D&D 5E DM Quits The Game

[Hussar]

It sounds like you're trying to force a square peg into a round hole, by prepping an adventure arc for a beer n pretzels group.

Recruit different players, leave off DMing, or explore a different game style. Them's really your only options.

Pretty much this.

It annoys me to no end that people treat gaming so cavalierly. In any group activity there is some expectation that participants will make a commitment. If you showed up two hours late consistently, you'd be asked to leave.

Why is gaming any different?

 

[Sunseeker]

I generally treat 3/5 as quorate, unless some Epic Final Battle is about to start. Then 4/5.

Admittedly, it depends on who is there. Otherwise sometimes if we're not in dire straits (IE: everyone went to sleep in town) I will indulge in individual activities around town.

 

[Lanefan]

Yeah, as a DM, the only schedule I have is what's happening in game that follows a normal timeline. I.e., if the PCs stand around yanking in town for a few days, the world isn't on pause for them and something may have happened.

Absolutely.

But I never, ever, have a schedule for adventure completion, nor an order of completion that has to happen.

I've long since given up on any sort of schedule for completion; but there's still sometimes an order of completion if I'm trying to run a quasi-path...usually managed by either a) presenting the steps as a specific sequence when first found, or b) their not learning about the next step (or just how to go about it) until they're already partway through the current one. Other times they just know there's stuff needs doing, and they get to it however they like.

For example, the crew I'm running tonight: they're currently out bashing Giants. At the start of this adventure they could have done that, or gone after some undead they'd heard about in the same area, or tried to rescue their captured companion from the Mind Flayers. They sort-of decided at the time to do the Giants then the undead in that order to hopefully get a bit more powered up before taking on the Mind Flayers. That said, this was 6 months ago real time and the players have probably forgotten about the undead by now...

Lan-"speaking of completion schedules, I originally had this Giant adventure storyboarded to take about 2-3 months; so far it's been 6 and they ain't done yet"-efan

 

[Remathilis]

Pretty much this.

It annoys me to no end that people treat gaming so cavalierly. In any group activity there is some expectation that participants will make a commitment. If you showed up two hours late consistently, you'd be asked to leave.

Why is gaming any different?

People tend to treat it more like a social engagement (party) than an activity (sport or show).

 

[Hussar]

People tend to treat it more like a social engagement (party) than an activity (sport or show).

Yeah, and if I had a friend who consistently showed up two hours late for every party we had, I'd stop inviting them. It's incredibly rude. I mean, if you invited a group of friends to go see a movie and one friend shows up two hours late, what's your reaction? Ours is to go see the movie without him or her. Sorry, too bad. In this day and age of cell phones and instant communication, expecting someone to spend thirty seconds out of their self involved life is not too much to ask.

Again, sure, life happens. We're all late once in a while. But, every time? Forget that. I don't need the hassle. Sorry, I'm not going to waste my and everyone else's time waiting for some schmuck who can't be bothered to come to a social engagement that everyone has known about. My free time is extremely limited. Hell will freeze over before I put up with that sort of crap.

And as far as the players jacking around for an hour, again, wasting everyone's time, forget about it. If you want to socialise, go right ahead. Just don't do it here. We have any number of ways to socialise with our friends during the week. Expecting people to actually show up and play something we've all agreed to come and play is just common manners. Then again, I never run sessions anywhere near as long as the OP's. My sessions are three hours, weekly. Spending an hour futzing about means we don't actually do much of any gaming for the week.

Same with that player who dithers every single time their turn comes up. Like I said, if I took ten minutes to take my turn in anything other than maybe chess, I would rightly be expected to be beaten about the head and ears. Why play a game and then piss on everyone else's good time? Because watching someone dither for ten minutes just sucks all the fun out of the game. It's frustrating to no end. Again, expecting a player to learn a 5e character sheet, when the group is 8th bloody level (so hardly new players) should take just a tiny bit of effort on their part.

I used to be really patient about this sort of thing. Give people time and whatnot. Now? Forgeddaboudit. Come to the table to play or don't come. You want to socialise and kibbitz and whatnot? Hey, let's go for a beer. Not a problem. But, we've organised the schedules of five to seven adults, all with children and jobs and everything else. If you can't be bothered even putting in that tiny bit of effort of actually showing up on time and taking the fifteen minutes to read your character sheet? I don't want you at my table.

 

[Zardnaar]

Yeah, and if I had a friend who consistently showed up two hours late for every party we had, I'd stop inviting them. It's incredibly rude. I mean, if you invited a group of friends to go see a movie and one friend shows up two hours late, what's your reaction? Ours is to go see the movie without him or her. Sorry, too bad. In this day and age of cell phones and instant communication, expecting someone to spend thirty seconds out of their self involved life is not too much to ask.

Again, sure, life happens. We're all late once in a while. But, every time? Forget that. I don't need the hassle. Sorry, I'm not going to waste my and everyone else's time waiting for some schmuck who can't be bothered to come to a social engagement that everyone has known about. My free time is extremely limited. Hell will freeze over before I put up with that sort of crap.

And as far as the players jacking around for an hour, again, wasting everyone's time, forget about it. If you want to socialise, go right ahead. Just don't do it here. We have any number of ways to socialise with our friends during the week. Expecting people to actually show up and play something we've all agreed to come and play is just common manners. Then again, I never run sessions anywhere near as long as the OP's. My sessions are three hours, weekly. Spending an hour futzing about means we don't actually do much of any gaming for the week.

Same with that player who dithers every single time their turn comes up. Like I said, if I took ten minutes to take my turn in anything other than maybe chess, I would rightly be expected to be beaten about the head and ears. Why play a game and then piss on everyone else's good time? Because watching someone dither for ten minutes just sucks all the fun out of the game. It's frustrating to no end. Again, expecting a player to learn a 5e character sheet, when the group is 8th bloody level (so hardly new players) should take just a tiny bit of effort on their part.

I used to be really patient about this sort of thing. Give people time and whatnot. Now? Forgeddaboudit. Come to the table to play or don't come. You want to socialise and kibbitz and whatnot? Hey, let's go for a beer. Not a problem. But, we've organised the schedules of five to seven adults, all with children and jobs and everything else. If you can't be bothered even putting in that tiny bit of effort of actually showing up on time and taking the fifteen minutes to read your character sheet? I don't want you at my table.

Well my new plan is have a session 0 as I want to run OotA or PotA which are on the way hopefully). I was gonna wind it down anyway. I think I need to have a sesison 0 and lay down some ground rules and expectations, if people can't commit thatsfine but then I will replace you. I'm almost happy to cut down to 1-3 players if need be and just run a small group.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

About adventure pacing:

Ever since I started running 5e (around the time the PHB came out--I ran Next before then), I've been working on refining my ability to get as much done as I can in the amount of time I've allotted. It has been a difficult road, but I feel I'm mostly there. I've learned a few things.

1. My players (thankfully) love to get into their characters and interact with the world, rather than some meta-concern about what the DM has planned (although most of them are still cognizant of the latter).
2. Because of this, my players are prone to spend way more time than I think they will considering options and possibilities of what's going on in my world. It's actually a great feeling when my world evokes in-character discussions of all sorts of possibilities (that aren't actually what's going on), and causes the characters to seriously consider their course.
3. Because of that, if I want them to get something done in a set amount of time, it has to be clear exactly what they need to do by when.
4. All extraneous distractions need to be removed.
5. This is generally considered "railroading", and should be used in moderation, but it is a tool one can use.

Example: I've been running some stand-alone adventures to get a better feel for various elements of the 5e system, as well as to run certain scenarios that aren't in need of a full campaign. The latest one was Questing Knights. The pitch on the adventure was very clear (a group of honorable knights pursuing a quest, lots of race/class restrictions, etc) and I had player buy-in for those who were there. At the beginning of the adventuring, the PCs all showed up at the same castle. A blind seer came into the courtyard and prophesied to them. I typed it up so they could see exactly what was said. He told them that they needed to go west to a certain place, then east to another place, would face certain tests, needed the holy armaments, and needed to travel a full day's ride for 7 days to avoid being too late to stop the evil event.

Pretty darn specific. I made sure it was as clear as possible, and they got it. Then, I made sure the paths to travel were extremely clear. I only mentioned one place where the road even split (because it made sense geographically) but it was clear which way they had been directed to go after a little discussion. There was a tiny optional side-quest to rescue a princess, but it was easy for them to find where it was.

It worked. Not only did I get everything I had planned for the adventure done within the alotted time (target 8 sessions, max allowed 10), but I actually finished it up a session earlier than intended (7 sessions). That's the best I've ever done, and it took me a long time to figure out how to pull it off. Everyone seemed to have a good time with it.

In a more sandbox campaign (which is how I prefer a long campaign), that just isn't going to happen. I let the players run around and go wherever, and they probably will.

So if you want to fit into an allotted time, you either need to railroad or pray for a miracle.

But it sounds like your players might not have made characters that are really right for the campaign in any event. Nothing to do about that but to start over with new characters, new campaign, or new players.

 

[JohnLynch]

See I'm trying to do the opposite. I'm pretty good at getting my players to go exactly where I want them to. They might not take the expected route or in the expected order. But if I tell them "you need to get X" they tend to get to there. I'm trying to step away from that and instead say to the players "Here's the area. Here's some plothooks so you're not left completely lost as to what to do. Go forth and have fun." The first session will be a very clear "go to X" adventure (largely to get the characters to work together and bond with each other so they then continue to address problems as a collective group) but after that it will be open slather. I already know one character has his own personal mission he'll be trying to rope the characters into pursuing (and one he won't be able to complete on his own). Ideally the other characters will have their own (that also requires at least one other character to complete).

 

[Warbringer]

People tend to treat it more like a social engagement (party) than an activity (sport or show).

Nope, not for my groups. It is an activity that cannot commence until everyone is there.

Whenever one is there, then party can start

 

[Uchawi]

I think the scenario goes beyond just describing one day's encounters that are planned. If you build a world that has severe consequences for missteps and you provide little prompting as a DM on how the players/characters may circumvent certain challenges, then they will be paranoid and things will crawl. That is the case whether they are experienced or not. If you want the players to experience certain set pieces you have created, then ease up on everything that leads up to it so they can get there even if they don't follow the path you expected. Your other choice is to create set pieces that are flexible, where you may place them in various locations. That is pretty easy for a large city or even outdoor environment, but even a dungeon can be flexible.

But the biggest mistake you can make as a DM is trying to provide a player experience you would want if you were on the other side of the screen. What you expect as a player is totally different then running a game as a DM. This scenario happens a lot if you rotate the DM chair. If you don't like how the other DM runs the game, then you try to bring out the qualities you want when it is your turn. However, you can't rely on the players acting in accordance to how you would react as a player.