How to get players interested again?

[Squnk]

My group has been playing d&d 3.5 for the past year and a half. Our gaming sessions have been off and on and the players at each session is often inconsistent. I believe that in almost every group some players are more interested or dedicated to playing than others, but in our group many of the players are starting to get uninterested in playing. We have been playing one of the most stable campaigns we have played in a while, we all like our characters, switch DMs on a semi-regular basis (so we all get our fix), we play a 6-8 hour session once a week, and if we start to get burned out a little we take a break. And spite all of this some of our most dedicated players are starting to lose interest.

I just don't know what to do about this problem. Even I have to admit I do get burned out from time to time but that was back when my group was playing twelve hour sessions multiple times a week. I'm not sure if playing a new RPG would help but I have my worries about getting all our players to learn a new game when some aren't as dedicated as others and we have already put so much time and effort into this game. I just don't see it happening.

I was just hoping someone out there has gone through a similar problem and could share some advice or story. Thanks.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

I just don't know what to do about this problem. Even I have to admit I do get burned out from time to time but that was back when my group was playing twelve hour sessions multiple times a week. I'm not sure if playing a new RPG would help but I have my worries about getting all our players to learn a new game when some aren't as dedicated as others and we have already put so much time and effort into this game. I just don't see it happening.

Is playing a new rpg what you want to do, or is what you suspect some of the others want to do?

Either way, it sounds like you need to talk it out with your group. Or at least talk it out with those who are losing interest. You need to find out why they're losing interest if you're going to save the princess (game).

 

[CrimsonReaver]

Communication is essential. If GM duties fall to me, I typically start a campaign by asking my players what they want from the game. As much as possible, I try to let them dictate the setting, the theme, the mood, and the balance of action vs. role-playing. Obviously you can't please all the players all the time, but I do my best to meet the needs and expectations of my players. And whenever player interest starts to wane or the campaign feels like it's losing steam - and it almost always will when you've been playing the same campaign on a weekly basis for a year or more - I make a point of asking players what the like and didn't like about the last few sessions. Or if it's just one player, I'll take them aside and ask them why they aren't having fun, if there's something in the game/story/their character that's detracting from their enjoyment, or if they want/need to take a break for a few sessions.

Sometimes everyone needs a break. I don't generally like switching to another game system, like D&D to Star Wars or a superhero-themed RPG, because it can result in just dropping the other game completely - which, I mean, I guess is fine if nobody was having fun with it, but I'd feel a little irked that I put so much effort into a story that's left unfinished and forgotten. However, that approach can work as a palate cleanser if you make it a one-time jaunt. I much prefer spending a few gaming sessions playing something completely different, like card games, board games, video games, or tabletop miniature wargames. Something that doesn't necessarily have a story, but is still close enough to the RPG experience that it'll keep players thinking about the campaign and, hopefully, eventually wanting to get back to it.


Really, though, the best approach is to talk to your players. Best way to figure out what's happening and how to remedy the situation is by talking things out with all parties involved.

 

[airwalkrr]

I agree that communication is important. If you have noticed this, bring it up at the next game and ask some of the other players their thoughts and opinions.

One idea I have for you is not to change the campaign, but to change the tone. For example, if you have been playing a classic style dungeon romp campaign for the last year and a half, look into playing a horror-themed campaign. The next time the player characters delve into the dungeon, they find themselves enveloped in an eerie mist and come out the other side of the mist in the world of Ravenloft! Or perhaps it is time to shake up the campaign setting with a major war. Heroes of Battle has a lot of great ideas for running a war-based campaign that still focuses on the player characters. Maybe a visit to the outer planes and the city of Sigil might invigorate the campaign when the player characters find themselves enmeshed in the machinations of the Lady of Pain. You do not necessarily have to change the campaign or the RPG, but a change of style might generate some renewed interest.

 

[Squnk]

Is playing a new rpg what you want to do, or is what you suspect some of the others want to do?

I have no interest in playing a new RPG. My reason for bringing it up was I thought it was an obvious answer and was hoping to avoid it as a solutions. With my group starting a new RPG would be way too difficult. Half of the group is not as dedicated as the rest of us and would make learning a new rule set difficult. And the campaign has had way too much time and effort spent on it to just drop it.

 

[Squnk]

We have talked about the issue, not to a great extent but enough to identify there is a problem and that a break was needed. Our group has eight members, two of them are young and single, and often they play when they have nothing else going on and make up the less devoted group. We have one fairly new guys who started off having a strong interest but has been distracted by the release of skyrim and a couple other games, and as a player is becoming frustrated and confused with the game rules. One of our players who has a strong interest in the game continuously flakes. The remaining four of us are deticated to the game but the one person I am worried about the most has been playing d&d since he was a young kid and it seems pretty obvious he has been losing interest.

Sorry for the long break down of my group but I wanted to share some of the mentality of my group. I would hate to lose a big portion of our group just because they got bored.

 

[Gilladian]

You have a big group, with a diverse set of wants and expectations, from the sound of it. Have you thought that maybe you should break it into two games?

Or, another option might simply be to shorten session length. My games nowadays run about 3-3.5 hours long. As DM, that's my limit anymore; my focus wanders after that, and the quality of the game goes downhill. It also makes playing a LOT more doable. Where someone may hesitate to take 6-8 hours away from family and other responsibilities, a 4 hour activity is a lot more manageable. And thirdly, it leaves everyone at the end of the session wanting more. Nobody is exhausted, nobody is bored or distracted. Even if they didn't get to "do" a lot in a given session, it was a short enough time that they can always expect "more" next time.

In fact, I often plan sessions in such a way that a particular session may really focus on a single PC - or pair of PCs, if their interests interlock enough. One week, we spent almost a whole session mapping out the new property two PCs purchased, figuring out how much it would cost to refurbish it, when it would be ready for them to move in, how many servants they'd want to hire, etc... and the other two players were willing to let that happen, with only brief focus on what they were doing, because previous weeks had been invested in them doing "their thing".

So maybe shorter sessions, maybe a change of pace and focus, maybe smaller groups of players - I would not try to run 7 players again for just about anything, or at least, not with the modern DnD rules (3.5 nor 4e)!

And yes, always TALK to everyone before changing anything.

 

[Squnk]

I wish shorter but more frequent sessions was more of a possibility but between work, family, and school we are limited on when we can play. But I completely agree that if it was possible it would greatly help the situation.

Breaking the group into two smaller groups might work but I'm unsure how everyone would feel about it. This is like our guys night out and to slit the group in two would be take a great deal away from that feeling. We are very much social players and doing this would definitely take away from that feeling and I would take a good guess that we would lose a player or two. But I will see how everyone else feels about it

 

[Wild Gazebo]

I have a friend who used to game with us occasionally. He is a very energetic and enigmatic role-player...really put the rest of us to shame. But, he doesn't get the same enjoyment out of the game as we do. We like to have a bit of a buy-in or commitment to our games that he just wasn't willing to be a part of. He would much rather hit the bars, shows, movies, parties, ect. So, we only very rarely play with him...usually one-shots or brief cameos within a current campaign. I would never ask him to commit to a long adventure and he would rather not be asked.

I guess what I'm saying is that you probably have a very good four player group instead of a poor eight player group.

I would never try cater to all of the individuals: as I would wait and find the right individuals...to find the game you want.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

I have a feeling your group might be just too big for some of the players. When was the last time you ran a campaign with 4 players and a DM? With such a large group, you do get a social feel and I can understand wanting the "boys night out" away from family and job commitments; but from the sounds of things, something in this mix is not working.

Our group had a similar situation in terms of size and it does hurt feelings if you downsize but sometimes you have to make some tough decisions (as long as you are 100% sure that this is your problem.)

Ryan Dancey in his EN World articles makes an interesting point with gaming based upon the comments of one of his former co-workers wives' comment regarding their game; that it was the best 20 minutes of fun packed into 4 hours that she'd seen. Now such a ratio is cool if you're heavily invested in everything but if not, that 3 hours and 40 minutes could be what is weighing some of your group down. What are your thoughts?

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise