Episode/Season/Session vs Campaign

[Edgewood]

I started to utilize the episodic format way back in the mid-nineties when I was running my Star Trek campaign. The whole thing was presented like an episode of ST:TNG including the teaser at the beginning and three three to four acts that one would find in a common script. We had a allot of fun doing it this way and word of mouth got around and soon I was running three different games. One was the USS Lexington. The second was the USS Endeavour and the third was aboard the USS Andromeda.

Nearly each player would at least get an adventure that was more or less centered around their character for development.

The one problem I would typically run into of course was that not every adventure would fit neatly into an evening's worth of play. Therefore I was forced to use the "To be continued..." approach, which would simply make that adventure a two or three part episode.

 

[Lanefan]

I just can't see this working in my game, in part because it doesn't bother me if the players decide to take 2 sessions to do what I thought they'd get done in an hour, and in part because if I had a set end point in mind for the session and they were dragging their heels it'd just take too much railroading and forcing of issues to get them there.

That, and I can never predict with any accuracy how long any given encounter or interaction will take. Even something as simple as walking through a village could take no time at all "You pass through Ravenshire on your way to the coast." "OK." or could take all night and into the next session "You pass through Ravenshire on your way to the coast." "[babble of voices]Wait. Is there anyone in Ravenshire with information that might help us? Is there a pub - Thog the Dwarf wants to get his drink on, and pick a fight while he's at it! Are there any available pockets to pick? [etc. etc.]" with no way to predict which way things will go.

Combats are also unpredictable. One good critical can shorten things immensely, while some bad rolling can make it go on far longer than expected.

All in all, I start where the last session stopped and just carry on...and if someone's not there, tough; that person can always leave instructions ahead of time but otherwise knows their character(s) are at the mercy of the other players. (example: after this weekend I'm out of the games for a month - while my own games will stop I don't at all expect the game I play in to stop, nor do I expect my characters to vanish...I'll leave instructions and hope someone pays at least vague attention to them, and see what happens by the time I get back)

Lan-"stopping a session immediately after rolling for surprise is always fun"-efan

 

[maddman75]

I just can't see this working in my game, in part because it doesn't bother me if the players decide to take 2 sessions to do what I thought they'd get done in an hour, and in part because if I had a set end point in mind for the session and they were dragging their heels it'd just take too much railroading and forcing of issues to get them there.

This is an important distinction - I don't generally have a set endpoint in mind. They can and will go in directions I haven't thought of, and I enjoy that very much. What I'm talking about is some kind of gratifying ending, some resolution. I'm more than willing to add a little with more scenes, or cut some chaff. But I don't decide ahead of time what the end point will be.

Heck, in my current game I'm giving the PCs 3-4 leads they could follow up on every week and let them decide where to go and what to do.

 

[Ariosto]

It is, I think, most efficiently a matter of everyone adjusting thinking to a limited scenario -- as in setting up a typical miniatures or board game. When we know we're after something to occupy so many hours, we can consider what is likely to fit the bill.

The advice repeated prominently in the 1st ed. AD&D PHB is to have an objective, and that's generally good advice regardless of the adventure. The better defined it is, the easier it is to estimate how long it is likely to take.

When we have had to compete with other parties for sessions, our adventures have been well organized. It's been likewise when referees take the lead, as in preparing something for a time slot at a convention. Planning is critical.

There is in my experience typically a fair bit of "slack" in the amount of socializing that does not contribute to the progress of the game. It might amount to about a quarter of the time. That can contract or expand, so that precise timing of the game is not relevant to an entertaining gathering.

When the players have a clear objective, a "victory condition" for the session's endeavor, that can be something they decisively attain or fail to attain. At the very least, it provides a focus so that -- instead of just wandering aimlessly -- events can be seen to have progressed to a certain point.

If it is clear what is unresolved, then it can also be clear what the next step will be. We can anticipate something specific enough to be exciting.