
I wrote about alternating games back in 2005, and my group has been doing just that for nearly two years now. In that time, I’ve noticed a few things:
Communication is key. It’s obvious, but it’s easy to miss. When we started alternating games, everyone assumed our two GMs were confirming whose turn it was each week, and that led to some confusion and the occasional missed session. Now, we all make an effort to bring this up at the end of each session — “We’re playing X next week, right?”
The mix may change. Since we started doing this, the arrangement has gone from true alternation (1, 2, 1, 2) to game 1 in the main spot (1, 1, 2, 1) to game 2 in the main spot (2, 2, 1, 2) — or at least, that’s been my perception (I wasn’t running either game). In any case, those changes haven’t been a bad thing, and now I know to anticipate that when we alternate games.
There won’t be fewer breaks. As TT reader Vanir put it in a recent comment, for his group March is “a gatling gun filled with D&D-destroying birthday parties.” For us, that’s been this past July and August — and having two games on the go didn’t reduce the number of weekends we missed.
Variety rocks. I suspected we’d like the variety of having two wildly different games — different GMs, systems, styles, moods, everything — and it’s been good to see that hunch borne out. If you’ve never tried the two-game model, it’s worth it for this reason alone.
Does your group alternate games? How has it gone for you?
We’ve been alternating games for a few years now. It has worked great. Currently we are alternating between playtests for the upcoming Gaeana setting and Exalted. It helps keep things fresh and reduces GM strain.
I definitely agree that there are no fewer breaks or interruptions in the schedule, though. Since the whole group gets together for all the games, missing players still generally cause cancellations.
One other bonus is that if you have two games alternating, if one or two players aren’t into a given game (or just want more space between gaming sessions) it is possible that they just bow out of one portion of the rotation. This keeps the group together more often.
Funnily, in the very near future my group will start alternating games(for the first time ever) so this is very useful for me. Somehow the blog posts always seem to be relevant.
Good timing, Martin. I started playing in an alternating game this summer. Same GM, but two wildly different systems and scenarios.
One game is 3.0 D&D. I’m Fletch, a tactically-minded Goblin rogue/sorcerer from another world (Eberron), who is part of a high-powered group (a Saint, a High Priestess, a godling, a Drow transmuter, and little ol’ me), running around a homebrew world and doing epic things.
The other game is Werewolf the Apocalypse (old school WoD). I’m Patrick O’Donnelly, a teenage football phenom who recently learned of his “condition”. I’m a Fostern Homid Fianna Ahroun, whose passions are competition and sex, not necessarily in that order.
It’s a good mix, and we have a lot of fun with it, although it can be difficult to get into the proper headspace if we switch games at the last minute.
If you like nothing more than character advancement, alternating games might not be for you.
My fellow GM and I have been alternating games for 17 years now. (Sheesh!) It started in college when there were 3 of us DMing. Back then we were still holding marathon gaming sessions, starting around noon and running until 8 or 9 pm. One campaign was considered the primary and ran every weekend from noon to 4-ish, while the other two were sort of secondary games, taking turns at filling the evening slot.
Since then we’ve cut back considerably on the amount of time we spend gaming–you know, jobs, families, that whole “adult” responsibility thing–so now we game every other weekend and alternate games, sometimes running on the 1,2,1,2 schedule and other times on more of a 1,1,2,2,1,2 schedule to avoid breaking continuity too much. And yes, as Martin says, it makes no difference in the number of canceled games, and sometimes even makes missed session more of a problem…especially when the players all start asking about “make-up” games for the missed sessions.
My group has been using the alternating games for over 5 years now, and it has been a blessing.
We are a group of “maturing” gamers, all of us professionals, with wives and some of us with children. That said we came to the agreement a few years ago, that it was not going to be possible for one GM to prepare something weekly.
So we started the GM rotation. We started with two GM’s, but now have folded in a third. We run mostly in true alternating style, unless something happens in the schedule to juggle a few dates.
We keep the rotation organized by using a monthly email where our Calendar-Master lays out the rotation, and confirms with all players, from all games that the schedule is fine. If not, we make some adjustments. When the schedule is done, it is entered into our Google Calendar, so that there is never any confusion about who’s game is when.
One thing we have found, with three games running, is that Recaps are key before each session. In our typical rotation, there is three weeks between session of a campaign, and a lot happens during those weeks. So every game has a recap. In my game (Iron Heroes), I do the recap myself, in the others the GM’s in the past, have had the players do the recaps. Either way, recaps are essential when you are not playing weekly.
The other thing we have found as a challenge is a canceled session. Since all the GM’s are on a writing schedule, it is sometimes hard to find one who can jump in, at the last minute to fill in a canceled session. Worst, if we do not re-schedule the game, then up to 6 weeks will pass between sessions. For an established game, that is no problem, but for a new campaign, that can kill any and all momentum.
I will say, that Alternating GM’s has been a great way for a bunch of us “old guys” to be able to game weekly, without it crashing into any of our other responsibilities.
My group does a GM rotation, but we don’t alternate games. Instead we assign a block of time (usually 3 months) to a GM and give him plenty of notice to prep. We really can’t pull off the weekly schedule due to other committments, so with two weeks between games it works out well for us.
Having 2 games sounds sweet. I’ve been the only DM in my group of friends for a few years now (5+).
How would you try to get experienced players give GMing a shot? I know they’ve never expressed serious interest in the GMing craft.
Yax: Ask on the forums, so we don’t derail this too much. But an alternating game sounds like a great place to try it.
I did just spend an entire blog comment talking about my characters, didn’t I? *facepalm* OMG, I’ve become a cliché…
I really like Phil’s “two GMs” reasons for an alternating game, especially now that my commitments are catching up with my available time.
Having the games be sufficiently different (whether genre, style, or ruleset) helps me keep them mentally separated. But having to know the ins-and-outs of two different systems can be difficult. And a really complex storyline can get tangled up pretty easily.
I find it fairly ironic that our weekly session tonight got canceled, and it was to be the first session of a new campaign to alternate with the Dragonlance game I’m running.
I’ve found, however, that weekly alternations just don’t work well. We use monthly, for the most part, and just spend a little extra time at the beginning of each month recapping.
Right now we’re on a three-week schedule so that we can have an off week for whatever. I.e. one sunday is my game, then the other DM’s game, then off, then back to my game.
It actually started as a compromise because the other DM needed some time for his family, but didn’t want to miss my game, so we decided on 1, 2, X, 2 as the pattern (X being the time off), but I thought that really sucked because it meant I’d only get to play once a month (I like DMing, but I barely ever get to play). So I came up with the idea of a three week rotation, and I like it.
A ‘cancelled session’ is perfect for a one-off adventure with a player being the GM… so long as they were warned in advance of this backup plan.
I say one-off, because that’s always seemed easier for a starting GM. Say your group is playing AD&D and there’s going to be a missing session. Well, try a demo of a game. Call of Cthulhu’s free adventure, or a Paranoia adventure or something.
Lots of the normal ‘GM craft’ is minimized here. Long term NPC interactions? Uh, no. Detailed setting? No. Maps? Not really. The newbie GM can then focus on the key bit – keeping things moving. Not much rules debate is going to ensue – no one’s been obsessing over this particular set of rules. (Or, in the case of Cthulhu or Paranoia, there might be the implicit rule ‘everyone dies!) So… nothing long-term is affected.
Other than nudging a player out of their comfort-zone.
God, I’ve been trying to set up an alternating games approach for about four months now… we’ve been playing Savage Tide, and I wanted to have a “once a month” game run by another player so I would:
a) Have a turn to play, even if it wasn’t in d20, and:
b) HAve some time to read the modules over a few more times, as well as take a breather as a GM.
We almost started playing Mongooses “OGL Wild West”, despite some major rules problems, because everyone in our group but my little brother (Who will play anything) was on a cowboy kick.
It never picked up, which is too bad.
When STAP finishes up (I figure around May for us, just in time for 4e!) I’m going to insist that we switch to a multi-game format, even if I run a game maybe 75% of the time.
Looking to alternating games as a way to get a player into GMing is a good idea. With some support from the rest of the group (particularly you, the GM), running one session on an off-week is a lot less intimidating than being asked to start an entire campaign.
(Sien) Funnily, in the very near future my group will start alternating games(for the first time ever) so this is very useful for me. Somehow the blog posts always seem to be relevant.
Glad to hear it! I’d like to think that that’s because TT posts are system-neutral, which forces me to write about stuff that I think will be useful to a broad spectrum of GMs — but it could just be that I’m getting so general after two years of doing this that in another six months the posts will all just be “GMing is a lot of work, but it’s fun.” 😉
We have long alternated games, though we usually run a new game for at least 3-4 sessions straight before alternating (so that people can have a little continuity in developing their characters).
I’m a big fan of it– in fact, right now I’m prepping for D&D to fit in between the Shadowrun we’re currently playing.
An interesting point related to you point about the mix changing, Martin, is that we’ll sometimes ease out a less popular game that way. If a GM is getting tired of running, or players are finding new characters more exiting, the other game can get hit more often, until the first game goes on indefinite hiatus.
Scott: I can see how a game everyone’s having more fun with could take over the whole cycle — that seems like a pretty organic process, and one that probably works well in practice.
Late to the party…blame it on Disney 🙂
I participate in a Sunday group that alternates games. We pretty much follow the 1-2-1-2 model (with a few exceptions).
Most of my observations are “me-too,” but here they are:
1. It enables players that can only do “every-other-week” to fully participate in a campaign.
2. There’s less stress and more reflection time for a GM with two weeks to prep, and that GM gets “play time” in the other campaign if he so chooses.
3. Campaigns stay fresher. A two-session adventure now takes a month instead of two weeks, eliminating a lot of filler or quick character advancement (thus prolonging the “sweet spot” and keeping a campaign focus tight).
4. While having two games (or more) going on means that different genres can be explored at once (e.g. superheroes one week, fantasy the next), it also enables players to opt out of one game without hurting feelings (“I’m not really into Star Wars, so I’m only going to play in the Pirate campaign” sounds much better than “I’d rather play in Laura’s D&D game than Stan’s D&D game”).
5. Dovetailing from point 4, the group no longer needs to retire a popular GM in order for another GM to take over.
Walt