Is "finding the right players" a solvable problem, or just luck?

[Ralif Redhammer]

Some of it is luck, sure, but in a lot of ways, it's luck you make. You keep persisting in trying to find the right players, you don't tolerate bad behavior at your table. Even if you've been burned before, you still take that chance on a new player. You maintain and put the effort in to stay connected with your friends (though I will say that I've found that a good friend doesn't always equate to a good fit as a player).

 

[zakael19]

I think a big part of it is how you frame your game? That’s both advertising / pre-session expectation setting and then clarity in session 0. It all works together to get everybody on the same page up front.

I’ve done that with 5 very successful online groups now. There was some churn up front in a couple of them as I ironed out vibes and compatibility via discussions and interviews, and I had to get better at how I did my framing to ensure there was inherent filtering going on in who replied, but things hum along nicely now.

Key aspects I establish before session 0 even:

- day and time. If I don’t have this listed up front (7-10Pm EST, Thursday’s bi-weekly) we figure that out first. Scheduling is the killer, getting everybody to be comfortable with a consistent space is key.

- General expectations. Here’s my starting assumptions about the game, here’s where I need you all as players to step up and contribute. No progressing further without some base excitement about what I’m proposing and initial buy-in via players tossing ideas out there.

- Firm session 0 building on above. Find out what excites the players in the campaign doc, get everybody cohered with connections with each other and the world. Ensure the table environment feels like a safe and inviting space to unleash our shared imaginations.

 

[prabe]

No idea.

I don't have gaming tables; I have tables of friends where we choose to play RPGs as a fun activity. If those tables decided to just do board games instead, it's RPGing that gets punted, not my friends. I'm not that attached to the hobby.

Some of the people who game at the tables I run had been friends for a decade or two (and people I've played a lot of board games with) before I started TRPG tables. I specifically started my games at local playspaces in part so I'd game with people I hadn't met yet. (And in part because my place was kinda a disaster.) Obviously my case is different from yours, and there's really nothing wrong with either approach.

 

[TwoSix]

Some of the people who game at the tables I run had been friends for a decade or two (and people I've played a lot of board games with) before I started TRPG tables. I specifically started my games at local playspaces in part so I'd game with people I hadn't met yet. (And in part because my place was kinda a disaster.) Obviously my case is different from yours, and there's really nothing wrong with either approach.

For sure. I've said this in the past, but if my current game tables dried up, I'd more than likely just move on from the hobby rather than go through the effort of finding new tables. It's just not worth it to me at this phase in my life.

 

[Li Shenron]

As a casual GM with home games, I've never actually run a session 0. I've only played with friends and had to go with the vibes. The problem with that is that not all of your friends are great D&D friends and will want the same game that you do.

I am quite the same and >90% of the times I just played with people I already knew, because even if decide they don't like it, they blame the game and not the friend who played with them.

 

[Koloth]

Luck does play a big role. I've had really good groups destroyed by adding a new player. One of my best 3rd edition groups was ruined this way. You got to watch out for relationship breakups also.

This. Was in a good group with an engaged couple. Both were good, fun players. They both left at the same time. The story I got from the GM was that her parents found out she was playing D&D and so was her fiance. Parents gave her a choice. Walk away from that evil corrupting person or be disowned. She walked so we lost one player. He was mentally messed up over it so also quit to get back to right with the world. 2nd player gone. Before that happened, I had thought the D&D = Satan thing was well in the past. Guess not.

 

[Umbran]

As a casual GM with home games, I've never actually run a session 0. I've only played with friends and had to go with the vibes. The problem with that is that not all of your friends are great D&D friends and will want the same game that you do.

Working with old friends in no way means you cannot or should not run a Session 0. Being friends does not make one a mind reader. You don't have to go with vibes - friends are quite capable of using their words and answering questions about what they do, and do not, want.

I've got a group that's been playing together, with minor personnel changes, for approaching two decades, and I run a survey and a Session 0 with them for every new campaign. It means I always offer a game they want to play.

 

[MichaelSomething]

What are you looking for in players??

 

[SableWyvern]

Everybody who joins my group is someone I already know outside gaming, or someone another member of the group knows outside of gaming. If you are invited to join us, someone in the group has already determined that they get along with you and you're probably a good fit for the group as a whole. I have had players come and go because they've decided they don't enjoy the game style or they're just not interested enough to prioritise gaming, but I've never lost anyone due to personality clashes or bad feelings. I've just never had time for that kind of drama in any aspect of my life, and gaming has proved no different.

Beyond that, I think a key factor is that I'm not looking for players who will read the rules, devour background material and are under pressure to constantly drive the session forward. I just need you to turn up, not be argumentative/disruptive and pay attention to the things that matter to your character. I make it extremely easy for players to participate and will happily teach through play. If you enjoy sitting around passively, I'll try and give you opportunities to get more involved, but I won't demand it. I've noticed that my newbie is gradually getting heavily involved more often (I assume just because he's gradually becoming more comfortable), while I have another long-term player who has always been fairly passive most of the time. For the latter, if he's happy turning up session after session for more than a decade, I assume he's content with that, and I'm not going to demand more active involvement.

Having a large group also enables us to have the games proceed even if people can't attend. I have some players who sometimes can't make it to quite a number of sessions in a row. That's just life, and I don't view it as a problem. There are people who would claim someone who doesn't attend a third of the time isn't really that interested, but if a player is making it to 2 out of 3 sessions over the course of a decade, I defy anyone to argue they're not genuinely interested.

Some players don't like the style of game I run or end up prioritising other things in their life, but I've had a group size of 5 - 8 players for over 25 years now and most of the current group has been with us for 15+ years.

In summary, my solution is:

• Don't recruit gamers, recruit people you already know you'll get along with.
• Make it easy for people to participate.
• Cultivate a relaxed, friendly atmosphere where mutual respect is the norm.

Edit: One other big advantage to the way I do thing is that I am completely unaffected by the mood and nature of the wider hobby or industry. It doesn't matter what's popular or in print or whether the corporations and influencers are attracting new people to the hobby or how the biggest gateway games are performing. I run the games I want to run and I'm happy to create my own gamers rather than going to a pool of gamers someone else made. D&D/WotC could collapse entirely tomorrow or become the most popular hobby in the world overnight, and neither event would have any meaningful impact on what happens at my table.

 

[SableWyvern]

Working with old friends in no way means you cannot or should not run a Session 0. Being friends does not make one a mind reader. You don't have to go with vibes - friends are quite capable of using their words and answering questions about what they do, and do not, want.

I've got a group that's been playing together, with minor personnel changes, for approaching two decades, and I run a survey and a Session 0 with them for every new campaign. It means I always offer a game they want to play.

I think one of the absolute biggest factors in a successful game is establishing clear, shared expectations. Before every campaign, I go out of my way to ensure my players understand my vision for the upcoming game, the general style and mood I'm aiming for and the like.

I don't have a formal session zero or generally offer surveys, but we do engage in just talking about the game, generally over a period of numerous months, in the lead-up to a new campaign, which amounts to the same thing (and is probably more comprehensive).

And then, at any point, I'm open to feedback and discussion, and consider it critical to smooth out any areas where misunderstandings have slipped through. We discuss what the players like and what they don't, what sort of games they would like to play in future, why the enjoy participating in my campaigns, what things they might prefer to do differently. This is a discussion that never ends.

So, I 100% agree that there is no reason at all to just work on "vibes". This is a hobby based on communication and it shouldn't be shocking that good communication is a key building block for a successful, long-term group.