D&D 5E DM Quits The Game

[Mercule]

I tend to be really loose with the appointments I make with my players.

As do I. Which means "official time" +/- 15 minutes. Other than an "open house" shindig, like a graduation or other party, there are few socially acceptable reasons to not try to make it within that window -- preferably on the early/before start side. I consider myself horrible with time management and feel guilty if I'm more than a couple minutes late. Things happen: abnormal traffic (if the freeway is generally busy, plan competently), the dog squats on the rug, the in-laws drop by, etc. Those things are the exception, though, and should be so rare as to disappear into the background.

When we plan a session, we agree on a rough time when we want to start (For example, around 18:00 till 23:00). We also agree on having diner together, and then they usually show up around that time. They may be an hour later, but they usually call me if that is the case. It doesn't really matter if they are a bit late, because I already have the whole evening reserved for D&D, so one hour later, or two hours late, it doesn't really matter. We'll start when they are all here. Fortunately they all arrive with the same car, so it's never just one person who is late.

This one makes sense. We will occasionally do a "guys' strategy game night" where part of the deal is pizza. Dining together is optional, but the expectation is that there's only an hour set aside for it. So, if dinner is at 5:30, the game starts at 6:30 (at least, we start choosing colors, etc. at that time). We aren't jerks about it, but it's completely disrespectful to mess with people's schedule on the back side -- get to bed for early work, work second shift, wife waits up, whatever.

Real life commitments go first, so people can be late due to circumstances, its fine. But, if one player is consistently late, simply because he doesn't leave his house in time, that should be addressed. It's a shame if everyone except one specific player always shows up on time, and you all have to wait for him.

This one blows my mind: This is a real-world commitment. Sure, it's not as important as a sick kid, my job, etc. But, it's something to which I've committed and which my absence has a noticeable negative impact on others. If I can't commit, I shouldn't have. At the very least, I should be up front about having a volatile schedule (as per my one player that was working tons of last-minute, mandatory overtime).

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

I'm with [MENTION=6801286]Imaculata[/MENTION] on the topic of scheduling game sessions, at least for the most part - I can't say I entirely am because I'm not sure if Imaculata feels the same way about players giving the group notice of any absence or late arrival before it happens rather than leaving us all wondering if we should wait to start or not. To me, not being able to make it to a gaming session is entirely non-offensive, but being disrespectful about it isn't. I mean seriously, I don't even care what your reasons for not being able to show up or show up on time are, I just care that you actually inform me.

This one blows my mind: This is a real-world commitment. Sure, it's not as important as a sick kid, my job, etc. But, it's something to which I've committed and which my absence has a noticeable negative impact on others. If I can't commit, I shouldn't have. At the very least, I should be up front about having a volatile schedule (as per my one player that was working tons of last-minute, mandatory overtime).

I think that Imaculata is using the term "real life" the same way that I do, which is as a means to color the commitment with it's different level of priority from a "hobby commitment", rather than to try and say that it isn't a commitment at all as you took it to mean.

That said, I've got a group of players that have scheduling difficulties of varying types, but instead of allowing that to negatively affect those that have been able to show up, we just embrace that our schedule is going to have issues and roll with it - including that we have "back up campaigns" for the three most common configurations of players present when 2 or more of the players can't attend, and have a shelf laden with board and card games that we enjoy having the opportunity to play when an RPG session doesn't work out.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

My scheduling system is pretty rigid. Most of the time, we game twice a month, on set days. I always try to finish the game within 4 – 5 hours, depending on how good we are at getting going in the beginning.

Sure, things come up that shift gaming now and then, but I work really hard to stick to the schedule, so that people generally know in advance when we're going gaming. If attendance is wildly skewed from the adventure as planned, then I do some quick adjustments to reduce or increase the difficulty level.

I used to work very hard to accommodate everyone’s schedules when coming up with dates. But I absolutely hated that – it was like herding cats, as the expression goes. So now I have our fixed dates, and whoever shows up gets to game.

We have a player that is routinely about two hours late. It’s frustrating, but I figure he’s the one losing out on time that could be spent gaming.

Being a DM is often a thankless job, but it’s also very rewarding. I think we’ve all had moments where we’ve been frustrated over something, and have considered throwing in the towel. But I say sometimes that’s an opportunity to look at how to improve your game. It can be tough to look at yourself critically, but oftentimes that’s how you get better. I just wish there was more of that thought process on the other end with the players.

 

[Doctor Futurity]

A quick suggestion to the OP: I have been in spots where it stops being fun. I have figured out (though it's not always obvious) that that point in time is almost always fixed by removing one or more players who I am not getting along with. It has so far worked like a charm every time.

 

[sleypy]

I'm fairly rigid about start times for games. I usually wait up to 15 minutes for people to arrive and get started no later than 30 minutes from the scheduled start. I usually use some form of RSVP system, e.g., meetup.com or G+ (sans "Maybe").

My games have a cutoff time and require a minimum number of confirmations. The game gets cancelled if enough people haven't said yes before the cutoff; with my friends, it becomes video/board game night.

I don't mind if people cancel as long as there is notice. I can't tolerate no-shows, and without special exceptions, there might not be a second chance. Habitual cancelations, regardless of the circumstances, will mostly get people replaced. Depending on the circumstances I might end the game or put it on hold.

 

[Mercule]

I'm with [MENTION=6801286]Imaculata[/MENTION] on the topic of scheduling game sessions, at least for the most part - I can't say I entirely am because I'm not sure if Imaculata feels the same way about players giving the group notice of any absence or late arrival before it happens rather than leaving us all wondering if we should wait to start or not. To me, not being able to make it to a gaming session is entirely non-offensive, but being disrespectful about it isn't. I mean seriously, I don't even care what your reasons for not being able to show up or show up on time are, I just care that you actually inform me.

I don't mean to come off as draconian or snoopy. Most irritability I have comes from the lack of communication or from lack of consistency. Stuff happens and it's just a game. Be that as it may, it's also five other people (in my group) who have arranged their schedule to get together for a particular purpose. It may not be hugely important, but consideration is still appropriate.

I'll also say that, when we were all high-school and college-aged single man-geeks, the standing rule was that if you ever turned down a date because it was game night, we were going to kick you out for the night, anyway. Sadly, rules like that exist for a reason. *sigh* Priorities, people!

I'm fairly rigid about start times for games. I usually wait up to 15 minutes for people to arrive and get started no later than 30 minutes from the scheduled start. I usually use some form of RSVP system, e.g., meetup.com or G+ (sans "Maybe").

My games have a cutoff time and require a minimum number of confirmations. The game gets cancelled if enough people haven't said yes before the cutoff; with my friends, it becomes video/board game night.

I don't mind if people cancel as long as there is notice. I can't tolerate no-shows, and without special exceptions, there might not be a second chance. Habitual cancelations, regardless of the circumstances, will mostly get people replaced. Depending on the circumstances I might end the game or put it on hold.

Sounds a lot like mine. Everyone has email accounts that actually link to their calendars, so I just send out an actual calendar invite. Since my wife and I communicate our schedule by sharing our online calendars, it fits perfectly with my workflow.

 

[PnPgamer]

A fire giant king. He appeared in AD&D module G3: Hall of the Fire Giant King

To me it sounds like the ruler of the land where Snarf came from.

 

[Imaculata]

I'm with [MENTION=6801286]Imaculata[/MENTION] on the topic of scheduling game sessions, at least for the most part - I can't say I entirely am because I'm not sure if Imaculata feels the same way about players giving the group notice of any absence or late arrival before it happens rather than leaving us all wondering if we should wait to start or not. To me, not being able to make it to a gaming session is entirely non-offensive, but being disrespectful about it isn't. I mean seriously, I don't even care what your reasons for not being able to show up or show up on time are, I just care that you actually inform me.

Indeed. As long as I'm aware that they are coming in a bit later, its all good. So what if we start an hour later, or two hours later? It's up to them how long they want to play, and if real life commitments get in the way, then so be it. It's not like I'll be sitting at my table the whole time by myself, watching the clock, waiting for them to arrive. My friends arrive when they do, and then we get started. If they are a bit late, that is not the end of the world. And if they are so late that there is very little time left to play D&D, then we pull out a board game.

I think that Imaculata is using the term "real life" the same way that I do, which is as a means to color the commitment with it's different level of priority from a "hobby commitment", rather than to try and say that it isn't a commitment at all as you took it to mean.

Exactly. D&D is just a hobby, and is secondary to what ever reasons my friends may have for being late. Maybe they had car trouble, or overslept, or forgot to do the laundry, for forgot to put on pants. Whatever. It is not the end of the world if they show up for D&D. It's just a game anyway.

That said, I've got a group of players that have scheduling difficulties of varying types, but instead of allowing that to negatively affect those that have been able to show up, we just embrace that our schedule is going to have issues and roll with it - including that we have "back up campaigns" for the three most common configurations of players present when 2 or more of the players can't attend, and have a shelf laden with board and card games that we enjoy having the opportunity to play when an RPG session doesn't work out.

This is how I solve it as well. We have plenty of backup campaigns to play, and a ton of board games and card games to fill the rest of the evening. All that matters, is that me and my friends have a fun evening together. That evening does not have to be filled with none-stop D&D. I'm fine with skipping an evening even, if it just doesn't work out.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

One of my players is of the mind that it’s not fair that the player shows up late, because they game less but still get the same amount of treasure and XP as everyone else, since we generally divide it up at the end of the session. I’m not sure it’s worth individually tracking, though. That's got a whole bunch of headaches as it is.

We wait for a little bit, but I try to get us actually started within half an hour of the start time, regardless of who's running late.

Indeed. As long as I'm aware that they are coming in a bit later, its all good. So what if we start an hour later, or two hours later? It's up to them how long they want to play, and if real life commitments get in the way, then so be it.

 

[Imaculata]

One of my players is of the mind that it’s not fair that the player shows up late, because they game less but still get the same amount of treasure and XP as everyone else, since we generally divide it up at the end of the session.

Well I hand out party experience. So if one player does something cool, I reward the whole party for it. That makes it less of a contest, and more "yay, teamwork!". I don't want to cause jealousy amongst my players.

As for treasure, I expect the party to distribute things reasonably. I know that my players are fair, and will simply discuss who needs what the most. But I rarely continue my campaign if one or more players has not arrived yet (unless they really aren't coming, but then they do miss out on treasure, but not exp).