Before You Sign Up For A Game

A THOUGHT: Don't gain the reputation as a NO SHOW by haphazardly signing up for Games you really cannot commit to. Please take a second to ask yourself, do I really want to play in this Game, am I going to remember WHEN the Game is being played, and Am I going to be there ON TIME and READY to go. As GMs and Game Creators this is all we are asking of Players.

Amen. I wish I at least got a heads up from some folk.

Amen #2. As a Raid leader in a MMO or a GM on roll20 no shows drive people crazy!!!

bump

I respect this sentiment

Very true. It's very disruptive. Considering it only takes a minute to let your group know that something has come up, letting your GM know ahead of time that you can't make it anymore is a very small thing to ask of players. I don't ask for experienced players. I don't ask for a perfectly balanced party. I don't ask for players to hold back criticism of my GM'ing style. I ask for one thing, and I enforce it like a total tyrant. If you can't handle that, leave my campaign before I make you utterly hate me.

You can save yourself some headaches as a GM by erring on the side of inviting too many people to your game. While you might get stuck running an adventure for nine or ten people, at least your odds of having to call the game off or run it for just a couple players is diminished. For my game, I recruited ten players and got very lucky: Six showed up and we had a fantastic game. I'll be adding a couple more for next week with the assumption that not everyone will make it back, but just in case they do, my module is setup with variables instead of hard numbers for things like encounters and treasure. This allows me to run the game with anywhere form three to twelve players.

My issue is that you shouldn't have to over invite, I understand that Real Life happens but like any other commitment you should have the curtsey to at least take a couple of minutes to inform a GM that you won't be able to make it.

To Question: My Point Exactly.

Maybe we should have some kind of eBay style rating system for players and GMs so people can plan around that.

I think that was discussed about a month ago by someone else and it was not received well. I thought what if we had a NO SHOW list, listing players who don't show up without ever contacting the GM. But I figure somebody would think that's too harsh. I also think that there are large number of very immature players and it might not just be their age. I have a fairly young player in some of my games and he's far more mature than many others I had playing. So I really don't know what the answer is. I can say that I won't accept players who are on my own NO SHOW list and I encourage other GMs to do the same thing. All that said I am not talking about players who play a few sessions and then quit showing up, that's different, that can be because something happened in their lives to cause scheduling problems, maybe they think you suck as a DM, or your story stinks, they got hit by a hurricane (which actually happened), etc. Although it would be nice to hear from them too. End of Rant

I think the concern was that at the time people were talking about a "rate a player" system, which although it seems like a good idea at first glance is vulnerable to lots of problems. For example: As a GM I might advertise that I'm running a game set in ancient Rome but without too many more details because I don't want to spoil the surprise (or something). Then on the day I present a plot & character heavy game about politicking in the senate. If I have a first time Roll20 player who turns up expecting Spartacus style "swords, sex and sandals" they're probably going to be pretty disappointed with the session they get and they might not participate as much as they might as a result. If I give that first time player a one star rating they'll probably never get another game due to no fault of their own. I think you'd find far less resistance for a "did not attend" list.

A rating system might be better geared for players looking at GMs instead of GMs looking at players. This way, players would know what to expect from a GM before they go into a game. Players could rate the GM after a session, GMs would get tagged for what types of games they run and might create a sense of competition to be among the top rated. I wouldnt have any issue participating in such a system, once i learn roll20 and start GMing on here that is. It may also make it easier for players to find particular types of games. Just a thought.

One of the reasons I'm against a rating system is that, like every request, it requires developer time. If it was really needed, maybe players/GMs could use the existing Activity page of roll20 profiles to post comments? If I was to click the name of a poster and see a slew of flattering and appreciative comments from players, I'd feel more comfortable joining. It also has the benefits of: more detail than a categorical rating system, and allows you to see responses from both sides (such as, "Why didn't you show up last night?" "Sorry, there was a hurricane. My computer was thrown violently from an open window.") We could implement the Activity Check system immediately, but should let all players/GMs we run into know to comment on each other's profiles to help create a better community (otherwise, 90% of the community would probably not know to start using the activity page). Things like Ajax's one shots would be a perfect way for new players to start building their status in the community.

Maybe that's our best bet: Keeping "no show" lists and maybe passing them around between DMs. Ajax, got yours anywhere online we can all see it and possibly contribute?

yeah the No Show Lists give around could help alot

I could see something like a No Show List or shorthand eBay style commenting working without official implementation. I foresee some people getting hot about it, but sometimes things just need to be done, especially in this kind of setting. I'm really feeling just comments on their profile in like an eBay style. Example- On Ajax's Page: A++ GM, would play again On My page: Horrible GM, rude, doesn't provide towels, get your act together Now obviously I'ma be pissed and if I were a lesser man I'd lose my shit, but problems I (theoretically) caused shouldn't happen again and it saves people time. Could be seen as harsh, but I think it needs to be done.

Ajax gets a A++ just for his badasss voice lol

Grrr...............

I've had the same weekly game get 6 new players every week and I'm lucky if 1 shows. It's frustrating to plan a game and design maps/music/scenes/story/npc's etc. only to have no one show or 1 person show and yes I'll run a 1 person game but then you've wasted a 6 person setup on 1 player. There needs to be a way to mark off no shows of players signed up for your games so there is a 3 strikes and you get a warning symbol so other GM's know who these no show sign up players are!

if you have ventrilo here is the link: https:app.roll20.net/join/49355/8ut2AA

oops actually used that link, uh Ajax if you could just drop me....sorry about that

I've no idea how this ended up in this post from 2 months ago.

also thought: don't haphazardly post links to your campaign, without detailing when you are playing, and what kinds of time constraints you are looking for... only to get frustrated when a bunch of people show up and can't commit :/

I wish there was a player rating system.

You think that's bad? One of my campaigns had the DM fail to show up without giving the group a heads up, 2 weeks in a row, now.