A D&D relationship issue

[billd91]

The implication being that if one doesn't game with cursing and barmaid-cleavage jokes then one isn't an adult?

I think it's a good rejoinder for asking for a PG-rated game. No parental guidance is necessary for an adult game for adults.

 

[roguerouge]

For me, this has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with the typical issues of bringing a potentially uninterested SO to the gaming table.

The first question to ask her, when she's alone, is "Why do you want to play?" Listen very, very carefully to her answer. If one of the first two answers is because she likes something about the game (story, RP, exploration, imaginary killing, tactics), then you'll be fine. If one of the first two answers hints at "Because I want to check up on my boyfriend" or "Because I want to do everything my boyfriend does, even if I don't think I'll like it" then you've got a potential problem. If the first two reasons are both that she likes something about the game and she has separation issues with her SO, well, hope for the best.

I can tell you that I've had players who were at the gaming table for the wrong reasons. It's never worked out badly, but it's never worked out well. (Usually, we just get stuck with an NPC after 1-3 sessions.)

I've NEVER had someone give an existing table an ultimatum on how to play the game with them. That takes some serious stones. It's a very bad warning sign.

I hate to say it, but it sounds like there's some control issues in that relationship that are going to get worked out through you. In fact, no matter what you do, you may end up losing a friend. I hope I'm wrong, but...

Now, I have to ask: what happens if her character dies? Are you going to fudge the rolls to avoid that?

 

[Dausuul]

I'm going to diverge a bit from the advice given in the rest of the thread.

My inclination would be to say to Jane, in the most polite and friendly way possible, "I'm not sure we'd be a good fit for you, Jane. I can't ask my players to change the way they play, and I'm not going to change the way I run. It doesn't really sound like the kind of game we play is something you'd enjoy. What are you looking for here?"

The reason is that it doesn't sound like Jane is really interested in gaming qua gaming. I get the strong impression that this is a case of "Jake and Jane must do everything together." It might be Jake wanting his girlfriend included in every aspect of his life, or it might be Jane wanting to be part of everything Jake does, but either way it isn't Jane wanting to play D&D.

So, push back some. If she really does want to play the game, she'll say so when you ask "What are you looking for here?" and you can come to some kind of accommodation. But if Jake is trying to drag her into something she doesn't really want to do, pushing back gives her an out; and if she's trying to insert herself because she doesn't want Jake doing things without her, she won't have a good answer.

And consider your own limitations. It's easy to talk about kicking people out of a group, but in practice, most gamers I know (myself included) have a lot of trouble with confrontation. Are you prepared to boot her if her behavior at the gaming table becomes a problem? Are you prepared for the argument with Jake that this will entail? Because it's very possible you'll end up having to do that.

(Edit: Dang ninjas. Roguerouge said everything I wanted to say, but said it better.)

 

[ExploderWizard]

For me, this has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with the typical issues of bringing a potentially uninterested SO to the gaming table.

The first question to ask her, when she's alone, is "Why do you want to play?" Listen very, very carefully to her answer. If one of the first two answers is because she likes something about the game (story, RP, exploration, imaginary killing, tactics), then you'll be fine. If one of the first two answers hints at "Because I want to check up on my boyfriend" or "Because I want to do everything my boyfriend does, even if I don't think I'll like it" then you've got a potential problem. If the first two reasons are both that she likes something about the game and she has separation issues with her SO, well, hope for the best.

I can tell you that I've had players who were at the gaming table for the wrong reasons. It's never worked out badly, but it's never worked out well. (Usually, we just get stuck with an NPC after 1-3 sessions.)

I've NEVER had someone give an existing table an ultimatum on how to play the game with them. That takes some serious stones. It's a very bad warning sign.

I hate to say it, but it sounds like there's some control issues in that relationship that are going to get worked out through you. In fact, no matter what you do, you may end up losing a friend. I hope I'm wrong, but...

Now, I have to ask: what happens if her character dies? Are you going to fudge the rolls to avoid that?

DING DING DING! We have a winner. This whole situation sets of alarms. I certainly second the idea to see if she really wants to play. I have been involved with groups containing tag-along SO's who were not into the game and it was horrible.

The list of demands just screams " Hey lets see how much of this crap they will take before I can have Jake to myself".

Proceed with caution. Remember that gaming is supposed to be time to kick back, relax and have fun. I would advise not to let a newbie come in and start dictating the conditions under which you are permitted to enjoy your game. If adult language and themes with a good dose of bawdy humor is normal for your game and everyone enjoys themselves why would you change things?

 

[Obryn]

How old is everyone at the table? I think there are different answers if we're talking high school, college, or adulthood.

With that said, I agree with the folks directly above me that this is likely less about the religion and more about arm-wrestling for Jake's time and attention.

-O

 

[invokethehojo]

I've been in a similar situation, although the significant other my friend wanted to bring in didn't have different views, she just wanted to customize any character she played beyond the rules or so it didn't fit in our group. It created hassles for me as a DM, and it caused the game to slow down and we all had to cater to this persons interests because they conflicted with the group. This didn't ruing our game, but it shifted the group comfort level, and in the end everyone enjoyed the game less.

I think your friends motives for bringing in this are girl are rather suspect. Honestly, if you have a good group and you don't need another person, I wouldn't feel bad in your position just saying "no" to your friends request to let her in the game. At the least tell your friend you want to wait until the relationship is more stable before you decide. From your position I'd say there is a good reason to think letting her in could disrupt your game, so if the only thing to potentially gain from risking that is to make one player happy, I'd have to say it doesn't sound like it's worth it. It's hard to get a good group together, don't risk ruining it unless it's really worth it.

 

[catsclaw227]

It could be about wrestling time away from the table to be with Jake, I suppose.

But what we don't know is how she will react when the DM tells her that, though they could try, they can't guarantee they'll not swear or that a mature theme or topic may arise. It may not even be sexual in nature, but still abhorant to the views of a devout Christian.

She may say, "That's fine, as long as no one tries to put it in my face, I can deal with some mature themes and the occasional swearing. Jake talks about this game and he seems to have some much fun, so I wanted to give it a try and find out if I may enjoy it as well."

Let's not attribute an immature response or ulterior motive to her without finding out more information. Otherwise we are simply doing to her what we wouldn't want others to do to ourselves.

And from the OP, it seems that Jake is more obsessed with Jane than the other way around. She simply asked two questions. The first - "Can I choose God as my deity" - is a perfectly reasonable question from a Christian that hasn't played D&D or understands the paradigm of the game.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Let's not attribute an immature response or ulterior motive to her without finding out more information. Otherwise we are simply doing to her what we wouldn't want others to do to ourselves.

I would say that making demands of a group you have not even met or played with before is a fairly explicit display of motive and not the best way to make a first impression.

If she simply wanted to try the game out then why not save any reservations/demands until after at least one session of play?

 

[catsclaw227]

Wait. I didn't see the part in the OP where she made demands. Weren't they just requests?

EDIT: I see he said she had "conditions", and while it's possible that they were actual demands, it is just as likely that they were simple questions or requests.

All I am saying is that we shouldn't attribute malice when we don't have any evidence that supports it.

 

[Dausuul]

Let's not attribute an immature response or ulterior motive to her without finding out more information. Otherwise we are simply doing to her what we wouldn't want others to do to ourselves.

Mmf. I see where you're coming from, but I'm also not inclined to bend over backwards (or tell the OP to do so) to accommodate someone who is, well, to put it diplomatically, pretty clearly not in sync with the group. And I've seen the "tag-along significant other" dynamic in action before. I don't think it's unreasonable to consider the strong probability that that's what's going on here.

And from the OP, it seems that Jake is more obsessed with Jane than the other way around.

This part I do agree with. As I mentioned upthread, the "tag-along significant other" comes in two flavors - you might call them Push and Pull. Pushes try to insert themselves into the game, so as to make sure their SOs aren't having fun without them. Pulls are dragged reluctantly into the game by SOs who don't quite grasp the idea that just because you date people doesn't mean they want to do everything you do.

On balance, I think this is more likely a Pull than a Push. And that's not necessarily a bad thing. I've known a number of gamers who were pulled in by significant others and then embraced the game for its own sake. But there's always potential for a massive train wreck, and Jane's attitude makes me think it's more likely than not.

All I am saying is that we shouldn't attribute malice when we don't have any evidence that supports it.

To which I reply, "True, but we also shouldn't ignore the possibility of malice* when the situation suggests it might be a factor."

[SIZE=-2]*Or jealousy/control issues, which is a better description than "malice."[/SIZE]