>have tried to be a player for years now
>games barely last a month, maybe 3 months at most because people lose interest and DM fatigue
>try to DM
>players are god awful, moronic
>decide to be stringent in recruitment process
>players start losing interest in 3 months, start feeling demotivated when I have to replace players
I love TTRPGs, I hate the general player base. I wish there was some kind of plague that removed all the uncommitted people.
How the hell do you guys finish actual games?
>Start a solo game
>GM is an butthole
>Player doesn't even show up
Somethings are just not meant to be.
>How the hell do you guys finish actual games?
I don't know what to say man, my group has been together for 10 years now and 4 of us have been part of it since the beginning.
I play with my friends. You could try having those.
>players start losing interest in 3 months, start feeling demotivated when I have to replace players
>How the hell do you guys finish actual games?
You answered your own question: Instead of always trying to make "le epic years-spanning campaigns" that grognards always like to brag (LIE) about, just plan for smaller games that only span 3 months (12 sessions or so). Increase the rate of character advancement due to this.
>"le epic years-spanning campaigns" that grognards always like to brag (LIE) about
It doesn't surprise me that people on this site don't understand the concept of actually getting along with people.
>How the hell do you guys finish actual games?
If commitment is the problem play dirty. Play systems will long term mechanical advancement and make sure not to use milestone leveling. Each session make the players feel like they are on step closer to their next dopamine hit, either a level up, acquiring cool shit, ending a story arc, whatever and never resolve all these in one session.They should never level up the same session they completed a story arc or got a brand new magic item(tm). Give them some XP whenever a session starts and give them bonus XP if they are consistent and they don't cancel sessions.
What is that anon? We have to cancel a session because your wife is giving birth? Shame! You are all going to lose all that bonus XP you accumulated by being consistent all those months! But do not despair! I am going to award you the "shitcom dad" perk that will give you advantage on all social rolls if you make a dad joke! See you next session!
So the milestones, but inconsistent. Bravo.
Also
> cancelling a session because of one player
Bruh
>So the milestones, but inconsistent. Bravo.
There is nothing inconsistent about this. I mean I am not going to seriously defend this tactic since it is tongue in cheek and encourages the use of F2P online games mechanics that have the intent to create addiction but inconsistency? What a weird thing to say.
Wait, wait, wait. Milestone is when GM arbitrary desides to level up a player or a party. Foe example, the quest/session complete.
And you are telling me that to ARBITRARY define if you have enough XP to level up or not is somehow different. I don't see how except the extra step of the bean counting.
It only makes sence if the game has well defined XP-scoring and leveling system, so players have a tangible degree of control of their progress.
If the adventure is interesting by itself, you don't need this gamey bs in a role-playing game.
You are having an imaginary argument with an imaginary opponent. Apply yourself.
>And you are telling me that to ARBITRARY define if you have enough XP to level up or not is somehow different.
Never said that. And you should really check what tongue-in-cheek means.
Then I misunderstood
> They should never level up the same session they completed a story arc or got a brand new magic item
> Give them bonus XP if they are consistent and they don't cancel sessions
I keep a else group of friends but anothet friend of mine ran a bunch of pug one shots then privately contacted only the best players to snipe for his group and it stuck after a few revisions and replacements
Have you tried not playing DnD? Doing so increases the quality of your players drastically.
To play in my games you either need to be my friend, someone I really want to become friends with, or someone a friend of mine vouched for in a convincing manner.
I would like to have more players, but the players I have are lovely. Try making some more friends, Anon.
Terrible advice! I want to be able to play my games without befriending anyone. I want to feel absolutely nothing as I strike down the character they've spent the last 10 sessions building up, right at the moment of truth!
>You thought you were my favorite, did you?!?!?
You call yourself a man. Ha.
What is wrong with killing your friends?
Is it so much to ask for to just sit down and play a game with 4 strangers and have them remain strangers after 200 hours of play??
> 3 months
Am I the only one who deliberatley limits his campaigns to 12-16 6 hours sessions (3-4 months) so they won't become stale and boring and have in-game timers that matter and force players to act?
I honestly have no idea how some campaigns get so out of hand. I don't set hard limits or rules or anything but if things look like they're not panning out either me or someone else at the table will usually speak up about and we can agree to give it a wrap up or just flat out drop it in favor of something else if we need to. Everyone always thinks they need to play the lord of the rings when sometimes it's more fun to just play the hobbit.
Pretty much the same here - I feel people who jump headfirst into "forever campaigns" don't have a whole lot of experience to begin with.
It's not that I don't understand the romanticism behind it but it's not really realistic. And trying to force it will just stretch things to thin.
>playing with randoms
>playing a single campaign for more than 3 months
Have you tried not doing both of those at once?
Maybe your process is flawed.
If you just go after random people, you'll have plenty of failures, since it often takes 1 or 2 people to break everything down.
I play with a bunch of dudes online who have been playing the same dnd 3.5e campaign since the mid 2000s, and while sometimes we don't get to play for weeks due to real life issues, we always come back and continue where we left off.
One yhing that helps a lot is having more players than are needed to have a sesion, that way even if one or two people flake, there's 4 dudes to at the ready.
Maybe try and join a long running campaing, if anything, to make friends with those guys.
Networking is important here. Find commited people and have them refferr you other people that are just as commited, I suppose.
That’s not gaslighting, you fricking tard. Where’s the induced mental illness?
>How the hell do you guys finish actual games?
Accept that games don't actually finish. Ever.
You play because the act of playing is inherently fun. If you reach the end of a campaign, you know what you're supposed to do? Look around at your friends and then play a different game. Get bored of one story or system? Transition to playing in another.
The problem you people have is you put the narrative on a pedestal, the game exists to craft an awesome story with a beginning, a middle, and an end.
The real reason you should be playing is just to enjoy the journey. If you can start to enjoy the journey instead of treating the game like collaborative fiction, you will have a lot more retention.
You are philosophically backwards.
If you want gold anon you have to work the mine. Real world isn't critical roll
Play with people you actually know, not randos from the internet. If you don't know people you can play games with that's unfortunate, but at least you can find a better use for your time.
>games barely last a month, maybe 3 months at most because people lose interest and DM fatigue
A season for a campaign sounds perfectly normal. You can still have a long campaign if you're focused around chaining together shorter interrelated campaigns, but breaking things up into 3 month chunks gives allowances for players to gracefully bow out due to changes in life circumstances or interest.