This is demoralizing. DM's please read.

[Ruinous]

I don't normally do this, go on a forum and flame post, but I really feel that it is necessary. I've been playing FG for over a year now, and played in about 7-8 campaigns. I really wanted FG to be a success, because I care about having a good time playing in a game that I love. But, the GM's that I've had have been just plain flaky. Personally, I DM 5e tabletop and I would never pull the things that I have had to put up with or seen others go through. This is very demoralizing and I can see why the games that I have been in, had a high attrition/turnover rate. I really want to play in a great group and see that others here have had the same opportunity, but I'm just not seeing it. I hope that I am an outlier, or someone can show me that this isn't true. I think I'm going to give FG a break for awhile, thanks and take care.

[Raunalyn]

I've had few issues here. The DM's I've played with have all been pretty good, with only one or two having to put the game on indefinite hold due to life issues. I've been running games on FG for almost 3 years now, 2 of my campaigns that I ran lasting 2 years or so, and the ones I'm playing in still on-going.

[Royalwolf]

can you give some examples without being too specific? its hard for a problem to be corrected if they don't realize there is a problem

or is it just personality clashing?

[LindseyFan]

So what is the problem then: FG or the DMs? It sounds like you are complaining about "bad" DMs and attributing it to FG... Not to minimize your concerns of course, as it is sad to not see someone having fun. Perhaps you should look around at some of the games available from our community? You've been playing FG for "over a year" but just came here a few weeks ago.. Why not try some of the games available on the game calendar?

[JohnD]

Complaints with nothing but vagueness accomplish nothing except make you look like an attention seeker. If you have a problem with a specific DM, take it up with him/her personally, not via public mail blast.

Even better, light the way and start DMing yourself.

[Trenloe]

This is not a "FG problem" this is an Internet gaming issue. Anyone - players/GMs can, and do, come and go - don't turn up, don't inform people, flake out, etc.. It's a lot easier for people to mess others around when they don't see them face-to-face and perhaps don't see the others as friends. Sometimes it can simply be a case of personality conflicts that just make people (players or GMs) decide not to run/play games anymore. If a GM isn't enjoying the game then they're not going to continue to run it - so always try to work with your GM and assist them in the ongoing campaign. These are the facts, I don't think there's any particular fix for it - just to keep trying until you find a group that works.

One recommendation for everyone reading here - try to make your group work. Don't be disrespectful, don't make demands of the GM/other players, try to play as a cooperative group, etc.. Your first thought should be "I want this gaming group to be my friends and game with them for a long time." Cultivate the group with that in mind. Sure, sometimes it just won't work as the group dynamic isn't great, the GM style is not what you're looking for, etc.. But everyone in the group has to make an effort to make it work.

[SirGraystone]

Like everything you find good or bad peoples, so far i had 2 bad DM and 3 good ones, it's the luck of the draw. This have nothing to do with FG, its life.

[LordEntrails]

Once more I will suggest those having trouble getting the group together that they want, take the time to read this blog. It is really well done and imo very well thought out.;
https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/entry.php?241-How-to-Build-a-Successful-Long-term-Gaming-Group

[Emerald_wind]

Over the years I have had very good DMs and very bad DMs and run the gamut in between both IRL and on VTTs. I have had to quit games I didn't want to due to RL issues and had to quit games due to personality clashes, or DMs favouring one person over the rest of the group, both IRL and VTTs. This is a fact of life and Roleplaying gaming. I have even as a DM, had to leave a group in the lurch a couple times due to RL issues, but sometimes it happens. (Most recently because a house fire destroyed my house and all my computers). I can assure you, not all DMs are bad, not all games are bad, the hard part is finding a game, DM and group that works for you. Best thing to do is sit down, figure out what YOU want from a group, from a DM and what you are willing to compromise on. Also figure out what you have to OFFER a group - this is as important as what you want. Then look for only that. I have come to realize for myself that I can only do Text only games (which are amazingly hard to find - I have only played one, one-shot game pretty much since before Christmas), but I won't settle, because it will not be good for me, or the group when I am forced to quit.

The game for you is out there. You just need to figure it out.

[Vhok]

I've been using FG for about a year and a half and have been with the same core 4 people since I started. we have had some people come and go but us 4 have been together the whole time. we play 3 nights a week now. its hard to find that 5th person whos commited like we are :(

[JohnD]

In front of a keyboard now.

I've run on-line games for over 16 years. Neverwinter Nights and Neverwinter Nights 2 for a combined 12 years, and Fantasy Grounds since then.

You will never - ever - solve the larger problem of flaky people on the internet. There will always be people who think nothing of blowing off an online commitment with some random people online in favor of hitting the clubs with their buds (or whatever). This by the way in my experience is a bigger problem when you have "'free' to play (i.e. Roll20)... the less skin someone has invested the easier it is to pull a disappearing act. And... sometimes life does just happen and drop a big torpedo into best laid plans... I've had this happen to me on four different occasions with games I was running).

All you can do is keep churning through the unreliable ones until eventually you gather a group of like minded people who enjoy the same style of game, and have compatible availability.

Once you get to this point, you really don't have much to worry about. Occasionally one person will drop due to whatever. You might lose a group because the DM gets burnt out and just stops... this by the way happens to everyone and the best way to avoid this is to get out there and share the DMing duties so it isn't always the same person putting the extra hours and always having to be "on target" when everyone else can simply show up.

But blasting out to the world accomplishes nothing. There's nothing here for FG to fix - you have to fix it for yourself by assembling a group or finding one you fit into well. Only you can do that for yourself.

[Full Bleed]

This is not a "FG problem" this is an Internet gaming issue.
This.

Personally, I think a significant margin of failure comes from people putting together "first-come first-serve" games. That may be ok for 1-shots, but if players/gms are looking for something more long-term they need to put a little more legwork into lining up more compatible participants.

[Ruinous]

Thanks for the input, I do agree that it isn't an FG issue. And maybe posting on here in frustration wasn't the best thing to do. I decided not to post names and users because I don't feel that it would actually solve anything.

Out of all the advice I think this was the most helpful from John D: "All you can do is keep churning through the unreliable ones until eventually you gather a group of like minded people who enjoy the same style of game, and have compatible availability."

Thank you, and Ill read that sticky post in the forums. And yes this account is new, but I've been a user for awhile.

[Ruinous]

Thank you, Ill read this.

[damned]

Hi Ruinous you sound like you are landing in poor groups all too often and as others have said the internet is full of people who view an online commitment as something easily blown off. Sometimes its because people bite off more than they can chew and dont know how to tell the group that and try something simpler or ask for help. Often times one or more people at the table are difficult to get along with - RPG players are often quirky and a little unique and all definitely have ideas on the best (or only) way to do things and struggle with differing opinions. This makes it hard for them and hard for everyone around them.

I do think that an approach that might work for you is one that a few others have begun to try recently and that is forming a group of players that are all willing to take a turn at GM - but you might have to be the first GM. Everyone needs to be willing to support each other in learning to do the GM role and supportive of their efforts (good or bad). A less confident GM might choose to run a one shot or a two session adventure. A more experienced one might run LMoP or CoS etc. And there is plenty in between. And of course on your GM turn you might take the group for something different - Call of Cthulhu or Savage Worlds etc.

On saying all that - sometimes when your head is telling you to have a break it might be worth take a month or three off and coming back refreshed.

[TMO]

Thanks for the input, I do agree that it isn't an FG issue. And maybe posting on here in frustration wasn't the best thing to do. I decided not to post names and users because I don't feel that it would actually solve anything.

For what it is worth, I appreciated your original post. It did not come off as "flame" to me, but rather a genuine desire to share your experiences so that others might take note and consider how they might improve their respect for fellow gamers. Sometimes, a note like this is what is needed.

I've been a DM using FG for over a year and I find myself fortunate that my first (and only) group has been pretty good. That said, I had a couple of players just drop out after the first few months without any warning and they would not respond to any attempts to reach them. As already stated by others, the anonymity of the net makes it easy to flake out. That is unfortunate. DMs and players alike put a lot of time and energy to make campaigns successful. I get that people's priorities change all the time, which is just life, but being unwilling to show courtesy toward others is a shame.

The blog article that was linked to has some great ideas. If I were to boil it down to just one piece of advice it would be to communicate your expectations very clearly and get confirmation that your expectations are respected and shared.

[spoofer]

I am in three groups. The players quit on average one person every month. Of those, I have been playing with the same two guys since 2010. Here is what you want:

Someone older... at least 40.
Employed.
With kids who are at least ten years old (or has decided to not have kids).

Why? These are the people who are settled into the same routine day in day out. All of the major interruptions in life (breaking up, getting married, having children, getting a job, etc.) are done with. These are the people who have been a part of my FG experience for seven years now.

As for DMs, the best way to get a good one is to become that good one yourself. That is what I did. Some people don't like my style. They move on to a different group. Other people love my style. They stay. Each to his or her own.

I am envious of the poster who meets with the same people three times a week. Wow!!!

[Dwarf Ulf]

I've had one encounter lately regarding a DM, won't be naming names, who had a group and campaign starting up, where we had a week to do stuff and all before we'd start, but he ended up, for some reason, lying straight to my face earlier about it, using RL as an excuse to not do the campaign, whilst on the day we where originally set to start, he advertised and everything, and a friend of mine even joined him. So yea, I am butthurt about that.

Honestly, I've had 2 bad dms and 4 good ones, along with 1 newly made one that is learning. But I've yet to find a proper stable group saddly. So still going for gold.

[Myrdin Potter]

I started a game in Wednesday night a little bit ago with all the players being brand new to me and me to them. There has been churn, but about 1/2 the initial players are there and people seem to be having fun.

I just assume that I will lose players and plan accordingly.

[Howell Family]

This is not a "FG problem" this is an Internet gaming issue. Anyone - players/GMs can, and do, come and go - don't turn up, don't inform people, flake out, etc.. It's a lot easier for people to mess others around when they don't see them face-to-face and perhaps don't see the others as friends. Sometimes it can simply be a case of personality conflicts that just make people (players or GMs) decide not to run/play games anymore. If a GM isn't enjoying the game then they're not going to continue to run it - so always try to work with your GM and assist them in the ongoing campaign. These are the facts, I don't think there's any particular fix for it - just to keep trying until you find a group that works.

One recommendation for everyone reading here - try to make your group work. Don't be disrespectful, don't make demands of the GM/other players, try to play as a cooperative group, etc.. Your first thought should be "I want this gaming group to be my friends and game with them for a long time." Cultivate the group with that in mind. Sure, sometimes it just won't work as the group dynamic isn't great, the GM style is not what you're looking for, etc.. But everyone in the group has to make an effort to make it work.

I think this is the core issue. Things do come up in real life and sometimes things don't work out. On the Internet it's easier to not show up than it is to work things out.

My suggestion is that if you're new to DM'ing it's probably easier to host some one-shots to get your feet wet before devoting yourself to a regular schedule; and to make sure you like it. Then if you want to continue, come up with a schedule, ask for players to join, and then handle things as they come. Keep communications open and if schedules change, things come up, do your best to communicate to your group. I would also make it clear to the players that you expect the same from them.

People tend to avoid conflict both in real life and the Internet. The ironic thing is that if you're open and honest with people you'll have less conflict than if you do things like avoid them, ditch them, and/or lie to them.

[dulux-oz]

For me the trick is, as in real life, to vet my Players thoroughly first. This is done by relying on my existing and previous Players to recommend others that they know (not necessarily those who they have gamed with in the past) - they know my style of GMing and the type of Campaigns I run, and so if they get on well with a person then it increases the chances that I'll get on well with them as well - and that they'll fit into the group.

For new people who aren't known to me or my Players then I get to know them - as well as I possible can. Admittedly is slightly easier for someone whose been gaming for so long - I can pick a potential gamer out of a group in under 10 minutes, but I still need to get to know someone BEFORE I'll invite them in.

Yes, it does take longer to get a game started this way, but I run Campaigns, so spending a few weeks making sure my Players all get along and get along with me and each of our styles is worth it in the end. I've made a few bad calls, normally by letting someone talk themselves or their friend in against my better judgment, but in 30-odd years of gaming (IRL & VTT) I'm pretty sure I'm under 5 "bad calls" in that time - but again, I run multi-year Campaigns so I'm not starting a new game every month or two.

I'll be honest, I'm building up a dossier of potential Players from these boards; how you all react, how you all treat each other, how you all express yourselves, etc, etc, etc - and when the time comes to start a new Campaign (our current one's been going regularly ever two weeks since 2012, with only a few turn-overs in that time, but the story-arc's coming to an end in the next 6 months or so) then I'll be tapping a few people on the shoulder - and it won't necessarily be those who I've seemed to get along well with (I don't look for "Yes Men", but I don't look for @ssholes, either). Out of my current group there will be a couple who'll want a break from gaming - and that's OK - but it means that I'll probably have a spot or two for others - and it won't necessarily be experienced gamers either - there's something nice about corrupt... sorry, introducing new people to out hobby.

How does all this help a Player? Well, you can vet your GM and other Players as well - get to know them from their IRL and/or on-line presence. Again, it may take some time, and it may be frustrating because we all want to get in there and GAME, but if you take some time to get to know the people you're going to game with then you'll be happier in the long-run - and you'll get more gaming in as well - trust me!

So how do you do this? Read people's posts; start a list of people who's posts catch you eye; read their blog (if they've got one); see if they've got a Twitch channel or if they game with a GM who does (you can then see what they're like "in the moment"); ask others about them and get some recommendations (for eg I'm pretty sure damned and Trenloe run a good game, as does Rob2e, Gwydion and Zack, and Lord E is also one to watch); and if someone has an attitude (or at least an unjustified attitude) then they'll probably be a PITA in a game as well, so steer clear.

In short, take your time - yes, we all want to game, but its better to game steady then sporadic, and if you take the time to find your group you won't be gaming sporadically.

Cheers

[Xydonus]

It certainly can be very demoralizing to a GM (and player) when your in a game that is essentially a round of musical chairs. One of the games that I was in as a player experienced very significant turnover - nearly a new player or two every session and this went on for awhile. The most frustrating issue (as a GM) is also experiencing players who will 'commit' to a game but never show up. I've seen this happen to many GM's and while life certainly does get in the way, the biggest head scratcher is wondering why do people commit and just not bother to politely inform the GM. As a player who has been in more than a few games that this has happened to, it can be frustrating for us all. I count myself lucky in this regard as a GM - I've only had a couple of players leave my game over the span of what is nearly 3 years now; the same 5 players however have remained constant. Life is going to get in the way sooner or later, no doubt.

As JohnD wonderfully put it, all you can pretty much do is keep looking until you come across a like-minded group. There is certainly going to be more misses than hits.

[GunnarGreybeard]

So how do you do this? Read people's posts; start a list of people who's posts catch you eye; read their blog (if they've got one); see if they've got a Twitch channel or if they game with a GM who does (you can then see what they're like "in the moment") . .
LOL, glad I'm not the only one to do this. Anytime I get an inquiry into my games or they sign up on the calender/group, that's the 1st thing I do. :bandit:

[bryk]

There's new DMs, and "experienced" DMs, but like other's said it's all about matching the right DM with the right players.

For instance, I find that my weakness is that my immersion can break easily when a DM has players do 1000 perception checks in a night throughout an entire session, is too loose with investigation vs perception. Ignores what I say my character is going to do multiple times, every time I do something. It can be very frustrating.

I for one didn't think I would like a text only game, however LindseyFan ran an amazing 1 shot text only that I was in (AL). Very patient, worked with new players, etc.

I'm learning that there are some others that are supposedly good DMs that are more concerned with patreon and twitch than they are the game though here on FG. It might be different now on Roll20, but that wasn't the case when I played there 2 years ago.

Immersion is D&D, when you have a "you have a follower" sound go off and the DM interrupts what he is doing to thank the person... you start to wonder why you showed up.

[Xydonus]

Immersion is D&D, when you have a "you have a follower" sound go off and the DM interrupts what he is doing to thank the person... you start to wonder why you showed up.

:O .... Wow, yeah that's one way to break immersion. Podcasts, recordings and twitch should never get in the way at the table, virtual or physical. Madness.

Edit* That actually reminds me of a DM who replayed a whole session (that resulted in a different outcome) because he messed up the recording of the session for his podcast.

[LordBalkoth]

I started a game in Wednesday night a little bit ago with all the players being brand new to me and me to them. There has been churn, but about 1/2 the initial players are there and people seem to be having fun.

I just assume that I will lose players and plan accordingly.

Yeah, I recruited eight players for a game where I wanted six people max -- I just knew I'd lose at least some of them. And after a month and a half I'm down to four of the original eight.

[Daemini]

Over the years I have had very good DMs and very bad DMs and run the gamut in between both IRL and on VTTs. I have had to quit games I didn't want to due to RL issues and had to quit games due to personality clashes, or DMs favouring one person over the rest of the group, both IRL and VTTs. This is a fact of life and Roleplaying gaming. I have even as a DM, had to leave a group in the lurch a couple times due to RL issues, but sometimes it happens. (Most recently because a house fire destroyed my house and all my computers). I can assure you, not all DMs are bad, not all games are bad, the hard part is finding a game, DM and group that works for you. Best thing to do is sit down, figure out what YOU want from a group, from a DM and what you are willing to compromise on. Also figure out what you have to OFFER a group - this is as important as what you want. Then look for only that. I have come to realize for myself that I can only do Text only games (which are amazingly hard to find - I have only played one, one-shot game pretty much since before Christmas), but I won't settle, because it will not be good for me, or the group when I am forced to quit.

The game for you is out there. You just need to figure it out.

I can confer, Emerald_wind was in one of my games when he had the house fire. Hope I wasn't one of the bad DMs haha.

[Daemini]

A lot of good advice here on this thread. I'll add something to it. When your gaming with folks, and find ones you really like, try to become friends outside the game. I have 2 people I play with, that I meet from FG, all the time cause they are good players and I know they commit to the group. So, try and make friends with people you think you'd like to play with in the future and then when it comes time to DM a campaign, or need another for another DM's campaign, you have a pool of players to pull from.

I had a player drop out of my campaign. He notified me a week before session, allowing me to get someone new into his spot. I didn't think he would show up to the next session, but he did. He role played his own death for the group, which is far and beyond anything I have seen from a player that has to quit a group. And you know what, hes on my list of good players, if I need someone in the future, I will defiantly ask him to join. Then, I've had players go silent (my term) were they just dont show up or respond to PM's.

[Martin153]

I have been incredibly lucky so far. I DM for a group of real life friends, but have recently started a campaign after inviting random pickups from advertising here. I have just found really great group of players.

The things I look for are.
Age. (this has already been mentioned). The group is mature, so they are happy to commit.
TZ. I try and avoid players way out of the TZ. Best intentions at the start. But late nights etc can become a difficult later.
Maturity. I avoid three word replies using txt speak to applications.

If I am running a long campaign, I start off with some homebrew scenarios to get a feel for the group chemistry before starting the long campaign commitment.

Maybe I been lucky, but there are many committed DMs and Players in FG.

[dulux-oz]

I had a player drop out of my campaign. He notified me a week before session, allowing me to get someone new into his spot. I didn't think he would show up to the next session, but he did. He role played his own death for the group, which is far and beyond anything I have seen from a player that has to quit a group.

I had something similar happen - and when the rest of the group isn't aware that its on the cards a well played "death scene" is not only memorable but it can also put the wind up the others and help them to realise that there is actually some risk of dying in the game.


Then, I've had players go silent (my term)...

I use "go dark".

[Topdecker]

My experience with campaign play on FG 'looking for group' has been 1 for 1 to the positive as a player. Our GM has a core group of 3 or 4 of us that are consistently there and then a group of players that cannot be as active and as a result tend to rotate in and out as their life allows them.

I don't want to get too system-centric, but it is worth observing that a newbie/low-level in Savage Worlds is much more able to contribute to the team than a 1st/2nd/3rd level D&D-type player in a 5th or 6th level group. I think that significant frustration with new players / infrequent players would exist if the game system were less forgiving of them. (Currently at 35xp - almost Veteran level play with is probably level 7-8 in D&D - and still no real problems with peeps showing up and making meaningful contributions with a pre-gen.)

As it stands, the campaign really has taken on a bit of cosmopolitan air with players from around the globe and if you haven't guessed, I find it somewhat interesting. It is also odd in the sense that our in-game characters belong to an international organization (Rippers) - and we get to briefly cross paths with other operatives. Of course, I don't know what our GM thinks of it - I simply admire him for plugging away and still giving new players a shot or welcoming back those that have been gone for a while.

[LordBalkoth]

I don't want to get too system-centric, but it is worth observing that a newbie/low-level in Savage Worlds is much more able to contribute to the team than a 1st/2nd/3rd level D&D-type player in a 5th or 6th level group.

Which...only matters if you bring in a new player at level 1/2/3 in a 5th or 6th level group for some reason. Instead of, oh I don't know, maybe starting the new player at level 5 or 6 like the rest of the group?

[Answulf]

I am in three groups. The players quit on average one person every month. Of those, I have been playing with the same two guys since 2010. Here is what you want:

Someone older... at least 40.
Employed.
With kids who are at least ten years old (or has decided to not have kids).

Why? These are the people who are settled into the same routine day in day out. All of the major interruptions in life (breaking up, getting married, having children, getting a job, etc.) are done with. These are the people who have been a part of my FG experience for seven years now.


This is a tough one - there's no denying that age is a factor in reliability, and certainly someone who has settled down and is playing after the kids go to bed is more likely to stick to a routine. But I think most would agree that younger players aren't automatically unreliable - we played pretty reliably back in college. I think if I was in college now trying to play FG with other college players, I would just plan on running a game that lasted a semester or a summer and that wasn't scheduled on a weekend night.

[damned]

Which...only matters if you bring in a new player at level 1/2/3 in a 5th or 6th level group for some reason. Instead of, oh I don't know, maybe starting the new player at level 5 or 6 like the rest of the group?

Or even simpler - hand the new player the departed players character. She can roll up a new character is she is still here after 2 sessions (mostly they will continue to play the one you gave them anyway).

[dulux-oz]

Or even simpler - hand the new player the departed players character. She can roll up a new character is she is still here after 2 sessions (mostly they will continue to play the one you gave them anyway).

That's pretty much what I've done the (relatively) few times its happened.

[LordBalkoth]

That also works!

[Wintermute]

I really like damned's idea of reusing the departed characters.

[JohnD]

I do that also... had enough of spending time with someone creating a character and integrating into the group to disappear soon after.

[dulux-oz]

I do that also... had enough of spending time with someone creating a character and integrating into the group to disappear soon after.

Right - and it can disrupt the ongoing story/plot as well when "you just happen to find a new adventuring companion at an out of the way Waystation on the road to nowhere/the dragon-lich's lair (or whatever the BBEG is supposed to be)".

No, its easier to let the new player play the old character in an already established group - and they pretty much make the old character their own after a while anyway.

[Ardem]

I am now onto my 5th Year with an FG Rolemaster Campaign, I had players come and go some a session and some have stuck it it out for the 5 years. I do not have any advise for either GM or player, except to adjust your expectations of other people. Low expectations create less disappointment, this flakiness it not about FG or RPG it people in general across the board. All I suggest is go with your gut as it normally the best indicator you have.

[LindseyFan]

Here is what you want:

Someone older... at least 40.
Employed.
With kids who are at least ten years old (or has decided to not have)
I am 23, self-"employed", with no kids of my own...

So what are you trying to say?? Hmmm??

Lol

[Ardem]

Being a Gen X myself I think he saying that millennials and Gen Y are flaky and have no consideration of other people, are self obsessed and the concept of honour and duty has been lost to them. To which I totally agree with <wink>

Well maybe not all as with all general aspersions.

Sorry I am an Aussie cannot help but stir the pot <evil grin>

[LindseyFan]

Well we wouldn't be so self absorbed if we weren't so special! :P

[dulux-oz]

Sorry I am an Aussie cannot help but stir the pot <evil grin>

Yeap, we're natural born sh!t-stirers :p

[dulux-oz]

Well we wouldn't be so self absorbed if we weren't so special! :P

Now now, don't put yourselves down for being "special" - its something that can be overcome if you learn from your "betters" (ie Gen-X's)

See (natural born sh!t-stirer) :p

[Atua]

Isn't that the reason the English sent us off to the middle of nowhere with no farming skills and limited chance of survival in the first place, because we are antagonists. ;)

[LindseyFan]

Oh yeah? Did you get a ribbon for everything you did like me? I bet I got way more ribbons to prove I am a special flower!

(heheheeh it IS a RP community!)

[Ardem]

Well we wouldn't be so self absorbed if we weren't so special! :P

hahahha Nice One!

[dulux-oz]

Isn't that the reason the English sent us off to the middle of nowhere with no farming skills and limited chance of survival in the first place, because we are antagonists. ;)

I thought it was because we were drunk - or did that come later :confused:

[dulux-oz]

I bet I got way more ribbons to prove I am a special flower!

Umm, I'm not so sure - do pieces of pretty paper with lots of swirly writing on them count? :p

[Atua]

Australians - Drunk and Disorderly

[dulux-oz]

Australians - Drunk and Disorderly

True - and once again I refer you all to this (https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/entry.php?15-The-Confusing-Country-Or-Understanding-Australia)

[valiantcosmos]

Interesting to read all the thoughts here and the varied approaches to putting together a group. I am definitely sympathetic to those DMs who do a lot of vetting of potential players, but I'm also grateful to those DMs who take a more 'first come first serve' approach of which I have been the beneficiary. The games have not worked out for the long run, but I've had fun and learned something from them all (as a relatively new player) and I have been impressed, from the start of my FG involvement, by the inclusiveness, open mindedness, and welcoming nature of the community here. And while I'm happy to hear that older family folks are a good bet (as I am one), I have fond memories of a game that included a high school student who played with a death wish and whose sister regularly barged in to his room to yell at him. He provided some comic relief for the group as a whole, and clearly he needed the escape D&D afforded him. I hope to eventually find a stable long term campaign that's the perfect fit, but I'll keep on rolling the dice until then.

[Full Bleed]

I am definitely sympathetic to those DMs who do a lot of vetting of potential players, but I'm also grateful to those DMs who take a more 'first come first serve' approach of which I have been the beneficiary. The games have not worked out for the long run
This is really the only observation/conclusion I was trying to make when I mentioned the "first come, first serve" method of player recruiting. I wasn't denying the ability to "luck" into some good players or games without any vetting. But the proof is usually in the pudding when it comes to lasting campaigns (as your lack of long-term success seems to confirm).

My experience is that Players (and the GM for that matter) are usually on their best behaviour out of the gate (and if they're not, red flags should be flying!) So a few sessions may not reveal glaring incompatibilities... but time usually does. It's really a matter of what the GM and player's expectations are... and what their level of disappointment will be if things don't work out. In general, if a GM expects to have a long-term game and puts a lot of time into setting it up and prepping... it would behoove them to spend a *lot* more time trying to communicate what they're looking for from their players and be a little more discerning. Their players will thank them for it later and they will increase their odds of actually running the type of game they're shooting for.

In this case, the OP was lamenting many failed attempts leading to becoming "demoralized" (in part with gaming and, seemingly, with FG itself as a result). Ultimately, he's got to take some responsibility for that, and look closely at his own approach with regard to what games he's getting into... and, frankly, he should probably look for a GM that's going to put more work into crafting a campaign/group that he's compatible with. It's really sort of like any relationship in real life... you may meet your best friend or life-mate completely by accident... and may have a lot of fun with those that don't last... but you're going to increase your odds of something longer-term if you put in a little more work and look a bit deeper than the surface.

It's actually great that you've had so much fun with the short-term games you've been a part of. But, sadly, I'd hazzard to guess that not all of those GM's or fellow players were as cool as you were with the early demise of those games (unless, as noted earlier, a short-term/one-shot game was always the purpose).

[valiantcosmos]

Well said, Full Bleed (and others who have said similar things -- it's worth saying something multiple times for those of us like me who need to read something multiple times before it starts to sink in) -- expectations are a key consideration, and when I join a group on a first come first serve basis, though my hopes may be high, my expectations are pretty low. I was about to ask for thoughts on how to articulate reasonable and specific enough expectations, but then I read the blog by Answulf that Lord Entrails linked to earlier in this thread (https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/entry.php?241-How-to-Build-a-Successful-Long-term-Gaming-Group) which was extremely helpful. Putting that advice together with the comments by Damned and others I've come across a few times encouraging newer players to share the DMing responsibilities among themselves, the next time I look to join a new group, I'm going to try to look for (or try to put together) that kind of group.

[Black Hammer]

As a DM, when I started with FG I thought it was useless as a gaming tool. I didn't have any issues with flaky DMs; I did have terrific problems with flaky players. I can recall having six players say they'd show up for one of my early games, then sitting in my FG lobby and the TS waiting for people to show up. Thirty minutes after the official start time, one guy popped in and apologized for being unable to make it.

That guy was my hero, because he got the same messages as everyone else, and managed to figure out he was supposed to be there, making it clear to me that people ghosting on me wasn't due to a mistake I made, but them being clowns.

As someone pointed out before, you get a lot of flakes when it comes to internet gaming. I still do. I'm currently planning a new campaign, and in a discussion with a potential returning player not fifteen minutes ago, I mentioned that out of every eight randos I hear from on the FG or Steam forums, I expect one person to actually show up for maybe two sessions before vanishing without comment. That's a pretty terrible ratio. And that's with trying to vet people before allowing them in the game, not just handing off alias and TS info to anyone who asks.

One of my biggest concerns with GMing is reliability. If I only get a bare minimum to run a campaign (say, three players), I'm in the ugly position of having to cancel whenever someone is late/sick/extinguishing dog on fire. Having a core of a dozen or so known-to-be-reliable players to draw recruits from is an incredible luxury. Once I have three players I already know will show up, I can invite five more randos knowing that even if four or even all five ghost, I still have a game to run for the remaining three.

Getting into a solid campaign is a chore. Yes, it is demoralizing. Extremely so. People will waste a lot of your time. I know it's small consolation to you, but it's even worse as a DM. I have downloaded rulesets, build campaigns and modules, messaged dozens of people, posted on numerous forums, and even bought book and FG DLC for campaigns that lasted one session or never got off the ground. When I started, I was incredibly frustrated with it for months. I'm less so now, but it still isn't easy. All I can say is stick with it. Once you're in a decent campaign or two, they last for months, if not years.

[TMO]

If I only get a bare minimum to run a campaign (say, three players), I'm in the ugly position of having to cancel whenever someone is late/sick/extinguishing dog on fire.

This is my current major problem. On the whole, my players are reliable but real-life kicks in we have to reschedule. Fortunately, we all started our campaign with this understanding. This is also why I have our games scheduled every week...there are enough breaks that come about due to schedule conflicts.

[jasonthelamb]

I think that, echoing quite a few people here, it's all about finding the group that meshes well with you. As a DM I try to make it a friendly environment, but sometimes it just doesn't work with a player, or even worse, an entire group. It's my opinion that a group of people who get together to play D&D without any prior knowledge of each other is almost guaranteed to fail, however groups that form friendships at the table give players and DMs a reason to come back every week and keep things going.

[damned]

Hey valiantcosmos I will occasionally invite a player to join a campaign or throw it open but most likely I will recruit from someone I have at least interacted positively with before. But when I run a one shot I really want to have new players join.

[dellanx]

Even your most devoted player may oversleep sometimes, people have lives outside of game. I add players to the Facebook group and our gaming group, and try to stay in touch with them. After more then six months of building a group, I finally have seven players all over the world. I would imagine they keep playing as long as their schedule mashes with the game schedule. The game schedule is basically tuned to my first player's gaming requirement, which I had no problem with. Over the months, many players came and went. Schedule, gaming style and other limitations were some of the reasons of players leaving the game. All I can do is keep learning the software and the Pathfinder game, I can't promise it will be perfect, I will forgive myself when I fail, because I will learn from the mistake. I will push buttons and challenge the group, Fantasy Grounds is awesome for roll playing. Hopefully we will have a great time. I try to communicate with my players, on and off game time to improve our experience. I also try to summarize the weekly play by play of events.

[Ken L]

Players flake far more than GMs, and I speak this with the experience of hundreds of games under my belt (i run FLGS encounters so that kinda inflates my number).

I've gotten to the point of being cranky and keeping fingers on the axe when needed. It's ended a handful of games, but those games post axing have run to completion with swimming results. Games that have fallen apart without an axe die a slow death through numerous accommodations and pocket reservations; I've more often regretted not axing someone early than I having axed and ended a game in the ensuing fallout. If I dread the 'chore' of running a group with a toxic player, It's not worth running with them around. I've personally axed a player mid-game in person and escorted them out of the room; the game got infinitely better when everyone could laugh and experience freely without the 'uh-oh, here he goes again' sigh in withheld reservations.

Regarding finding a game as a player, remember that you're entering the GM's world and you need to respect the GM's style, or politely disengage after a session or two with notice. If you try to push against the grain you're putting pressure on them unless they explicitly ask for it. If there are concerns about a certain adjudication, bring it up after the session unless it's super important such as character death due to a little nit picky thing. If you don't enjoy reading the book, change books, don't berate the author. Some like Brandon Sanderson, others Patrick Rothfuss, but you don't tell one to be like the other.

Every GM has a voice, and I've joined new GM's games and ran with the flow even if their rules were bent and style inconsistent. It's more fun to simply experience rather than look for kernels of grievance to pick out for a few extra damage or missed actions. New GMs in particular are in the process of finding this, and I give them great leeway for it to develop. For experienced GMs their style is already established and it's a matter wither or not you enjoy that experience or not. I'd never tell them to change their way if I disagree, but I'll play a few sessions to see if we're compatible before I bow out.

I've not experienced GM flakes as that's more a symptom of new GMs, and I tend to only play in their one-shots as opposed to campaigns. In that respect it's a risk/reward I suppose you're taking; availability of games verses its stability. There are exceptions, I had a 1.5 year campaign I recruited new blood for fall apart the next 2 sessions he was in, but that was due to an existing player I had unresolved issues with (ah, the axing discussion earlier.. if only). Either way I seamlessly created a new campaign with trusted players from my prior games and it has been amazing since.

[valiantcosmos]

Hey valiantcosmos I will occasionally invite a player to join a campaign or throw it open but most likely I will recruit from someone I have at least interacted positively with before. But when I run a one shot I really want to have new players join.

The different approaches for one-shots versus campaigns makes sense.

When I started (relatively recently), since I was interested in developing a character over time, one-shots did not seem very appealing to me and I looked for longer term campaigns. Something explicitly advertised as a one-shot that could evolve in to something longer term would have appealed to me, but that raises the difficult question of how the DM let's players go who don't seem to fit with the rest of the players, since the expectation of continuing has been created. I think I am beginning to realize that one-shots are a way to find like minded players, and that although not explicitly advertised as potentially evolving into something more long term, they can and do.

[Black Hammer]

I've gotten to the point of being cranky and keeping fingers on the axe when needed. It's ended a handful of games, but those games post axing have run to completion with swimming results. Games that have fallen apart without an axe die a slow death through numerous accommodations and pocket reservations; I've more often regretted not axing someone early than I having axed and ended a game in the ensuing fallout. If I dread the 'chore' of running a group with a toxic player, It's not worth running with them around. I've personally axed a player mid-game in person and escorted them out of the room; the game got infinitely better when everyone could laugh and experience freely without the 'uh-oh, here he goes again' sigh in withheld reservations.

I do regret at times not being freer with "the axe" as you put it. One of the side effects of recruiting being hard is that I'm very leery of axing anyone for fear of it putting the game as a whole in jeopardy. Would someone rather play the game they like with a problem player or not play it at all? I'm not comfortable answering that for people, but at the same time, it's a question players tend to shy away from being blunt about. After all, talking about giving someone the boot from what's supposed to be a co-operative social experience seems perhaps ironic at best and mean-spirit at worst. But then people start coming up with excuses to not play because they're intimidated by the problem player, and it's now the DM's job to figure out whether someone's dog is on fire for the third week this month because his game is bad or because one of the players just isn't worth putting up with.

[Ken L]

One of the side effects of recruiting being hard is that I'm very leery of axing anyone for fear of it putting the game as a whole in jeopardy. Would someone rather play the game they like with a problem player or not play it at all?

It's a more complex problem than that. It can be that the player stirs trouble with others, yourself, or even doesn't appear to enjoy the game and constantly finds ways to bend the setting to their preference.

Breaking it down:

1. Player stirs trouble with others: This is obvious so you can counsel it with one, the other, or both in a conference call. In the end either they resolve it between each other, or one of them is axed. Usually the problem causer is the at the sharp end of this, but picking out exactly who this is requires some detective work. Ideally they work it out by themselves after attention is brought to it, but if there is ever a 'forced resolution' imposed as GM, it will leave an undertoe that will be present for future games and will boil to head eventually.

2. Player stirs trouble with you: This takes a few sessions to differentiate between wither it is a rules, arbitration disagreement or perhaps even just a bad day with personal events. A common oft brought up pattern is "you always do this" or a constant bickering on key decisions. Disagreements on adjudications are normal but if it becomes a pattern then it's a problem. Resolutions to this are usually either a caveat, or a frank conversation about how you run and giving this player a choice to stay and accept this is how you run and what makes your games distinctly 'yours', or for them to leave. It's a simple matter of a disconnect over what's expected, and what your game actually is. Typically you don't jump to this conclusion before having a 1:1 of a 'hey what's up?' call to see literally.. what's up and usually they'll tell you what their issue is.

3. Player actively is changing the game to their preference: This is a rare thing, and I've only encountered it a couple of times. It's a passive aggressive play against the party and GM where they act as a disruptor against both. This needs to be separated from sociopathic characters which are being RP'd, and those who are just in good nature stirring the pot. The separation between them is intent to ruin everyone else's fun not only once, but repeatedly be it constantly stealing from party members as a rogue to the point of maliciousness or ruining the party's well thought out plan by performing a leroy jinkens. Against the GM it can be akin to 'f--k your setting, I do my own thing' by forcing sandbox elements outside the scope of the adventure to 'do their own thing'. If you've read the GameMastery book, you could draw a few parallels with the diva personality some players exhibit but I'd more equate it to someone putting their own character's interaction above that of the party for ill. Dealing with this personality, I've resolved completely by talking with them about it. Either I've talked them into being a team player, or they leave because they "can't RP their character" so technically I've never had to axe anyone because of this.

Pitfalls: The problem player isn't an isolated system so chances are there's a relationship web with your other players. There are usually alliances behind the scene and navigating these takes finesse, and overall is pretty annoying to have to do if you're in this position. After all, as GM you just want to have fun with like minded people, not be an HR broker for your own game.

1. Problem player is backed by another problem player: Double axe them and don't look back. You will not be held hostage within your own game and it's probably better that you either form a new group or fill out their slots after a hiatus with trusted players.

2. Problem player is backed by a good player: Axe the problem player and explain after their axing why you had to do so. I'd advise against telling the group in advance that this player will be axed as it should be obvious it is going to happen already, this only foments drama. In most cases they'll get over it but the timing is tricky. The earlier the better as if they establish themselves it'll be a more difficult axe to make; I'd equate this to pulling a band-aid off swiftly as opposed to ripping it off slowly. Wither or not the good player keeps a chip on their shoulder depends on the player and the circumstances of the axe, I'd only perform this when it's pretty obvious to the others that this is an issue that even the good player sees (though perhaps wanted to resolve more diplomatically).

3. Problem player is backed by a player threatening to quit if they are axed: Axe them anyway for the same reason for the first. As rough as this may sound, if you feel you're being held hostage in your own game, it's not worth running. What's more important, the current story you're cultivating, or your mental happiness?

---

As always, these are after attempts are made to resolve the problem by talking it out, perhaps even several times. At some point you have to be decisive and either way you're going to take flak from other players feeling uncomfortable with/without that player, or with yourself losing motivation to run the game with the group.

[JohnD]

I use a "three strikes" rule on attendance, but I am starting to become a little more restrictive than that. Not sure if this is a good idea or not yet. One thing is true; you are better off being a few players short than having those players be unreliable or disruptive (or even worse, having to cancel your game because them not showing up means you don't have the numbers to run).

As a DM I have completely dropped the ball on one occasion. Life happens and sometimes it happens catastrophically. When it does, you need to make an allowance for the possibility that flaky player or DM is a symptom of what could be a person's life falling apart.

Bottom line gaming is supposed to be fun for everyone - DM included (most forget about that bit). If you aren't enjoying and want to leave or stop, at least have the courtesy to drop your DM a quick email so you can leave "well".

What the flaky types don't realize is that DMs can and do talk about good players and not so good players; word of mouth. This also happens with players; good and bad DMs.

Not sure where I'm going now, train of thought lost... time for medication, coffee, spiced rum and pancakes.

[JohnD]

Wanted to add... there's some good thoughts and advice in this discussion. Good on everyone for putting their thoughts out there.

[dulux-oz]

... time for medication, coffee, spiced rum and pancakes.

Ah, the breakfast of champions! ;)

[Xydonus]

Roleplaying is all about having fun - without the drama. When the fun stops, finding out why it stopped is key to kickstarting it again.

[dellanx]

I like communication.

[taylordavidm]

I had someone offer to DM SKT for a group of us then never show up to the game - even though he he is active on the forum's and DM's other FG games. There was no notice or message saying he'd changed his mind he just didn't show up or reply to further messages about the game.

I did manage to find a game on FG and am exceptionally pleased with the GM and core group of players.

[Springroll]

My suggestion would be to do One-Shots with people you don't know, a campaign is a large undertaking and with the "wrong" people it usually isn't the best of experiences.
Better then to run one evening and see if you're compatible as a group and above all are having fun, run another game and then finally you'll have found a gaming group that suits your particular play-style and needs.

With that said, we can all do better and without feedback we won't ever get better :)

[Arcanix]

I understand OPs concern. Being able to play a game without drama is a nice thought. Alot of good points on principles and behavioral mechanisms in
this thread.

The bottom line is that its a online gaming thing not a game specific thing. In addition, its an ego thing...some players want go play "god mode" characters
some GMs want to wipe the group at lvl 1 with a dragon just to prove a point or get their "fix". Some players and GMs just want toons to survive in a
combat and rp challanging setting. This includes ingame economy and loot. Whether or not to use a health pot because its expensive....Do you want to
wipe?


No fix to this other than get involved with other people. I played online since 1996.


Yeah im looking for a long term group. I have a lvl 2 Cleric.

[HoratioDrank]

I would say this issue is a bit of a two-edged sword. Yes, it is easy for DMs to "flake out", but it is also way easier to find new campaigns to play in than it is if you were trying to get involved in a local tabletop RPG. The (perhaps unavoidable) model seems to be there are many campaigns across many different game systems that seek out players each week, and there is a higher-than-in-person failure rate to these campaigns. But be patient, it's worth the effort. Once you find a good campaign and players with good chemistry, you'll be glad you stuck it out.

[kevdog45]

I have a full license and have been having a hard time finding a game to play in much less worrying about DMs. If I were DMing in Fantasy Grounds, which I hope to be soon, I would simply focus on making sure my adventure was prepped enough for the players. I would want things to go smoothly so that we could focus on the fun stuff. I used to have a DM back in the day that would scream at you if you questioned his ideas about his campaign so I know somewhat where the OP is coming from.

[JohnD]

All I can say is keep at it. Finding a group you mesh with (and they mesh with you) can take some time just like a face-to-face game. However, once you get even 3 or 4 like minded people you will never look back... over time you might add a person or two to your stable and everything will be great.

[MoonlitDNC]

Oh wow. Part of me is glad to know "it's not just me feeling this", yet at the same time, it's a bit of a downer to know that so many people cant find a solid group.

Since getting Fantasy Grounds, I've been able to participate in 1 fairly large group as a player for a fair chunk of months, but said group didn't really mesh well and the GM was running everyone pretty ragged. I had a good time while I was playing, but looking back on our sessions, none of us really connected as players, and I groan at a lot of the things that happened in hindsight - even things ~I~ personally did.

Otherwise, I've only had the opportunity to host a couple small things for friends and family. I don't have a mic, and Discord & my PC DO NOT get along pleasantly, so I realise that's already eliminating some of the games I can participate in, yet I've sent quite a few messages out to GMs this month looking for games to join and I've not heard squat back from all of them. It makes me ask "If I send a PM, and this person doesn't reply after like 4 days of waiting, are they a GM I want to play with?"

I tend to agree with what Trenloe mentioned on the first page about it being an Internet Gaming issue - if I can hop on Overwatch and do a good job as my character but still lose because everyone fought over controlling Genji/Hanzo/Widowmaker, I can see why coordinating a "pen & paper" party would hit some potholes along the way.

Like the OP said though, it's demoralising to watch Matt Mercer & co. on Critical Role and desire such a deep, meaningful RPG experience with other people & a fair GM, but I have yet to find anyone that walks up to me, shakes my hand, and says "Hey! I want that too!" Searching around on my own hasn't been successful in the slightest so far.

[TMO]

Oh wow. Part of me is glad to know "it's not just me feeling this", yet at the same time, it's a bit of a downer to know that so many people cant find a solid group.

Earlier in this thread I posted my own empathy to the OP from a DM's perspective. However, allow me to throw in a bit of a twist. There are several responses to this thread that suggest there are a large number of DMs and players who want to take the game seriously. I think this alone should encourage us to keep on looking for the right DM or group of players.

Since this thread began, I have begin participating in two campaigns as a player. Both are very different but both have been (thus far) fantastic experiences for me as a player. Interestingly enough, one of the campaigns is comprised of players who are usually the DM and our DM is someone who is normally a player. He is also quite new to FG. Hence, all the players know what a DM would want from a great group of players. The DM is excited because we aren't expected a whole lot from him (although, he is doing great as a novice DM) and we are always willing to help him out when he gets stuck.


Like the OP said though, it's demoralising to watch Matt Mercer & co. on Critical Role and desire such a deep, meaningful RPG experience with other people & a fair GM, but I have yet to find anyone that walks up to me, shakes my hand, and says "Hey! I want that too!" Searching around on my own hasn't been successful in the slightest so far.

I'll be honest, as much as Critical Role and other "celebrity" role-players out there have been a boon to the game, I sometimes feel they are a bane as well. These professional creatives can set a very high bar that can make it difficult for a DM to feel like she or he is providing an experience players expect. Likewise, some players may feel wholly inadequate if they are unable to role-play as expressively as those who are on YouTube. I've played in a campaign that was basically destroyed because of the unrealistic expectations players had after they binged on several of these recorded game sessions.

I've personally lost interest in games when fellow players have tried to put so much focus on humor, inside jokes, et al., (i.e., everyone wants play as if they are playing for the camera) that the adventure never progresses. I realize that D&D is many things to many people. I also realize it isn't the game it used to be 30+ years ago. Yet, I can't help wondering if these online game sessions (which feel to me more oriented toward audience amusements than actual campaigning) are making the traditional D&D game seem stale, slow, and boring.

[Victor]

Geez, you guys make me feel bad that I have so much fun in my games. Funny thing is, I have had and continue to have the same issues from time to time, it has nothing to do with FG (which I love), it's just the nature of online gaming.

Here is an example of what I consider a stable group for online gaming..
We have 4 members, including myself, that have been in the group for the entire 2+ years, and the other 3 guys have all DMed, we play 3x a week, different games each night with different other people.
We have gone thru at least 3 other DMs, that joined our group, then either flaked out, or had a personality dispute and left. We have had probably over a half a dozen other players join for a time then leave either from personality, work schedules, or just vanishing. The core group of us keeps going, gets new people in on occasion, and has a lot of fun and tries to keep any drama from bothering us. We actually just lost one guy on one day, but have a very stable sset of players besides the core group right now.

How is this possible? persistence helps as many have pointed out. Also the main body of us met playing PFS, which is a way to play a lot of one shot games with different GMs and players. Then we found who we got along with and started a group.

Also, saying DMs are flaky is unfair. DMs are just players with a bit more initiative. Flaky is as flaky does. :)

Lastly, in the past couple of years I have tried to join a few other groups. 1 had the flaky DM and 2 I didn't mesh with at all. Not a problem, just keep going.

[Artemis_Entreri]

I have been in a group for a few months now. Our Dm has done well at keeping us informed when things come up. We as players have had the same respect when it comes to keeping him informed the best we can. the Dm broke it down really well about how most of the group knew each other and had been playing together on and off and that sometimes life happens and people can't make it. We have had times where it was simply 3 of the pcs and the dm running the other 2 characters and other times where people got called into work shortly before the game. It's about communication like anything else in life.React to the changes in a positive way. If there is an issue with the dm or players do the polite thing and try and work it out with them.Browsing I've seen a lot of sound advice given. Keep searching and the right group will be found!

[Asterionaisien]

I can just offer my experience here, and I can sum it up in just one word: Patience.
Yeah, to find or create a group online it is not easy at all, we could even say difficult, and I do believe it is the same everywhere in the world.
Before creating my own group I had to run several one shot adventures, and I had to personally invite the players I liked most to join a private facebook group.
That way, due to the fact they like how I DM, good synergies grew between them, and now we run our game once or twice every week.
So..have patience, stay in contact with other people you meet and like, and form a group with them. Eventually, after a while (about 3 months in my case) pieces will start to glue togheter.
I'd like to add that this blog article has been a very good advice, I urge you to read it :) https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/entry.php?241-How-to-Build-a-Successful-Long-term-Gaming-Group

[TMO]

I can offer just my experience here, and i can sum it up in just one word: Patience.
Yeah, to find or create a group online it is not easy at all, we could even say difficult, and i do believe it is the same everywhere in the world.
Before creating my own group I had to run several one shot adventures, and i had to personally invite the players i liked most to a private facebook group.
That way, due to the fact they like how i DM, good synergies grew between them, and now we run our game once or twice every week.
So..have patience, stay in contact with other people you meet and like, and form a group with them. Eventually, after a while (about 3 months in my case) pieces will start to glue togheter.
I'd like to add that this blog article has been a very good advice, I urge you to read it :) https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/entry.php?241-How-to-Build-a-Successful-Long-term-Gaming-Group

I realize long threads are difficult to absorb, but LordEntrails linked to that blog on the first page. Good stuff!

[Alzarian Crimson]

I have to agree with much of what is posted here. At the same time, I'm going to defend the DMs a little.

This is not only a DM problem. DMs routinely contend with the same "flaky" type of behavior from players.

Bear in mind that to run a good game in FG, it takes hours of prep time and electronic mastery. I have DMed games where many, many hours of my time have gone into a project and after months of gaming and a majority of the players liking the results, personality conflicts between the players have ruined the game for some. Or a player perceives slights from the DM that the DM never intended and is not even aware of. Or the DM is spending hours each month fielding complaints and actively fighting to keep his group intact because the players have grown to dislike each other or are "insulted" over this or that. Or players are disappointed over expectations that are unrealistic or unknown to the DM. Or they have anger management problems. Or... you name it.

So, while I can absolutely appreciate the frustration expressed here, imagine this scenario from the other side. Say that you have created a world and a story and learned a software package, mastered hundreds of pages of rules and then put everything together in advance for the sole purpose of pleasing a group of people you don't even know. Only to have them complain.

Now, I'm not trying to insult anyone posting here. The "complaining" I'm referring to is not intended to include these posts. This has been a useful discussion.

But, I am asking that players take a moment to think about it from the other side every now and then. Without DMs, there is no game. So show your DM a little love every now and then!

Or, if you're really unhappy with how it is going, show us how you would do it! That's the type of passion that makes a game great. Just find the right players! And invite me!

:)

[LordEntrails]

I realize long threads are difficult to absorb, but LordEntrails linked to that blog on the first page. Good stuff!
Yet I was tempted to link to it again *G*

[SheckyS]

I've played in two games and I run my own game and I haven't really had any problems. One game I was in collapsed because of lack of interest, but it was really the players that flaked, not the DM. The game I'm running has been going on for over a year. Some players drop out, new ones join, but the game lives on. :)

[dulux-oz]

It's a long thread, so people might have missed it, but what I talked about back in Post #21 (https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?36801-This-is-demoralizing-DM-s-please-read&p=322220&viewfull=1#post322220) is probably worth mentioning agian :)

Cheers

[spite]

It's a long thread, so people might have missed it, but what I talked about back in Post #21 (https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?36801-This-is-demoralizing-DM-s-please-read&p=322220&viewfull=1#post322220) is probably worth mentioning agian :)

Cheers

Absolutely, and to respond to it, a great way to find a group of players is to run a few one-shots. No commitment, no obligation to game with people again but gives you a chance to see who meshes with you well, and most importantly who meshes with other people well. DMing and player styles vary, and you might find fun in something someone else does not. It's a bit late to discover this 2 sessions into a 1-15 campaign however, so get to know people first!
From one shots you can build relations with other players, and they'll also have the opportunity to bow out/not accept your game invitations without offending anyone, or dropping out with nary a word said.

[Arcanix]

Prepping games have nothing to do with nitpicking on everything and question the motives of everything and everyone while demanding the players refrain from it.

Example: (No sarcasm)

- Why are you moving there?
- *Points* That guy is DYING.
- Why are you using a health pot?
- *Points* That guy is DYING.
- What, you can wait until combat is over.
-*Points* That dragon is ALIVE.
- Well health pots aint free you know.
- *Points* Bodies, we loot we sell shinies, yes?
- Here we go, loot, why did you have to bring that up. Im not trying to **** you guys. Whatever, fine, use a health pot.
- *Takes health pot and stab that guy in the **** (the GM allowed health pots to be injectors).
- Why did you stab him in the ***?
- Im sorry,*stab him in the eye*. Dead guy you are now BLIND.
- Dont be that guy, why did you use a greater health pot and not a normal one?
- The dead guy need max hps if hes to have a remote chance of surviving atleast one round with that dragon at LVL 1.
- Why didnt you use the health pot on some of the others?
- 3 are dead dead and the other dying guy is a cleric. You need a pew pew bash bash guy in this case.
- Whatever cant reach you.
- *Stabs the guy in the *** with a health pot and saves the party from a wipe*
- Here we go the cleric saves the day...yet again...
- Yeah, we need to bring the bodies back to town for a burial ceremony. Wizard is dead so we might not be able to use the portal.
- Have you played Diablo?
- Yeah.
- This works like that, easy enough for you?
- Sure.


During which some of the other players only thought is....."ok, WHOs gonna pay for that greater health pot?"."Not me...screw that".

...20 mins later a player asks.

- So why did you use a health pot on a NPC and not on a player?.
- Players are dead dead, wouldve been a waste.
- *Frowny face* Yeah you wasted alot of health pots.
- The NPC is somewhat important.....quests and stuff.
- Yeah, but you didnt have to use a health pot.
- Do you realize we might have to walk back to town?
- Ya.
- Do you realize 2 of our guys were dying, doesnt take much for them to DIE.
- Ya, but we can rest.
- They were bleeding out, we cant make it to that storage room.
- Ya, but you used a health pot, now what.

and so on and so on....

[dulux-oz]

Sorry Arcanix, but I'm not getting your point - possibly because I'm not following the example conversation. Is that between two players or a player and the GM?

Not sarcasm intended, I'm genuinely interested in what you're trying to get across :confused:

[Arcanix]

Sorry Arcanix, but I'm not getting your point - possibly because I'm not following the example conversation. Is that between two players or a player and the GM?

Not sarcasm intended, I'm genuinely interested in what you're trying to get across :confused:

If you're not following the example conversation its unfortunate, it could possibly clear any and all confusion you might have. No sarcasm a genuine reply.

[Ken L]

Arc, I don't know who your GM is and I'm not going to pass any judgement either. It sounds like a new GM, and GMing is really a trial by fire so I'd give him some space and talking it over after the game.

It sounds like a personal issue as opposed a 'GM-wide' problem. Most experienced GMs already have set groups so most of the new postings are from new blood. Experience doesn't manifest from the Aether.

[Arcanix]

Arc, I don't know who your GM is and I'm not going to pass any judgement either. It sounds like a new GM, and GMing is really a trial by fire so I'd give him some space and talking it over after the game.

It sounds like a personal issue as opposed a 'GM-wide' problem. Most experienced GMs already have set groups so most of the new postings are from new blood. Experience doesn't manifest from the Aether.

Exactly. (This is an experienced GM).

[spite]

Did you discuss with this DM that you had issues with how this went? Did you discuss it with the group there also? Did you discuss anything with the problem player?

[Arcanix]

Did you discuss with this DM that you had issues with how this went? Did you discuss it with the group there also? Did you discuss anything with the problem player?

Such a discussion was not welcomed by the GM. "Im not going to deal with this, look i have **** to do". "I have another group and i need to prep for that session".

There is no "problem player"...this is an issue about the GMs handling of loot and ingame economy. His personal preference about healing and heal pots.


(People replying here should be mindful that the manner of in which they reply might push a narrative making this a 'GM-wide' problem).

[damned]

it went whoosh right past me too.

As Ken L says - GMing takes practice - and for some of us a lot of practice. And then we still have off days.

There is a saying that GMs run the systems that they want to play.
As a player - if you cant find that game that plays the way you enjoy - consider running a game and see if you can run the game that you always imagined playing in.

[Arcanix]

Eventually i might, but it takes practice. Atm im more into making maps. Simple tower maps, barn maps etc. Watched a utube clip about it. Just need to learn the software tool for it.


What this thread is about is very helpful in that GM regard.

[damned]

Perhaps is several of the players are feeling a similar way there might be a way to raise it gently with the GM and let him know that you find something challenging and would he/she be willing to try playing (something specific - eg potions or loot) differently.
Dont ambush your GM with it though - he/she might be feeling stressed by the load already - see if it can be presented constructively between games.
It might turn out that he/she has a request to make of the players style too and that both giving a little might make everyone happy.

[Fazakerley]

I have no idea what was going on in your post either Arcanix, sorry.

In my experience (and I'm sure most people's) there are good and bad GMs and players. For me, for my style. They may be fine players with other people, or in a different style, but just don't gel with mine. Or perhaps they're just terrible players and human beings. Or perhaps I am? Er...

But the difference is, that a GM who doesn't like their group or individual players within it has the option of starting another one and junking the one they don't like. Players tend to cling on to what they've got, as it's much harder to find another group if your current one collapses. This can lead to resentment about a game that they basically should already have left if they couldn't fix it to their liking. It's a hobby, not a job or therapy. We do care, and care deeply about what goes on in this shared imaginary space, but when the cons outweight the pros it's time to go.

This is compounded by natural internet flakiness that has been discussed back in the bowels of this thread - online, people don't care as much. They don't regard the people they play with as indisposable friends and so some of them feel fine about junking a game, disappearing, not answering messages etc. If a GM or a player wants to leave and tells the rest of the group they're usually pretty understanding, but it's the going silent that is really annoying to most of us.

I've had this happen a few times to me, and you just have to roll with it and not let it get you down. Keep trying, and eventually you should find a group that you like and that likes you. I've found a few great ones, both GMing and playing, but had my share of the other kind.

[Halaku]

I have only played in one game as a player and GMed a couple of oneshots and one ongoing game.
As a player whilst sessions have been dropped by the GM sometimes at short notice he has kept all players informed and it hasn't been an issue.
As a GM I've got a good group together now but roughly half the people who signed up either didn't show or vanished after one session without a word, I don't mind but it would be nice if people just sent a courtesy email or something explaining why.

I guess you just have to keep plugging away until you find a group you mesh well with.

[Ken L]

Exactly. (This is an experienced GM).

If that's the case, then there's clear incompatibility so I'd bow out of the game if I were you. Just give him a week of notice. You can't really force him to change his style.

[Arcanix]

Perhaps is several of the players are feeling a similar way there might be a way to raise it gently with the GM and let him know that you find something challenging and would he/she be willing to try playing (something specific - eg potions or loot) differently.
Dont ambush your GM with it though - he/she might be feeling stressed by the load already - see if it can be presented constructively between games.
It might turn out that he/she has a request to make of the players style too and that both giving a little might make everyone happy.

Kind of hard to do that when the GM loud and clear stated "Im not going to deal with this, look i have **** to do". "I have another group and i need to prep for that session". Goes without saying.


Youve made your standpoint clear though, i leave it at that.


Halaku, my experience thus far is that people dont talk between session. Sure got forums for it setup but after the GM calls it a night its like they never knew eachother. There are ways to remedy this, but as youve heard people rather do the blame game. (Yeah i know some of you will pop a vein me saying this...."OMG he said blame game!!!! What do i do!!!!). GMs vs players.

People have pointed out that the only decent thing you can do is to move on and find another group. This advice aimed both at the players and the GM. I agree with this advice, and ive said something about it in a previous post.

Yeah im going to grind these forums until ive found a group i mesh well with. Healer with a health pot, how hard can that be.



OP said something about flakey, in the light of the replies he got i can see why he raised the question.

[Arcanix]

If that's the case, then there's clear incompatibility so I'd bow out of the game if I were you. Just give him a week of notice. You can't really force him to change his style.

What youre saying is this. "GM decided that you can have health pots but not use them and if thats his game deal with it".

Your use of the force word is misplaced and rests on assumptions. Should be able to ask basic questions and get a sensable answer other than "Im not going to deal with this, look i have **** to do".

[Ken L]

Halaku, my experience thus far is that people dont talk between session. Sure got forums for it setup but after the GM calls it a night its like they never knew eachother. There are ways to remedy this, but as youve heard people rather do the blame game.

I usually have a skype group chat up for the game, you can also use a group discord chat. It's where I post alerts about game schedule and what not so there's incentive to pop in. Most of the time however, my players scheme plans and talk about how the last game's events relate to the mission. Recently the new It thing for my Evenstar game is the science of cryostasis given the last lore revelation.

[Arcanix]

I usually have a skype group chat up for the game, you can also use a group discord chat. It's where I post alerts about game schedule and what not so there's incentive to pop in. Most of the time however, my players scheme plans and talk about how the last game's events relate to the mission. Recently the new It thing for my Evenstar game is the science of cryostasis given the last lore revelation.

Thanks for sharing but this wasnt about you.

[ravenloft713]

So what is the problem then: FG or the DMs? It sounds like you are complaining about "bad" DMs and attributing it to FG... Not to minimize your concerns of course, as it is sad to not see someone having fun. Perhaps you should look around at some of the games available from our community? You've been playing FG for "over a year" but just came here a few weeks ago.. Why not try some of the games available on the game calendar?

This is the same impression I got.

[Ken L]

Thanks for sharing but this wasnt about you.


What youre saying is this. "GM decided that you can have health pots but not use them and if thats his game deal with it".

Your use of the force word is misplaced and rests on assumptions. Should be able to ask basic questions and get a sensable answer other than "Im not going to deal with this, look i have **** to do".

Looks like I missed a post, the pagination is weird. Some GMs are simply more controlling; I recall a story about one GM who had years under her belt whom was very specific about how to get into a door that when the party did everything else but use a key, she had some magical woodland creature scurry up with a key in their mouth whom the party promptly slaughtered. (she raged about the group afterwards but hey). I'm just saying some GMs are like that, there's nothing you can really do about it, and it's still a style, even being chatty about the situation in the wrong way. Some bend rules, others break them constantly; my basic premise is not even defending them or judging but merely stating that it's "Their game" and playing in it is a concession of sorts, if there's no compatibility there's nothing stopping the players from leaving.

If it sounds like I'm defending the GM, I am in a weak sense even though I earlier stated that I'm neutral. Basically they have right to run however they please, and players to play in it however long they please including leaving. I put in the one week notice bit as it's just a courtesy to the GM akin to handing in a 2 week notice as opposed to rage quitting.

[Arcanix]

Looks like I missed a post, the pagination is weird. Some GMs are simply more controlling; I recall a story about one GM who had years under her belt whom was very specific about how to get into a door that when the party did everything else but use a key, she had some magical woodland creature scurry up with a key in their mouth whom the party promptly slaughtered. (she raged about the group afterwards but hey). I'm just saying some GMs are like that, there's nothing you can really do about it, and it's still a style, even being chatty about the situation in the wrong way. Some bend rules, others break them constantly; my basic premise is not even defending them or judging but merely stating that it's "Their game" and playing in it is a concession of sorts, if there's no compatibility there's nothing stopping the players from leaving.

Ok. Yeah that story applies here.


If it sounds like I'm defending the GM, I am in a weak sense even though I earlier stated that I'm neutral. Basically they have right to run however they please, and players to play in it however long they please including leaving. I put in the one week notice bit as it's just a courtesy to the GM akin to handing in a 2 week notice as opposed to rage quitting.

OP talked about flakey, shouldnt it be loyalty. Because people "defending" the GMs they talk about loyalty....GMs have no right to loyalty FYI. The players have a right to leave whenever they please. Courtesy goes both ways. "No compatibility there's nothing stopping the players from leaving".

[Black Hammer]

Eh. DMs are all different. I nearly always give players my Skype and steam handles so they can easily message me, and use G+ or Discord for heavy narrative campaigns so people can have persistent conversations between games.

Player attrition is super high. As I've said before, I have never gotten in trouble over booking my games. Once had 16 people say they were playing only to have eight show up. I've been running two sessions almost every week now for almost two years, and my primary reason for cancelling games is player absence. (Which I have no issue with, people have lives. But when you only get three players for a niche campaign, it can be hard to play around one third of the storyline.)

[Litvyak]

If that's the case, then there's clear incompatibility so I'd bow out of the game if I were you. Just give him a week of notice. You can't really force him to change his style.

This. I'm privileged to play with a fantastic group of players right now, and I'm part of a second group that's just getting started but which feels very promising so far. However, there have been more than a few campaigns that I've had to walk away from because I just wasn't having fun, and I've never regretted leaving any of them.

[Answulf]

It's painful to hear all the incompatibility stories and I feel bad for players and GMs going through all these failed campaign starts, but it's important to understand that these are self-inflicted wounds. They all come from the same source - joining a random online campaign.

Joining a campaign is a long-term commitment and if you think about it, in "real life" most people would never commit up front to spending hours and hours of time over a period of months or years with a random group of total strangers. But people do it all the time in RPG circles and then wonder why it rarely works or just lament about the high failure rate. They assume it's the only way to start, and that you have to keep banging your head against the wall until you finally get lucky.

Instead, take a cue from real life and start a campaign with your friends! The key here is that if you are newly joining an online community like Fantasy Grounds, that means making friends first and then starting a campaign with them in the future. It takes planning and patience, but it will save you a ton of frustration in the long run.

[Myrdin Potter]

I make mistakes reasonably often and my Wednesday night game has at least one player who is much better at FG than I am (and it is obvious). My Monday night game is with my original group of players from my mid-teens when I started playing, and mess up with them and I hear about it pretty quick. :-D

All I do is try and remember that we are all there to have fun and all the players are respectful even if they raise an issue with a ruling. I listen, make a judgment call and am I not afraid to say I was wrong when I was.

Otherwise, you are always going to have a player or a DM that you at least occasionally have issues with. My ability varies with jet lag and playing on a laptop vs. my three screen set-up.

The "forums random" Wednesday game had some player churn and then settled down. My Monday game almost always is missing one player, I just run that character and we keep going.

[spite]

It harks back to the age-old saying "No gaming is better than bad gaming". Don't stick at a group that is leaving a bad taste in your mouth every time you play. As others have suggested you can run your own game, or keep trying for good groups (they ARE out there).

[Trenloe]

Yep, don't play if it's a bad/mediocre game.

Jump into all sorts of games - especially one-offs so that you can learn which GMs and player you enjoy playing with. Then look to form a group with those type of people at the nucleus. FG Con is an ideal place to do this (FG Con 10 has just finished, next one in April), FGDaze! events or just a GM running a one shot. Look out for them and join them - even if it's a system you're unfamiliar with (just let the GM know ahead of time).

[Victor]

This is a very good thread with lots of uplifting posts as well as lots of good advice. It also lets a lot of new players know they are not alone and that many of us have mostly gotten past some of the problems inherent in online gaming.
2 thing I wanted to mention though. The OP has not been on in about a month, and the title of this thread is depressing and at the top of the page.
I would like to see the best parts of this thread made into a Sticky titled something like, "Trouble finding a good game? Read This".
Just a thought. :)

[Blackwolf]

Yes I second that Victor Change the title to something more positive, this post has turned into more of a informative post and hey if if you cant help to fix try not to make it worse kind of thing.

[Black Hammer]

I don't think false optimism is good. The whole point of this thread is that finding a good group or getting a campaign started isn't fun and easy. It's hard work and can take a while, but is worth it.

[Dracius]

I don't think false optimism is good. The whole point of this thread is that finding a good group or getting a campaign started isn't fun and easy. It's hard work and can take a while, but is worth it.

The issue is that the title is vague and misleading. It reads like a Facebook post with no indication of the actual content.

Even if it just said "Finding groups is demoralizing. Help needed" it would be a huge improvement.

[damned]

Unless the OP wants to change the Title it should stay as is.
The OP had a point she/he wished to make.
If the thread goes off on another direction later on that doesnt change the original thread intent.

[Victor]

Far be it from me to suggest any sort of censorship, very far. :) I would not change a thing about this thread.

What I meant though was that the OP brings up some common problems, but eventually this thread will go into obscurity. Making a Sticky that recognizes the issues realistically and gives advice to new players may help out.

[Myrdin Potter]

If you can make a 1st level character quickly, I can probably fit one player in tonight at 7 PM Pacific time. Look for us in Roslof Keep on the FG teamspeak server and I can give you the server to connect to.

[LordEntrails]

Since we've wandered into the GM advice area, I'm going to add anther link. A lot of you have probably already seen it, but those who haven't, and are participating int his thread probably are open to learning and thinking about GMing. So, check out this thread I put together, GM Advice (https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?36014-GM-Advice), and feel free to add suggestions to it.