Quote from: Kyle AaronYou didn't mention snacks. This is a failing of your understanding of the world of gaming.

Eh. Snacks are just a part of the social thing. People can prefer for there to be food or not same as they can prefer roll-over or roll-under dice mechanics. It's not significant enough to be it's own category.

If you were talking about caffeine for the GM, you might be on to something.

QuoteSession A: "A good group playing with a system or setting they don't like won't be terribly happy with the game. It's why they play something else next session."

Session B: "A bad group playing with any system or setting is going to suck. It's why dick GMs and problem players either can't keep their games going or won't find games."

Session A will have been more fun than Session B. I'd rather watch Beverley Hills Chihuaha with my best friend than Conan the Barbarian with some idiot I hate. I'd rather have boring missionary-style sex with my girlfriend than wild kinky time with a hairy biker. And you would rather play Spawn of Fashan with your friends than whatever game you love with the Fatbeard, Munchkin, Rules Lawyer and Catpissman game group.

Honestly, I'd walk out of Beverly Hills Chihuahua and my friend would come with me. Moot point because we wouldn't go in. But RaHoWar would be bad even with a bunch of my friends, maybe worse given how confused I'd be at why they ran it. Hybrid would grind to a halt if it ever started. Friends are great. Acquaintances are fine. Tolerable convention strangers are A-OK. But no matter who I'm gaming with, there are certain games that are outright bad to the point that you just don't want to play them whoever else may be there.

If the setting sucks you play another setting next session. If the system sucks you play with a different system. If the players suck you play with other players.

QuoteThe people you're sharing the experience with are more important to how it turns out than anything else about the experience.

The vast majority of people won't be a problem. And only a handful of people will make any kind of positive impact. I just hold that the same is true for system and setting. The social nature of the game is integral, but not moreso than the game itself. There are people out there who enjoy the game for the game's sake too.

Quote"People" coming first in the importance of the success of a game session does not mean that everyone in the group must be your bosom buddy. It simply means that people must more or less get along. This is often managed with strangers, because only the most obnoxious of people don't tone things down a bit with strangers; when a group's new to each-other, they make an extra effort to get along. It's only when they get to know each-other better that they let all their weird shit out. Unless, as I said, they're truly obnoxious.

And that's why I say as long as no one thing as bad (and usually it won't be) there's no problem with the game.

Although I also disagree with the "tone it down" rule. The crazy shit is what makes gaming awesome, both with strangers and at home. It's part of the reason the first session is always a little dull compared with any of the middle ones. That and character creation. I've played con games with all the crazy shit... times when i wasn't even expecting it. It was awesome. I wouldn't have called the people there obnoxious either.

The system seems to effect the GM's experience much more than it effects the other players' experience.