|
The hard thing in my experience is not getting rid of obvious bad actors, but managing players (or GMs) who bring the group down in less bombastic fashion. I'm talking about the guy who clearly does not enjoy the game and spends every session essentially doing nothing, but continues showing up week after week. It creates an increasing impression that the group is a place of last resort for people who have "nowhere else to go", which in turn reduces investment on the part of the other players and GMs. It's tough to kick people out who "didn't do anything wrong", the common response I've seen is the rest of the group schedules around them instead to ensure they don't show up.
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2022 17:54
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 18:13 |
|
|
I'm also referring to a scenario with multiple tables and a shared pool of players. After enough "bad games" the GMs respond by handpicking the players they actually like and leaving to form their own smaller groups. Which is great for those people, since they now have regular games with people they like to play with. But it's not good for the overall health of the larger group.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2022 23:45
|
|
|
Interested to see how forcing the players to make their own maps goes. I tried it with my own megadungeon and eventually abandoned it because the players all hated it. Out of a rotating cast of about twenty, not a single one wanted to spend the entire session taking careful notes and repeatedly clarifying the geometry of every room. There were a few who did so out of a sense of obligation, but they weren't always present (perhaps because they disliked being saddled with a chore nobody else wanted). I suspect the player organized scheduling will resolve itself into a facsimile of regularly scheduled sessions, since the limiting reactant is what timeslots the DM can actually make. If the players can make twenty different times and the DM can make three, you've got three potential times. You could "unlock" additional timeslots by recruiting more DMs, but that requires convincing people to put in the effort to run games in a shared setting where they don't have total creative control. How do you plan to recruit more DMs?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2022 19:07
|
|
|
Were you ever able to recruit more DMs?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2023 05:20
|
|
|
aldantefax posted:Players of all skill levels and all play styles are encountered. aldantefax posted:As people who are paying to play there is a certain level of self-selection taking place - which is, only people who can afford the membership can join. This does change the people who I end up engaging with, and folks at my table are all completely okay with it and seem significantly more invested in the experience (other referees report similar energy at their tables)
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2023 06:59
|
|
|
I can't imagine running modern d20 fantasy for fifteen players at once. I know it was a common way to play the older editions, but even B/X bogs down when a combat involves more than a dozen characters, let alone a dozen player characters.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2023 18:40
|
|
|
I visited the closest game store today and discovered there's no way to reserve a table there for a weekly meeting. They won't rent out anything smaller than a private room. The attached bar even has a sign saying they won't give you a table unless you show up with a group of people already assembled, so there's no possibility of grabbing a space there and playing with whoever shows up. The game store I played at in grad school let you reserve tables for weekly play, but they went out of business a few years ago. They did a lot of things that were good for the hobby but not particularly profitable, like giving most of their shelf space to indie and non 5e RPGs. I suspect they were kept afloat solely by in-person Magic, and when that disappeared for several years they went under.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2023 18:54
|
|
|
You could scramble the teams and force people to play at new tables with new DMs, but
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2023 18:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 18:13 |
|
|
Actually the whole situation sounds like the reverse of every "living world" I've ever participated in. Usually the guy at the top is very enthusiastic about the shared world and keeping everyone on-script, while the co-GMs are more interested in doing their own thing than putting in the grunt work of writing/reading play reports and updating setting documents.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2023 22:51
|
|