Choosing a Better Group

    Hello everyone, going to get my feet wet here in the forums, but before I get started; I'm relatively new to Roll20, so this is not Sage advice, more it is initial observation of the most commonly discussed topic I've encountered so far. GROUP AGE/LONGEVITY :     I hear a lot of people disappointed about how long their group held sessions before disbanding for whatever reason. I can already speak from experience as in one of my first gaming sessions, a player dipped out before the session even concluded -- didn't say a word. So I wanted to give a knee jerk reaction to why I see this happening: Group Selection Process: Take your time . People are throwing a game up and just grabbing the first handful of applications that are thrown there way. Take your time... It doesn't have to be a rush to get the right group of players together. Hold an interview or two. I know we're all just as eager as the next to play, but --  Slow is Smooth, Smooth is Fast. Laziness ! I know some out there selecting players for their game look right over the players who apply with longer applications. Yes I fall into this, and from what I've seen so do others. In fact, I've yet to see a player selected for a game who applied with a long application. But I've only prospected 20 games in the last month. This is Laziness and speaks volumes to your capabilities as a GM, and to the quality of group you'll inevitably settle with. Get a good mix in there, don't be scared of the players who come with their own story. No attention to detail . Where is your game taking place? Homebrew or Premade? What are you looking for out of your players? Why not set an application standard. Give a sample of what you're looking for, etc. There are too many out there who start a game and just pencil in "I'm running this, apply below". You're not going to get dedicated players if you yourself are not dedicated to your game. Feedback! For the love of the Gods, please include some feedback in your inquiries. I've seen some people really put some time into their applications, only to have some has-been who practically farted on the screen get grabbed up minutes after they apply. If you're looking for the Ultra Casual, say you're looking for the Ultra Casual. Let the dedicated "hardcore" players know before they bother with applying that you're not looking for their type.   Group Cohesion In Between Session play . Don't be afraid to set up an avenue to discuss in/out of game topics for in between sessions. Not every session permits it, but in most cases the party is getting a short to long rest in at least once during a session. Out of Game that time may pass instantly, but for our characters there was several hours worth of in game time that could have been spent doing various things. I can say that I like to role play, but I also don't want to take away from the progression of the game by slowing it down with too much role playing. So create a thread, or something that allows the players to "role play" those camp site engagements in between the game session. Things not only encourages group involvement, but group cohesion. Resolve Roles/Group Duty . Who wants to play the face in this scenario? Who wants to handle this or that. Having multiple players creates a dynamic scenario where these things cannot be easily determined... But that doesn't mean we can't try. However it works in your game, assign players a "task" or "duty" they're responsible for when in game. Something they're the go to player for. This encourages everyone to participate, and helps avoid situations where 2 people are always talking/playing for the other 5 or six at the table. Heck, whatever these "tasks" may be, they can be interchangeable between sessions, negotiable, etc. Give the Player a purpose, not just their character. Communication . I like how  Mathew Colville stated this in " Running the Game #12 " when he said you have Players and Audience members. There are going to be people who like to talk and participate, and those who just want to absorb what's happening. Regardless of the type of players, its important to still give them a voice and the feeling of inclusion. You don't have to force the player to speak up if they'd rather not, but be sure to moderate players that like to speak for everything and everyone. This way the game can continue to feel like a group activity, and not a spectators event. I appreciate any feedback, as this is intended to aid the community, so the more feedback and involvement the better we may all become at properly " LF a G ".

This is very interesting and has given me something to think about.  I also can not help but feel that this shows a need for something resembling a session zero.  I hope that this is either stickied somewhere, or is used to create something official.

Steely Phil said: This is very interesting and has given me something to think about.  I also can not help but feel that this shows a need for something resembling a session zero.  I hope that this is either stickied somewhere, or is used to create something official. I appreciate it Phil. A session zero is a really good idea, especially when playing over the web like this. In many cases, we're strangers to each other with no history, etc. It's a shift from traditional table top gaming where in the past, you or someone at the table were already friends with everyone, or you all came from the same hobby shop. A session Zero can be key in allowing for the players, not just the characters, to get a feel for each other. I've heard several players leave a game because it transitioned into too much combat, or got too meta, too goofy, etc... And I just wonder why these things aren't being discussed early on in the process. Perhaps even during the application phase.

"I appreciate any feedback" My feedback is critical and challenging and is in no way intended to break any forum rules. Just so you know before you think about reporting me for having a different opinion and offering the feedback you said you were open to . From my experience running games for 25 years: Slow is smooth, smooth is fast? That makes 0 sense to me but I'm open to a more in depth explanation.  Laziness? Maybe you don't need to write a novel to recruit for a game . Maybe you shouldn't be surprised if 30 people apply to play and the GM doesn't have time to read through several books. That's not laziness, that's life balance.  " This is Laziness and speaks volumes to your capabilities as a GM" <--- lolwut? You have no idea about the capabilities of a GM until you sit down and play their game and to throw that general accusation out there is absurd. Some GM's aren't tech savvy or great writers or great communicators but they may be the greatest GM in all of history. You wouldn't know because you wrote them off for their lack of being able to recruit for a game effectively.  I don't agree that if you, as a GM, don't include a novel with your LFG post that you're a lazy GM who has no attention to detail. If a game popped up that I really wanted to play, I wouldn't brush it off if every detail wasn't explained. Yes, I agree that GM's should put some level of detail in their LFG post. Important details like: When are we gaming? Who are you looking for? What system are we playing in? If you don't have those details in your LFG, then yes, you're probably being lazy but I'll still give you the benefit of the doubt until I actually play in your game .  Feedback? It's silly to ask that a GM respond to every single applicant in depth just because they applied to your game. It's like applying to a job. Do you really think the job recruiter is out to get you or is a jerk? Or is the reality that they have little to no time to respond to every single applicant? And to take it further and name call by saying the person the GM picked over you is a "has-been". That's uncalled for and rude. Your group cohesion suggestions are bit out there as well. Point 1 means that you expect everybody to have the time to play the game 24/7 or at least be game aware 24/7.  I also still don't see why group cohesion is so important to you. To me, who cares if the group doesn't have cohesion? Inter-group conflict is an opportunity for plot hooks, interesting role play, fun interactions, etc. It creates immersion. Don't force the paladin to get along with the rogue. And don't tell the player they can't be a paladin because there is a rogue in the group.   Point 2 is overbearing. Nobody wants an assigned role in a role playing game. It's why we play RPGs. Just because I'm playing a cleric doesn't mean my role is healer. I get to be whatever I want and I really don't want to be micro-managed in a game when I can just get that at work. You're not the boss of me.  Point 3  I agree with this when you have a not so great GM. A great GM is not telling a story to the players. The players are not an "audience." They are your fellow storytellers. A great GM understands, and makes it clear, that everyone involved is telling a story together. The GM is merely the person who provides the structure. If a player wants to be a bump on a log and not contribute to the story, either kick them out of the game or make it very clear that their character has no impact on the story/world unless they make an effort to make that happen. I'm not going to tell your character's story for you.  My community guideline would be: It's just a game. Stop taking it so seriously and just have fun and play. 

This is really good insight, and I appreciate the time you  guys put to share your thoughts, Thank you very much. You gave me something to think about, both Magnus Vardalon and Bardus Maximus. Thesis, antithesis, summary. :)

Alright, I have finally thought of something useful to add.  I sincerely hope that both of the main posts are read closely and thoroughly mined.  The are some very good points.  Clearly each GM and group is different.  I feel that it is best to consider the points and counterpoints and use what works best for you and your game.

Steely Phil said: Alright, I have finally thought of something useful to add.  I sincerely hope that both of the main posts are read closely and thoroughly mined.  The are some very good points.  Clearly each GM and group is different.  I feel that it is best to consider the points and counterpoints and use what works best for you and your game. That's very good insight. I want to make it clear that I appreciate the insight from Magnus as well. I may not agree with most of the points that were made but I do respect Magnus opinion. 

Bardus Maximus said: Slow is smooth, smooth is fast? That makes 0 sense to me but I'm open to a more in depth explanation.  I am (obvious) not Magnus, but this expression was fairly common when I was in the army. Put simply, it is often ultimately faster to take your time and do it right the first go round, rather than to rush it and have to do a job several times until it's finally correct.

Finally got that response up, didn't get a notification the Moderators moved the post.

Arcosus said: Bardus Maximus said: Slow is smooth, smooth is fast? That makes 0 sense to me but I'm open to a more in depth explanation.  I am (obvious) not Magnus, but this expression was fairly common when I was in the army. Put simply, it is often ultimately faster to take your time and do it right the first go round, rather than to rush it and have to do a job several times until it's finally correct. My father handmade a woodworking cabinet in the 60s and chiseled in the four corners: Well Begun Half Done Half Done Twice Done Which I think expresses almost the same sentiment. =D

This thread is considered off-topic for the Community Forums. Predictably , responses to this thread have come to violate the  Common Courtesy and  Civil Discussion clauses of the Roll20 Community Code of Conduct . As such, this thread will be moved to the General Off-Topic locker. From the Roll20 Community Code of Conduct : The Roll20 Forums exist to discuss topics directly related to the use of the Roll20 program. Anything that more fittingly could be discussed on another website SHOULD be discussed there. Here are some more fitting websites to discuss this topic: /r/rpg /r/LFG /r/gamemasters