|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
He is not asking for personal information, he's asking for general examples. If you aren't comfortable sharing situations even stripped of private information, that's understandable. But don't expect us to accept 'it just is' as a valid reason.I mean you pretty much guessed what the issue is and then are acting like its some mysterious thing that needs examples for. At that point you just want to rubberneck.
Partially, the reason why I am being so flippant about this is that most of the advice Tallow is giving is useless.
Its hard to weigh advice that works for a particular situation, when that particular situation has not been revealed. Please see my revised post above where I've covered what I'm assuming the situation to be.
The point is, you've used the buzz-word exclusionary in reference to the rules themselves. And then given no explanation as to what that even really means. So its hard to really comment on that or build a reasonable response.
The point is, there are ways to assist just about anyone who wants to do things correctly, to do so. You just have to take the time, patience, and understanding to do so. And if you aren't willing to take that time (even if its away from the particular game day), and explain the situation (even in the barest of details) then it really isn't fair of you even bring it up.
People will have disabilities, learning disabilities, and neuro-atypical conditions. That's a fact of life. And we can help make things easier and inclusive for those people, by making sure we have friendly, trustworthy, and patient people willing to take the time to assist them as necessary. I do not believe, however, removing the rules altogether helps them or anyone else.
Venture-Captain, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
The point is, you've used the buzz-word exclusionary in reference to the rules themselves. And then given no explanation as to what that even really means. So its hard to really comment on that or build a reasonable response.
Well I could just say what the issue is but the rules are physically painful for people to follow just sounds worst than they are exclusionary. And no I'm not actually joking about that.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well I could just say what the issue is but the rules are physically painful for people to follow just sounds worst than they are exclusionary. And no I'm not actually joking about that.
The point is, you've used the buzz-word exclusionary in reference to the rules themselves. And then given no explanation as to what that even really means. So its hard to really comment on that or build a reasonable response.
But saying it this way doesn't make me feel like an jerk head for supporting following the rules. Then I can think of ways to help folks for whom it might be physically difficult or painful to follow the rules, instead of getting defensive about supporting an exclusionary process.
Are they handicapped? Rheumatoid arthritis perhaps? Injured combat veteran? You don't have to answer. But in real life, if confronted with a situation in which someone is having difficulty due to physical limitations, I can certainly try to help accommodate that by finding acceptable and less painful alternatives that still follow the rules.
See, appealing to someone's reasonable side gets a whole different conversation started, than immediately calling them exclusionary, which is a negatively weighted word that immediately puts them on the defensive.
|
Venture-Captain, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
Well I could just say what the issue is but the rules are physically painful for people to follow just sounds worst than they are exclusionary. And no I'm not actually joking about that.
The point is, you've used the buzz-word exclusionary in reference to the rules themselves. And then given no explanation as to what that even really means. So its hard to really comment on that or build a reasonable response.
But saying it this way doesn't make me feel like an jerk head for supporting following the rules. Then I can think of ways to help folks for whom it might be physically difficult or painful to follow the rules, instead of getting defensive about supporting an exclusionary process.
Are they handicapped? Rheumatoid arthritis perhaps? Injured combat veteran? You don't have to answer. But in real life, if confronted with a situation in which someone is having difficulty due to physical limitations, I can certainly try to help accommodate that by finding acceptable and less painful alternatives that still follow the rules.
See, appealing to someone's reasonable side gets a whole different conversation started, than immediately calling them exclusionary, which is a negatively weighted word that immediately puts them on the defensive.
Well it is because you can't actually figure out what is wrong with the person looking at them. And at that point it does make you a jerk. That was my original point and why I told you you were rubbernecking. You can't tell when people are physically incapable of doing something. And its not really something that should be up to arbitrary whim which is why I said its exclusionary.
|
|
How'd you get your AC? Show that to the guy beside you.
How are your skill point determined, and do they add up? Show that to the guy beside you.
What kind of magic items do you have on this PC? Show that to the guy beside you.
What's your HP? etc.
"The magic jar trap dissipates.
Pass your PCs to the person on your left!"
A couple of scenarios with events like that should persuade players to ensure they can justify every ability and score on their sheet.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well it is because you can't actually figure out what is wrong with the person looking at them. And at that point it does make you a jerk. That was my original point and why I told you you were rubbernecking. You can't tell when people are physically incapable of doing something. And its not really something that should be up to arbitrary whim which is why I said its exclusionary.
I do not understand. These rules have evolved out of the needs of the campaign over a decade. It is certainly not a whim. And I cannot see how 'have your paperwork filled out' is exclusionary. It doesn't say "YOU must fill out your own paperwork". I would be more than happy to help someone fill out the paperwork. Accommodations can be made.
|
|
Well it is because you can't actually figure out what is wrong with the person looking at them. And at that point it does make you a jerk. That was my original point and why I told you you were rubbernecking. You can't tell when people are physically incapable of doing something. And its not really something that should be up to arbitrary whim which is why I said its exclusionary.Well I could just say what the issue is but the rules are physically painful for people to follow just sounds worst than they are exclusionary. And no I'm not actually joking about that.
The point is, you've used the buzz-word exclusionary in reference to the rules themselves. And then given no explanation as to what that even really means. So its hard to really comment on that or build a reasonable response.
But saying it this way doesn't make me feel like an jerk head for supporting following the rules. Then I can think of ways to help folks for whom it might be physically difficult or painful to follow the rules, instead of getting defensive about supporting an exclusionary process.
Are they handicapped? Rheumatoid arthritis perhaps? Injured combat veteran? You don't have to answer. But in real life, if confronted with a situation in which someone is having difficulty due to physical limitations, I can certainly try to help accommodate that by finding acceptable and less painful alternatives that still follow the rules.
See, appealing to someone's reasonable side gets a whole different conversation started, than immediately calling them exclusionary, which is a negatively weighted word that immediately puts them on the defensive.
This does not track. At some point, people in general have to take responsibility for themselves. My job, when I was an organizer, was creating an atmosphere where anyone would feel comfortable coming to me with any issue they may have, and feel comfortable that I would treat them with compassion, empathy, and do my best to help as I was able. But if someone has a condition that leaves them incapable of following the rules, and it isn't immediately apparent, then its up to them to let the organizers know, so the organizers can give them alternatives and help them out.
But "fill out this paperwork" is pretty ubiquitous in our society (not just PFS), and so they would already have experience on where they have problems and can immediately bring them to light.
But a big question becomes, "what other system that ensures good record keeping that accommodates everyone would you suggest?"
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm also not sure how its "rubbernecking". Unless you are implying that I'm ogling someone with some form of disability. Or trying to force you to reveal some sort of disability you've noticed so I can then ogle it.
Trying to be helpful is not rubbernecking, and its that kind of language that doesn't help the conversation move to a useful place.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well it is because you can't actually figure out what is wrong with the person looking at them. And at that point it does make you a jerk. That was my original point and why I told you you were rubbernecking. You can't tell when people are physically incapable of doing something. And its not really something that should be up to arbitrary whim which is why I said its exclusionary.I do not understand. These rules have evolved out of the needs of the campaign over a decade. It is certainly not a whim. And I cannot see how 'have your paperwork filled out' is exclusionary. It doesn't say "YOU must fill out your own paperwork". I would be more than happy to help someone fill out the paperwork. Accommodations can be made.
Someone with a disability, especially one that isn't obvious, isn't always going to feel comfortable saying why they haven't filled out their sheets. The issue isn't that there aren't ways that they could get their sheet filled out. The issue is when the initial reaction to the sheets not being filled out is punitive.
A Player shows up to game. GM realizes something is wrong on their character. Chronicles aren't completely filled out. Gm reacts with, "Play a pregen or go home." Maybe, for whatever reason, the player doesn't want to have another conversation about their disability at a table in front of 5 other players in the middle of a crowded game shop. Maybe they aren't comfortable having that conversation with a GM from out of town who they just met. Maybe they aren't comfortable having that conversation with anyone involved with PFS. So they just don't come back. It becomes exclusionary without anyone ever intending it to be that way.
An alternative situation would be, "I see you have a +2 weapon, but you've only played 10 scenarios. It's not possible for you to have enough prestige to buy a +2 weapon. I'll let you play the game with a +1 weapon, and we'll sort it out after. There may be other things that we'll catch going through your chronicle." This both allows the player to play their own character, and shows them that you're willing to help them get things in order. If something else comes up in game that doesn't sound possible, address it then in the same way and get on with the game. This works whether it's a disability that was the source of the chronicles not being filled out, or if it was just that a player didn't understand the rules, and it doesn't call them out on doing anything wrong.
I don't understand why the second option would be any different than a GM making a rules call in the middle of a session, but agreeing to look it up after to make sure it's done right the next time. That happens all the time. Bottom line, whether you ask them to play a pregen or to not use an option on their character, the important part is following up after the session to help them get things right. That's my only issue with the idea of dropping in from out of town, enforcing rules more strictly than you would in your own area, then disappearing and hoping it prompts the locals to start following the rules.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll agree with that Ferious Thune. Being willing to help out and being lenient on small mistakes is always a good faith, good will effort to be accommodating. This also helps the person gain a level of trust in you, so that they might later confide in you what might be an embarrassing situation to them.
But, there are always situations (several of these I've actually run into) where accommodation is not something you should do.
1) Showed up with a Drow Noble and a set of rolled stats where nothing was below a 17 -- the CRB says I can roll stats...
2) Showed up with a custom made level 6 character that had never played a game of PFS before, with custom items and some 3.5 and 3PP feats, items, etc.
and others...
Some things you can be accommodating and helpful with, and some things you should just say "no" to. Do it as nicely as possible, "hey, the guide to organized play lets you know whats possible to play. How bout you play a pregen today and I'll help you build a character from our guide for next week."
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Likewise, I had a player show up with an 8th level gunslinger at GenCon. No chronicles or anything. I asked him to run the 7th level pregen as he could not play the character he brought.
When my player came with a sword wielding eidolon that had just grown to large, I let them use a large sword for the scenario until I could verify how the transition worked.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, yeah, and I'm not suggesting allowing illegal options. I'm suggesting there's often some level of compromise with lesser issues. The two situations Tallow mentioned are different from having a legal item before a character should have it, and not having done your homework filling out sheets completely.
Steven - I'd be really reluctant to turn someone away at an event like Gencon if their character otherwise looks legal, chronicles or not. I'd at least give them the chance to bring up their play history on Paizo first, and if it looks like they've played enough scenarios, I'd probably let it go. I just don't understand what's gained in the moment by forcing pregen play, but I can definitely understand what's lost spending thousands of dollars traveling to a convention and being denied the chance to play your character because you forgot your paperwork.
|
|
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well it is because you can't actually figure out what is wrong with the person looking at them. And at that point it does make you a jerk. That was my original point and why I told you you were rubbernecking. You can't tell when people are physically incapable of doing something. And its not really something that should be up to arbitrary whim which is why I said its exclusionary.
Speaking as one of those invisibly disabled people, for whom filling out chronicle sheets can be physically painful even, can I just say your being super not helpful here?
It's not rubbernecking to want an example of the situation your proposing, and just shouting about "Exclusions!" doesn't help people understand and improve things to meet the needs of people with disabilities.
You can't see my disability, and I'm lucky enough that the world actually works in my favor to help "Hide" the effects of it in the fact that nobody is surprised when someone shows up with digitally scanned copies of things and everything filed into computer folders. They just assume I'm being nerdy and fastidious instead of avoiding the act of writing anything or moving miniatures or things like that.
So if something comes up, say a new audit that says "All copies must be original, and all character sheets must be hand written", then saying it's "Exclusionary" to do that isn't good enough. If they thought about people like me, they wouldn't take that action in the first place. It's my job, or an ally's job, to go "Hey, you do know some people can't write things by hand right?". The solutions can be arrived that accommodate people like me.
And before you say that he's "Prying for private information", as someone who has a REALLY difficult time maintaining physical sheets, I wanted to offer some suggestions and help but even after reading all your posts I STILL have no idea what the circumstances your are and if my suggestions would be helpful or not.
Sorry for the book, I just get a little riled up about this topic since it's close to home.
|
Venture-Captain, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
But "fill out this paperwork" is pretty ubiquitous in our society (not just PFS), and so they would already have experience on where they have problems and can immediately bring them to light.
No because well society is still pretty horrid when it comes to a lot of issues and most of this is relatively new compared to the archaic PFS rules. This is why I still stand by the jerk standpoint because of comments like this.
It's not rubbernecking to want an example of the situation your proposing, and just shouting about "Exclusions!" doesn't help people understand and improve things to meet the needs of people with disabilities.
They are physically incapable of remembering the rules which is a common enough issue that I doubt most people aren't aware of it.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
But "fill out this paperwork" is pretty ubiquitous in our society (not just PFS), and so they would already have experience on where they have problems and can immediately bring them to light.
No because well society is still pretty horrid when it comes to a lot of issues and most of this is relatively new compared to the archaic PFS rules. This is why I still stand by the jerk standpoint because of comments like this.
They are physically incapable of remembering the rules which is a common enough issue that I doubt most people aren't aware of it.It's not rubbernecking to want an example of the situation your proposing, and just shouting about "Exclusions!" doesn't help people understand and improve things to meet the needs of people with disabilities.
Ok, great. You think I'm an exclusionary jerk, who's creepy and trying to pry into the personal lives of people.
I'll just be helpful in my life and let the thanks of those I assist be enough. I don't need your validation.
<points at the post just above yours>
EDIT: <and just below this one>
Venture-Captain, Special Projects
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Did I do the right thing? How do you deal with culture differences when travelling, especially if those differences have rules issues?
I'm not going to read the whole thread, because I'm 100% certain that there are people whose views are different than mine, and that's okay. What I will say before I post this is that I, personally, am a very lawful good person.
The rule for Society Play exist because they are an effort to keep people at a semi-even playing field so that new players are less intimidated by people who may know more about the game. So that characters are equally useful. Give us a place to meet other players so that if we prefer homebrew we can maybe make friends there to invite over to our house to play with homebrew rules. etc.
The reason we audit is to ensure that players are 1) keeping honest and 2) to ensure that this balance is maintained to the best of our abilities. That way someone who is brand new can come in and contribute similarly to someone who has played for years. The idea behind Society Play is to expand the fan base and introduce new people to the game that we all love to play. The sacrifice we, as people who have played for a while, make is to not be able to roll stats, have arbitrary gold amounts at the GM's discretion, and must show that we achieved what we said, earned what we did, etc.
I think it's a very fair trade considering the opportunities Society Play creates for people like me who have moved often and lost more home groups than I care to count due to scheduling conflicts. Society allows me to take a character that I love and have put a lot of thought into, and travel anywhere in the world and be able to find a game. That's an amazing thing! Especially when you factor in that with my visual impairment it makes meeting people really difficult (most people aren't really willing to drive out to you to meet you for the first time, that's something people get more comfortable with once they know you better... and unfortunately I am incapable of driving since I'm not able to see very well and all).
So by auditing, you did the right thing, because you just held them to the rules. After all, Society Play is no different than any other hobby. Bowling teams have rules, Pottery classes have rules... By participating in Society Play you are agreeing to abide by Society Play rules. If you don't want to, then you can always play a home game. You don't have to lose your hobby if you don't like the Society's rules, because there's always the option to play at home with friends by whatever rules (or lack thereof) that you want. While enforcing the rules as a GM will often get you a few negative looks from your players when it clashes with their desires, what you're really doing is standing up for the other people who may have wanted to do something awesome but didn't because they actually followed the rules. You're keeping things fair and equal. That is a beautiful thing!
Additionally...
I did skim some of the comments and I know disabilities were brought up. And I get that sometimes things can be harder for those of us with impairments (both the visible and invisible kind). However, I have found that most people are generally kind enough to help when I need it. If none of the players volunteer to help someone when an auditing error occurs, the GM should step up to do so. Because as a GM you are, in a way, a representative of the Society (because that's how the player will perceive it, even if you don't). At that point, you helping out someone who is disabled not only reflects well on you as a person, but on the Society as a community.
So if people are finding that they've got a player or two that doesn't seem to keep up with their chronicles, or fills them out incorrectly, or whatever the case may be, we can always go that extra step to volunteer to help them correct it! That will earn you a new friend, make the society look good, and keep things on an even playing field. That is far more helpful than asking the Society to change how it works.
Because the reality of the situation for us disabled people is this: the world isn't going to change to accommodate us, we have to be responsible for knowing what we can do and ask for help with what we can't. It is near impossible to account for all disability types in accommodations most cases. There is always someone whose disability won't be covered. And an accommodation that will help one person might hinder another. It's an impossible balance to keep up with.
As someone who is legally blind, I do what I can, and ask for help with what I can't. That's all I can do. I don't expect different treatment or for anyone to go out of their way. I just ask. And if I get the help, great. If not, I ask someone else later. And so on. (And if you're wondering how I can type and read in the forums, let me tell you about two wonderful pieces of technology: Screen enlarging, i.e zooming, and Screen Readers, i.e. it reads the screen for me if enlarging doesn't help).
That's my 2 cents on the subject... as someone who actually does physically struggle with these things but still manages to make it work. :)
|
|
They are physically incapable of remembering the rules which is a common enough issue that I doubt most people aren't aware of it.
This is a whole different issue, and its hard to even respond to this. Do we want to be exclusionary of someone who literally can't function in any sort of structured game without major assistance? No. And when I say, "...any structured game...," I mean anything from tag to volleyball to Warhammer 40K to Pathfinder in general, let alone PFS. They likely need significant help just to survive in the real world let alone playing a game. Which is fine. I'd be willing to assist someone like that. But it isn't likely that they are driving themselves, legally, to a game, and sitting down to play without some assistance with them anyways, if they literally can't remember rules to a game.
In which case, they don't need to be brave, and I don't need to pry. It is likely self evident immediately because their assistant will be asking for my help.
Unless you are using hyperbole to try and make your point...
|
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
They are physically incapable of remembering the rules which is a common enough issue that I doubt most people aren't aware of it.
Then I will be patient and explain what options the player can use when their turn comes up. And I will assist in filling out their chronicle completely and fully before I leave them after the game. If I have to have a second copy of their character sheet to help them get through the game, I'll do that.
|
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think we're all in agreement on the basic ideas here.
With small errors help fix, keeping the player and character playing the adventure if possible.
At some point the error is large enough that the character can't be played.
It makes sense that we can't clearly define that line because it's different in every case.
|
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
They are physically incapable of remembering the rules which is a common enough issue that I doubt most people aren't aware of it.
A.) You'd be surprised the things people are unaware of. B.) Then their are lots of ways to adjust and work with that, both in and out of game. My father who's getting on in years likes to tell stories and roll dice but the whole "Game" and "Books worth of rules" thing is beyond his reach. So for him, I wrote him out a series of index cards that are his "actions" that state in big bold letters what dice he should roll, and then all the mathy bits pre-done for him at the bottom. If he wants to get super creative, he just asks the GM what he should do and goes from there.
|
Venture-Captain, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
They are physically incapable of remembering the rules which is a common enough issue that I doubt most people aren't aware of it.This is a whole different issue, and its hard to even respond to this. Do we want to be exclusionary of someone who literally can't function in any sort of structured game without major assistance? No. And when I say, "...any structured game...," I mean anything from tag to volleyball to Warhammer 40K to Pathfinder in general, let alone PFS. They likely need significant help just to survive in the real world let alone playing a game. Which is fine. I'd be willing to assist someone like that. But it isn't likely that they are driving themselves, legally, to a game, and sitting down to play without some assistance with them anyways, if they literally can't remember rules to a game.
In which case, they don't need to be brave, and I don't need to pry. It is likely self evident immediately because their assistant will be asking for my help.
Unless you are using hyperbole to try and make your point...
No. I'm not using hyperbole. I also know you are incapable of noticing because it's appears as a relatively common quirk. That and symptoms tend to be all over the place. At the table it was just severe short term memory loss. I never really asked beyond that because it was also really depressing because you aren't wrong. Especially, since its not the first time I've known people in PFS with the exact issue to the point where they needed help. The only difference as far as I could tell is the symptoms manifested in other ways.
|
|
Had it happen this weekend. Two brothers showed up with 3rd level characters. Fighter and barbarian for The Silver Mount Collection. I got us started and by the end of the first fight had serious questions about their characters, given the fighter was rocking 17HP and the barbarian could not figure his greatsword damage on his own. Paused for a quick audit and found that the fighter had all but one chronicle (none completed) and the barbarian had none available. I attempted to verify chronicles from reporting, but via my phone it just didn't work. I asked them to play the 4th level Valeros and Amiri as their characters stats and the barbarian dropped out. I was later able to confirm that the barbarian did indeed have six chronicles, but the fighter was not so well reported. I feel bad about the player opting out, but the table seemed to all agree that offering a pregen was a reasonable compromise.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As a player with disabilities, I find these comments patronising and bullish. Which does a disservice to the people the arguing is purportedly defending. Not being the only one saying this, and the previous one to get the same idea has been blatantly ignored in this posturing ?Seems the word " compromises " starts to be an empty word. Thinking of being right first before engaging into a positive discussion is a wrong approach.
It's something that I see sometimes, where Ally's are more concerned with virtue signaling than actually helping. They just wanna yell and fight, not actually make life better for us, which is deeply frustrating because they almost never end up being the ones who have to deal with the fallout of their behavior. :(