D&D 5E "My group uses Discord, Email, or some other form of chat to take care of in-game between-session logistics and/or role-playing." (a poll)

[el-remmen]

Again, what I think of as a simple premise:

True or False: "My group uses Discord, Email, or some other form of asynchronous communication to take care of in-game between-session logistics and/or role-playing."

Note that I said "in-game," I don't mean a group text or email chain to schedule the actual sessions or whatever. I mean things like, "questioning an NPC prisoner," "visiting the market to gather information," "working out the budget for building our stronghold" or even in-character discussion of the campaign plot among the group. Solo adventures run this way also count.

It does not have to be every time - just "sometimes" or "it is rare but always an option" is still true.

 

[Mistwell]

We have an ongoing Discord chat for between game RP (and a separate one for non-RP matters). It's mostly used for "This is the loot we got, how do we want to split it or spend it?" type stuff. Or, "We're building our tavern out, how do we want to do that?"

 

[payn]

We use a discord channel to track loot. I will drop links to areas of the Traveller map for reference. So, I think true.

 

[iserith]

My players don't interact in-character in Discord, but they do track treasure in specific channels there and sometimes discuss goals pre-session.

 

[Guest 7034872]

Oops!--I voted incorrectly. I didn't read the "in-game" clause in time...so my actual vote should be "False."

 

[EzekielRaiden]

It's not an always-on thing for my current game, but I've had Discord-based between-session RP elements, so yeah. We just use Discord for most communication, so it comes naturally.

 

[Deset Gled]

I have one group that plays on a regular night each week and one that plays monthly (more or less). I think this is more common with the monthly group.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

We have a Discord for our West Marches(esque) campaign where players are encouraged, among other interactions, to submit session recaps from their character's perspective to share intel with players who weren't involved in the session. The authoring PC will even get a 4th-wall-breaking single-use magic item for doing so. Unfortunately, that incentive has not been enough to promote greater use and we've now had 7 straight sessions without a peep. Is this a case of "They're just not that into you(r campaign)" and/or "a DM is always way more invested in a campaign than the players" and/or "a con of West Marches campaigns is a diffusion of responsibility" and/or something else? Any advice is welcomed!

 

[el-remmen]

Oops!--I voted incorrectly. I didn't read the "in-game" clause in time...so my actual vote should be "False."

 

[Guest 7034872]

Yeah, that's twice now.