I'm trying to get a group together for a campaign. They've all already created character concepts, and all seem excited to join. The problem is, it seems like every day of the week, someone is taken, and I know that if we don't keep a consistent schedule, the group will eventually cease meeting. Does anyone know how to get everyone together, or how to break the idea that someone may have to drop out?
[RPG] How to deal with conflicting schedules
group-dynamicslogistics
Related Solutions
"A practical man can always make what he wants to do look like a noble sacrifice of personal inclinations to the welfare of the community. I've decided that I've got to be practical myself, and that's one of the rules. How about breakfast?" The Pirates of Ersatz, Murray Leinster
From your question I noticed a few things. Nominally, I completely agree with @mxyzplk's answer, so this should be in the way of an addendum.
It sucks to be the leader
In a RPG, it just completely sucks to be the leader. Most players when confronted with a plan, remember about fifteen percent of it for the first fifteen minutes. But they'll certainly remember when you deviate. Leaders get no additional responsibility and no perquisites, but they get all the blame.
In the military this is mitigated with the clear distinction between commissioned and non-commissioned officers. Not least because the isolation provides both support structures and necessary emotional distance (to a degree, of course). Being "elected" leader, especially with the pack dynamics of typical werewolf games is an extremely dubious honour that I'd flatly reject.
The fact that while you may be leader in character but not dominant over the player group makes things even stickier. You need to assert authority within the realm of the narrative without actually having that authority in reality. Again, something that will cause friction and resentment any way you cut it.
Depressing environments bleed emotions into play
The world of darkness does what it says on the tin. Having played in a horror game myself recently, the iconic themes of the world of darkness do not make for "happy" or, for that matter, validating game experiences in the main. (And, if they do, it's a violation of genre.) When you are faced with the stresses of being "leader" which are compounded by the stressors of the philosophies baked into the setting, no wonder you're having a rough time.
Some solutions:
On leadership:
Fundamentally, a gaming group is a relationship. Bad relationships that do not provide validation are a drain on mental and emotional resources. When they don't work, cut them off or change them. In your case, I'd play a game that's a bit lighter in tone and focus: a nice traditional dungeon crawl or similar heroic fantasy.
I'd also reject the leader role for all the reasons I outlined above. Or, if they force it upon you, demand the perquisites and authority that is concomitant with it: they can't have it both ways.
On the group:
I've found that group character creation creates a far more cohesive group. By having entangled backstories, the group can draw upon a deeper understanding of each others' characters, creating the basis for empathy and respect within the characters, instead of the necessary simulacrum imposed by players.
By articulating desired tropes, a "palette" (as Microscope) calls it, before the game begins, you'll be able to shape the narrative of the group in directions that you want to play. This allows you to avoid the nominally depressive tropes that come default with the setting (not limited to world of darkness) and describe a source for future characters to connect with the current group. Replacement characters, if they tie into the shared narrative, will continue to maintain the tropes and social trust.
Be practical:
As players, we shape our narratives to an amazing degree. Emulate Bron Hoddan in the Pirates of Ersatz. While playing, you will be aware of the desired practical outcome that will provide validation and satisfy your personal goals. With that outcome in mind, you then frame it in terms that suit both your character's narrative and the expected narratives of the other players such that they will act to reinforce your framing and thereby your outcome. If you fight their narrative control by "being a loner," it is difficult to achieve your own goals. If you help them work as a team and appear to sacrifice nobly on their behalf while executing your own goals... the entire process is smoother and more effective.
Note that I am not saying to lie. Instead, consider the causal constructions of your actions, the explanations for those actions to be an aspect of the role * separate* from the actions themselves. By manipulating the framing as well as the actions, you can provide the necessary hooks for the other players to support your version of reality, rather than rejecting it and, by extension, you.
Postscript
Looking at your comments to other questions, you should absolutely give this group two last tries. In the first trial (of one or two games), try a heroic romp where you can be "Big Damn Heroes." Require the players who need the spotlight be leader. In the second trial (again of one or two games), try a game where players can intrigue against each other (I'd recommend Ars Magica, but then again I recommend it for most things. Most games support PvP intrigue quite ably.) If neither game provides the validation you need and the spotlight the other players need, move on. Before you do anything, take a month break, sit down, relax, and try to game with some strangers. I'm pretty sure that if you go looking for games in the chat section of this site... someone will oblige. For more on the framing problem, I'd quite recommend Rule 34 by Stross, as it describes it in a delicious narrative context.
You're not having fun.
Since the entire point of role-playing is to have fun, you need to do something about it. In particular, it sounds like the character he's playing (called a GMPC) is seriously distracting him from his GM task of running a fun story for the other players at the table.
You have several options, depending on whether you're willing to accept him as a GM as long as he changes, or if you can accept him as a part of the group as long as he isn't GMing:
- Talk to the GM about his behavior. Try to be non-confrontational, and don't have this conversation in front of the group; that will just make him defensive and won't accomplish anything. Try persuading him to not bring a character along with the group; he's GMing, not playing.
- Sit out the current game, until the GM is done. There's no need for you to continue playing a game you dislike, so take a break until he's done running the game. Then join the next game, that someone else in the group will run.
- Take over GMing duties, with the support of the rest of the group. Since they already asked you to be the GM, they'll almost certainly be willing to let you run the game. Talk to the other players about this individually before you try this; if you have enough support, you'll be able to usurp his position as GM, and start an entirely different game. Perhaps the current GM will be a better player than they are a GM. And look on the bright side: you now have some fantastic examples of how not to GM, which will make you much better at this new role! You can also combine this with #2 above: sit out the game until it's over, then be the next GM. (Warning: given what you've described of his personality, the current GM is unlikely to take this well.)
- Start a separate gaming group, inviting whoever is willing to play without the problem GM. If some people are unwilling to play with the new group because they don't want to exclude the current GM, then you'll need to exclude them as well. Recruit a few other players from elsewhere if you need to.
- Find a new gaming group. If all else fails, just don't play with this group at all. If they're willing to play with someone they dislike, and you can't persuade them to kick out a problem GM, that's their problem. It doesn't have to be your problem.
Note that none of these options include playing a game you dislike with a GM who you hate. He isn't going to improve on his own, unless you talk him into changing or encourage the group to leave him behind.
On a slight tangent, see the Geek Social Fallacies. It sounds like some of the members of the gaming group are suffering from GSF #1: "Don't exclude anyone" and GSF #5: "Failing to invite someone is a deliberate snub."
Related Topic
- [RPG] How should I deal with a difficult group and a DM that doesn’t help
- [RPG] How to satisfy two groups who want the same quest in a West Marches campaign
- [RPG] How to fairly schedule sessions when not everyone can make it anymore
- [RPG] How to deal with differing interests as a DM
- [RPG] My group is too big for the game, how to manage this situation
- [RPG] How to deal with the group having issues with the character
Best Answer
First determine if the game required the whole group to be present
I've heard that some games require that the group is consistent more than others (somewhere I've read that you should be careful in The Dark Eye for example because you need certain characters to progress past certain story points, but I've never played it), while others are more forgiving (DnD 5e for example). If your game doesn't require the whole group you can try to find ways around this issue, otherwise splitting your group might be better - run two games with smaller groups whose schedule alines nicely.
Handle absent group members out-of-character
This is something you need to discuss with your players, but often you can find ways to work around a few players that are absent. To give a personal example: I am the playing DnD 5e with a few friends. We are seven players plus me as the DM. This is a big group. We managed to get two introduction sessions where everyone was present so that I could teach them the basic rules they need to know to play the game.
Afterwards we changed the schedule a bit and stopped requiring everyone to be present. It just doesn't work, especially with so many people. During the week is difficult and everyone puts a lot of the personal stuff in the weekends, so we decided to play once or twice a month on the weekend as long as we get at least four players plus DM.
It's quite some work on the part of the DM to accomodate varying group sizes, but as long as everyone is on-board with the idea of changing the group size because "characters x and y are staying in the town to gather information while you are exploring the goblin cave" and "characters y and z came to the goblin cave last night and found you after they gathered information in the town" everything is fine. It's not a style that works for every group but for our group it does work and you might want to talk with your players about this.
Another idea we explored was to use Side-quests of one or two sessions length whenever there was only half the group and progress with the main story when everyone is present. It's important to decide on one or two sessions to have the time for a dungeon or little adventure arc, but then it's easily possible. For the side-quests you could just make a "quest-board" in the main town. Maybe you know that half the group will make it to the next two sessions and then the other half will be available, so sending them on "Orc extermination"-style quests might, depending on your group, be an option.
Try to find regular times to meet
Every other week on a Saturday for example. Or your alternate weekly between Tuesday and Friday. Try to come up with something so that everyone can be present every other session for example.
Work with milestones
You used "DM" in your comments, so I assume you are playing DnD. In DnD 5e you can also use the milestone rules for advancing. That way your players might feel better about being available only every other week, because the level-ups are given out after every big main-adventure story arc. Or maybe your group would like to progress as a group and it doesn't really matter to them whether the characters are present or not.
In my group this wouldn't work. I give out experience whenever they overcome some kind of challenge and they like it that way. It feels better to be rewarded instantly, but using milestones is nevertheless an option and might work for your group. Talk to them to find out how to do it.
Be prepared for drop-outs
If this is a first game as you mentioned in the comments then there is a possibility that some may drop out after a couple sessions, for example because they realized that there are more rules and difficulties than they imagined. Every new RPG is a completely new experience and every group has their own style. Devoting so much precious time to a game that is not quite what you were hoping for may have the effect that some people are dropping out. Of course you should talk to them and try to make the game something everyone on the table enjoys, but nevertheless someone may drop out. Which would make scheduling easier. So maybe you only need to find a schedule that fits for two or three sessions and then you can see how you want to progress.