and we're talking to farmers south of Sandpoint. I told the party to roll diplomacy. The halfling's player tells me he scored a 20 something...which it seems he regularly scores 20 something, especially on attacks with smoosh and perception checks. I just started laughing and told him "I don't think so". Of course, I get a confused look, and he asks me why. It's frustrating, because he's the next most experienced player, and is very roleplay oriented (supposedly). I don't think I should have had to explain the situation to him...but I did. We eventually decided that after a good disguise roll his diplomacy check would be counted...and I think he now realizes there is going to be consequences for playing the fruitcake character.
And yeah...no texting. My last group had a social butterfly in it, who was always on his phone...talking or texting. "yeah yeah, I'm listening...wait, what did the wizard tell us to do?" In my group, you get up from the table to take a phone call, and I'm not pausing the game. So if you get up to talk to your friend about the foot balls score, or to flirt with that cute chick in biology...then your missing out on the game. The important part, is the rest of us aren't missing out.
Depends on where. I've never played in an actual game store, as we don't have those things where I live. Groups I've played in over the years have met in resturants late at night (had some problems, but not as many as you might think), lots of different places in our community college (played here the most often, so this is where we've had the most problems), and we ran one session in a convience store a while back (one of the players couldn't get the night off work, so we showed up with dice and books and played there for about four hours).
Two biggest issues we've ever had was one time, playing at a resturant (truck stop really) a guy comes over and tells us we're offending his family and we need to stop swearing...normally I'd appologize and try to watch my mouth from then on. He started the conversation rather rudely though, and it was the middle of the night (probably closer to two in the morning actually), in the smoking section of a truck stop diner...that was utterly empty. He and his family sat next to us, and then complained. I actually had to be restrained and gaged by my friends...and he and his family ended up moving to a different table.
At the college we had some problems with faculty complaining to campus security. Luckily head of security was a really cool guy (had been a cop for many years before getting the sec job) and not only came and talked to us civily, but watched several sessions, both openly and covertly, to see if we were actually doing anything wrong. I think the complaints against us were that we were smoking in the building, and harassing people who walked by. Very few members of our group smoked, and they always went outside. As for the harassment...I have no clue where this came from.
On the other hand, about every month we would get another member to the group, as someone who was just walking by would stop and talk to us about how they used to play years ago and didn't know there were gamers in the area.
|
I played in a public place, a game store, and the owner had a "no one left behind" store rule for the tapletop RPG games. Basically he wanted everyone to feel welcome in the shop so DMs were not allowed to limit their games if they wanted to run a game using this person's space.
Some of you will be properly horrified, some of you won't:
I ended up in a game with 14 players. 6 of the players were boys aged 10-11. The game was Ravenloft, AD&D, Skills and Powers was allowed.
The old-school among the crowd should understand the horror...
|
The old-school among the crowd should understand the horror...
A shiver just ran down my spine.
I have reversed my opinion about playing at a public venue. Being an "elder statesman" (gaming since '78), I was loath to play in a public venue (other than cons), the whole distraction thing. And i'm sure there was some underlying elitism. D&D was MY game after all :). But over the years, finding a group and keeping it together became increasingly difficult with people getting married, having kids, jobs, moving, etc. It wasn't until Pathfinder society that I started playing at a gaming store. In the last year, I am now involved in four on-going campaigns. Being exposed to more gamers, new gaming styles, etc was the best decision I ever made. And the distractions in the gaming store are more caused by the players than the patrons. Our role-playing draws the attention of the causal shopper and at least two younger players, who had never played RPG before (CCG'ers), have joined and bought RPG stuff from the store. Not only does this increase participation for us, but it increases the chances that the FLGS will remain in business. I encourage everyone to get involved in more public gaming.
|
|
The old-school among the crowd should understand the horror...A shiver just ran down my spine.
I have reversed my opinion about playing at a public venue. Being an "elder statesman" (gaming since '78), I was loath to play in a public venue (other than cons), the whole distraction thing. And i'm sure there was some underlying elitism. D&D was MY game after all :). But over the years, finding a group and keeping it together became increasingly difficult with people getting married, having kids, jobs, moving, etc. It wasn't until Pathfinder society that I started playing at a gaming store. In the last year, I am now involved in four on-going campaigns. Being exposed to more gamers, new gaming styles, etc was the best decision I ever made. And the distractions in the gaming store are more caused by the players than the patrons. Our role-playing draws the attention of the causal shopper and at least two younger players, who had never played RPG before (CCG'ers), have joined and bought RPG stuff from the store. Not only does this increase participation for us, but it increases the chances that the FLGS will remain in business. I encourage everyone to get involved in more public gaming.
Oh I agree, I worked and played in a (different from above) shop for years and it was quite the expanding experience. I think of it as one of those things that everyone should try, probably a couple of time just to put the feather in thh cap and get the experience.