It was encouraging to hear that I am not the only GM whose campaigns loose steam. Sometimes it has been my players. Sometimes it has been me who gets disinterested.Only once did I fall prey to the 3rd reason, Unexpected Twist. I had been running a Star Wars campaign using the D20 system for over a year. We were between Episode 1 and 2. But I was feeling like it was getting samey so I tried to spice it up with a twist. Several of my players were fans of StarCraft. So I had a hyperdrive jump fail land them in an unknown region of the galaxy. And they ran into one of the three races from the StarCraft game. There was immediate decent from the players. They thought it was stupid and jarring. I admitted I was running out of ideas for Star Wars. So we put that campaign on hold and we went back to Shadowrun for a while. Actually, now that I am thinking about it, Shadowrun had been put on hold and we had pickup up Star Wars for similar reasons.
A much appreciated video. My campaign has been running for 47 sessions now (a bit over a year). Overall going well, but even with a (currently) successful campaign, every topic mentioned has been an issue. From the start I knew we would have a core group of players who would be more available than others. The characters whose player is not present can stay on the ship, participate in a supportive role, but does not hold up play. The challenge is when plots prepared for that character must be held, or replanned unexpected. I try to focus on the core group, while making sure the less available players have fun when they are able to attend. This has helped increase the attendance rate of some of the less available players. Another solution was to have players who were present the week before play cool NPCs with the missing players/characters from the previous week; a branch adventure bring out an unexpected part of the plot. The cool NPCs give light into a different culture or point of view (yes, a bit of metagame, but accessible to the players via gameplay). New roleplay dynamic, and totally unexpected. I make sure it is not adversarial (so far). I have been getting a bit bored; my solution was to not hoard secrets and plot twists, but me more free in letting them be discovered in cool ways/epic moments. It energises me, the players, and the plot. Some players have been frustrated with their characters; more envy seeing other characters do stuff, while not knowing their character well enough to realize they too can do cool stuff! Making sure I included moments in adventures for those challenged players to have their players shine (and giving them guidance in game to help them learn) seemed to help this issues. The players are all having lots of fun. The quality of the roleplaying is better than I had expected, which is outstanding. Seeding early and often has paid off. Moving the plot along, to give the players more of a sense of accomplishment I think will help keep up momentum and energy level. I would like that video on DM recharge!
Much appreciated. Although no doubt I use all of these tools in my own way, most (if not all) were inspired/borrowed from others. Guy's channel was my first glimpse of a way to improve my playing, the game for other players and a totally different perspective on GM'ing. On that Great GM crafting table, a lot more has been added. Tools and techniques from Colville, Mercer, Roll20, Nerdarchy, Johnn Four, Skorkowsky, the best of my own GM, ideas inspired by my players and creative players on line have been added. Each time I read comments after a video, I pick up something or try to share something. The community which Guy has grown to support us all is one of the neat things about our hobby!
Wargames *CAN* include roleplaying. We were playing a Plains Indians campaign; my Cavalry commander was Julius Augustus Tiberius Witherspoon, a man who was used to sending men to their deaths. If he lost an entire command of 60 troopers, he would count it as a minor skirmish. His trusted Indian scout was Haji Singh. ("Oh no sahib, I have not seen a single Indian, also I have not seen a single buffalo.")
I have a number of failures under my belt as a Perma GM. The important thing to do is to learn, to grow from them. Go over those failures with a fine tooth comb and extract every lesson you can. Only then will you become a better GM.
A twist on Character Disinterest... We play 7-9 month low-deathcount campaigns. I had 3/4 character deaths in the first 4 months. This is my first time gming. These were characters with backstory and player engagement. When they rolled up new characters, they focused on "the build" rather than the character... Our campaign is now so built around the only remaining character's backstory from the original party, both I and my players have struggled to get excited about story. I've been speeding towards a satisfying ending so we can just start fresh. No advice here, just a warning to make new character creation just as important as session 0.
Thank you for this the out of game communication has really helped me! Working with a player now who is losing interest in his character from an rp standpoint but the rest of the party loves the character. We are working towards a character death in a boss fight unbeknownst to the rest of the party with the flexibility of him still surviving but being changed internally from the experience. Really hope it works out and adds to the narrative and keeps everyone having fun, we will see!
One of the main reasons that caused my campaigns to die: insufficient preparation. In the past I repeatedly fell into the trap of having a cool campaign idea and starting right away with it, having my players create characters and dashing into the first scenario - and then what?! My advice: Don't rely on cool ideas to be self-sustaining, as promising as they may appear on first glance. When you have an idea for a campaign, always - *always* - take the time to sit down and prepare a plot. Otherwise it might occur to you - just like it did to me - that you quickly lose direction and, with it, interest. Even if you intend your campaign to be rather "sandbox-y", make a brainstorm list with encounter ideas which you can spin into adventures if need be (about a dozen or so, depending on how long your campaign shall go) *and* prepare for a conclusion to bring the campaign to a satisfying end. Consider what the PCs where about to achieve with the campaign, try to tie up any loose ends, and let them have that in a grand finale, if you feel that your or your players' interest is fading. But have a finale prepared, from the start! If you want to tell a story with your campaign, plan out the plot structure. Which means: major plot points and the encounters involved with them. Prepare a minimum of narrative structure, maybe guided by templates like the _5-room-dungeon_ -structure or by Joseph Campbell's _Hero's Journey_ -structure. So you can develop one major plot point - basically one chapter of your story - for each point of the template you're using. I, at least, found such templates very helpful in structuring my campaigns and preparing them out to the end. And that basically is my advice against premature campaign death: When you start a campaign, have the end already prepared. Know where you want to go.
#3 Is actually FUN. I currently run a campaign where I envision the world ACTUALLY in transition. For example: the muskets and pistols replace bows and crossbows, a group of warforged is more technically advanced as the rest, etc. Players like it
Another one I've seen: new gamesystems or versions (Pathfinder 1 to Pathfinder 2, D&D 4 to D&D 5, etc). Often, the group wants to get a handle on rules changes and doesn't want to try translating old characters over, and so abandons their current campaign to start over with a much simpler game. While I don't consider this a bad thing - it's logical to want to learn the new system properly - it does seem a shame to throw out all the previous lore and promise just to learn how to do the same stuff again. So my advice to those who want to do this: set your old world aside and start a new *temporary* game specifically designed to teach the new rules. Once everyone's been through a few sessions and is comfortable with the basics, say that you're going back to the old game, and for everyone to come up with new similarly-powered characters. Meanwhile, the GM takes the next session they'd PLANNED to run in their campaign and alters encounters to fit the new mechanics; any other sessions are to be removed and put on hold until THIS ONE session is completed so that the GM can account for respecs, character changes and other alterations of the PCs. After that, if players want to continue the campaign they were playing, the GM can start working on sessions for the new system as normal.
I recently concluded a campaign. It was supposed to be about the mystery of this ancient dwarven kingdom buried underneath the current elvish kingdom, and the intrigue as powerful lords and ladies vied to unearth the powerful magical artifacts buried within it in order to usurp the throne and gain power. INSTEAD, my druid player robbed a QUARTER MILLION GOLD from the freaking MAFIA, and the whole campaign became about finding the dragon who was secretly funneling money out of the kingdom to build his hoard.
7:18 I was waiting for you to mention this. Every one of my campaigns failed because of this! The rest of the video is really well thought-out and speaks from experience. Thank you for this, Guy!
My top 10 reasons: 1. Scheduling 2. Scheduling 3. Scheduling 4. Scheduling 5. Scheduling 6. Scheduling 7. Scheduling 8. Scheduling 9. Scheduling 10. Scheduling I play exclusively online now because it's so much easier to get people to sit on their computers for 2-3 hours than to arrange a game in the real world.
On an adjacent subject: How do you know when a campaign has ended? The heroes have subdued the countryside and there is peace in the land. ( Aside from those giant carnivorous bluebirds that have taken over the white cliffs.) But generally there is no more character growth to be had. How do you handle that?
End it there. It ends when it ends, especially if there isn't any worthwhile plot threads that makes sense(in-character and/or in-universe) or that don't jump the shark.
@@timbuktu8069 We've had few campaigns we ended short due to circumstances. One instance was where we really didn't have a true end goal but it was to influence the tide of an upcoming war-- we ended up killing one of the generals in cold blood(like, there wasn't even a roll for initiative, we caught them in a very vulnerable time to coup de grace them), screwing over the chain of command and dooming that nation to a massacre-- THE END. Or another example was, some of our party members used their abilities to kinda sorta spoil themselves the endgame and shortly after triggering the events of it. This one ended in a happier note though despite the GM having to skip an entire chapter because the party's meddling because, we got to deflect an entire invasion of an army of mind flayers with a joint effort of diplomacy while rolling the most important nat 20 and the very end.
I don't run a published campaign or anything, but there are some games that just go past their sell by date. Yet nobody wants to be the one to say it's over and they keep playing more out of habit than anything else.
My Spacemaster: Privateers campaign ended when the players has ramped up their own tech and political connections to the point that they had a faction ready to take over the enemy empire, then used an advanced FTL mass impactor to obliterate the enemy emperor and his government. I just asked the players what they wanted their characters to do "after the war" and wrote an epilogue I shared with everyone. Then I created the Rolemaster campaign I am running now.
I like your new video wrap up, it's efficient. Over the years we spend hours of our time looking at youtubers asking us to like and subscribe, so doing it silently while the actual content is still running is litterally a lifesaver. Anyway thanks for the quality content.
Unexpected twists work if they are announced as being that. We are all familiar with the Halloween episode of many TV shows (i.e. Star Treks "Catspaw") But then at the next session the play returns to normal.
I probably should get worried as one of my current campaigns has 4/10 boxes checked and it's just the starter kit for DnD... Interpersonal communication seems to be the hardest
My campaign started in my scout troop. Each time we end a session we do roses, thorns, and what we learned. It's actually something that helps the party have a great time and it's like 10 minutes at the end and it gives us a good feeling that we're all on the same page. Also it's like a ritual and it brings the session to a close and it's like a transition back into reality. It's very nice.
Projection would probably be one of the biggest sticklers for our group. We've never been able to figure out good pacing, often playing single sessions for hours until we're barely coherent and spending multiple sessions in one "minor" dungeon.
This is a helpful video as my group is returning from a two month break where interests have waned. At the very start of the campaign half a year ago we had planned our set schedule and confirmed everyone was available for the next month or two on that schedule. Of course a player gets a new GF two sessions in and misses two sessions by his request so he could go on dates, which was ok since he asked. Then he just "forgets" we are playing two weeks later because "no one told me we were playing", on the set schedule we all agreed to. He then asks the group if he can start attending every second session (which as the GM, I was not OK with trying to make this work in my first ever campaign). I had a long phone call with him and basically discussed whether or not he could make the set sessions consistently or if he would rather use that time to spend it with his new GF and asked him to think about it. I was relieved when he messaged the group and told them he was dropping out and that I didn't have to figure out some weird schedule or kick him out.
I’m actually about to start a new game. At least, I hope so. I have DMed before, but this time I have all new players except for one somewhat experienced player. I think that will make it easier for me to enforce the rules for the game since before, I had more experienced and more knowledgeable people on my previous group who occasionally interrupted the flow of the game with their, “what type of wood/stone is it?” Stuff. It helped out most of the time, especially when I first DMed. I had a rules lawyer player and he was super helpful for me to keep track of the rules at the time. The point of this potentially unreasonable rant is that this video has come out at a great time for me, so thank you sir! :D
The first point is so interesting to me. I absolutely love creating new characters, even when I’m in love with the one I’m already playing, I just love character hopping. So I’ve never thought of it from the other angle seeing problematic.
OH the feels. I've been there so many times in the past. If I feel that things aren't moving along or the players are done (or I am) I generally suggest playing a different style of game (M:tG, board game, etc.). I find that sometimes people need to walk away from the game for a couple of sessions to get their mojo/interest back. I know it happens to me from time to time. Just my two cents. Great video as always!
This is the first video in my feed today, when I just had a text conversation last night with a player that said he might have to bail on the campaign due to scheduling issues only to reveal he didn't like his character. Spooky. Thanks for the video. I plan to have a conversation as a group after our next session to discuss the upcoming 3 month block. Great piece of advice.
You could tell them it's important. Or, tell them to make an intelligence roll to see if their characters remember, or you can let them face the consequences for not paying attention.
Ask them at the start of every session to summarise what happened last session. That might be an effective primer to identify what the players retain, or haven’t. Make it so the oninous is on the players around the table to prime themselves sessions
In terms of describing scenes, I try to engage multiple senses for important scenes or NPCs. How does it appear? Is there a scent or sound? What feeling does it evoke? "The Dapper Dragon is the magic shop in OldPort. It is a small shop, with multiple display cases lit from within by continuous light spells, giving the space a warm glow and a cozy feel. The uplighting also helps the Magister, a Red Dragonborn, to look more imposing as he watches you move about his domain. The air smells spicy, with the odor of strange herbs and a strong scent of cinnamon. The creaking wood floor is muffled by a thick wool rug, cushioning your every step while making the space quiet enough for you to be conscious of your breathing." On the other hand, if you are very fortunate, one player will consciously take note of all this. This is ok. When it comes up again, perhaps 2 players will remember your clues, that the rug was mentioned, so when a trap door is revealed, or a rug of smothering attacks, or a rug maker has a powerful magic item, or when the scent of cinnamon is again noted at a murder site, linking back to a special poison, etc, it all makes sense. Seed early and often; what takes root is what you cultivate!
Use recaps at the start of a session - that is recaps delivered by you the GM, don't let the players do this - to emphasise and clarify important information and choices that were presented in previous sessions. This allows you to remind the players of important facts just before they need them.
DMing since AD&D was a total of 3 books. The biggest killer is life changes/schedule conflicts. It's not too hard to see when a group is uneven in terms of committing, but that can be modified as we go. Job changes, new baby, professional transfer etc, those are killers.
I have a friend who’s miniature campaign (month long) died because he forgot to read that Aboleths can only control two players at a time... 7 out of his 8 players got mind controlled by 3 Aboleths and he had no idea where to go from there and didn’t run it that last week.
Unresolvable differences in opinion about how the system/rules work. (Yes I know the DM has the final say! :-) We had an Exalted-3rd.ed game where the DM wasn't sure how to adjudicate a charm, and sessions later when he finally determined the 'rule as intended' the PC couldn't accept that the charm was now effectively 'worthless', and he couldn't do anymore the things he had done. It is still a sore subject, and the PC has resolved never to mess with Stealth-Charms again because he was so disgusted with the situation. For me one big one is tonal inconsistencies... In one memorable game, i was playing a hardened warforged mercenary prepared for a pseudo-realistic and serious world. Our first adventure arc involved an insane amatur-wizard who had created a... (shuddering sigh) 'Calzone' Golem. Needless to say my warforged saw this as an abomination, and the wizard as a heinous-evil. To the surprise and disapproval of the party the warforged killed him. Turns out his wife was a much more accomplished wizard, and was supposed to be an ally of our group to set up the next step of the adventure after we rescued her husband from his own creation... The warforged had to hoof it before she returned, and the rest of the party wasn't sorry to see him go... I believe that campaign was pseudo reset since that was our first gaming session. (Sans the Calzone golem arc) ...So not exactly the death of that campaign... But tonal inconsistencies have caused me in particular a lot of problems. The other DM in our group constantly complains about us not taking threats seriously, and then his NPC's are glib and unconcerned when we have them at sword point... like they aren't taking the threat seriously. We jump from light hearted hilarity, to something grim-dark and horrifying... The world is about to be destroyed by a great evil... but sure, take all the down time you want, no pressure! No matter what you do, you'll arrive at the last second you could possibly intervene. A second example had a unit of enemy soldiers hiding under a siege engine from our flying wizard. He was trying to conserve spells, so he suggested that they surrender rather than have him burn them to death with a fireball. They were low-level soldier almost certain to die from the spell (even if they made the save), and unable to hit the wizard without catastrophically good rolls. (having tried repeatedly to his annoyance) Eventually... They refused the offer to surrender arms... for what reason, we have never been able to ascertain. I recall them being a bit 'Meta' about the whole situation, like 'Oh, he won't waste the spell'. The DM seemed a little surprised when the wizard shrugged and torched them. Honestly he always seems caught off guard when someone presents a If A than B situation and actually follows through on B. (which is weird because both players are good about doing that) Enemies that seem to not value their own life has been a frequent stumbling block for us in his games. I've lost count of the number of mercenaries that are willing to die for the gold they will never live to see, valuing it over their own lives.
As a GM, we can all be overly invested/blinded by our own plots/ideas/NPC-point of view. Here the skill checks can save us from ourselves. I'd have given the fireball threatening wizard an intimidation or persuasion check with advantage, and the defenders an insight check, perhaps with disadvantage if the argument didn't seem persuasive enough or if other factors were in play (blind loyalty, stupidity, etc). The DM need to not take each NPC decision personally.
So we had a GM running a pathfinder module. Rise of the runelords. Problem we had was the GM always had an excuse to cancel his game. In 6 months we only played about 6 times. The GM would play on his computer and would take a very long time to get setup. We got party wiped as well and the GM told us to make new characters without even trying to GM wizardry something for our old characters. So all the other weeks when he cancelled we started playing a secondary game. We had a fantastic time playing the second game and one day after a string of 3 cancellations in a row, I asked the party if we would rather make our second game, our primary and tell the GM we don’t want to play pathfinder. The party agreed. So I politely told the GM our interest in playing something else. I also invited him to play with us and again. He used to be a player with us before he GMed the group. He is also a real life friend. Well, that was the last time he has spoken to us. He didn’t come over to make characters, won’t return texts and has disappeared. I never wanted to lose a friend over this but it just seemed like the campaign was failing. Constant cancellations. GM seemed not interested. And we were not having fun. If anything I thought he would enjoy stepping away from the GM duty and returning to player status but it seems he took it very hard. What would you have done. Continue to play in a boring game that feels phoned in, or try to move on and enjoy your Saturday nights?
1. Character disinterest I got 1 player that wants to stop being the barbarian and want more then just swing an axe and be stupid. So i'm talking with him to give items that give more magical effects. including an artifact axe that can do a wave of fire in front of him doing similar damage to a fireball on a smaller area. on a crit doing additional explosive fire damage. now that he has a cursed drum from a green hag's lair that let's him cast some spells. allowing him to do epic stuff so far has re-ignited his fun. In short talk with the player and see what you can provide. Otherwise switching PC can be done if all other solutions failed and there is a story moment that lets the switch occur naturally. My "problem" is with another player that constantly switches ideas for his character. this week he wants to multiclass into rogue, the next into barbarian then he wants to train a pet, then he wants to make deals with devils for more power. This type of player is just a pain in the arse at times. 2. GM Dis-interest I do have some ideas in the back that i'm playing with. however I just create 1shots that we do in between our campaign sessions. 1shots that let me experiment with ideas/mechanics in a sci-fantasy setting. And bring my findings of the mechanics and concepts over to the main campaign. It also allows the players to try out other characters they want to try and see how they work. Keeps it fresh. Especially I 1 of the player tries his hand at DM'ing so I can play for once. I stopped an online game, because online DM'ing just isn't for me. doesn't feel right to me. that's the only time a campaign of mine "failed". 4 Real life interruptions Not an acceptable excuse at our table unless it is a very rare situation. Such as a family member dying at the last moment. Other than that we schedule our sessions at regular intervals and times. We all know months in advance when all the sessions are going to be. And if the game has enough priority then you plan other activities around it. You don't show up... not my problem. the game continues no matter what. 5 Inter personal issues So far we've been able to talk about everything. there have been issues over the years, but nothing we couldn't deal with in a mature calm way. making clear agreements and being consistent in application.
Very interesting post. I very much enjoy the remedy for the Barbarian Who Wanted More. Gaining some magic, or shamanistic abilities is a nice segue to move to a more cerebral, cunning, or rounded character. I like it.
I beat the GM disinterest by having a board game session, or a friend's campaign, or a weekend off, instead of a session of my game when I am uninspired tor getting apathy. I then read something out of the genre of my campaign, do some crossword puzzles, watch a few episodes of some kiddie cartoons, and it helps reset my brain.
I do the fantasy/scyfy swap some times but really its never really sudden. My worlds are meant to be 50/50 so the swap can happen but it should be noted that its stuff like video game logic. where things just work. Best example is Magical AI or Psionics because they are not really fantasy... squishy physics if you will. I mean you combo the right stuff and things work at all then chemical reactions occur... thats why scyfy.
I know 20 has been huge for me. And I have learned my biggest problem was and is preparing in advance. My story ideas are good. That time to like the NPC, but I need to have better discreptions and events planned out
I had 2 games end at the same time, both had the same players save one I was the gm the other was someone else. What happened? One's passion project started gaining steam and they became too busy. Another got their first job and could no longer make it. It sucked and we're still hoping that both will restart but probably not.
One thing that my DM is currently dealing with is a bit of Creator's Block (or Writer's Block as most call it). So, to help him buy time to figure the plot out, he has allowed another player to run their own campaign - it's a little simpler, but fairly enjoyable. Of course, I'm new to the game in general, and it seems that the DM could use a few more books, so that more than just the basic nine races can be used. After all, why play a somewhat crazy hafling when you could play a childish tabaxi that gets into the same amount of trouble. Lol!
Sesh -1 before session 0 in my group is called “Pitch” where a potential DM pitches a story concept and all the players pitch character concepts and give each other notes. Then Sesh 0 we hammer some of those details out then by Session 1 everyone has a full idea what the game is. I play a pretty permanent group but if you play more pickups you can also include what themes and material you are comfortable with.
Session 0 is not needed, there should be a short level 1 adventure no matter what, adding a session -1 for 2 straight sessions of no gameplay? Boring. All major themes and world basics can be hashed out before session 1, it isn't hard. Been doing it for a long time and I have folks waiting for someone to drop to join in.
Personally, the campaign failure I've experienced the most is the oops I'm stuck let's reset the story. It can be a couple sessions sometimes but we had a campaign that went on for over 2 years, actually making good progress, and hey guys I want to reset. We ended up upsetting our dm because of it, we had someone else take over the campaign to let him play for a while as a player and we finished it. Had to prune some plot threads but that wasn't that big a deal as they mostly were mergible.
One advice I think it's extremely important is that if you're on a tight schedule, you might want to play a less complex system. Don't try to run Pathfinder or even 5e if you don't have time to prep.
I think limited influence is a real bad one. Went through a game where players had very limited influence. Ultra frustrating, and since then I try to give my players real potential clout and that they can change so much. Yes, even beyond my planned material.
How does one prepare the players for an unexpected twist without spoiling the plot for them? I have players who get pretty immersed in the stories I throw at them, and I don't want to ruin everyone's experience by taking the story in a direction that will take the fun out of it.
Seeding, early and often. It is amazing how blatant a clue can be overlooked when it is out of place, or doesn't lead anyplace (initially). But start a pattern over many games/months . . . when the reveal comes, and the breadcrumbs were there, it is easier to take.
that intro is basically my anxiety to me when it comes to dnd in general... with "youll never be as good as the dms or players you see online" added in :'D
My group and I have recently realized that we have made a big mistake. We ended the our first campaign and we loved our first characters and setting and we loved the campaign... We wanted to keep on using those character, take it to a higher level, but in the end we should have stopped when it was great. We have realized that everything was great FOR THE CAMPAIGN WE WERE PLAYING, but everything it's too simple and was not well thought... Now we want to give the story a nice closing and we are trapped in a "meh" kind of game.
Lack of planning, and I don't mean for the session I mean for the campaign itself. If you have a good idea about what is in the town, but if your players don't find the town interesting or you lead too many trails away from the town then you need to know kind of what is there. Bad party build, this is just one of those things where you are use to one type of play style and then join another group or a player does this. Or there is a massive difference in build style in characters so they can work together but not well.
#5. wasn't the gm for this, but was a part of the campaign. Two other people in the group were dating and thought it would be so cool to create their characters as a married couple. In real life, they ended up breaking up so every game after that, they literally had the objective of trying to "assist" in the death of each other's characters. Eventually she just quit coming and everyone had such a bad taste in their mouths over the whole thing that we all lost interest in the campaign.
Not that it bothered me terribly, but I couldn't help but wonder what was going on with the map that was suddenly super imposed over the video from about 14:20 - 14:40.
I know I never let my players switch after the fourth session. I let them know that thay can up to that point. Because sometimes thay just don't like the character or feel like thay made some bad choice's. After that it needs to be a really good reason
I am right now having a campaign wither and rot spectacularly - each time i was enthralled in my plots, and the players ended up having no influence on the campaign. The ridiculously underscaled villains either killed when running away from the party, killing themselves or killed by deus ex machina became a running gag.
My group is new to D&D. We started by one of us introducing us to the game (2nd edition) by GMing for a module for a couple of sessions for Easter. We met up again during summer we transitioned to 5e and we all wanted to try the new things. Another player became the GM and based a sandbox adventure on a running joke we made on the first session ever. It went nicely and we all had fun, but the joke grew old and we moved on with the same characters. Because of issues, we decided to postpone this adventure until one of the guys who couldn't play would finally have time to play as a group again. I decided to run a new adventure for the others so we wouldn't have him miss out on the progression, but it turned out my adventure type was a lot more demanding/ dangerous/ hard and the guy that GMed second didn't like it because it wasn't laid back as he was expecting it to be and many times characters went down (but they all had plot armor- no TPKs yet-) due to bad decisions, positioning or holding back on abilities and he didn't like that... So it has started going down the failure road and we have talked about the reason he didn't like it, but I don't feel like turning the encounters into child's play...
Spent months preparing my open-world West Marches campaign for 12+ players, only to have Coronavirus put an end to it. I even designed custom exploration and survival mechanics, and had ran a beta test for it :(
#1 Schedule Problems (Individual or Group) #2 Players That Have The Attention Span of a Mayfly #3 Players Who Don't Like the Mechanics #4 Players Who Don't Mesh With Each Other #5 External Events That Are Not Game Related
Ha, unexpected surprise. That's exactly what happened to the latest Star Wars trilogy. Lots of discussion on why the prequels get a lot of grief but are not despised while the current trilogy is downright hated by many, and I think the answer is the latest trilogy has a lot of unexpected surprises that just unraveled the journey. Interesting to see it show up here.
Well if we're talking D&D it's the square to wargames' rectangle (they just stopped calling it one a couple editions in) I do agree that the process of GMing the RPG subgenre is quite different and story games aren't RPGs, but get roped in there anyways.
Players changing PCs is a bit of a problem. But know your player on this. Sometimes they thought something was gonna be fun and it just. Wasn't. I've personally done that. Either something mechanically isn't fun for me, or the characters personality is not fun to RP. In those cases I work with the GM and switch out. I've only done this once or twice though and only had a player of mine do it once. However I have had players get bored with their characters really quickly and want to move on to the next new thing. For that group I invented a game where they could change between classes with class rings. That was a big hit for those ADHD fuckers.
I have one player who sticks with their character no matter what. The rest will change characters from once every year or two to once every few months. With experience and maturity, the reasons for changing characters have moved on from "I'm bored with Harold the Axe" to "Harold the Axe is not filling a unique or useful role, and the party really needs a bard."
@@MonkeyJedi99 And that's perfectly fine right? And personally as a GM I dont want to lock a player into a character they're not enjoying. But I just want my players to be consistent. Most of my players are pretty good and stick with their characters though i just had that one group. And they got the game where they could just reinvent their characters just by changing rings.
Talk to your players about how important it is to communicate those things beforehand as it benefits everyone in the group. Then try again. If there is still no response, maybe looking for different players is the option. Communication is key to this hobby and that includes organisatory stuff, so when the players understand that this is important (which after you talking to them they should) and still fail to properly communicate, they probably do not belong in that group.
We end every session with a quick discussion about availability for the next session. We generally play weekly, but realize not everyone can play every session. If we don't have a quorum, we push it back, may play on Saturday, or I get creative with spin off sessions in which those who can play may do a side adventure, or may even play another character to see a situation from a novel point of view. One thing that has helped me with scheduling has been Google Calendar. I write up a little summary of the last session to set the scene of the next session, and give it a catchy title (generally with a pun, reference, etc). I duplicate the previous calendar invite, change the info, and send it out. I also have it set to send an email reminder 3 days before the session and a notification 30 min before (we play on a VTT). Here is the announcement from a few weeks ago: Session 46: Safe Under the Seas Assailed by spiders and goo, crabs and ghosts, some who ventured beneath the waves have paid with decades of life to locate the hiding place of the ship's log, only to find it secured behind the wall of a safe. Meanwhile aboard the Tight Fit, Ari and Red avoided a diplomatic incident with patrolling Koa-Toa, accepting their help hunting Sea Devil boarders and Ghost hijackers. The Goblin ghosts relinquished control of the ship upon learning of Nahlakx's presence nearby. Although my players don't always remember to mark down if they are attending or not, at least I know the session is on their calendar, and they have been reminded.
Okay, Guy... I like this format about as well as the earlier ones... NOT sure what exactly went on around 14:24 (ish) with the superimposition of the map-animation and in the "timeline preview" it looks as if a whole other clip from some other video was plugged into the vid' here... At first, I thought, "...ermmm... weird choice of transition..." BUT I'm just going to guess at this point, there was a weird technical glitch in the upload... or possibly something server related. I DO (however) think you should be aware of it. It didn't disrupt the audio, so your whole exposition works out fine. Just the visual part did a "weird something or other" at around the timestamp above. OKAY... Sorry for the weirdness intruding, but technical garble can be difficult and frustrating to make it "eloquent"... AND I'd prefer a degree of precision here. Campaign Failures... Adapting... and occasionally "making sh*t work anyways"... I think it's worth mention, that some of those points you mentioned as "flags" or signs of a Campaign nearing collapse, can also be part of the adaptation to keep the Game and thus the Story going. Players/Characters disinterests... changing characters (for instance) Sometimes a Player (and usually a less experienced Player) will construct a PC that's initially a lot of fun... BUT over a longer haul (like a full-on Campaign) it gets to be a slog... Now, Gurps points out in the 3e books, around "limits on disadvantages" that they don't recommend being too strict on limiting Players,"...because one of two things will happen, either they'll hate the idea of the blind, deaf, dwarf with only one leg and an aversion to dogs... getting rid of the Character or letting it die quickly... OR everyone will have so much fun playing with it, they won't notice the limits..." That might be true in a short adventure, a one-shot, or in very limited and small "doses", like hour-and-a-half sessions every month or so... BUT put them in this limiting role for longer, and it's not hard to see how cramped they feel their style is getting. SO when a Player decides he/she has had enough of a Character (particularly an ambitious or limiting design/build) I let them get their Character killed... or find a way otherwise to "write them out"... like a retirement, going mad and getting committed, fostering a child or elder... or some other side-ward quest/lifestyle change that's adequate for the Character and relatively satisfying as an "ending" AND then allow the Player to enter a new PC. Okay, so there are some "flighty" types who might seek to take supreme advantages of my methods... You know what? SO BE IT... I encourage ambitious Role Play, and thereby ambitious builds. I like to see my Players going through the mental gymnastics just as much as they like to stretch and strain their ingenuity and creative license to the limits... BUT that carries the risk of a burn-out scenario or just flailing about uselessly when we manage to "adventure ourselves into a corner"... THEN I feel it incumbent upon me (as GM) to allow that Player the escape. Let them out of their "contractual duty" to a PC they no longer love... AND encourage them (especially with a talent coming into refinement as real skill) to get back in the Game and continue to test their metal... I've willfully killed off my own PC's in-game, creating great "endings" in the midst of a Campaign before... With a good GM and some thought beforehand (remember that "DISCUSS" part) we've managed a few Character endings that didn't leave a dry eye in the house... and some of those games went on in full view of the public in a shoppe! GM disinterest... Okay, if you're somehow "losing steam" on this particular conflict and plotline... Maybe identify what it is that's boring you to burning out... AND bring it up in DISCUSSION before you toss in the figurative towel. Chatting this issue out with Players, especially if the Players are still hot-to-trot on the Campaign, will usually elicit some advice and ideas that you can "sink your teeth into"... I've "cat-walked" more than my own fair share of Campaign plots simply because I was growing weary of the original idea... and something better seemed to materialize when I mentioned it to a Player or two... BEYOND Session-Zero... One of the chief advantages to "marathon game sessions" for us wasn't that much more rolling dice and getting on with the Plots... Rather, we had the time to take breaks and occasionally wine and dine the difficult discussions where we sort of "debriefed" the session(s) to date... chatting up what was or wasn't working so well for us either as a group or as individuals. It brings up those suspicions of disappointment and allows the GM a chance to occasionally refresh his memory of any particular Player's hopes for the Character Arc... so adequate measures can be taken before an opportunity is hopelessly lost. It can also build the GM-PC relationships and add measures of trust between the members of the collaborative story group, so the GM can take advantages of risky behavior in the interest of a greater story and more fun for everyone involved. You don't easily get permissions (let alone congratulations) for murdering PC's willy nilly... BUT with adequate discussion and an appropriate choice of which PC (see the Player disinterest point again) to kill outright, the plot can thicken and the group can tighten... making a Player's choice to change Character all the more useful as a dramatic or literary device. ...and just quietly let the group pat your back or buy you beer for being a "god damn genius". PvPvGM... Ugh... It's again worth creating a discussion. Rather, it's worth at least three discussions, beyond session-zero. I like to call them Table-side Chats or "Tween Session Talks"... One discussion should be made with each of the Players in question... Some of our antics in PvP is entirely orchestrated between the Players and isn't a problem at all. It's just "their dance they do" in certain contexts of camaign. It seems vicious and between their Characters, it can get serious... BUT between the two Players... not so much. When two Players simply can't be in the same game together... there's action to be taken. This is where that third discussion should happen. Generally I avoid the original two Players involved at this one, myself. I prefer to get the rest of the Table together, and hold the discussion completely as private as possible. It doesn't matter who jumps to be on which side, or if there is anyone to defend or pick on one side or the other. It's not worth destroying more relationships between friends because we're dealing with an RP-issue. The same thing goes for PvGM... One discussion should be with that Player and NOBODY else. Just try to reach out and understand what the problem is... It may be a complete criticism of your methods, style, artwork, voice acting, lack of any of the theatrical, overly theatrical, whatever. Try to pinpoint what exactly this person finds so completely disgusting AND (more importantly) why do they then KEEP COMING BACK. Again, the second conversation should be with the rest of the Table, avoiding (in my experience) the original "problem Player" all together. Find out (if you can) what everyone else thinks... and try to detach from your GM-persona. You're being evaluated, and it's not always exactly going to be stuff you want to hear... I get a lot of flack about my vocabulary and word games. I've learned to tone that down a bit, but I'm outright refusing to get rid of it, because it does elicit laughs and entertainment more often than not at the Table IN the Game... {just an example} I wholeheartedly agree about Discussion and Planning. The more Planning you can do, the less improv' you HAVE to do. it's okay to leave some things to a reasonably responsible element of "playing it by ear" or "winging it"... BUT you don't want to HAVE to improv' an entire session because it derailed in the first two minutes and you're never in hell getting back "on book". Discussion solves more problems In-game than about any other tool. I like that you pursued the importance, as I find you seem to have a functioning awareness of just how little you can over-sell that point. Talking a problem out between friends isn't a fix-all necessarily, but there just isn't such a fix-all to be had. AND talking it out is a lot closer to a fix-all than just about any other attack for inter-personal problem solving... Hell... at any rate... This thing's getting long enough... Hope I've offered a few tertiary points to think on. ...AND you don't have to be Guy to respond to this mess. (of course) ;o)
on the top of this list should be "Because Players x&y only can play on Sunday but player z only on Saturday, oh and also only on that one weekend where the other two can't join the game because...."
Just here to confirm about people that don't like each other: there is no point trying to solve the issue during the game session, or even just before the game session starts. Also if you think the other guy is really being a jerk and you did nothing wrong but most of the other persons around the table appear to be siding with him or simply looking away from the issue, you'd probably be better playing an other game with other people.
Mine failed because my original players skipped out on the game I spent a year building and the new ones I got talked into Dm'ing for didn't trust me or my story telling. They thought I was just making shit up with no plans or foresight while flexing on them with my big bad... I'm just gonna nuke the damn thing, its just another thing for the list of stuff I've failed at.
Ah, I remember how my GM ruined my second game, because some of the players are disinterested and one of them did some stupid stuff. GM flipped shit and just party-wiped us all.
Why campaigns fail....sure. I get it. My biggest problem with campaign failure lay solely with poor player choice, resulting in a dilemma that is either an obvious deus et machina to save them from themselves or allow themselves to fly their paper plane into the sun. Imagine, if you will, running a campaign for: Player 1 - Switches characters all of the time. Refuses to engage with each character because they see them as numbers on a page. Gets jealous easily if this or that character isn't the biggest and baddest. Can and will bully other players at the table. Will not accept a ruling from the GM if it's not what they want. Player 2 - A former GM. Cannot accept that the table is being run by another GM, and refuses to relinquish control of the story to other players let alone the GM. Will actively sabotage the plans of other players if it's not about them, and refuses to take responsibility for any choices. Refuses to adhere to agreements. Player 3 - Just like player 2, but never ran a game in the past. Furthermore, refuses to learn any rule. Any. Rule. Expects and demands that other players do all the heavy lifting with regard to know how things work, and will actually nap at the table if the focus isn't on them. Player 4 - Will sit like a statue and say nothing, even if asked. Simple questions become interrogations by other players. Solves all problems as if they were the "hammer and nail" metaphor, and will not learn from past mistakes. These are all actual people that have played at my table. Two of them still do. I have run three campaigns to date in my home brew world, with positive input from the majority of the table. I've had to all but do flaming hand stands in some cases to make things work out, but there's only so much one can do when players actively sabotage themselves and others. Players 5, 6, and 7 are a joy to run for. Engaged, imaginative and fun. One campaign failed. The second one finished. I am unsure about the third. Heck, play 7 is starting up another table with two more brand new players, so I'll have two campaigns to run. I am more hopeful about that than the original table. I have half a mind to pare it down to just those two, to be honest.
Players 1-4 sound like more trouble than they are worth, Give them a few years to a decade to get older. Unless they are already older, then set a fire and walk away.
Players 3 and 4 are unsavable. The other two would be unimaginably frustrating, but at least they're engaging in some fashion... I feel like they have the potential to be fun but also to ruin other people's fun. Very risky. I'd pare it down if it's causing you and other people to not have fun while playing. It sounds brutal.
The first seconds of the video: Here we can observe a lich in its natural habitat
I strangely enough heard that in Sir David Attenborough's voice...
Scheduling problems are a major cause of campaign fatality.
Yes! That is what cause my DM Disinterest to keep going.
Travel issues most likely no longer exist.
It was encouraging to hear that I am not the only GM whose campaigns loose steam. Sometimes it has been my players. Sometimes it has been me who gets disinterested.Only once did I fall prey to the 3rd reason, Unexpected Twist. I had been running a Star Wars campaign using the D20 system for over a year. We were between Episode 1 and 2. But I was feeling like it was getting samey so I tried to spice it up with a twist. Several of my players were fans of StarCraft. So I had a hyperdrive jump fail land them in an unknown region of the galaxy. And they ran into one of the three races from the StarCraft game. There was immediate decent from the players. They thought it was stupid and jarring. I admitted I was running out of ideas for Star Wars. So we put that campaign on hold and we went back to Shadowrun for a while.
Actually, now that I am thinking about it, Shadowrun had been put on hold and we had pickup up Star Wars for similar reasons.
Video is titled "3 Reasons Why Your RPG Campaign Fails"
Guy: "I meant (3x3)+1 Reasons"
A much appreciated video. My campaign has been running for 47 sessions now (a bit over a year). Overall going well, but even with a (currently) successful campaign, every topic mentioned has been an issue.
From the start I knew we would have a core group of players who would be more available than others. The characters whose player is not present can stay on the ship, participate in a supportive role, but does not hold up play. The challenge is when plots prepared for that character must be held, or replanned unexpected. I try to focus on the core group, while making sure the less available players have fun when they are able to attend. This has helped increase the attendance rate of some of the less available players.
Another solution was to have players who were present the week before play cool NPCs with the missing players/characters from the previous week; a branch adventure bring out an unexpected part of the plot. The cool NPCs give light into a different culture or point of view (yes, a bit of metagame, but accessible to the players via gameplay). New roleplay dynamic, and totally unexpected. I make sure it is not adversarial (so far).
I have been getting a bit bored; my solution was to not hoard secrets and plot twists, but me more free in letting them be discovered in cool ways/epic moments. It energises me, the players, and the plot.
Some players have been frustrated with their characters; more envy seeing other characters do stuff, while not knowing their character well enough to realize they too can do cool stuff! Making sure I included moments in adventures for those challenged players to have their players shine (and giving them guidance in game to help them learn) seemed to help this issues.
The players are all having lots of fun. The quality of the roleplaying is better than I had expected, which is outstanding. Seeding early and often has paid off. Moving the plot along, to give the players more of a sense of accomplishment I think will help keep up momentum and energy level.
I would like that video on DM recharge!
Excillent advice, HLR4th. Issues will come to any GM of any skill level. These are some interesting ways of handling aspects of it.
Much appreciated. Although no doubt I use all of these tools in my own way, most (if not all) were inspired/borrowed from others. Guy's channel was my first glimpse of a way to improve my playing, the game for other players and a totally different perspective on GM'ing. On that Great GM crafting table, a lot more has been added. Tools and techniques from Colville, Mercer, Roll20, Nerdarchy, Johnn Four, Skorkowsky, the best of my own GM, ideas inspired by my players and creative players on line have been added. Each time I read comments after a video, I pick up something or try to share something. The community which Guy has grown to support us all is one of the neat things about our hobby!
>3 Reasons Why Your RPG Campaign Fails
>Reason 4, real life disruptions.
war games? you haven't known humiliation as the GM until you've been banished all the way to the magic: the gathering table :)
Oh jeez, that's like sitting with the kids at thanksgiving
isn't that the pokemon table?
Wargames *CAN* include roleplaying. We were playing a Plains Indians campaign; my Cavalry commander was Julius Augustus Tiberius Witherspoon, a man who was used to sending men to their deaths. If he lost an entire command of 60 troopers, he would count it as a minor skirmish. His trusted Indian scout was Haji Singh. ("Oh no sahib, I have not seen a single Indian, also I have not seen a single buffalo.")
@@vanhovemare I was thinking exactly that!
Unexpected twist at 5:34 sounds a bit like Emerillia series.
I have a number of failures under my belt as a Perma GM. The important thing to do is to learn, to grow from them. Go over those failures with a fine tooth comb and extract every lesson you can. Only then will you become a better GM.
A twist on Character Disinterest...
We play 7-9 month low-deathcount campaigns. I had 3/4 character deaths in the first 4 months. This is my first time gming. These were characters with backstory and player engagement. When they rolled up new characters, they focused on "the build" rather than the character... Our campaign is now so built around the only remaining character's backstory from the original party, both I and my players have struggled to get excited about story. I've been speeding towards a satisfying ending so we can just start fresh. No advice here, just a warning to make new character creation just as important as session 0.
Thank you for this the out of game communication has really helped me! Working with a player now who is losing interest in his character from an rp standpoint but the rest of the party loves the character. We are working towards a character death in a boss fight unbeknownst to the rest of the party with the flexibility of him still surviving but being changed internally from the experience. Really hope it works out and adds to the narrative and keeps everyone having fun, we will see!
One of the main reasons that caused my campaigns to die: insufficient preparation.
In the past I repeatedly fell into the trap of having a cool campaign idea and starting right away with it, having my players create characters and dashing into the first scenario - and then what?!
My advice: Don't rely on cool ideas to be self-sustaining, as promising as they may appear on first glance.
When you have an idea for a campaign, always - *always* - take the time to sit down and prepare a plot. Otherwise it might occur to you - just like it did to me - that you quickly lose direction and, with it, interest.
Even if you intend your campaign to be rather "sandbox-y", make a brainstorm list with encounter ideas which you can spin into adventures if need be (about a dozen or so, depending on how long your campaign shall go) *and* prepare for a conclusion to bring the campaign to a satisfying end. Consider what the PCs where about to achieve with the campaign, try to tie up any loose ends, and let them have that in a grand finale, if you feel that your or your players' interest is fading. But have a finale prepared, from the start!
If you want to tell a story with your campaign, plan out the plot structure. Which means: major plot points and the encounters involved with them. Prepare a minimum of narrative structure, maybe guided by templates like the _5-room-dungeon_ -structure or by Joseph Campbell's _Hero's Journey_ -structure. So you can develop one major plot point - basically one chapter of your story - for each point of the template you're using. I, at least, found such templates very helpful in structuring my campaigns and preparing them out to the end.
And that basically is my advice against premature campaign death: When you start a campaign, have the end already prepared.
Know where you want to go.
#3 Is actually FUN. I currently run a campaign where I envision the world ACTUALLY in transition. For example: the muskets and pistols replace bows and crossbows, a group of warforged is more technically advanced as the rest, etc. Players like it
Another one I've seen: new gamesystems or versions (Pathfinder 1 to Pathfinder 2, D&D 4 to D&D 5, etc). Often, the group wants to get a handle on rules changes and doesn't want to try translating old characters over, and so abandons their current campaign to start over with a much simpler game. While I don't consider this a bad thing - it's logical to want to learn the new system properly - it does seem a shame to throw out all the previous lore and promise just to learn how to do the same stuff again.
So my advice to those who want to do this: set your old world aside and start a new *temporary* game specifically designed to teach the new rules. Once everyone's been through a few sessions and is comfortable with the basics, say that you're going back to the old game, and for everyone to come up with new similarly-powered characters.
Meanwhile, the GM takes the next session they'd PLANNED to run in their campaign and alters encounters to fit the new mechanics; any other sessions are to be removed and put on hold until THIS ONE session is completed so that the GM can account for respecs, character changes and other alterations of the PCs. After that, if players want to continue the campaign they were playing, the GM can start working on sessions for the new system as normal.
I recently concluded a campaign. It was supposed to be about the mystery of this ancient dwarven kingdom buried underneath the current elvish kingdom, and the intrigue as powerful lords and ladies vied to unearth the powerful magical artifacts buried within it in order to usurp the throne and gain power. INSTEAD, my druid player robbed a QUARTER MILLION GOLD from the freaking MAFIA, and the whole campaign became about finding the dragon who was secretly funneling money out of the kingdom to build his hoard.
7:18 I was waiting for you to mention this. Every one of my campaigns failed because of this! The rest of the video is really well thought-out and speaks from experience. Thank you for this, Guy!
Top reason why a campaign fails ? Rescheduling issues.
True, that's the most common reason, but not the only one.
My top 10 reasons:
1. Scheduling
2. Scheduling
3. Scheduling
4. Scheduling
5. Scheduling
6. Scheduling
7. Scheduling
8. Scheduling
9. Scheduling
10. Scheduling
I play exclusively online now because it's so much easier to get people to sit on their computers for 2-3 hours than to arrange a game in the real world.
Appreciate all of these videos!
On an adjacent subject: How do you know when a campaign has ended? The heroes have subdued the countryside and there is peace in the land. ( Aside from those giant carnivorous bluebirds that have taken over the white cliffs.) But generally there is no more character growth to be had. How do you handle that?
End it there. It ends when it ends, especially if there isn't any worthwhile plot threads that makes sense(in-character and/or in-universe) or that don't jump the shark.
It's always sad. Like the last people left at party. LIFE! Don't talk to me about life-Marvin
@@timbuktu8069 We've had few campaigns we ended short due to circumstances. One instance was where we really didn't have a true end goal but it was to influence the tide of an upcoming war-- we ended up killing one of the generals in cold blood(like, there wasn't even a roll for initiative, we caught them in a very vulnerable time to coup de grace them), screwing over the chain of command and dooming that nation to a massacre-- THE END.
Or another example was, some of our party members used their abilities to kinda sorta spoil themselves the endgame and shortly after triggering the events of it. This one ended in a happier note though despite the GM having to skip an entire chapter because the party's meddling because, we got to deflect an entire invasion of an army of mind flayers with a joint effort of diplomacy while rolling the most important nat 20 and the very end.
I don't run a published campaign or anything, but there are some games that just go past their sell by date. Yet nobody wants to be the one to say it's over and they keep playing more out of habit than anything else.
My Spacemaster: Privateers campaign ended when the players has ramped up their own tech and political connections to the point that they had a faction ready to take over the enemy empire, then used an advanced FTL mass impactor to obliterate the enemy emperor and his government. I just asked the players what they wanted their characters to do "after the war" and wrote an epilogue I shared with everyone. Then I created the Rolemaster campaign I am running now.
I like your new video wrap up, it's efficient. Over the years we spend hours of our time looking at youtubers asking us to like and subscribe, so doing it silently while the actual content is still running is litterally a lifesaver.
Anyway thanks for the quality content.
Unexpected twists work if they are announced as being that. We are all familiar with the Halloween episode of many TV shows (i.e. Star Treks "Catspaw") But then at the next session the play returns to normal.
I probably should get worried as one of my current campaigns has 4/10 boxes checked and it's just the starter kit for DnD... Interpersonal communication seems to be the hardest
My campaign started in my scout troop. Each time we end a session we do roses, thorns, and what we learned. It's actually something that helps the party have a great time and it's like 10 minutes at the end and it gives us a good feeling that we're all on the same page. Also it's like a ritual and it brings the session to a close and it's like a transition back into reality. It's very nice.
Projection would probably be one of the biggest sticklers for our group. We've never been able to figure out good pacing, often playing single sessions for hours until we're barely coherent and spending multiple sessions in one "minor" dungeon.
This is a helpful video as my group is returning from a two month break where interests have waned.
At the very start of the campaign half a year ago we had planned our set schedule and confirmed everyone was available for the next month or two on that schedule. Of course a player gets a new GF two sessions in and misses two sessions by his request so he could go on dates, which was ok since he asked. Then he just "forgets" we are playing two weeks later because "no one told me we were playing", on the set schedule we all agreed to. He then asks the group if he can start attending every second session (which as the GM, I was not OK with trying to make this work in my first ever campaign). I had a long phone call with him and basically discussed whether or not he could make the set sessions consistently or if he would rather use that time to spend it with his new GF and asked him to think about it. I was relieved when he messaged the group and told them he was dropping out and that I didn't have to figure out some weird schedule or kick him out.
I’m actually about to start a new game. At least, I hope so. I have DMed before, but this time I have all new players except for one somewhat experienced player. I think that will make it easier for me to enforce the rules for the game since before, I had more experienced and more knowledgeable people on my previous group who occasionally interrupted the flow of the game with their, “what type of wood/stone is it?” Stuff. It helped out most of the time, especially when I first DMed. I had a rules lawyer player and he was super helpful for me to keep track of the rules at the time.
The point of this potentially unreasonable rant is that this video has come out at a great time for me, so thank you sir! :D
The first point is so interesting to me. I absolutely love creating new characters, even when I’m in love with the one I’m already playing, I just love character hopping. So I’ve never thought of it from the other angle seeing problematic.
OH the feels. I've been there so many times in the past. If I feel that things aren't moving along or the players are done (or I am) I generally suggest playing a different style of game (M:tG, board game, etc.). I find that sometimes people need to walk away from the game for a couple of sessions to get their mojo/interest back. I know it happens to me from time to time. Just my two cents. Great video as always!
This is the first video in my feed today, when I just had a text conversation last night with a player that said he might have to bail on the campaign due to scheduling issues only to reveal he didn't like his character.
Spooky.
Thanks for the video. I plan to have a conversation as a group after our next session to discuss the upcoming 3 month block. Great piece of advice.
QUESTION: How do i as a DM narate important plotpoints/scenes, so that my players don't forgett them (until those informations matter)?
You could tell them it's important. Or, tell them to make an intelligence roll to see if their characters remember, or you can let them face the consequences for not paying attention.
Ask them at the start of every session to summarise what happened last session. That might be an effective primer to identify what the players retain, or haven’t. Make it so the oninous is on the players around the table to prime themselves sessions
In terms of describing scenes, I try to engage multiple senses for important scenes or NPCs. How does it appear? Is there a scent or sound? What feeling does it evoke? "The Dapper Dragon is the magic shop in OldPort. It is a small shop, with multiple display cases lit from within by continuous light spells, giving the space a warm glow and a cozy feel. The uplighting also helps the Magister, a Red Dragonborn, to look more imposing as he watches you move about his domain. The air smells spicy, with the odor of strange herbs and a strong scent of cinnamon. The creaking wood floor is muffled by a thick wool rug, cushioning your every step while making the space quiet enough for you to be conscious of your breathing."
On the other hand, if you are very fortunate, one player will consciously take note of all this. This is ok. When it comes up again, perhaps 2 players will remember your clues, that the rug was mentioned, so when a trap door is revealed, or a rug of smothering attacks, or a rug maker has a powerful magic item, or when the scent of cinnamon is again noted at a murder site, linking back to a special poison, etc, it all makes sense.
Seed early and often; what takes root is what you cultivate!
My players usually write everything down on notepads and binders. If you emphasize the delivery of a description they usually get the hint.
Use recaps at the start of a session - that is recaps delivered by you the GM, don't let the players do this - to emphasise and clarify important information and choices that were presented in previous sessions. This allows you to remind the players of important facts just before they need them.
Love the new streamlined format! Awesome video as always!
All of these are familiar.. by me and friends. It's a learning process
Unresolved differences in creative agenda among the players (including the DM).
Literally my first RPG experience in a nutshell, if it could have even been called that.
I've had two of those myself, one where I was on each side of the DM's screen.
DMing since AD&D was a total of 3 books. The biggest killer is life changes/schedule conflicts. It's not too hard to see when a group is uneven in terms of committing, but that can be modified as we go. Job changes, new baby, professional transfer etc, those are killers.
I really want to use that intro for all campaigns that end early! WOW!
I have a friend who’s miniature campaign (month long) died because he forgot to read that Aboleths can only control two players at a time... 7 out of his 8 players got mind controlled by 3 Aboleths and he had no idea where to go from there and didn’t run it that last week.
Unresolvable differences in opinion about how the system/rules work. (Yes I know the DM has the final say! :-)
We had an Exalted-3rd.ed game where the DM wasn't sure how to adjudicate a charm, and sessions later when he finally determined the 'rule as intended' the PC couldn't accept that the charm was now effectively 'worthless', and he couldn't do anymore the things he had done. It is still a sore subject, and the PC has resolved never to mess with Stealth-Charms again because he was so disgusted with the situation.
For me one big one is tonal inconsistencies...
In one memorable game, i was playing a hardened warforged mercenary prepared for a pseudo-realistic and serious world. Our first adventure arc involved an insane amatur-wizard who had created a... (shuddering sigh) 'Calzone' Golem. Needless to say my warforged saw this as an abomination, and the wizard as a heinous-evil. To the surprise and disapproval of the party the warforged killed him. Turns out his wife was a much more accomplished wizard, and was supposed to be an ally of our group to set up the next step of the adventure after we rescued her husband from his own creation... The warforged had to hoof it before she returned, and the rest of the party wasn't sorry to see him go... I believe that campaign was pseudo reset since that was our first gaming session. (Sans the Calzone golem arc) ...So not exactly the death of that campaign...
But tonal inconsistencies have caused me in particular a lot of problems. The other DM in our group constantly complains about us not taking threats seriously, and then his NPC's are glib and unconcerned when we have them at sword point... like they aren't taking the threat seriously. We jump from light hearted hilarity, to something grim-dark and horrifying... The world is about to be destroyed by a great evil... but sure, take all the down time you want, no pressure! No matter what you do, you'll arrive at the last second you could possibly intervene.
A second example had a unit of enemy soldiers hiding under a siege engine from our flying wizard. He was trying to conserve spells, so he suggested that they surrender rather than have him burn them to death with a fireball. They were low-level soldier almost certain to die from the spell (even if they made the save), and unable to hit the wizard without catastrophically good rolls. (having tried repeatedly to his annoyance) Eventually... They refused the offer to surrender arms... for what reason, we have never been able to ascertain. I recall them being a bit 'Meta' about the whole situation, like 'Oh, he won't waste the spell'. The DM seemed a little surprised when the wizard shrugged and torched them. Honestly he always seems caught off guard when someone presents a If A than B situation and actually follows through on B. (which is weird because both players are good about doing that) Enemies that seem to not value their own life has been a frequent stumbling block for us in his games. I've lost count of the number of mercenaries that are willing to die for the gold they will never live to see, valuing it over their own lives.
As a GM, we can all be overly invested/blinded by our own plots/ideas/NPC-point of view. Here the skill checks can save us from ourselves. I'd have given the fireball threatening wizard an intimidation or persuasion check with advantage, and the defenders an insight check, perhaps with disadvantage if the argument didn't seem persuasive enough or if other factors were in play (blind loyalty, stupidity, etc). The DM need to not take each NPC decision personally.
Duuude I joined a group that's constantly changing PC's mid-campaign (or worse, playing multiple characters at once) and it gives me such whiplash.
So we had a GM running a pathfinder module. Rise of the runelords. Problem we had was the GM always had an excuse to cancel his game. In 6 months we only played about 6 times. The GM would play on his computer and would take a very long time to get setup. We got party wiped as well and the GM told us to make new characters without even trying to GM wizardry something for our old characters. So all the other weeks when he cancelled we started playing a secondary game. We had a fantastic time playing the second game and one day after a string of 3 cancellations in a row, I asked the party if we would rather make our second game, our primary and tell the GM we don’t want to play pathfinder. The party agreed. So I politely told the GM our interest in playing something else. I also invited him to play with us and again. He used to be a player with us before he GMed the group. He is also a real life friend. Well, that was the last time he has spoken to us. He didn’t come over to make characters, won’t return texts and has disappeared. I never wanted to lose a friend over this but it just seemed like the campaign was failing. Constant cancellations. GM seemed not interested. And we were not having fun. If anything I thought he would enjoy stepping away from the GM duty and returning to player status but it seems he took it very hard. What would you have done. Continue to play in a boring game that feels phoned in, or try to move on and enjoy your Saturday nights?
This is more than GM advice. As always, thank you for sharing!
1. Character disinterest
I got 1 player that wants to stop being the barbarian and want more then just swing an axe and be stupid. So i'm talking with him to give items that give more magical effects. including an artifact axe that can do a wave of fire in front of him doing similar damage to a fireball on a smaller area. on a crit doing additional explosive fire damage. now that he has a cursed drum from a green hag's lair that let's him cast some spells. allowing him to do epic stuff so far has re-ignited his fun. In short talk with the player and see what you can provide. Otherwise switching PC can be done if all other solutions failed and there is a story moment that lets the switch occur naturally.
My "problem" is with another player that constantly switches ideas for his character. this week he wants to multiclass into rogue, the next into barbarian then he wants to train a pet, then he wants to make deals with devils for more power. This type of player is just a pain in the arse at times.
2. GM Dis-interest
I do have some ideas in the back that i'm playing with. however I just create 1shots that we do in between our campaign sessions. 1shots that let me experiment with ideas/mechanics in a sci-fantasy setting. And bring my findings of the mechanics and concepts over to the main campaign. It also allows the players to try out other characters they want to try and see how they work. Keeps it fresh. Especially I 1 of the player tries his hand at DM'ing so I can play for once.
I stopped an online game, because online DM'ing just isn't for me. doesn't feel right to me. that's the only time a campaign of mine "failed".
4 Real life interruptions
Not an acceptable excuse at our table unless it is a very rare situation. Such as a family member dying at the last moment. Other than that we schedule our sessions at regular intervals and times. We all know months in advance when all the sessions are going to be. And if the game has enough priority then you plan other activities around it. You don't show up... not my problem. the game continues no matter what.
5 Inter personal issues
So far we've been able to talk about everything. there have been issues over the years, but nothing we couldn't deal with in a mature calm way. making clear agreements and being consistent in application.
Very interesting post. I very much enjoy the remedy for the Barbarian Who Wanted More. Gaining some magic, or shamanistic abilities is a nice segue to move to a more cerebral, cunning, or rounded character. I like it.
I beat the GM disinterest by having a board game session, or a friend's campaign, or a weekend off, instead of a session of my game when I am uninspired tor getting apathy. I then read something out of the genre of my campaign, do some crossword puzzles, watch a few episodes of some kiddie cartoons, and it helps reset my brain.
I do the fantasy/scyfy swap some times but really its never really sudden.
My worlds are meant to be 50/50 so the swap can happen but it should be noted that its stuff like video game logic.
where things just work. Best example is Magical AI or Psionics because they are not really fantasy... squishy physics if you will. I mean you combo the right stuff and things work at all then chemical reactions occur... thats why scyfy.
But your players know and expect this as part of the campaign setting, right? So this is not a break in the flow.
I'm starting a Campaign in the New Year, this video comes in perfect time
I know 20 has been huge for me. And I have learned my biggest problem was and is preparing in advance. My story ideas are good. That time to like the NPC, but I need to have better discreptions and events planned out
I had 2 games end at the same time, both had the same players save one I was the gm the other was someone else. What happened? One's passion project started gaining steam and they became too busy. Another got their first job and could no longer make it. It sucked and we're still hoping that both will restart but probably not.
If there is no implicit roleplay to your wargame, you're missing out on a lot. Campaign games will inevitably bring out some roleplay.
One thing that my DM is currently dealing with is a bit of Creator's Block (or Writer's Block as most call it). So, to help him buy time to figure the plot out, he has allowed another player to run their own campaign - it's a little simpler, but fairly enjoyable. Of course, I'm new to the game in general, and it seems that the DM could use a few more books, so that more than just the basic nine races can be used. After all, why play a somewhat crazy hafling when you could play a childish tabaxi that gets into the same amount of trouble. Lol!
Sesh -1 before session 0 in my group is called “Pitch” where a potential DM pitches a story concept and all the players pitch character concepts and give each other notes. Then Sesh 0 we hammer some of those details out then by Session 1 everyone has a full idea what the game is. I play a pretty permanent group but if you play more pickups you can also include what themes and material you are comfortable with.
Session 0 is not needed, there should be a short level 1 adventure no matter what, adding a session -1 for 2 straight sessions of no gameplay? Boring. All major themes and world basics can be hashed out before session 1, it isn't hard. Been doing it for a long time and I have folks waiting for someone to drop to join in.
The release of this video was perfectly timed. I needed a reminder that campaigns fail for more reasons than just my GMing ability
Personally, the campaign failure I've experienced the most is the oops I'm stuck let's reset the story. It can be a couple sessions sometimes but we had a campaign that went on for over 2 years, actually making good progress, and hey guys I want to reset. We ended up upsetting our dm because of it, we had someone else take over the campaign to let him play for a while as a player and we finished it. Had to prune some plot threads but that wasn't that big a deal as they mostly were mergible.
One advice I think it's extremely important is that if you're on a tight schedule, you might want to play a less complex system. Don't try to run Pathfinder or even 5e if you don't have time to prep.
I think limited influence is a real bad one. Went through a game where players had very limited influence. Ultra frustrating, and since then I try to give my players real potential clout and that they can change so much. Yes, even beyond my planned material.
10 is a great format, but if there are more than that a follow up video would be nice as well
Great video! I'm starting my own campaign and worry about a lot of these points. Why was there a random battle map around 14:20?
That caught me off guard as well.
wondered that as well, might've been a sneak peek for something?
How does one prepare the players for an unexpected twist without spoiling the plot for them? I have players who get pretty immersed in the stories I throw at them, and I don't want to ruin everyone's experience by taking the story in a direction that will take the fun out of it.
Seeding, early and often. It is amazing how blatant a clue can be overlooked when it is out of place, or doesn't lead anyplace (initially). But start a pattern over many games/months . . . when the reveal comes, and the breadcrumbs were there, it is easier to take.
that intro is basically my anxiety to me when it comes to dnd in general... with "youll never be as good as the dms or players you see online" added in :'D
My group and I have recently realized that we have made a big mistake. We ended the our first campaign and we loved our first characters and setting and we loved the campaign... We wanted to keep on using those character, take it to a higher level, but in the end we should have stopped when it was great. We have realized that everything was great FOR THE CAMPAIGN WE WERE PLAYING, but everything it's too simple and was not well thought... Now we want to give the story a nice closing and we are trapped in a "meh" kind of game.
Biting your players tends to end campaigns early.
Lack of planning, and I don't mean for the session I mean for the campaign itself. If you have a good idea about what is in the town, but if your players don't find the town interesting or you lead too many trails away from the town then you need to know kind of what is there.
Bad party build, this is just one of those things where you are use to one type of play style and then join another group or a player does this. Or there is a massive difference in build style in characters so they can work together but not well.
I love these tips. I am going to keep them in mind.
I ended up switching characters because things got more science fantasy than fantasy, luckily switching to artificer worked in getting me invested
#5. wasn't the gm for this, but was a part of the campaign. Two other people in the group were dating and thought it would be so cool to create their characters as a married couple. In real life, they ended up breaking up so every game after that, they literally had the objective of trying to "assist" in the death of each other's characters. Eventually she just quit coming and everyone had such a bad taste in their mouths over the whole thing that we all lost interest in the campaign.
Not that it bothered me terribly, but I couldn't help but wonder what was going on with the map that was suddenly super imposed over the video from about 14:20 - 14:40.
My guess is Guy uses cool maps as screen savers! What else would The Great GM use?
Why didn't you call an "unexpected twist" "RPG Shark Jumping"
I know I never let my players switch after the fourth session. I let them know that thay can up to that point. Because sometimes thay just don't like the character or feel like thay made some bad choice's. After that it needs to be a really good reason
I am right now having a campaign wither and rot spectacularly - each time i was enthralled in my plots, and the players ended up having no influence on the campaign. The ridiculously underscaled villains either killed when running away from the party, killing themselves or killed by deus ex machina became a running gag.
11:00 little does Guy know about Foo fighters.
WW II did involve more than you think
My group is new to D&D. We started by one of us introducing us to the game (2nd edition) by GMing for a module for a couple of sessions for Easter. We met up again during summer we transitioned to 5e and we all wanted to try the new things. Another player became the GM and based a sandbox adventure on a running joke we made on the first session ever. It went nicely and we all had fun, but the joke grew old and we moved on with the same characters. Because of issues, we decided to postpone this adventure until one of the guys who couldn't play would finally have time to play as a group again.
I decided to run a new adventure for the others so we wouldn't have him miss out on the progression, but it turned out my adventure type was a lot more demanding/ dangerous/ hard and the guy that GMed second didn't like it because it wasn't laid back as he was expecting it to be and many times characters went down (but they all had plot armor- no TPKs yet-) due to bad decisions, positioning or holding back on abilities and he didn't like that... So it has started going down the failure road and we have talked about the reason he didn't like it, but I don't feel like turning the encounters into child's play...
Spent months preparing my open-world West Marches campaign for 12+ players, only to have Coronavirus put an end to it. I even designed custom exploration and survival mechanics, and had ran a beta test for it :(
#1 Schedule Problems (Individual or Group)
#2 Players That Have The Attention Span of a Mayfly
#3 Players Who Don't Like the Mechanics
#4 Players Who Don't Mesh With Each Other
#5 External Events That Are Not Game Related
Could someone please point me to the video about loss of GM interest? Thanks
Ha, unexpected surprise. That's exactly what happened to the latest Star Wars trilogy. Lots of discussion on why the prequels get a lot of grief but are not despised while the current trilogy is downright hated by many, and I think the answer is the latest trilogy has a lot of unexpected surprises that just unraveled the journey. Interesting to see it show up here.
Well if we're talking D&D it's the square to wargames' rectangle (they just stopped calling it one a couple editions in)
I do agree that the process of GMing the RPG subgenre is quite different and story games aren't RPGs, but get roped in there anyways.
Players changing PCs is a bit of a problem. But know your player on this.
Sometimes they thought something was gonna be fun and it just. Wasn't. I've personally done that. Either something mechanically isn't fun for me, or the characters personality is not fun to RP. In those cases I work with the GM and switch out. I've only done this once or twice though and only had a player of mine do it once.
However I have had players get bored with their characters really quickly and want to move on to the next new thing. For that group I invented a game where they could change between classes with class rings. That was a big hit for those ADHD fuckers.
I have one player who sticks with their character no matter what. The rest will change characters from once every year or two to once every few months. With experience and maturity, the reasons for changing characters have moved on from "I'm bored with Harold the Axe" to "Harold the Axe is not filling a unique or useful role, and the party really needs a bard."
@@MonkeyJedi99 And that's perfectly fine right? And personally as a GM I dont want to lock a player into a character they're not enjoying. But I just want my players to be consistent. Most of my players are pretty good and stick with their characters though i just had that one group. And they got the game where they could just reinvent their characters just by changing rings.
What if you ask your players about, for example, scheduling conflicts, and... they don't answer?
Talk to your players about how important it is to communicate those things beforehand as it benefits everyone in the group. Then try again. If there is still no response, maybe looking for different players is the option. Communication is key to this hobby and that includes organisatory stuff, so when the players understand that this is important (which after you talking to them they should) and still fail to properly communicate, they probably do not belong in that group.
We end every session with a quick discussion about availability for the next session. We generally play weekly, but realize not everyone can play every session. If we don't have a quorum, we push it back, may play on Saturday, or I get creative with spin off sessions in which those who can play may do a side adventure, or may even play another character to see a situation from a novel point of view.
One thing that has helped me with scheduling has been Google Calendar. I write up a little summary of the last session to set the scene of the next session, and give it a catchy title (generally with a pun, reference, etc). I duplicate the previous calendar invite, change the info, and send it out. I also have it set to send an email reminder 3 days before the session and a notification 30 min before (we play on a VTT). Here is the announcement from a few weeks ago:
Session 46: Safe Under the Seas
Assailed by spiders and goo, crabs and ghosts, some who ventured beneath the waves have paid with decades of life to locate the hiding place of the ship's log, only to find it secured behind the wall of a safe.
Meanwhile aboard the Tight Fit, Ari and Red avoided a diplomatic incident with patrolling Koa-Toa, accepting their help hunting Sea Devil boarders and Ghost hijackers. The Goblin ghosts relinquished control of the ship upon learning of Nahlakx's presence nearby.
Although my players don't always remember to mark down if they are attending or not, at least I know the session is on their calendar, and they have been reminded.
It was an One World By Night or similar sort of LARP wasn't it?
This made me crack up, as a crafting GM and a wargamer.
Okay, Guy... I like this format about as well as the earlier ones... NOT sure what exactly went on around 14:24 (ish) with the superimposition of the map-animation and in the "timeline preview" it looks as if a whole other clip from some other video was plugged into the vid' here... At first, I thought, "...ermmm... weird choice of transition..."
BUT I'm just going to guess at this point, there was a weird technical glitch in the upload... or possibly something server related.
I DO (however) think you should be aware of it. It didn't disrupt the audio, so your whole exposition works out fine. Just the visual part did a "weird something or other" at around the timestamp above.
OKAY... Sorry for the weirdness intruding, but technical garble can be difficult and frustrating to make it "eloquent"... AND I'd prefer a degree of precision here.
Campaign Failures... Adapting... and occasionally "making sh*t work anyways"...
I think it's worth mention, that some of those points you mentioned as "flags" or signs of a Campaign nearing collapse, can also be part of the adaptation to keep the Game and thus the Story going.
Players/Characters disinterests... changing characters (for instance)
Sometimes a Player (and usually a less experienced Player) will construct a PC that's initially a lot of fun... BUT over a longer haul (like a full-on Campaign) it gets to be a slog... Now, Gurps points out in the 3e books, around "limits on disadvantages" that they don't recommend being too strict on limiting Players,"...because one of two things will happen, either they'll hate the idea of the blind, deaf, dwarf with only one leg and an aversion to dogs... getting rid of the Character or letting it die quickly... OR everyone will have so much fun playing with it, they won't notice the limits..."
That might be true in a short adventure, a one-shot, or in very limited and small "doses", like hour-and-a-half sessions every month or so... BUT put them in this limiting role for longer, and it's not hard to see how cramped they feel their style is getting.
SO when a Player decides he/she has had enough of a Character (particularly an ambitious or limiting design/build) I let them get their Character killed... or find a way otherwise to "write them out"... like a retirement, going mad and getting committed, fostering a child or elder... or some other side-ward quest/lifestyle change that's adequate for the Character and relatively satisfying as an "ending" AND then allow the Player to enter a new PC.
Okay, so there are some "flighty" types who might seek to take supreme advantages of my methods...
You know what? SO BE IT...
I encourage ambitious Role Play, and thereby ambitious builds. I like to see my Players going through the mental gymnastics just as much as they like to stretch and strain their ingenuity and creative license to the limits... BUT that carries the risk of a burn-out scenario or just flailing about uselessly when we manage to "adventure ourselves into a corner"... THEN I feel it incumbent upon me (as GM) to allow that Player the escape. Let them out of their "contractual duty" to a PC they no longer love... AND encourage them (especially with a talent coming into refinement as real skill) to get back in the Game and continue to test their metal... I've willfully killed off my own PC's in-game, creating great "endings" in the midst of a Campaign before... With a good GM and some thought beforehand (remember that "DISCUSS" part) we've managed a few Character endings that didn't leave a dry eye in the house... and some of those games went on in full view of the public in a shoppe!
GM disinterest... Okay, if you're somehow "losing steam" on this particular conflict and plotline... Maybe identify what it is that's boring you to burning out... AND bring it up in DISCUSSION before you toss in the figurative towel.
Chatting this issue out with Players, especially if the Players are still hot-to-trot on the Campaign, will usually elicit some advice and ideas that you can "sink your teeth into"... I've "cat-walked" more than my own fair share of Campaign plots simply because I was growing weary of the original idea... and something better seemed to materialize when I mentioned it to a Player or two...
BEYOND Session-Zero...
One of the chief advantages to "marathon game sessions" for us wasn't that much more rolling dice and getting on with the Plots... Rather, we had the time to take breaks and occasionally wine and dine the difficult discussions where we sort of "debriefed" the session(s) to date... chatting up what was or wasn't working so well for us either as a group or as individuals. It brings up those suspicions of disappointment and allows the GM a chance to occasionally refresh his memory of any particular Player's hopes for the Character Arc... so adequate measures can be taken before an opportunity is hopelessly lost.
It can also build the GM-PC relationships and add measures of trust between the members of the collaborative story group, so the GM can take advantages of risky behavior in the interest of a greater story and more fun for everyone involved.
You don't easily get permissions (let alone congratulations) for murdering PC's willy nilly... BUT with adequate discussion and an appropriate choice of which PC (see the Player disinterest point again) to kill outright, the plot can thicken and the group can tighten... making a Player's choice to change Character all the more useful as a dramatic or literary device.
...and just quietly let the group pat your back or buy you beer for being a "god damn genius".
PvPvGM...
Ugh... It's again worth creating a discussion. Rather, it's worth at least three discussions, beyond session-zero. I like to call them Table-side Chats or "Tween Session Talks"... One discussion should be made with each of the Players in question... Some of our antics in PvP is entirely orchestrated between the Players and isn't a problem at all. It's just "their dance they do" in certain contexts of camaign. It seems vicious and between their Characters, it can get serious... BUT between the two Players... not so much.
When two Players simply can't be in the same game together... there's action to be taken. This is where that third discussion should happen. Generally I avoid the original two Players involved at this one, myself. I prefer to get the rest of the Table together, and hold the discussion completely as private as possible. It doesn't matter who jumps to be on which side, or if there is anyone to defend or pick on one side or the other. It's not worth destroying more relationships between friends because we're dealing with an RP-issue.
The same thing goes for PvGM... One discussion should be with that Player and NOBODY else. Just try to reach out and understand what the problem is... It may be a complete criticism of your methods, style, artwork, voice acting, lack of any of the theatrical, overly theatrical, whatever. Try to pinpoint what exactly this person finds so completely disgusting AND (more importantly) why do they then KEEP COMING BACK.
Again, the second conversation should be with the rest of the Table, avoiding (in my experience) the original "problem Player" all together. Find out (if you can) what everyone else thinks... and try to detach from your GM-persona. You're being evaluated, and it's not always exactly going to be stuff you want to hear... I get a lot of flack about my vocabulary and word games. I've learned to tone that down a bit, but I'm outright refusing to get rid of it, because it does elicit laughs and entertainment more often than not at the Table IN the Game... {just an example}
I wholeheartedly agree about Discussion and Planning. The more Planning you can do, the less improv' you HAVE to do. it's okay to leave some things to a reasonably responsible element of "playing it by ear" or "winging it"... BUT you don't want to HAVE to improv' an entire session because it derailed in the first two minutes and you're never in hell getting back "on book".
Discussion solves more problems In-game than about any other tool. I like that you pursued the importance, as I find you seem to have a functioning awareness of just how little you can over-sell that point. Talking a problem out between friends isn't a fix-all necessarily, but there just isn't such a fix-all to be had. AND talking it out is a lot closer to a fix-all than just about any other attack for inter-personal problem solving...
Hell... at any rate... This thing's getting long enough... Hope I've offered a few tertiary points to think on.
...AND you don't have to be Guy to respond to this mess. (of course) ;o)
on the top of this list should be "Because Players x&y only can play on Sunday but player z only on Saturday, oh and also only on that one weekend where the other two can't join the game because...."
Does anyone know what program was used for the map at 14:37 ? :)
Im down for watching more videos. whether it be about losing interest or monster design etc.
Just here to confirm about people that don't like each other: there is no point trying to solve the issue during the game session, or even just before the game session starts. Also if you think the other guy is really being a jerk and you did nothing wrong but most of the other persons around the table appear to be siding with him or simply looking away from the issue, you'd probably be better playing an other game with other people.
4 in the morning. Bought fell out of my chair at the start.
But wait if you're in a corner with other people can't you just make another game with them?
XD
Just salvaged one. *sweats profusely*
thank you
I thought Shad of Shadiversity made an RPG channel at first glance.
Mine failed because my original players skipped out on the game I spent a year building and the new ones I got talked into Dm'ing for didn't trust me or my story telling. They thought I was just making shit up with no plans or foresight while flexing on them with my big bad... I'm just gonna nuke the damn thing, its just another thing for the list of stuff I've failed at.
They failed as players.
You may be all good roleplayers but sometimes styles conflict and things get bitter.
Tenth reason why campaigns fail: Learn
… what? XD
Ah, I remember how my GM ruined my second game, because some of the players are disinterested and one of them did some stupid stuff. GM flipped shit and just party-wiped us all.
This hits me too deep
That some good shit.
Need to put a new number. Players being dumb.
Good vid
Why campaigns fail....sure. I get it. My biggest problem with campaign failure lay solely with poor player choice, resulting in a dilemma that is either an obvious deus et machina to save them from themselves or allow themselves to fly their paper plane into the sun.
Imagine, if you will, running a campaign for:
Player 1 - Switches characters all of the time. Refuses to engage with each character because they see them as numbers on a page. Gets jealous easily if this or that character isn't the biggest and baddest. Can and will bully other players at the table. Will not accept a ruling from the GM if it's not what they want.
Player 2 - A former GM. Cannot accept that the table is being run by another GM, and refuses to relinquish control of the story to other players let alone the GM. Will actively sabotage the plans of other players if it's not about them, and refuses to take responsibility for any choices. Refuses to adhere to agreements.
Player 3 - Just like player 2, but never ran a game in the past. Furthermore, refuses to learn any rule. Any. Rule. Expects and demands that other players do all the heavy lifting with regard to know how things work, and will actually nap at the table if the focus isn't on them.
Player 4 - Will sit like a statue and say nothing, even if asked. Simple questions become interrogations by other players. Solves all problems as if they were the "hammer and nail" metaphor, and will not learn from past mistakes.
These are all actual people that have played at my table. Two of them still do. I have run three campaigns to date in my home brew world, with positive input from the majority of the table. I've had to all but do flaming hand stands in some cases to make things work out, but there's only so much one can do when players actively sabotage themselves and others. Players 5, 6, and 7 are a joy to run for. Engaged, imaginative and fun.
One campaign failed. The second one finished. I am unsure about the third.
Heck, play 7 is starting up another table with two more brand new players, so I'll have two campaigns to run. I am more hopeful about that than the original table. I have half a mind to pare it down to just those two, to be honest.
Players 1-4 sound like more trouble than they are worth, Give them a few years to a decade to get older. Unless they are already older, then set a fire and walk away.
Players 3 and 4 are unsavable. The other two would be unimaginably frustrating, but at least they're engaging in some fashion... I feel like they have the potential to be fun but also to ruin other people's fun. Very risky. I'd pare it down if it's causing you and other people to not have fun while playing. It sounds brutal.