|
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Since apparently this is a major problem for some people, I thought I would start a thread to discuss basic table courtesy and manners.
If you follow these basic rules, you will have no problem finding games.
1. BYOS, BYOS and if applicable definitely BYOB unless you are told there will be food and drink provided. Even then it can't hurt to bring something. And frankly, you really should bring enough to share if you want to really be courteous and welcome at all gatherings.
2. Be on time and be ready to play. Don't show up at the time the game was supposed to start and start rolling up a character. Have the materials you will need as ready as you are able (laptop, book or printout)
3. When starting a new game or new character, run your concept first by the GM and then by the rest of the group. Not the character sheet, just the concept. Don't put anything on paper until you check in to make sure the concept fits in with what other people want to play.
4. If you are doing something you think is going to force a rule check, either mention it beforehand or have the rule ready when you do it. Stopping a table to find a rule is annoying.
5. Use the time between turns to get ready. When possible, have your spells available to show your GM or to check yourself. Be ready on your turn.
6. Be a part of the party, not a lone wolf. Look for synergies with your fellow players and try to create reasons for everyone to be a part of the party.
7. If you aren't interested in the game the GM is running, politely bow out. Don't try to force a square peg in a round hole. Other games will come.
8. If a game is dying, let it go. There are lots of other ideas and concepts you can try if the group isn't into what you are currently running. Rebooting is always better than group collapse.
9. You are "a" GM, not "The" GM. You can be replaced.
10. You are "a" player, not "The" player. You can be replaced.
11. If the rest of the party is zoning out while you role play, tone it down. It's a team game, not your own personal acting debut.
12. If you think the GM stinks, run your own game to show how you think it should be run. If the rest of the group agrees with you then changes will come. If not, you'll learn how hard it is to be on the other side of the table and be more likely to...well...STFU.
13. Keep your group's dirty laundry off the messageboard. Seriously, don't post asking strangers to affirm your players or GM are a jerk. If you really need advice, come here with a post asking how you can change, not how you can change everyone else.
14. Be nice to the books. If possible, buy some to add to the communal library.
15. Rules discussions are for downtime, not at the table. Even death can be corrected in this game, so just wait and talk to your GM when there is some downtime.
16. If you are GM, make sure there is some downtime periodically for players to go eat, use the bathroom, talk, plot (or for you to scramble to come up with a plan when they throw you for a loop). If a player seems upset, give them time to talk to you between encounters before it blows up.
17. Die with dignity. It happens to everyone. Start working on your 2nd character (assuming you don't already have a pre-approved backup) or something.
18. Remember it is a game, and the people at the table are your friends, and no one is (generally) getting paid to be there. Rather than acting like you are entitled to customer service from others at the table, put yourself in the mindset of helping to provide the best game for everyone else at the table.
19. When you mess up, apologize. It seems like a small thing. It isn't.
20. Don't just design for yourself, design for your group. This goes for GM's and players alike. If you thinking about what you want and not thinking about what would be fun for everyone, you are doing it wrong.
Feel free to add your own.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
22. If a player is obviously against something out of player, you might want to think twice before doing it. Remember this goes for the GM and every other player at the table.
|
|
Aren't 2 & 3 exclusive of each other, or better yet summarized by 'discuss the GM's expectations for characters before the game starts and act accordingly'? I mean, some DMs want players to be present for the creation of characters while others want them brought pre-made.
You can't talk to you GM and other players before the game? We live in the age of e-mail.
Edit: And to be clear, you are getting approval of concept not approval of character.
You can say to your GM "Hey, I'm thinking of X,Y, and Z, depending on how I roll" and still roll up characters for same day play if that is the group preference.
What you want to avoid are fights on the day of.
Sometimes you make characters when you make the concept or as you make the concept. Different people have different ways of building up characters. Groups also have many ways to contact each other, show what their doing, and go about character creation. There isn't one way that's totally superior because everyone is different. I know many people without internet or cell phones for example, and some older people who don't use computers still.
Regardless, making sure every ones cool with what your doing is a good idea. Preferably do it before the table gets started and there is any easily avoided friction.
|
Aren't 2 & 3 exclusive of each other, or better yet summarized by 'discuss the GM's expectations for characters before the game starts and act accordingly'? I mean, some DMs want players to be present for the creation of characters while others want them brought pre-made.You can't talk to you GM and other players before the game? We live in the age of e-mail.
Edit: And to be clear, you are getting approval of concept not approval of character.
You can say to your GM "Hey, I'm thinking of X,Y, and Z, depending on how I roll" and still roll up characters for same day play if that is the group preference.
What you want to avoid are fights on the day of.
I completely agreed with the statement I bolded. My intention was to point out that 2 and 3 seemed too direct on a specific style of character creation than a generic courtesy. Even within my own home group, as an example, we have differing styles. Our current campaign we acted as you have outlined, each creating a character and talking it with each other, but the GM didn't care what we did and didn't want to know until day of, only laying down certain limitations on us. This is actually a break from the norm where our first session is usually devoted to the creation of characters and running concepts by the GM at that time. In fact, despite having used this method, I didn't consider running concepts by the GM/other players before hand (and I would use Facebook instead of eMail, seems more of my friends use that).
I just was recommending that it may be of more benefit to a wider range to consider combining the two and wording it more generically.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
A great big "+1" to almost everything on your list, ciretose (and a +99 to a few items). I do have one disagreement, though:
12. If you think the GM stinks, run your own game to show how you think it should be run. If the rest of the group agrees with you then changes will come. If not, you'll learn how hard it is to be on the other side of the table and be more likely to...well...STFU.
Perhaps it wasn't your intent, but this one makes it sound like if I've got a grievance with how my GM does things, my only two options are to do it myself or shut up. But what if I'm new to the game and wouldn't know the first thing about GMing, but I know it's not fun that the only time my GM rolls behind a screen is when attacking my high-AC character (who subsequently gets hit more consistently than any other party member)? If I'm not better at GMing than him, then I can't protest unfair treatment?
Newbies aside, some people just aren't cut out for GMing. What if I'm such a person? Am I therefore not allowed to take issue with anything the GM might do? What if my GM and I are BOTH the type of person who isn't cut out for GMing?
What if every player at the table hates that the GM uses (or doesn't use) a crit/fumble deck, but none of the players has the time needed to GM in their stead (perhaps the GM is only the GM because he's the only unemployed person in the group)?
There are lots of reasons that a player with a very legitimate grievance might be unable to do a better job, or even GM at all. "Do it yourself or shut the f*** up" means that such a player's concerns are always automatically invalid. That doesn't seem right to me.
A very good list Ciretose only a few I'll would change or add.
13. Keep your group's dirty laundry off the messageboard. Seriously, don't post asking strangers to affirm your players or GM are a jerk. If you really need advice, come here with a post asking how you can change, not how you can change everyone else.
I agree with this 100% even though you might not think I do. But than again as long as you leave out the names is it really dirty laundry? People just need to rant...or bring their problems to a somebody neutral.
23. If you are a GM at the end of every session ask if players are having fun? Any complaints?
24. If you are going to be late or have to cancel call ahead of time.
25. Don't assume anything about anybody till you know it to be truth. Example a bad reason to ban something is because what a player did with it in your game...don't assume that all players are like that.
26. If you feel the need to critize do so politely. If you are politely critized listen and politely respond.
And don't drink my damn milk.
You can drink my milk!
(But you had better ask first).
13. Keep your group's dirty laundry off the messageboard. Seriously, don't post asking strangers to affirm your players or GM are a jerk. If you really need advice, come here with a post asking how you can change, not how you can change everyone else.I agree with this 100% even though you might not think I do. But than again as long as you leave out the names is it really dirty laundry? People just need to rant...or bring their problems to a somebody neutral.
Not to start debate, but I actually find that one really subjective. The use of the term dirty laundry I mean. The rest is okayish.
17. Die with dignity. It happens to everyone.Still waiting on my turn. :(
I've always said if there is one thing in life you really want to suck at, suck at dying. Worked out well so far right?
|
|
A great big "+1" to almost everything on your list, ciretose (and a +99 to a few items). I do have one disagreement, though:
12. If you think the GM stinks, run your own game to show how you think it should be run. If the rest of the group agrees with you then changes will come. If not, you'll learn how hard it is to be on the other side of the table and be more likely to...well...STFU.Perhaps it wasn't your intent, but this one makes it sound like if I've got a grievance with how my GM does things, my only two options are to do it myself or shut up. But what if I'm new to the game and wouldn't know the first thing about GMing, but I know it's not fun that the only time my GM rolls behind a screen is when attacking my high-AC character (who subsequently gets hit more consistently than any other party member)? If I'm not better at GMing than him, then I can't protest unfair treatment?
Newbies aside, some people just aren't cut out for GMing. What if I'm such a person? Am I therefore not allowed to take issue with anything the GM might do? What if my GM and I are BOTH the type of person who isn't cut out for GMing?
What if every player at the table hates that the GM uses (or doesn't use) a crit/fumble deck, but none of the players has the time needed to GM in their stead (perhaps the GM is only the GM because he's the only unemployed person in the group)?
There are lots of reasons that a player with a very legitimate grievance might be unable to do a better job, or even GM at all. "Do it yourself or shut the f*** up" means that such a player's concerns are always automatically invalid. That doesn't seem right to me.
What I've personally found is that 80% of player complaints are cleared up by a player just being in the GMs chair. Realizing how much is going on when you are on the other side leads to players giving much more slack for small stuff and taking a more helpful than confrontation approach, in general.
15% are cleared up by the player showing what they think works better when they GM, and then making that the rule for the group, or the player realizing the idea doesn't work when they try to GM it.
Only about 5% falls to other stuff.
YMMV.
EDIT: Also nothing shuts a tyrant GM down faster than competition.
I'd say this is a spot on list.
I would also add that constantly making jokes that are overly-crude constitutes as discourteous. I can understand a little crude/rude humor here and there, but when those are the only jokes you make, it gets old fast. See: every adult cartoon ever (ok, there are few that are't like that).
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Avoid people who make Lists, that's just creepy.
Good one- we can add that to the list..
28. Please know your spells. We don't want to open the book or shift through a deck of spell cards every time you want to cast. If you can please give your GM a copy of your spells description (preferably through a spell card) so that everyone knows what's going on.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Plan your actions out one round in advance, modifying as the round advances.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I fell guilty to that one last session. Hadn't read up on the baddies spell lists and they had APG and UM material in there. Lessons learned.
It can be really hard as a GM, particularly at high levels, but there is far less excuse as a player since you only are running one person and you have time between the turn to look stuff up.
When I GM, I have the laptop open and tabs for anything I am playing to cast. Wi-Fi FTW :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I fell guilty to that one last session. Hadn't read up on the baddies spell lists and they had APG and UM material in there. Lessons learned.
Happens to everyone. Especially when your new to the material or it comes from a splatbook you didn't even know existed. I see it hit divine casters more than anyone because they have a massive spell list and its all spells known. I see it a crazy number of times in PFS from everyone at the table.
The fact every other person in the world now has some electronic device does alleviate much of this. I'm not one of those people, but its super helpful when someone has a laptop or phone open. Speaking of which...
29. Cell Phones and Lap Tops are great! Not so great they should take your eyes totally away from the table and we have to remind you what's going on. No we won't take your turn for you... So please remember that we want your attention too.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A great big "+1" to almost everything on your list, ciretose (and a +99 to a few items). I do have one disagreement, though:
12. If you think the GM stinks, run your own game to show how you think it should be run. If the rest of the group agrees with you then changes will come. If not, you'll learn how hard it is to be on the other side of the table and be more likely to...well...STFU.Perhaps it wasn't your intent, but this one makes it sound like if I've got a grievance with how my GM does things, my only two options are to do it myself or shut up. But what if I'm new to the game and wouldn't know the first thing about GMing, but I know it's not fun that the only time my GM rolls behind a screen is when attacking my high-AC character (who subsequently gets hit more consistently than any other party member)? If I'm not better at GMing than him, then I can't protest unfair treatment?
Newbies aside, some people just aren't cut out for GMing. What if I'm such a person? Am I therefore not allowed to take issue with anything the GM might do? What if my GM and I are BOTH the type of person who isn't cut out for GMing?
What if every player at the table hates that the GM uses (or doesn't use) a crit/fumble deck, but none of the players has the time needed to GM in their stead (perhaps the GM is only the GM because he's the only unemployed person in the group)?
There are lots of reasons that a player with a very legitimate grievance might be unable to do a better job, or even GM at all. "Do it yourself or shut the f*** up" means that such a player's concerns are always automatically invalid. That doesn't seem right to me.
Though I understand the intent, I agree that the wording of the item is troubling. I also just don't like the idea of "become a GM just to show someone how to do it right" as a motivation for becoming a GM.
For dealing with GM vs player issues, this is what I'd offer as advice/guidelines:
* If you are unhappy with how a GM or player is handling something, TALK TO HIM/HER ABOUT IT, civilly, courteously. Assert your feelings on the matter clearly, but also acknowledge and be mindful of the others' point of view and feelings. When the other person responds, listen without interruption (and ask them to do the same for you), and acknowledge what they say and how they feel, whether you are about to agree or disagree. Try to work out conflicts like this. Be willing to compromise within reason, and be willing to take no for an answer when a clear and rational reason is given.
* If you are a player and having trouble with a fellow player, talk to the player about it, using the guidelines above. If that doesn't work, go to the GM and ask for help mediating the issue. If the problem player is agreed to be a problem player by everyone in the group, have a group chat with the problem player.
* As a last resort, if you are unhappy with a game and are unable to find a mature solution through discussion and compromise, then leave and find another group. Or, if you feel inclined, start your own group as a GM. Different people have different playstyles and sometimes unfortunately they just don't mesh well; and moreover, some personalities were not designed to work well with others. Sometimes it's better for all concerned to cut loose and find people you work together better with. Likewise if there is someone else who is just not being willing to work at all with the group, sometimes you just have to ask them to leave.
* Remember above all what you are doing is playing a cooperative game whose chief purpose is for all involved to have fun. If you or someone else is not having fun, something is wrong. Do your best not only to have fun and assert what you need to have fun, but also to ensure that all around you are having fun as well.
((I know some of the second to last is covered by the "you are replaceable" items, but I felt it warranted revisiting in another light.))
|
|
I agree talking is the best solution, but I think far to often it is approached as "You are causing me a problem" rather than "I have a problem I would like addressed, please."
And far to often on here, cheerleaders appear egging on a fight.
If you want a game run a certain way, and your GM doesn't, they aren't necessarily wrong and your aren't necessarily right. It isn't black and white.
If you have a playstyle that differs from your GM that you think your group would enjoy better, running a game is the best way to show it. And if you actually do have a GM who controlling, competition corrects that.
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree talking is the best solution, but I think far to often it is approached as "You are causing me a problem" rather than "I have a problem I would like addressed, please."
This is a good point. I don't know who'll pay attention to this, but here's DQ's unsolicited advice on effective communication (this is coming from my training in conflict resolution, mediation, and active listening):
There are four (basic) styles of communicating or dealing with conflict:
Aggressive: "YOU are MAKING me SO MAD!" The focus is on the other person's behavior; the person is made to be "responsible" for the communicator's feelings (even if, due to misunderstanding, they are actually not). Aggressive person vents frustration but does not identify real causes or solutions, and deflects his own participation entirely. Extreme aggression can also go to violence. Ciretose's example of "you're the one causing the problem" is a (mild) example of an aggressive statement.
Passive: Not doing anything. Sucking it up and being miserable, or even trying over-hard to be accommodating. While this can be fine for the other party in a conflict, it means that someone is miserable (and will become increasingly so) and that will influence their behavior. In games, the passive person is upset but never tells anyone, but both they and their character just slowly starts to withdraw from interacting with the group, and nobody understands why. A passive person who is confronted about it who does not want to communicate asserively will likely respond passive-aggressively.
Passive-Aggressive: "No really , do whatever you want , I'm fine." Passive-aggressive person never actually communicates frustration, but expects his anger to be read from body language, which may be overlooked or interpreted. Passive-aggressive people kind of want others to be telepathic, and even expect others to know how they feel without ever clearly communicating it. Passive-aggressive people also "take out" their frustration on others indirectly; in gaming, good examples are GMs unfairly attacking or trying to kill PCs of players who are annoying them, or players unfairly trying to bend or break rules or find ways to "destroy" the campaign--without ever either side directly communicating what's really bothering them. Passive-aggression can actually be one of the most infuriating and blocking ways of dealing with conflict, because nothing is ever actually communicated but all sides kind of expect the other to understand hwo they feel, and methods of "problem solving" create more problems and cause more anger (e.g., PC killing).
Assertive: "I feel overwhelmed and frustrated because you are talking over other people during combat, which is both unfair to the others because they can't be heard over you, and makes running the game very distracting when everyone is talking at once." The prior is an example of an "I statement" (I feel (emotion) because you are (description of behavior) and (concrete explanation of why the behavior is influencing the emotion described). You don't always have to word it that way exactly (it can feel awkward) but it includes important elements:
- By saying "I feel" - you are OWNING your reaction. You're also making yourself instantly part of the process of resolving the conflict, which is very important. You are not putting the weight of your own feelings or the responsibility of resolving your feelings on the other person.
- By explicitly describing the emotion you feel, people know exactly what's going on with you, you aren't forcing them to guess, a la passive aggression. This allows them to help respond in a more constructive way.
- By identifying the BEHAVIOR the person is doing, this separates "you" from the _activity_ that is being frustrating. "You" might be the guy who is usually a nice person who brings donuts to every game--he just also happens to be disruptive during combat. Statements like "you make me mad" attack the whole person, both their good traits and bad--they boil down to "YOU ARE A BAD PERSON." Saying "you are doing X wrong" implies not "YOU ARE BAD" but "this BEHAVIOR is bad." This is a majorly important distinction. Addressing the behavior, not attacking the person, is key.
- Addressing the behavior also makes the person clearly identify what exactly they are doing wrong. It is entirely possible they have no idea. Some things that may be obvious to you are not obvious to others. In the example of being disruptive, the person may simply be so excited about the game he is not recognizing that others are talking or that they might be hurt by his interrupting them. The additional qualifiers offered -- "unfair" and "distracting" -- helps explain exactly what is wrong with the behavior and why he is going to be asked to change it.
A lot of times, just communicating this way can end an argument before it even starts. In distracting guy's example, he might say, "Oh my god, I had no idea I was stepping on other people's toes. I just get really excited. I'll try to hold it back. Can you give me a nudge if I start doing it?"
Now, someone might react very negatively still--there's no way you can guarantee how someone will respond. But this opens things up a hell of a lot more for dialogue AND resolution than simply attacking, ignoring, or trying to circumvent the problem without dealing it. And the person as above might even offer solutions.
When seeking solutions, you can involve the other person. "What can we do to try and make this less of an issue?" Offering yourself and the person makes this a team effort rather than a "versus" situation--which is the real crux of dealing with arguments. Often people are really on the same side--or at least find some points of agreement. Turning "you versus me" into "us" can negate an awful lot of bad vibes.
Another key factor in communication is acknowledging how other people feel. Whether you're initiating a discussion with a problem person, or you are being addressed as a "problem person" -- it doesn't matter. An easy thing to do is to repeat back and summarize what the person said. If something's not clear, ask questions.
"Okay, you said I made you mad. What did I do that made you mad?" That can turn a verbal attack into an opportunity for someone to start communicating more assertively rather than aggressively.
Sometimes just acknowledging how someone feels can be ridiculously HUGE in turning an argument or tense situation into one that's resolved. Doing some customer service for a magazine I worked for, I got an irate customer on the phone, who was receiving magazines on behalf of his father, who recently passed away, and his requests for canceling the subscription had not been processed. While I apologized for the problem and told him it would be handled, he stayed on the phone and kept yelling at me--and he really was yelling. I realized this was not yet resolved. All I said was, "Sir, I understand you must be going through a very difficult time with your father's death, and I can understand why you're so angry, that not only did we not process your subscription cancellation, as long as you keep getting these, you're reminded of him. I'd absolutely be angry too!" "Oh," was his first response, in which his tone of voice COMPLETELY changed. "I-I'm sorry if I was yelling, yes, this really is a difficult time. Thanks so much for your help." The last sentence spoken almost sounded like an entirely different person--his anger, his yelling, his giving me a hard time was gone in a flash. The keys were that I didn't take it personally, and thus started to fight with him, and that once he realized he had been heard and understood, he was done with the anger, and the call ended successfully.
All most of us want is to be understood. It is amazing and sad how often we don't feel that we are. Showing someone we do understand them--or are trying to--can go extremely far in resolving a situation. It is really crazy how well it works.
The final key in good listening--which is essential in good communication--is listening completely before speaking. Never ever ever interrupt. This is hard because a lot of local cultures at least tend to encourage talking but not listening, and we're essentially trained to interrupt to "Get our word in." Just watch pundits talk on the news--it's just a mess of people talking over each other, and nothing actually being heard. But it's really important to be mindful of what other people are saying, and not just try to react right away if they're not done. And if you do this, it's more likely someone will respond in kind---and it gives you the ground to ask to be treated the way you treated them if they don't. I had a conversation fairly recently with someone who was mad at me over a situation; I listened to her all the way through without interruption, and then I summarized what she said to make sure she understood. Then I started to respond, and she immediately started to talk over me. I straightened and asserted, "Did I ever interrupt you when you were talking just now?" "No," she had to admit. "Could you please do me the same courtesy?" "Sorry. Yes, I'll do my best."
The harder part when dealing with a difficult person is staying calm yourself. The less combative you are, and kindly assertive you remain, the less ground they have to remain combative themselves. And if you are really being attacked, it is really hard not to just fight back. In extreme situations, it might be all you're left with. But in a lot of cases, if you can try to stay calm, and try not to take what's said personally, it's a heck of a lot easier to find a way out without fighting.
Now, in the end, some people are going to be asshats no matter what you do or say. And in that case, f!%!'em. But until you've clearly communicated assertively your issues and done your best to get them to do the same, it's absolutely worth trying that. Fighting, forcing someone to leave, etc. should always be the last resort, the last alternative. You should always give a person a chance to be a decent human being, and that starts with behaving as respectfully and assertively as you can yourself.
TL;DR: Speak up, own your own feelings, resolve behaviors not attack people, and listen listen listen listen.
Back to your regularly scheduled gaming.
|
|
This is a good point. I don't know who'll pay attention to this, but here's DQ's unsolicited advice on effective communication (this is coming from my training in conflict resolution, mediation, and active listening):
Not enough people, so I'm bumping it.
And for the record, I do this in person but not on the forums ;)
So much good advice here, and I'm spot on with the OP's list. I have a player who for over 25 years is never prepared when his turn comes around. It doesn't matter if it's D&D, Pathfinder, DC Heroes, anything. So when it comes around to him, we have to wait while he decides which spell to use or how many points he's going to add into his power's damage or whatever. All my players are like family (you play for a quarter century together it turns out that way) so we just sort of overlook him as the slow cousin.
|
|
So much good advice here, and I'm spot on with the OP's list. I have a player who for over 25 years is never prepared when his turn comes around. It doesn't matter if it's D&D, Pathfinder, DC Heroes, anything. So when it comes around to him, we have to wait while he decides which spell to use or how many points he's going to add into his power's damage or whatever. All my players are like family (you play for a quarter century together it turns out that way) so we just sort of overlook him as the slow cousin.
And I think most every group has a "special" player (if you can't think of who, it is probably you :)) but this is more geared toward people who complain they can't find a game, but break the rules above.
Those things aren't unrelated, I would bet.
This is a good point. I don't know who'll pay attention to this, but here's DQ's unsolicited advice on effective communication (this is coming from my training in conflict resolution, mediation, and active listening):
Not enough people, so I'm bumping it.
And for the record, I do this in person but not on the forums ;)
Forum communication is its own special little universe. Part of the trouble in communicating effectively is we all tend to cherry-pick what bits of a conversation we pay attention to and which ones we don't, which doesn't allow for a proper conversation to happen. It's a lot easier to ignore the things we don't want to hear... or simply misread or misunderstand something because we're skimming through dozens of posts at once, and we're not in a person-to-person situation where we can make an agreement to please listen and pay attention. So sometimes you just have to ignore stuff and not let it get to you (best), or just otherwise speak up the best you can without being a complete dick.
My favorite times on forums is when I post something like a paragraph of brilliant and unique insights about the subject at hand, and then parenthetically mention as an aside that my favorite color is blue. Everything I say on topic is entirely ignored, but five people give me lengthy, vicious diatribes about why I am wrong because I like the color blue.
That's the kind of thing where there's no point in confrontation, there really is nothing to resolve; someone of no real relevance is just using my words as a reason to mouth off.
Sadly, I only fail to rise to the bait about half the time.... :(
FIFY
my favorite color is bluethat's just silly. Everyone knows that green is by far the better color!
I like gray, but I'm color blind and my DM told me I had to like purple. What's a guy to do, hey?
30. Favoritism may sound nice at the moment to a certain someone, but it creates rifts in the group. Please treat everyone with respect.
|
|
my favorite color is bluethat's just silly. Everyone knows that green is by far the better color!I like gray, but I'm color blind and my DM told me I had to like purple. What's a guy to do, hey?
30. Favoritism may sound nice at the moment to a certain someone, but it creates rifts in the group. Please treat everyone with respect.
This is the first one I kind of disagree with. Not to say that favoritism is "good" but rather to say I think the better advice is not to covet.
Not everyone earns equal treatment. Including GMs. Which is why when you have more than one, it doesn't matter if it is "Your turn" or not, let the best idea be run.
Experience has taught me favoritism can easily alienate players, especially newer ones to the group. Its not the most visible form of alienation either. Trust is something different I think, as is coveting.
|
|
Experience has taught me favoritism can easily alienate players, especially newer ones to the group. Its not the most visible form of alienation either. Trust is something different I think, as is coveting.
Favoritism isn't the same as special treatment. Everyone at the table getting the same treatment isn't a goal I have. Everyone having a good time is.
Experience has taught me favoritism can easily alienate players, especially newer ones to the group. Its not the most visible form of alienation either. Trust is something different I think, as is coveting.Favoritism isn't the same as special treatment. Everyone at the table getting the same treatment isn't a goal I have. Everyone having a good time is.
I don't think I can advocate giving some people better treatment than others. Would it matter if I felt unwelcomed because someone was treated with favor over me? That's a real fun killer, feeling unwelcome is.
I think between all of us in my gaming group we break almost all of these. We still manage to have fun and remain friends. Go figure.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll actually give Ciretose's first post the fave it deserves.
DQ also gets one. That post right there is made of pure win, and brings back memories both good and bad.
Actually, might as well inform that I met former DM a few days ago, and we reconciled the past s***storms after a long talk about the whole thing. I won't expect to play my homebrew races in his games, but we can still run games for one another once we gather up the player groups. He wants me to run a Kingmaker before he'll run one for my current group, and I'm pretty sure that I'll enjoy DMing for a more RP-focused group for once since he'll gather players from his current party.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think I can advocate giving some people better treatment than others. Would it matter if I felt unwelcomed because someone was treated with favor over me? That's a real fun killer, feeling unwelcome is.Experience has taught me favoritism can easily alienate players, especially newer ones to the group. Its not the most visible form of alienation either. Trust is something different I think, as is coveting.Favoritism isn't the same as special treatment. Everyone at the table getting the same treatment isn't a goal I have. Everyone having a good time is.
Some people earn special treatment, both positively and negatively.
Actually, I'll give this a thorough run while I'm at it.
1. BYOS, BYOS and if applicable definitely BYOB unless you are told there will be food and drink provided. Even then it can't hurt to bring something. And frankly, you really should bring enough to share if you want to really be courteous and welcome at all gatherings.
Has been done with both groups. The first DM also appreciates when we don't bring non-kosher food to the table.
2. Be on time and be ready to play. Don't show up at the time the game was supposed to start and start rolling up a character. Have the materials you will need as ready as you are able (laptop, book or printout)
I inform the group ahead of time if I'm late, though it's usually the others who end up late in my current group, usually due to circumstances.
3. When starting a new game or new character, run your concept first by the GM and then by the rest of the group. Not the character sheet, just the concept. Don't put anything on paper until you check in to make sure the concept fits in with what other people want to play.
Never been a problem with the current group, and we usually discuss our character ideas and concepts even before the actual campaign starts, both DM and players.
4. If you are doing something you think is going to force a rule check, either mention it beforehand or have the rule ready when you do it. Stopping a table to find a rule is annoying.
Hasn't come up in-game, except once when the Gunslinger was new to me yet I decided to introduce a Gunslinger NPC. Problem got solved with player help.
5. Use the time between turns to get ready. When possible, have your spells available to show your GM or to check yourself. Be ready on your turn.
I've had to teach the Cleric to do this. So far he's been keeping track better than before.
6. Be a part of the party, not a lone wolf. Look for synergies with your fellow players and try to create reasons for everyone to be a part of the party.
We all know what happens when you split the party...
7. If you aren't interested in the game the GM is running, politely bow out. Don't try to force a square peg in a round hole. Other games will come.
Kinda the thing me and that old DM had. As mentioned earlier, situation was fixed.
8. If a game is dying, let it go. There are lots of other ideas and concepts you can try if the group isn't into what you are currently running. Rebooting is always better than group collapse.
Has happened once while I was DM. Both me and the players played a part in that.
9. You are "a" GM, not "The" GM. You can be replaced.
I'm fine with that. No fun being DM all the time.
10. You are "a" player, not "The" player. You can be replaced.
I'm fine with that. No fun being a player all the time.
11. If the rest of the party is zoning out while you role play, tone it down. It's a team game, not your own personal acting debut.
Strangely enough, this has NEVER been a problem in any game I've been in, neither as a player nor as a DM.
12. If you think the GM stinks, run your own game to show how you think it should be run. If the rest of the group agrees with you then changes will come. If not, you'll learn how hard it is to be on the other side of the table and be more likely to...well...STFU.
That's pretty much what I did.
13. Keep your group's dirty laundry off the messageboard. Seriously, don't post asking strangers to affirm your players or GM are a jerk. If you really need advice, come here with a post asking how you can change, not how you can change everyone else.
*Shrug*
14. Be nice to the books. If possible, buy some to add to the communal library.
I'm nice to my books! My Core Rulebook was a birthday gift!!
15. Rules discussions are for downtime, not at the table. Even death can be corrected in this game, so just wait and talk to your GM when there is some downtime.
It's kinda unavoidable when you have new players at the table, but it hasn't caused significant problems.
16. If you are GM, make sure there is some downtime periodically for players to go eat, use the bathroom, talk, plot (or for you to scramble to come up with a plan when they throw you for a loop). If a player seems upset, give them time to talk to you between encounters before it blows up.
We usually have a coffee break (like a Finnish version of tea time) in the late afternoon with my current group. As for the latter, I usually waited till the session was over when the heated debates with my old DM happened.
17. Die with dignity. It happens to everyone. Start working on your 2nd character (assuming you don't already have a pre-approved backup) or something.
Haven't had a character death yet. Those who have heeded this rule.
18. Remember it is a game, and the people at the table are your friends, and no one is (generally) getting paid to be there. Rather than acting like you are entitled to customer service from others at the table, put yourself in the mindset of helping to provide the best game for everyone else at the table.
Had only been an issue with the old DM.
19. When you mess up, apologize. It seems like a small thing. It isn't.
I take apologies seriously, and I do hand them out when warranted.
20. Don't just design for yourself, design for your group. This goes for GM's and players alike. If you thinking about what you want and not thinking about what would be fun for everyone, you are doing it wrong.
I usually aim for what's fun for both me and the others. If that's not possible, I aim for what's fun for the group, even if it's one of the ideas I'm not as keenly into.