I want to talk today about social contracts. I had heard bits about them here and there, but hadn't immersed myself in them (or even considered using them) until my campaign was coming up and I starting reading up on GMing tips. The beginning of the first session was spent discussing the social contract. I basically introduced this idea to my players, made suggestions on various issues, and we then talked about them and eventually came to an agreement. Here are some of the bigger things in the contract:
Qi
- There will be no XP for roleplaying. How much you roleplay your character depends on various things - how much you enjoy acting out stuff, your character's personality (I'm thinking about my gruff dwarven Cleric in 3.5 who didn't say much), how much energy you happen to have in that session, if opportunities come up, etc. That being said, acting out your character is just part of the game. I myself more enjoy the creation of a layered and complex story, and tended to instigate a lot of trouble just to keep the story exciting and moving on. I don't get XP for starting a fight, neither do I get more XP for dealing more damage or killing more enemies. So why should someone get XP for pursuing the one part of the game they enjoy? If they enjoy it, it's reward enough, and it makes the game more exciting and more fun for everybody at the table.
- People missing out sessions will still get the full XP earned during the session they missed. Playing RPGs is not a means to a goal. I don't want to receive points so that I can have a sheet of paper with really large numbers in order to beat monstrosities in my imagination. Missing out on a session sucks, because playing RPGs is fun in and of itself. You don't get to meet your friends for that week, you didn't experience the story first hand, you didn't get to have the fun. And when you do return, you shouldn't get punished again by lagging behind mechanics-wise. The game becomes more fun if everybody is able to go on adventures and overcome the dangers opposing them together. Having someone be weaker by virtue of having a busy life is plain unfair.
- Players have near-free input in my world. This was a point I had to stress quite a bit, because none of them were used to this level of player input in the game (and to be honest, neither was I). They had to be made aware that I would try my best never to veto any suggestion they made (though I did reserve that right), merely adapt it if needed. So far it's going well.
- Character names instead of player names will be used. It's just a little tidbit to get a bit more immersed in the game, and so that everyone will eventually remember all the character names.
Qi
Haha, at first I thought you were going to talk about Hobbesian social contracts and government. I guess social contracts and games naturally go hand in hand. In order for a game to work all players (even if it's a solo game) must agree to a set of rules to play by. We give up our "right" to do whatever we want ("My level 1 rogue is special so he can cast Magic Missiles, and it does 10d20 damage!") so that everyone can be playing the same game. In a sense, it's so that there even is a game.
ReplyDeleteI suppose it's more about what players should expect from the game, or what they want to expect from the game. The choice of the system is part of this, but it is usually brushed off as a first step, ie. "Let's play D&D!"
ReplyDeleteQi