Talk to her nicely, and ask her what she really wants to do about the game.
The impression her behavoir gives me is that she's not actually interested in the game, but plays because she feels she is obligated to, or that she doesnt want to hurt your feelings by dropping out.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I second those saying "prep for her not to come, adjust if she comes", if you're willing to go that far. I've had a few of those players, though not always living with me. I've had one player with quite a bad case of social anxiety who never knew earlier than an hour before if they could make it, and sometimes had to leave mid-session because it was too much.
It's not that hard to adjust for an extra player once you get used to it, though it can take a bit of practice in the beginning. The fact that infrequent players often tend to be the same as those who aren't super-good at combat tactics and/or optimizing (though many of them can be good roleplayers!) means that you might not even have to do any adjustments if it's a decently large player group - basically, the sessions she shows up will be a little easier than the ones she doesn't, but that doesn't matter that much unless your players want it really difficult.
It's interesting to note that in threads where a problematic player is female, it's common for the moderators to be forced to remove sexist language, but that hardly ever happens when the problematic player is male. That says something about gender issues within the community.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Why by golly, my good old bean! In regard of the partaking of your most tippity-top personhood in tonight's merrymaking of verosimilitudinous and affectatious savoir-faire, mind if I entreat of you the grant of disestablishing said committement in favour of another that would result in a discongruity of our respective collocations? By all means, send my best of regards to [Insert Name of Someone Important]. Ta-ta!"
We approve of this display of courteous rejection. Tally-ho!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Why by golly, my good old bean! In regard of the partaking of your most tippity-top personhood in tonight's merrymaking of verosimilitudinous and affectatious savoir-faire, mind if I entreat of you the grant of disestablishing said committement in favour of another that would result in a discongruity of our respective collocations? By all means, send my best of regards to [Insert Name of Someone Important]. Ta-ta!"
From now on, I am going to refer to people as "[their] most tippity-top personhood[s]" in all legal documents.
|
I always find it really strange that, when diplomacy is called for with this kind of thing, the usual response is to "have a sit down" and talk about what's been happening with their lives or about mutual respect.
Maybe I'm wrong, but have any of you had been through this kind of thing and done that and had it work? I haven't, but if I was feeling hostile towards another player over a lengthy period of time and they wanted to have a sit down with me to talk about my feelings, I completely wouldn't be open to it.
It's like you're turning it into a counseling session, and sorry, but unless there are some really serious issues going on (and granted there might be), no game is worth that talk - I'd rather get up and leave, and you risk damaging relations further at the attempt.
Hopefully I'm just reading the suggestions wrong.
Again, I haven't had this happen, but if I was feeling like I was going nutty at a GM who was hassling me with my plans in a way like El Ronza described, you say this is the last time you'll lay down the expectations and that you want to keep them reasonable - reassure them two or three times that you just want to be reasonable, and also tell them that that doesn't mean it has to be unreasonable for her - it has to be reasonable on everyone. It's tough for anyone to disagree with that, and that's the first time you should be able to anticipate whether actually laying down any sort of expectations will work with them or not by judging their reaction. Keep it cool and don't panic.
As part of the expectation, point out you will never ask where they're going or how long they'll be, because that's not your business. Start with that, because that's bad for you and good for them.
Second is that even though you don't want to know how long they'll be, you do need to be assured that they'll be on time for the game (or 15 minutes early, or whatever your group commonly does).
And wrap it up - with less expectation, the better - by saying you want everyone to enjoy the game, including them. Ask if that's cool. It's probably best not to even bother bringing up what will happen if those expectations aren't met the first time you talk to them so you can give them the benefit of the doubt. Ask if there's anything else they'd like from you and try to compromise, even if it seems harsh to you (it might seem harsh to them).
Thank them for being cool with having it explained. Be sincere.
If they weren't cool about talking about it, then come back later, and if they're never cool about talking about it in the first place, go straight to plan B and assume she's already not playing except as a +1 at best. You've got good reason at this point.
Maybe I'm wrong, but have any of you had been through this kind of thing and done that and had it work? I haven't, but if I was feeling hostile towards another player over a lengthy period of time and they wanted to have a sit down with me to talk about my feelings, I completely wouldn't be open to it.
Yes, I've had them work for me, as long as they're done _in time_. There is a point of no return, but we frequently have sit downs in between sessions discussing how we'd like the game to be and how we feel things are going. None of us are very busy people, but we're on different schedules so the issue of getting to play isn't finding time, it's finding a time when _everyone_ can. Thus, it's easy to have frequent sitdowns.
As for the more "we need to talk about this" sitdowns, they've usually "worked" though the outcome has been varied. Usually though after the sitdown, you and the group has a clear idea of what needs to be done, whether it's dropping the player or changing the play style.
EDIT: On the other hand, I and most of the players are also engaged in different political groups where it's the standard to discuss how people feel for different situations; thus, for us more than the average person, it might be easy to put feelings to words and discuss serious issues without getting too antagonistic. We're all pretty humble in front of each other, which I think is important for "the talk" to work well.
|
|
Yeah, if everyone's keen to talk, I'm sure it'd work well, but in a situation where (at least) one side is resistant to taking any action to make things better because they think nothing's wrong - or, in this case, intruding into their lives, I can't see it happening.
I'm genuinely curious, it's interesting to know about.
|
If they decided to play, that means that they made a commitment. To the GM and other players. Honestly, i wouldn't bother with inviting them back. I respect the OP and their reasoning.
Honestly, I don't care whether its family or not. A person who can't keep their word and be there on time will lose any respect i might have had for them. And will not be considered for anything anymore. I went to the movies with my sister a couple of times a few years ago, and she was always late. Once she didn't come at all. I never go to the movies with my sister any more.