Twice now in the last week people have tried to make a discussion over at RPGNet about "social contracts" and using better channels of communication to make gaming groups last longer and play better. Twice now in the last week those discussions have been shouted down, mostly by the same people, who say anyone who needs these sorts of things are obviously either socially dysfunctional themselves or obviously play in groups that are full of dysfunction. "Normal" people don't need these sorts of things, they say, because people who can function socially don't need to talk about what's right and proper because non-dysfunctional people know what's right and how to interact with others. All you need is to not "be a dick," they say. "Don't be a dick" is the extent of their help and insight into these issues. I know which side of the "don't be a dick" fence it puts these people on for me.
First off, a "social contract" as we are referring to it in this circumstance isn't a signed document. It isn't even a document. Nor does it refer to a social contract as philosophers see it. Saying that "I'd never play with a group that would make me sign something" is a fallacy because no one is signing anything. What follows is what is strictly my personal definitions of how I use all these terms and how I think they can help. If they don't work for you, use them as a springboard for what might work for you. If you don't need them for your group, ignore them.
I start from this premise: any sort of implicit agreement is bound to cause issues in a social group sooner or later, so the more that you are explicit in your agreements the better things are likely to work. I think of this as oiling the machine before using it.
An important part of all of this is being willing to have discussion and discourse, without sniping or being passive/aggressive about things. Are you unhappy with the way that things are going in the gaming group? Speak up and air your issues rather than bottling them up and letting the problems fester. That's only going to make smaller troubles into bigger ones.
A second premise would be: gaming is a group activity, which means that (to paraphrase Spock) "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few." That means that the fun of any one person is not as important as that of any other person at the gaming table. Fun is to be had as a group, and facilitating that fun is a good thing. I felt that was worth bolding.
How do you do this? Well, simply put...you communicate with each other. For me, a "social contract" is a discussion that the group has the first time we meet, or sometimes the first time we start a campaign if the assumptions are going to be dramatically different with what is starting. Outside of discussion on message forums where "social contract" is a convenient shorthand for "that talk we have," I have never used the term social contract with any of my gaming groups, even though we have had them. Not all of them have been implemented successfully, but this is always a learning process.
What sorts of things do you talk about? I think it is best to keep these sorts of discussions as fluid as possible because no two groups are going to have the same needs, nor will they see the same issues pop up during play or social interaction. Here are some bullet points that I think are fairly universal, they are also presented without comment:
- Punctuality/Timeliness
- How issues will be brought up/discussed by the group
- What play style(s) will be used
- Any house rules for the system being used
- The degree to which the group uses or ignores the rules during a session
- Character generation options (ranging from Do we create characters as a group? to Which books do we use for character options?)
- Introduction of new players
- In character and out of character "chatter"
- Intra-party conflict
- Types of characters allowed
- Use of electronics at the gaming table
- Where gaming takes place
The most important thing to remember is that communication is never bad. There are, however, bad ways to go about doing it. Being dismissive of the issues of others and writing them off as being dysfunctional is one of those bad ways to communicate. It is about talking with each other rather than seeing who can shout the loudest. Someone who is afraid to communicate, or unwilling to do so, is not someone that I would want to game with. When I was still in Cleveland I organized and built a networking group with the purpose of getting gamers together in non-gaming situations so they could meet other gamers and get to know them a bit before jumping into a gaming group that might, or might not work out. At first there was the resistance of "Why would gamers get together to not game?" but eventually people started to see that by meeting and getting to know a person before gaming with them they could better learn if there would be personality clashes or conflicts with their group's existing social dynamic. Having open discussion works the same way. It might seem a funny thing to do, until you do it and see that it can have a benefit for you.
Another important thing to remember is that just because a group of people are friends it doesn't mean that they have to do everything together. Don't do something that you don't consider to be fun just because all of your friends are doing it as well.
Is this post going to be all-inclusive? No. Am I an expert on all of this? No, I'm just relaying what I have picked up in my now 30+ years of being a gamer (on both sides of the GM's screen). There will be holes in all of this that will (hopefully) get plugged up with further discussion of the issues. There are probably also issues that some groups are having that wouldn't occur to me.
This is the long and short of the tool that I sometimes think of as the "social contract." It is not a written document. It is not a tool for one person in a group to use against another. It is not for everyone. For those groups that need a little extra help, open communication can be a great boon, as well as one that can strengthen the health of your gaming group and lead to longer term play.
[Please Note: I want to thank each and every one of you for reading this, but there are some ground rules to this discussion (sort of like a social contract). If you have nothing to contribute, do not comment. If your only comment is to say something negative about this concept, the discussion of it, or the people who are interested in this type of discussion, do not comment. Anyone doing these things will find their comments deleted by me. And in advance: no, I don't care about your freedom of expression. You have plenty of places to express your opinions elsewhere on the internet.]
Again, thank you for reading this and I hope that the discussion sparked by this will be helpful to people out there needing the help.