PDA

View Full Version : The toxicly nontoxic group



Drache64
2019-10-06, 07:50 PM
Have you ever run into a group that was so focused on keeping toxicity away that it was actually toxic?

I've seen this in two ways:

1. The family dynamic: People who are so focused on protecting the group dynamic that they oust any players who they think will be a bad fit without warning and sometimes without even infraction. This only really becomes toxic when it's among family/friends, can't blame a private group for not accepting strangers.

2. The DM with PTSD from "That guy":
Had a DM who had dealt with a legitimate "That Guy" scenario. After that he became so focused on running a nontoxic group that he began kicking players left and right for slight infractions such as texting during a session and sitting everyone down for a talk before the session began every time. He currently plays with 3 other players who are pretty chill and that's about it.

{scrubbed}

What are ways you guys have seen people try to avoid toxicty in their group to the point it actually came across toxic?

GentlemanVoodoo
2019-10-06, 08:27 PM
I hear what your saying but sometimes it happens. For the instances like in your first example that is where the session zero comes in. All items such as how you are playing a character and other issues can be addressed. It will solve such problems like you had most of the time but not always. At least by doing this you have ground to stand on and say "Well you knew how I was going to play this character. Should of raised any concerns at the beginning."

The second example you gave is simply you just get an DM like that sometimes who will be a horse's butt about anything and everything.

Slipperychicken
2019-10-06, 11:58 PM
It just seems like a matter of taste and finding a group where you can roleplay what you want. Personally, if I'm in a fantasy game and some drunks try to start something in a bar, then I'll want to see a more lighthearted response ("I don't want no trouble" / "you picked the wrong drunk to mess with" / "oh look, the entertainment has arrived" / etc). I don't want to spend my violent fantasy romp mirandizing people and trembling in fear of the consequences of violence.

For the second guy, that sounds like a deliberate process: Cast a wide net for players, then thin the worst players from the herd until you have a core of good reliable people. Most good gaming groups start with some variations on the theme, whether poaching players from other games, or running oneshots for randos to test-run a variety of them. It pays to be selective. I have to admit that kicking players outright is pretty ballsy; I only GMed for a short time, but it takes some courage to do that.

For you I'd suggest discussing these sorts of scenarios with prospective GMs, to illustrate your favored style of play, help set some informal/tonal boundaries for yourself, and help evaluate your fit before you join games.

Mordaedil
2019-10-07, 03:24 AM
That second DM needs a backrub and a calm talk to chill his nerves a bit. Of course, it does help to have a full group about the social contract and set up some agreements on things we don't do during a session and treat eachother with respect, including the DM.

For the first one, I think I'll echo someone else that a session 0 would have helped clear things up ahead of time and that it isn't so much toxic as it is just how their group works and any outsider element is actually toxic to them.

Knaight
2019-10-07, 03:52 AM
The second example seems like someone who could probably stand to chill a bit, but the first? You have an existing group. They have an existing group dynamic - it's on new people to either fit it or decide that the group isn't for them, but not someone reading the dynamic at all and then accidentally going against it is a pretty good reason not to accept them in the group*.

*Assuming the assumptions made based on hints in the first post. Most notably these are that the non-game relationship between the parents in the family game and the OP was minimal to nonexistent.

King of Nowhere
2019-10-07, 04:59 AM
Never seen it happen for gaming.
But i saw it happen several times in other real life context.
Saying more would probably violate some forum rule

Drache64
2019-10-07, 09:41 AM
At least by doing this you have ground to stand on and say "Well you knew how I was going to play this character. Should of raised any concerns at the beginning."



I don't want to spend my violent fantasy romp mirandizing people and trembling in fear of the consequences of violence.

For you I'd suggest discussing these sorts of scenarios with prospective GMs, to illustrate your favored style of play, help set some informal/tonal boundaries for yourself, and help evaluate your fit before you join games.



For the first one, I think I'll echo someone else that a session 0 would have helped clear things up ahead of time and that it isn't so much toxic as it is just how their group works and any outsider element is actually toxic to them.


but not someone reading the dynamic at all and then accidentally going against it is a pretty good reason not to accept them in the group*.
*Assuming the assumptions made based on hints in the first post. Most notably these are that the non-game relationship between the parents in the family game and the OP was minimal to nonexistent.

First I'll answer the assumption "Most notably these are that the non-game relationship between the parents in the family game and the OP was minimal to nonexistent." Actually they were family friends of my wife, my wife grew up playing at their house and the son who taught me D&D was a close friend at the time.

The first example was my first group, the son taught me D&D, at this point I have been playing D&D for years, running groups as a DM I have taught about literally 20 people how to play and 5 people how to DM.

The toxicity isn't about maintaining a group dynamic, it's about dropping people at a moments notice on a slight infraction with no warning. I agree with everything you guys said, but none of that really applies here.

New player joins a group, starts playing the session, with no conversation, no warning, no second chance, the DM stops the player and says "I think you should leave". That action is toxic.

That is the ONLY thing I am calling toxic, let's not think I am throwing the baby out with the bath water. I am saying that the family dynamic form of toxicity is kicking people without warning on a minor infraction without any conversation or chance to adapt their play style.

P.S. When I started hanging out with that family my wife did warn me "They have a weird habit of being best friends with people and then never talking to them again over petty things". I gave them a chance anyways as they seemed SUPER cool and SUPER chill... until they weren't.

icefractal
2019-10-07, 11:23 AM
I think from their perspective it wasn't sudden, if that was "the straw that broke the camel's back". That's what happens when people don't bring up problems until they're at the "can't stand it any longer" level. Not uncommon IMO, because resolving it can be awkward and "hope the problem fixes itself" is a lot easier.

Faily
2019-10-07, 11:59 AM
First I'll answer the assumption "Most notably these are that the non-game relationship between the parents in the family game and the OP was minimal to nonexistent." Actually they were family friends of my wife, my wife grew up playing at their house and the son who taught me D&D was a close friend at the time.

The first example was my first group, the son taught me D&D, at this point I have been playing D&D for years, running groups as a DM I have taught about literally 20 people how to play and 5 people how to DM.

The toxicity isn't about maintaining a group dynamic, it's about dropping people at a moments notice on a slight infraction with no warning. I agree with everything you guys said, but none of that really applies here.

New player joins a group, starts playing the session, with no conversation, no warning, no second chance, the DM stops the player and says "I think you should leave". That action is toxic.

That is the ONLY thing I am calling toxic, let's not think I am throwing the baby out with the bath water. I am saying that the family dynamic form of toxicity is kicking people without warning on a minor infraction without any conversation or chance to adapt their play style.

P.S. When I started hanging out with that family my wife did warn me "They have a weird habit of being best friends with people and then never talking to them again over petty things". I gave them a chance anyways as they seemed SUPER cool and SUPER chill... until they weren't.


They are not being toxic. And it seems there is way more to the story about this group.

I will however disagree with your statement that they are toxic.

From what it seemed like of the group dynamic you presented, they seem to like to play D&D with the "good heroes"-fantasy (which is a perfectly legit way of playing D&D, you want the fantasy of people being good nice people and good defeating evil), and thus bringing in "I'm not evil I'm Chaotic Neutral"-character who is fine with torture and the like is *not* going to go over well. If anything, one could argue that you were representing the toxic stereotype of D&D gamers being murderhobos and "ends justify the means"-evil, but that is also a stretch.

Just accept that that group is not for you, and let it go. It was a mistake to jump into Chaotic Neutral {scrubbed} with a new group before seeing what their dynamic and preferences were like.

And like me, they might've come to the conclusion that there is no reasoning with people who want to play D&D that way. Some people just want to have consequence-free fantasy, and that is also a perfectly fine way of playing D&D and other roleplaying games. Trying to combine the two different styles is going to lead to a lot of disscussions about alignment and "that is evil/not good"... it's a real mood-killer for the fun.

Some groups, playstyles, or players just don't mix. At all. Just let it be.

Anxe
2019-10-07, 12:17 PM
I agree that kicking players for unwarned and relatively minor infractions is not the best way to expand one's group, but I don't think toxic is the right word for it. Rude and inhospitable, but not toxic.

Jay R
2019-10-07, 12:43 PM
The warning signs are somebody whose character is Good being nonchalant about PC death and comfortable with torture.

Somebody escalating a mere brawl with lethal force would be the determining factor.

Sorry, but I agree with the family in case 1. You are not a good fit for a group of people trying to behave well.

I have no problem with a group of people who are comfortable doing that sort of thing, but it clearly doesn’t fit with players running a Lawful Good party.

Drache64
2019-10-07, 12:53 PM
The warning signs are somebody whose character is Good being nonchalant about PC death and comfortable with torture.

Somebody escalating a mere brawl with lethal force would be the determining factor.

Sorry, but I agree with the family in case 1. You are not a good fit for a group of people trying to behave well.

I have no problem with a group of people who are comfortable doing that sort of thing, but it clearly doesn’t fit with players running a Lawful Good party.

Again, you guys miss the point, I agree with 100% of what you just said. Stop reading for a second, sit back in your chair and just ponder that for a second.

good? okay now, what the toxic part is, is not communicating that with a player. I have run many new players through D&D and I tell them "I run good campaigns with heroes, this is not a place for evil characters, if your character falls into an "evil" alignment he will die from a DM inflicted Karma". When I have had players toe that line I have given them verbal warning in the form of "Hey man, that will change your alignment, remember what I said about this being a table of heroes, are you sure you want to do that?"


They are not being toxic. And it seems there is way more to the story about this group.

I will however disagree with your statement that they are toxic.

If anything, one could argue that you were representing the toxic stereotype of D&D gamers being murderhobos and "ends justify the means"-evil, but that is also a stretch.

Just accept that that group is not for you, and let it go. It was a mistake to jump into Chaotic Neutral {scrub the post, scrub the quote } with a new group before seeing what their dynamic and preferences were like.

And like me, they might've come to the conclusion that there is no reasoning with people who want to play D&D that way. Some people just want to have consequence-free fantasy, and that is also a perfectly fine way of playing D&D and other roleplaying games. Trying to combine the two different styles is going to lead to a lot of disscussions about alignment and "that is evil/not good"... it's a real mood-killer for the fun.

Some groups, playstyles, or players just don't mix. At all. Just let it be.


The problem here is that you have it all wrong, I was Neutral/Chaotic Good. Always frustrates me on here when people decide they are the expert on the experience I had. My character fell in line didn't challenge the DM, wasn't a rules lawyer, didn't actually kill anyone in the game aside from goblins robbers etc. And the "torture" was hitting the pirate that attacked us in the face while he was tied up and resisting questions.

Listen, people can be in the wrong aside from the OP, I just want you to keep an open mind going forward.

And I have let it be, it was over 6-8 years ago, I was just sharing a story, not venting.

Always bothers me when people in this community take any sharing of a past experience as venting/whining. I just wanted to open up the discussion on various type of toxicity people have run into, not have my experiences put under a microscope and be told why I am the problem 6 ways from Sunday.

I also think it is pretty petty (like the actual definition of petty) to be like "well it's bad/rude/inhospitable, but not toxic" I'm not here to get to the root Aristotelian Form of the platonic nature of "toxic" (Holds up a skull looking at it longingly "what IS toxic?").

{scrubbed}

(Now that was venting)
/rant

Tvtyrant
2019-10-07, 03:48 PM
The issue here, like most debates, is we use terms collectively that we don't define. Discussions of toxicity in gaming are either going to be case based or definition based, if you want the latter a clear definition would make it so the disagreement doesn't feel personal would be best.

Jay R
2019-10-07, 04:34 PM
I didn't miss your point. I am actually disagreeing with it. That family group does not sound toxic.

And they did communicate with you. You were made aware that you weren’t fitting in at least twice: when you punched the prisoner and when you didn’t show an interest in NPC life. They didn’t use the exact phrase, “Start acting Good, or we won’t invite you back,” but you were made aware that you weren’t acting like the rest of the group.

And whatever the character sheet said, punching a prisoner is not a Good act. A Good character might be forced to do it, if it was the only way to get info to save lives, but that’s not what you described, and you specifically said you didn’t care about NPC lives.

It was a group you didn’t fit in with; that’s all. That’s not what “toxic” means.

Drache64
2019-10-07, 05:43 PM
And they did communicate with you. You were made aware that you weren’t fitting in at least twice: when you punched the prisoner and when you didn’t show an interest in NPC life. They didn’t use the exact phrase, “Start acting Good, or we won’t invite you back,” but you were made aware that you weren’t acting like the rest of the group.


{scrubbed}

ExLibrisMortis
2019-10-07, 06:14 PM
For what it's worth, I feel that "toxicity" is more of a long-term thing, little annoyances slowly building up and escalating into a toxic environment, in which every interaction is interpreted in the worst light. Suddenly kicking people for no apparent/given reason is definitely rude, but it's a bit too up-front and immediate, you know? That said, I completely get what you're getting at, and I do think the first group was toxic in a broader sense (I read the story before you edited it). Giving people a second chance is basic politeness, especially when they're new to the group, especially especially if they haven't actually been briefed by the group on what is expected and allowed.

Peelee
2019-10-07, 07:48 PM
The Mod on the Silver Mountain: Please be respectful to other posters.

Drache64
2019-10-08, 10:24 AM
The Mod on the Silver Mountain: Please be respectful to other posters.

I apologize to the community, I accused someone of trolling and arguing in bad faith, I SHOULD NOT have called them out on that, I had forgotten that calling people out on such things here is against the rules.

I have reported all of the comments as I should have done in the first place.

This is a great reminder, that if you too feel you are being trolled, or someone is arguing in bad faith, please say nothing and report the comments.

Thank you Peelee for this reminder in how to run a non-toxic community :)

Kardwill
2019-10-09, 07:36 AM
New player joins a group, starts playing the session, with no conversation, no warning, no second chance, the DM stops the player and says "I think you should leave". That action is toxic.


Depends of the infraction. I know there are some things that would make me ask a player to pick up his things and leave. For example a new player that tells me his character rapes or torture another PC? Or does that on an NPC "for the evilz lulz" when in a table he doesn't know? Yeah, never gonna fit at my table, so I can spare everyone the trouble and let him look for a more compatible group.
...Okay, I'm a big coward, so I would probably simply quickly end the session, dicuss it with the other players when he's gone, and "forget" to invite him for the next game, but same difference.

For less horrendous stuff, like punching a prisoner at a family-friendly game, a serious discussion would probably be in order, so that the table can tell the newbie he's out of line, or he "doesn't really fit because we want to play X". Although it's unlikely it will solve the problem if the game expectations are different enough.
But I think that kind of things should be told during session zero. Avoiding clashes, laying down limits and wording expectations are the reason why it's the most important part of any campaign.

And yes, sometimes this kind of explosion comes after a long buildup of "small stuff" where the other players bite their tongues, hoping the newbie would take the hint and behave. Communication is hard, and gamers are quite often pretty bad at direct face-to-face conflicts and arguments


As for the second one : We've all had bad experiences with "This Guy", so we as GMs bring this baggage to the game. When it's our horror stories that shape our expectations, it sounds perfectly reasonable, but when it's another GM's, then it will of course feel arbitrary and stupid.
For example, I'm a guy who mostly plays female characters, but I've met many GMs with a "no crossgender play" rule because some guys, at their high-school table 12 years ago, played all their female PCs as sexoholic-stripper-ninjas. And I find this "you can play an elf sorcerer but not a woman" policy VERY frustrating :/
And on the other hand, I've met enough players who used their "chaotic psycho" character to bully the other players or hijack a game, so I'm now VERY wary when a new, unknown player comes up with an amoral PC. And I imagine that would come up as arbitrary for a new player who simply wanted a "shade of grey" character with a redemption arc.

Rhedyn
2019-10-09, 08:50 AM
I don't think your examples count.

My vision of a toxicly nontoxic group is one that spends a third or more of the season being concerned by people's tone and berating people for interrupting someone else. Much like forums I've seen go down the drain where concern trolls derial threads or try to win arguments by getting the other person banned and the mods supporting that behavior rather than cracking down on it. It's such a stupid thing to do in person that I doubt it actually comes up or such a group would ever meet more than once.

Droid Tony
2019-10-09, 03:23 PM
I don't think a group being proactive is an any way toxic.

For a lot of people they have two big issues: They only have a very limited window of time they can game and they want to have a fun game.

So, simply put, if you disrupt any of that, you are out of the group.

You mentioned texting...and it's a big one of mine. Text in a game when I'm GM, and you will be asked to leave. "If your text is so important, maybe you should go text and we will stay here and play the game".

Warnings are a big waste of both peoples time. If your a person who thinks it is ok to pull out your phone and text during the game, you are not the type of person I want to game with. And sure, we can play the game of I ask you to stop, you lie and say you will and then text a dozen more times. Or have to send emergency texts.

So, not toxic.

Ken Murikumo
2019-10-10, 01:48 PM
You mentioned texting...and it's a big one of mine. Text in a game when I'm GM, and you will be asked to leave. "If your text is so important, maybe you should go text and we will stay here and play the game".

That sounds kind of extreme. I can understand texting whole novels to the recipient or staying focused on their phone for long periods of time, but if my roommate texts me "when will you be home" and i respond "10ish" i can't see that 8 second exchange ruining the game for anyone. Especially when it's done when someone else is adding up damage or rolling an attack or something.


On topic, though

Here's a weird one: when you help a player so much they literally don't learn the system. I've seen this with a group i briefly played with. The person in question had their character written for them and didn't know how to add stats to get final results with rolls. It happened ALL session. He was never taught how to do it himself so he would ask the person next to him who would mentally do the math and tell him the result.

ExLibrisMortis
2019-10-10, 03:50 PM
Warnings are a big waste of both peoples time.
I mean... this sounds kind of toxic to me. It's like you only want to game with people who magically know your pet peeves. Sometimes, you have to put in a little effort and adjust to eachother. Friendship is not magic, you know?

Tvtyrant
2019-10-10, 06:25 PM
That sounds kind of extreme. I can understand texting whole novels to the recipient or staying focused on their phone for long periods of time, but if my roommate texts me "when will you be home" and i respond "10ish" i can't see that 8 second exchange ruining the game for anyone. Especially when it's done when someone else is adding up damage or rolling an attack or something.


On topic, though

Here's a weird one: when you help a player so much they literally don't learn the system. I've seen this with a group i briefly played with. The person in question had their character written for them and didn't know how to add stats to get final results with rolls. It happened ALL session. He was never taught how to do it himself so he would ask the person next to him who would mentally do the math and tell him the result.

This reminds me of something my math teacher told me: If you have the book open to the formulas while you do your homework, you will never remember them. You have to have the confidence to do it without assistance, and then later you can correct the work if it is wrong.

The player probably did know their stats and how the game worked, but they were nervous about getting it wrong and so never dared to step out on their own. I had a player who would throw alchemist's fire pots every turn as a Factotum, and then played a Cleric that only healed because they were afraid of trying any knew actions. The confidence to be wrong is needed to really master anything.

zinycor
2019-10-10, 07:05 PM
You mentioned texting...and it's a big one of mine. Text in a game when I'm GM, and you will be asked to leave. "If your text is so important, maybe you should go text and we will stay here and play the game".


What is considered texting for you? Cause people have lives outside of the game and checking on their phones every once in a while I'd absolutely ok in my opinion.

I have only had a problem when people are actively playing a game on their phones or go on a whole tangent that gets them absolutely distracted from the game.

Tvtyrant
2019-10-10, 07:08 PM
What is considered texting for you? Cause people have lives outside of the game and checking on their phones every once in a while I'd absolutely ok in my opinion.

I have only had a problem when people are actively playing a game on their phones or go on a whole tangent that gets them absolutely distracted from the game.

There is a kind of slippery-slope where when one person takes out their phone everyone starts doing it, and it can mass derail the group. "While they check their messages I might as well check mine" and suddenly it has been five minutes and the DM has to start forcing people to pay attention.

zinycor
2019-10-10, 07:11 PM
There is a kind of slippery-slope where when one person takes out their phone everyone starts doing it, and it can mass derail the group. "While they check their messages I might as well check mine" and suddenly it has been five minutes and the DM has to start forcing people to pay attention.

Not such a slippery slope has happened on my experience, yours might be different but I think that you are over reacting.

More importantly, at my table it would be fairly hard to enforce a no texting rule, since me and the players keep many details of our characters (such as the full descriptions for our spells) in our phones.

Tvtyrant
2019-10-10, 07:17 PM
Not such a slippery slope has happened on my experience, yours might be different but I think that you are over reacting.

More importantly, at my table it would fairly hard to enforce a no texting rule, since me and the players keep many details of our characters (such as the full descriptions for our spells) in our phones.

I think it depends on group make up. I inevitably have people who are there because their spouse/sibling is who don't care so much about the game, and if their attention slides off of the game it takes roping them back. I don't know how people find groups without that issue, but it seems omnipresent to my experience as a player and DM.

That would take like 5 minutes one time to print everything. I can see having a preference for doing it that way, but it isn't a major obstacle. When I used to play casters I would make spellbooks that had their stats, spells known, the mechanics for their spells, and whatever other information was needed in it (like printed summon stats for my preferred summons or binds.)

I'm not saying ban phones, but I can see why someone would (not kicking people for forgetting though.)

Koo Rehtorb
2019-10-10, 07:32 PM
I think it depends on group make up. I inevitably have people who are there because their spouse/sibling is who don't care so much about the game, and if their attention slides off of the game it takes roping them back. I don't know how people find groups without that issue, but it seems omnipresent to my experience as a player and DM.

That sounds intolerable.

kyoryu
2019-10-10, 07:40 PM
I think it depends on group make up. I inevitably have people who are there because their spouse/sibling is who don't care so much about the game, and if their attention slides off of the game it takes roping them back. I don't know how people find groups without that issue, but it seems omnipresent to my experience as a player and DM.

Well that's the issue, isn't it?

If you're checking your phone at points when it's not disruptive, and you're ready on your turn or whatever, then I don't see a big deal.

If you're dragging the game down becuase you're not paying attention, then it's a problem.

Droid Tony
2019-10-10, 07:41 PM
What is considered texting for you? Cause people have lives outside of the game and checking on their phones every once in a while I'd absolutely ok in my opinion.

I have only had a problem when people are actively playing a game on their phones or go on a whole tangent that gets them absolutely distracted from the game.

I agree with you here, if a person has a life that is so important that they can't stop and play a game for a couple hours, they would be best to simply go and live their life.

I want players in the game that what to do nothing except play the game, not people who just view the game as a distraction between texts.

zinycor
2019-10-10, 07:55 PM
I agree with you here, if a person has a life that is so important that they can't stop and play a game for a couple hours, they would be best to simply go and live their life.

I want players in the game that what to do nothing except play the game, not people who just view the game as a distraction between texts.

Then you should really treasure the players you have, since they can allow themselves to worry only about their game like that and that definitely isn't easy to come by.

Squark
2019-10-10, 08:07 PM
My 2 cents on the texting thing; For me, it's contextual. A quick text to let a family member know you'll be home late? Fine. Someone watching for texts regarding a loved one in a serious situation? Sure you can still play, you need the distraction from real life, but also need to stay up to date. Constantly texting a new Significant Other? Yeah, both the party and your new SO want your full attention. Please pick one instead of disappointing everyone.

zinycor
2019-10-10, 08:09 PM
My 2 cents on the texting thing; For me, it's contextual. A quick text to let a family member know you'll be home late? Fine. Someone watching for texts regarding a loved one in a serious situation? Sure you can still play, you need the distraction from real life, but also need to stay up to date. Constantly texting a new Significant Other? Yeah, both the party and your new SO want your full attention. Please pick one instead of disappointing everyone.

Completely agree.

kyoryu
2019-10-11, 12:03 AM
Again, is it impacting the game? Is stuff repeated? Is the player not ready for their turn in combat? Then there's a problem.

If they can manage the multitasking, I don't worry about it.

Kalashak
2019-10-11, 12:29 AM
I absolutely hate the relationship most people have with their phones, and the idea of kicking someone out with no warning for texting once during a game still feels extreme. For most things the idea of immediately booting someone without warning or discussion does feel toxic to me.

Kaptin Keen
2019-10-11, 12:43 AM
Just imagine the world before cell phones: It must have been chaos! How did anyone know what everyone else was doing every instant of every day for the entirety of their lives.

Un ... be ... lievable.

If someone can't keep their hands off their phones for 3-4 hours, they don't play at my table. Of course, my friends are as old as I am, so ... it's frankly not an issue, at all.

Mordaedil
2019-10-11, 01:11 AM
Generally I find texting isn't a huge problem anymore, but social media is something I'd make a no-no while playing.

I'd assume if they were doing texting, it'd be something important.

Then again, I've not had that problem with anyone in our gaming group.

Kardwill
2019-10-11, 03:54 AM
Just imagine the world before cell phones: It must have been chaos! How did anyone know what everyone else was doing every instant of every day for the entirety of their lives.

I'm 47 and started playing when I was 11, so I know how it went "before" : If a player had any sort of responsibility for that weekend, then the game was cancelled. Or he would be distracted, because he wanted to play but thought "I shouldn't be here" the entire game.
Personally, if a player wants to check on their spouse to know if the kid got back from his friend's birthday party, text a loved one to tell them they will be late, or needs to have their phone because they are on standby call duty for their job? I'm cool about it, because I kinda like the idea of playing with my friends, including those whose lives got a lot more busy than mine since college. We can even have regular breaks once in a while so that they can do it (and go to the bathroom / smoke outside / get stuff out of the fridge) without missing stuff going on at the table.

Social media and phone games are irritating, though.

But that discussion shows that it's another example of things that look completely reasonable for some, and a ban-level offense for others, though. Another argument for the need of addressing those things explicitely before play. :smallsmile:

zinycor
2019-10-11, 09:39 AM
Just imagine the world before cell phones: It must have been chaos! How did anyone know what everyone else was doing every instant of every day for the entirety of their lives.

Un ... be ... lievable.

If someone can't keep their hands off their phones for 3-4 hours, they don't play at my table. Of course, my friends are as old as I am, so ... it's frankly not an issue, at all.

I believe that you are talking past everyone, as far as I can see people are arguing that the occasional text or update over your phone is absolutely ok (things like telling your SO you are going to be late or an update on a home situation, etc), meanwhile you say "How did anyone know what everyone else was doing every instant of every day for the entirety of their lives. ", which hasn't been implied by anyone.

kyoryu
2019-10-11, 10:13 AM
Depending on the game, asking 100% attention 100% of the time is not reasonable.

I've played high crunch games where people took multiple minutes per turn, and we had 6+ people at the table. That's 15 minutes between your turns, plus GM time. It's not reasonable to expect people to pay 100% attention to 15 minutes of other people calculating which square gives them the most bonuses.

People are not going to do that, phones or no. If they don't have phones, they'll doodle, or look at advancement options, or something

What is reasonable is to expect that people pay attention when they need to. In the situation above, I don't care if someone checks out for most of that time. I do expect that they pay attention as it gets close to their turn, and are fairly ready to act when their turn rolls around. If they are, then I don't care what they do. If they don't do that, then I also really don't care why they're distracted - the fact that their distraction is slowing down the game is the problem, not the particular form of the distraction.

Sirpatchio
2019-10-11, 02:22 PM
{scrubbed}

Jay R
2019-10-11, 08:01 PM
Texting is a symptom of the problem, or possibly a cause of the problem, but it isn't the actual problem.

The problem is people who aren't paying attention, at times when it slows down the game.

If Bob never takes his phone out, but needs the tactical situation explained to him again on each turn, and never gets involved in group decisions, then he's not taking part. That's a problem.

If Carol is constantly texting, but is always ready with a planned action when her PC's initiative comes up, and always has a cogent suggestion when the group is making a decision, then the texting is fine.

Here's a solution I've had to use, I think, twice in forty years.

DM: OK, Ted, it's your initiative. What does Stronginthearm do?
Jon: Hmmm. I'm not sure, which was the goblin who shot at me?
DM: Stronginthearm looks around and takes his bearings. Somebody help bring Ted up to speed, and I'll get back to you later in the round. Alice, what does Bramblerose do?

Note that it doesn't matter if Ted was texting. Maybe he went to the bathroom. Maybe somebody spilled the salsa on him. Maybe he was helping his child with math homework, or ordering the pizza, or bringing me a beer. I don't care. He'll get his turn, but right now I'm going to keep the game running.

Netbrian
2019-10-12, 10:04 AM
My 2 cents on the texting thing; For me, it's contextual. A quick text to let a family member know you'll be home late? Fine. Someone watching for texts regarding a loved one in a serious situation? Sure you can still play, you need the distraction from real life, but also need to stay up to date. Constantly texting a new Significant Other? Yeah, both the party and your new SO want your full attention. Please pick one instead of disappointing everyone.

This is my experience too. A quick back and forth isn't a problem, but it's best if people aren't trying to multitask while playing, and ongoing conversations disrupt that. However, we do need some flexibility -- there are people I'm glad to be campaigning with that simply wouldn't be able to play if they couldn't react to texts from work/family.

False God
2019-10-12, 11:09 AM
Am I the weird one in the room that takes advantage of people being on their phones to deliver secret information?

I love texting players game info and I actually tell my players to keep an eye on their phones in case I need to tell them something. It's sooooooo much easier than telling everyone to leave the room, or taking the player in question outside for a moment. It's even easier than passing out paper notes IMO, because of how much attention they attract and how some people still try to peek. There's a lot strong social norms about it being uncool to peek at someone's phone, and I use that to ensure secret info remains secret.

Making their phones an aid to gameplay goes a long way to reducing them as a distraction.

Velaryon
2019-10-12, 01:42 PM
Here's a weird one: when you help a player so much they literally don't learn the system. I've seen this with a group i briefly played with. The person in question had their character written for them and didn't know how to add stats to get final results with rolls. It happened ALL session. He was never taught how to do it himself so he would ask the person next to him who would mentally do the math and tell him the result.

I used to have one of these. I've been playing D&D with him on-and-off since 2002, and he still can't build a 1st level character, or remember how even the simplest spells work. He can kinda read his character sheet but doesn't do so with total confidence. I always wondered whether he actually enjoyed D&D or just came because it was the only way he could hang out with all his friends at once. These days, I don't play with him anymore because most of us have moved away from our hometown, he doesn't have transportation, and it would be too much of an inconvenience for someone to go out of their way to pick him up.



Am I the weird one in the room that takes advantage of people being on their phones to deliver secret information?

I love texting players game info and I actually tell my players to keep an eye on their phones in case I need to tell them something. It's sooooooo much easier than telling everyone to leave the room, or taking the player in question outside for a moment. It's even easier than passing out paper notes IMO, because of how much attention they attract and how some people still try to peek. There's a lot strong social norms about it being uncool to peek at someone's phone, and I use that to ensure secret info remains secret.

Making their phones an aid to gameplay goes a long way to reducing them as a distraction.

I love this in concept, but I don't think I could make it work personally unless I was also using my phone for other game-related stuff like character sheets and info, tracking initiative/hp/ongoing effects/etc., and I generally prefer to use a laptop for that kind of thing.

False God
2019-10-12, 01:54 PM
I love this in concept, but I don't think I could make it work personally unless I was also using my phone for other game-related stuff like character sheets and info, tracking initiative/hp/ongoing effects/etc., and I generally prefer to use a laptop for that kind of thing.

Depending on the messaging app you're using, there are a few that also work on PC (like Skype or Discord). You can also get phone emulators for the PC that allow you to run phone apps off your computer. Not sure how well they work for texting though, haven't done that in a LONG time.

Netbrian
2019-10-12, 02:25 PM
I think it depends on group make up. I inevitably have people who are there because their spouse/sibling is who don't care so much about the game, and if their attention slides off of the game it takes roping them back. I don't know how people find groups without that issue, but it seems omnipresent to my experience as a player and DM.

These players are natural born healbots.

"OK, whenever it's your turn, just say 'I cast cure wounds on the Fighter'."

Jay R
2019-10-13, 11:30 AM
Here's a weird one: when you help a player so much they literally don't learn the system. I've seen this with a group i briefly played with. The person in question had their character written for them and didn't know how to add stats to get final results with rolls. It happened ALL session. He was never taught how to do it himself so he would ask the person next to him who would mentally do the math and tell him the result.

Depending on the person, this can be a manageable situation. I played with a friend for years who had no interest in learning the rules. He would describe what he wanted his character to do (and in D&D, he always played Fighters). I prepared his character sheet with everything worked out in advance. He had no problem playing original D&D, 1E, 2E, Flashing Blades, or even Champions. His characters were always good allies.

The only problem occurred rarely, when his intuitive idea of what an action should do didn't match the rules. But he was always ready, engaged, and active in the game despite not knowing the rules.

Faily
2019-10-13, 02:42 PM
Texting is a symptom of the problem, or possibly a cause of the problem, but it isn't the actual problem.

The problem is people who aren't paying attention, at times when it slows down the game.

If Bob never takes his phone out, but needs the tactical situation explained to him again on each turn, and never gets involved in group decisions, then he's not taking part. That's a problem.

If Carol is constantly texting, but is always ready with a planned action when her PC's initiative comes up, and always has a cogent suggestion when the group is making a decision, then the texting is fine.


This is pretty much my experience with phones (and other distractions at the table). Some people can multi-task just fine and use their phone when it's not their turn, and someone else who isn't even on their phone needs to be reminded of the sitution on their turn.

During Pathfinder, I use my phone a lot because of the Masterwork Tools app (so I can look up anything I might wonder about). I've frequently been drawing or doodling during play over the years as well - and I focus better if I can do these things. But I fully realise that my situation is not like everyone else's.

Kardwill
2019-10-14, 04:26 AM
People are not going to do that, phones or no. If they don't have phones, they'll doodle, or look at advancement options, or something


Dice arrangement (including pyramids) and wax sculptures (when we were young and foolish and played by candlelight) and the occasional snore are also popular options for bored/distracted/tired players. ^^

I find the noisy options more problematic, like tangential conversations or loud dice rolling "for stats".

Kapow
2019-10-22, 06:27 PM
Dice arrangement (including pyramids) and wax sculptures (when we were young and foolish and played by candlelight) and the occasional snore are also popular options for bored/distracted/tired players. ^^

I find the noisy options more problematic, like tangential conversations or loud dice rolling "for stats".

Ha, I actually have a player who regularly dozes off.
As he is nice, polite and works crazy hours, we tend to forgive him and only mock him from time to time.