D&D General How often do you complete a campaign as a player?

[James Gasik]

I'm going to ask "what does completing a campaign" even mean? Are we talking an adventure path? Getting to level 20?

I've been playing in the same AD&D game (on and off) since late 1989 and it's still going to this very day...and I've played one-shots that lasted a couple of sessions which had a definite beginning, middle, and end.

Depending on how you define "a campaign", my answer could be never, lol.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The probability of real life interrupting is directly proportional to the amount of real world time the campaign lasts. I ran a campaign that lasted about 6 months and only went to level 8 - that’s when the narrative was resolved. I don’t think I have ever had a campaign last more than two years. Some players run campaigns that run on much longer, and are not intended to reach a narrative conclusion anyway.

Whilst it’s nice if the DM can run snappy game with good pacing, I don’t think pacing is the cause of the problem, or if there actually is a problem.

 

[TiQuinn]

I'm going to ask "what does completing a campaign" even mean? Are we talking an adventure path? Getting to level 20?

I've been playing in the same AD&D game (on and off) since late 1989 and it's still going to this very day...and I've played one-shots that lasted a couple of sessions which had a definite beginning, middle, and end.

Depending on how you define "a campaign", my answer could be never, lol.

I call this the Grey’s Anatomy model of D&D campaigns

 

[Hex08]

But, that's kinda my point. For you, this isn't an issue because you almost always have enough time to satisfactorily complete your campaigns. So, obviously, pacing isn't an issue. Fair enough. However, there are some of us out there where this isn't true.

What's the solution? Simply accept that I only get to read the first three chapters of every novel I pick up, or switch to short stories? For me, I'd rather switch to short stories. Which brings me to the next reply:

But, that's not quite what I mean either. It's not a case of running a regularly paced campaign and then jumping to the end. It's more a recognition that this campaign that I'm starting is on life support from day one. That it's very likely that there is a hard limit to how long it will have before real life steps in and steps on its neck.

So, again, the solution to me is to advise DM's to plan accordingly. If you're running a game for your university classmates - and everyone's buggering off for the summer break, that means you've likely got 8 months to run your campaign. It might pick up again after the break, but, most likely not. So, plan accordingly. Cut stuff out. Run tightly focused campaigns where you leave off the side bar stuff.

I imagine it's rather like running a season of Adventurers League really. ALthough, I'll admit, I've never played AL. But, if each adventure MUST be completed in 4 hours and you'Ve only got X number of adventures per season, those constraints are going to significantly limit what your advnetures look like.

You are not wrong that GMs should plan accordingly. If you know people are only going to be at school for a certain amount of time (for example) then yes, the GM should plan for that. However, when I referred to life getting in the way that also includes things you can't accommodate for; an unexpected move, a new job with hours that conflict with gaming, someone being sick or hospitalized, pregnancy or new children, personality clashes within the gaming group or anything else that can't be foreseen. These types of things can end a campaign prematurely and are, in my experience, the things that stop campaigns in their tracks most frequently. They are more likely to happen as people get older and start a family and settle into their career. However, I do acknowledge that other people's experiences may not mirror my own

 

[Burnside]

I am rarely a player; since 2017 I have participated in two long campaigns as a player (Tomb of Annihilation and Baldur’s Gate: Descent into Avernus) that lasted 35-45 4-hour sessions and two short ones (Memories of Holdenshire and a homebrew one) that lasted 7 or 8 sessions. All of them were completed. Avernus and Holdenshire were actual play shows, so probably less surprising that they were completed.

One thing I would say is that i don’t think WotC’s official campaign books need to be “padded out” with a lot of extra content. Or if extra content is added, then take out stuff rather than just making the whole thing bigger. If anything, most of them are already a bit too long RAW. Curse of Strahd is great if it runs levels 3-8. It just doesn’t need to go to level 15, and trying to make it do so could be why you didn’t finish it.

 

[TiQuinn]

You are not wrong that GMs should plan accordingly. If you know people are only going to be at school for a certain amount of time (for example) then yes, the GM should plan for that. However, when I referred to life getting in the way that also includes things you can't accommodate for; an unexpected move, a new job with hours that conflict with gaming, someone being sick or hospitalized, pregnancy or new children, personality clashes within the gaming group or anything else that can't be foreseen. These types of things can end a campaign prematurely and are, in my experience, the things that stop campaigns in their tracks most frequently. They are more likely to happen as people get older and start a family and settle into their career. However, I do acknowledge that other people's experiences may not mirror my own

This. When I say real life, I don’t mean the stuff that happens according to plan. I mean stuff that changes unexpectedly. Now one could say don’t make any campaign longer than 3 months and have a much higher completion rate, but generally that’s not what we have shot for.

 

[Hussar]

I'm going to ask "what does completing a campaign" even mean? Are we talking an adventure path? Getting to level 20?

I've been playing in the same AD&D game (on and off) since late 1989 and it's still going to this very day...and I've played one-shots that lasted a couple of sessions which had a definite beginning, middle, and end.

Depending on how you define "a campaign", my answer could be never, lol.

It means whatever you want it to mean. Did the campaign you were playing end at a point that you feel is appropriate? No? Then I would say that’s a campaign that wasn’t completed.

Again, there’s no point in diving into pedantic minutiae to define what “end” means.

 

[Hussar]

You are not wrong that GMs should plan accordingly. If you know people are only going to be at school for a certain amount of time (for example) then yes, the GM should plan for that. However, when I referred to life getting in the way that also includes things you can't accommodate for; an unexpected move, a new job with hours that conflict with gaming, someone being sick or hospitalized, pregnancy or new children, personality clashes within the gaming group or anything else that can't be foreseen. These types of things can end a campaign prematurely and are, in my experience, the things that stop campaigns in their tracks most frequently. They are more likely to happen as people get older and start a family and settle into their career. However, I do acknowledge that other people's experiences may not mirror my own

Totally agree. I was using the uni example because it was easy. But as it was mentioned above - the chances of real life stepping on the neck of a campaign is directly proportional to the length of the campaign.

 

[Lanefan]

You are not wrong that GMs should plan accordingly. If you know people are only going to be at school for a certain amount of time (for example) then yes, the GM should plan for that. However, when I referred to life getting in the way that also includes things you can't accommodate for; an unexpected move, a new job with hours that conflict with gaming, someone being sick or hospitalized, pregnancy or new children, personality clashes within the gaming group or anything else that can't be foreseen. These types of things can end a campaign prematurely and are, in my experience, the things that stop campaigns in their tracks most frequently.

These things can end a campaign early only if they directly affect the DM or those that live with same. Without a DM, obviously the campaign's gone. But if real life causes a game to lose a player or two, why not just recruit new players and keep on keepin' on. IME there's always more players than there is space to put them; though perhaps I'm lucky in that regard, I don't know.

They are more likely to happen as people get older and start a family and settle into their career.

I've found the opposite to be true: once most of our crew hit the 40-45 age range, player turnover dropped off sharply.

However, I do acknowledge that other people's experiences may not mirror my own

Ayup.

 

[jasper]

As a player 1 in 6 with a campaign being an hardcover or a trio of connected modules like g1-G3