How would your group handle this somewhat delicate situation with a player?

[Jeff Wilder]

The reason I insist on a set schedule for games is that i want to be able to schedule around the game, and I want other people to be able to do that, also. I love my RPG time, but I also love playing poker, playing Rock Band, seeing movies with my (ex) GF (don't ask), and so on.

Game scheduling isn't completely inflexible in our house, but pretty close, and I think it's completely reasonable for joethelawyer to feel -- if I'm not just projecting -- that their schedules -- not just gaming schedules, but rest-of-the-time schedules -- not be held in limbo because one player has a problem adhering to a schedule (for whatever reason).

It's reasonable to try and settle on a set game day that works for everyone. It's not reasonable for other players to wait around to hear what day will work for one player.

 

[delericho]

I have a well-known complete lack of tact in these sorts of matters. If I approached him, it would be something like "Dude, grow a pair, tell your wife it's game night, and if she doesn't like it, tell her she can kiss your 20-sider. If she gives you any more lip, tell her she's cut off. No more nightly deliveries from Mr. Happy."

If you provoke a confrontation of any sort, you will only lose a player.

I would take one of two approaches, depending on the rest of the group.

Approach one is to switch to a more flexible arrangement of game days. That is, you don't play every Saturday, but instead aim to play one evening every two weeks or so. The key to making this work is three things:

1) Everyone must come to the session with a reasonably accurate note of when they're free to play again. Before anyone leaves, you need to fix a date for the next game. (If a player can't make it to a session, they need to let the group know when they'll be available next, or else they'll almost certainly miss the next session... and very soon be an ex-player.)

(Also, people need to provide a diary that they can reasonably stick to. So, if your 'problem player' is having his schedule dictated by another, he needs to have the discussion with her before coming to the session so he can set up the next game with confidence. Otherwise, this just won't work.)

2) Everyone needs to be commited to actually gaming. When scheduling gatherings (of various people for various reasons), I've seen a lot of people answering the question, "when are you free?" with one or two 'ideal' dates. Obviously, if everyone does that, then you may well find there are no dates when everyone will play. Instead, the answer needs to include those dates that the player could be there, even if it's not quite ideal.

3) Once a date for the game is set, it needs to be treated with the same seriousness as any other commitment. If people merely 'pencil in' the date, but overwrite it as soon as anything else comes up, you'll get lots of cancellations, and your group will disband. (Obviously, this doesn't apply to the occasional emergency - sometimes things really do come up.)

If, for whatever reason, the group can't work like this (perhaps your player's wife can't fix her schedule in advance, which means he can't, either), I would instead propose that the group have a fixed game day that suits as many people as possible, but is very flexible about attendance. Basically, everyone should aim to "be there when you can", but not stress out about it.

For this to work, I recommend that the DM keep all the character sheets, and all the PCs gain XP and treasure at the same rate, whether the player is there or not (so that people don't fall behind, and find they can't contribute to the game when they are there).

Of the two, the first approach probably works best for a small group, where there are likely to be fewer scheduling conflicts but less resiliance to absenteeism, while the latter would work best for a large group (as getting people's schedules to mesh will be difficult, but the group can survive missing a few people). The latter approach also works best if people can't be sure when they're available, or if you find you're getting a lot of people calling off.

Whatever approach you go with, it's probably a good idea to monitor how it's working out fairly constantly. It may well need tweaking as things change. If it doesn't work, change the system - don't try to force people to change to work within the system you've agreed. If all else fails, consider moving to a virtual tabletop.

Good luck!

 

[delericho]

Giving him the holidays nuttiness benefit of the doubt, here's an example that puts it all in perspective I think. Our big game day of the year is the day after thanksgiving. Its sort of a tradition that we all take off from work, and spend the entire day, like 12 hours at least, reliving the college days and just playing D&D and drinking beer all damn day.

A 'tradition' like that can only work if all the people involved are onboard with the idea. This includes the DM and all the players and any significant others, children, and others. It sounds like your player booked this time without properly consulting with his wife, and got burned as a result.

Basically, I would recommend you get used to the idea that the days of this tradition are numbered. Because even if this player drops out and ceases to present an issue, it is very likely that the rest of your group will one day marry, and be unavailable.

However, if you really want to keep it going, then be aware that the day after Thanksgiving just won't work once you have families to deal with. There is too much holiday nuttiness to deal with. Instead, you should pick some other day, perhaps a random Tuesday in August, and have everyone agree to take the day off work to gather that day. That might work. (Sound like too much sacrifice for a day of gaming? Then be prepared to lose the all-day game entirely.)

A week or less before the big day this year, we started the get rumblings that all was not well in Camelot. We started hearing he might have something to do with relatives. That turned into family is visiting and we may have to start later. That turned into "I can play all day, I just might have to take off for 2 hours in the middle of it" (we figure no biggie, we'll use that time to eat turkey day leftovers and watch a D&D day appropriate movie). What ultimately ended up happening was us starting at like 11 am and ending at 4 pm.

You do have a legitimate grievance, and it is this: the player should have been honest and up front with you guys, and said, "I'm sorry, I just can't make it." Unfortunately, I suspect he didn't want to face up to that reality himself.

That pretty much sealed the deal for us that he was the wussy in the relationship.

Take that attitude, and you'll lose the player. You don't know the inner workings of his marriage.

I liked the idea of suggesting we just play at his place.

It is a good idea, but not because it will "force the issue".

You seem to be adopting the position that your player's wife is an enemy to be overcome. She isn't, or else you would be doomed. Force a guy to choose between his wife and his game, and you'll lose. Every time.

What you need to do is learn some diplomacy, and try to make the wife an ally, or at least someone you can negotiate with reasonably.

So:

1) Suggest gaming at their place. Whether they go for it or not, you should also invite the wife to join the game, either permanently or for a session or two.

2) Suggest some non-gaming things you guys can do, and make sure to invite the player's wife (plus any other wives or girlfriends of players). The focus should be on getting to know the people involved, and opening a dialogue. Your player's wife will be a whole lot more comfortable with her husband meeting up with Joe than with "some guy he hangs out with."

3) If and when this guy has to cancel the game due to family commitments, be nothing but understanding. No matter how much you have to hold your tongue. No matter how it tries your patience. Or lose the player. (The only exception is this: I would insist that the player be honest with you about when he can play, and not make commitments he can't keep. That's just basic manners.)

 

[justanobody]

Take that attitude, and you'll lose the player. You don't know the inner workings of his marriage.

Doesn't matter. Doesn't seem like a lost player to me. Either he needs to get his jewels out of her purse, or move along and remove himself form the game and get his priorities straight. Is he some woman's lapdog, or a human being?

He is greatly affecting 3 other people's lives be flaking out because his wife, and needs to get out of the bad relationship himself, or not put the D&D players through one because of himself.

As it stands now, it seems this woman is controlling not only him, but those around him and something needs to give. If she won't then he needs to be cut form the game as a loss.

There needs to be no involvement of the group into the marriage, but likewise he doesn't need to bring his marital problems to other people costing them their precious time because he doesn't have a pair.

Cut him lose since he doesn't seem to fit the playstyle of the group and doesn't want to work to be a part of it.

 

[delericho]

Either he needs to get his jewels out of her purse, or move along and remove himself form the game and get his priorities straight. Is he some woman's lapdog, or a human being?

He ... needs to get out of the bad relationship himself...

As it stands now, it seems this woman is controlling not only him...

There needs to be no involvement of the group into the marriage, but likewise he doesn't need to bring his marital problems...

...he doesn't have a pair.

You're making an awful lot of assumptions about the wife, the player and the marriage, and based on what? We have a second-hand report of what the wife has said and done. We don't know what the wife actually said, nor how she said it. We don't know if the player fought for the game or not, or if there are other factors at work. We simply do not have the information to make any sort of sane judgement of the situation.

And, frankly, the wife isn't being all that unreasonable. In the first years of a marriage, a couple has to spend a significant amount of time together, working out the parameters of their new lives together. And, if he works days and she regularly works nights, their time together is going to be severely curtailed.

And similarly, for a husband to unilaterally make plans to spend the whole of the day after Thanksgiving away from his wife and family is, at the very least, questionable. That was his first mistake in that situation. His second mistake was in adjusting his availability based on hope rather than reality. But the mistake here lies with the player, and not his wife.

 

[Nightchilde-2]

You should hold your game in the way that works out for the most people. If the three people that are not the problem guy want to hold the game on Friday nights (or Monday nights, or whenever), then hold it on that day. Let the problem player know that he is welcome to join you, but that you can't keep putting your game on hold when he can't show up.

This. I've had to do this in my own game, and while it has casued me to lose *players*, I've never lost a *friend* because of it.

 

[Jack99]

Doesn't matter. Doesn't seem like a lost player to me. Either he needs to get his jewels out of her purse, or move along and remove himself form the game and get his priorities straight. Is he some woman's lapdog, or a human being?

It's called responsibility and compromise. Have you ever had a significant relationship with a woman?

He is greatly affecting 3 other people's lives be flaking out because his wife, and needs to get out of the bad relationship himself, or not put the D&D players through one because of himself.

Let's not overexxagerate how much being able to have a fixed day means to people. Sure, it would be nice, but greatly affecting their lives might be overreaching, like a tad...

As it stands now, it seems this woman is controlling not only him, but those around him and something needs to give. If she won't then he needs to be cut form the game as a loss.

There is rarely only one side to a story.

There needs to be no involvement of the group into the marriage, but likewise he doesn't need to bring his marital problems to other people costing them their precious time because he doesn't have a pair.

Now you are just making up more assumptions. And you know what they say, right?

Cut him lose since he doesn't seem to fit the playstyle of the group and doesn't want to work to be a part of it.

Some people actually have friends and wish to preserve them. TBH it doesn't seem as if the OP has gone through too much trouble to fix this situation yet, so maybe, just maybe, it's a little early to talk about "cutting people loose".

And, frankly, the wife isn't being all that unreasonable. In the first years of a marriage, a couple has to spend a significant amount of time together, working out the parameters of their new lives together. And, if he works days and she regularly works nights, their time together is going to be severely curtailed.

Depends on the couple really. Lots of couples have known and lived together for years before making it official to the State and/or God, so therefore not everyone need to get to know each other afterwards.

 

[avin]

There must be some space in a couple. She has to concede him a game night and he has to trade something in return.

Otherwise their marriage is going in the wrong direction.

 

[La Bete]

Doesn't matter. Doesn't seem like a lost player to me. Either he needs to get his jewels out of her purse, or move along and remove himself form the game and get his priorities straight. Is he some woman's lapdog, or a human being?

He is greatly affecting 3 other people's lives be flaking out because his wife, and needs to get out of the bad relationship himself, or not put the D&D players through one because of himself.

As it stands now, it seems this woman is controlling not only him, but those around him and something needs to give. If she won't then he needs to be cut form the game as a loss.

There needs to be no involvement of the group into the marriage, but likewise he doesn't need to bring his marital problems to other people costing them their precious time because he doesn't have a pair.

Cut him lose since he doesn't seem to fit the playstyle of the group and doesn't want to work to be a part of it.

Ken?

 

[ruemere]

Speaking from experience...

Marriage is about two people agreeing on a compromise. Live and let live.

Your friend appears to be in early stage of such relationship - this is when people take their significant other's inclinations and preferences for granted. What should they work on now is communicating their personal needs.
It's not evil, egoistical to have a hobby. It's not a betrayal to be able to enjoy or pursue different goals. Just keep in mind that the other side needs to be able to do the same, and at the same time, they appreciate and know how to enjoy their own interests.

It's hard to give a specific advice in this situation, but probably asking your friend to talk to her like his equal [1], and then stating that this is something your friend simply loves to do, would be a good start. One just has to put himself in a position of a supplicant - you do not need to be humble or apprehensive, however you should be polite (and probably avoid becoming too defensive).

Compromise: If there is a need, offer to spend quality time with her during more convenient hours, but try to avoid making it looking like bargain offer. You're genuinely trying to be happy with her, not just trying to strike a business deal.

Regards,
Ruemere

[1] Putting her in a role of an opponent means that you're not treating her on equal terms. It's really easy to attribute ill will to someone who is simply not aware of your need.