Quote from: RPGPundit;872190Another solution is to have a less-serious backup game. If your main campaign absolutely depends on everyone (or certain PCs) showing up (always, or at certain crucial junctures) you could have a secondary and more relaxed game to occasionally run.

Or just run a less serious and more relaxed game as the main one

Turn the bug into a feature.

That is, deliberately design a campaign that's episodic: a series of linked one-shot missions or delves that are self-contained and can be completed in about 4 hours, at which point all the survivors "go back to the tavern," so to speak.

This makes it easy for players to come and go as their schedules permit, without disrupting "the flow" much.

The Five-Room Dungeon model is great for this.  I'm using it to design my upcoming 5e campaign, and I found that letting potential players know in advance that there's no long-term commitment implied actually boosted my ability to recruit them.

Related to this, don't make the time and place of the sessions the same every time.  Find out which players are available when you're ready to run the next session, and hold the session on a day that works best for those particular players that particular time, and that time only.

Rinse, and repeat for every session.

Quote from: King Truffle IV;874052Turn the bug into a feature.

That is, deliberately design a campaign that's episodic: a series of linked one-shot missions or delves that are self-contained and can be completed in about 4 hours, at which point all the survivors "go back to the tavern," so to speak.

The easiest way would be to run organized play scenarios designed with this sort of thing already in mind.  This is pretty much exactly what PFS scenarios are.

IME a regularly scheduled campaign that doesn't cancel for 1-2 absences has much more legs than one that tries to fit into the schedule of every player.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;874045Or just run a less serious and more relaxed game as the main one

I run both. DCC is a very relaxed game. Albion is a serious one. They do very different things. You can't achieve what one does with the other.

Quote from: King Truffle IV;874052Turn the bug into a feature.

That is, deliberately design a campaign that's episodic: a series of linked one-shot missions or delves that are self-contained and can be completed in about 4 hours, at which point all the survivors "go back to the tavern," so to speak.

This makes it easy for players to come and go as their schedules permit, without disrupting "the flow" much.

The Five-Room Dungeon model is great for this.  I'm using it to design my upcoming 5e campaign, and I found that letting potential players know in advance that there's no long-term commitment implied actually boosted my ability to recruit them.

Related to this, don't make the time and place of the sessions the same every time.  Find out which players are available when you're ready to run the next session, and hold the session on a day that works best for those particular players that particular time, and that time only.

Rinse, and repeat for every session.

While you were more easily able to recruit players, did you see them actually show up and be reliable? Or was the fact that you were able to hook them with the promise of less commitment a prelude to flaking?

Sometimes people have to be absent.  That's just the way it is.  People have to work.  People have kids.  People get sick.  Two of my players have kids and one works in the restaurant industry.  Absences are just a thing you have to deal with.

Quote from: yosemitemike;874621Sometimes people have to be absent.  That's just the way it is.  People have to work.  People have kids.  People get sick.  Two of my players have kids and one works in the restaurant industry.  Absences are just a thing you have to deal with.

Well, yes. The topic of this thread is HOW to deal with it.

Quote from: RPGPundit;874940Well, yes. The topic of this thread is HOW to deal with it.

I've seen a few of these threads, here and there.
Some posters take the attitude of "If anyone misses a game regularly then they are out".
Some say "I only choose to play with reliable people".
Some say "People have lives outside gaming and we try and deal with that".

I am in the third group, which is, to me, the most sensible one.

Quote from: RPGPundit;874940Well, yes. The topic of this thread is HOW to deal with it.

That was more in response to the suggestion that the solution is to only play with reliable players.  I have reliable, adult players who, nevertheless, sometimes have to be absent because of things like work or kids.  Just saying "play with reliable people" is not a practical solution for many people.

I press on if that is practicable.  If it isn't, I have a backup game called Dead of Night ready that is suitable for one shots done with minimal prep.

Quote from: soltakss;875027I am in the third group, which is, to me, the most sensible one.

Depends on how you look at it.  I'm somewhere between #1 and #2, which is a whole lot less work.  I've been a part of three separate attempts to start a new game over the last few years that foundered because the GMs insisted on getting everyone to (a) sign off on the same day and time, and (b) actually show up on the aforementioned day and time.  Those games took between six weeks and three months, respectively, to get that far, no session had more than half of the expected players show up (to the great consternation of the GMs), and none made it past the second session.

Yes, indeed, people have lives.  Yes, indeed, emergencies come up.  I just prefer that "emergency" = "My seven year old is sick as a dog," or -- as happened with today's session, come to that -- that the spouse called just as the player walked into my door to report that her car broke down, a hundred miles away from my apartment and into the leading edge of the East Coast blizzard.

I don't, by contrast, think "There was a neat show on TV today" or "The gang invited me to go bowling with them" to be valid excuses.  Too many gamers do, these days.

In consequence, I've got a bi-weekly run that misses about one session in ten, attendance is near-perfect, and the six week hiatus I just took to recharge my batteries is the first such gap I've had in thirteen years.  I don't think that's a bad thing.

Quote from: soltakss;875027Some posters take the attitude of "If anyone misses a game regularly then they are out".
Some say "I only choose to play with reliable people".
Some say "People have lives outside gaming and we try and deal with that".

You forgot one:

Some say "I run an open table.  Show up when you want to.  No commitment required or requested."

I'm seeing that my style is set up to have committed players, and my enjoyment is diminished when I have to run a casual game. My plots, when they do work out (which is often) evolve characters quite a lot, and I find it hard to achieve this with sporadic attendance.

This being said, the attendance has been better of late, and the advice here has made me just roll with the punches. I've actually just stopped explaining why characters are absent. I might find the sweet spot with some learning and time.

I do like the idea of a casual side game, going to institute that when I'm missing 2+ players.

Quote from: nDervish;875138You forgot one:

Some say "I run an open table.  Show up when you want to.  No commitment required or requested."

I haven't heard that one before. Some must say that, then.

Quote from: nDervish;875138Some say "I run an open table.  Show up when you want to.  No commitment required or requested."

Quote from: soltakss;875186I haven't heard that one before. Some must say that, then.

That's how D&D Encounters is run. It probably works best with large groups with multiple GMs.