Poisonous politeness

[Ekul]

My friend and I love DnD. We play it as often as we can, which is once a week, barring emergencies or whatever. Recently, we've been wanting new blood, so since he's the more social of us he's been pulling some of his work friends in. First one guy, then a married couple. They're pretty nice people, they show up on time and without being belligerent. So it goes alright for a while, DnD is going on as normal.

Now I should mention, one half of the married couple is more or less only in it because the other half is- and he can only come once every other week because of his job. So the wife asks that we play every other week.

Naturally, the two of us who started have a problem with this- once every other week is not really enough momentum for us. Now I know that some people would kill to have dnd once every other week, but for me this is like my only real life interaction with people out of my family IRL. But, well, we decide to let it slide and we're stuck with dnd only every other week. And I gotta say, that kills my enthusiasm for the game. For the next month and a half or so, I'm not really feeling it anymore. My favorite activity has just lost most of its draw. I even start to feel like I'm willing to let my character just die and then accept that I'm not allowed to come back, which is a major deal for me.

Well anyway, during this period, we even get the occasional cancellations from the married couple, which is even more grating to my sensibilities. My friend and I, used to playing from 6PM-1AM every week are now stuck playing from 2 PM to 6 PM less than every other week. Much of the time, the married couple can't wait to leave before the end of the session. So finally, my friend the other night intuited that she doesn't actually want to play, and finally tells her that she doesn't have to come back. She confirms his suspicion and says "Are you sure" etc, and basically that part of the group is released from their obligation to be here.

Now, the whole point I'm trying to make here is that essentially she kept playing out of politeness so as not to say "I don't want to be here", but the end result, good intentions or no, is that everybody was miserable because of it. Maybe it would have been better if she just told us she didn't like it and wanted to stop. Does anybody else have any situations that resemble this or have any thoughts on topics like this? Is there some perspective I've not considered in all of this? Are we being selfish, magnanimous or arbitrary?

[tahu88810]

tl;dr- Is being (diplomatically) honest with people the best way to handle social situations?

The answer: Yes.

[Anxe]

That situation is actually my favorite part of CS Lewis's Screwtape Letters.

[Ashdate]

Are we being selfish, magnanimous or arbitrary?

Yes. Yes you are.

Marriage is a big deal (there's a reason he married her and not you).

Just because your life allows you the freedom to game once a week from 6 to 1am doesn't mean that everyone has that freedom. I don't know why she was playing with you guys in the first place (you would have to ask her about that). But two things stand out to me:

1) It was you, not them who settled for playing bi-monthly for 4 hours. Yeah I'm sure finding players is hard where you live but if you want your group to play weekly for 7 hours, then it's your job - not this guy's - to find players who are willing to put in that kind of commitment. It sounds like he was pretty clear about his ability to play; if that doesn't work for you, then find someone else.

2) I don't want to tell you how to run your game, but I get this not-so-subtle hint that even though she may not have wanted to be there, you didn't really seem to want her there either. I mean, I agree with what tahu88810 said above, but it sounds like you weren't exactly engaging her in the game. Yeah, she may or may not have been attending for reasons other than slaying orcs, but you had her in a seat at the table, and rather than trying to fix whatever was stopping her from having fun, you appeared to have soldiered on as normal.

[Tengu_temp]

How about starting another game and playing it during the weeks when the married player cannot join?

[Mr Beer]

As said above, you agreed to cut your game sessions in half. I have no idea why, it seems pretty silly to do that when you like playing so much and it's a request from a new player. Run a seperate campaign on the alternate weeks or say "no but DM will run your PC when you're not here" or whatever. I would never agree to cut my gaming days by 50% to accomodate one player's selfish desire to not play as much but also not wanting others gaming without them.

So yeah, don't agree to silly requests would be my advice. Pro-tip, sometimes the most demanding players are also the least invested in the game.

[Ekul]

Just because your life allows you the freedom to game once a week from 6 to 1am doesn't mean that everyone has that freedom. I don't know why she was playing with you guys in the first place (you would have to ask her about that). But two things stand out to me:

1) It was you, not them who settled for playing bi-monthly for 4 hours. Yeah I'm sure finding players is hard where you live but if you want your group to play weekly for 7 hours, then it's your job - not this guy's - to find players who are willing to put in that kind of commitment. It sounds like he was pretty clear about his ability to play; if that doesn't work for you, then find someone else.

2) I don't want to tell you how to run your game, but I get this not-so-subtle hint that even though she may not have wanted to be there, you didn't really seem to want her there either. I mean, I agree with what tahu88810 said above, but it sounds like you weren't exactly engaging her in the game. Yeah, she may or may not have been attending for reasons other than slaying orcs, but you had her in a seat at the table, and rather than trying to fix whatever was stopping her from having fun, you appeared to have soldiered on as normal.

Perhaps. But I had nothing to do with engaging or not engaging her in the game, and I had nothing to do with her leaving. I'm not the GM, and my friend, who was the GM, tried his hardest to engage everyone and at first, he succeeded. I complimented them and helped them out whenever I could, and we never had bad vibes towards each other, at least none that I detected.

Let me get one thing clear. I'm not saying this post out of any malice towards anybody. I'm just stating my interpretation of events that were mostly out of my control.

And yes, I did try to do more DnD on the side, but my DM found it stressful so he requested that we stick to one campaign.

As said above, you agreed to cut your game sessions in half. I have no idea why, it seems pretty silly to do that when you like playing so much and it's a request from a new player. Run a seperate campaign on the alternate weeks or say "no but DM will run your PC when you're not here" or whatever. I would never agree to cut my gaming days by 50% to accomodate one player's selfish desire to not play as much but also not wanting others gaming without them.

It wasn't decided that we would split the session times to once every other week until a good ways after they joined, and I never told them not to restrict it. Heck, I thought my DM had something else going on in his life, it wasn't until the group break happened that he told me why he was cancelling it so often.

[Honest Tiefling]

Personally, I think that her (and possibly the husband) expressing an interest to leave before the scheduled end of the event to be quite tacky.

But honestly, it would seem to me that the married couple wanted a briefer, less frequent diversion, while the other two wanted a more hardcore hobby. Is that bad? No, just means that you guys have different takes on how to do DnD. I am sad to hear how it all ended up, but I don't think anyone was in the wrong from the information present.

I do also agree with previous posters that two games might have been interesting, and given you a back up if the couple had to bail for whatever reason.

[TuggyNE]

Now, the whole point I'm trying to make here is that essentially she kept playing out of politeness so as not to say "I don't want to be here", but the end result, good intentions or no, is that everybody was miserable because of it. Maybe it would have been better if she just told us she didn't like it and wanted to stop. Does anybody else have any situations that resemble this or have any thoughts on topics like this? Is there some perspective I've not considered in all of this? Are we being selfish, magnanimous or arbitrary?

No. "Unselfishness", in this sort of situation, is a very different thing from really considering others more important than oneself or trying to be kind and generous: a very different, much more toxic thing, because it's founded not on what one really wants, or even what someone else really wants, but on one's idea of others' unstated desires or needs, which are often quite wrong.

Communication is key to society at every level.

That situation is actually my favorite part of CS Lewis's Screwtape Letters.

Quite so. There's a feller with a natural 18 in Wis for you.

[Krazzman]

We have our game once or twice on average every week.

BUT! We have about 4 campaigns.
One PF for weekends (where when some guys can't make it they play anyway).
Our DnD game with 4 players, SWSE game with 3 players, Another dnd game with 6 players and so on.
When someone can't make it we play something different. Or we just play some board games. Maybe this could work out for you?

[erikun]

How about starting another game and playing it during the weeks when the married player cannot join?

This is what I am wondering. If you were having fun with these long, six-hour sessions, why not just start up a second game on the weeks that the married couple is not coming over? If the other players are available, then you could invite them as well and have something to do when the married couple didn't make it.

It's obviously not a concern now, but it is something to keep in mind if the situation happens again.

[Killer Angel]

So yeah, don't agree to silly requests would be my advice.

Well, the request itself is understandable (especially if you consider that it came from someone that doesn't know the real appeal games got on us).
But the answer should have been "no, sorry" nonetheless.

[veti]

And yes, I did try to do more DnD on the side, but my DM found it stressful so he requested that we stick to one campaign.

Have you considered playing something else? There are a lot of RPGs out there, you could run a D&D campaign every other week and "something else" - pulp fiction, superheroes, space opera, horror, whatever - in off-weeks.

(However, I agree that 4 hour sessions are really too short to generate much investment in the game. My idea of a good session is from about midday to midnight, allowing about 3-4 hours of downtime while people turn up late, eat meals, natter about life etc.)

[Airk]

Have you considered playing something else? There are a lot of RPGs out there, you could run a D&D campaign every other week and "something else" - pulp fiction, superheroes, space opera, horror, whatever - in off-weeks.

(However, I agree that 4 hour sessions are really too short to generate much investment in the game. My idea of a good session is from about midday to midnight, allowing about 3-4 hours of downtime while people turn up late, eat meals, natter about life etc.)

Guys? It's over. The deed is done. The ship has sailed. The problem people have left the game. Offering solutions like "Why not play something else on off weeks?" at this point is too late.

Also, for the record, my group is doing well with multiple games once a week, 4 hour sessions tops.

[Jay R]

There is a belief out that it is selfish to actually tell people what you would like to have happen. So people hide their actual desires, and try to guess what other people want. The result is that everyone is unselfishly aiming, not at what the others want, but at their own guess about what they want.

This does not serve anybody.

The ideal solution is to agree to have everybody announce what their preference is, and then try to base the group's plans on the real desires, knowing that we usually can't meet them all.

And yes, Screwtape said it much better.

[Janus]

There is a belief out that it is selfish to actually tell people what you would like to have happen. So people hide their actual desires, and try to guess what other people want. The result is that everyone is unselfishly aiming, not at what the others want, but at their own guess about what they want.

+1
I spent a couple of years in Brazil, and one thing that surprised me was when I learned it was okay to (tactfully) tell someone you didn't care for a specific food, and it was generally considered ruder for you to keep on eating something you didn't like.
...granted, "don't complain about the food" was so ingrained in me growing up that I didn't really take advantage of that like I should have.

But yeah, I think we're too afraid of offending each other these days. Tactful honesty tends to be the best course, IMO.

[Eladrinblade]

All of that.

I have problems like this with many people I know. They're too cowardly to just say what they think/feel, so they lie, basically, to everyone's detriment. You did nothing wrong.

[TriForce]

Now, the whole point I'm trying to make here is that essentially she kept playing out of politeness so as not to say "I don't want to be here", but the end result, good intentions or no, is that everybody was miserable because of it. Maybe it would have been better if she just told us she didn't like it and wanted to stop. Does anybody else have any situations that resemble this or have any thoughts on topics like this? Is there some perspective I've not considered in all of this? Are we being selfish, magnanimous or arbitrary?

perhaps, however, i do think that its a shared blame. if she didnt want to game, she shouldnt have come to begin with.

all in all, you and the rest are there to have fun, and if someone isnt, something needs to change. i do think that it was a bad idea to adjust the schedule in favor of 1 person, but all in all, the situation was handled reasonably well

[Kalmageddon]

If you want to know if you handled the situation correctly, I think you did.
You were being mislead to believe that the married couple (or just the wife from the sound of it) was actually interested in the game as much as you were, and the fact that they didn't made it clear that this wasn't the case made it so that you and your friend agreed to their conditions instead of rejecting them as players in the first place.

With that said, communication is everything, so maybe it should have been clear from the start that this couple wasn't at all into roleplaying games. I blame the fact that both you and your friends were eager to find new players to have a decent sized group to play with, so maybe you believed what you wanted to believe when they started creating problems.
Next time just try to make everything clear before the start.