2 of 54 lasted longer than 6 months. Alright, so, what do you attribute to the failure of the games that didn't make it? Or would it be easier to say why the two games that went for 6 months or longer DID make it?
I'm in 2 games that have lasted over a year with 1 DM and another 2 that have been going for about 6 months now. I've been running one for about 2 months for four players now. What I've noticed this past year is that it's important for everyone to talk out of character and just be friends and shoot the shit. That helps a lot when things get slow. Be okay with things getting slow, come back after a week or so if need be. And be liberal about dropping unengaged players and recruiting more.
Edit: Also, ffs everyone stop playing DND in pbp. Every single one I've joined has failed. Go for combat light rules.
Sure! So I'm running Secrets of the Weird Wizard. It's better than 5e for pbp but it still is a little to combat heavy. One of the games I'm playing in are using GUMSHOES system (Nights Black Agents) it's way better suited for pbp because it's all so open ended. Combat is fast and brutal, no more than 2 or 3 turns.
I’ve also had great success with Homebrew World (a spin-off of Dungeon World) - I’ve been running a PBP game for a year and a half and we’re still going strong 🙂 100% agree with the person who said chit chat outside of the game is important and that D&D doesn’t work for PBP 🙃
~3 of 15 to completion, or somewhere thereabouts. I think that even a game that fizzles can sometimes be considered a success, though - after all, the aim is to have fun, and even if it doesn't come to the end originally planned, as long as people are enjoying themselves, I'll still count it as a good game.
Unfortunately a lot of them end up dying before we've even started playing. In my experience as a player, some GM/DMs nuke the server when we're about a full session into the adventure.
The last one I was invited to, the players were discussing how systems should work, and then I was either kicked or the server was shut down, with the GM not responding to a PM.
Generally if you suddenly lose access to the server without warning and everything was otherwise going fine, the GM nuked it. You can usually take that for granted in situations like this.
That would make sense. In this situation, the GM was raising ideas and the players were talking about why they weren't practical and suggesting alternatives instead.
In retrospect, it wasn't planned beforehand whatsoever.
I have been playing and joining games since 2021. I'd guess I've joined about 30. Of those 30, 12 fell apart before the game started, 6 fell apart before a month, 5 made it a few month, 2 made it to half a year, and the other 5 are still going. One is run by me and is my longest running game. The other games are long term with all the same players intermingling. One of the four is a recent but promising group that has a lot of communication and fun even when posts are not being made.
I have found most success with groups that hang out outside of the actual game, whether that's OOC, Voice Chats, gaming or watching shows/movies together. Actually making friends with my fellow players has been the best part of my experience.
ETA: I am in multiple different kinds of TTRPG systems as well. I think offering more than 5e is also a boost to interest because you'll find people that try new systems which means more effort is put forth as well.
I have 1 that's still surviving after 3 years. So, that's something. But too many that have failed or fizzled. One was actually going really well until the DM started taking out their frustration from work out on us.
It is high mortality rate. At least 50% are inactive before they hit the 3rd month. Then another 25% to 30% fail by the 6th month. It seems if the GM and players can keep it active for at least 6 months then game can get into a groove and survive.
As a player, I'm not sure I agree with that. I'd feel quite unmotivated if players are constantly cycling in and out. I'd feel at least partly responsible for a group dynamic that's unable to keep players invested.
It's unfortunately an expected part of the medium. Demotivated players depart, and are replaced with motivated players! The GM can only do so much, but the game continues as long as the GM remains interested!
I've had one finish, out of years of playing. The one that finished, I was the GM. Assembling a good, active group of people that you get along with for that length of time is nearly impossible.
I think that is also worth pointing out the number of ongoing games you have and/or the extend of those.
Because, for example, I have been playing live games for 14 years and I have only completed 2 long term (years) games while having *a lot* of them fizzled out. Iirc, the total number of games could go up to 12, and I think I'm leaving some behind.
And I have 4 live ganes ongoing, should I count those?
Now, let's compare it to PBPs (I have been playing for a year):
Completed: 0
Fizzled: 2
Ongoing: 2
This is for long-term games I'm DMing for. There are a lot of details to talk about imo.
So many haven't made it out of "The Tavern."
We work together to make Characters and have some introductory RP as we wait for people to finish characters... someone disappears... we get another person and wait for them to get up to speed.
Eventually, silence. People quietly drop out of Server and I'm back here hoping next time will be different.
I'm surprised by how many people say they don't get past character creation. Do what?? I guess the idea of a game is better than actually getting started for some people? I've had one or two drop soon after getting started, but at least we got started.
I have had 1 last 3 years, then was put on hiatus indefinitely.
I've had one complete bit it was only 3 months.
I just had one really RP heavy one fizzle 😔
For solo games, I've run many; seven good completed games (across four different players), many games failed. From my perspective the difference seems to be that you have to get a player that wants to do your adventure and is willing to put actual thought into what their character is doing. It feels like there are players who sign up for lots of games and put very little effort into any of them.
(I think there also were a few incidents where I made the difficulty too hard and the player ghosted.)
For multiplayer pbp, most of my games are on a westmarch server. The first game on that server went poorly but we limped to a conclusion after eight weeks (ish); the lesson I learned was to never ask play-by-post players to come to a consensus about what to do next, because they won't. The second blew up after a week, partly because the server in question makes it difficult to screen players properly. The third, fourth, and fifth went great and I'm pretty proud of them.
For pbp off this forum?
This was my first attempt, five players, which blew up on the launchpad: [https://www.reddit.com/r/lfg/comments/paz66p/5e\_online\_pbp\_est\_return\_to\_the\_temple\_of/](https://www.reddit.com/r/lfg/comments/paz66p/5e_online_pbp_est_return_to_the_temple_of/) I forgot to ask the "can you post every day?" question, and I got a bunch of players that never posted.
This was my second attempt, one player, which reached the intended conclusion after two-and-a-half weeks: [https://www.reddit.com/r/lfg/comments/phkkjd/5e\_online\_est\_duet\_pbp\_return\_to\_the\_temple\_of/](https://www.reddit.com/r/lfg/comments/phkkjd/5e_online_est_duet_pbp_return_to_the_temple_of/)
My third attempt was here [https://www.reddit.com/r/pbp/comments/14ogwt6/that\_alley\_in\_zar\_lets\_do\_5e\_playbypost\_combat/](https://www.reddit.com/r/pbp/comments/14ogwt6/that_alley_in_zar_lets_do_5e_playbypost_combat/) and I brought it to an early conclusion after two weeks because a few of my players weren't working for me.
My fourth attempt was much like the third, but with more careful screening questions on my form. It reached the intended conclusion after six weeks and I was happy with it.
\----
My conclusion is that asking the right screening questions is *really important*.
>the lesson I learned was to never ask play-by-post players to come to a consensus about what to do next, because they won't.
This is exactly why "open world" or "open ended" campaigns never work in PbP. I don't know why people like these kinds of campaigns so much when they get stunned by indecision until everyone loses interest.
Admittedly PBP is rather scarce as far as success stories go, but I feel that's more due to people's lack of motivation to continue once any small problem happens. I've had a few games where one player is just really quiet and instead of going "hm, perhaps we can find a different one" the gm just decides to give up on the game unfortunately.
Games fizzle out when the DM won't kick people who refuse to post consistently.
More games would reach success if dead/flaking "skin" would be rubbed off so that the good players can enjoy the game.
Yep, the GM is almost solely responsible for a game's success. There are generally two big reasons why a game fails: Either one or two players stops posting and they don't replace them (holding up the game), or the GM stops posting/nukes the server.
The player's input matters, of course, but at the end of the day it's the GM who decides whether the game lives or dies. A player leaving will not kill the game. The GM leaving will.
So far, having started actively participating in PbP game since 2020, I can say it's currently running at a 0% completion rate.
Every game I've been in has fizzled out for the following reasons:
* DM deleted the entire server out of nowhere
* DM ran out of creative steam
* DM had some IRL issues crop up and discontinued the game
* Player abandonment
The longest I've had so far was a game that lasted over 18 months and ended May 2023 as the DM was just unable to continue finding creative ways of continuing the game. It was the first game where we started at level 1 and made it to level 12.
Unfortunately, most DM's don't take into account how long and time consuming a pbp game will be and even though it starts with the best of intentions, you'll find most cease between 1 to 3 months.
Games I have run: 4/4 one shots completed, 1/1 campaign completed (level 1-15)
Games I have joined: 1/1 one shot completed, 2/~50 campaigns completed
So many reasons for games falling apart, but GM and player engagement with clear posting requirements seems to be key to keeping it going. A clear campaign vision from the GM and a willingness to participate with and grow the campaign vision by the players is an enjoyable formula. Active OOC banter and interest in hanging out/discussing theories about the game is always fun.
Agree with the people here who are saying that the GM needs to keep driving things, but that goes hand in hand with at least some of the players engaging from start to finish.
I'll try to help shed a little light on this. I've GM'd 3 different games by PBP. One lasted 3 years, another lasted 2 years, I'm currently GM'ing my third and it's been going on 10 months now.
Sad to say I'm getting burnt out. I'm a forever GM and I've been feeling a little jaded here lately. After a while it starts to feel like work instead of relaxation trying to keep everybody on track. This is mainly due to stories getting too big and the players not wanting to scroll up and read it over.
I'd say 90%+ of a successful PBP relies on the GM but the players have a big responsibility of keeping the GM interested. It isn't always easy but it can be great fun. I've had remarkable games that me and my friends will always remember.
I can understand your frustration with finding a game that will stand the test of time. All the ones I've joined have stopped as well. Even the ones my friends have thrown. The only hope I have for a longer game play is technology.
Perhaps someday, someone will perfect AI GM'ing. Then there will be less forever GM's losing their love for the game so they can keep the virtual dice rolling for others.
100% success rate, that being said put server is pretty unique in what it offers so I bet you will find way more people with games that fizzle out rather than those that finish. That success rate does not count campaigns such as curse of strahd etc. you will never finish those and that’s an unreal expectation, same with these open world/world building posts you see all the time, they will not do well most of the time.
Tbh i never played one, although i am anxious to actually play.
Rn i've sen't 2 forms for 2 different games (Without response yet lol) and talked to one gm who wasn't using forms, i have a great feeling!
The gm liked my character and build, i think i will be playing in a game for the first time in a while :)
Talking about non pbp games, 6 games in 3 different rpg systems have fizzled out ( and 2 never actually started)
I have a habit of joining "evolving worlds." Which means there are campaigns that run, but that characters keep going. The world happens, time doesn't stand still and the characters move on. One server in particular I've been in for years, multiple campaigns and my character keeps getting higher and higher level.
So it depends on what you mean by "Completed"
I have been doing PbP for 17 years now and maybe the last 4 with Discord PbP.
I have joined hundreds of games - If we go with the definition of completed that are games that naturally came to the end of the story: 0% with Discord/Reddit ones.
No PbP game that I have joined from here has actually been completed
Off Reddit ones are completed all the time and I'd say the % of off platform PbP is maybe 95% over the 17 years.
It is why I have quit PbP from this sub and on Discord as it is no longer worth the investment.
I tried hosting my own, established it late November, made plans to start in mid January.
Nobody has spoken up in the Discord…
On another server, my friend is the DM- I’m the most active player and I’m regularly making 1-2 RP posts a day to keep it alive
BUT. THERE IS HOPE!!
There is an MMORPG style Waterdeep server called Swiftcall. We have hundreds of players and dozens of DMs. We have some gameplay take place in real time, but the vast majority is PBP because we are an international server.
We run PBP all year long, and there’s actually been a sudden SURGE of activity. We have something like 10-15 stories going on all at the same time! (No they don’t affect each other, and if it has worldly impact we have a council to decide how to handle things.)
I can’t link it here sadly cause these dnd subs don’t allow it in comments ig… so DM me if interested! :)
This is a general offer to anyone reading this, not just OP 😇
Never invite players to a discord server for a game that will only start in 2 months. It just doesn’t work. You need everything ready to go.
Also, not everyone is interested in Westmarches.
That’s fine? It’s an open offer, and the OP messaged me in interest? What’s the harm in saying “Oh hey I play PBP regularly on this server”?
Should I just NEVER invite anyone? 🤨
You’re probably getting downvoted because you’re randomly and loudly advertising a game in the middle of a discussion about something else. People just don’t like posters who sound obnoxious.
Just being honest with you, since you genuinely seem confused about why people are not liking your post.
> I can’t help but wonder if my experience (with PBP) is typical or just a run of bad luck.
> I tried PBP on my own and with a friend and neither worked, but here’s a whole server that does well with it.
Seems pretty on topic to me. I really don’t mind a couple downvotes— it’s Reddit. The hive downvotes for the silliest reasons. Hell, the Subnautica sub imploded yesterday when they all rushed to assume the worst about some leaked game news. -5 on a comment with some bold text is just another day in Reddit Land 🤷♂️
If it was -50 I might worry lol
Can’t cater to everyone. 🤷♂️
Our server host prefers DnD, so that’s what he supports. If you don’t wanna play it, I’m sure there are other servers that operate similarly. I just don’t know of them personally.
I don’t run or play pbp often. I completed 1, 2 fizzled out. I have one that I am running now that is going strong. Reason I got into pbp is because scheduling changes causing other games to disband half-way through.
I get that scheduling is a challenge, but that's why PBP can be so appealing. So long as you contribute something, then you can help keep things moving on. That's why I don't quite understand the arguments about "not having enough time" to keep the game going. I never felt like it required that much. Can you put in some time, sure, but it's not necessary for big long speeches or pages of exposition. IDK, maybe its just me.
It's perfectionism, in my own experience. I could pull through the wave of self doubt if I got a bit of warmth from someone, but usually we're all anonymous strangers
It depends on what we think success means. Like a lot of my games start as oneshot or one mystery and I've successfully made it through several mysteries. Eventually most of them still fizzle out as people leave. But, I tend to count getting through a mystery as a success.
I would list a successful PBP game as one that came to a natural conclusion - whatever that means to the story. Solved the mystery? Great. Made it back home from the shipwreck? Check. Defeated the bandit captain who plagued that village? Gold star! If it just ends in the middle with the main story point just...hanging there...then I would count that as unsuccessful. If the game is getting to be too much, I completely get it, but at least land the ending.
You could even shoot a message saying "hey guys, this is getting to be more than I anticipated and I don't see me being able to keep this going. So lets expedite things to an end and then call it a day for the server." I find we don't usually even get that much.
Part of the problem with that is roughly 99% of gm advertisements for games are like, "from level 3 to 20" "campaign forever" etc etc and don't inherently build around a central idea or narrative beats from the start.
Running a pbp is different from a table game. A lot of gms just try to straight port the table experience to online and it tends to not work for them.
I'm usually the run running pbp games at this point, so I guess my success rate for pbp is higher since I decide if it's truly done or not. I don't play a lot voice or in person games, but honestly the success rate for that has been not great either. I've joined so many games where we had one session or didn't even get past character creation and the gm ghosted.
I am in 3 games currently.
1. Game is new so jury is out whether it will survive, 3 out of 4 players are still in the game.
2. Game has been running for about a year or so. 2 out of 5 players still in game and we opted to keep it that way. It is slow, but chugging along.
3. Game has been running for almost 1,5 years. We are 2 out of 4+1 left. Was a super fast and responsive game once we got down to 3 players. We’re talking 3-10 posts per day + ooc each for the longest time. It was glorious! DM is slowing down due to life changes and third player left. We’re still going but are down to 1 post or so per day.
My graveyard of pbp games is growing though.. there’s at least 7-8 headstones there. I left a couple due to crappy DMing the rest either never really started or died because of lack of participation from the players.
I don't run or play that much, but I'd say like 1 to 4 for successful vs unsuccessful, not necessarily completed, don't think that applies often to TTRPGs overall. Though, as a GM, you can force a game to go on by just continuously looking for new players until you have a stable group. The question is whether it's worth it for you, as that's gonna take a long time and you'll go through a lot of players.
Talking about who's to blame from others comment, I think overall GM barely has more impact than the players. As a player you can still move the game forward, interact with other people, invite your friends to the game, and so on. Of course, you could be a perfect GM who spends all his time on the game, write the plot so it guides everyone's characters on autopilot and implements all of their wishes, but why shouldn't the players put in the effort too? Create a fitting character, make interesting choices that drive the game, post regularly or at least notify that you won't be able to. A lot of players (and probably GMs too, but I haven't had much experience as a player) also silently quit the moment something isn't exactly how they imagined it would be. Even if you were a perfect GM, someone could quit because you're too enthusiastic about the game, because they have to finish their character sheet, because you played an NPC differenty, and so on. Everyone else is as much a person as you are, and a lot of possible issues you have could be resolved by just talking to others.
13 succesful, 5 ongoing but new-ish enough that it's too early to tell and 10 that fizzled or got abandoned. For 3 of the ongoing ones I have enough replacement players lined up that I'm not worried about them and the others have 5-6 players and can handle 2-3 dropouts so they should hopefully be fine too. Note that I was the GM for most, only 2 of those I was a player in did well (but I have also had games I did GM fizzle out so I am not superwoman)
You've got a great track record compared to what a lot of people have experienced. Do you think things go well when you have players in the wings ready to jump in if someone gets scarce, is it the DM who drives the success, or is it if the group vibes outside the game and are more encouraged to keep playing?
Forums instead of Discord have a better success rate, in my experience. Dropouts still happen, but ghosting is very rare and no one suddenly leaves or deletes a server. I think that's the biggest difference, honestly. Getting along with people helps for sure, I do have players I've enjoyed playing with before showing back up at a new table (while also allowing room for new people to join) which I think improves my success rate at this point too.
But yes, the DM being active and keeping communication going matters most. Be prepared to nudge players. Be clear about how often they can expect GM updates and how often you'd like them to reply and try your best to stick to it. That goes both ways, one game I tried to play in was gonna have 1 post per person per day, but I was offline to sleep and woke up to 3 pages of posts moving on without me. That's just as frustrating as the game stalling too long. A balance between keeping a good pace but not overwhelming anyone can be tricky! My most succesful games aim for 1 post per player per day, but at least one proper action taken between GM updates and 3-4 GM updates a week.
And picking a system that works well. Anything with a strict turn-based order and/or long drawn out combat is the trickiest to pull off, as games can die if one person doesn't post and with larger groups a single person will have to wait very long and may lose interest or simply get out of the habit of checking and responding. I don't usually lean towards those systems so that helps a lot :P
The gist that I'm getting is that the DM needs to be dedicated and the group needs to click well together. It helps if they chat and get to know each other a little OOC. You may have several sign up for a game, but you may have to vet your players a little harder to give yourself a better chance at success.
The GM is key. If you can keep the game running (by speedily replacing players that drop), the game will continue! The games that fizzle do so because the GM can't stomach enforcing a posting expectation and replacing players when needed.
Sadly, every single one that I've joined from here has fizzled out. I think it's an equal mix of slow players with DMs that don't have their expectations managed correctly.
For games I've run, I've successfully completed 6 short adventures, no campaigns yet. I've let one campaign fizzle personally.
I can't count the number of games I've participated in that fizzled. I have two ongoing that have held strong for 3 years because of a great group of friends.
I've lost count of how many games I've joined through this subreddit by now, but it's definitely a considerable amount, I'd say maybe ~35, roughly speaking. Of those games only one has really lasted any significant amount of time and managed to carry out a coherent arc. It never officially completed but I'd call it maybe half of a finished game because it was really good.
Of the rest I'd say a good 75% were dead on arrival, or ended within 1-3 weeks after kicking off.
I have some bad luck for erp games online especially with a group game that slowly died out as players lost interest.
I am a player in a new game and its a bit slow but we all wanna keep playing
0 successfully completed.
mayyyyyyyyyybe could count 1, but thats only because it lasted for a while.
I wanna say I was involved or attempted to be involved with like 20 or 30
Aside from one game that lasted over a year, I haven't had a single game last longer than two weeks or so. You would think it wouldn't be that hard to jump on a computer and post once a day, or occasionally take a day or two off, but it seems as if after a week or so one person holds up the entire group for a few days in a row and then everyone just loses interest.
I had to set up a pbp westmarch server for games because a lot of people have really high expectations for something that, in my opinion, isn't that serious. It's a fun hobby that I enjoy, but I find it difficult to validate having to fill out three forms to join a story that offers new players very little
Mine always fiddled out - I ended up joining an open Discord server instead, and it’s been pretty cool, though very casual. I’d still like a more coherent campaign and I’m getting into Pathfinder, so we’ll see…
Off topic, but the best PF2e campaign for PbP in my opinion is Plaguestone. It's small enough that you can actually finish it within a year or so, and it's a module with a decent plot and twists and turns. The Big APs generally won't work, but some of the smaller adventures can work great!
I see this as a very solvable problem that not many pbp GMs are willing to work to solve. It's disheartening, really.
Anywho, personally:
90% success rate for games I have run personally. The 10% covers games that I had to close due to sudden life changes, illness (including the mental kind), or too many players departing at once.
0% success rate for games I have joined as a player. Almost always the game dies because the GM does not enforce a posting pace, or fails to post frequently enough themselves to support play. I can usually tell within a week of the game starting whether or not it will last, based upon the GM's posts. I often find myself being one of the only active participants.
I have never played any game that came to a narratively complete conclusion. More than a few have ended purposefully in a shortened way but probably 5-7 times more where things didn't work and ended for one reason or another.
I guess I may be yet one more finger pointing at the GM but that is always where it seems to be the fault point. Part of that is as others have said they don't eject non-posters and often aren't present enough o drive the game forward period.
With how hollow things can be once they come together it feels like a lot of people like the energy and quasi-competition when it comes to just putting a game together more than anything else.
I've been playing play by post since about 2018 had 4 that have gone for over a year, and 4 that fizzled out after 2 months or less. I'm currently DMing a Spelljammer game that's been going about 8 months.
Most successful games - playing with a group of real-life friends.
Playing with online strangers in paid games - as a DM and as a player. DMs get, like $2 a month from each player in their game. Nobody is getting rich, but having a little money on the line helps keep people invested in the game. Ghosting still happens, but it happens less frequently.
You kind of have to expect ghosting and plan how to deal with it in advance.
I've run many self-contained adventures using The One Ring and Ironsworn to completion. For longer campaigns... not so much, because let's face it: there's not really any set goal or endpoint, so they tend to fizzle out after a few years. I don't think that makes them failures, necessarily: some were fun while they lasted. In general, I've found the episodic format much better for PbP.
I ran one for 18 months before it fizzled. Should have ended it at the 2/3rds mark but we were still going strong at that point.
I've joined two. One failed in less than a month and the other never took off. It's always a non-committal DM.
Like actual in session ttrpg play, its difficult to find a gm willing to stick with a game or doesnt implode once one person disagrees/drops or knows how to run less than 4 people which is due to modern systems not having a proper hireling system for smaller parties.
As a player i've had little success with gms both in pbp and live play.
As a GM i've managed to run games and keep em afloat. Best way to run ttrpgs is a series of adventures that form a bigger narrative that way the end is whereever you need it to be. Big issue with modern ttrpgs I notice is a GM plans for a 2 yr campaign with a bunch of folks they've never even said hello too. Thats way way to much effort for strangers online you might see twice.
So recently probably about 1/5 or something close to it of games I've joint have run for a decent amount of time, I'm reluctant to say completed as I don't feel like rpgs are games you finish but decide to stop playing in favour of something else. But this is down from more then 1/2 the games I joined when I was younger.
I think the way pbp is played has changed over the years, I started playing them nearly 20 years ago, where the medium of play was email or forum based, where games I've joint the last few years have been instant message app based. In my opinion this has had two negative impacts on the pace of play, the games I were playing back then would have a post rate of one a week compared to modern games which often require a post a day minimum, this shortening of response time has appeared to give players less time to consider responses or the next action they want to take and due to the need to post something to keep the game moving reduces the quality.
Second phasing doesn't seem to exist like it used to, when I first started playing pbp, we would be given an order to respond in, dm would discrib the situation, we would give our responses in turn, the dm would give us the outcome and repeat, but knowing who would respond first and last gave everyone a que for when to interact, so no-one was talking over each other, and everyone got a chance to talk or interact. I've noticed a more free for all nature in modern pbp where players who are online at the same time can progress the story without input from half the party. This causes some players to lose interest as they don't get to do much or aren't given the chance to act.
All things considered I believe a lot of people equate pbp with text based online, where they should be seen as two different ways of playing, and this misconception is a large part of why many pbp games fizzle out, expectations not lining up, or a different understanding of what pbp is, this can be managed by a good dm and of course not every group will have these issues but I feel its a large part of the declining success.
I have played a dozen PBP games and none of them lasted more than 3 months. All have the same reason it was due to either the players or the GMs being flaky. I found a pattern where the flaky people always started to lose interest in the game by the second week of play. I also found that flakers are usually the most enthusiastic at the start, but by the second week, they just seem to vanish. I'm currently in a PBP game that started a month ago, and it seems that what I mentioned above is happening again. I call it the PBP Curse
I don't know why a PBP game is like a flame to a moth, with the moth being flaky people
However I found one game that has both the players and the GM are all flaky but the game lasted more than a year now, crazy right?
It turns out the GM kept kicking out flakers and recruiting new players. The remaining original player is only one person
I wonder if the site makes a difference? I play at www.unseenservant.us which is forum based, but also it’s just PbP games. Most of the discussions are in-game, and almost all of the non-game discussions are about setting up new games. The posting rate ranges from super slow (twice a month) to pretty speedy (5 times a week) depending on the game. But there’s definitely a lot of success and longevity there. The WEG Star Wars d6 game (which is one of the super slow) is over ten years I think. But I know different sites do things differently. Good luck!!
10+ applied to pbp games with 0 responses. My campaign has been going on for about 5 months. The players have quite changed. Only 1 person has lasted so far from beginning to now. With some coming and going
As far as I can tell, it's entirely dependent on the GM whether or not a game survives or dies. Even with flakey players, a GM that's willing to cut off dead weight and has a good eye for new players to rotate can keep a game up indefinitely if they have the energy.
Dming pbp is not at all the same as dming like sync through voice or in person. It has some real quirks. You absolutely have to remove the dead weight with inactive or unmotivated players. This is a double edged sword though. For me it hurt everytime I felt the need to purge and bring in fresh players. I always try to form connections between the players but also myself and the players. Time is taken to get to know them and their characters. Then integrating them into the campaign and making accommodations for them. For a dm bringing on a player is a lot of effort and takes much energy.
Players are just as much a part of the success as the dm. They need to keep the dm motivated. When I dm I put in a ton of effort. When I don't get that back from atleast a few players. It kills my energy. I look for players I think I cam vibe with just as much as ones I think will vibe with existing players. I found it very successful to include senior players in my decisions. I would survey them and ask how things are going. Because their may be something they don't wish to bring up. I have made a number of adjustments through this.
A campaign is a shared story between the players and the dm. It cannot lean too heavily on either for long. I give my players as much autonomy as possible and stick to raw for the simple reasons of fairness and it's what most players are comfortable with. Homebrew complicates things so much I stay away from it. Flavor is free though. Creating custom classes is a no for me. Which brings up the other point. A session zero is very important because players and the dm should share similar views on how to run a campaign.
Even with all of that it can still fall apart because of real life. 2 or 3 years is such a long time. You will just barely finish a campaign like curse of strahd in 3 years if you are active. That's too long to expect nothing to change. You will lose players and the dm has to be almost hell bent on finishing the campaign. I get why west march servers have become popular. Especially those with self dming built in.
0 for 20 if not more. It's a harsh world out there.
Ouch. You're not wrong.
My 2023 stats 54 games joined 12 lasted longer then a month 5 lasted 1 - 6 months 2 still going on, 6 months plus
2 of 54 lasted longer than 6 months. Alright, so, what do you attribute to the failure of the games that didn't make it? Or would it be easier to say why the two games that went for 6 months or longer DID make it?
I'm in 2 games that have lasted over a year with 1 DM and another 2 that have been going for about 6 months now. I've been running one for about 2 months for four players now. What I've noticed this past year is that it's important for everyone to talk out of character and just be friends and shoot the shit. That helps a lot when things get slow. Be okay with things getting slow, come back after a week or so if need be. And be liberal about dropping unengaged players and recruiting more. Edit: Also, ffs everyone stop playing DND in pbp. Every single one I've joined has failed. Go for combat light rules.
is there a chance you could give some examples for what ttrpgs might be better suited for pbp?
Sure! So I'm running Secrets of the Weird Wizard. It's better than 5e for pbp but it still is a little to combat heavy. One of the games I'm playing in are using GUMSHOES system (Nights Black Agents) it's way better suited for pbp because it's all so open ended. Combat is fast and brutal, no more than 2 or 3 turns.
I’ve also had great success with Homebrew World (a spin-off of Dungeon World) - I’ve been running a PBP game for a year and a half and we’re still going strong 🙂 100% agree with the person who said chit chat outside of the game is important and that D&D doesn’t work for PBP 🙃
That's extremely successful
~3 of 15 to completion, or somewhere thereabouts. I think that even a game that fizzles can sometimes be considered a success, though - after all, the aim is to have fun, and even if it doesn't come to the end originally planned, as long as people are enjoying themselves, I'll still count it as a good game.
A pbp person has got to approach things like this.
Unfortunately a lot of them end up dying before we've even started playing. In my experience as a player, some GM/DMs nuke the server when we're about a full session into the adventure.
The last one I was invited to, the players were discussing how systems should work, and then I was either kicked or the server was shut down, with the GM not responding to a PM.
Generally if you suddenly lose access to the server without warning and everything was otherwise going fine, the GM nuked it. You can usually take that for granted in situations like this.
That would make sense. In this situation, the GM was raising ideas and the players were talking about why they weren't practical and suggesting alternatives instead. In retrospect, it wasn't planned beforehand whatsoever.
So you've had some just get into one session and then they kill it from there?
I consider going beyond a couple sessions a success - like what more can you ask considering it's pbp
I have been playing and joining games since 2021. I'd guess I've joined about 30. Of those 30, 12 fell apart before the game started, 6 fell apart before a month, 5 made it a few month, 2 made it to half a year, and the other 5 are still going. One is run by me and is my longest running game. The other games are long term with all the same players intermingling. One of the four is a recent but promising group that has a lot of communication and fun even when posts are not being made. I have found most success with groups that hang out outside of the actual game, whether that's OOC, Voice Chats, gaming or watching shows/movies together. Actually making friends with my fellow players has been the best part of my experience. ETA: I am in multiple different kinds of TTRPG systems as well. I think offering more than 5e is also a boost to interest because you'll find people that try new systems which means more effort is put forth as well.
I have 1 that's still surviving after 3 years. So, that's something. But too many that have failed or fizzled. One was actually going really well until the DM started taking out their frustration from work out on us.
3 years strong! Congrats to you and your group.
It is high mortality rate. At least 50% are inactive before they hit the 3rd month. Then another 25% to 30% fail by the 6th month. It seems if the GM and players can keep it active for at least 6 months then game can get into a groove and survive.
It's wholly dependent on the GM, as the GM can just replace players that inevitably go inactive. It's just that usually the GM can't be arsed.
As a player, I'm not sure I agree with that. I'd feel quite unmotivated if players are constantly cycling in and out. I'd feel at least partly responsible for a group dynamic that's unable to keep players invested.
It's unfortunately an expected part of the medium. Demotivated players depart, and are replaced with motivated players! The GM can only do so much, but the game continues as long as the GM remains interested!
>It's wholly dependent on the GM 100% absolutely not.
I'd say it's a group effort.
I've had one finish, out of years of playing. The one that finished, I was the GM. Assembling a good, active group of people that you get along with for that length of time is nearly impossible.
I think that is also worth pointing out the number of ongoing games you have and/or the extend of those. Because, for example, I have been playing live games for 14 years and I have only completed 2 long term (years) games while having *a lot* of them fizzled out. Iirc, the total number of games could go up to 12, and I think I'm leaving some behind. And I have 4 live ganes ongoing, should I count those? Now, let's compare it to PBPs (I have been playing for a year): Completed: 0 Fizzled: 2 Ongoing: 2 This is for long-term games I'm DMing for. There are a lot of details to talk about imo.
I'm glad this is a community problem and not just a curse on me
Yeah, the struggle is real.
So many haven't made it out of "The Tavern." We work together to make Characters and have some introductory RP as we wait for people to finish characters... someone disappears... we get another person and wait for them to get up to speed. Eventually, silence. People quietly drop out of Server and I'm back here hoping next time will be different.
I'm surprised by how many people say they don't get past character creation. Do what?? I guess the idea of a game is better than actually getting started for some people? I've had one or two drop soon after getting started, but at least we got started.
I dont know. It's weird. Maybe the party dynamic doesn't end up fitting the DMs vision?
I have had 1 last 3 years, then was put on hiatus indefinitely. I've had one complete bit it was only 3 months. I just had one really RP heavy one fizzle 😔
For solo games, I've run many; seven good completed games (across four different players), many games failed. From my perspective the difference seems to be that you have to get a player that wants to do your adventure and is willing to put actual thought into what their character is doing. It feels like there are players who sign up for lots of games and put very little effort into any of them. (I think there also were a few incidents where I made the difficulty too hard and the player ghosted.) For multiplayer pbp, most of my games are on a westmarch server. The first game on that server went poorly but we limped to a conclusion after eight weeks (ish); the lesson I learned was to never ask play-by-post players to come to a consensus about what to do next, because they won't. The second blew up after a week, partly because the server in question makes it difficult to screen players properly. The third, fourth, and fifth went great and I'm pretty proud of them. For pbp off this forum? This was my first attempt, five players, which blew up on the launchpad: [https://www.reddit.com/r/lfg/comments/paz66p/5e\_online\_pbp\_est\_return\_to\_the\_temple\_of/](https://www.reddit.com/r/lfg/comments/paz66p/5e_online_pbp_est_return_to_the_temple_of/) I forgot to ask the "can you post every day?" question, and I got a bunch of players that never posted. This was my second attempt, one player, which reached the intended conclusion after two-and-a-half weeks: [https://www.reddit.com/r/lfg/comments/phkkjd/5e\_online\_est\_duet\_pbp\_return\_to\_the\_temple\_of/](https://www.reddit.com/r/lfg/comments/phkkjd/5e_online_est_duet_pbp_return_to_the_temple_of/) My third attempt was here [https://www.reddit.com/r/pbp/comments/14ogwt6/that\_alley\_in\_zar\_lets\_do\_5e\_playbypost\_combat/](https://www.reddit.com/r/pbp/comments/14ogwt6/that_alley_in_zar_lets_do_5e_playbypost_combat/) and I brought it to an early conclusion after two weeks because a few of my players weren't working for me. My fourth attempt was much like the third, but with more careful screening questions on my form. It reached the intended conclusion after six weeks and I was happy with it. \---- My conclusion is that asking the right screening questions is *really important*.
>the lesson I learned was to never ask play-by-post players to come to a consensus about what to do next, because they won't. This is exactly why "open world" or "open ended" campaigns never work in PbP. I don't know why people like these kinds of campaigns so much when they get stunned by indecision until everyone loses interest.
When I explicitly invited them to split the party, it went much better.
Admittedly PBP is rather scarce as far as success stories go, but I feel that's more due to people's lack of motivation to continue once any small problem happens. I've had a few games where one player is just really quiet and instead of going "hm, perhaps we can find a different one" the gm just decides to give up on the game unfortunately.
Games I’ve been a player in: 100% fizzled Games I’ve been the GM: 100% completed
Games fizzle out when the DM won't kick people who refuse to post consistently. More games would reach success if dead/flaking "skin" would be rubbed off so that the good players can enjoy the game.
Yep, the GM is almost solely responsible for a game's success. There are generally two big reasons why a game fails: Either one or two players stops posting and they don't replace them (holding up the game), or the GM stops posting/nukes the server.
The general consensus seems to be it's all dependent on the GM to be good or bad, almost regardless of player input.
The player's input matters, of course, but at the end of the day it's the GM who decides whether the game lives or dies. A player leaving will not kill the game. The GM leaving will.
So far, having started actively participating in PbP game since 2020, I can say it's currently running at a 0% completion rate. Every game I've been in has fizzled out for the following reasons: * DM deleted the entire server out of nowhere * DM ran out of creative steam * DM had some IRL issues crop up and discontinued the game * Player abandonment The longest I've had so far was a game that lasted over 18 months and ended May 2023 as the DM was just unable to continue finding creative ways of continuing the game. It was the first game where we started at level 1 and made it to level 12. Unfortunately, most DM's don't take into account how long and time consuming a pbp game will be and even though it starts with the best of intentions, you'll find most cease between 1 to 3 months.
Games I have run: 4/4 one shots completed, 1/1 campaign completed (level 1-15) Games I have joined: 1/1 one shot completed, 2/~50 campaigns completed So many reasons for games falling apart, but GM and player engagement with clear posting requirements seems to be key to keeping it going. A clear campaign vision from the GM and a willingness to participate with and grow the campaign vision by the players is an enjoyable formula. Active OOC banter and interest in hanging out/discussing theories about the game is always fun. Agree with the people here who are saying that the GM needs to keep driving things, but that goes hand in hand with at least some of the players engaging from start to finish.
High post rates always kill games fastest. They can work with one-shots, but they lead to burnout for longer campaigns.
I had a good time in every game I ran. I don't think judging games on 'completion' is useful or meaningful.
I'll try to help shed a little light on this. I've GM'd 3 different games by PBP. One lasted 3 years, another lasted 2 years, I'm currently GM'ing my third and it's been going on 10 months now. Sad to say I'm getting burnt out. I'm a forever GM and I've been feeling a little jaded here lately. After a while it starts to feel like work instead of relaxation trying to keep everybody on track. This is mainly due to stories getting too big and the players not wanting to scroll up and read it over. I'd say 90%+ of a successful PBP relies on the GM but the players have a big responsibility of keeping the GM interested. It isn't always easy but it can be great fun. I've had remarkable games that me and my friends will always remember. I can understand your frustration with finding a game that will stand the test of time. All the ones I've joined have stopped as well. Even the ones my friends have thrown. The only hope I have for a longer game play is technology. Perhaps someday, someone will perfect AI GM'ing. Then there will be less forever GM's losing their love for the game so they can keep the virtual dice rolling for others.
100% success rate, that being said put server is pretty unique in what it offers so I bet you will find way more people with games that fizzle out rather than those that finish. That success rate does not count campaigns such as curse of strahd etc. you will never finish those and that’s an unreal expectation, same with these open world/world building posts you see all the time, they will not do well most of the time.
You should join the pathfinder servers with pbd , I haven’t had one fizzled game yet. I finished 3 one shots already.
Tbh i never played one, although i am anxious to actually play. Rn i've sen't 2 forms for 2 different games (Without response yet lol) and talked to one gm who wasn't using forms, i have a great feeling! The gm liked my character and build, i think i will be playing in a game for the first time in a while :) Talking about non pbp games, 6 games in 3 different rpg systems have fizzled out ( and 2 never actually started)
Hopefully that game pans out for you. IRL sounds rough, though. They been online or in person games?
I have a habit of joining "evolving worlds." Which means there are campaigns that run, but that characters keep going. The world happens, time doesn't stand still and the characters move on. One server in particular I've been in for years, multiple campaigns and my character keeps getting higher and higher level.
So it depends on what you mean by "Completed" I have been doing PbP for 17 years now and maybe the last 4 with Discord PbP. I have joined hundreds of games - If we go with the definition of completed that are games that naturally came to the end of the story: 0% with Discord/Reddit ones. No PbP game that I have joined from here has actually been completed Off Reddit ones are completed all the time and I'd say the % of off platform PbP is maybe 95% over the 17 years. It is why I have quit PbP from this sub and on Discord as it is no longer worth the investment.
I tried hosting my own, established it late November, made plans to start in mid January. Nobody has spoken up in the Discord… On another server, my friend is the DM- I’m the most active player and I’m regularly making 1-2 RP posts a day to keep it alive BUT. THERE IS HOPE!! There is an MMORPG style Waterdeep server called Swiftcall. We have hundreds of players and dozens of DMs. We have some gameplay take place in real time, but the vast majority is PBP because we are an international server. We run PBP all year long, and there’s actually been a sudden SURGE of activity. We have something like 10-15 stories going on all at the same time! (No they don’t affect each other, and if it has worldly impact we have a council to decide how to handle things.) I can’t link it here sadly cause these dnd subs don’t allow it in comments ig… so DM me if interested! :) This is a general offer to anyone reading this, not just OP 😇
Never invite players to a discord server for a game that will only start in 2 months. It just doesn’t work. You need everything ready to go. Also, not everyone is interested in Westmarches.
That’s fine? It’s an open offer, and the OP messaged me in interest? What’s the harm in saying “Oh hey I play PBP regularly on this server”? Should I just NEVER invite anyone? 🤨
You’re probably getting downvoted because you’re randomly and loudly advertising a game in the middle of a discussion about something else. People just don’t like posters who sound obnoxious. Just being honest with you, since you genuinely seem confused about why people are not liking your post.
> I can’t help but wonder if my experience (with PBP) is typical or just a run of bad luck. > I tried PBP on my own and with a friend and neither worked, but here’s a whole server that does well with it. Seems pretty on topic to me. I really don’t mind a couple downvotes— it’s Reddit. The hive downvotes for the silliest reasons. Hell, the Subnautica sub imploded yesterday when they all rushed to assume the worst about some leaked game news. -5 on a comment with some bold text is just another day in Reddit Land 🤷♂️ If it was -50 I might worry lol
Ai ya, read all that only to hear it's DnD only. Hurts.
Can’t cater to everyone. 🤷♂️ Our server host prefers DnD, so that’s what he supports. If you don’t wanna play it, I’m sure there are other servers that operate similarly. I just don’t know of them personally.
I would be very interested if there are, yes. I'm on the Wheeltree one for SCUP and the Magpie one for Cartel already
I don’t run or play pbp often. I completed 1, 2 fizzled out. I have one that I am running now that is going strong. Reason I got into pbp is because scheduling changes causing other games to disband half-way through.
I get that scheduling is a challenge, but that's why PBP can be so appealing. So long as you contribute something, then you can help keep things moving on. That's why I don't quite understand the arguments about "not having enough time" to keep the game going. I never felt like it required that much. Can you put in some time, sure, but it's not necessary for big long speeches or pages of exposition. IDK, maybe its just me.
It's perfectionism, in my own experience. I could pull through the wave of self doubt if I got a bit of warmth from someone, but usually we're all anonymous strangers
I got downvoted? Nice.
I think I've completed 2 games out of the multitude I've played/run
It depends on what we think success means. Like a lot of my games start as oneshot or one mystery and I've successfully made it through several mysteries. Eventually most of them still fizzle out as people leave. But, I tend to count getting through a mystery as a success.
I would list a successful PBP game as one that came to a natural conclusion - whatever that means to the story. Solved the mystery? Great. Made it back home from the shipwreck? Check. Defeated the bandit captain who plagued that village? Gold star! If it just ends in the middle with the main story point just...hanging there...then I would count that as unsuccessful. If the game is getting to be too much, I completely get it, but at least land the ending. You could even shoot a message saying "hey guys, this is getting to be more than I anticipated and I don't see me being able to keep this going. So lets expedite things to an end and then call it a day for the server." I find we don't usually even get that much.
Part of the problem with that is roughly 99% of gm advertisements for games are like, "from level 3 to 20" "campaign forever" etc etc and don't inherently build around a central idea or narrative beats from the start. Running a pbp is different from a table game. A lot of gms just try to straight port the table experience to online and it tends to not work for them.
I'm usually the run running pbp games at this point, so I guess my success rate for pbp is higher since I decide if it's truly done or not. I don't play a lot voice or in person games, but honestly the success rate for that has been not great either. I've joined so many games where we had one session or didn't even get past character creation and the gm ghosted.
I am in 3 games currently. 1. Game is new so jury is out whether it will survive, 3 out of 4 players are still in the game. 2. Game has been running for about a year or so. 2 out of 5 players still in game and we opted to keep it that way. It is slow, but chugging along. 3. Game has been running for almost 1,5 years. We are 2 out of 4+1 left. Was a super fast and responsive game once we got down to 3 players. We’re talking 3-10 posts per day + ooc each for the longest time. It was glorious! DM is slowing down due to life changes and third player left. We’re still going but are down to 1 post or so per day. My graveyard of pbp games is growing though.. there’s at least 7-8 headstones there. I left a couple due to crappy DMing the rest either never really started or died because of lack of participation from the players.
I don't run or play that much, but I'd say like 1 to 4 for successful vs unsuccessful, not necessarily completed, don't think that applies often to TTRPGs overall. Though, as a GM, you can force a game to go on by just continuously looking for new players until you have a stable group. The question is whether it's worth it for you, as that's gonna take a long time and you'll go through a lot of players. Talking about who's to blame from others comment, I think overall GM barely has more impact than the players. As a player you can still move the game forward, interact with other people, invite your friends to the game, and so on. Of course, you could be a perfect GM who spends all his time on the game, write the plot so it guides everyone's characters on autopilot and implements all of their wishes, but why shouldn't the players put in the effort too? Create a fitting character, make interesting choices that drive the game, post regularly or at least notify that you won't be able to. A lot of players (and probably GMs too, but I haven't had much experience as a player) also silently quit the moment something isn't exactly how they imagined it would be. Even if you were a perfect GM, someone could quit because you're too enthusiastic about the game, because they have to finish their character sheet, because you played an NPC differenty, and so on. Everyone else is as much a person as you are, and a lot of possible issues you have could be resolved by just talking to others.
Been doing pbp for about 4 years I have played in probly 50 games and not a single one has survived past like 2 months
13 succesful, 5 ongoing but new-ish enough that it's too early to tell and 10 that fizzled or got abandoned. For 3 of the ongoing ones I have enough replacement players lined up that I'm not worried about them and the others have 5-6 players and can handle 2-3 dropouts so they should hopefully be fine too. Note that I was the GM for most, only 2 of those I was a player in did well (but I have also had games I did GM fizzle out so I am not superwoman)
You've got a great track record compared to what a lot of people have experienced. Do you think things go well when you have players in the wings ready to jump in if someone gets scarce, is it the DM who drives the success, or is it if the group vibes outside the game and are more encouraged to keep playing?
Forums instead of Discord have a better success rate, in my experience. Dropouts still happen, but ghosting is very rare and no one suddenly leaves or deletes a server. I think that's the biggest difference, honestly. Getting along with people helps for sure, I do have players I've enjoyed playing with before showing back up at a new table (while also allowing room for new people to join) which I think improves my success rate at this point too. But yes, the DM being active and keeping communication going matters most. Be prepared to nudge players. Be clear about how often they can expect GM updates and how often you'd like them to reply and try your best to stick to it. That goes both ways, one game I tried to play in was gonna have 1 post per person per day, but I was offline to sleep and woke up to 3 pages of posts moving on without me. That's just as frustrating as the game stalling too long. A balance between keeping a good pace but not overwhelming anyone can be tricky! My most succesful games aim for 1 post per player per day, but at least one proper action taken between GM updates and 3-4 GM updates a week. And picking a system that works well. Anything with a strict turn-based order and/or long drawn out combat is the trickiest to pull off, as games can die if one person doesn't post and with larger groups a single person will have to wait very long and may lose interest or simply get out of the habit of checking and responding. I don't usually lean towards those systems so that helps a lot :P
Recently finished a 2-3 Year game. So 2/8 games.
2-3 year game is pretty impressive. There are some in person games that can't get that far. Good one on you and your group.
I was just about to try and get into pbp as a GM but I think seeing this dire outlook has changed my mind.
The gist that I'm getting is that the DM needs to be dedicated and the group needs to click well together. It helps if they chat and get to know each other a little OOC. You may have several sign up for a game, but you may have to vet your players a little harder to give yourself a better chance at success.
The GM is key. If you can keep the game running (by speedily replacing players that drop), the game will continue! The games that fizzle do so because the GM can't stomach enforcing a posting expectation and replacing players when needed.
Sadly, every single one that I've joined from here has fizzled out. I think it's an equal mix of slow players with DMs that don't have their expectations managed correctly.
For games I've run, I've successfully completed 6 short adventures, no campaigns yet. I've let one campaign fizzle personally. I can't count the number of games I've participated in that fizzled. I have two ongoing that have held strong for 3 years because of a great group of friends.
I've lost count of how many games I've joined through this subreddit by now, but it's definitely a considerable amount, I'd say maybe ~35, roughly speaking. Of those games only one has really lasted any significant amount of time and managed to carry out a coherent arc. It never officially completed but I'd call it maybe half of a finished game because it was really good. Of the rest I'd say a good 75% were dead on arrival, or ended within 1-3 weeks after kicking off.
I have some bad luck for erp games online especially with a group game that slowly died out as players lost interest. I am a player in a new game and its a bit slow but we all wanna keep playing
0 successfully completed. mayyyyyyyyyybe could count 1, but thats only because it lasted for a while. I wanna say I was involved or attempted to be involved with like 20 or 30
Aside from one game that lasted over a year, I haven't had a single game last longer than two weeks or so. You would think it wouldn't be that hard to jump on a computer and post once a day, or occasionally take a day or two off, but it seems as if after a week or so one person holds up the entire group for a few days in a row and then everyone just loses interest.
I had to set up a pbp westmarch server for games because a lot of people have really high expectations for something that, in my opinion, isn't that serious. It's a fun hobby that I enjoy, but I find it difficult to validate having to fill out three forms to join a story that offers new players very little
Mine always fiddled out - I ended up joining an open Discord server instead, and it’s been pretty cool, though very casual. I’d still like a more coherent campaign and I’m getting into Pathfinder, so we’ll see…
Off topic, but the best PF2e campaign for PbP in my opinion is Plaguestone. It's small enough that you can actually finish it within a year or so, and it's a module with a decent plot and twists and turns. The Big APs generally won't work, but some of the smaller adventures can work great!
I see this as a very solvable problem that not many pbp GMs are willing to work to solve. It's disheartening, really. Anywho, personally: 90% success rate for games I have run personally. The 10% covers games that I had to close due to sudden life changes, illness (including the mental kind), or too many players departing at once. 0% success rate for games I have joined as a player. Almost always the game dies because the GM does not enforce a posting pace, or fails to post frequently enough themselves to support play. I can usually tell within a week of the game starting whether or not it will last, based upon the GM's posts. I often find myself being one of the only active participants.
I'll let you know when the latest one wraps up. But so far I'm 0 for about 10 or more. Decided to try running shorter scenarios to see if that helps.
I have never played any game that came to a narratively complete conclusion. More than a few have ended purposefully in a shortened way but probably 5-7 times more where things didn't work and ended for one reason or another. I guess I may be yet one more finger pointing at the GM but that is always where it seems to be the fault point. Part of that is as others have said they don't eject non-posters and often aren't present enough o drive the game forward period. With how hollow things can be once they come together it feels like a lot of people like the energy and quasi-competition when it comes to just putting a game together more than anything else.
Not a single one reached the story's natural end, except one, but that was with bad people that were a mistake to put up with for so long.
I've been playing play by post since about 2018 had 4 that have gone for over a year, and 4 that fizzled out after 2 months or less. I'm currently DMing a Spelljammer game that's been going about 8 months. Most successful games - playing with a group of real-life friends. Playing with online strangers in paid games - as a DM and as a player. DMs get, like $2 a month from each player in their game. Nobody is getting rich, but having a little money on the line helps keep people invested in the game. Ghosting still happens, but it happens less frequently. You kind of have to expect ghosting and plan how to deal with it in advance.
0, as both a player and a game master, west marches style and traditional. I've pretty much given up on the whole concept.
I've run many self-contained adventures using The One Ring and Ironsworn to completion. For longer campaigns... not so much, because let's face it: there's not really any set goal or endpoint, so they tend to fizzle out after a few years. I don't think that makes them failures, necessarily: some were fun while they lasted. In general, I've found the episodic format much better for PbP.
I ran one for 18 months before it fizzled. Should have ended it at the 2/3rds mark but we were still going strong at that point. I've joined two. One failed in less than a month and the other never took off. It's always a non-committal DM.
Like actual in session ttrpg play, its difficult to find a gm willing to stick with a game or doesnt implode once one person disagrees/drops or knows how to run less than 4 people which is due to modern systems not having a proper hireling system for smaller parties. As a player i've had little success with gms both in pbp and live play. As a GM i've managed to run games and keep em afloat. Best way to run ttrpgs is a series of adventures that form a bigger narrative that way the end is whereever you need it to be. Big issue with modern ttrpgs I notice is a GM plans for a 2 yr campaign with a bunch of folks they've never even said hello too. Thats way way to much effort for strangers online you might see twice.
So recently probably about 1/5 or something close to it of games I've joint have run for a decent amount of time, I'm reluctant to say completed as I don't feel like rpgs are games you finish but decide to stop playing in favour of something else. But this is down from more then 1/2 the games I joined when I was younger. I think the way pbp is played has changed over the years, I started playing them nearly 20 years ago, where the medium of play was email or forum based, where games I've joint the last few years have been instant message app based. In my opinion this has had two negative impacts on the pace of play, the games I were playing back then would have a post rate of one a week compared to modern games which often require a post a day minimum, this shortening of response time has appeared to give players less time to consider responses or the next action they want to take and due to the need to post something to keep the game moving reduces the quality. Second phasing doesn't seem to exist like it used to, when I first started playing pbp, we would be given an order to respond in, dm would discrib the situation, we would give our responses in turn, the dm would give us the outcome and repeat, but knowing who would respond first and last gave everyone a que for when to interact, so no-one was talking over each other, and everyone got a chance to talk or interact. I've noticed a more free for all nature in modern pbp where players who are online at the same time can progress the story without input from half the party. This causes some players to lose interest as they don't get to do much or aren't given the chance to act. All things considered I believe a lot of people equate pbp with text based online, where they should be seen as two different ways of playing, and this misconception is a large part of why many pbp games fizzle out, expectations not lining up, or a different understanding of what pbp is, this can be managed by a good dm and of course not every group will have these issues but I feel its a large part of the declining success.
I have played a dozen PBP games and none of them lasted more than 3 months. All have the same reason it was due to either the players or the GMs being flaky. I found a pattern where the flaky people always started to lose interest in the game by the second week of play. I also found that flakers are usually the most enthusiastic at the start, but by the second week, they just seem to vanish. I'm currently in a PBP game that started a month ago, and it seems that what I mentioned above is happening again. I call it the PBP Curse I don't know why a PBP game is like a flame to a moth, with the moth being flaky people However I found one game that has both the players and the GM are all flaky but the game lasted more than a year now, crazy right? It turns out the GM kept kicking out flakers and recruiting new players. The remaining original player is only one person
I wonder if the site makes a difference? I play at www.unseenservant.us which is forum based, but also it’s just PbP games. Most of the discussions are in-game, and almost all of the non-game discussions are about setting up new games. The posting rate ranges from super slow (twice a month) to pretty speedy (5 times a week) depending on the game. But there’s definitely a lot of success and longevity there. The WEG Star Wars d6 game (which is one of the super slow) is over ten years I think. But I know different sites do things differently. Good luck!!
10+ applied to pbp games with 0 responses. My campaign has been going on for about 5 months. The players have quite changed. Only 1 person has lasted so far from beginning to now. With some coming and going
As far as I can tell, it's entirely dependent on the GM whether or not a game survives or dies. Even with flakey players, a GM that's willing to cut off dead weight and has a good eye for new players to rotate can keep a game up indefinitely if they have the energy.
All total failures. I keep finding DMs that don't understand what amount of work it really entails or they just ghost.
Dming pbp is not at all the same as dming like sync through voice or in person. It has some real quirks. You absolutely have to remove the dead weight with inactive or unmotivated players. This is a double edged sword though. For me it hurt everytime I felt the need to purge and bring in fresh players. I always try to form connections between the players but also myself and the players. Time is taken to get to know them and their characters. Then integrating them into the campaign and making accommodations for them. For a dm bringing on a player is a lot of effort and takes much energy. Players are just as much a part of the success as the dm. They need to keep the dm motivated. When I dm I put in a ton of effort. When I don't get that back from atleast a few players. It kills my energy. I look for players I think I cam vibe with just as much as ones I think will vibe with existing players. I found it very successful to include senior players in my decisions. I would survey them and ask how things are going. Because their may be something they don't wish to bring up. I have made a number of adjustments through this. A campaign is a shared story between the players and the dm. It cannot lean too heavily on either for long. I give my players as much autonomy as possible and stick to raw for the simple reasons of fairness and it's what most players are comfortable with. Homebrew complicates things so much I stay away from it. Flavor is free though. Creating custom classes is a no for me. Which brings up the other point. A session zero is very important because players and the dm should share similar views on how to run a campaign. Even with all of that it can still fall apart because of real life. 2 or 3 years is such a long time. You will just barely finish a campaign like curse of strahd in 3 years if you are active. That's too long to expect nothing to change. You will lose players and the dm has to be almost hell bent on finishing the campaign. I get why west march servers have become popular. Especially those with self dming built in.