Forums of the Megaverse®

Okay this a weird notion. (But from me what else do you expect?) I'd like a chance to establish a chain of command and sense of team unity by having people working as a team and keep the PC's alive. so I thought a set of non-lethal scenarios danger room type runs might work. Now another player suggested a situation that all the PC's had to contribute a skill or power would work..Now I have a few questions.
Here's a few trust building exercises I planned on using..


Willow in the Wind
Time Required: 20 minutes

This particular trust building exercise goes by different names, but usually illustrates the same idea. This exercise is best suited for coworkers who already know each other fairly well. One participant must volunteer or be chosen to be the “willow.” The willow must stand in the middle of a group with their eyes closed, their feet together, and body upright. They will perform a series of “trust leans” against the other participants, whose job is to hold up the willow and pass them around without allowing them to fall or feel frightened as if they’re going to fall. Before beginning, the instructor should discuss “spotting” techniques to all participants. Those who are not the willow must have one foot in front of the other, have their arms outstretched, elbows locked, and fingers loose, as well as be ready and alert. This will ensure that they will successfully pass the willow around without any troubles. Various co-workers can take turns being the willow. This technique helps coworkers establish and build trust with each other in an open, fun environment.

Running Free
Time Required: 20 minutes

This trust building exercise requires nothing more than a few blindfolds and a large, flat area- preferably with grass. The group leader can either team people up or allow them to pick their own partners. Once everyone is in teams of two, one team member will be designated as the leader and the other as the follower. The follower must wear a blindfold. The group leader will instruct the leaders in each team to hold the hand of their blindfolded partner and take them on a slow walk around the area for at least 3 minutes. This will allow the partners to get accustomed to the process and their partner. After three minutes, instruct the teams to take a normal-paced walk for three minutes. After those three minutes are up, instruct the leaders to take their blindfolded partners on a fast walk for thirty seconds. After each turn, the blindfolded partner is developing more and more trust in their seeing partner. Instruct the leaders to take their blindfolded partner on a 30 second jog, then a 15 second run, and lastly, a very fast 15 second run- with breaks in between. After the last run, the follower can take off their blind fold and rest for a bit with their partner before the process begins over again and the followers become the leaders and vice versa. After the last run, a discussion can be had about the process, whether or not it was difficult for participants to trust their partners and if so/not, why?

Mine Field
Time Required: 20-30 minutes

This trust exercise requires some setting up before it can be executed. It also requires a large, open area such as a room without furniture or an empty parking lot. The leader must distribute “mines,” which they place haphazardly around the area. These “mines” can be balls, bowling pins, cones, etc. This exercise gives coworkers a chance to work on their relationships and trust issues, which is why they are paired into teams of two. One team member will be blindfolded and cannot talk and the other can see and talk, but cannot enter the field or touch their blindfolded teammate. The challenge requires each blind-folded person to walk from one side of the field to the other, avoiding the mines by listening to the verbal instructions of their partners. Penalties can be put in place for each time a blindfolded person hits a mine, but the real idea behind the game is to get the team members to trust their partner’s directions and to teach them to communicate in a more effective way.

Questions:
1) How do I Assign xp for those and the danger room simulations?

2) Would these situations be accepted or do PC's need real threats to consider them worth there time?

3) How would you as GM or player approach this idea?

4) This is initially for HU, but I have the feeling it would fit other games as well. How they fit into non HU games? Hence why its posted here.

Also if you have a scenario you feel might help or wish to post feel free to do so.

I'm confused. Are you having the players directly participate in these trust exercises or some how plan to role play their characters doing these?

Cinos wrote:I'm confused. Are you having the players directly participate in these trust exercises or some how plan to role play their characters doing these?

From the looks of it he wants to build a sense of trust and teamwork between the actual players with RL exercises to that effect, so that in game they'd trust each other more rather than acting as individuals in competition.

More for in game. But yes the idea is to ease the PC/players into a team better. Like Night says, Sometimes people with the same skill sets or powers often compete and that can lead less efficient team sometimes. Plus I could see a super team doing something like this in large groups to evaluate leadership, confidence and such.

in the case of PBP It would need be in game of course.

Now the issue is do I give xp and if so how much wold be fair?

Rimmerdal wrote:Questions:
1) How do I Assign xp for those and the danger room simulations?

There is a problem-solving exp bonus I believe that is listed.

Rimmerdal wrote:2) Would these situations be accepted or do PC's need real threats to consider them worth there time?

3) How would you as GM or player approach this idea?

4) This is initially for HU, but I have the feeling it would fit other games as well. How they fit into non HU games? Hence why its posted here.

Also if you have a scenario you feel might help or wish to post feel free to do so.

The only thing I can really add to this is that unless it actually works, then it hasn't worked and they have failed. I know that is vague.

What I mean by this is that unless the PCs can show they actually trust their fellow players, then no real trust has been established.
An example and an explanation: you cannot have one PC simply state that they "trust" another when they are constantly doing things counter to the other PC's ideas, plans, etc.
An explanation of such is one from my personal experience:
I play a lot of Deadlands: the Wasted West (another role-playing game) and when I first started, I was playing with three friends of mine - we grew up together and had a real bond of trust. We would be all in on each-others' ideas regardless of how stupid they may actually have been, but we would put forth true teamwork. And by true teamwork, I mean like; 'one time my character with wings needed to support the rest of the party in order to avoid the growing fire under our feet in what amounted to a stone shaft. Well I wasn't strong enough, and we all literally dumped every possible piece of equipment and clothing we could in an attempt to reduce weight. Still wasn't good enough. My one friend had the ability to regenerate limbs over the course of weeks, so we cut off an arm and his legs. The Marshal was dumbfounded at just how strong our sense of group was and allowed that to be enough loss of weight. But being that the game was Deadlands, there was a bit of sinister planning behind his decision.'

That level of dedication to the group is something that is very hard to simulate in a role-playing game. Because, as I was saying previous to the above story, my group eventually gained additional members. These people were not as out for the group as myself and close friends were, and we ended up with groups within groups; where one character might take a bullet or ten for one party member, or a few may have pooled all of their resources together to reanimate said dead companion as a Harrowed (true story), these "new" members were not as such.

So while you and your players can go through the motions of various trust exercises, only a true expression of trust can ever actually show a sign of success. But I have found that to be its own reward.