Character Class #17: Winning the Metagame: Explaining the Rules
Character Class
Well, if you agreed with the first paragraph, you should NEVER explain the rules to anyone. Rules are explained way too frequently during games, when discussing games, and when trying to introduce people to roleplaying. And very rarely is this done in anyway for the benefit of the person being explained to. Often these explanations are extremely patronizing (sometimes called Mansplaining or GMsplaining). So the first thing you should do before explaining anything during a roleplaying game is ask yourself these questions:
1. Why am I going to give this explanation?
If the answer to this is any variation of "to show off how well I know the rules", don't give the explanation. Best case scenario, people think you are a jerk, but hey maybe they did actually learn something. Worst case scenario, people think you are a jerk and you've wasted everyone's time.
If the answer is to fix the player or their play style, don't give the explanation. Their play style may be an issue for you, but then that should be addressed directly with a discussion about why the play style is a problem for you, not through passive-aggressive explanations of what the person is doing wrong.
If the answer is to fix their opinions in some way, don't give the explanation. If someone expresses an opinion that people disagree with, the default assumption is to condescendingly assume that the person just didn't understand, and with enough education they will see the error of their ways. In roleplaying games, this often takes the form of assuming that the person is playing wrong or doesn't understand the rules. This is enormously condescending and never an effective way of convincing people to change their mind. That's true even if they are actually messing up the rules. Think about a food you don't enjoy. Now imagine someone trying to explain to you that you just don't understand the texture. Or telling you that you didn't like it because you're just a bad cook and you would like it if someone else made it. That's not going to convince you that you actually you do love pickled chicken livers, is it?
If the answer is that you genuinely want to inform the other person of something that they are not aware of, and them knowing that thing will have net some benefit for both of you, then maybe you can give your explanation.
2. Does the person want this explanation?
If the answer to this is no, don't give the explanation. But, but, you have some justification for why no actually the person needs to have their wishes ignored so you can be condescending! No, just don't do it. It's not going to accomplish anything, and if this is to alleviate some other issue, there are better approaches.
If the answer to this is you don't know, ask the person if they want you to explain it. Gasp! Consulting someone before you talk at them at length? Perish the thought.
Actually, even if you're confident that the person wants you to explain, you should ask before you start explaining just by default, unless they've explicitly asked you to explain already.
3. Are you the best suited person available to give the explanation?
If the answer is no, don't give the explanation. Some people are good at explaining rules. Some people aren't. If people's eyes tend to glaze over as you explain things, probably someone else at the table is better equipped to help. Point them in the direction of that person. It is common, because of the dynamics of the table, for explanation giving to fall on the GM or else on some much more experienced player. An explanation of the rules might just come across better from the GM, or from someone who generally takes on a mentor role, than from a random player. If this is the case with your group, it is usually best to just let the designated person handle it.
4. Are you literally going to be reading something to them they could read themselves?
It's sad to have to say this, but if you're going to explain something to someone by reading the rules out loud, don't do it. Unless you're playing with young children, odds are 99% of people you are going to be playing with can in fact read. Just give them the book.
5. Is there a better way to convey this information?
There actually may be. Look, no one enjoys being corrected or Mansplained to, especially if they haven't asked you to explain. If your goal is really to inform someone then you want to irritate them as little as possible. Here are a few tricks to try for avoiding explanations.
First, ask questions and establish what the person already knows. These questions should not be an attack or a lengthy interrogation. The person never needs to justify or prove that they don't need your explanation. The goal here is to avoid explaining things the person already knows and let the person establish that they are informed, so they don't feel like they need to prove that they're not an idiot. It is also a way to refresh pertinent information in the other person's mind and maybe let them figure things out for themselves. This takes it from a situation where you're possibly attacking or tearing down a person to one where they're actually gaining confidence.
I once went to a professor's office hours because I did not understand how to solve a problem. He asked me three questions, which I answered, and then he said, "Well, it sounds like you've got it solved then." And he was right, I had figured out what my mistake was and I felt a hell of a lot better about it than if he had just started explaining the problem step-by-step.
Second, play the fool. If you think someone is doing something wrong, give the other person a chance to explain to you by asking for an explanation about it. This has one huge advantage, if it turns out you're wrong (and it seems like the person that wants to do the explaining generally is 50% of the time) then you don't look like a massive tool. If you are right, it might let the other person see what their mistake is before you have to explain anything to them. It can also help avoid confusion on terms and conveys that you respect the person and assume that they know what they're talking about. All positives when trying to have a productive conversation.
Third, share your own mistakes with the material as a way of establishing a common experience and provide things that were helpful to you in understanding the game. Try to avoid giving this as advice. If done well this can just come across as just an anecdote and might even be amusing. Saying something like, "I could never remember what I had to add to my attack roll. Screwed me up for years. I eventually had to remember it as STAB, STrength + Attack Bonus, and DART, Dexterity Are Ranged Targets." is going to go over better than "See you have a basic attack bonus that is added to . . . . and so melee weapons use your strength modifier which you find by . . . Dexterity on the other hand . . . and each weapon . . . . blah, blah, blah."
If you have determined that you do need to give an explanation, the most important thing is don't be a dick.
-Don't puff yourself up or spend time explaining how qualified you are. Is telling someone that you've been running games since Gygax was in diapers really going to make them listen to you? No. We're talking about roleplaying games. If you think you need to prove that you're qualified to talk about them, there may be other issues that need addressed.
-Assume good faith from the person you are talking with. A rule mistake is probably that, a mistake, not a nefarious assault upon the sanctity of the gaming table.
-You're not trying to win a court case against the other player before the jury of your fellow gamers. Nothing is worse than drawing attention to you correcting someone in order to have an audience to humiliate them in front of.
-Also, give the person of the benefit of the doubt that they know what they're talking about. It's quite possible that you're being entirely too pedantic and so you're missing the broader point by honing in on some small detail. If someone says that they don't like low level wizards because you only get two spells a day and then you might as well be playing a commoner, telling them that wizards are awesome and then explaining how cantrips work and the other class features that wizards have that commoners don't at low levels is grossly misreading the person's intent with that statement and making a very insulting assumption about the player to boot.
What you should do is: Keep explanations short and concise. Check in frequently on whether you're being helpful and if further explanation is necessary. Stop when they've got it.
Closing thoughts
First, yes, I am aware of the irony of writing a column on this. Second, while reading this you may have started thinking, "No, actually when I explain things, it's different and always necessary." If that is the case, you may be tempted to launch into a lengthy explanation of how when you do it, it is okay. If that is the case, you can practice not giving unwanted explanations right now.
Giving Credit
I've been doing this column for a little over a year. In that time, my partner (The Dragon Gaude on the forums) has been my sounding board, given me a lot of suggestions, told me when I was being a moron and should just start over, listened to multiple drafts, and edited every one of these columns. I need to acknowledge the huge amount of time and effort they have put into making this and all my myriad other silly projects work. Thank you.

