What makes a successful game? Share your best tips.

[hakootoko]

I've found the key to a successful game is knowing each other outside the game. Then you're less likely to ghost, you can be politely pinged when you're falling behind (to ask if anything is wrong), and you get to know each other more and want to game together more.

 

The successful games I've run online have been for old friends. I've also seen groups of people who are active in discord groups together keep their games going.

[Vladim]

5 hours ago, hakootoko said:

(...) The successful games I've run online have been for old friends. I've also seen groups of people who are active in discord groups together keep their games going.

Those are good points. I haven't yet managed to convince my IRL friends to get into PbP/RPGs (not through lack of trying) but my more successful games have a sense of camaraderie and community and everyone liking each other about them. Otherwise, they rarely last.

21 hours ago, Actana said:

(...) Personally, I think one of the key methods to accomplish this is by the paradigm of "action, reaction, action". Every post made by either player of GM (but especially GM) should have either an implicit or explicit statement of "what do you do?". Always leave an opening for the players to react to something, to keep the actions going and to prompt a new post from them. Never end a post in a fugue state where there is nothing to latch onto for the next post.

I think this action-reaction-action paradigm is effective and useful, but I've personally found some issues with it:

• Sticking to it all the time leads to rapid GM burnout, at least for me. Especially if there's escalation in the importance of these actions PCs should react to.
• Sometimes I just want to do descriptive posts that just set the scene or convey a mood without giving the PCs something pressing to react to. And not every character (often no-one) will react to a pretty flower or pleasant weather or birdsong, but I like those things to be there, otherwise I feel like RPGs become less about role-playing and more about problem-solving (and I already do enough problem-solving irl, so I don't need it to feature all the time in my hobby).
• I don't particularly like it when I feel like I'm spoon-feeding the players plot all the time, or when the mode of play becomes too reactive for them. Sometimes they should take the reigns and give me something to react to 🙂
• It's kind of hard to build slowly escalating tension without slower scenes that don't necessarily have something pressing to respond to.

Of course, it is possible to add things of a smaller scope to react to, but in my personal experience, not all players will care about such small things, especially if they are not as important as previous choices. But maybe these are just my own issues with this principle and lack of experience.

 

---

 

What I do enjoy (and have had good success with) is using systems that have structures to support scenes beyond combat. Of course, most RPGs have structures (dedicated rulesets) for combat, but extended mechanics for journeys, social encounters and so on have given me (and my players) a useful framework to scaffold RP on. I don't count simple skill checks as sufficient for this-at least not all the time, as these can become a bit underwhelming. If a GM post gives the players something to roll, this can be useful, as they can build their RP around that roll and keep the momentum of the game going.

[Jedaii]

Runaway railroads ending in brutal TPKs. Then, as GM, you explain to the players how it was all a phenomenal exploration of art 😂

[cailano]

On 7/1/2023 at 11:43 AM, Jedaii said:

Runaway railroads ending in brutal TPKs. Then, as GM, you explain to the players how it was all a phenomenal exploration of art 😂

Someone has been playing too much OSE, lol.

[Jedaii]

On 7/2/2023 at 6:05 PM, cailano said:

Someone has been playing too much OSE, lol.

lol too much of everything?

Once again @cailano you've created a great thread! So many great responses. Honestly, I would agree with you: Momentum.

Once you've decided to run something, if possible, you should follow Bushido Code:

Quote

Even if one's head were to be suddenly cut off, he should be able to do one more action with certainty. With martial valor, if one becomes like a revengeful ghost and shows great determination, though his head is cut off, he should not die.

Run that one-shot or campaign until the end. Anyone can run games, it takes a Gamemaster to finish them 😉

[cailano]

On 7/5/2023 at 3:41 PM, Jedaii said:

 

...Run that one-shot or campaign until the end. Anyone can run games, it takes a Gamemaster to finish them 😉

Now that's a quote. Well said.

[farothel]

I've put my game (Warhammer Fantasy) in chapters. since I'm running a published campaign, it's rather easy. But it gives natural stopping and starting points (also to introduce new players if you have dropouts) and it makes it easier for players (and GMs) to look something up (we did that two chapters ago, so I have to go search in those 20 pages, not in the 150+ if you put everything in one thread).

 

Also if they are discussing something interesting IC, let them play it out. In my game we had an interesting philosophical discussion recently. Yes, it took a bit under two weeks, but it was fun to see and as GM I kept posting in the OOC to see if a plan could form so I know what they wanted to do when the discussion was over and I could immediately move forward, but until that time I let them play it out.

[DecoyGirl]

Not going to say what makes a game work as much as what does not.

What kills a ton of games is that the players will do what they can/are going to do, and sit and wait for someone else to do something.
But everyone is done doing what they are doing to. And the GM does not nudge anyone. I don't just mean a "Hey post" message.

Online games lack the ability of the GM to add little hints or extra comments to nudge people in the right direction.
We often assume that everyone understands what we want or what we expect of them.
Or even that everyone is going to have something to say/do in every scene.

Every IRL game I've ever played you had players who talked less then others.
Players who were just there to be part of the group fight a bit in the game and add some color to the group.
Not everyone is the plan or talking person.
For every LOTR group you need room for people to be Legolas and Gimli, just to bros killing bad guys.

So as a general rule if no one has said anything at all in 48 hours in a game, I think the GM should move the story along in some way. Be that adding some information or actually moving it along.

-

Also don't be afraid to run things slightly non-linearly.

Some of the best pbp integrations I've ever seen are in the threads that are in character but don't matter.
But you can't stay in them to long because you need to get to the next scene... right?
Well.. not really no.

Once you have given the players the info in the tavern you can totally start the next scene and just.. let them talk at the table running both scenes at the same time, it's actually one of the reasons that pbp is so nice at times.

It's also one of the reasons that super hero pbp works so well.
You can totally be punching bad guys in one scene and hanging out just chilling in another.

Edited July 12, 2023 by DecoyGirl (see edit history)

[zeone3000]

Engagement. Each player doesn't want the same thing. To keep each of them coming back for more, wanting to post and drive the game forward. A note: that may not always be the plot as you see or want it; roleplaying does require improv, after all. I also say these things to remind myself of these facts.

[cailano]

I think there is something to @Actana's idea of the implicit "what do you do" in most GM posts. While having pure RP scenes is okay, their timing is important. Personally, I feel like they are best used after extended action scenes, such as after a dungeon crawl or a huge battle in a fantasy game.

But if a game starts with action and character choice and the GM keeps their foot on the gas for the first several hundred posts, I think that's a good sign. "Action," in this case, doesn't necessarily mean violent conflict. It should be the central sort of action that the campaign features. In an investigation game, it can be investigating. In a dungeon-crawling campaign it should be exploring some forsaken ruin. In a heist campaign, there should be some thieving going on. Etc.

And, of course, you need pacing and consistency. Keep the posts coming and the feedback loop short. That's where the GM comes in.

 

 

[Jedaii]

On 6/16/2023 at 12:53 AM, Vladim said:

Stubbornness & Consistency & Enjoyment of the thing.

Emphasis mine.

If you aren't enjoying the system or setting or whatever, find what works. The purpose of games is to have fun 😃

[DecoyGirl]

GMs really need to learn that PdP lack the cues that in person games have that no one has anything to say and the scene either needs to move on or the GM needs to give more info. And that if you have six players, not ever one is chatty, some players should be allowed to just be around for the fight and or for some roleplay in specific areas, that's how real life games work.

[cailano]

All these points about keeping the action moving -- which I call Pacing -- are critical. If I could give only one tip to a PbP GM, it would be to "keep the game moving."

That said, even I'm guilty of having slow weeks. It doesn't take a lot of them to kill a game.

The medicine for it is to write a bunch of posts! Games can be pulled back from the brink by the GM re-engaging.

I like the ticking clock idea. 24 or 48 hours to post, or you get NPC'd for the round.