When you’re given the opportunity to play an RPG — there’s a GM at hand, the game has been selected and you have enough players for a group — what’s the single most important factor in deciding whether you say yes or no to that chance?
This sounds like a player-oriented question, but there are GMing issues at its heart. Knowing why your players are playing in your game helps you make that game fun for them, and honing your craft to the point that more people will choose to play in your games because you’re the GM is a worthy goal.
These are all of the major factors that I could think of:
- The GM. “If Ellen’s running it, I know it’ll be fun.” It doesn’t matter what the game is — you know the GM is solid.
- The RPG itself. “I love GURPS, so I’ll enjoy this campaign.” This can be true for multiple games, but it most often applies to your One True (RPG) Love.
- The other players. “These are my friends — everything we play together is fun.” This is one of the main reasons why groups play RPGs that not everyone is wild about: because the other folks involved make it enjoyable.
- The genre. “Nothing scratches my gaming itch quite like supers. I don’t care what system it is.” I default to fantasy, although I can’t think of a case where I said yes to a game solely because it was fantasy.
- The setting. “It’s Star Wars — who cares what kind of dice we roll?” Licensed properties and long-running settings like the Forgotten Realms are the most likely candidates for this one.
- The nature of the system. “I like rules-light games. If you can run it with one book, I’m good to go.” Realistic, crunchy/not crunchy, cinematic, dramatic — there are lots of ways to skin this cat.
Reader Contributions
From your comments:
- Habit. “We get together every week, no matter what we play.” (Walt C.)
- Something different. “I’ll try anything once.” (Walt C.)
- Kewl artwork. “That elf chick is hot — I want to play this game!” (Walt C.)
- Availability. “This was the only game I could find…” (Micah)
- Scheduling. When and how often the group plays can be an important factor. (Burrowowl)
Personally, I’ve regularly said “Yes” to games because of the GM, my fellow players and the game itself. Which factor is most important changes based on the situation, and sometimes more than one ties for first place, as it were. I don’t think the latter three factors have ever taken the top spot for me.
How about you?
In order:
GM – Nothing affects the quality of the game like a good GM. However, this is a very subjective value. Your favorite crunchmaster GM with a mind like a combat computer and a memory like Wikipedia won’t appeal to me as much as my favorite GM with an imagination like Robin Williams (back when he was on coke) and flexibility like a Chinese gymnast.
Players – There are some players who can take any game up about two notches just by showing up. There are some players whose quips and comments can make an entire table laugh. I want to game with these guys.
(insert really big vertical gap here)
System, setting, genre, etc. These generally don’t matter as much. A good GM can patch a questionable system or make a kludgy setting smooth, or mix up genre enough to appeal to a wider base, etc.
That’s a good list. Things I’d add:
*Habit: This is related to “Other players.” I know of at least one gaming group that enjoys getting together once a week to play, no matter what is being played.
*Something Different: If the proposed rpg has something that I’ve never seen before, that might be enough to get me to play. Also known as “I’ll try anything once.”
*Kewl Pictures: I know a few games that got started because someone flipped through a rulebook and fell in love with the artwork.
GM: Definitely the GM. If the game master is good at his or her craft I know it will be a good game. Also though I tend to run in games where my friends are starting to Game Master. I want to encourage my friends and if they have never had experience with running a game it is good to have players who are supportive of them.
The Genre: I’ll definitely go for a game if it is a property or genre I like. When I get an itch to game it is a certain framework. I’m not really worried if we are doing a certain type of mission, but that the game overall has the feel of the genre established. That to me makes it great.
The nature of the system.: I dislike playing in systems where I have to change my way of playing. I will to mesh with the system, but when I keep running up against logic blocks (for me at least) it makes it frustrating.
Right now, just the opportunity to play is enough for me. I haven’t played much because there just doesn’t seem to be as many opportunities where I’m at.
I’m actually preparing to run a game with some friends of mine, and they all have similar reasons. Only one of them has any RPG experience and the rest are interested in trying the experience. Hopefully things will go smoothly and we’ll have fun.
Great players (including GM) is by far the top reason I’d choose to play in any particular game. In fact, unless I like the people, I don’t even consider playing. I’ve just had too many bad experiences playing with people I don’t know, which brings me to the one reason you missed:
This is the only game I could find…
While I was in college, that was the deciding factor in whether I played or not. There just didn’t seem to be that many people playing D&D.
It all comes down to the group for me (GM and players). Got a good group and I am in. Got a great GM but lousy players (meaning people that I don’t like socially regardless of how they play) and I am a bit hesitant. Got great players and a bad GM (again, more about personality than how they GM) and I might take a pass. Genre, system, and everything else is just minor details in the long run.
So for myself it always comes down to whether or not I want to hang out with the group for a 10 hour stretch every two weeks (or possibly more). If you got that part nailed down the rest just seems to work itself out.
I’d go GM/players first, setting and genre a close second (I find the two too interlinked to separate out, at least as far as how much they influence my likelihood of playing), and rules system an also close third.
For me, it’s a matter of whether something affects the game positively or negatively. Things don’t always have to be positive to be good for the game, but they can’t be negative.
For example, regarding GM’s and the rules/setting, it’s a question of what GM is paired with what system. Bob might run a killer V:tM game, because he’s great at improvising games at the drop of a hat, but his D&D games suck because he doesn’t have the attention span to actually sit down and deal with the crunchiness of creating a D&D adventure (GM vs Rules/Nature of the System). Jenny runs great earthshaking super-powered heroes games, but she doesn’t quite get horror and flounders when the group wants to play Call of Cthulhu (GM vs Setting/Genre).
I don’t think that not having spectacular players makes for a bad game, but having a bad player definitely makes for a bad game.
A factor not listed that’s very important for me is timing. When is the group to meet, how often, and for how long? This isn’t exactly a reason to say “yes,” but can often trump other tempting factors when you have work and family obligations, leading to more “no” answers than I’d otherwise want to give.
Of all the other factors mentioned, the most important to me is “the other players,” which for me includes the GM. Once a group gets together that everybody enjoys, GM duty tends to shift around internally. Your mileage may vary, of course.
Good additions to the list — thank you! I’ve added them to the post.
Reading your comments, I realized how much we as gamers take into account when we pick games/groups. Back when I first started gaming, I wasn’t nearly as picky — I wonder if there’s any correlation with age?