[D&D 3.5] Kids in the game.

[komradebob]

It seems to me like Dad in this case is trying to be the rpg equivalent of a little league coach. Maybe you could suggest to him to do the coaching "pre-game", keeping his in-game suggestions to in-character suggestions?

[Andrew Cooper]

I certainly appreciate all the advice and good ideas that have been thrown my way here.  I'm with Ralph on this topic though.  The kids are playing and that's not going to change.  Nor are we going to change systems any time real soon either.   The topic of when kids should start playing and which games are better than others is an interesting topic but not one I was trying to start.  I was looking for ways to engage the kids playing in my current game using my current system.

Please, note that I'm not offended or upset with any of the responses.  I'm just trying to keep things pretty narrowly focused on the subject.


I'm definately going to talk with both Sean and his father before the next session.  I'm also going to talk with the other adults at the table and get them to help in reinforcing good play verbally.  The rewarding of cool play with XP or Tokens seems like a great idea too, so I'm going to integrate that.  I'll probably get around to trying everything suggested here at some point or another but trying to shoe horn too much into the game at one time might not be a good idea either.

[Mike Holmes]

Does Sean "cheat" at other games? If not, then he's not cheating at this one. What's going on is that he's playing a different game - he doesn't understand the social contract of this one. Basically he doesn't see how it's fun.

If I had to guess, you probably have a little narrativism player there. More interested in telling a cool story about his character than winning or losing. So he modifies the rules on the fly to do so. Standard incoherence behavior in a player of any age. I did it myself in D&D games as late as, oh, 14 or so? After that, I knew enough to make up my own games that had rules that worked for me instead of against me.

What this means is that you're going to have a very tough time "converting" this player to the CA that you're trying to play with. As everybody says, use the system as well as you can while not taking away any of that nar protagonism that he wants to see. And maybe he'll come over to your side eventually.

But I wouldn't hold my breath for a ten year old to change his stripes.

Mike

[Andrew Cooper]

Mike,

You know.... I hadn't thought of it that way.  I don't know whether he cheats at other games or not.  He loves to play Magic: the Gathering and Yu-Gi-Oh but I'm not a big CCG player so I don't know how he does with those.  His father plays with him and I'll ask.  The insight there is interesting though.  I remember cheating on rolls much later than 14 because I thought, "The hero shouldn't go down here.  That's just not right."  I did that until I realized that story really wasn't "the point" of the game we were playing no matter what people said.  Then I was old enough to make the cognitive switch to Step On Up and all was well.

I'll definately keep an eye on this and see what I can do to help Sean out.  That's not code for "convert him to our way", either.  I mean I'll try to drift things for him some so that he gets what he's looking for out of the game.  Assuming it really is CA Incoherency and not just a 10 year old not wanting to lose.

[droog]

Please, note that I'm not offended or upset with any of the responses.  I'm just trying to keep things pretty narrowly focused on the subject.

I'm glad you're not offended, because I want to make this point one more time:

You are seeking to modify the behaviour of this child based on certain assumptions. Behaviour modification in and of itself is not something to be tackled lightly or without serious examination of the ethical issues involved. When you are attempting to modify behaviour in play, the underlying assumptions need very careful evaluation indeed.

You are in a position of high responsibility, not too far from being a teacher or youth-group leader. I urge you to consider my points, if only for the future.




By the way, I do not consider this a question of theory at all. We are dealing with actual play with real people at the table, who happen in this case to be children. As adults, it is our responsibility to modify our own behaviour in the interests of the children's welfare.

[Ron Edwards]

Droog, you need to stop there. The topic of this thread is not how to protect children, although I do respect your views as they apply in reality and we all do need to consider these issues. However, I'm sure that Andrew has taken your points seriously on his own, and needs no further reminder. If you really need that affirmed, send him a private message.

Thanks,
Ron

[Callan S.]

I don't want to stir the behavior modification pot here so much as affirm a peer relationship is needed.

If your acting the boss to get the kid to do something, then there's no point in trying to play with them, because that isn't play as I know it. If your the only one modifying your behaviour to assist them but not vise versa, then your not both doing the same sort of activity (your making them the boss from before)

I've run into this with my 5 YO son. I've hit a few points where what he was doing frustrated me and I REALLY wanted to pull out the 'I'm your dad, do as I say' card. Except that would defeat the point of play since if he's under my control, I'm essentially playing by myself because I'm controlling everything. So I had to talk to him as a peer or stop playing with him.

From some D&D tabletop and a lot of PS2 champions of norrath, it's interesting to have the playing field leveled between us so I have to negotiate with him as a peer. And I think he's figuring out what it's like to talk to daddy, not just talk up to him. Lots of stuff like him saying 'Hey, I was killing that monster!' and either I say 'Okay, sorry, reflex on my part! I'll try harder next time!' as a peer statement or I have to stop playing with him. Sometimes this works the other way too, where he thinks he should just have something and I say 'Well, I need some healing potions too!'.

On a side note, conflicting over resources is helpful for that. When we conflict over resources, we either work out a peer relationship or stop playing the game. I'm not so sure that 'everyone should just create stuff in play' aids that particular goal. Not that you have to have that goal, of course.

[Andrew Cooper]

Okie Dokie...

I talked to Trey, the father.  I asked him some questions about Sean and how he behaves when playing other games.  His indication was that Sean is highly competitive and really hates to lose at anything.  (I think this is a fairly common trait in 10 year old boys.)  After discussion we *think* what is going on is that Sean sees getting hit and taking damage is "losing" so he is either avoiding it through his character's actions or fudging to avoid it.  This is comforting in that it means that we are playing the same game but after only 2 sessions I wouldn't neccessarily bet the farm on that analysis.  I'll keep my eyes open for other tells during the upcoming sessions.

I also talked to Trey and the other adult players about being sure not to come down from on high and tell the kids they can't make their characters do things.  I mentioned to Trey that he seemed to be trying to be "Coach" with Sean during the game and that he probably needed to do that between sessions and let the boy play during the sessions.  He agreed.  We also agreed to be conscious to give the kids verbal affirmation when they do something cool with their characters as a social reward for good play.  I, personally, am going to be watching for chances to reward everyone at the table (including the kids) with Tokens or XP for doing cool things.

I'll let everyone know how it works out but I'm optimistic.

[Callan S.]

Yeah, it's a bit hard to learn that 'loose something to gain something' gamist tactic, since that's part of gamism itself, learning tricksy skills like this.

Could you sit down and tell him about this tactic? Tell him something like "Well, you could face monsters who could never hit you...they just wouldn't be able to get your guy. But you'd get nothing out of them...they don't carry much treasure and you don't get much XP. While all the dudes in the other D&D games have their characters beaten up really bad most of the time, but will be many levels ahead of your character and have thousands more gold! They get hit, and that means their winning more than you. Do you want them to win more than you?"

Perhaps design into the session a challenge choice, where in game he is presented with a choice between fighting wimps for little reward, or fighting guys who can hurt him, for much greater reward (if you go left to save the princess, its goblins. If you go right, bugbears). In fact, be transparent and tell the exact gold piece amount each choice gives. Let him weigh it up.

Though keep in mind he might try to do both paths, weak first then strong latter...which is actually a good gamist tactic. And it still proves the point to him by his own choice.