PDA

View Full Version : "Find a new group" and "choose the right players"



Frozen_Feet
2011-07-11, 08:43 AM
For quite a lot of problems discussed on these forums, someone will eventually come out and say "well, just don't play with <group>/<person> X". Alternatively, some gameleading issues (such as placing restrictions on character) are considered solved/non-issues because you "just have to pick the right players".

To which I can only say "What the hat? How many of you actually have that option?"

Outside the internet, I know I don't have a pool of potential fellow roleplayers to cherry-pick from. Either those available are complete strangers (for example, playing in conventions), or I have to rear them from people who are completely new to the hobby, with me as their only connection to it to begin with.

In the former case, I only have the barest hint of how the game's going to go, so instead of fixing anything I'm just mixing up the deck and hoping I end up with better cards than when I started; in the latter, any solution reliant on player skill is contingent on me first teaching them said skills, by hand, and booting out player means that instead of having ready-made replacements, I have to draft someone completely clueless to the hobby.

Erom
2011-07-11, 08:48 AM
I agree with you and have long thought that this is a major oversight in most of the advice given on these boards.

Maybe if you live in a major city it is different, but I have never had the freedom to pick and chose my players to the degree people here seem to believe they have.

Tyndmyr
2011-07-11, 09:29 AM
To which I can only say "What the hat? How many of you actually have that option?"

I do, in spades. I've certainly kicked people out because they were a bad fit. Though when I say I, it's generally a we. My group tends to make decisions mutually, on everything from what to play, to who to invite.

I could also probably assemble a small convention(couple hundred people) of the local gamers I know. Granted, I do live in a rather good area for gamers, but even so...the same basic things work anywhere.


Outside the internet, I know I don't have a pool of potential fellow roleplayers to cherry-pick from. Either those available are complete strangers (for example, playing in conventions), or I have to rear them from people who are completely new to the hobby, with me as their only connection to it to begin with.

Both of those ARE options. The complete stranger option requires getting to know them...but hell, my secondary group right now, a large scale 7th Sea event run monthly, I met because I overheard people chatting about the game in a Denny's, and struck up a conversation. Didn't know a person in the group, but they're good people, and I certainly haven't regretted joining.

I've also definitely trained plenty of newbies. It's kind of cool, actually, seeing someone you introduced to the game take up DMing and what not. One former-newbie in my main group had his first DM session a while ago, and it actually went pretty well. He's building a collection of all 3.5 books too, so I'm fairly proud of him.


In the former case, I only have the barest hint of how the game's going to go, so instead of fixing anything I'm just mixing up the deck and hoping I end up with better cards than when I started; in the latter, any solution reliant on player skill is contingent on me first teaching them said skills, by hand, and booting out player means that instead of having ready-made replacements, I have to draft someone completely clueless to the hobby.

Yeah, sometimes a new member doesn't work out. But hey, there's a shot. And IMO, personality is more important than knowledge. Knowledge can be taught. Personality...eh, not so much.

In the end, roleplaying is a social game, and finding players and groups is a social activity. Approach it the same way you would finding people to do any other activity with.

Tengu_temp
2011-07-11, 09:43 AM
Outside the internet

What is this witchcraft?

Frozen_Feet
2011-07-11, 09:53 AM
Both of those ARE options.

Sure they are. But they come with a lot of caveats that are often left unacknowledged when the titular advice is given, making them considerably less trivial than implied.

My gripe isn't really with the titular advice being bad - but with the apparent way little thought is given for the applicability of it when it's given.

HalfDragonCube
2011-07-11, 10:00 AM
Well... There's always PbP but yeah, I know how you feel. Finding a group is pretty much out of the question in some places.

Tyndmyr
2011-07-11, 10:07 AM
Sure they are. But they come with a lot of caveats that are often left unacknowledged when the titular advice is given, making them considerably less trivial than implied.

My gripe isn't really with the titular advice being bad - but with the apparent way little thought is given for the applicability of it when it's given.

I feel like people are aware of this...but the advice is given when they feel like it's easier than fixing the current situation.

And, in some of the horror stories I've seen on here, they're probably right.

Being military, I've moved....a lot. I once had seven different houses in a five year stretch. I've literally never had trouble finding a game. I've always had options for finding more, if I desired it. Sure, some of these options would be things like "hit up the local game shop for players", which are a bit of a crap shoot, but it's never been actually hard to find groups or players. There's a surprisingly large amount of gamers out there.

RPGuru1331
2011-07-11, 10:09 AM
I'm from an exceedingly small town, and even there, in real life games, DMs would disinclude folks if they knew they weren't going to like their stuff. or attitude.

If you're not in a small town, there's probably a decent supply of roleplayers in your city.

And you know, I know this might seem a wild leap, but you could try asking a stranger about their roleplay before including them. They could always lie, and there's probably at least a few ways their self perception doesn't totally match reality, but at least you know what they value, and what they'll try for. It's not like they're total unknowns unless you, you know, make sure it's that way.

It's not always useful advice, but there's a point where someone has to be willing to say "Okay this isn't fun for me" or "okay this isn't working", rather than flailing forever where things aren't working.

Tyndmyr
2011-07-11, 10:16 AM
I also want to point out that removing a person from a group need not be confrontational. I still hang out with the people that have been asked to leave my current group in other contexts.

A lot of people seem to have the impression that since they're all friends, they all have to play together...tbh, not all of my friends would make good roleplayers....but a drinking buddy doesn't have to. It's no different than any other activity, really. Don't have to have everything in common to be friends.

WarKitty
2011-07-11, 10:25 AM
I also want to point out that removing a person from a group need not be confrontational. I still hang out with the people that have been asked to leave my current group in other contexts.

A lot of people seem to have the impression that since they're all friends, they all have to play together...tbh, not all of my friends would make good roleplayers....but a drinking buddy doesn't have to. It's no different than any other activity, really. Don't have to have everything in common to be friends.

No, but if the group is all friends, it can be really hard to ask a person to leave without causing a lot of hurt feelings and a general rift in the group. Granted this depends on the group, but...it's going to be true in a lot of groups.

Friv
2011-07-11, 10:29 AM
I've got one roleplaying friend that I will no longer run anything more serious than Paranoia for, due to him damaging the game otherwise and making it not fun. I also have several friends that I would not put in groups together - their styles are just too different, and they wouldn't have fun.


And you know, I know this might seem a wild leap, but you could try asking a stranger about their roleplay before including them. They could always lie, and there's probably at least a few ways their self perception doesn't totally match reality, but at least you know what they value, and what they'll try for. It's not like they're total unknowns unless you, you know, make sure it's that way.

One thing I've found works well is one-shots. Don't even mention to people that you have a group, just mention that you want to run a one-shot game. Afterwards, if you liked playing with them, you can invite them into the actual group. It's sort of like an audition, except that it's a fun stand-alone activity as well.

Frozen_Feet
2011-07-11, 11:02 AM
A lot of people seem to have the impression that since they're all friends, they all have to play together.

Heh. True. Wasn't there a list of "5 social fallacies in RPG groups" floating around somewhere? It had the same point.


I feel like people are aware of this...but the advice is given when they feel like it's easier than fixing the current situation.


Which, to me, sometimes feels like they're making the opposite fallacy: working things out is not worth it since finding new people is so easy. Maybe in some of the worst scenarios they're right, like you said, but I still feel the point is discussed glaringly little compared to the frequency it's brought up.



One thing I've found works well is one-shots. Don't even mention to people that you have a group, just mention that you want to run a one-shot game. Afterwards, if you liked playing with them, you can invite them into the actual group. It's sort of like an audition, except that it's a fun stand-alone activity as well.

That's what afore-mentioned convention play is, essentially.



If you're not in a small town, there's probably a decent supply of roleplayers in your city.

I feel there's a slight fallacy in what you're implying with the statement. Just because resources exists, somewhere, doesn't mean they're accessible. You might be right that every decently-sized town has a pool of at least interested people, but if they're too many steps removed from your own social circles, noticing they're even there is very hard.


And you know, I know this might seem a wild leap, but you could try asking a stranger about their roleplay before including them.

Works with moderately experienced players, less so with new ones. I'd say just playing is better and faster in many cases.

Discuss - play - discuss is probably the best way, but it requires you've already managed to draft the stranger to a chat and a game.

Sipex
2011-07-11, 11:10 AM
Agreed that these responses aren't always ideal. I know I had to end a group recently because of a player and because of this I haven't played (in person) in months. I simply don't have the contacts to make up a new group yet.

Tyndmyr
2011-07-11, 11:16 AM
Heh. True. Wasn't there a list of "5 social fallacies in RPG groups" floating around somewhere? It had the same point.

Right...it got posted a while back. I liked all of them, really, but that point tends to come up often for some reason.

I treat a guy who is a problem roleplayer exactly like I treat someone who is a problem drinker(assuming social problems here, not actually dangerous ones). Chat with em about it, and if I feel like it's not going to work out, make sure I, they, and booze aren't all in the same place at once.

I am occasionally amused that a highly social game is targeted at what is stereotypically an unsocial group of people. Now sure, we all know that not every gamer is unsocial...but most of us have probably met a few that fit the usual image. It can be a challenge.

RPGuru1331
2011-07-11, 11:25 AM
I feel there's a slight fallacy in what you're implying with the statement. Just because resources exists, somewhere, doesn't mean they're accessible. You might be right that every decently-sized town has a pool of at least interested people, but if they're too many steps removed from your own social circles, noticing they're even there is very hard.
It's not that difficult to find at least some strangers if you actually want to. Hit up the nerd hangouts in your area. If there's any smaller shops that sell gaming supplies, you can ask around. Colleges usually have folks.

I empathize with not wanting to, but it is doable. And if things can't work out as is, it's not a horrible decision to make.

If you need new people, there are decent odds you need to broaden your horizons a bit. They're accessible, almost certainly, you just haven't met them yet. That's cool and all, but it's not the same as inaccessibility (Or them being too inconvenient to play with due ot distance, etc.)


Works with moderately experienced players, less so with new ones. I'd say just playing is better and faster in many cases.
Horse Hockey. It takes maybe, MAYBE 20 minutes to get through a conversation on the matter outlining and asking basics. Even if character creation can be done within 20 minutes, sessions take much longer itself. You don't need their entire life story, just what they want from RPGs.

Frozen_Feet
2011-07-11, 11:39 AM
Horse Hockey. It takes maybe, MAYBE 20 minutes to get through a conversation on the matter outlining and asking basics. Even if character creation can be done within 20 minutes, sessions take much longer itself. You don't need their entire life story, just what they want from RPGs.

It's not that answering the question necessarily takes long, but some people are really bad at giving any answer. New players especially, since they sometimes don't have the faintest idea of what's being asked in the first place. In which case, leading then through a game explains it better than an explanation. It's classic case of "show, don't tell".

It might be I misunderstoof your suggestion somewhat. I took it to mean "ask people of how they roleplay and what they'd want from it". It works much better with people who are already experienced with RPGs.

WarKitty
2011-07-11, 11:50 AM
I've also noticed people seem to ignore the fact that someone might genuinely want to work things out, and might see that as preferable to kicking someone out - or even see living with the problem as preferable to kicking someone out. Like, I had a player that was a wonderful roleplayer and a good friend out of combat, but was completely disengaged from combat.

I would note that the ease of finding a new group also depends on your age. We have a fair number of underage posters (or even overage and still living with parents) here that may not be allowed to just go out and invite someone in that's not on the family approved list.

Fiery Diamond
2011-07-11, 12:10 PM
It's not that difficult to find at least some strangers if you actually want to. Hit up the nerd hangouts in your area. If there's any smaller shops that sell gaming supplies, you can ask around. Colleges usually have folks.

I empathize with not wanting to, but it is doable. And if things can't work out as is, it's not a horrible decision to make.

If you need new people, there are decent odds you need to broaden your horizons a bit. They're accessible, almost certainly, you just haven't met them yet. That's cool and all, but it's not the same as inaccessibility (Or them being too inconvenient to play with due ot distance, etc.)

A wee bit optimistic, I think. THERE ARE NO NERD HANGOUTS WHERE I LIVE.
We no longer have any stores that sell gaming supplies, and even when we did, there were so few patrons of that store that the store closed because of lack of business.

Cities may be different, and I know colleges are (I had no trouble finding people to recruit, even teach from scratch, in college), but small towns do not always have people accessible. In my town, you pretty much just have to hang out in the grocery store or walmart and hope to see someone with a gaming shirt on that you can chat to. Not to mention schedule conflicts from different jobs (especially jobs that have erratic schedules, like mine) can be as much of an obstacle as distance for being able to play.

The person you were disagreeing with is right.

Tyndmyr
2011-07-11, 12:30 PM
In my town, you pretty much just have to hang out in the grocery store or walmart and hope to see someone with a gaming shirt on that you can chat to.

I feel like if this is the case, you need a better town? Not to bash on it to much, but if there's no better hangout place than walmart/grocery store, it can't be all that great of a place.

Coffee shops, restaurants, any fun activity hangout area...all much better than the grocery store, IMO. A place without such locations is one I can't imagine living for long.

WarKitty
2011-07-11, 12:37 PM
My old college wasn't all that good at finding new people either. Some of it was the aforementioned schedule conflicts. A lot was simple no-shows - we'd have ten people say they were interested and none would show up on gaming day.

Traab
2011-07-11, 12:42 PM
Its not so much that people think its EASY to just up and find a new group/player, its that we see the dm or player complaining about the idiocy of someone, and see that its the third topic with the same general issue for the same person, and that according to their own words they have always been like that, and we have to wonder, why are you subjecting yourself to this? Do you think its better to be driven insane, and have absolutely no fun because this problem player goes out of his way to ruin everything? Do you think you can actually CHANGE him or her after all this time? Yes picking someone at random, or trying to train a newbie is a risk, but think about it, if you are being driven to the point of making repeated message board topics just to vent about some horrible player, do you REALLY think it will get much worse with the new guy?

Fiery Diamond
2011-07-11, 12:49 PM
I feel like if this is the case, you need a better town? Not to bash on it to much, but if there's no better hangout place than walmart/grocery store, it can't be all that great of a place.

Coffee shops, restaurants, any fun activity hangout area...all much better than the grocery store, IMO. A place without such locations is one I can't imagine living for long.

Hence why most of the younger generation can't wait to leave this place behind as soon as they graduate high school. I, on the other hand (I'm 22), like this town: it's small and has beautiful countryside around it. You shouldn't make the assumption that every place has "hangouts," and then go "uh... yours doesn't? Sorry, that's lame." Guess what? It's just a wrong assumption, and no judgments on the quality of the location should be made.

Sipex
2011-07-11, 12:51 PM
I think the OP isn't referring to those particular topics, usually everyone is in agreement there and the person complaining will weigh in, usually reluctantly agreeing.

I think this is more to the general topic of one post is made and a few people chime in with the aforementioned responses before much discussion is made.

Tyndmyr
2011-07-11, 01:20 PM
My old college wasn't all that good at finding new people either. Some of it was the aforementioned schedule conflicts. A lot was simple no-shows - we'd have ten people say they were interested and none would show up on gaming day.

Now this...this frustrates me. It's a problem I haven't been able to entirely cure with my group. We've been tossing around the idea of some sort of xp penalty(we've been allowing full xp to missed players, because one individual can only play every other week) for those players who don't provide sufficient advance notification of not showing up.

The idea of recruiting more players until we have more reliable folks was also floated, though. We may end up doing both.

JadedDM
2011-07-11, 01:31 PM
For quite a lot of problems discussed on these forums, someone will eventually come out and say "well, just don't play with <group>/<person> X". Alternatively, some gameleading issues (such as placing restrictions on character) are considered solved/non-issues because you "just have to pick the right players".

To which I can only say "What the hat? How many of you actually have that option?"

That bothers me, too. But it's not limited to roleplaying games. You don't know how many times someone has gone into a forum, saying something like, "I just bought a new car/computer/HD TV/something ridiculously expensive, and I'm having a mildly inconvenient problem with it, help?" and the vast majority of responses are "Ehh, just buy a new one."

(Or even worse, "I don't have that problem!" Oh, good for you! That was so helpful!)

Frozen_Feet
2011-07-11, 01:36 PM
Now this...this frustrates me. It's a problem I haven't been able to entirely cure with my group. We've been tossing around the idea of some sort of xp penalty(we've been allowing full xp to missed players, because one individual can only play every other week) for those players who don't provide sufficient advance notification of not showing up.

In my group, characters only get share of loot / XP if they were used in a session, and to use a character without its player being present requires permission.

In practice, this leads to those players who show up splitting from the party, because they're greedy, greedy bastards.

RPGuru1331
2011-07-11, 01:38 PM
The person you were disagreeing with is right.

No, he isn't. He's asserting it can't generally be done and it's not useful advice. I hate to remind you, but most humans live in larger towns and cities. It sucks that you don't have options, but most people aren't in tiny towns.

It isn't a thing that is super easy; meeting new people often isn't. But it is generally an option, and it can be a better one tan trying to keep a flailing group together when it's completely fractured at its best.


t's not that answering the question necessarily takes long, but some people are really bad at giving any answer. New players especially, since they sometimes don't have the faintest idea of what's being asked in the first place.
You placed 'new people' as a seperate category from just regular 'strangers' in a number of posts. Notably, the posts I was responding to. If they don't know the answers because they've never played, they can't tell you, obviously, and there you do take a risk at more than just personality conflicts. But with people who have roleplayed more than once or twice, you can start to pin down what they're hoping for, and doing so before the game is substantially faster than even character creation.

WarKitty
2011-07-11, 02:08 PM
No, he isn't. He's asserting it can't generally be done and it's not useful advice. I hate to remind you, but most humans live in larger towns and cities. It sucks that you don't have options, but most people aren't in tiny towns.

It isn't a thing that is super easy; meeting new people often isn't. But it is generally an option, and it can be a better one tan trying to keep a flailing group together when it's completely fractured at its best.

Then again, I've also had people absolutely refuse to believe that finding a new group might be at all difficult, despite statements from the OP describing the situation and stating the lack of the assumed resources for finding said group.

There's a lot of "it's easy for me so it must be easy for you" that goes around.

Frozen_Feet
2011-07-11, 02:10 PM
No, he isn't. He's asserting it can't generally be done and it's not useful advice.
No. I was asserting that just because it can generally be done, doesn't mean it can always be done. (Or just because something can theoretically be done, doesn't mean it's easy or viable option.)

Just because resource A is there, doesn't mean it can be utilized. To use a totally unrelated example, the amount of energy sun shines on land masses on earth is hundreds of times more than what mankind consumes; but utilizing even a tiny fraction of that energy is decidedly non-trivial, so a society that's run on purely solar energy might never happen.

"Just because" is they key here; to utilize a resource (in this case, potential players), you need means to do it (time and possibly money to find other people and tell them you're there). Glossing over those means is exactly why I started this thread - it's not about the advice being bad in a vacuum, it's just that people throw it around like it's good in a vacuum, seemingly leaving any consideration of the actual applicability of the advice out of the discussion.


You placed 'new people' as a seperate category from just regular 'strangers' in a number of posts.

Hmmm? No, I placed "experienced players" to the category of "strangers". "Strangers" includes all strange people, regardless of skill.

WarKitty
2011-07-11, 02:36 PM
The other problem I've seen is people often assume the DM is in sole control of the players in their group. This is not the case in many groups. If the group as a whole has decided to keep someone, the DM may have to put up with them or leave the entire group.

Tyndmyr
2011-07-11, 02:43 PM
In my group, characters only get share of loot / XP if they were used in a session, and to use a character without its player being present requires permission.

In practice, this leads to those players who show up splitting from the party, because they're greedy, greedy bastards.

I've played that way before as well. It's not bad, but I don't really want to punish the guy who plays every other week. He's reliable, just not there all the time. Good guy. It's a pretty realistic system, though, so I do like that.

The problem is more the people who notify us they're not showing once we're already waiting to play.


No, he isn't. He's asserting it can't generally be done and it's not useful advice. I hate to remind you, but most humans live in larger towns and cities. It sucks that you don't have options, but most people aren't in tiny towns.

This is a better way to put it. If you like small-town life, go nuts...but it's a tradeoff. And the vast majority of people likely to be on this forum have at least a moderately sized town somewhere in driving range. Hell, I originally got into roleplaying in the extremely rural midwest. Met em through work...I wasn't as social then, but I realize now that there were plenty of people like that around. Local community college, library, etc.

Now, mind you...I had to bike or drive 25 miles to get to this town from where I lived, but that's doable. I've driven significantly further for a good game before. I know lots of people that drive hours to get to specific games. Obviously, they could find games much closer...but a truly good game is worth it.


The other problem I've seen is people often assume the DM is in sole control of the players in their group. This is not the case in many groups. If the group as a whole has decided to keep someone, the DM may have to put up with them or leave the entire group.

This is true. Just because you happen to be in the DM seat at the moment in my group doesn't give you control of the group. In fact, we kicked a DM out once. Granted, we gave him a chance as a player first, but still. Like any other social group, if everybody but you wants something, it matters.

Frozen_Feet
2011-07-11, 02:53 PM
... and the vast majority of people likely to be on this forum have at least a moderately sized town somewhere in driving range...

But a lot of them might not have a car, or anyone to drive them there. Plus, whether you go by bus or your own vehicle, it's going to cost you. Even biking the distance requires you to own a bike, which might also fall outside one's budget. Especially as a minor, many of these things are hard to influence yourself.

WarKitty
2011-07-11, 02:54 PM
This is true. Just because you happen to be in the DM seat at the moment in my group doesn't give you control of the group. In fact, we kicked a DM out once. Granted, we gave him a chance as a player first, but still. Like any other social group, if everybody but you wants something, it matters.

Which incidentally led to my worst problem - a game where I felt the problem player was specifically targeting my characters while justifying it to the rest of the group. No one else wanted to take action over a "personal problem", and I didn't want to leave because of one person.

Problems are more likely to arise when only one or two individuals are affected than when the whole group is affected, imo.

Tyndmyr
2011-07-11, 02:57 PM
No one else wanted to take action over a "personal problem", and I didn't want to leave because of one person.

Yeah, there's the problem. If ignored, odds are, you'll only end up with one of the two involved people. Much better to get involved from the start, possibly fix it, or at least pick who stays.

My group fortunately understands this now. However, I've seen a *lot* of groups who acted just as yours did. Procrastination/noninvolvement is easy. It's hard to change, too, when you're the involved party. Looks partisan. The most you can generally do is help others in that situation out.

Frozen_Feet
2011-07-11, 03:03 PM
Yeah, "someone else's problem" phenomenom sucks. I've been in few group where someone felt unjustly left out by the whole group, due to single other guy being obnoxious and no-one else speaking up. It was painful to explain that it was not the rest being against him, they just didn't feel like being for him either as they plain didn't want to get involved.

Choco
2011-07-11, 03:14 PM
I only just recently got into a position where I can pick and choose my group/individual players. But even before then I still kicked people out or left the one group available (I never had to wait longer then 2 years to find another completely new group, the military is good for that...). My personal philosophy is that I would much rather not play the game at all then play it and not enjoy it. I guess you just have to decide if the problem player/group is bad enough to be completely killing, or at least overshadowing, your enjoyment of the game. If the answer is yes, then you should just leave. What is the point of continuing something you do not enjoy if you can just as easily not do it?

But more on topic... The best group I have had is one where only 2 of us (out of 7) had any experience when we started. The 2 of us with experience took turns DM'ing (the other guy's personal life drama has since exploded so I am stuck with that mantle right now) and after 2 years one of the other players is getting a campaign together. The advantage of getting new players started is that if yours is the only playstyle they know, and they stick around and enjoy it (and don't visit certain forums known to post optimized builds...), you don't have to worry about one of the major causes of group drama, AKA playstyle differences.

Tyndmyr
2011-07-11, 03:20 PM
The advantage of getting new players started is that if yours is the only playstyle they know, and they stick around and enjoy it (and don't visit certain forums known to post optimized builds...), you don't have to worry about one of the major causes of group drama, AKA playstyle differences.

There is a certain truth to that. My group values optimization, and crazy tricks such as dual wielding burst-firing submachine guns(playing D20M atm) in conjunction with Double Tap results in high fives. And, when everyone is doing it, optimization isn't a problem at all. Hell, even forums aren't a problem. They're more likely to mock the terrible homebrew they find surfing the webs than anything else.

Choco
2011-07-11, 03:30 PM
There is a certain truth to that. My group values optimization, and crazy tricks such as dual wielding burst-firing submachine guns(playing D20M atm) in conjunction with Double Tap results in high fives. And, when everyone is doing it, optimization isn't a problem at all. Hell, even forums aren't a problem. They're more likely to mock the terrible homebrew they find surfing the webs than anything else.

That's true. I was mostly inferring my personal experience (this group is even lower on the optimization scale then what most people would consider low-op...). In fact *I* am the problem player in this group when it comes to optimization, as when I am a player I tend to unconsciously do it. I don't really plan to optimize, I just skim through my books and say "ooo, this looks cool, let's find a way to work this in..." And by the time I am done, I have some abomination that is Tier 4 at best. But when the rest of the group is Tier 6....

Shadowknight12
2011-07-11, 09:29 PM
The way I see it, D&D is a recreational activity that demands my free time and energy in exchange for the promise of fun. If this promise is not delivered, I have a waiting list of other recreational activities where the expenditure of free time and energy will give me more fun than that.

So it will not matter if I have a choice of players or not. The moment D&D stops being fun and doesn't seem to go back to being fun any time soon, that's the moment I get up and leave, regardless of whether I have sixty-eight more potential players/DMs waiting or absolutely none.

Oh, and PbP. PbP is an excellent answer to this type of conundrums. Through the internet, you can befriend people and play with them, to ensure you do end up having fun. All you have to do is join plenty of games and start networking.

Knaight
2011-07-11, 09:44 PM
The way I see it, D&D is a recreational activity that demands my free time and energy in exchange for the promise of fun. If this promise is not delivered, I have a waiting list of other recreational activities where the expenditure of free time and energy will give me more fun than that.
In short, no gaming is better than bad gaming. The majority of the cases advice like "get a new group" comes along, its in situations where the group is so dysfunctional that just not playing games with them is the best option, whether or not it cuts off all roleplaying games.

Frozen_Feet
2011-07-12, 02:02 AM
The majority of the cases advice like "get a new group" comes along, its in situations where the group is so dysfunctional that just not playing games with them is the best option.

Underlines for emphasis. I'm not convinced this is actually the case. Surely it's so in some cases, but the majority? From what I've seen, the advice is given much more casually than that. Or maybe it isn't, but as I've tried to draw attention to, reasons for giving it are not elaborated. We see the conclusion, but the chain of logic is missing. It's assumed to be self-evident, I guess - but that's the point, it often isn't.

For example, numerous threads about Paladins falling. There seems to be a subset of people who automatically assume that a situation leading to falling means the GM is an uptight jerk, and the player is better off quitting. With no other information given.

Shadowknight12
2011-07-12, 02:55 AM
Underlines for emphasis. I'm not convinced this is actually the case. Surely it's so in some cases, but the majority? From what I've seen, the advice is given much more casually than that. Or maybe it isn't, but as I've tried to draw attention to, reasons for giving it are not elaborated. We see the conclusion, but the chain of logic is missing. It's assumed to be self-evident, I guess - but that's the point, it often isn't.

For example, numerous threads about Paladins falling. There seems to be a subset of people who automatically assume that a situation leading to falling means the GM is an uptight jerk, and the player is better off quitting. With no other information given.

If the player is upset and the DM has not made any attempt to restore the fun in the game for the player, it's really not that much of a stretch to assume that the situation is not going to change. Suggesting the player to leave is not really that crazy. After all, no gaming > mediocre gaming, for a lot of people.

caden_varn
2011-07-12, 04:28 AM
Well, you also have to remember that some people posting these responses may not be doing so in quite so calm and considered a manner as one might like....

And to be honest, in these situations, the responses we get are so similar we may as well have a sticky for them. Stripping these away to what I see as the core good advice is:

Talk through the issue out of game, see if you can resolve it this way. If that fails, or for some reason you are unwilling or unable to do so, consider the situation and decide to either put up with it or leave the group/kick the problem player(s). The consequences of this will vary depending on your situation, and may mean you have no game.

As other posters have mentioned, I've had times where I preferred not to play at all as I did not enjoy playing in any of the groups that were available to me at that time.

Knaight
2011-07-12, 08:19 AM
Underlines for emphasis. I'm not convinced this is actually the case. Surely it's so in some cases, but the majority? From what I've seen, the advice is given much more casually than that. Or maybe it isn't, but as I've tried to draw attention to, reasons for giving it are not elaborated. We see the conclusion, but the chain of logic is missing. It's assumed to be self-evident, I guess - but that's the point, it often isn't.
We also know that whoever is complaining about a problem in their games views it as bad enough to go to a forum about it. That isn't exactly a good sign.

Oracle_Hunter
2011-07-12, 08:29 AM
Underlines for emphasis. I'm not convinced this is actually the case. Surely it's so in some cases, but the majority? From what I've seen, the advice is given much more casually than that. Or maybe it isn't, but as I've tried to draw attention to, reasons for giving it are not elaborated. We see the conclusion, but the chain of logic is missing. It's assumed to be self-evident, I guess - but that's the point, it often isn't.

For example, numerous threads about Paladins falling. There seems to be a subset of people who automatically assume that a situation leading to falling means the GM is an uptight jerk, and the player is better off quitting. With no other information given.
Sturgeon's Law (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SturgeonsLaw?from=Main.ptitle3tinj4tz) applies to advice on the Internet probably more than anything else. Of course most people give terrible advice on the Internet; but that doesn't mean "find a new group" or "choose the right Players" aren't good pieces of advice, even when the supply of in-person Players is small.

For what it's worth, I say that Oracle_Hunter's Guide is the best way to resolve these sorts of problems (from the DM's end).
(1) Identify Exactly What Is Bothering You
(2) Talk With The Problem Player To See What Is Bothering Him
(3) Reach A Compromise Or Kick Him Out

The long and short of it is that RPGs are leisure activities that require a certain amount of agreement on the "social contract" aspect of the game to be fun. If people won't agree, then the dissenters will ruin the game for everyone. Better to kick the dissenters than to ruin everyone's fun.

WarKitty
2011-07-13, 12:40 AM
We also know that whoever is complaining about a problem in their games views it as bad enough to go to a forum about it. That isn't exactly a good sign.

Except different people's ideas of "bad enough" are different. I've been known to go to the forum in cases where I'm enjoying the game as a whole, but there's one area that's bothering me and I'm not quite sure how to resolve it. It isn't even really a "bad enough" threshold, it's a "I'm sure someone else has had this and it could be made more fun for everyone" threshold.

cattoy
2011-07-13, 01:32 AM
FWIW, I'm one of those people who gives 'that' kind of advice.

It works for me. I've spent most of my life in areas with high concentrations of gamers. I spent less than a year in small town environment with a small gamer community and it was rough sledding. I experimented with different groups and in the end I went back to California.

A good game group is worth struggling for, worth sacrificing for, worth working for. I was in a group where one member would drive 95+ miles one way to attend a weekly game, sleep over and leave in the morning. It was a superior game with excellent players and a superstar GM. I would have driven that far to attend, too. Fortunately, I didn't have to.

Kiero
2011-07-13, 07:33 AM
In 2007 I moved to a city where I knew no one and started looking for RPG groups to join. Courtesy of people who post on RPGnet, I had two offers of local groups, turned out the first one I tried out were a bunch of cool people who broadly liked to play the way I did.

But if I had to, I could probably leave and start again with another lot of people. They're not my bestest buds who I've grown up with and known since birth and have to do everything with, as some people seem to have to deal with. They're people who've become friends who I game with, when everyone is able to. And that works for me.

Eldan
2011-07-13, 08:14 AM
You know, I'd take both total strangers or newbies. But that's not how it works. I haven't played in about five years, since my players moved elsewhere for university. I've been spending my weekends at a gamestore for over a year now, and I can't find any other roleplayers. Or even people who seem interested in it.

Mark Hall
2011-07-13, 11:18 AM
No, but if the group is all friends, it can be really hard to ask a person to leave without causing a lot of hurt feelings and a general rift in the group. Granted this depends on the group, but...it's going to be true in a lot of groups.

I have to agree with this. I've been fairly open with Hzurr (who is on here and also a member of one of my gaming groups) that I REALLY don't like one of our players, for a variety of reasons. However... he's the roommate of a player I adore, and we've been meeting at their apartment the last few times (when Hzurr hasn't been out of town).

Thus, it would be really hard to get rid of him. Social networks make some things a bit less simple than "don't play with X"... but that doesn't mean it isn't occasionally the right idea. I've had, a number of times, people suggest the most obvious thing, and myself go "Huh. I could do that, couldn't I?"

Sipex
2011-07-13, 01:12 PM
I will echo this information. It's 100% true.

As some of you may remember, my last IC game had one problem player. Just dropping the player would've caused the group to collapse in on itself and would've cut the campaign short.

I know because it did, another player blew up at problem player finally and the group imploded because one player is scared of the problem player and another is dating her.

It's not always simple.

Another_Poet
2011-07-13, 02:06 PM
"What the hat? How many of you actually have that option?"

I float between several gaming groups, one that meets weekly and two that happen more ad-hoc. At one point, I considered leaving one because of personal conflicts and I was glad I had already cultivated a place in my other groups.

In the age of the internet, I don't think it's terribly hard to find existing groups in most locales. I realize this may be different for people living in non-English-speaking countries, so I don't want to generalize. But I think it's fair for people to suggest it as an option, since so many people out there can do it if they want.

I also feel that starting a new group of your own is pretty doable, even if you are a teenager or live somewhere with few players. Finding an existing group may be hard, but making one of your own is likely to attract some players.

Lastly, anyone anywhere can throw one person out of a group. Assuming you have 3-4 players to start with, reducing it to 2-3 is just fine.

Usually, breaking off ties with problem players is more of an issue of willingness (I don't want to offend them!) than capacity.

And that's why people suggest it so strongly.

DiBastet
2011-07-13, 02:46 PM
The "find a new group" is irritating, specially because, well, rpg players usually don't walk around everyday in con t-shirts and such things. It's hard to find, so the advice is usually useless.

Theodoxus
2011-07-13, 03:43 PM
My buddy and I recently split from a group due to irreconcilable differences, and I was downcast - until I remember that little miracle on the internet: Meetup.

We don't have a formal meetup group for RPGs here, but we have a list of 50ish folk who desire to start one (I think the $$ associated with actually starting a group keeps everyone wishing, and no one contributing). Be that as it may, everyone who's signed up with an interest in RPGs has to leave their email address! So, being the enterprising, if somewhat introverted guy that I am, send out a mass mail, basically stating "Hi, I saw your interest in D&D on Meetup and was wondering if you're currently playing."

I only got 4 hits out of the 30 or so emails I sent out (I assume most ended up in junk folders) - but of them, 1 was a 'no, don't game anymore' 1 was 'not currently, if you find something, hit me up', 1 was 'yes, but it's full, I'll keep you posted' and the last was 'not currently, but I have a group of 6 or 7 people interested, we're planning on meeting up soon'

So, we met, and the first decision we made corporately was to try out different GMs with pregen characters to see who meshed well and give a chance for folk who aren't comfortable with other strangers to step out of the game with no consequences.

We've gone through one GM session - and it went fairly well. My issue with pregens is I have no qualms doing insane things (rushing into combat, using suicidal combat maneuvers, etc) so the group didn't really see me roleplay all that well - but that wasn't the point. We learned the GMs quirks and each others table manners without any stress over a 'real' game.

I'm looking forward to the next session and a different GM, though the pregens are still making me not wanna go full bore...

At any rate, I've found that using this format for meeting strangers for games alleviated a lot of the social anxiety I typically feel at the start of a new group. Hope the advise is of some use :)

Theo

Knaight
2011-07-13, 05:01 PM
The "find a new group" is irritating, specially because, well, rpg players usually don't walk around everyday in con t-shirts and such things. It's hard to find, so the advice is usually useless.

Sure, but on the other hand odds are good that you know at least one person somewhat well who would be amicable to trying, and just happening to find someone who plays isn't necessarily that unlikely.

That's how I found my last group. A friend of mine was having a party, a lot of her friends came, and I happened to be hanging out with one of them who made a D&D joke in passing. I happened to catch it, which would never have happened if I didn't also know the rules fairly well, and a player was found. I then joined this player's group, and started a second game with some of the people from it.

DiBastet
2011-07-13, 08:50 PM
Sure, but on the other hand odds are good that you know at least one person somewhat well who would be amicable to trying, and just happening to find someone who plays isn't necessarily that unlikely.

You see... it's, ahm, hard... to just call people into my games or to go to stranger's games. Me and my group we have some, ahem, standarts, by wich we play. We play my games heavy houseruled to better balance things, we like be rp heavy and dramatic, but we like to optimizate too (nothing like "YOU MUST PLAY TIER 1 CLASSES OR ELSE YOU'RE A N00BZ TROLOLO!"). So many groups are just too... "raw" for our tastes... or too much door kicking, or too little houserulling...

Also there's the fact that one new player that someone knew had a fit over his char being hit by a shadow, and why it's bad dming using things that take power of the player (the players promptly made him in pieces it seems, 'cause he never showed up again).

Other player had 24 pages story of his character, with 8 of his horse, who died in the first battle. After tha battle his car was robbed, and he didn't pay the insurance that month.

Another player, a newb who was a good guy, said one player, was arrested the other week for some gta.

Another one came with a vodka on the first session, even we telling him no one drank and no one smoked and everything. I supposed he was also shred to bits.

The other one wanted to make a build like in the internet, with dips in multiple prcs, even we telling him that we had the rp rule of "you began, you finish it".

Another threw his sheet at the floor and yelled and went away after we showed him the nerfs on spellcasters...

Another one named his char "Piggy" and said he had a teddy-bear cloak, in a heavy drama group...

In other group the dm thought spellcasting was too weak and casting didn't provoke.

In the other elves had +5 to all skills because according to RotW they have a lot of time and they make everything in their cities. In this same game dwarves also had -2 do dex because they were fat.

And finally in other the dm was nice, but the players felt roughly the same as the example provided in the munchkin d20 book, and you could call them collectively "Steve".


...you see... we have some...am...scars... that make the idea of finding random players and groups... strange.

Yukitsu
2011-07-13, 10:37 PM
I'm of the view that if you would rather be playing tetris than sitting at the table with the problems it has, then you need to get a new group. And if you can't, don't play pen and paper RPGs. It's not like your some kind of addict that absolutely must play these sorts of games, even if it's boring you out of your mind, frustrating you or whatever. If it wasn't bringing you entertainment or joy, then it's better to not play at all.

Basically, if I say "well, you just need a different group" and your only counter is that you can't get a new one, then I'm just going to say "don't play at all then."

WarKitty
2011-07-13, 11:20 PM
In 2007 I moved to a city where I knew no one and started looking for RPG groups to join. Courtesy of people who post on RPGnet, I had two offers of local groups, turned out the first one I tried out were a bunch of cool people who broadly liked to play the way I did.

But if I had to, I could probably leave and start again with another lot of people. They're not my bestest buds who I've grown up with and known since birth and have to do everything with, as some people seem to have to deal with. They're people who've become friends who I game with, when everyone is able to. And that works for me.

And "find a new group" works if that's the approach you're using. Our group used the opposite approach - we have a bunch of friends that have been together for a while. One day someone shows up with some basic rulebooks and says hey let's play D&D, it's fun. There's no question of finding a new group because the point of the activity is to hang out with the group - gaming is the vehicle for that.

Fiery Diamond
2011-07-13, 11:29 PM
I'm of the view that if you would rather be playing tetris than sitting at the table with the problems it has, then you need to get a new group. And if you can't, don't play pen and paper RPGs. It's not like your some kind of addict that absolutely must play these sorts of games, even if it's boring you out of your mind, frustrating you or whatever. If it wasn't bringing you entertainment or joy, then it's better to not play at all.

Basically, if I say "well, you just need a different group" and your only counter is that you can't get a new one, then I'm just going to say "don't play at all then."

At least you're consistent. For what it's worth, I happen to agree with you. If the ONLY counter someone has to that advice is "I can't get a new one," then they probably are better off not playing. I'm a believer in "no gaming is preferable to bad gaming."

Kiero
2011-07-14, 07:51 AM
The "find a new group" is irritating, specially because, well, rpg players usually don't walk around everyday in con t-shirts and such things. It's hard to find, so the advice is usually useless.

Assuming you don't live in the middle of nowhere, and have access to the internet, it really isn't that hard.


And "find a new group" works if that's the approach you're using. Our group used the opposite approach - we have a bunch of friends that have been together for a while. One day someone shows up with some basic rulebooks and says hey let's play D&D, it's fun. There's no question of finding a new group because the point of the activity is to hang out with the group - gaming is the vehicle for that.

Whereas for me, they're explicitly my gaming group, not my friends who I hang out with. We meet up to play RPGs, not to hang out. I don't really have the latter any more, not with a wife, child and full-time job. We have friends who come to visit/we visit, but not general unspecified hanging out time.

Erloas
2011-07-14, 10:01 AM
The "find a new group" is irritating, specially because, well, rpg players usually don't walk around everyday in con t-shirts and such things. It's hard to find, so the advice is usually useless.

Assuming you don't live in the middle of nowhere, and have access to the internet, it really isn't that hard.
But sometimes it really is. I registered with and checked several of those types of sites and never found anyone even near me. Most sites only had a hand full of people for the entire state and none where I live (given its the state with the lowest population, and just the county I live in is larger then about 10 states on the east coast, so traveling isn't much of an option).

Of course not on the net of that I have found one person that has tried to run a few games but no consistence with time to actually have them go anywhere.
And I did find out my cousin is playing, but she had been playing for years before I found out about it. The point being that its not actually that easy to find out who is playing. Most people don't advertise that they are playing, and then I've found a number of people that I thought might play that don't.
And at this point, even knowing about 6-8 people that are or have played, I'm still only able to find a PbP game. The likelihood of being able to easily add or remove a single player is not that great and to find a completely new group is much lower still.

So the short version is that while I'm sure there are players around it can still be very hard to find them.
Of course there is no obvious place for people like that to meet or hang out. I'm sure once my brother gets his game shop open (tomorrow if everything goes as planned) it should be much easier to find more players. But not every city has places like that and even if they do it seems that PnP RPG gamers can be very hit-or-miss with game store owners because they tend to play long hours with much fewer purchases compared to other games, at least that seemed to be the case for the shops in Phoenix when I was living there.

stainboy
2011-07-14, 02:16 PM
Assuming you don't live in the middle of nowhere, and have access to the internet, it really isn't that hard.


I've had trouble with it, and I live near Dallas so it's not a location issue. Finding gamers is easy but finding a game takes a lot of time. Maybe it's easier for a DM looking for just one more player, I don't know.

DiBastet
2011-07-14, 05:32 PM
I've had trouble with it, and I live near Dallas so it's not a location issue. Finding gamers is easy but finding a game takes a lot of time. Maybe it's easier for a DM looking for just one more player, I don't know.

Since I just dm, 'cause I like it much more, it's easier for me. Now, finding a group to play is hard. Finding a good group is nightmarish.

Knaight
2011-07-15, 12:29 AM
And "find a new group" works if that's the approach you're using. Our group used the opposite approach - we have a bunch of friends that have been together for a while. One day someone shows up with some basic rulebooks and says hey let's play D&D, it's fun. There's no question of finding a new group because the point of the activity is to hang out with the group - gaming is the vehicle for that.

Still, "find a new group" still works as advice, if the problems are bad enough that you would have more fun doing something else, and still want to play RPGs somewhere, possibly with a different group of friends. All face to face gaming I do is with friends, the vast majority of it is with everyone involved a close friend. All online gaming I do is with people who can certainly be called "internet friends" even if one views online relationships as inherently trivial. That doesn't mean that all friends of mine who play RPGs play them with me, and there have been group restructuring to account for some vastly different tastes that could cause problems.

Starwulf
2011-07-15, 01:13 AM
I feel like people are aware of this...but the advice is given when they feel like it's easier than fixing the current situation.

And, in some of the horror stories I've seen on here, they're probably right.

Being military, I've moved....a lot. I once had seven different houses in a five year stretch. I've literally never had trouble finding a game. I've always had options for finding more, if I desired it. Sure, some of these options would be things like "hit up the local game shop for players", which are a bit of a crap shoot, but it's never been actually hard to find groups or players. There's a surprisingly large amount of gamers out there.

I know I've said this to you before(ie: my Introduction thread to these forums 3 months ago), but man do I ever envy you! Same state we live in, but game wise, it's like we are on two totally different planes of existence!

Which, btw, brings me to my second reason for posting in this thread: While recruiting players for the kind of gaming we do may be easy for you, and even for others who think it's not(you have a good point, sometimes it can be as easy as just going down to the local game-shop and asking random strangers), for some people, like myself, it's literally impossible. My tiny pimple of a town on the face of Maryland, and all the surrounding areas, are so incredibly redneck and anti-anything but Hunting and Fishing, sports(nascar and football!), that the nearest game story is literally over half an hour away, and the last time I went inside it(several years ago), the place was a desolate wasteland. I'd have better odds of winning the Mega Millions when it's at 200+million then I would of finding a group of like-minded people in my general area ><

Really, if I had the capability of traveling more then an hour for a gaming group, I'd probably be fine, but finances eliminate that possibility outright. Anyways, my point is, while some people may have more options then they think/realize, other people really don't have the option of just "leaving their group" or "training a complete newbie" when it comes to Tabletop Gaming. I've asked all my close friends(all of whom are avid Video Gaming gamers), and I was politely declined by every last one of them. Which is why I am very happy I found this site :)

edit: Also, @ Knaight: I have to save, that anyone who would trivialize internet friendships, obviously are missing out. I met one of the closest friends I've ever had over the internet. We belonged to the same alliance that played a text-based browser war-game(earth2025). After one of the worst days/nights of my life, I logged onto the alliances web-site and posted my farewells, stating I was done with everything, including life. Within, literally I think a minute of posting that, he messaged me on AIM before I could sign off, asking me to talk to him before I did anything rash. I agreed, and after an entire night of talking, I had not only decided life could be worth it, I had also gained an extraordinary friend. I've since spent several weeks in Real Life with him, and am going to be one of the groomsmen at his wedding in September in Chicago. Distance and primarily internet-based communication has nothing to do with the connection that can be made, and me and him are damn well living proof of that.

To be quite honest(and I don't give two whits about how stupid this may make me sound) but he is one of my 3 best friends(yes, I have 3. All 3 of them I would willingly lay my life down for, and I know they'd do the same. Everyone of them know virtually everything there is to know about me, and the same goes for me knowing things about them). Not a damn thing trivial about that what-so-ever. Also, I'm not aiming this rant at you in particular, as you merely mentioned that some people can/will trivialize internet friendships, but it just really irks me(or, in the words of Peter Griffon, the very episode of which Is on TV right this second, it GRINDS MY GEARS!. lol)

Erloas
2011-07-15, 11:01 AM
My tiny pimple of a town on the face of Maryland, and all the surrounding areas, are so incredibly redneck and anti-anything but Hunting and Fishing, sports(nascar and football!), that the nearest game story is literally over half an hour away, and the last time I went inside it(several years ago), the place was a desolate wasteland.
Your closest shop is a full 30 minutes away and thats an issue for you? My brothers shop he is just opening up is 20-25 minutes away from our house and thats just sort of expected around here. My daily commute is about 25 minutes as well. Virtually nothing is closer then that. Of course its probably perspective, seeing as how the county I live in is only slightly smaller then your whole state.
I don't know about driving conditions but its not uncommon for people here to drive for minor events that would be more then half your state away.
Mostly just saying to keep some perspective in that finding a group even 30-40 minutes away is nothing compared to what it is in some parts of the country. Prior to my brother opening his shop (tonight as it is) the next closest game shop is about 180 miles away.

Knaight
2011-07-15, 11:06 AM
Your closest shop is a full 30 minutes away and thats an issue for you? My brothers shop he is just opening up is 20-25 minutes away from our house and thats just sort of expected around here. My daily commute is about 25 minutes as well. Virtually nothing is closer then that. Of course its probably perspective, seeing as how the county I live in is only slightly smaller then your whole state.
I don't know about driving conditions but its not uncommon for people here to drive for minor events that would be more then half your state away.
Mostly just saying to keep some perspective in that finding a group even 30-40 minutes away is nothing compared to what it is in some parts of the country. Prior to my brother opening his shop (tonight as it is) the next closest game shop is about 180 miles away.

That is certainly a cultural thing. I have a game shop that is ten minutes away by car, and prior to it moving it was maybe five. I bike pretty much everywhere, and its still less than half an hour a way, despite the traffic being miserable.

Knaight
2011-07-15, 11:07 AM
Your closest shop is a full 30 minutes away and thats an issue for you? My brothers shop he is just opening up is 20-25 minutes away from our house and thats just sort of expected around here. My daily commute is about 25 minutes as well. Virtually nothing is closer then that. Of course its probably perspective, seeing as how the county I live in is only slightly smaller then your whole state.
I don't know about driving conditions but its not uncommon for people here to drive for minor events that would be more then half your state away.
Mostly just saying to keep some perspective in that finding a group even 30-40 minutes away is nothing compared to what it is in some parts of the country. Prior to my brother opening his shop (tonight as it is) the next closest game shop is about 180 miles away.

That is certainly a cultural thing. I have a game shop that is ten minutes away by car, and prior to it moving it was maybe five. I bike pretty much everywhere, and its still less than half an hour a way, despite the traffic being miserable. Being in a college town, and a fairly densely populated area, this is pretty normal. Pretty much everything is within 15 minutes by car, and anything 40+ minutes away is either a commute related to work, or a place one goes rarely.

SuperFerret
2011-07-15, 11:51 AM
And "find a new group" works if that's the approach you're using. Our group used the opposite approach - we have a bunch of friends that have been together for a while. One day someone shows up with some basic rulebooks and says hey let's play D&D, it's fun. There's no question of finding a new group because the point of the activity is to hang out with the group - gaming is the vehicle for that.

This is my situation, and it's not like it's been problem free (had two players have outside personal issues erupt in game, another player wanted to break out the dice every time we hung out as a group, and so on), but these are my friends, and I've got to work with them to solve these issues. Luckily, I'm usually outside of the problems and can mediate (though I've made mistakes).

Jay R
2011-07-16, 09:09 PM
It can be hard to find a new group. One method is to put up a notice at your local gaming store detailing what you're looking for in detail. If you want people who have the spell lists memorized, or who own every book, or can design Champions characters without a calculator, say so. If you only want high schoolers, or married people over thirty, or left-handed welders, say so. The place to find the gamers you want is at the gaming store, but that's also the place to find the gamers you don't want, so convince the ones you don't want that they don't want you, either.

Real-world social problems do not come with Challenge Ratings, dealt out to be level-appropriate. If the correct answer is to find a new group or choose the right players, then that's the right answer, no matter how difficult it is to do.

WarKitty
2011-07-17, 12:35 AM
Then again, I've also had people say "find a new group" over relatively minor problems. I personally suspect a bit of information bias. I talked to some of the people later about my posts, and got the comment that, when presented with a post that only details a problem, it is very easy to get the impression that the poster has a bad group. The reality is, the 90% of the sessions where we had fun and no real issues cropped up aren't likely to result in a forum post. The 10% that is frustrating does. To a forum-goer who doesn't see that 90%, it can easily seem that the group itself is a problem.

Kiero
2011-07-17, 02:13 PM
I don't relate to any of these gaming store references in the slightest. I haven't been in a gaming store in over a decade, I've never played a single RPG session in them, and everything I ever hear about the sorts of people who "hang out" in one give me no cause to want to visit, never mind play there.

They form no part of my gaming existence, and certainly wouldn't be a place involved in any search for players/a game.

Tyndmyr
2011-07-17, 10:50 PM
Then again, I've also had people say "find a new group" over relatively minor problems. I personally suspect a bit of information bias. I talked to some of the people later about my posts, and got the comment that, when presented with a post that only details a problem, it is very easy to get the impression that the poster has a bad group. The reality is, the 90% of the sessions where we had fun and no real issues cropped up aren't likely to result in a forum post. The 10% that is frustrating does. To a forum-goer who doesn't see that 90%, it can easily seem that the group itself is a problem.

Yeah...we only see what gets posted, and reccomendations get made based on that. I suspect you'd find that people who include caveats saying things like "this is a very rare problem" or "this group is otherwise terrific" probably get more positive advice w/regards to the group. After all, it's not uncommon for follow-up posts by the op or another player in his circle to clarify and/or entirely change the situation presented and thus, the advice given.

Travel time isn't a big deal for me, personally. I have no problem spending a couple hours driving for a fun night out. I certainly wouldn't bother for a game I'm not enjoying, though. I understand that some people might not have transit options...but I tend to assume that they do unless specified otherwise. Car ownership is terribly common, after all, and even non-car owners often have options.

Kiero, I've dabbled in the gaming store circles. It's a crap shoot. Some great people there, and also some of the...er...people that are responsible for negative gamer steriotypes. It isn't my first choice for finding gamers, mind, but not everyone there is a bad sort.