TheRPGSite

Hi, Kyle,

In your sig, you cite snacks before setting. Can you clarify? Seems to me that setting would come first. Looking back on my gaming over the years, I remember my buddies first, of course -- me and my gaming group had some great times. Second, I think of setting. We stomped all over the Forgotten Realms, shot our way through Chi-Town, and bled all over Arkham.

But what did we eat? I have no idea. Doritos? Pretzels?

So -- why snacks before setting?

If this has been discussed elsewhere, please feel free to point me to that thread.

Thanks!

It's about trying to tap into our monkey brains. "Breaking bread" and sharing food is usually a social bond making thing.

I personally don't rate it nearly as high as Kyle as my experience tells me it isn't even close to essential. Although maybe that's more when meeting on neutral ground? When inviting to someone to your home it tends to be socially expected in nearly all cultures to provide food, possibly for the visitor to bring food. I know it is considered very impolite in a number of cultures if the visitor doesn't stuff themselves like a pig. My mother-in-law (slavic) is very openly disapointed if I don't eat thirds and turning down alcohol is just inconceivable. So I don't think it's got much at all to do with gaming, just where a lot of the gaming occurs.

Quote from: blakkieWhen inviting to someone to your home it tends to be socially expected in nearly all cultures to provide food, possibly for the visitor to bring food. [...] So I don't think it's got much at all to do with gaming, just where a lot of the gaming occurs.

This is basically it.

Sharing food is part of the social experience. There's a reason that people have dates over dinner, visit families once a week to have dinner, and that some sort of food-sharing is a part of many religious rituals.

Whether we had Doritos or Cheetos or whatever isn't important, and as RC said, won't be remembered. The very act of sharing food binds people together.

The thing is that I think of it as a social creative hobby, and the social comes first. You can have a good game session with a crap setting and rules if the people are good and the snacks are, too. You cannot have a good game session with a marvellous setting and rules, but people you don't get along with and bad food.

Now, for a campaign of more than a few sessions, that's where setting comes in as very important, because the players and GM will be more interested in it, more enthusiastic, if the setting is good. And over time if the rules are really good or really bad it'll have an effect.

But session-to-session, the most important thing is the people, and after that, the snacks. I find that gamers are in general quite tolerant of a wide variety and quality of settings and systems, but not so tolerant of bad company or bad food.

It's a social creative hobby.

Probably matters how long you play for too (session length). If it is a short period, if you are time constrained, food just gets in the way of gaming. ;) Longer period? People need energy. Something to drink tends to be more important, you are often talking a lot during the game.

Liking the people you play with though? That is a huge thing. And it's like the game and setting. Yeah people will put up with a lot for a session or two. But longterm all the Cheetos in the world isn't going to gloss over a crap game, crap setting, or some dick sitting across the table.

P.S. One group I play with, and have played with for years, is less and less having food at the table during the game. We only meet for 3 hours, it has become normal not to have anything there. Although there are always glasses and a selection of beverages (usually no alcohol). I notice this mainly because the few times there is it really gets in the way.

When you put it that way, it makes sense. Thanks for clarifying!

Quote from: blakkieProbably matters how long you play for too (session length). If it is a short period, if you are time constrained, food just gets in the way of gaming. ;) Longer period? People need energy.

I must have low energy reserves, we meet up after 7pm and go until 11pm, most of the food is gone by 8:30, though :)

Quote from: blakkieLiking the people you play with though? That is a huge thing.

I dunno, you don't even have to like them, just get along with them. Works better if you do like 'em, and after a year or two you might stop gaming with them, but "we get along" is usually enough for quite a while. I mean, I genuinely like most of the people I game with, but some there's never quite that "click" - not a clash, but no click either. And that's okay.

Quote from: blakkieYeah people will put up with a lot for a session or two. But longterm all the Cheetos in the world isn't going to gloss over a crap game, crap setting, or some dick sitting across the table.

No snacks will make up for "some dick" because people come before everything else. I'm not sure what you mean by a "crap game" - you mean game session? In this little model of mine, we have


The session isn't some thing strangely off by itself apart from the people, snacks, setting and system - the session is all those things mixed together in a big soup. So if your session's crap, it's because one or more of those four was crap - usually something to do with the people, someone was sleepy or a couple of people didn't get along or whatever.

Quote from: blakkieOne group I play with, and have played with for years, is less and less having food at the table during the game. We only meet for 3 hours, it has become normal not to have anything there. Although there are always glasses and a selection of beverages (usually no alcohol). I notice this mainly because the few times there is it really gets in the way.

Well, in my little model, "snacks" includes drinks. We shouldn't be too pedantic and semantic about some words in a sig, "oh but "snacks" can't possibly mean drinks, how can you have a session without drinks?" this isn't the fucking Forge.

The drinks are addressing a physical limitation of the human body. Especially where I live, in winter single digit relative humidity indoors is common.

'Snacks' are all about the people, a subset of social grease. And still frankly it isn't even close to a universal truism that they help that much or are needed at all. You'd do a lot better just to group it with people and call it 'socialable group of people' or something. Sure it isn't as much a catchy gimick name. :rolleyes: But it would be a lot more instructive and universal.

EDIT: Or better yet 'social/physical atmosphere', keeping it seperate from people. Then people might think about replacing their crappy chairs, think about physical arrangement, environmental noise, getting curtains for that window so I don't have the damn sun in my eyes, etc. :p

By "crap game" I mean the game system. Of course there are degrees and there is rewritting the game system. EDIT: Same thing with setting. And people can hone their personalities, to a degree. The people I game with now are definately not the same people I started gaming with several years ago, even though they have the same names. I'm not the exact same person either.

P.S.  The people I find longterm tolerable locked in a room with for hours interacting with directly is how I define 'people I like'. :)

Quote from: blakkie'Snacks' are all about the people, a subset of social grease.

You can reasonably argue that everything is a subset of the social. Then we get into all that "social contract" nonsense and end up spending six weeks preparing for some indie game that never happens because the GM is incapable of just sitting down and playing and sends us essays of Uncle Ronny to read.

Quote from: blakkieAnd still frankly it isn't even close to a universal truism that they help that much or are needed at all.

Well, I've been to game groups where nobody brought any snacks, or where each person brought their own and hunched over them protectively through the session. Those groups didn't last.

Quote from: blakkieOr better yet 'social/physical atmosphere', keeping it seperate from people.

No, then we'd be getting into the longer words which when combined with other longer words which emerge as we debate "what is setting, anyway?" and so on, end up making people's eyes glaze over.

Quote from: blakkieThen people might think about replacing their crappy chairs, think about physical arrangement, environmental noise, getting curtains for that window so I don't have the damn sun in my eyes, etc. :p

Which is why I write something longer in Cheetoism (http://cheetoism.pbwiki.com/FrontPage), about Why Game Groups Fuck Up.

Quote from: blakkieThe people I find longterm tolerable locked in a room with for hours interacting with directly is how I define 'people I like'. :)

You're locked in the gaming room? Wow, that explains a lot :p

Quote from: Kyle AaronWell, I've been to game groups where nobody brought any snacks,

Me too. And life and the game went on mysteriously. Huh.

Quoteor where each person brought their own and hunched over them protectively through the session. Those groups didn't last.

Well duh, because the ranks were sown with one or more dicks and/or didn't trust each other. Or it was their supper.  Hey, they were eating snacks! Eating in front of each other (communal eating). Do you really think that throwing down a bowl of chips in front of them would have gotten rid of all the baggage they brought? Because apparently nobody was in a sharing mood (you didn't share?)

Of course I've seen that too, in college. People show up with their supper. I don't expect people to give up their damn supper for me.

QuoteNo, then we'd be getting into the longer words which when combined with other longer words which emerge as we debate "what is setting, anyway?" and so on, end up making people's eyes glaze over.

Dude, my eyes glaze over when you start going on and on about the importance of snacks. Which is actually just a code word for something else. Only you slip back and forth between code word and it being real.

QuoteWhich is why I write something longer in Cheetoism (http://cheetoism.pbwiki.com/FrontPage), about Why Game Groups Fuck Up.

*eyes glaze over* Damn man, you makes Ron look on the ball and that's pretty hard to do.

But you've got that one-word, a snappy, empty, "regular joe", misleading word, going for you.

Always serve dinner to your guests.  I'm the GM, and that's what I do.  It's a thing.  

If you bring your own snacks and I perceive you are hunching over them, not only do I snake some (also pirate them) but you won't be back.  Thankfully, the only person that ever did this was a fat ugly chick one of the guys brought.  Neither have ever come back.

I'm not exactly sure what Blakkie is getting at, but I agree completely with Kyle.

There's no doubt food is important. But it really is a subset of the whole social infrastructure. I don't think you can elevate it above, or separate it from, other elements of friendship and trust.

People come first (and I realize this is rather unpopular around here) than system. I realize you can have a fun time with your mates with a bad (for whatever reason) system, but I'd rather be doing something else with them if that's the case.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: David RPeople come first (and I realize this is rather unpopular around here) than system. I realize you can have a fun time with your mates with a bad (for whatever reason) system, but I'd rather be doing something else with them if that's the case.

Exactly.

I play games I like with people I like. I'll try out new games and new people on fairly broad speculation but in the end it becomes a requirement that I like both. If the people I like really want to play a game I don't like I bow out of the game and do something else with those people, because they are people I like. If I still feel the desire to play I wait till they are ready to switch to a game I [might] like and/or I find new people [that hopefully I'll like] that are playing a game I [might] like.

And sometimes the new people and the old people join up with me and we all play a game, and new friendships result.

Yeah, RPGs are definately a "social game" but I don't lose sight of what the noun is in that phrase.


EDIT: Once upon a time I didn't realize this. I played games I liked with people I didn't like. I played games I didn't like with people I liked. Woe was I.

I game with my closest friends, lifelong buddies since we were kids. Gaming is only one of the things we do together. It probably doesn't even crack the top three. We go to pubs, go hiking, watch hockey, and play in bands. Have dinners and barbeques together with our families.

And we eat before we play. One guy scarfs down some fast food at the beginning of the session, and that irritates the rest of us who ate before the session. It's tough enough to get any gaming done in a 4 hour session on a weeknight without spending half the time serving out food and eating it over our gaming material.

Come to think of it, we rarely eat together unless we're having a sit-down dinner or a barbeque. We don't eat at the pub. Or when we're watching hockey. Or when we're playing music. I guess we're all three meals a day kind of guys.

Of course we always have beer.

Quote from: HaffrungIt's tough enough to get any gaming done in a 4 hour session on a weeknight without spending half the time serving out food and eating it over our gaming material.

In my case, I host the game and each of us contributes some munchies - one player brings the chips, another the dips, another something sweet, while my contribution is the dinner itself.

So at 7pm people arrive, I serve up dinner and we chat and catch up on the events of the week.

By 7:20pm people are usually finished eating and I pass out character sheets as someone collects the dishes and puts them in the sink. Then we break out the munchies and put most of them in dishes in the middle of the table. It's at this time people will be rolling for skill improvement, spending xp or whatever, depending on the system.

About 7:30-7:45pm the game proper begins. As GM I'll point to one player and say, "Hey, tell us what happened last session."

We eat and drink the munchies throughout the session, which usually ends just before 11pm so that any players taking the train can take the one just after that, and those driving and working tomorrow can be home before midnight and sleep.

So while the session is over 4 hours, in practice we get 3 hours of actual gaming. I run a relatively fast-paced game so quite a bit usually gets done in that time, so long as there are no clueless obstructionist players - and those are only maybe one in twenty players, and they never last long.

Vin Diesel says (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwlalS7C7ZQ&feature=player_embedded),

If the subject was "does Pitch Black need a sequel?" I would.

I have my own list of priorities for a good session, it's somewhat different, which is normal, everybody has his own tastes.

For a good session:

1. People. I can't overstate how important this is, to the point that I wouldn't game at all if I hadn't good quality players and GMs to play with.

2. System. Yes, I put system over setting because I consider myself a system-guy, I need the system to click with me to feel confident enough to run a game.

3. Setting. Third place, but important nonetheless. A good setting excites players and GMs, and makes them be eager to play.

4. Whiskey and vodka. After a long week at work, there's nothing like a good Jack Daniels, a Jameson or a Żubrówka to forget all the worries of your dayjob and pretend to be an elf or a samurai.

And now I have visions of a vodka-inebriated elf samurai... ;)

Pass the Dorritos please...

I usually bring the Guinness...and enough for everybody, does that count?

Quote from: shalvayez;295506I usually bring the Guinness...and enough for everybody, does that count?

Yes ... yes it definitely would. Especially import Guinness and/or Kilkenny. Please come gaming to my house! :D

OK, but you have to buy the boat ticket, a tent, and a Crocadile Dundee sized knife for me. Oh, and ya have to promise NOT to run 4e or RaHoWa.

Sadly I can't afford the boat ticket, but next time you are passing through .. feel free to pitch a tent :)

I am a fan of Cheetoism, but I don't game primarily for the social experience.   I am in it for the adventure, the challenge and the immersion, but there is no doubt that 1.People. 2.Snacks. 3.Setting. 4.System works for me.

I mostly game at conventions and nothing helps break the ice with strangers than throwing some munchies or drinks on the table for everyone to share.  It really does change the mood and camaraderie.   A dozenfold if its some kind of homemade goodie.

I am not kidding.  If you are shy about cons because of the strangers, bake a couple dozen cookies the day before and bring them.  Pass around just a dozen cookies to the table and watch how everything changes.   Kyle is extremely correct about the power of shared food and drink.

The only important thing about System is that the mechanics have to be something that the GM and the players enjoy and doesn't get in the way during the game.

Quote from: Spinachcat;295576The only important thing about System is that the mechanics have to be something that the GM and the players enjoy and doesn't get in the way during the game.

Some people like mechanics, but I guess you're saying that.

Quote from: droog;295583Some people like mechanics, but I guess you're saying that.

I am saying that whatever system mechanics feel fun and useful for that GM and that group is a "good system"...for that group.

Did somebody post this link explaining the whole thing (http://thevikinghatgm.blogspot.com/2008/10/my-gaming-manifesto.html) before? It's from the Viking Hat GM's blog.

My opinion on the relative importance of system, setting, and the folks you play with is that they can't be ranked. As long as at least one is good and nothing's outright bad you're okay, but if one is bad it can fuck up the rest. If two out of three are really good, it'll be a great game.

If everything but the people at the table seems less important, it's because they decide what's good and bad in the other two categories.

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.

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.

A good setting and/or system with a tolerable group works well enough that con games filled with total strangers work.

Just my experience. YMMV and all.

Quote from: beejazz;295772My opinion on the relative importance of system, setting, and the folks you play with is that they can't be ranked.

You didn't mention snacks. This is a failing of your understanding of the world of gaming.

Session 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.

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

Quote from: beejazA good setting and/or system with a tolerable group works well enough that con games filled with total strangers work.

"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.

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.