TOPIC: Time to Revisit Age Policy?

Incognito wrote: The difference is that babies should not have been in the dungeon (due to the Minimum Age Policy), while adults generally are permitted.

Dude, you missed my point.

"Babies should not be in the dungeon"? Correct.

"...because making accommodations can take away from the experience of others" Nope.

There's a host of reasons why under-age individuals should not be in the dungeon.

Raven, in some of the examples you provided, it would just be small modifications.

and with underage kids, a lot of the time it would just be small modifications. Perhaps super-small! Like... not telling the rest of the group that your 13yr old is really big for his age, and letting them all assume he's 16. It doesn't take away from the party's enjoyment at all, right?. Does that make it OK?

The point I am trying to make is that it's not about accommodations. Those are a completely different topic, and should not be used to justify or prohibit under-age participants.

An important distinction to make for this discussion would be the difference between players, and tag-a-long kids "ghosts". Players being someone with a paid for armband. There may be reasons to have different rules for both (or not). I wanted to point it out.

The age constraints on a player may be different because of the required interaction with props. A player under 18 might not be required to have a parent/guardian on the run (I don't know the policy on this). A player can get treasure and xp.

TD might feel the need to have policy rules with specific conditions, that allow mothers parents to bring small children as non players. For instance that the child is at all times in a carrier, That the parents has the consent of the rest of the party to bring the child, that the parent sign a special waiver.

Personally I don't think bringing an infant on a dungeon run is the best idea, There's nowhere to stop and change a diaper, and if they're fussy, you as a parent will be distracted and not enjoy the dungeon. I also get that for some parents, it may not be possible to do a dungeon run without the baby.

Firstly I think if you buy out a run you should be able to do whatever you like with it.

Anyway given there isnt really going to be a way to prevent people from buying tickets for their kids (we wernt able to stop them from buying into nightmare runs they wernt equipped for either) I wonder how we are going to address issues when kids under whatever age turn up.

Even if we refund them, which isnt a great customer service experience there will be a lot of short runs.

End of the day I say have a recomended age but let parents be the judges of their kids.

This thread makes me smile because as a parent I can read these comments and probably guess with a high degree of accuracy who actually has children and who does not. Eric - I'm sure you'll be there one day my friend!!! And when you do I'm betting you wind up with at least 7 or 8

I have three children, ages 4, 11 and 13. Would I ever bring my 4 year old into the dungeon? Hell no. Unless of course he was really acting up at which point I may try and stuff him into a bag and leave him at the Adventurers Guild bag check station while his daddy and mommy went out for a few beers. But other than that no way. And babies? I love em, but absolutely not. I mean how would ones ego hold up when a baby busts out a natural 20 on a slide?

Last year I bought out a run and took my oldest two kids. I also had other family members and friends join us one of whom brought his 12 year old son. Everything went well and we all had an absolute blast. That being said I never would have attempted it without a full run to ourselves as I don't think it would have been fair to spring a small group of minors on other players. Not that the kids would have been disrespectful, but a run with children has a different dynamic which not all people may appreciate.

I like what Rob expressed!

I only have four kids, maybe five, that I feel have the maturity to play and let everyone enjoy.

But those five are 21, 19, 16, 14, and 11... I wouldn't bring my 18 year old nor 13 year old since they don't have the maturity yet...

Matthew Hayward wrote: I think 12 is a fine age since a line has to be drawn somewhere. Individuals will always be different in maturity and capability, but heck, if the good folks at the MPAA think your kid might not be able to handle Lord of the Rings or The Avengers they probably shouldn't be in there.

"Maturity" doesn't make much of a difference when it comes to the age for selective service, the age of consent (and the age ranges that determine statutory rape), the age for alcohol consumption, and the age to obtain a driver's license.

Or perhaps there could be "kids hours" for some days or times where the minimum age is lower?

That might be a solution, provided that the volunteer shifts are then also specially scheduled so that only DM's who love or are okay with kids, are staffed to work during those times.

I feel slightly differently about babies who are carried. I think it's OK to permit this, under the clear understanding that if the baby begins to cry or be disruptive the guardian and baby will be escorted out with no refund. It might be too much hassle to administer such a program for the benefit it's going to bring.

If there are kids or babies on the run, should the rest of the party members be forced to moderate their language? For example, no adult topics, no "swearing," no talk of violence, no talk of religion, etc.

Raven wrote:

Incognito wrote: The difference is that babies should not have been in the dungeon (due to the Minimum Age Policy), while adults generally are permitted.

Dude, you missed my point.

"Babies should not be in the dungeon"? Correct.

"...because making accommodations can take away from the experience of others" Nope.

There's a host of reasons why under-age individuals should not be in the dungeon.

And dude (or should it be dudette?), you missed my point.

I don't mind making reasonable accommodations for someone who has the right to be there. I *don't* think we should need to make any accommodations at all for someone who isn't supposed to be there in the first place!

Similarly, suppose TD has a banned list. If any of those individuals show up on a TD run, I also wouldn't think we should make *any* accommodations to that person, even though I would be willing to make the same accommodations for someone who was not banned from TD.

Since that person shouldn't be there in the first place (see the current minimum age policy), no, we shouldn't do anything (whether that be an accommodation or something else) that takes away from the experience of the others.

and with underage kids, a lot of the time it would just be small modifications. Perhaps super-small! Like... not telling the rest of the group that your 13yr old is really big for his age, and letting them all assume he's 16. It doesn't take away from the party's enjoyment at all, right?. Does that make it OK?

If you're okay with deception and lies of omission (and I say that without judgment).

The point I am trying to make is that it's not about accommodations. Those are a completely different topic, and should not be used to justify or prohibit under-age participants.

I actually agree with you that the main issue is *not* about accommodations. It's about the simple fact that young children and babies are not supposed to be in the dungeon. Therefore, anything related to that child/baby that negatively impacts the experience of any of the players or volunteers (whether that be due to an accommodation or something else), is most definitely a cause for concern (but there are also additional issues as well).

Graven wrote: TD might feel the need to have policy rules with specific conditions, that allow mothers parents to bring small children as non players. For instance that the child is at all times in a carrier, That the parents has the consent of the rest of the party to bring the child, that the parent sign a special waiver.

It should also require the consent of the volunteers doing that run. Not all of them signed up to be baby-sitters.

Personally I don't think bringing an infant on a dungeon run is the best idea, There's nowhere to stop and change a diaper, and if they're fussy, you as a parent will be distracted and not enjoy the dungeon. I also get that for some parents, it may not be possible to do a dungeon run without the baby.

Being a parent requires sacrifices. (I know that may sound ironic coming from a non-parent). And that means not being able to do everything you want to (which may also include skydiving or backpacking across another continent). Unfortunately, too many of this current generation "want it all" but by trying to do so, they impose a burden on everyone else.

I know I might sound harsh (look at Incognito, the baby-hater!) but this is the EXACT issue that comes up in heated discussions about whether parents should take babies and young children on airplanes or nice restaurants or movie theaters (particularly non-kid movies).

Picc wrote: Firstly I think if you buy out a run you should be able to do whatever you like with it.

I disagree because you are not considering the perspectives of the volunteers, who have to suffer the consequences of any such decisions.

Anyway given there isnt really going to be a way to prevent people from buying tickets for their kids (we wernt able to stop them from buying into nightmare runs they wernt equipped for either).

The easy solution would have been to run those adventures as they had been planned - Nightmare.

End of the day I say have a recomended age but let parents be the judges of their kids.

I strongly disagree. Parents are not sufficiently objective when it comes to their kids. WAY too many parents are soooooo sure of how brilliant or how beautiful or how special their kids are. (When to me, they all look and taste like identical little sandwiches! Bwahahaha! )

Rob F wrote: Last year I bought out a run and took my oldest two kids. I also had other family members and friends join us one of whom brought his 12 year old son. Everything went well and we all had an absolute blast. That being said I never would have attempted it without a full run to ourselves as I don't think it would have been fair to spring a small group of minors on other players. Not that the kids would have been disrespectful, but a run with children has a different dynamic which not all people may appreciate.

Do you think it would have been fair to spring a small group of minors on the volunteers?

Do you think it was fair for the 12 year-olds whose parents didn't let them run because they wanted to follow the rules (even if the kids were very mature for their age)?

Or perhaps there could be "kids hours" for some days or times where the minimum age is lower?

That might be a solution, provided that the volunteer shifts are then also specially scheduled so that only DM's who love or are okay with kids, are staffed to work during those times.

I think you have the wrong perspective here.

Volunteers don't get to veto what sorts of people TD will allow to play.

I feel slightly differently about babies who are carried. I think it's OK to permit this, under the clear understanding that if the baby begins to cry or be disruptive the guardian and baby will be escorted out with no refund. It might be too much hassle to administer such a program for the benefit it's going to bring.

If there are kids or babies on the run, should the rest of the party members be forced to moderate their language? For example, no adult topics, no "swearing," no talk of violence, no talk of religion, etc.

You can't talk about religion in front of babies?

Players should behave within some reasonable bounds of decorum at all times. The presence of a baby changes nothing.

Incognito wrote:

Rob F wrote: Last year I bought out a run and took my oldest two kids. I also had other family members and friends join us one of whom brought his 12 year old son. Everything went well and we all had an absolute blast. That being said I never would have attempted it without a full run to ourselves as I don't think it would have been fair to spring a small group of minors on other players. Not that the kids would have been disrespectful, but a run with children has a different dynamic which not all people may appreciate.

Do you think it would have been fair to spring a small group of minors on the volunteers?

Do you think it was fair for the 12 year-olds whose parents didn't let them run because they wanted to follow the rules (even if the kids were very mature for their age)?

I think you think to much sometimes.