Activist GMs Are Something I Try To Avoid

Generally speaking we expect a judge to act dispassionately, and to weigh a case on its merits to see how the law as it's written applies to a criminal or civil matter. While these individuals tend to have some discretion in how they use their authority, the expectation is that they are attempting to implement the rules of society as they exist, rather than as they might like them to be.

An activist judge, by contrast, is someone who uses their position and authority to attempt to change or alter the law as it exists to better suit their personal belief system and ideology. This term is most commonly used for judges who sit on the supreme court in the United States, as there is not really a higher power above them that can double check their work for bias, personal slant, etc. when they rule on how a law should be applied. Best you can hope for if a ruling affects you in a negative way is that whoever sits in the big chair next undoes that ruling.

Game court is now in session!

I generally think this is a good framework to use when you're a game master as well. It isn't your job to rewrite the game, or to twist the rules outside of what they actually say because you don't like them. You're there to oversee that the rules you've all agreed to are implemented fairly for everyone.

For more use of this metaphor, take a look at my post Table Attorneys Vs. Rules Lawyers: How To Be Fair Without Bogging Down Your Game. Also, if you want to make sure you don't miss out on any of my fresh posts, be sure you subscribe to my weekly newsletter!

Rule 0, Cooperative Play, and GM Neutrality

I'm sure there are a lot of folks out there who are already preparing their rebuttals for the comment section, but before you put on your Caps Lock let me break down the totality of what I'm talking about when I say we should avoid being "activist GMs," and how that interacts with things like Rule 0, homebrewing, etc.

There's a lot of text here... so let's take it one issue at a time.

Now, to begin at the beginning, an activist GM is not someone who homebrews their own setting, who writes house rules for their game, or any of the dozens of other examples one could probably think of. I'm not advocating that we all play our RPGs exactly how they're written in the books with no changes or personal touches ever. That would make for a game that got pretty boring pretty fast.

As I've said repeatedly on here, every table is free to customize their game and setting however they choose to do so. If you want to make your own classes, alter how certain feats operate, change spells, or ignore anything from falling damage to alignment restrictions, you are absolutely free to do that... provided that as a GM you are A) up-front about any changes to your players, and B) that your players agree to the new changes and limitations you have made.

However many or few those changes may be.

So what would make someone an activist GM? Well, let's say you're looking over a player's sheet, and the swashbuckler they're running has a morning star. You decide that, though Swashbuckler's Finesse expressly says they gain weapon finesse with all light and one-handed piercing weapons that the spirit of the class was to recreate the Three Musketeers, so that ability only applies to rapiers and daggers. Also, they can no longer use the feat Power Attack combined with a finesse attack, because you feel that just isn't in keeping with how a dexterous fighter should function.

It's not that you're changing the rules... it's that you're changing them based solely on your personal opinions about what the so-called intent of the creators was (or should have been), typically in ways that disadvantage your players. Doing that without having a discussion with your players, or making it clear that's how you're going to run things just adds insult to injury.

It's like if you were making a case in court, and then the judge declared that you weren't allowed to cross-examine witnesses, or present more than three pieces of evidence, because they felt that was more in keeping with what the founders of the court intended when they wrote the law. Even if that's not what they actually put down on paper.

Let The Dice Fall Where They May

RPGs aren't perfect, and sometimes we can't house rule out all the issues we find in them before the first session. There are even times where you don't realize something is even a problem until you're halfway into the campaign, and suddenly the issues with a given mechanic are front-and-center. We're always going to have to make tweaks and changes as things go.

When we make those changes, though, they need to be with the consent and input of the players. Not only that, but changing something to better fit with your personal tastes or desires (whether it be giving half-orcs automatic negatives to Intelligence and Charisma because you think they're ugly and stupid, or stating that barbarian players don't get to control when or how they use Rage because you feel that's not how anger control issues work) means you're putting yourself before your players and their experience.

GMs should have fun, there's no two ways about that. You're a player, along with everyone else. However, you are just one player at the table, not a director telling the actors what to do as part of your personal vision. There needs to be room for everyone's fun and ideas at the table (within reason, of course), and you all need to be operating under the same rules.

And if those rules do need to change, they should be changed to make the game better for everyone involved, not just because they don't jive with a GM's personal image of how a game should run.

Like, Follow, and Stay in Touch!

That's all for this week's Moon Pope Monday. To stay on top of all my content and releases, make sure you subscribe to my newsletter at the bottom of the page!

Again, for more of my work, check out my Vocal archive, and stop by the YouTube channel Dungeon Keeper Radio. Or if you'd prefer to read some of my books, like my cat noir thriller Marked Territory, its sequel Painted Cats, my sword and sorcery novel Crier's Knife or my latest short story collection The Rejects, then head over to My Amazon Author Page!

To stay on top of all my latest releases, follow me on Facebook, Tumblr, Twitter, and now Pinterest as well! To support my work, consider Buying Me a Ko-Fi, or heading to The Literary Mercenary's Patreon page to become a regular, monthly patron. That one helps ensure you get more Improved Initiative, and it means you'll get my regular, monthly giveaways as a bonus!

Game Masters, Make Sure You Run The Setting Everyone Agreed To Play

This Monday I'd like to take a moment to address all the game masters out there. This applies to all of us, no matter which systems we prefer, or what settings we use. I want all of us to take a moment, and ask ourselves a simple question regarding our games.

"What is in the setting?"

"Whatever I say is in it," is not an appropriate answer.

This isn't a rhetorical question, either. Because I can tell you that the worst arguments I've had with game masters and storytellers across the board has been over what should be a simple, fundamental understanding. But there are a lot of us who bring our own preconceptions (and sometimes our misconceptions) to the game, and that can cause serious problems when the game you're trying to run is not the game everyone else showed up to play.

I'll give you some examples in a minute. Before that, though, take a second to sign up to my weekly newsletter so you don't miss any of my updates! And, as usual with discussions like this, those who completely make their own worlds and settings, you are mostly excused from this... provided, of course, your settings remain consistent once the game actually begins.

Magic, Technology, World Canon, and Tone

There is one example for what I'm talking about that I come across basically every other week due to the parts of the Internet in which I live, and it is game masters who are running Pathfinder games who seem to have confused Golarion for Middle Earth in terms of just exactly how rare spellcasters, magic items, non-humans, and other fantastical elements of the setting happen to be.

Because, in the minds of these game masters there should only be a few actual spellcasters in any given region of the world. Non-humans should be weird and unusual sights, often stoking panic, unless we're specifically in places where they are the dominant species. Magic items are rarities never seen by the common citizenry, and they are only to be wielded by those of great wealth or power.

And absolutely NONE of that describes Golarion as it's written. At all.

Seriously... it's all in the books.

You don't have to delve deep into the setting guide to realize these things, either. Golarion as a setting is a bubbling cauldron of high magic nonsense and insanity! Practically every nation of note has a mage's college of some variety (telling you there are enough students year after year to fill the ranks of an academy), there's an entire region that's filled with a semi-permanent gateway into the abyss (depending on if you completed Wrath of The Righteous yet or not), a fascist government literally propped up by the forces of hell, a nation of nearly-endless night watched over by a Hellraiser-style god, a meteorite that can allow someone to transcend mortality... you get the idea.

Golarion, as a setting, is meant to be a kitchen sink of nonsense and possibility. Your party might have a sorcerer birthed in a graveyard who wields the forces of death, a one-eyed gunslinging paladin, a barbarian with a great ax and a cybernetic arm he took from a robot he fought in a crashed spaceship, and a druid who has reincarnated for nearly a thousand years to maintain the eternal balance of nature... and none of that is outside the setting canon. It's all in the game, right there in black-and-white, often with specifically laid out paths and options for players to use.

It's not a low-fantasy setting, but if you approach it like one it will feel like you're trying to run a totally different game than the players agreed to if they're going off what's written in the book.

Oh don't worry, I've got more examples.

I see this sort of attitude in World of Darkness and Chronicles of Darkness games all the time, too. A storyteller is running a game set in the modern day (or even back in the late 1990s), but when players start tooling up with high-caliber weaponry and body armor instead of using diplomacy, stealth, or even a more magical route (for characters who have access to unique powers), suddenly the ST starts making all sorts of noises about how those options aren't available, or won't work. Rather than rewarding the players for using the options presented in the game, they instead want to get salty about how a riot shotgun or an incendiary grenade suddenly let the players dole out a lot more harshness than they'd anticipated, reducing a threat to ashes... even though it is precisely those modern advances that makes regular mortals the most dangerous things in the setting (in large enough numbers, anyway).

Shady arms deals and flying lead are as much a part of the setting as smoky backrooms and drippy sewers, and while there should be complications (illicit arms require time and resources to acquire, they tend to draw a lot of attentions, enemies will escalate the same way the players do, etc.), just denying that this is part of the setting doesn't make your game better. It just discourages players, and highlights what routes you will and won't accept for solving problems as the ST.

Perhaps the most common example of this that I come across, though, is when the person running the game changes the setting history and tone without checking with the players to be sure they're on board with that fundamental shift.

This can take all sorts of forms. From instituting new tribal social bands and customs for Werewolf: The Apocalypse, to declaring that the god Aroden isn't dead in Pathfinder (or in more extreme situations that Zon Kuthon was never corrupted to become what he is now), to cutting out all of the loss of humanity and horror elements from Vampire: The Masquerade so that it feels more like Assassin's Creed with fangs, I've seen this happen in a dozen different ways across a dozen different games.

Now, I'm not rendering judgment on these changes. If they're what you want to do to make your game more enjoyable for your table, shine on and do your thing... but talk to your players before you make changes that they're going to have to deal with.

Communication Really Is Key

The first rule of RPGs is that you can always change the game to suit your table... but that needs to be done with the approval and consent of your group. It's a fundamental aspect of the game that you all need to be on the same page about before you go forward, because if you're not it's going to lead to nothing but problems as surely as if you said you wanted to run a political thriller and your players rocked up to the table with the A-Team.

I can be diplomatic. When I want to be.

So before you change anything you should have a clear understanding of what's actually in the book. Then, once you understand the game, setting, lore, mechanics, etc. as they exist, you can discuss what you want to change, limit, alter, and tweak to make things work the way you want them to with the players around your table.

Just remember that it is your responsibility as the person in the big chair to communicate to your players what is going to be different... and what is going to be the same. Because if you ask someone, "Hey, want to join my Masquerade game?," but you don't tell them that you're running it more like a superheroes-with-fangs setting, then a player who showed up expecting body horror, angst, drama, and the dark midnight of the soul is going to be less than pleased.

My two cents, the more you're going to change, the better you need to understand the game, and the more communication there needs to be. Because just altering some notes in tone, or changing one or two minor details probably isn't going to be a big deal... but the more fundamental your changes are, and the wider the ripples go, the more important it is you have your players' full buy-in and support.

Trust me... it's better to check twice than to just assume people will go with it, "For the good of the game." Because players only have so much trust, and that's not a currency you want to spend casually.

Like, Follow, and Stay in Touch!

That's all for this week's Moon Pope Monday. To stay on top of all my content and releases, make sure you subscribe to my newsletter at the bottom of the page!

Again, for more of my work, check out my Vocal archive, and stop by the YouTube channel Dungeon Keeper Radio. Or if you'd prefer to read some of my books, like my cat noir thriller Marked Territory, my sword and sorcery novel Crier's Knife or my latest short story collection The Rejects, then head over to My Amazon Author Page!

To stay on top of all my latest releases, follow me on Facebook, Tumblr, Twitter, and now Pinterest as well! To support my work, consider Buying Me a Ko-Fi, or heading to The Literary Mercenary's Patreon page to become a regular, monthly patron. That one helps ensure you get more Improved Initiative, and it means you'll get my regular, monthly giveaways as a bonus!

Game Masters, You Must Get Player Buy-In If You Want To Control Their Stories

The way a tabletop game is set up is that the players control their characters, and the game master controls basically everything else. Because the player characters are the only method of participation in the game that the players have, they tend to fall under the sole control of the players themselves. Whether they want to give their characters green hair, or make them half-elves, or go into excruciating detail on everything from the skull-shaped buckle on their sword belt to the patched whipcord of their trousers, at the end of the day their characters are the only thing the players can really control.

And if you want to limit that control as a game master, then you need to really take a moment and sell the reason for that loss of control to your table. Especially if you don't want them to collectively fold their arms and refuse to take one more step forward until you get your hands off their agency.

Never assume buy-in. Ever.

As game masters we sometimes get so caught up in our own "brilliance" that we forget we need the rest of the players to actually make this game work. And before I get into an example, remember to sign up for my weekly newsletter so you don't miss any of my new releases or upcoming projects!

One Man's Meat is Another Man's Poison

For those who've played this game...

If you've looked into playing Strange Aeons pictured above, then you probably understand the simple gimmick it has. For those who aren't familiar, this entire adventure path is meant to explore the Cthulhu Mythos aspects that are baked into the Golarion setting for Pathfinder. Elder gods, ancient cults, bizarre prophecies, horrific visions, and so on, and so forth. And when the game starts off the players are in an asylum, unable to remember the recent past. They don't know how they got there, how long they've been there, or what's going on. A large portion of the early part of the campaign is investigating their own pasts, and finding answers to these questions.

Now, I have not read the campaign books, because I'm still hoping to play this game and I don't want to spoil things for myself. However, in the player's guide it tells you very explicitly that this amnesia is for the past several years (up to a decade, I believe). As the game is written, the characters do not awaken with total amnesia, piecing themselves together from nothing as the game goes on.

However, I have lost count of the number of game masters who've said that's exactly how they want to run the game. Not only do they want to be the ones who create the stories of every PC, which the players will discover over time, but they also want to be the ones in charge of their character sheets. Everything from which classes a character has levels in, to what feats they have, to what spells they know, is already pre-set, the same way their stories and identity are... it's up to the players to "discover" it, which is the central conceit of how they'd tell the story.

Just put on the mask, trust me, it will be fun!

I guarantee you right now there are some people out there who think that sounds like an amazing game to play. They would be totally down for a full mystery and uncovering all the boxes on their character sheet as they play, in addition to who their character is and what brought them to such a bizarre and dangerous place.

And if that's a version of the game you would love to play, then I wish you godspeed in that endeavor!

However, you need to make sure everyone at your table is equally enthused for playing the game with that twist before you get started. Because if you want that kind of control over the characters people are going to end up playing, you need to get people to agree to give it to you. Because if a player is more interested in telling their own story as part of the campaign, there might be no faster way to kill any interest they had in being a part of this particular table than to take that away from them.

Communication, As Always, is Key

Playing a tabletop RPG is a collaborative process. Everyone needs to build off of everyone else, and all persons at the table need to be on the same page regarding what's allowed, what the limits are, and where things happen.

And if you want to try something a little unconventional or unexpected as a game master, then you need to make sure all of your players agree to it, and that they're just as enthusiastic as you are about it. Otherwise you're going to be in for a bad time.

Or, at the very least, some awkward questions.

There is a line down the middle of the table. You, as the game master, have control of everything outside a player's bubble. If you want to reach into their territory to change something then you're going to have an easier time if you ask permission and work with them than you are going to have trying to force that change.

Because if a player has no agency in their character's actions, and they aren't contributing to their character's story, it's very likely they'll take the only action left to them and push back from the table entirely to find a game where they are more of an active participant.

Also, if you haven't been keeping an eye on my latest releases, you might have missed the news on the following:

- 100 Stargazer Kinfolk: The encore piece for my 100 Kinfolk project for Werewolf: The Apocalypse, this was the one tribe left out of the initial project that readers demanded. So I decided to give it to them!

- 100 Sci-Fi Mercenary Companies: For folks who enjoyed the supplement 100 Random Mercenary Companies for their fantasy games, I decided it was time to do a far future version for my sci-fi gamers. There's at least one more supplement like this that did a genre hop, so stay tuned!

- Captain America is Chaotic Good: The latest installment in my Alignment Deep Dives, this one has led to some... spirited discussion, shall we say? So stop in and give it a look!

Like, Follow, and Stay in Touch!

That's all for this week's Moon Pope Monday. To stay on top of all my content and releases, make sure you subscribe to my newsletter at the bottom of the page!

Again, for more of my work, check out my Vocal archive, and stop by the YouTube channel Dungeon Keeper Radio. Or if you'd prefer to read some of my books, like my cat noir thriller Marked Territory, my sword and sorcery novel Crier's Knife or my latest short story collection The Rejects, then head over to My Amazon Author Page!

To stay on top of all my latest releases, follow me on Facebook, Tumblr, Twitter, and now Pinterest as well! To support my work, consider Buying Me a Ko-Fi, or heading to The Literary Mercenary's Patreon page to become a regular, monthly patron. That one helps ensure you get more Improved Initiative, and it means you'll get my regular, monthly giveaways as a bonus!

DMs, Remember That "No" is Not The End of The Conversation... It's The Beginning!

One of the most common pieces of advice I've seen for newer dungeon masters is not to be afraid to tell your players no. Whether it's saying no to a race that doesn't fit your setting, or no to a third-party class you're not familiar with, it's important for you to have confidence in your ability to run the game effectively. Sometimes that means saying no to something your players want.

With that said, though, a lot of DMs make the mistake of assuming that their "No" is where the conversation ends, when it's actually the place it should be getting started.

An excellent question, Cindy. I'm gonna have to say no, though, and here's why...

Explain Why You Said "No"

To be clear, here, we're not talking about scenarios where players are asking about the rules as they're written, or checking the hard limits of a game. Those are simple yes/no questions that have a binary answer. However, when a player asks whether it's okay for them to take a certain feat at this level, play a creature of a certain race, or take levels in a particular class, these are usually options that are perfectly legal by the rules of the game.

Or, put another way, it's you as the dungeon master that stops a player from doing this, rather than the game as it's written.

Pay no attention to the man behind the screen!

When it's you, and not the rules, that's preventing a player from moving in a certain direction, it's your job to have a conversation with the player to explain your reasoning. While we all joke about how the dungeon master is god, it's important to remember that your players are just as much a part of the game as you are. They're equal participants, and if you're going to stop them from contributing to the game in a certain way, they at least deserve some kind of explanation as to why.

If, for no other reason, than to help them figure out what you found objectionable, and why so they don't just keep running into a wall.

For example, say that you had a player who wanted to play a tiefling ninja in your Pathfinder game. By the rules, that race is completely legal, and the class is part of the game's rules, so there should be no problem. But maybe you're running a homebrew game where tieflings aren't really a thing, and it didn't come up until just now because no one else asked for a native outsider. Alternatively, you might not feel that the ninja is a proper fit for your game due to its skill set, and that it won't have the chance to really shine taking on the challenges you have planned in the campaign. Maybe you're not comfortable with classes or races outside of the core book, or you've heard horror stories about that class and it makes you worry. Whatever it is, talk about it with your players.

Remember, the more specific you can be here, the better the results you'll generally get. You want your player to see your position, and to understand your reasoning so you can both find an amenable solution.

Hear Your Player's Point of View

The second part of this conversation is letting your player actually respond to your points. Because just like the characters in the game, you're not making these decisions in a vacuum. The game is a group endeavor, and sometimes it needs to be talked out.

All right, I see what you're saying, but hear me out on this...

In order to keep your player enthused with your game, you need to make sure they know they're being heard... so listen to them. If they make good points, discuss those points and see where it leads you. If they find inconsistencies in your rulings, don't hedge or dodge.

The goal here is not to be right, because as pointed out above, there is no right answer when it's not a specific rules question. The goal is to make sure you and your player can both see each other's point of view, and that you're both on the same page moving forward.

Work Together To Find A Solution

Let's return to the concept of the tiefling ninja, to continue our example. Perhaps the thing you're objecting to is not that tieflings don't exist in your setting, but that they are often marginalized and looked down on in the nation where your game is taking place. Having a tiefling PC is going to create a lot of unnecessary friction, and you're worried it could cause problems not just for the player, but for the rest of the party.

What's that? Roll initiative? Ah, well, if you insist...

That's a fair point, and one worth raising. However, the player counters, what if they took the tiefling variant that allowed them to pass for human, displaying very few traits one associates with a tiefling? In this instance they could still have the race they really want to play, and as long as they take a few basic precautions (not putting their feet in the fire and taking no damage, not using their spell-like abilities where it could cast suspicion on them, etc.) then they should be able to keep their true heritage a secret. This could create a fun cat-and-mouse dynamic, and even add another dimension to the game!

Alternatively, if your concern about the ninja is that you don't want your player to portray them in the way we typically see them in fiction (the age old, "No Eastern classes in my Western fantasy!" argument), then an alternative compromise might be to simply rename the class as the Agent, instead. I talked about this a ways back in Want To Play a Ninja, But Your DM Said No? Try Calling it "The Agent" Instead, but the point is that if the objection is to the class's imagined flavor instead of its actual class abilities, just change the flavor to fit your game. In much the same way a monk can be a half-orc prize fighter who's never once set foot in a monastery, a ninja could just as easily be an agent of the crown who fulfills the role of a fantasy James Bond or Black Widow (incidentally, it was the base class I used for my Pathfinder character conversion for Natasha Romanova).

On the other hand, if your primary objection was that you didn't like the class's main features, then a different compromise might be to allow the player to build a rogue, but to take the rogue talent that allows them to substitute ninja tricks, thereby giving them some of the things they wanted from the ninja class, but working it into a core class that you're more comfortable with instead.

Remember don't get so invested in your "No" that you cling to it even in the face of a workable solution.

However, if there is no way to find a compromise for your player's original proposal, then you need to throw them a life preserver instead of letting them flail around and hope to reach the shore. Ask your players why that wanted that class, that race, etc. What was the benefit they needed for their concept to work?

Because if it was just the aesthetic ("I thought being descended from demons would be cool flavor"), then you could propose alternative choices to give them that same look and/or feel without being a full tiefling, such as feats or traits that give them hints of an infernal bloodline, along with small powers to add to the mystique. If they needed a stat boost, maybe you could suggest a race that offered similar benefits they didn't think of ("Hey, catfolk get a boost to that stat, and you'd be considered weird in a positive way"). If they really wanted to combine monk and rogue, you could point out archetypes from either class that give them that kind of strange, dangerous infiltrator feeling, but which don't use the class you'd rather not have at your table.

Leap tall buildings at a single bound? Okay, I think I know a different way to make that work....

Incidentally, talking about tieflings so much reminded me that I came out with 5 Tips For Playing Better Tieflings and Aasimar a little while back. Figured I'd share that, for any folks who find this example I'm using hits a little too close to home.

You're All in This Together

In order to actually run a game, you need to keep your players interested. Even if your initial premise hooked them, you have a finite amount of goodwill from your table. Generally speaking, every time a player has to move to a secondary or tertiary concept, path, or idea, you're going to lose some of that goodwill. The best way to minimize that loss is by having open, frank conversations, and working with them to make sure they're as enthusiastic as possible when it comes time to roll the dice.

Because once a player has lost their enthusiasm for your game, it takes a whale of an effort to reel them back in... and most of the time, it's just not going to happen.

Like, Follow, and Stay in Touch!

That's all for this week's Moon Pope Monday. Hopefully you enjoyed, and if you've used run these kinds of games before, leave us a comment to let us know what worked for you!

For more of my work, check out my Vocal archive, and stop by the YouTube channel Dungeon Keeper Radio. Or if you'd prefer to read some of my books, like my sword and sorcery novel Crier's Knife, then head over to My Amazon Author Page!

To stay on top of all my latest releases, follow me on Facebook, Tumblr, Twitter, and now Pinterest as well! To support my work, consider Buying Me a Ko-Fi, or heading to The Literary Mercenary's Patreon page to become a regular, monthly patron. That one helps ensure you get more Improved Initiative, and it means you'll get my regular, monthly giveaways as a bonus!

Want To Have More Fun At Your Table? Stop Playing With Jerks!

So, as I've said in previous posts, I spend a lot of time on gaming forums. I lurk around FB, I spend time on Reddit, and I think I might be in the top five most-disliked people on Paizo's forums. In these and other spots, I run into a lot of people looking for solutions to their gaming problems. The mechanical problems are easy. Whether they're looking for ideal feats for a two-weapon fighter, or they want to build a character that resembles someone from pop culture (often one of the 48 entries on my Character Conversions page fits nicely), I can usually provide some solid guidance.

It's the other problems that are more difficult to solve. Like when a player wants to know what to do about the rest of the table ignoring them, or demanding they play their character a certain way. Or a DM who has a player that purposefully brings serial killers to a game about shining heroes. Even what to do about the player who will argue for half an hour about a rules call, and torpedo a session whenever they don't get their way.

Look, I'm just saying that my character is the best, and you should just admit that already.

Since we're adults, and we're here to enjoy some cooperative storytelling, the first thing to do is to communicate your feelings. Talk to your DM if you feel they're being unfair, talk to the other players if they're making you uncomfortable, or if there's a big issue going on, talk to your group. You can do it in-person, over a group chat, or even on Skype. As long as you make your feelings clear to your group, and open a dialogue, you can solve a lot of your problems. If you're a DM, then having a Session 0 where players can talk about what they want out of a game, and what they expect from you, you can head off a lot of problems.

Sometimes you can't, though. Sometimes you're sitting at the table with someone (or several someones) who's a jerk, and part of the fun for them is being a jerk. In that situation, you are playing chess with a pigeon. All your logic, careful explanation of the rules, and appeals to being a better gamer won't change anything. The pigeon will just take a crap on the board, knock over your pieces, and strut around like it won the argument.

When that happens, walk away. Seriously, just walk away.

You Don't Need That Kind of Game in Your Life

Perhaps the most common reason people don't walk away from gaming groups populated by jerks is they have no other options. Jeff runs the only game in town, and it's either show up to his game where my character is made the butt of every joke, or don't play at all. Or maybe the only game you can find is the local organized play at the one gaming shop in the region, where you have never finished a module on time due to the constant bickering over rule calls.

If you find yourself in that kind of situation, ask yourself this question. If there was another game you could go to, any other game at all, would you go? If the answer is yes, then walk away.

No, seriously, you have other options.

Finding a new game is a huge pain in the ass, I won't argue there. And it might cause some hard feelings if you do have friends at the other table, but you exit stage left. If you are not having fun, and nothing you've done has made the problems you're dealing with better, though, then you're sticking it out for nothing.

So what can you do? Well, the most obvious solution is to pop online and see if anyone's running a game in your neck of the woods. With social media and gaming-specific forums, it's entirely possible for you to meet new gaming friends whose paths you'd otherwise never cross. If you have a friendly local gaming store, check the cork board, and ask around to see if there are other groups that meet there, or if anyone is looking to pick up a new player. Post a notice yourself, if you have to, and pitch yourself to groups in the area who might see it.

If you can't find anything in-person, you have the option of playing online. While it isn't for everybody, online games can be great if you have a group willing to include you. Thanks to advances like Roll20, it's now possible to play with people nowhere near where you live.

Of course, it's possible there are no local games, and that you aren't the online gaming type. What you really want is a game that's local, where you can play with friends, and have fun in a positive atmosphere. And as they say about books, if no one is doing the thing you want, then it's your turn to step up and do it. Even if that means you need to recruit a new group of friends into the hobby just so you have some new folks to run with.

Seriously, Though, Don't Break Rule 0

Now, to clarify where this advice is meant for, I'm not talking about groups where you have occasional disagreements, but you're all friends at the end of the night. Nor am I talking about groups where, though play styles may clash, you still have fun and enjoy the game. I'm talking specifically about games bad enough that players (or DMs) who describe them sound like someone talking about being in an abusive relationship.

Sounds harsh, but if you go down the checklist, it might be accurate.

We hear people talk about how, "we're here to have fun," or, "it's just a game," but it's also a social interaction. Those come with rules, and standards, unique to our subculture. One of those standards is that even if we disagree, we should respect the other folks at our table, and we should do our best to work together to find solutions so we are all getting what we want. If you are talking, but no one is listening, it's time to find a new group. Or to start your own, with blackjack and hookers!

An Edit: Those For Whom This Advice Doesn't Help

It has been brought to my attention that there are several sub-groups of gamers this advice does not help, or will not work for. Those who suffer from anxiety disorders, those with limited social currency, and players for whom giving up and moving on seems like too big a task.

Now, I'll be clear here. This advice is just like all the other advice on this blog. If you like it, take it. If you don't, or it doesn't work for you, you know your situation better than I do. I am just some yutz on the Internet with a blog, and an opinion.

The point is not to make some free-market, vote-with-your-feet statement. The point is, rather, that just because you spent a lot of time or effort making a mistake, that's no reason to cling to that mistake. If you are in a group that isn't giving you what you need, or is actively taking away your energy, you don't need me to tell you that it's toxic. And walking away might mean not participating in your favorite hobby if you have barriers to finding new groups, or starting your own.

If I find a solution for that problem, rest assured I'll share it.

That's all for my thoughts on this Moon Pope Monday installment. Hopefully some folks found it interesting, or at least thought-provoking. If you'd like to stay on top of my latest updates, follow me on Facebook, Tumblr, and Twitter! And if you'd like me to keep making content, stop by The Literary Mercenary's Patreon page to become a patron. If you pledge at least $1 a month you'll not only buy my everlasting gratitude, but I'll send some swag your way as a thank you!