Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- Pocket Sized Adventures! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed for 1-2 game sessions.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AstroArtificer" data-source="post: 9872351" data-attributes="member: 7056574">I made a thread recently asking about<a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/why-do-so-many-campaigns-never-finish-genuinely-curious-what-others-think.718211/#post-9868664" target="_blank"> "Why do so many campaigns never finish?"</a>, and the discussion was incredibly insightful. Something that kept coming up was how much the table composition mattered. Yes, fixed scheduling helps, but only if the people showing up actually want the same thing from the game. That got me thinking. How do GMs actually screen for that before session one?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 know that the obvious answer for a lot is session zero. But session zero assumes you already have the people. The harder problem for me seems to be about finding players that fit with you in the first place, before anyone has invested prep time, before the social contract gets awkward, before the first signs of a mutiny start showing. Most GMs I've talked to solve this through years of failed campaigns, one-shot interviews, and trial and error. The experienced ones have developed a knack for it. But is that the only way? Is there a more deliberate approach to finding players who are genuinely built for your table?I've been thinking about this a lot and have started building something around it. Curious whether others have developed any reliable signals or methods for compatibility before session one, or whether it's mostly still vibes and luck.</blockquote>

Verification