Thief + Wizard, Part 1/5
What’s this? The beginnings of a five-part arc about Thief and Wizard’s relationship? I mean, they’ve only been dating since comic #52 “Intra-Party Romance.” What are we up to now? Comic #549? It’s about time the Handbook’s OG couple got a little attention!
While we wait for that story to develop, why don’t we return for a moment to the well-worn topic of session scheduling? We may have talked about this once or twice (or thrice…possibly four times) before, but the perennial challenge of figuring out your next game time is always worth reconsidering. In fact, I’d venture to say that just picking a time and sticking to it may actually work against your campaign’s long-term health.
Weird to think about, I know, but here’s where I’m coming from. We so often hold up the ideal of “game night” as this sacrosanct thing. The campaign begins, the group picks Tuesday or whatever as the weekly Time of Convocation, and no further thought is necessary. Everyone knows that Tuesday is the day, and with that knowledge firmly in mind you can all work your schedules around it. It even works for a while. You game consistently for a few months. The months turn into a year, the campaign is still going strong, and so you march boldly forth together into the paragon tier. Mazel tov.
But then it happens. Alice decides to go back to school. Or maybe Bob has kid. Perhaps Carol gets voluntold for nightshift, and suddenly Tuesdays aren’t looking so hot anymore. When these things happen, asking the group to schedule around the game doesn’t really fly. And at that point, it’s time to slaughter some sacred cows. It’s time to renegotiate game night.
This is never an easy step. As gamers, we tend to cling to our comfort zone and never let go. But for my money, periodically revisiting Session Zero decision points is healthier than trying to make the same old thing work, even when it’s obviously not. Scheduling game night is just one example. Location and hosting duties are another. Who’s GMing, which system you’re playing, and attendance policy are all on the table. In my own games, the old XP vs milestone debate came back after four years of play. And honestly? I only wish we’d had that conversation a little sooner.
So for today’s discussion question, why don’t we talk about the BIG THINGS that you’ve changed midway through a campaign? Maybe you decided to switch to a new edition. Maybe you added some new players. Maybe you subtracted a few, splitting one big table into two smaller ones. Maybe you even did the unthinkable and changed the timing for your weekly game night. What was the decision, and how did your group collectively make it? Tell us your tales of bold executive action and consensus-building down in the comments!
GET YOUR SCHWAG ON! Want a piece of Handbook-World to hang on you wall? Then you’ll want to check out the “Hero” reward tier on the The Handbook of Heroes Patreon. Each monthly treasure haul will bring you prints, decals, buttons, bookmarks and more! There’s even talk of a few Handbook-themed mini-dungeons on the horizon. So hit the link, open up that treasure chest, and see what loot awaits!
My, my. I wonder what Thief and Wizard might be talking about…
One time, a player in my RL group got a kind of “intervention”. He had a tendency to be late to game. We always had a bit of a warm-up period before playing; chatting about regular life, having some snacks, then we’d head in. His ‘tardiness’ extended the warm-up period and reduced play-time, so some of the group’s members told him off in front of all of us and said he needed to be more considerate.
They did have a point in that we could only get together once a week.
Unfortunately, he took this as a personal attack, said they needed to be more chill because it was only a game, and wound up leaving.
I haven’t seen or heard from him since, which is a shame. He even said he didn’t blame me, as I hadn’t known about the intervention before it happened.
Another time, I myself jumped ship in the middle of a campaign. My RL group was big enough that we had two sub-groups playing simultaneously, and I was in a D&D 3.5-game, some of whose players were playing the Evil alignment.
Their antics included claiming the portable tower I brought was theirs, ignoring me when I warned them about an artifact being bad news (which led to a war erupting), and other stuff. I finally got so fed up, I went over to the other sub-group and asked if they had a slot.
I still remember the stunned expressions of my Evil teammates and one of them asking: “Wait, you mean you were REALLY angry?”
The lesson here for me was, insisting something is in-character for your character is not an excuse for consistently and deliberately ****** me the **** off.
This sums up how important it is to have out of character dialogue when doing anything PVP or boundary-pushing. All it takes is to say “hey, can I just check you’re ok with this” when you know you’re pushing it. Don’t wait for the victim to complain. And above all, never be too big to say “okay, I messed up here and accidentally caused unfun. Can we wind back please?”
Best thing about this is it’s good practice for real life too.
…maybe gaming groups should consider having an “I’m not having fun” safeword? I might suggest that to mine.
Sounds like a solid idea to me!
MYSTERY!
Every time I contemplate this kind of heavy-handed move for any of my late players, Laurel always talks me out of it.
“They have lives. 2020 sucks. People are stressed. Don’t turn something fun into a fight with your friends.”
She’s got a higher WIS than I do.
True. But this was decades ago.
And we were all still in education. :-/
I don’t think any of those things would be considered particularly bold by my group. Our designated game night has permanently shifted a few times over the years, we’ve gained and lost players now and then, and our longest running campaign went though three D&D editions before finishing. And I can’t say any of that was particularly contentious… we don’t agree on everything, but none of those things would be a big deal.
Now if you want contention and argument, you need to put the RPGs to one side and look at board games…
How do you guys manage to make those big decisions? Do you bring ’em up regularly, or just as necessary?
I AM NOT PLAYING RISK WITH YOU PEOPLE EVER AGAIN YOU BASTARDS ELMININATED ME ON THE FIRST TURN
My group won’t let me play monopoly with them anymore. We played once.
They just happen when they need to happen… e.g. I think we shifted to our current schedule because someone’s kids picked up a hobby that made him unavailable on Wednesday nights, so we just looked at our options and found that everyone could make Tuesday work. It really isn’t a big decision…
As to players joining and leaving… departures have generally been due to players unable to continue because they’re moving overseas. And new players have joined because someone has said “can I bring a friend along next week?”, and they’ve fitted in well enough to keep coming back. Again, not really big decisions…
That’s the thing. I’m beginning to think that regular revisits to these decision points might be a good idea. People tend to be polite, so you might never know when something is working or not unless you ask.
Of course, it’s also possible that I’m overthinking this mess. Spending time on Session Zero questions isn’t exactly fun, and this sort of formal revisit could be more trouble than it’s worth.
Hmm part of me is thinking maybe Wizard will go back to being male by the end of this arc.
Why ever would you suspect such a thing? >_>
Yeah, Thief is the one wearing the pants, she’s the one more likely to swap genders! She’s also more likely to create a spawn of world-ending doom if babies are ever part of the equation.
Calling it now: Wizard proposed, Thief is unsure.
<_<
The real question is, who all is in the wedding party, and what will they end up wearing?
(As has been previously confirmed, Fighter won’t be dressing up at all. No matter what happens.)
According to previous statements by Colin on Laurels arting habits, something poofy and frilly.
I mean….
https://www.deviantart.com/fishcapades/art/Apple-and-Raven-656714266
I play in a game almost every night. The GM on the Tuesday game noted that I was often awake for his game but struggled on the Monday one, which I ran. For his part, he had Mondays off and would be frustrated that I couldn’t respond to his plot questions. After nearly 4 years with my game on Monday and his on Tuesday, we swapped days.
As for what it was supposed to fix, it worked out well for him I think. He can spend the day plotting and planning for his game. My change will matter more once we’re done with COVID, as what was killing me were the hour long drive home after a weekend day, but it did help even in the short term.
Nice! Why do you think it took so long to make the switch though? Was it just inertia? I mean, this one seems like a slam dunk.
I’m honestly not sure. Partially, it was because my game was older by about a year and a half. His started up in late 2017, mine was mid 2016 so we were likely locked in. And at first, it wasn’t too bad. I went years without any issues.
Another reason might have been the fact we had different players at the start. My game started with 6 and is now at 4, his at 5 and now at 3. These weren’t the same players originally but now I have one extra; the other two are in the same games. He pointed out that if the other guy was fine with Tuesdays, it changed nothing for the rest of us.
Finally, it was useful at the start. He had all of Monday to prep for his Tuesday games and I had most of Sunday to prep for mine originally. It’s only once we stopped needing prep that the extra time seemed like a curse for him and I had long since added more to my time card.
Heh. You’re right. Obvious in retrospect, but if you’re running with different groups that only have one or two members crossing over, the incentive to reorganize goes way down. Cool that you guys managed to make it work though!
We are actively in the process of deciding if we want to keep playing on the same day or not, because life has happened and some people need money for nice things. And since deciding between gaming night and having nice things is undesirable, were trying to accommodate both. Fortunately, this would be a temporary change, so we dont have to totally break with tradition and good sense, but its not ideal either. The alternative would be playing a different campaign for December, where the missing player would be less important to the plot, but i dont think any of us really want to exclude him if we can avoid it.
You could always do a little play by post to keep him involved. Not ideal by any means, but another option to put on the table.
The problem is, we would be making decisions in real time to solve problems directly related to his character. Even if he was involved in the campaign in other ways, we would still be making decisions without his direct input at the time.
Yeah. That’s rough.
Always tough to try and spitball solutions in this format. I don’t know the full situation. I was imagining putting the character on a temporary side quest until the player can come back. If that doesn’t work due to any number of very good reasons why it wouldn’t, then no worries. It’s always a negotiation, and some solutions are just shots in the dark
Yeah. Its just a month though. Wont kill us, and we have other games we can do while he’s busy so he isnt missing any story or anything important like that.
Are Wizard and Rogue gonna separate? In the divorce who gets Fighter and who gets Cleric? Will you make an arc about the obvious romance between Sorcerer and Cleric? Or that arc will be HboEF exclusive? We already know those two get too intense 🙂
Better question: who would WANT Fighter?
Team Bounty Hunter seems to be doing OK. Of course, that’s a different (and decidedly less SFW) continuity….
HboH team bounty hunter still wants Fighter. Surely there is a bounty on him… or several… Maybe Inquisitor will need to make a raffle to see which reward to claim and who gets the quarry 😀
Fortunately for Fighter, he doesn’t look much like the wanted posters at the moment. At least not in HoEF continuity.
Surely he does look a lot like in the magazines 🙂
Playelf got some nice central pages of fighter 😛
Playdwarf got some material but it’s too much intense o_O¡
Spoilers I guess, but you know that blonde chick at the bottom of this page…?
https://aonprd.com/MagicCursedDisplay.aspx?ItemName=Girdle%20of%20Opposite%20Gender
Maybe the people issuing rewards are willing to share? It’d only take a bit of work with some chains and a team of oxen.
Oh, yes i know that girl is our favorite that-guy Fighter 🙂
And over on the HoEF, her first order of business was joining up with Team Bounty Hunter.
The evil party, of course! He’s already gotten praise from them for his desecration abilities (which he considers an art), and fits in perfectly, being evil aligned, using a cursed/evil/goal oriented sword, having very few morals or restrictions…
I think Fighter is actually too evil – or at least too random – for them.
YMMV, and I am not the author. The way I see it going, though, goes like this:
* Antipaladin would be horrified by Fighter’s puppy-kicking tendencies.
* Succubus would soon be annoyed by him hitting on her.
* Necromancer would be up in arms when he started killing her undead and dismissing her distress.
* Witch might like him, but only until he tried to collect the bounty on her.
What? How could Fighter be evil aligned? It says “Good” right on his character sheet!
Character sheets lie 🙁
You told me they don’t even exist 🙂
So how could it say that Fighter is good then? o_O
And yet Paladin sensed great evil in his vicinity, which Fighter was unusually uncomfortable about. Leading to the following theories to explain this oddity:
One – Fighter edited his sheet or is otherwise hiding his true alignment from the players and/or DM, if not cheating.
Two – Fighter has a constant aura of evil on him as a result of either Mr. stabby, an overuse of Infernal Healing spells, or other cursed/evil equipment that would stick around on him.
Three – Fighter has the [evil] creature subtype
or template, like demons, devils and similar ‘born from evil’ creatures do. This uniquely lets him be evil for all effects that would affect an evil character, but doesn’t demand an evil alignment. This for example lets a Succubus be legitimately good aligned/redeemed, but be still detected and harmed by things like holy water or smite evil. Players of Wrath of the Righteous might be familiar with this.
Heh. I’d forgotten about the original Sorcerer comic:
https://www.handbookofheroes.com/archives/comic/wizard-vs-sorcerer
I suppose the dynamic would be slightly different now. Dang… Might have missed an opportunity with that one. Especially considering that Thief + Wizard’s rough patch has already extended to the HoEF timeline. If you’re not already following that mess, let’s just say that Wizard’s current rebound mage is not Sorcerer.
Well that too Witch original comic, unless i am forgetting something. Does that mean there could have been a poly-amorous Fem-Wizard, Sorcerer and Witch o_O
Surely Sorcerer would approve of that 😀
One can only dream.
Good idea will do that 😛
The biggest change ever to happen to one of my campaigns was switching to online due to plague. I miss meatspace.
You and me both. And also Wizard:
https://www.handbookofheroes.com/archives/comic/post-session
I can’t help but wonder whether this — https://www.handbookofheroes.com/archives/comic/spat — had an influence on the arc started today…
Heh. Consider it Part 0/5.
And this (https://www.handbookofheroes.com/archives/comic/homophones) as -1/5? 😉 Not to mention what happened at open mic night…
The signs have been there for a while: this relationship is in trouble.
Our online game experienced a sort of… Revolution. The guy who started it was making some decisions that the rest of the GM team didn’t really agree with, ignoring our input and keeping information from us so he could be the big boss GM even though we were doing most of the work, and the team confronted him about it, and he invited us to do it his way or leave. So we did. We made another discord server and invited everyone who wanted to join our game as well, making it clear we didn’t mind if people played in both, and basically the entire player base joined our new game. Now its much more of a democracy, and the GM team all cooperates, and we’re all pretty happy with how things turned out. And boy am I glad I use a different email and screen name for Gravatar than I do on discord just in case anyone from the server reads your comic, which I’ve linked there a few times.
Starting these conversations can be hard work. I’m sure that moving from here…
…to here…
Took a little while. Recognizing that there’s a problem is rough. I guess that’s why I’m toying with the idea of a “Periodic Session Zero” that could help to air some of this stuff without waiting for it to boil over.
I’d say (from my perspective as a fairly new member of the GM team) that the whole process of the GM team starting to feel frustrated to our schism took about a month, though it might have taken longer if there hadn’t been a big catalyst event.
The first GM forced all players into an encounter in the rest area gladiators were sent back to between matches, and didn’t get any help from any of the other GMs to run it (because he wanted to be the only one controlling the higher up stuff in the setting) and it was kind of a disaster. First, because it was one GM and something like 16 players, and second because the players did super well and he had to bullshit his way out of them just destroying his carefully arranged plans.
Ooh, speculation! Let’s see what could be possible topics!
Thief or Wizard are discussing multiclassing. One vehemently deigns to stay pure in class and keep that capstone benefit, the other wants to be flexible and doesn’t care about the capstone.
Babies! They want a child of their own. Wizard would find a baby a fantastic addition to their torturous style of RP (imagine how many crisis situations can arise from having to cherish and protect a toddler, or the opportunities of them turning evil on you!). Thief does not want to get stuck raising and protecting a NPC as a permanent burden.
They’ve already agreed on a child, but disagree on the ‘how’. Will one of them bear a child? Shall magic be needed? Adoption/kidnapping of a youngling? Will another have to… Surrogate to gain some optimal racials and stats?
Wizard wants to grab a teamwork feat, which obviously requires one of the party to cooperate and grab the same feat for it to work. Thief, a class with limited feats, likely would want to keep her options open there.
The option guessed by others already, a marriage proposal, or a similar relationship.
Wizards backstory returns, and she wants to arrange for all of her worldly responsibilities (i.e. royal burdens) to be Thiefs as well. Thief cherishes freedom from such things, but also likes riches involved with such a thing.
Maybe Wizard wants to invest their joint wealth in stocks and bonds for long-term gains. Thief might object because those terms are longer than her projected lifespan…
I feel like this is a Shadowrun plot waiting to happen.
Oh no… The fans are having ideas! And they’re better than MY ideas! Quick, somebody monetize fan fiction!
No, don’t! That way leads to the 50 shades-franchise and similar horrors!
Dude. If I got a cut of the 50 Shades franchise, I would sell out immediately, lol.
“Wow! You guys are putting in a pool?”
“Yup. Bought it with the vampirine bondage money!”
Succubus looks a lot more fetching than the vampires you guys’ve shown in the comic so far. And that page where she feels conflicted about the stirling redeemer suggests she’s somewhat open to bondage.
Just sayin’. 😉
Next comic prediction: Thief and/or Wizard discuss their dilemmas with someone they can trust for ‘good advice’: Goldie and Skitters, or Fighter and Cleric.
That or at least one PC/NPC don some 3D glasses and pull out the popcorn as things get interesting.
Hmm. I think the Priest is the closest thing in Handbookworld to a professional counseller.
Just so long as it isn’t Succubus in disguise, I suppose.
BRB. Gonna check the password protections on my Google Docs.
Well, if we’re skipping the recent “decision” to move games online and therefore switch from monthly to biweekly, probably the biggest change was when I introduced my custom critical, injury and duelling rules for more interesting combat with long-lasting consequences. That’s helped maintain a sense of peril as the game climbs in level, but not much more than that, so I suppose I haven’t changed all that much.
How did the conversation go? Was everyone on board for the (famously contentious) addition of crit rules?
Amazingly, yes! It was a fairly quick talk at the start of the session, to the extent that I was shocked when I became involved in online D&D forums a few years later and saw the hate that crits get! I think that everyone in our group saw that crits would take us closer to the kind of game we wanted, where fighting was dangerous and negotiation critical.
I recall, many a year ago, I was running an online game on an IRC server. That particular IRC network went away, so we had to scramble to find a new place to hang out. We found one – and it was a server with many other gamers, some of whom watched our game and were thus attracted in when we finished it and started a new campaign. This chain of friends has continued from server to server (these days over to Discord, after some time on Skype), with some leaving and some joining but some staying on throughout, for over 20 years.
That was my big surprise when moving over to a PbP environment for the first time. For some reason, I didn’t expect other users to come in and comment on the game. Took my by surprise when it happened.
I think I mentioned I’m running my game in chapters… which are essentially 8-12 sessions or so. And then I take a break from GMing and let my other friends fill the gap for a bit.
What’s nice about this is that we get to have session zero to figure things out every time we reconvene. And while I’m not big on certain rubber baby bumpers in role playing, I certainly don’t WANT to offend anyone unnecessarily, or at least unexpectedly, so it gives a chance to go over triggers and such with folks and reach consensus to either not put something in game, limit it in game, or tell people to put on their big boy pants ‘cuz it’s going to be there.
Further, I listen to my players when they’re complaining something is too brutal. I don’t always agree of course, but I view our hobby as both cooperative and collaborative as opposed to competitive.
Interesting! This is more or less what I’m talking about, but you’ve found a way to make it a natural fit within your game structure.
Any examples of stuff that changed from chapter to chapter?
So again, my game has somewhat natural breaks in it. I run a hybrid of rails and sandbox. Since it’s so heavily player driven, I get behind with map generation because even I don’t know what they will do next, and typically after a major in game event, they aren’t sure anyway. So that’s usually a chapter conclusion followed by an, ideally, 3-6 month GM break for me while someone else takes their turn.
When we come back to my game, I put up a post in Discord asking everyone to note me about anything that they had concerns about, and I tell them very clearly that they aren’t going to offend me so long as they keep an open mind that I may disagree with them. I want them to fight a little bit for what their requests because it gives me a good indication of how serious the matter is.
But, so we’re clear… There’s no reason you couldn’t do this exactly say, every month with a Facebook or Twitter post or something. Or even a group text asking people to reply via direct text.
It is incumbent on the GM to push the issue, though. Someone may have a small thing bothering them, and you need to be proactive in getting them to tell you before it becomes a Big Thing. I have seen tiny things fester and boil and become huge issues ‘seemingly’ out of nowhere, so this is the approach I am trying.
You can’t fix or even address something you don’t know is wrong. If you are at least trying to however, you can say honestly to yourself and to your players that you have been trying.
You have to do your part. But you need to hold firm they need to do their part too.
Well-played, DLR. I think you’ve convinced me to try my own idea. 🙂
Big changes in a game-wise, our DM had some rough patches with our very first Rise of the Runelords game. Halfway through it, due to a lot of drama and problems, he did a ‘hard reset’ of it, with new characters and a few new players, plus removing a problem player and setting up some more limitations to keep us from breaking the game. Later we’d also remove a toxic player from the mix.
We’ve also quit/suspended Shattered Star, Crimson Throne and Kingmaker APs for player-related reasons after only a few books in. We plan on picking up Crimson (and/or Kingmaker) after Mummy’s Mask is concluded, however!
Was it the GM’s decision alone to make some of these changes, or was there group input along the way?
For the ‘reset’, DM alone, as they felt defeated and unable to challenge our ridiculously strong builds. We tuned down our stuff from that point. The other games was group input or agreement we weren’t getting what we wanted from the APs. Clunky mechanics or dungeon crawl issues and such.
It’s really a fault of pathfinder in general. They sprinkle in things that basically require you to have a full caster on hand to fix, and then don’t plan the rest of the game around the fact that full casters exist.
Same with lategame martials, “surely they won’t just stand perfectly still and full attack every round, right?” They didn’t make HP scale for the way the game is actually played.