Why do so many campaigns never finish? Genuinely curious what others think

timbannock · 2026-03-04T00:08:32+0000

AstroArtificer said:
How does it get that bad? I mean, you'd think that if the GM chose the group, the group wouldn't be draining on the GM, right?

I have players in one group that prefer to be led around by the nose. I don't particularly like that style of play, so we naturally have friction as a part of getting together to game. Plenty of times we're able to reduce that friction more than enough for everyone to have a blast. But sometimes it just doesn't work out, and after a session or two of frustration, there's not much you can do to put the wind back in the sails, as it were.

billd91 · 2026-03-04T00:09:59+0000

We've got a pretty good record going of finishing off APs for the campaigns where we've used them. They offer a promise of some closure if you get to the end of one - at least in the sense that you've resolved a major situation that has arisen in the campaign setting. So, as long as you're enjoying it, it's somewhat easier to stay the course when real life isn't completely getting in the way.

I may have abridged a couple things here or there, added other bits elsewhere, etc - but the only AP we haven't actually finished was the one interrupted by the pandemic.

Deset Gled · 2026-03-04T00:14:29+0000

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
I think it's also worth noting that not all campaigns have an end that can be reached.

Exactly this.

Do a parallel poll about how many consider their game to be at least partially "sandbox style". Then subtract all those answers from the people who claim their campaign never finished.

Koloth · 2026-03-04T00:24:06+0000

Part of it depends on the definition of a campaign. When I was in college and the game was D&D, AD&D or Traveller, our usual 'campaign' was a variation of "I am going to run a party through module <XYZ> this weekend. Create or bring existing characters of <y> level." Such campaigns lasted a session or three and were done. But a high percentage of finished campaigns/modules. But also a fair number of 'We are playing this weekend' games and it was a one and done. Later, I was in one 2e campaign that finished. It was a GM creation. Many GURPS, Traveller, Car Wars, etc campaigns would run for a few sessions then die when the GM ran out of ideas. We had a fairly steady group and when one campaign stopped, another would start. Later have made it through two different 1-20 PF1 adventure paths. Each with a different group. But still most games ended due to GM either running out of ideas or the group getting tired of that particular game.

GrimCo · 2026-03-04T00:49:48+0000

"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans."

In HS, we finished almost all campaigns. In Uni, that number started to decresee rapidly. We finished 1 big campaign, few shorter ones. After Uni, so in last 12 years, i think we finished 1 long campaign and few shorter ones. Long campaigns are 20-30 sessions, short ones are around 10-15 sessions.

Sometimes, DM would run out of ideas. Sometimes, we would start parallel second campaign and that one would take over, so first one would be dropped. Sometimes, there was player/DM burnout, or we just got bored or campaign ground to a halt. In the last 7-8 years, adult life (family, kids, aging parents with health problems, careers, other hobbies) would make scheduling hard and campaign would fizzle out due to long inactivity time.

I stopped running long campaigns almost decade ago. My "campaigns" are pretty linear 8-10 3h long sessions. But i mostly run short games, up to 3 sessions, each 3-3.5 hours long. Last short game like that, lasting probably 9.5 hours of game time, took us 2.5 months to finish due to inability to meet.

Dannyalcatraz · 2026-03-04T01:09:48+0000

Jumping in late on this…

I’ve been in the hobby since 1977-78, in multiple groups across 5 cities in 3 states, in over 100 systems. I’ve seen a lot of campaigns fail to resolve, so here’s a list (echoing a lot of what’s been stated already):

1) sometimes, the campaign has no set ending point. This is especially true of homebrews.

2) sometimes campaigns suck

3) people’s work/school demands interfere with their gaming hobby

4) people’s OTHER hobbies interfere with their gaming hobby

5) people move away

6) people run afoul of the law, get sick, get divorced or some other major change in life

7) something new comes along, and people would rather play THAT than continue what they’re playing.

8) sometimes, players aren’t engaged enough with the game, diminishing the enjoyment of the GM

9) GM burnout

titus171 · 2026-03-04T01:33:59+0000

AstroArtificer said:
This is gonna be a controversial take, but what if the problem isn't that the GM isn't interesting enough, bur rather it isn't the right audience? It's tiring to always be the Jester DM for groups that don't appreciate it

You're right, but one could argue that as the GM, it's your job to cater to your audience and give them the game they want.

It goes both ways. TTRPGs are games so really I think the best thing to do is play them with people who are compatible with our play style. If they aren't, it's understandable that games don't last.

Scott Christian · 2026-03-04T01:56:47+0000

AstroArtificer said:
Has this been your experience? What do you think actually kills most campaigns?

37%. I would think it is much higher than that.

I think there are a few reasons:
1. Players believe they are going to continue, but then life happens. Someone has a kid, someone gets married, or someone moves. Then, the group just slowly dissolves from there. Maybe the one person was the social glue? Or maybe they were the GM? Or maybe they had the house everyone played at?
2. People commit without a plan. A plan might be: "We are playing every Sunday from 5Pm to 9PM." Or it might be: "We are meeting at Rita's house every time we play." But so many groups are just trying to schedule randomly or "choosing" where to play. Then, suddenly they are surprised when they said on Sunday they were going to meet on Friday, but Friday came and Terry forgot to tell his wife he was playing, and she expected him to watch the kids because it was girl's night. Things like that happen all the time without a consistent plan in place. (Heck, they happen even when you do have a plan in place, but at least it happens less often.)
3. People burn out. Players do, but the GM can really burn out. And if they are the only one's running... well... the game ends.
4. (It wouldn't be my post without me mention this...) The GM doesn't prep properly. The GM runs a great campaign for the first five sessions. They did their homework. They had interesting NPCs. They had the gaps filled. They catered to their players' wants. Then, they stopped prepping. They begin to think they can "wing it." And, in turn, it becomes less interesting for the players. Then, the game slowly fades because there isn't a clear ending point.

In my opinion, these are the top four reasons. I like the thought of people moving on to other games too. The whole, "Ooh look, something new and shiny!" But, just from my experience, it only happens with groups that play a diverse number of games. And most tables I know generally only play one or two.

AstroArtificer · 2026-03-04T02:05:27+0000

Scott Christian said:
37%. I would think it is much higher than that.

I think there are a few reasons:
1. Players believe they are going to continue, but then life happens. Someone has a kid, someone gets married, or someone moves. Then, the group just slowly dissolves from there. Maybe the one person was the social glue? Or maybe they were the GM? Or maybe they had the house everyone played at?
2. People commit without a plan. A plan might be: "We are playing every Sunday from 5Pm to 9PM." Or it might be: "We are meeting at Rita's house every time we play." But so many groups are just trying to schedule randomly or "choosing" where to play. Then, suddenly they are surprised when they said on Sunday they were going to meet on Friday, but Friday came and Terry forgot to tell his wife he was playing, and she expected him to watch the kids because it was girl's night. Things like that happen all the time without a consistent plan in place. (Heck, they happen even when you do have a plan in place, but at least it happens less often.)
3. People burn out. Players do, but the GM can really burn out. And if they are the only one's running... well... the game ends.
4. (It wouldn't be my post without me mention this...) The GM doesn't prep properly. The GM runs a great campaign for the first five sessions. They did their homework. They had interesting NPCs. They had the gaps filled. They catered to their players' wants. Then, they stopped prepping. They begin to think they can "wing it." And, in turn, it becomes less interesting for the players. Then, the game slowly fades because there isn't a clear ending point.

In my opinion, these are the top four reasons. I like the thought of people moving on to other games too. The whole, "Ooh look, something new and shiny!" But, just from my experience, it only happens with groups that play a diverse number of games. And most tables I know generally only play one or two.

Yeah, those reasons all track with me. I feel as if a lot of GMs don't have the luxury of being able to run multiple games. I think you're right that it's often the reverse. GMs and players are already struggling to find the time for games, so once something else (like life) becomes a bigger priority, TTRPG time gets cut, and then the group just collapses.

Do you think that burnout is a symptom of life circumstances, or that people prioritizing their life stuff is a symptom of burnout?

AstroArtificer · 2026-03-04T02:09:38+0000

titus171 said:
You're right, but one could argue that as the GM, it's your job to cater to your audience and give them the game they want.

It goes both ways. TTRPGs are games so really I think the best thing to do is play them with people who are compatible with our play style. If they aren't, it's understandable that games don't last.

Yeah, you're exactly right. I think that's really what the main problem is. How are you supposed to find out who's compatible with you without first playing multiple sessions with them in the first place? We have vocab for what we want to play (systems, setting, logistics, etc.), but I think we are pretty bad at communicating how we play (our playstyle). I've been building something around this problem...