Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Castlemaster Jun 05, 2011 10:52:37	I used to be the head organizer of a local gaming group Knoxville Roleplayers Group. I have stepped down because I will be moving soon and I handed off the group to someone else. I founded it 2 years ago and since then we have hosted about 150 sessions. I would like to impart wisdom on the 10's of people that came in wanting to get into a game. Granted that unsolicited advice falls somewhere between annoying an threatening, I think these things need to be told to people looking to join in on a group because no one else will tell them. 1. We don't care how much you have played previously D&D is not a job. Experience does not directly correlate to skill. D&D is not a game of winning, it's a game of fun. Your experience may correlate to nothing more than knowing alot about previous editions and misreading rules. Unless you have worked at Wizards of the Coast, or some other official governing body, you experience pretty much counts for crap. 2. Trying to join our established games really annoys us If our game is already established, understand that getting in is "invite only". It is highly disruptive to wedge a random character into a game which, after several sessions, has an established plot and character rapport. Especially for someone they have never gamed with who is just as likely to decide he doesn't have time to keep gaming after 2 sessions. If you really want in, then try to run a session outside of theirs, and let them see you in action. Then if a spot opens up and they like you, they will include you. 3. It is not our duty to find a spot for you We all have jobs and lives outside of D&D. It is not our job to find you a game spot, and frankly, I would rather not play with the kind of person who expects to come into a group and get something out of it without putting anything in. In stead, offer to start a game...which brings me to my next point 4. Always offer to DM (even if you have no clue how)... On average, the ratio of DM's to Players is 1:5 for the average party. Despite this, DM's are always in demand, and players are always easy to find. If you offer to DM, I guarantee that 5 people will be willing to play in your game even if you have never done it before. Once you DM a few sessions, you'll build rapport, then you can maybe become a player or you might find you like DM'ing. 5. ...But don't expect everyone to fight themselves for a spot in your "cool campaign idea" Again, the whole, "I have a cool homebrew campaign idea" is something you do after you build rapport. It's great to come into a group and say, "hey I will DM," but then say it has to be these homebrew ideas that are--in all honesty--probably only appealing to you. Start with a common setting (forgotten realms, eberron, dark sun), then after a few sessions you can break out the "here's a cool idea" for your players. Coming in with already custom ideas is just masturbatory because you haven't taken the time to actually figure out what people would want to play. You have told people, "here is what I want to play come play it" In summary, here are my points You are not entitled to have a game your way You have to invest into the group to get something out of it You have to build rapport before you can make suggestions
#2 tequila_sunrise Jun 06, 2011 10:24:14	I've never done the meetup thing, so 2 and 3 don't apply to my experiences, but 1 and 5 are universally true. Attitude is ten times as important as experience; sometimes the best players are the newbies and the worst are the veterans. And DMs are always in demand. So a DM can run pretty much whatever s/he wants, so long as it's passably fun. But don't expect everyone else to think your super cool campaign idea is more than passably fun. 4 may or may not be a good idea, depending on the group you're joining. My group rotates DMs, so "I'd be happy to run an adventure sometime" is always looked favorably upon.
#3 lofgren Jun 06, 2011 11:41:45	Agree. Asking to join my established game doesn't annoy me.  It really shouldn't annoy anybody.  Is it really that hard to say "No?"  As in "Can I join your campaign?"  "No." Asking me if I know of spots available does not annoy me.  If I know of some games, I will tell you.  If I don't, I will say that as well.  If five people have asked me in the past two weeks, I will try to hook them up together.  Why wouldn't I?  Is it that hard to say "Ask Jim?"  As in, "Hey, do you know of any campaigns that are looking for players?"  "Ask Jim.  He's got three players so they might like a fourth." Don't offer to DM if you don't want to.  Give it a shot if you like, you're always welcome and encouraged.  But don't offer if you're not into it.  You'll just be wasting everybody's time.  Besides, DnD is not a job. Houserules are often problematic.  Run them by your players and accept their criticism.  Tell them what you were going for and why you think the rule will encourage that.  Homebrew campaign worlds, on the other hand, are always welcome.  DMs and players feel more comfortable when they are masters of their own environment, and you don't have to read 50,000 pages of high fantasy gobbledygook and then run a world you have no interest in before you take a crack at your low-magic, post apocalyptic, zombies-vs.-vampires campaign set in the arctic circle.  A flare for storytelling is all that is required for homebrew settings.  Houseruled mechanics are much more difficult.  Whatever you do, don't run yet another "You meet in an inn in the Forgotten Realms, try to overthrow a tyrannical feudal lord, then fight a red wizard/insane cultist" campaign. The OP sounds like somebody whose play environment is so broad and diverse that it can always handle another game, that five players will sprout from the ground for every new DM (but, oddly, those player refuse to play homebrew settings).  That is not my experience.  In my experience the Meetup community is fairly small, especially the regulars.  Even in Brooklyn with several hundred people signed up we were lucky to fill three tables at each meetup.  Besides the whole point of the meetup groups is to serve as a launchpad for meeting and organizing your own games.  The animosity towards newcomers on display by a meetup group organizer is frankly stunning.  Newcomers almost by definition do not know what is expected of them, and asking if there is a seat available in a campaign seems like the most logical place to start.  Showing up at the meetup and declaring that although you have never played before, you're going to compete with the other DMs for players and run a generic module in a generic setting sounds like exactly the best way to have a frustrating and flustering first experience at a meetup.
#4 Cohen95 Jun 06, 2011 13:31:37	Okay, perhaps I'm the minority, but 1 is not universally true, imo. Experience, specifically, experience with the edition of the game the group will be using, can be a good indicator of a player's level of system mastery. It's not a guarantee, but it's true more often than not. I've played with very experienced players who knew the rules and were seasoned RPers, and I've played with new players who were fresh off a WoW gamecard, and several points along both spectrums. I honestly prefer experienced players, if they can be had. That being said, the two members of my current group that I am enjoying the experience with the most are the two new players. They have natural RP talent, and it's kind of fun watching them learn pen-and-paper RPGs for the first time. It's...refreshing? I don't know. Also, I have serious beef with #4. I played in a game with a DM who was only DMing because he couldn't find a game to play in. He'd never played 4th edition, because he couldn't find anybody to DM it, so he DMed it. He was an absolutely horrible DM. I mean, reallllly bad. He had very little knowledge of the system, and that led overall to a terrible gaming experience. After a couple of levels, another player offered to DM, and things got a lot better. Then the problem became that the inexperienced player who had never played before had no idea how to play the game he'd just been DMing, leading back to my gripe with #1. I have also been lucky with a relatively good-sized meetup community, due in very large part to the fact that said meetup was for our FLGS, so it was easy to meet players as RPGA and Encounters events, play along side them, pick players you gel with, and form up a group. I'm now a member of a group of 7: two are brand new to the game, one has been gaming since 4th edition came out, two more have been playing at least since 3rd edition came out, and the other two have been playing since at least AD&D 2nd edition Revised came out. The best part? Because we (me and two members from my last group) sought out mostly experienced players, five of our players have DMing experience, and are interesting in DMing at some point, so it's a fully co-op, shared, community game.   OP, I honestly thought when I started reading that this was going to come off as some new-player-friendly guide to making yourself more appealing to other groups, especially after point 1. Then it went downhill, and in 2-5 you pretty much come off as elitist. I'm glad you had a community that suited your gaming style, but either your or my experience is far from representative, and the other posters in this thread have me thinking it's not mine that's far off.
#5 crowscape Jun 06, 2011 19:51:49	Yeah, that doesn't strike me as very good advice, or a friendly Meetup group. It seems the only way a new member is welcome is if they are going to immediately take on the GM role for a vanilla campaign. I'll back lofgren and Cohen. Their views are more in line with the Meetup group I'm in.
#6 Cohen95 Jun 06, 2011 21:10:59	It seems the only way a new member is welcome is if they are going to immediately take on the GM role for a vanilla campaign. Which gives one the impression that the meetup largely consists of too many players and not enough DMs that are generally reluctant and have been resigned to DMing. That is not a DM I want to play for.
#7 robertread3 Jun 07, 2011 0:33:55	in order 1. agree totally, i wish more people embodied this idea. 2. you follow that cool idea with a slam the door in your face? if someone wants in you should allow them assuming there are spots open, i mean why make rules so new people cant sit next to you? 3. absolutly, its not the job of orgonizers to make a bunch of accomidations for 1 or 2 people. 4. tricky, while DMs are oftin in demand, it requires some mastery of the rules even more so that other players dont take advantage of the DMs lack of knowledge to exploit somthing that isnt actually legal i would say you need 6-10 sessions of play before you are ready to DM properly. 5. yeah, lots of crap can get thrown at you and alot of angry people when you get a "screw the players" DM who like to be "tough but fair" or "challanging" and is given free reign. while you should encourage people to DM the way you want you do need to know if they are trustworthy of the title.  your points.... your not entitled sure, but at least work with the guy... you just said this isnt a job for you, why does it have to be for them? so i have to join your eletist heirachy of funpals to voice my opinion? all in all, no thanks, your group sounds snobbish and has this "in crowd" of lameness
#8 tequila_sunrise Jun 07, 2011 10:09:40	Okay, perhaps I'm the minority, but 1 is not universally true, imo. Experience, specifically, experience with the edition of the game the group will be using, can be a good indicator of a player's level of system mastery. It's not a guarantee, but it's true more often than not. I've played with very experienced players who knew the rules and were seasoned RPers, and I've played with new players who were fresh off a WoW gamecard, and several points along both spectrums. I honestly prefer experienced players, if they can be had. I guess it depends on the group in question. I've never been part of a group where at least one guy doesn't even know what system mastery means, so experience with the rules is a lot less important than positive attitude IMO. Naturally, in a group of optimizers, I can imagine experience taking the front seat.
#9 Cohen95 Jun 07, 2011 11:36:18	Okay, perhaps I'm the minority, but 1 is not universally true, imo. Experience, specifically, experience with the edition of the game the group will be using, can be a good indicator of a player's level of system mastery. It's not a guarantee, but it's true more often than not. I've played with very experienced players who knew the rules and were seasoned RPers, and I've played with new players who were fresh off a WoW gamecard, and several points along both spectrums. I honestly prefer experienced players, if they can be had. I guess it depends on the group in question. I've never been part of a group where at least one guy doesn't even know what system mastery means, so experience with the rules is a lot less important than positive attitude IMO. Naturally, in a group of optimizers, I can imagine experience taking the front seat.  When you play with someone who has a Dragonborn Fighter, and on the first round he uses his breath weapon, every single fight, and then in every subsequent round (of every single fight), he tries to do it again, only to be told he can't because it's an encounter power, and then he can't decide which of his powers to use, because he doesn't know what he wants to do...? Yeah, experience and system mastery are important. Hell, that was my very first session of 4th edition, and I wanted to yell at him to read the rules. Of course, my experience with D&D, over the course of several editions, taught me that knowing the rules was important to being part of a smooth running game in which everybody has fun, and nobody is doing anything ridiculous. Now, again, let it be known, my current group has two new players who were not familiar with the rules when they started playing. They understood the basics, though, because they'd read the rules, so they had a fundamental grasp of the system (aka- system awareness). Because they pay attention, ask specific, decisive questions, and read up on rules they don't understand, they're quickly approaching system mastery. So, yes, it falls both ways, but that's my point: OP's first point is not universally true. Experience is not always irrelevent. It's not always important either, but it often can, should, and does count for something.
#10 tequila_sunrise Jun 07, 2011 21:25:14	So, yes, it falls both ways, but that's my point: OP's first point is not universally true. Experience is not always irrelevent. It's not always important either, but it often can, should, and does count for something. Chill, guy. I take it back -- experience isn't universally unimportant. You don't have to resort to far-fetched horror stories to make your point. (Seriously, a player who can't remember he can only use an encounter power once per encounter? That goes way beyond inexperience, right into either willful ignorance or outright idiocy.)
#11 lofgren Jun 07, 2011 23:44:48	Meh, a lot of people don't set aside a whole lot of brainspace for game mechanics, and that makes seemingly simple things seem extremely difficult to remember.  Really they're just not that important to the player. The fact that there are a whole bunch of exceptions probably doesn't help.
#12 tequila_sunrise Jun 08, 2011 14:15:01	Meh, a lot of people don't set aside a whole lot of brainspace for game mechanics, and that makes seemingly simple things seem extremely difficult to remember.  Really they're just not that important to the player. The fact that there are a whole bunch of exceptions probably doesn't help. All true. My point is that willful ignorance is not a matter of experience, or lack thereof.
#13 lofgren Jun 09, 2011 10:43:17	Meh, a lot of people don't set aside a whole lot of brainspace for game mechanics, and that makes seemingly simple things seem extremely difficult to remember.  Really they're just not that important to the player. The fact that there are a whole bunch of exceptions probably doesn't help. All true. My point is that willful ignorance is not a matter of experience, or lack thereof. The reason I agreed with the OP's point number 1 is that, although I will ask about your experience and find it helpful to know how much you have, neither a lot of experience nor very little are going to stop me from asking you to join my game.  If you have very little experience then I know I should probably plan to make some allowances for you, maybe not factor you as a PC into experience budgets for fights for the first session or two so you can get your 4e legs, maybe give you a cheat sheet of conditions and their effects, etc.  But whether it is your first time or you've been playing 4e nightly since its release you are still welcome at the table (all other things being equal). And as you say, experience isn't going to tell you anything precisely about the player, just give an indicator.
#14 Castlemaster Jun 11, 2011 21:33:21	Hm, well apologies if I come off sounding elitist, but here are some points I am coming from. Several times, we allow new people in, and they immediately sign up for our recurring game that is full. Oftentimes, it is because we have forgotten to go ahead and fill those spots, and those are usually people that have been playing in a consistent game. Several times we have politely told them that the DM does not wish to take any more players, and that is usually the last they come back. Keep in mind they just signed up the day before. Also as far as willingness to DM, my general experience is that good players are good DM's and viceversa. Depending a the reason, a bad DM could also very likely be a very bad player, which brings up the question of what kind of person you want in your games. I'm probably jaded and these ideas can be sarcastic, but from the viewpoint of a group organizer who actually has consistent games (all our other local gaming groups don't have any games at all), this gives the viewpoint that newbies won't always get to see.
#15 lofgren Jun 11, 2011 23:17:40	Don't apologize for your opinions.
#16 Cohen95 Jun 12, 2011 1:21:24	Hm, well apologies if I come off sounding elitist, but here are some points I am coming from. Several times, we allow new people in, and they immediately sign up for our recurring game that is full. Oftentimes, it is because we have forgotten to go ahead and fill those spots, and those are usually people that have been playing in a consistent game. Several times we have politely told them that the DM does not wish to take any more players, and that is usually the last they come back. Keep in mind they just signed up the day before. Well, what I'm seeing here is that "we, as an organization, make administrative mistakes, and end up turning away players because we weren't tracking properly. As a result, those potential new members of our hobby went somewhere else." Now, depending on how seriously you take the group you're organizing for, this may or may not be a big deal to you, but it doesn't do anything for the hobby (which also may or may not be a big deal to you). The trick is, it has nothing to do with these impetuous new players trying to muscle their way into your group, and everything to do with your group not keeping up with its book-keeping. So, #2 goes from "Trying to join our established games really annoys us," to "Signing up for a game you had no idea was full and closed because there was a sign-up sheet available annoys us because we're not keeping track of paperwork." Also as far as willingness to DM, my general experience is that good players are good DM's and viceversa. Depending a the reason, a bad DM could also very likely be a very bad player, which brings up the question of what kind of person you want in your games. I...completely disagree, like, absolutely 100% think this is completely the opposite of right. It's a Venn Diagram, where one circle represents "Good players" and the other represents "Good DMs." Yes, they overlap, probably rather a bit. But until a year ago, I would have made a horrible DM, and I've been a great player for years. I can, right now, think of three players who are amazing, and who I love having at my table, but who I would never let DM for me. Further, I can think of two DMs I'd never invite to sit at my table, because they are not able to properly shift roles from DM to player, and as a result are terrible players. Mind you, in my group of 8, there are two that are brand new players, two that have never DMed but are interested in doing so, and four who do both, and we rotate out every couple of months. The goal is to, as a group, expand everybody's play experience. And none of this addresses the matter that you want people who are potentially new to the hobby to get into the hobby by DMing, which is kind of like telling people they have to buy a car before they can take Driver's Education. It is the absolute most expensive way to go about the process. I'm probably jaded and these ideas can be sarcastic, but from the viewpoint of a group organizer who actually has consistent games (all our other local gaming groups don't have any games at all), this gives the viewpoint that newbies won't always get to see. Okay, so, my local game shop has a meetup, and from that meetup they run leauge/sanctioned/official games for D&D, Pathfinder, World of Darkness, Warhammer, Magic the Gathering, and those are just the ones I can think of off the top of my head. What I'm getting at by posting that is, that store is effectively a gaming club that hosts events all week long, and they have organizers for those events. Those organizers want to promote their hobby, bring new players in, give experienced players a broader experience, and give seasoned players the tools to become GMs. Just as an example, on the "Open Night" (no organized play that night) that my group plays at the store, there are six groups that regularly meet, playing Pathfinder, 3.5, 4th edition, Amethyst, and either Malifaux, Warhammer, Blood Bowl, or some other TT game (Yes, my 4th edition group plays RIGHT NEXT TO a Pathfinder table and a 3.5 table, and we all get along just fine). My point in saying all that is to give you an idea where I'm coming from. The mentality here is "Promote the hobby. Expand the player base. Develop the players." I don't get that from your group, I get, "Leave us alone so we can game." Which is such a stark contrast it baffles, and possibly offends, me. I don't suppose there's anything morally wrong with the way your group does things, it just really, really strikes me as not good for the hobby, and I tend toward the collectivist or communal nature with regard to games (after all, the smaller the player base, the harder it is to support a local game store).
#17 robertread3 Jun 13, 2011 13:17:40	the part about having to turn away new people the day of because the signup wasent full through clerical error is your fault (or whoever manages this for the group) not theirs, so it feels like a personal blow to a outsider to think your going to get in on this whole new experance and get shot down at the last second this makes it look like the eletist group of funpals and no one wants to be on the outside of that i dont know why how recently they signed up matters, a spot was open the day before, they took it its that simple. now if you have issues with the table being for signup when it is full. this is an inherit error in your system because this presents the illusion that there is a game when there isent and some people drive an hour or so for this. its a good idea to not list them on the signup at all and list the time for that game, and the names of the players who are signed up for it. i personally come to D&D events with the expectation im going to play D&D, wouldent you?
#18 Castlemaster Jun 14, 2011 21:49:20	Hm, interesting comments. Well, I provide one viewpoint and apparently it is not comprehensive (as no one viewpoint would be). I guess this is more for explaining frustration with flaky people who sign up for a group on day 1 and just expect to fall into a game while the organizers have put effort to establish things.
#19 lofgren Jun 14, 2011 23:21:43	Well from your post it sounds like you expect people who sign up for a group to DM. That seems weird to me.  Certainly, if I signed up for a meetup group for the first time, I would bot expect that I should show up at the first meeting I have ever been to intending to DM. What should a person who signs up for a meetup group expect for their first time if not to play in the game they signed up for?
#20 robertread3 Jun 15, 2011 0:57:24	Hm, interesting comments. Well, I provide one viewpoint and apparently it is not comprehensive (as no one viewpoint would be). I guess this is more for explaining frustration with flaky people who sign up for a group on day 1 and just expect to fall into a game while the organizers have put effort to establish things. i dont understand this fustration, if i signup for a game and show up to said game then i should play it right? what your suggesting is that i signup, show up and expect..... what? now the issue you seem to have is errors where new players get signed up to tables that are actually long running campagins i would suggest you dont put these up since it is misleading. a new player dosent know what to expect, dosent know how to play yet aside from a few basics, dosent know anyone here and the most logical thing to do when you come to a new setting is try to do what you came here to do. as for signup time, it is irrelavant if i put my name on that signup sheet 10 minites before gametime when there is an open slot you just made a deal with that person for their spot on that table, it is theirs. if this is not the case then do not leave the spot signup sheet.
#21 Cohen95 Jun 15, 2011 20:00:13	I'm assuming these "sign ups" are, in fact, Meetup posts on the group board. If that's the case, when you post meet ups for tables that are already full, just don't put the "RSVP" slot open. Or, if you do, point out in the post that the group is already full, and not accepting new members. If you're frustrated that people are signing up for open games on a short notice, again, put into the post what the RSVP deadline is, and if someone signs up after the deadline, point out the deadline to them, and apologize that you can't work them in on such short notice. These things aren't hard, really, and they're the sorts of behaviors that will give a potential new player more respect for the group, even as that group turns the player away.
#22 magikot9 Jun 15, 2011 20:39:04	In one of my two current play groups, I joined trying to show up to an encounters session and didn't realize there was a game that was running on the same night. I showed up and asked if there was room for one more. The response from the DM was, "Well we're in a combat encounter right now but sit down and we'll see if we can work you in soon. Do you have any experience with 4th edition?" We play weekly and there are two players that can't make one week a month. This is perfect for new players since they are ok with newbies playing their characters (A knight and a warpriest) to learn the rules and then we send the new players to the encounters groups the following week. We are now up to the constant group (5 of us) and three encounters groups of 6 players each. Experience with the edition can be important if you're looking to join a pre-existing game, and something I take into consideration when I DM as well. Is it the be-all-end-all for consideration? Absolutely not! But oftentimes (IME) it helps.
#23 Cohen95 Jun 16, 2011 1:45:32	Experience with the edition can be important if you're looking to join a pre-existing game, and something I take into consideration when I DM as well. Is it the be-all-end-all for consideration? Absolutely not! But oftentimes (IME) it helps. That's kind of the point I was going for, as well. While it's not everything, it's also not nothing.