Why is it so difficult to find good groups?

[Celebrim]

"I'm intensely curious: Why does it seem so hard for so many players to find a good face-to-face RPG group to play with?"

This question has a very simple answer.

Because there are so few good game masters.

It ought to be relatively easy to find a group. There are large numbers of nerds. There are large numbers of other gamers like you who would play but don't have a group to play with.

The problem is that in fact, there aren't that many tables because there aren't that many game masters. The number of willing players exceeds both the number of willing dungeon masters.

I've tried the FLGS route. It doesn't work. What you find is that you end up attracting the gamers that have been kicked out of every gaming group that they've ever been in.

 

[Umbran]

3) it is focused on the social aspect as much as the rules aspect, so when you do find a group, the group has to mesh with personalitiy and style preferences (and, it goes without saying that personality and style each have a large spectrum of possible combinations and social expectations)

This is a big one. What counts as "good" is strongly subjective - getting a group of people together who are all in each other's personal definition of "good group" is far from trivial.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

One of the reasons that there aren't enough GMs to meet demand, is that we've gotten too intolerant of failure, as a society. (My favorite college professor could give you a very interesting argument for why this was the underlying reason for the current problems in high school and undergraduate education.)

For gaming purposes, there just aren't enough people willing to say, essentially, "You know, I might totally crash and burn, but I'm going to give this a whirl. Anyone want to risk it?" And once you think about it like that, then you might be able to pull it off. Because instead of trying to instantly do all the cool things that your last GM did, with 20 years experience playing multiple system, you'll deliberately stick to basics. Just run a dungeon crawl with that old copy of RC, or whatever.

And likewise, if you just moved across country, and are trying to assemble a new group, why expect to find a good group right away? Run some one shots or very short campaigns, using your new-found confidence to not care if you are a total failure. Invite some people and tell them what you are doing. You might get one good fit per season. Ok, by the end of the year, you've got a nice core group, practically self-selected out of a much larger sample that experienced you. Quick, while you aren't all that experienced and imposing, see if any of them want to GM too.

This isn't like you tried this with an established group (though if you have the slightest inclination to GM, you ought to). The cost/benefit ratio is extremely skewed in your favor. You might get a really good group that sticks together for decades. You might completely fail, tick some people off, and not have anything to show for your efforts except being older and wiser. But even that worse case is a better scenario than a year later nothing has changed, and you still don't know why ...

 

[kitsune9]

Because there are so few good game masters.

I agree with this.

 

[ShinHakkaider]

3) Get rid of those prejudices. Okay, so you hate 4e (or Pathfinder, whatever). But if the only game in town is 4e, then suck it up and play. (And don't spend the session moaning about the game system either - see #1.)

Again, many people play more than one game, and even more might be willing to at least try other systems. So, play their game for now, become known in the group... and later suggest that maybe you could run Pathfinder/WFRP/SWSE/WoD when the current campaign winds down. (And be prepared for them still saying no!)

I know this has been adressed by a few other people, but I have to say if those prejudices are minimal then, yeah good advice.

However, there are certain games that I just will not play because they're just not my idea of a good time. And honestly, I'd just as soon as not be gaming, as much as I like it, then play a game that I'm not big on. Suffer through a game that you hate to make contacts may work for some people, but for others it's a bit much especially if its for a hobby that you do for fun.

 

[lin_fusan]

Finding a good group is kind of like dating, isn't it?

You have to have a lot of "first dates" before you find that group of people you want to spend the rest of your fantasy life with.

And if your interests aren't compatible (they like Pathfinder, you like 4th ed), then hopefully you have compatible personalities. And if your personalities don't quite mesh, you all better have a lot of fun with the actual gaming.

And then sometimes you're more into them then they are into you or vice versa...

So sometimes you have to "play the field" a little, keep things casual, but some groups get jealous when they find out that you aren't monogamous. Or what about when you accidentally say that you really prefer that "experimental system" and they take it personally.

So you end up saying things like:
"It's not you, it's me."
Or, "I'm sorry, I'm just not into you(r group)."
Or, "You believe in GM authority, and I'm into player-narrative-control. We just don't mesh."

Man, relationships are hard.

I mean, groups, finding groups are hard.

 

[Phat Lute]

My partner and I are about to embark on the journey to find a new group. He is younger, and most of his friends are college age, and very soon they'll be scattering to the four winds with graduation. Meanwhile, there's a lot of new stuff we want to try out. This past Christmas, he got a ton of Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay and the Doctor Who Adventures in Time and Space RPG, and I got the Mage Chronicler's Guide.

In the midst of this, we both would like to actually have a decent length D&D 4th Edition game, but we both really, really don't like the direction of Essentials and don't want to have to bother with the hassle of disallowing some or all of it, or explaining why we're not supporting it to a new group.

The current group isn't ideal for gaming. I like them all outside of gaming, and sometimes we work well together if everyone's making an effort to not be difficult, but they're not completely committed to it. We've got:

The Method Roleplayer / Ethicist: "Can't we just have a serious session for once? I want to explore some of the deeper aspects of my character and the morality of his motivations."

His girlfriend, Chaos Incarnate: Who alternately plays misogynist male detectives with names like "Dick Hammer" or little orphan girls dressed like a Lolita that blow things up with huge guns they hide in stuffed animals. Her character is likely to try to find a brothel, or try to seduce an important NPC, or upload illegal porn to the computers or displays around important NPCs. Her stated character goal for a Dragon Age RPG game was to find and... well, do naughty things to King Alistair. We kept him out of it. Eventually she gets bored, starts drawing, and eventually says, "Do you guys want to do something else?"

The Cunning Introvert: Who always likes to create characters who fade into the background, thinking that they'll emerge at a dramatic moment that never arrives, usually due to the downward spiral that is the dynamic between The Method and Chaos Incarnate.

His girlfriend, the Care Bear: A somewhat shy and smart girl who likes to make cute things, until she is drawn out by Chaos Incarnate and tries to top her antics. The results are... disturbing... cute, cuddly characters that suddenly become pornographic.

A short attention span pervades the group, so that if we try to go with subtler plots that gradually involve them all and get them thinking, as they should being such smart people, they instead get bored trying to figure things out and start shooting everything, while The Method looks on in disgust. There has to be the promise of scandal, sex, violence, and somehow a hint of deep meaningful roleplaying for The Method.

We inevitably go from one type of game to the next, trying to find one that will keep them all from causing things to implode, with board games in between that we only sometimes finish, if Chaos Incarnate doesn't get bored.

So while I'm sad to see them go, they'll be getting on with their lives, and maybe, just maybe we'll find some true gamers. I'm not as optimistic as my friend. I've been out there in the post-college world for a while, trying to find people for gaming groups that aren't awful in some way, shape, or form.

I think part of the problem is that the gaming crowd is really more diverse than even we, the gamers, acknowledge. There are different types of people with different playstyles, covering every possible genre of science fiction, fantasy, horror, and fiction. I also think that sometimes we give ourselves, collectively, too much credit for being smarter or more creative than the general populace. I can't say that I think that's true any more, but at the very least there's definitely a range within our own subculture that goes from one extreme to the other. The curve may slant a just a little more toward the higher end, but there's still a curve.

 

[Haltherrion]

Put my own group together and ref the game works for me. Typically have to go through a few line-ups of players before you get a group that feels right but being willing to put it together and run the game gives you a big leg up.

It might be different in the on-line games but for the face-to-face games, your game group is also a social group. Might take a few tries to find some folks who you want to socialize with.

 

[karlindel]

1. Too few good gamers, especially good GMs. This is more of a problem in some areas than in others.

2. When looking around for players, it is much easier to find bad ones than good ones, as good ones are more likely to already be in a good game. When looking around for a game, there are more likely to be spots available in bad games than in good ones, as good games are more likely to remain stable and keep players.

3. Variation in gamer styles and preferred game system(s). Even if the group members are fine on their own, if their styles are contradictory, they will not form a good group.

4. Scheduling conflicts. The larger the group, the more likely that someone will have something come up that will have them miss a session. Smaller groups can cut down on the number of times someone will miss a session, but a single person missing a session has a much larger impact.

On the subject of playing games you don't particularly like in order to network, whether it is worthwhile depends on a number of factors:

1. How much you dislike the system. If you find the system painful to use, then you should not play it, as you will not contribute to making a fun game. If it is merely a system that you don't prefer, then it might be worth it to play for awhile. People that have actually gamed with you and enjoyed the experience might recommend you to their friends, while people who don't know anything about you are unlikely to do so.

2. How long the game is likely to last. If the group is talking about a long term campaign, you should probably pass. If the group is planning to play that game for only a few sessions, it might be worth trying it out. This is particularly true if the group is one that runs a lot of short campaigns, in which case getting in as part of the group could allow you to play your system of choice next, while passing likely means that they'll find someone else instead.

3. How connected the group is to the local gaming network. If you know that the group has connections to other local gamers, then meeting them can get you recommended to others for games that you might not find otherwise. If the group is just a few friends that only play in their particular game, then they are less useful for networking.

4. How closely the groups' playstyle aligns with your own. Although this souns similar to 1, as system does inform game style to some extent and vice versa, it is possible that the group uses a system you don't care for but still plays in a way that you like.

 

[Mallus]

Finding a good group is kind of like dating, isn't it?

Not at all. It's like trying to find a good bar.

Like gaming groups, some bars are annoying, some are dives, some are unsafe, and some are too costly, but, ultimately they all offer a marvelous form of entertainment. In the case of the group it's role-playing gaming. With bars, it's booze.

Like gaming groups, a good bar isn't perfect. Some nights are better than others (or days, if you roll that way). The jukebox might have a few songs you don't like, and eventually someone will play them. Sometimes there will be a chatty a**hole with a backwards baseball cap sitting on your favorite corner stool. Occasionally, the bar will be out of your favorite beer.

As with gaming groups, the biggest part of finding a good bar is not having unrealistic expectations. Note: this also works for the relationship analogy.

Ultimately, finding either is all about finding a place to hang out with friends, someplace where you feel comfortable, get a little silly, and have a few laughs.