Gaming Group Troubles

[ggroy]

Life is too short to be playing rpg games which one is not satisfied with.

 

[Bagpuss]

Life is too short to be playing rpg games which one is not satisfied with.

Life isn't too short people are living much longer nowadays, unsatisfying roleplaying experiences are a direct result of improved health care and better diets. In the middle ages every roleplaying game experience was epic! You know they played LARPs with real swords back then? None of your foam rubbish, we see nowadays in this health and safety culture we have today.

 

[Mistwell]

I agree with Bagpuss on this one.

Frankly it does not sound like you want players as flexible as you. Because that would mean any day they don't feel like playing your game (for whatever reason), you'd be fine rescheduling for another day.

You've already made it pretty clear though that you're not happy if a player says they don't want to play on a particular day because they are playing in another game - and you don't want to reschedule when they say that.

No, what you seem to want is players who are willing to conform to when you want to GM. That's what you seem to have meant by "flexibility".

That's not flexibility. In fact it's incredibly inflexible. Flexibility would run both ways. You want to dictate to everyone what days YOU want to play, and you want them to say yes to any day you demand, and you will not offer them the same courtesy when they ask for the same "flexibility" from you so they can play another game.

And I am offering you genuine advice and observation here. But I feel fairly certain, given your responses thus far in this thread, that you will disagree rather than listen, and react defensively rather than actually thinking about it. Because it sure doesn't look t me like you wanted advice in this thread or genuine self-analysis - you wanted to complain and get sympathy. OK then, but you probably should have said that instead of asking for advice. You're the one being inflexible, and it's no coincidence that so many people have said that to you here (and you have laughed about it rather than really considering the possibility that it's true).

 

[the Jester]

That's not quite right. I'm treating it like a usurpation because he didn't keep me in the loop when he was planning the game.

Especially when it's a game you have no intention of playing, but even when it's a game you would like to play, I don't think he is under any sort of unspoken obligation to to this.

I think you assumed a lot of "he should do x" stuff without bothering to check with him to see if he agreed. Or even letting him know.

As I said, I wouldn't have expected the other guy to ask my permission or anything, but it sure would've been nice to at least have been kept in the loop with a courtesy head's up e-mail or something. Is that really too much to ask? I'm just talking about something along the lines of: "Hey Jonathan, I'm looking at running a Pathfinder game during the 'off' nights for your Star Wars game and three of your guys are interested in playing too. Just FYI."

That actually sounds a whole lot like you did want him to ask your permission.

There was no agreement that he would tell you about his plans. I don't know why you feel entitled to that, but it really sounds like you did.

Other people don't have an obligation to keep you informed about stuff that doesn't concern you. Since you weren't going to be in his game anyway and he made a point to schedule it on your off nights, I think you're being unreasonable in expecting him to check in. Especially, as you've implied, if you guys aren't friends but rather just game together.

At the very least, I would've been able to discuss the schedule with him in advance, instead of having to fight with him about it after it was too late to change it.

But he scheduled it, explicitly, to be on your off nights. It was only when you asked him to skip games for you, and he declined, after you'd asked him before and then not actually used the week he gave up for you, that a conflict arose, right?

Here's how it went down: I e-mailed the guy to ask if I could meet up with him to collect some minis and other gaming aids off him. I asked if he was free Friday night. His response was: "Playing Pathfinder ..."

Now, I know that it's easy to misinterpret tone and intent with e-mails, but I took that little ellipsis as a sign of a guilty conscience on his part, like he didn't really want to tell me that's what he was doing. I could just picture him doing that guilty shifty eye thing and muttering his response out the side of his mouth. "I should've told you this before, but ..."

snip some stuff out

I just love that "funnily enough" bit ... it's like he was rubbing it in without even necessarily trying ... "I'll get to run my game for a few weeks in a row but you won't! Nyah nyah nyah!"]

I don't even know what to say to this. I think you're inferring something that he didn't mean to imply, and your response reads like you feel pretty persecuted/paranoid to me, to be honest.

The thing is: while I'm pretty sure he was joking, I'm not entirely sure that I was. I think I was just pretending to be joking but was really being serious.

Well, that's become increasingly apparent throughout this thread. Sorry, but I really don't think you're in the right here.

 

[pukunui]

Actually I thought they made it clear to you. At least that's what you implied at the start of this thread.

I must not have been clear enough. Let me reiterate that they have not abandoned my game for the PF game. All they've said is that if they had to choose between the two on any given night, then they would choose the PF. All three have expressed an interest in continuing to play in my Star Wars game so long as it doesn't conflict with the PF game. And that's fine. I'm not holding that against them any longer.

That being said, though, I think that my mindset has now shifted since I started this thread, and I am now looking forward to running a game with just two players rather than five.

Unfortunately I think you'll find most people prefer regular commitments. They are much easier to plan for.

I don't need to find that out. I already know that.

I'm just pointing out the double standard you seem to have.

But do you have to be so nasty about it?

And pukunui sounds like a bad DM.

Thanks for that insightful comment. I'll take it to heart.

Frankly it does not sound like you want players as flexible as you. Because that would mean any day they don't feel like playing your game (for whatever reason), you'd be fine rescheduling for another day.

Yep. That's what I said I was going to do from now on. If one or both of my remaining players (or I) don't feel like playing my game any given week, for whatever reason, then we won't play. I won't pester them to change their minds or give them grief about it at all.

But I feel fairly certain, given your responses thus far in this thread, that you will disagree rather than listen, and react defensively rather than actually thinking about it.

You're absolutely correct. I have a tendency to get defensive. I absolutely do take things too personally. I am not going to deny that in the slightest. But I do also think that some people are getting the wrong idea, and that may be entirely my fault for not presenting the "facts" or even my feelings clearly enough.

The thing is, I've moved on since starting this thread. Just writing it all out and putting it out in the open was very cathartic. I no longer feel so upset. I have made a decision and I am forging ahead with it.

Because it sure doesn't look t me like you wanted advice in this thread or genuine self-analysis - you wanted to complain and get sympathy.

Perhaps a little bit, yes.
But I am willing to accept genuine advice and criticism. I just wish people could be polite about it rather than snarky. I mean, honestly, what useful purpose does being snarky serve? I think probably the main reason I've been defensive is because of the snark from some posters. It's just not necessary. Why can't we have a civil discussion and be all polite and stuff? Gotta love the anonymity of the internet! You can be as snarky and rude as you want because the people you're talking to don't know who you are or where you live ...

and it's no coincidence that so many people have said that to you here

I'd say just as many people have said they sympathize with me. It's an even spread. And most of the posters here have been polite and civil.

I think you assumed a lot of "he should do x" stuff without bothering to check with him to see if he agreed. Or even letting him know.

Looks like maybe we both fell down on the "bothering to do stuff" front then, eh?

That actually sounds a whole lot like you did want him to ask your permission.

How are you reaching that conclusion? Wanting a head's up is not the same thing as wanting permission. I don't understand why expecting people you associate with to keep you informed of their plans, especially if there's a chance they might negatively impact on your own plans, is such an awful thing.

There was no agreement that he would tell you about his plans. I don't know why you feel entitled to that, but it really sounds like you did.

Yes, I do feel entitled to be kept informed, and I don't see why that's so wrong.

Other people don't have an obligation to keep you informed about stuff that doesn't concern you.

But it does concern me! Just because I'm not participating in the event doesn't mean it doesn't have any impact on my life.

But he scheduled it, explicitly, to be on your off nights. It was only when you asked him to skip games for you, and he declined, after you'd asked him before and then not actually used the week he gave up for you, that a conflict arose, right?

Again, I only ended up "not using" the week he gave me because he called in sick at the last minute. I'd already had Player #3 say he wasn't going to be there because he was going off on yet another of his outdoors excursions, and Player #2 had said he was going to be so late that he might as well have missed it altogether. At that point, I was not in the right mindset to run the game with so few players, so I decided to cancel. And bear in mind that this was at the very last minute. Same day. Only a few hours before the session.

I think you're inferring something that he didn't mean to imply

Are you able to read his mind? Can you honestly say with any certainty that he didn't mean to imply that?

and your response reads like you feel pretty persecuted/paranoid to me, to be honest.

You could be right.

Well, that's become increasingly apparent throughout this thread. Sorry, but I really don't think you're in the right here.

Maybe not. But what do you want me to say or do about it now? How would you suggest I proceed?

 

[evileeyore]

Thanks for that insightful comment. I'll take it to heart.

Hear that fellows? My work here is done.


ttfn

 

[pukunui]

Hear that fellows? My work here is done.

Indeed. I bow to your infinite wisdom, oh great and mysterious stranger on the internet! I am not worthy.

EDIT: [MENTION=1768]evileeyore[/MENTION]: I'm glad. Making you laugh was my intention with this post.

 

[pawsplay]

Pukunui, I can identify with your plight. It sucks when a group flakes out on you. However, I'm going to level with you. By the time I was done reading your OP, I wanted out of your group.

Whatever the truth of the situation is, and I don't claim to know it, here's how your coming across: entitled, negative, possessive, self-centered. Your group doesn't owe you three weeks in a row. Most people don't want to game with someone who spends his off-time considering which players to fire, or whether others are being disloyal, or whatever. It sounds like you're used to GMing from a standpoint where others follow your lead, but the group has come to want more input on scheduling and such. Through it all, all I keep hearing is how upset you are, how your feelings were hurt, and so forth, and it appears likely to me you have offended your group members and I'm wondering why you're not curious why.

IMHO.

Your game probably sucks. From the sound of it, you don't feel focus, and neither do your players. They have told you they like the other game better; there is no reason to mention it if they could have both, so the fact that someone volunteered this information pretty much means they are complaining that your game is not as much fun.

Stop inisting like other people have to be as excited about your campaigns as you are. Let people go in peace who want time off in a different campaign. Don't force people to choose. Recruit new players as you will. This is a situation where you have to give up some control: the more you tighten your grip, the more players will slip through your fingers.

 

[pukunui]

IMHO.

Yes, you've come across as very humble there. Good job. Can you please teach me how to be as humble as you are?

Your game probably sucks.

Yeah, you're probably right. I should really listen to you guys who've never sat at my table and seen me GM in person. You really seem to know what you're talking about. Maybe my players are just continuing to show up each session out of a sense of solidarity after all and not because they actually enjoy it ... but wait! Someone said earlier in this thread that there is no loyalty amongst gamers and that if they aren't having fun, they'll leave ... and yet these guys keep showing up (the only one who's actually quit the group is the guy running the PF game, and that wasn't because he wasn't enjoying it but rather because of some real life issues concerning his GF - sorry if I left that out before), and on top of that they have all told me that they don't want to leave (it's just that they don't want there to be any conflicts between the two games either), so I must be doing something that they like, right? So maybe, just maybe, my game doesn't suck! Could that be possible at all? Or am I way off base? Help me out here please. I'm confused now.

Let people go in peace who want time off in a different campaign.

Yes, this is what I am now doing. I have said so several times now. I have moved on from where I was at when I first started this thread.

But here's the thing: I am now at a point where I would like to put all of this behind me and forge ahead with my new plan, which is to run a two-player game rather than a five/six/seven-player one. How do I politely let the other three know that I would now actually prefer it if they didn't keep coming?

 

[ggroy]

(From reading the thread more closely.)

No offense, but the OP sounds like a "control freak". I've noticed for the many "control freaks" I've known in person over the years, DM-ing an rpg game just brings out the worst in them.

In the past, I've walked away from games where the DM was a total "control freak". Such games collapsed after awhile, with numerous irreconcilable personality clashes.