Pick up Games and Social Contracts

PICKUP GAMES There was another recent post that someone commented how players are playing pick up games, but they choose to play with friends. Some of us are here to play with friends over distance, with added tools, or for lack of playing space. Many others for issues of schedualing, living n remote regions, being beginners or a multitude of other reasons don't have anyone else we know to join in playing d&amp;d. So there are many palyers looking for groups, starting pick ups, etc... I played irl with friends, then on another service with friends, I started to DM in some one offs here, and then I've been trying some longer campaigns with random groups or people from one offs. What I've found with these pick up games is ((This isn't meant as offence to anyone I've played with, just parts of my experiences that could be improved. There's been some good games)): Open inventations lead to dozens of players clicking and never posting. Players don't show up, show up once and never return, or attendence is spotty. The DM can sometimes disapear for weeks or be completely disorganized. House rules are not clearly explained before the game. Drastic player differences can cause conflict, something that needs DM resolution and isn't useful perpetuating. Pick up games seam best to me for one offs. You can use these to hand pick players for longer running session serries, ones that match your play style and mesh well together. In addition to this, if you're looking to run a longer campaign successfully, then you might want to consider a social contract. SOCIAL CONTRACT Seeing as I played with friends, I found this idea that was rather new to me, but essentially what we do each game when we look for players...stating the rule system, game times, etc... but more in depth to make sure everyone's expectations are the same. Mismatched expectations are where conflict come in and it is useful to avoid them up front to keep things running smoothly. Here is an article about social contract, with suggested list of items to include: <a href="http://rpgathenaeum.wordpress.com/2009/04/07/is-a-social-contract-right-for-your-dd-group/" rel="nofollow">http://rpgathenaeum.wordpress.com/2009/04/07/is-a-social-contract-right-for-your-dd-group/</a> We don't have to worry about snacks so much as bathroom breaks. Other things to add after player discussion: Outside communications needed (such as skype) Loot splitting (also party fund) How much meta gaming is acceptable Player death (saw this in another article) Resolving player-player conflict (this is after one bad experience I had recently) Timing...What time the game starts, how long players should wait if GM is delayed (I'd suggest 15 mins), etc.. Giving notice (should give notice if going to be late, etc) Criticals and failures (critical failures should need to be confirmed, there's some good discussions on this out there) Any other variation rules to be used (ex: alternative spell charging, Unearthed arcana p154) The DM can add things to this later when problems arise: If turns are taking too long that person is delayed in initiative OR players get +1 to attack if ready/-1 to attack for taking more than a minuet to act. Players trying to steal/bluff/etc other players is causing game disruptions, players cannot attack/steal from one another

Social contracts? That's a bit harsh.

Social contract is a term that's been catching on. It's any agreement about the game...you agree what rules, when/where to meet, etc... This expands it and puts to writing any shared understanding including the type of game, rule variations, and resolutions to problems. The easiest way to avoid problems is to have players expectations match. I posted this here because online pick up games can be slightly different than those in person (such as choosing which voice software would be required).

To be honest James, I think it's not needed -- if I saw this before a game I was going to play, I would not join, and more then likely ignore the GM. If I joined a game and was presented with a contract, I'd drop out. I play to have fun and forget life for a while.&nbsp; With that said its perfectly fine for a GM to say, ok here is my game, this is when I am running it, here is my house rules.&nbsp; So to end this, to each their own.. Some people enjoy a lot of structure and rules while others just like to play. /shrug

This isn't an actual game Game: D&amp;D Pathfinder Sources: Pathfinder (any books) Game time: Starting Saturday April 20th 7:00pm GMT, 8:00pm BST, 3pm EST, Noon PST.&nbsp; Meet weekly We will be using skype Character creation: Level 1, 7rolls of 4d6 drop lowest, 1k starting gold.&nbsp; Please include at least 5 sentences about your character's past, description and motivations. You are allowed 2 traits and we will be using hero points. Type of game: Mix of hack and slash, role play and adventure. Moderate magic. No home brew. Original adventure. Story driven. (Keep meta-gaming to minimum for role-players) House rules: No evil characters, No attacking party members You do not need a +1 to put magical effects on items Exploding skill rolls, if you roll 20 on skill check then reroll and add results. A one on skill roll does not auto fail if bonus is high enough. Overall, have fun and work together. --- People do this all the time, they just don't call it a social contract. Even LFG has basics for version/time, which is a minimal version of this. My point was some things are weighted different online. I was wondering what everyone tells players up front (such as using skype/ventrilo/google hangout).

Oh ok, well I thought what you included there would be standard of games. I thought you might have been talking about a long drawn out what ifs along with what will happen if party a doesn't do plan a... Contracts...sign here to play stuff. Which I've seen in face to face games. I went to a game at this guys house he had printed out an entire 12 page bound packet for all players to review and sign. I left quickly.

I gotta agree with the Lord of Cameras: some players dig that structure, some don't. Just as some GMing styles are appreciated by some players, while others will chafe, James.&nbsp;

I think social contracts which grow out of a good Session Zero are compulsory if a group wants to start the game together on the same page. It's good for all kinds of groups, but especially important for longer running campaigns. My regular group and I have a great understanding and vision of what the game will be and we're always working in the same direction. That has a lot of benefits. With pick-up groups, the GM should at least express the minimum expectations he has for the game to run smoothly so that the players are aware of this and can opt out if the game is not for them. (I personally don't join games where I know I'm not going to like the DM's style. It's good to know this up-front.) Crunchy information as to sources permitted and house rules are good to see in advance as well. I tend to not like house rules in general (like critical fail rules or the like), so it's good to know what I'm getting into. I tend to run either one-session games or larger, three-to-four session games here on Roll20. In the longer-running games, I discuss pretty clearly how I like to run the game since it's more of a commitment. It's what players can expect during actual play. In the one-session games, I'm less verbose. Here's what I post for my longer games: TL;DR Version:&nbsp; Just say "Yes," because everyone else is going to be saying "Yes" to you. First, I'll be in-game 15 minutes before start to get situated so you can do mic checks or the like. I recommend testing your setup prior to play. Unlike the Marines, we will leave you behind. Nothing personal. When actual play begins, I will frame the&nbsp; cold open &nbsp;- your current situation and some tension to be resolved. This is like that part of the TV show or movie before the opening credits. I'll answer any questions you have about the scene. Following the cold open, I will begin a session of&nbsp; questions and answers . This serves a few purposes. First, it will allow you to introduce your character to everyone - the concept, the mechanical abilities, memorable features. Then I will ask you some questions that will tie your character to the adventure and world, fleshing out both. Once we've gotten to everyone, I will then ask each player one more question that will deal with character bonds. This will tie you to at least one other character. As you answer these questions,&nbsp; you should note that no answer is wrong that doesn't contradict a previous bit of fiction that was established. &nbsp;Also, if your character is mentioned in someone's answer, you are encouraged to accept and build onto that player's contribution in a supportive manner. (The only exception is if that person said something that contradicts established fiction or if you find it offensive in some way.) Aside from fleshing things out, this is an exercise akin to what improvisational actors do before going on stage. It's a warm-up that allows you to brainstorm and get your mind into a creative mode prior to play. This is the time to get used to saying, "Yes." It makes the rest of the game that much smoother. A note about your answers:&nbsp; Be concise. &nbsp;A Twitter-length response that is packed with possibilities is better than a long soliloquy about the intricate leatherwork of your codpiece. Conciseness is not a&nbsp;lack&nbsp;of detail. It's simply hitting the details that really matter or are particularly memorable. We have 5 people to get through. Keep that in mind. More details can and will emerge during play. To start, we just need something to work with and get us going. Once the Q&amp;A is done, we'll flash back to the cold open scene and begin play. There are a couple of things to keep in mind here. First,&nbsp; there is no plot or predetermined story. &nbsp;It's just an adventure location with some stuff in it, creatures and NPCs pursuing their own instincts and goals. You have a main goal and no doubt some sub-goals that will arise as we play. When your goals conflict with others in the location, it will snowball into action and we'll play to find out what happens. The story is the things you guys do, not something the DM made up for you to experience. So make it grand. To that end, I will present you with challenges, but&nbsp; I have no idea what the solutions are. &nbsp;I don't even think about it or try to predict what you will do. There are no contingencies. Thus, you won't have to engage in boring discussions trying to figure out what the "correct" answer is ("correct" being traditionally defined as "that thing the DM is thinking").&nbsp; The most correct answer is the one that is the most fun , whatever that means in context. I encourage you to say "Yes" to other players' ideas and add onto it with your own ideas. Don't say "No" because there is no particularly good reason to do this. This is known as the "Yes, and..." technique, the foundation to improvisational acting. Once the plan is in motion, the dice will determine its outcome.&nbsp; You can spend an hour to come up with the most "foolproof" plan ever and it will be tested with dice with standard level DCs, so that hour was most likely a waste of time. I have no bias and will not adjust DCs or number of successes required in any way. Even if your plan fails, it will fail in a way that is interesting, challenging, and fun. So don't worry about planning for every contingency, and certainly don't use that as an excuse to shoot down ideas and discourage your fellow players. Accept them and add onto them if you need to refine them. One of the worst ways to play, in my opinion, is to try and mitigate every possibility of failure. You're pulp action adventurers, so embrace it. Indiana Jones failed in the very first scene in&nbsp;Raiders of the Lost Ark&nbsp;and he went on to make three more movies! About an hour before our agreed-upon stopping point , &nbsp;I'm going to start looking for a&nbsp; cliffhanger ending . When it happens, I'll call for end of session. At that point, we'll have a little concluding Q&amp;A to talk about what happened during the game, get feedback, and see what interesting questions remain to be answered in a future session. And that's it! I look forward to the game and if you have any questions, feel free to ask anytime.

I try to get character sheets and any workup to playing done before the first game session, so we can start playing 10-15 mins from when everyone gets there or scheduled start time. I think of my session zero more as any workup, that's how I use the game's forum. I try to get the hour+ of people writing up sheets and basic basic structure out of the way. I could try setting up a meeting/session before hand to do a more organic version rather than writing it up, just not something I've tried beyond having one on one conversations and discussion on game thread.&nbsp; I think newer DMs like a lot more structure. I'm not a total newb...but I'm still at that stage where I like to have a plan to fall back on, rather than trying to improvise most everything. (I'm not railroading, but having multiple NPCs, monsters, and scenarios outlined.) Lets say...the players just completely skipped the plot hooks they were offered to recover a stolen item for a reward and head out into the forest? That's ok, I've got a preservation society's representatives ready to ask them to find a magical beast and capture it, without killing it. They decided to kill the society representatives? Well next time they are in town the guards are going to be questioning them...and when they head into the forest deeper they find a camp of monsters roasting the rare mystical monster.&nbsp; On roll20 there's many people we don't know. If a DM says yes to everything when players have vastly different play styles....lets say one is trying to kill everything in sight while another had wanted to roleplay, interrogate or go on a quest. That can cause conflict (character conflict being ok if not disruptive, but not when it spills outside the roles of the game). A player's character dies because they purposely tried burning down a town for no reason and the town guard confiscated their items? Well we did discuss/outline you'd come back at a level lower, it's not a surprise. Maybe I've just been in too many groups with problem players and am focusing too much on heading off issues before they ever occur. It's just my experience mismatched expectations are the source of most problems and all being on the same page helps things go more smoothly and lets people focus on the story telling, adventure and fun.&nbsp; Thanks for your input ^.^

I don't use plot hooks as I find them problematic, in part, for the reasons you've given. I use premises the players want to see played (I ask them directly for their buy-in as players) and craft questions to link their characters to that premise as needed. A plot hook is essentially the DM asking if the players are interested in his or her idea - but in the context of the game. A "No" may mean wasted prep, or at least, having it shelved for an indeterminate amount of time. I prefer to ask directly outside of the context of the game. The upside here is that if you're playing scenarios your players have expressed interest in, there's nobody going off and killing quest givers or skipping content. They've already given their inherent buy-in on the goals and objectives of the premise, so you can get right to it. Lots of focus, no wasted prep, and a faster pace for your game. If you've got players that are doing the things you describe in your examples, I can share solutions for that. But this sort of thing is certainly better for another thread. If you start it up, I'll surely participate.

That stuff isn't happening, but the general type of thing is the reasoning behind why I'd posted. 'Social contracts' seamed like a interesting idea, possibly extending the sort of outline we do already. It's a gentleman's agreement...I'm not asking anyone to sign anything. I might run a one-shot tower defense style D&amp;D game where you have to protect something from wave after wave of enemies, all combat. The next week I could start a campaign where players are investigating strange happenings in a sleepy town with more roleplay and puzzles than anything. This is just a summery of things that sets each world apart, special rules, or agreements made with the party. There's enough people here you could probably find interest in all sorts of games, but you want to try to make sure you let them know what kind of game you've set up.

James B. said: you want to try to make sure you let them know what kind of game you've set up.&nbsp; I completely agree. My only quibble is that a lot of DMs make these social contracts to put a patch on problems they themselves cause in the game due to their approach. DMs that post, "I prefer roleplaying more than combat" just says to me that the DM doesn't actually know what roleplaying is, and so I won't play in their game. A DM that denies certain source books (and not for thematic reasons) or decries evil characters similarly may be causing the problems they're trying to head off by limiting the players instead of reflecting on their own approach. If it works and players are willing to buy in to that, that's just fine, of course. It's good to have that information upfront.

Lou The Mad said: I gotta agree with the Lord of Cameras: some players dig that structure, some don't. Just as some GMing styles are appreciated by some players, while others will chafe, James.&nbsp; Lou... See the movie Hackers, you'll understand my name :)

Sorry. Anytime I see "Hackers" I get distracted by Angelina Jolie....mmmmm, she could corrupt my database any ti--......uh, what was I talking about again?