The erratic gaming group

[MarkusDark]

Hello everyone,

I have a question/discussion ta talk about. I currently have a group of 6 players who are 'in' my Champions game. However, attendence at it is sporatic at best. The players have other commitments and conflicts that spring up on a regular and irregular basis and most of the time, I am lucky if I can get 3 people at a game.

I find myself trying to figure things out and where to go with the game. I, myself, would say I am about 75-80% 'jazzed' about the game and I know that a good part of that missing 25% is due to the spotty attendence - so I am not thinking up front of ditching everything and walking away. But I am trying to decide on which course would be best - or if there is an option that I haven't thought of yet.

First is to find a new time to play. Friday nights were about the best time for everyone but the more we get into the summer months, the more people have 'other things to do'.

Second is to find more players. I prefer about 6 people at the table but as things stand now, that would mean I would need about 12 players to make that random 6 that would appear on one night. This is twofold trouble. First, I have to make the games very generic as I don't know who will be there each night so personal character treatment falls off. Second, if, by some miracle, all 12 show up at the same time, it would have very much the same effect and probably only get half of the actual episode out.

Third is to knuckle down and increase the 'quality' of the game overall. As it stands now, I like to feel I run a pretty damn good game. My thought would be to produce incredible games so that others would decide to go to the game than do other things. The trouble with this is that I would have to put in even more time into the games (still making them generic) and I also don't want to feel like I am competing for someone's attentions. Bad form there if you ask me.

So, is there something I am missing? Or have I basically summed up all of the possible modes and need to go from there.

Thanks for your input.

[Monolith]

Well, my first though is, have you talked to your players about this? They might not really understand that it bothers you that much. It's easy for players. They do not have to worry about making a good session. They just play. If you told them that it bothered you some of them might curtail their no-shows.

I have a standing policy that I need to know 3 days before a game who is going to be there and who is not. Yes, emergencies happen, but if a player skips the game at the last minute to go and see X2, then I am very unforgiving. Sometimes players need to think of the game like they would any other life commitment. If the players would not miss Tuesday night Judo class then they should not miss Friday night’s Champions game. A commitment is a commitment, whether you are playing for it (as in the Judo class) or not. I would be very hurt if players did not come to my game without even the courtesy of letting me know before hand.

Finding a better night or time might just be what the game needs though; perhaps Saturday or Sunday afternoons would work better instead of Friday evenings. Most people in our age bracket like to socialize to some extent, and it seems like most of that socialization takes place at night. I am currently playing on Sunday afternoons 1 to 6 and that seems to work well for everyone right now.

As I said above though, my first course of action would be to talk to the players and let them know it bothers you. If they care about the game they should be willing to be more responsive to your feelings and the needs of the game.

[MarkusDark]

Well I should say that it doesn't really bother me, per se. If a game is cancelled, I always have Shattered Galaxy waiting for me online and I can spend another week fine tuning the event. I just don't want the game to be half hearted as the more that happens, the less the game is involved, the less important and fun it becomes and soon I'm known as the GM who had that really crappy game in Fremont. ;) Yup, it is all about image.

I have talked to the players, we have tried to work out schedules and the usual comment that is made if we need to wait more than two weeks is "Ew. We shouldn't wait THAT long," so it sounds like they want a regular game. Just seems the fates are against us is all.

[Vanguard00]

There are a couple of options available to you, some of which you've already mentioned.

First, the night you play. Ask all your players to pick a night. It doesn't have to be "every other Friday" or anything like that. Just pick one night a week or two in advance and schedule a game. Ask your players to commit. Remember not to be too harsh or you'll drive them away. Let them know you're committed to the game on whatever night they can get together. Communication is the key, here.

Second, don't find more players. You'll drive yourself nuts with that many people the first time too many show up.

Third, how do you know the quality of the game isn't up to par? Have the players complained? Chances are your game is good enough but, as you said, it suffers from attendance issues.

Here are some fresh thoughts:

1) Be prepared to can the game. First and foremost. If you try and hold on too hard you'll make it highly unfun for everyone, including you. I'm not saying you should give up--far from it--but be prepared for this eventuality.

2) Consider alternative methods. So a few players show up each time. Is it the same ones every time? Build your adventure around them and let the others come and go as "guest stars".

3) Keep each gaming session encapsuled. By that I mean make it so when you stop, if you absolutely had to you could continue on in a different situation. For example, maybe you have a "Big Bad" who needs his buttocks whooped, but you can't keep your players together long enough to get to him. So on Friday your Brick player has a good time and busts some henchmen heads. Next week, however, he doesn't show, so you NPC him getting a call from mom in the hospital and he in turn calls his buddy, Energy Blaster Guy, who takes over from there. Does that make sense?

4) Take all the characters yourself for the duration of the adventure. Players who show up must choose from a core group of characters who are a must to the adventure. Yes, they might get played a little differently each time, but you'll have consistant characters even if you don't have consistant players. This might cause a little feedback from folks but I've seen it work. It will require you to explain the situation clearly so no one is offended, and a player should get to play his own character if he so desires, unless he's so inconsistant that his character has been relegated to "back burner" status in favor of a more centrally involved character.

I hope this all makes sense. I just thought I'd hammer out some thoughts while I had a moment.

Again, though, start with communication. Talk to your players before making any changes. Ask them their opinions on the game, on you, on attendance, etc. Give them a chance to solve the problem for you.

[MarkusDark]

Thanks for the input. Oh, also wanted it to be known that one of the reasons I am posting about this is that I am sure others suffer from similiar troubles and wouldn't hurt for a reference to be made. Always thinkin' about the others.

Plus, it gets me away from the political boards for a while... ;)

[zornwil]

How often are you expecting to play? What sort of other commitments do the players have - families, jobs, avocations? All three of the latter will take a lot of time. Groups are different of course but the group I'm in I'd guess that most people play 4 games in a month in a GOOD month and probably 2 on average. The issue are the other interests. Anyway, I'd say gauge these things and set realistic expectations for yourself. If most people have families (that don't play), "serious" jobs, and/or "serious" avocations, then weekly gaming with any consistency is out of the question typically.

That being said, unless there's some sort of issue with your games I don't think you need to go to heroic lengths (no pun intended) to attract players. If you do that, likely you'll burn out soon and/or it just won't be as much fun doing all that work.

I think the suggestion another person made about letting your group schedule is a good one, but I find that players need a little guidance/prompting. You may want to throw out some alternative dates and see which ones stick. Typically in our group there's 2 of us steadily GMing right now, we each post a date to our e-mail group usually 2-4 weeks in advance for what amount to monthly games, then see what people say. That or we ask people when we're all convened for a game.

[Blue]

GOOOOOD LUCK organizing a time where everyone can show. I know how hard that is.

Though I have yet to run a game with my current gaming group, I have taken it upon myself in the past to try and organize days/times for people to show up. Sadly, we are down to playing once very two weeks. And we've had to skip the last several sessions. Tomorrow is the first time in OVER TWO MONTHS that I've had the opportunity to roleplay.

The issues... Families... Four of the players have spouses and/or kids. Dating... Yes, some of the group shirk their obligation in favor of women. Hard to believe, I know. Vampire... One of our players doesn't like to play "evil" characters and dropped out. Two players have long drives. One of them has to come about 90 Miles.
There are about three of us who are there rain or shine. Come to think of it, since I began playing three years ago with them, I'm the only person who has been at every game.

I try to get a consensus by E-mail, but some people take forever to reply because they rarely check their e-mail, and others chime in right away before they check their schedules then have to cancel out within days of the game.

[Kaeto]

Be glad you don't have a GM like I had. Who when one person didn't show up completely cancelled the game.

[Alien Knight]

That exact issue killed my superhero game. I recruited five folks hoping that I'd be able to manage at least three players every game. That apparently wasn't a reasonable expectation.

After we didn't play for a month because of 'life issues' I had to cancel. I don't trust my GM abilities and player attention spans enough to keep a plot going on the every-other-month plan. That's with a written adventure log detailing the high points of each session mind you.

Dunno what to tell you except that you should keep it up as long as it's still fun for you and drop it like a hot potato if it's not. Too much work if you're not getting the 'GM rush.'

[BlackSword]

One of the groups I game with defines erractic. I stick with it because they are good friends and I enjoy hanging out with them. But...

We started the campaign in early march with nine people. There was a game in early April, but it was them wrapping up a d20 game. The next campaign game was May 3. This happened because I sent out an e-mail asking when everyone could game and the GM said, how about Saturday (his e-mail was sent on Thursday). Three of us agreed and we gamed. Then he sent another e-mail early last week that said, how about friday night, so three of us (and I was the only one that was consistent between the two weeks) played again. The next date is completaly unknown. I keep throwing out, lets at least make _one_ consistent weekend (first full weekend of the month) and then game at other times and it keeps getting glossed over. Most of the gamers do have families which makes it more difficult to plan. Mainly I have to get the DM to commit since we play at his house and he doesn't seem to want to commit.

[DocMan]

Never leave a gaming session without knowing when the next game will be.

If they don't want to commit to the next session, obviously they don't want to play. Ask them to leave. When you advertise for new players, be sure to note "Serious enquiries only."

It may be harder to put a game together, but once it's together it'll stay together.

Oh, and if one person misses at the last moment, play anyway. If two people miss, pull out backup board games. If they keep missing, they're out.

Doc

[MarkusDark]

Personally, I don't mind people having other activities. I just like to have them there once in a while. I know that if I had 'more of a life' I'd probably just cancel the game myself in lieu of, oh I dunno... dating. ;)

[Toadmaster]

Might be the group is being unrealistic about how frequently you can all get together, I'm in a twilight 2000 group and at best we play once a month, rarely twice and occasionally one every 2 months. Yes the story suffers since it generally takes awhile for us to remember what was happening the last session etc but its still good fun. We won't play unless all can make it which is part of the reason for infrequent games. If the cancellations are caused by one or two individuals it might be appropriate to single them out and either ask them to leave or run two games, one when they can make it one when they can't. If its a matter of most of the group how about running several games based on who shows up. I know none of these will be popular but I've found that is just a fact of trying to game as an adult.

[DocMan]

Originally posted by MarkusDark
Personally, I don't mind people having other activities. I just like to have them there once in a while. I know that if I had 'more of a life' I'd probably just cancel the game myself in lieu of, oh I dunno... dating. ;)

It's not a question of saying that people can't have other activities. They can. It's more a question of mutual respect and personal responsibility. The person that won't pull out their calender and pick a date for the next gaming session is irresponsible. The person that shedules a session, but then doesn't bother to show up because "something better came up" is saying that the game, and all the members in the group, are insignificant and not worth bothering with.

Personally, I would find it difficult to have fun with someone in my gaming group who considers me a nobody and is only there because they couldn't contrive to have something "better" to do. It's easier to have fun with players who actually want to play the game. It's a lot more fun, too.

Yes, regular gaming schedules do get distrupted. Yes, people do get sick at the last moment, or have family emergencies, car accidents, etc. But responsible players also let the group know what happened as soon as they can.

Doc

[Trencher]

Smaller groups are the way to go! It is much easier for two-three people to get together rather than four to six

[Fur Face]

I think DocMan hit the nail on the head. When you have to go to a lot of trouble to be a GM, and then hardly anybody shows, well I guess you've got your answer. It could simply be a matter of immaturity on the part of your players, which may or may not have anything to do with age.

I feel the same way trencher does, smaller is better. I've DM'd games that had up to 12 people, at least half of which were there to do something else besides game. Whenever I had four or less serious players, we always had fun and were able to have better character development & stories went by real fast.

One way I handled the life issues for gaming was not just the night of the game, but the frequency. I DM'd in a game that played every week, but I only came by every other week. I would always call to confirm several days in advance if I was going to make it or not. When I didn't, someone else took over as a GM for a different campaign. When I did GM, I always had episodic stories, or ones that always came to a close that night. That way no one was left hanging, we always ended play in a situation where characters could come and go ("Akiko had to take care of some family business, but she contacted North Star to come and help us out").

Just another perspective, use or refuse at your discretion! :)

[Deathwatch]

look also at the structure of the game you are playing. in my case it is often the arrangement that i have 10 people who want to play champions but i only like to have 3-5 players at a time. this often then provides the opportunity for you the judge to always have the number of players that are required for your comfort and still allow some of the players time to have other activities.

I think in most cases my games are rare i tend to be able to judge 45 weeks out of the year but most of the players can only attend perhaps half that many sessions. this can also lead to odd team interaction some nights as they need to do something that requires flight... but all the fliers are away.

I have spoken to many GM's and helped them in ways to schedule or plan adventures knowing that you may have only one or two players in common from week to week. If you know who is likely to be in play then the adventures and planning are simple.

Deathwatch

[American Valor]

It's never a good idea to get 12 players in the hopes that 4 will show up. You'll never have the 4 that you need. If you have, out of the 2-3 players that generally show up, 1-2 that are regulars, run a game based for them that can expand into more options. In other words, focus the game on your primary players, even if it's just one person, and have him or her "recruit" others for aid in specific missions. I find that if you run a few solos or duets that generate interest and appeal for their characters, those hold-outs take a more personal stake in their characters and show up more often. Check and see if the players are getting what they came for, be it more martial duels for your martial artists, saving innocents from natural disasters and pulling cats out of trees for your four-color enthusiasts, and "dealing with the true threat" by running some more "urban" plot threads for your darker heroes. There's a glut of good superhero flicks out these days, make that big budget movie work for you. Utilize some of those cinematic high-octane/cool-factor themes in your descriptors. Make the characters feel cooler than mundanes. Use simpler plots with NORMAL crooks where the world doesn't collapse if they fail, where they have the wide margin of success to show off a bit. Normals with guns might be easy to beat, but what if they're holding hostages or have planted explosives? (I find it a good idea to have one of the hostages be a DNPC or the mayor's daughter to make sure that they're really careful in such situations. If this'll add a high stress factor then ignore it.) In summary; run a smaller game for the players you trust to show and make it the best game that you can. Don't accept late additions to the game that you know aren't going to be there regularly. (You can give them a side-mission solo that links back to your main plot thread if you have the time) as bad as this sounds, keep an 'elitist' feel to your core membership that makes others want to work to be a part of it. In other words. Make a waiting list. And always remember that you're entitled to have fun too! Pick the players whose roleplay entertains you!

[Vondy]

I just cancelled my game for this very reason. There's no sense in having revolving door players in an ongoing campaign. My two most regular players have now embarked on solo careers, on alternating sundays.

[MarkusDark]

As an update, the group has been meeting more regularly now and things are picking up again. Whee!

[Blue]

Saturday is the fateful day! First game of the 5th City campaign. I have a plan, but now I have another consideration...

I have the test materials for Champions Battlegrounds (Except of course the maps which I'd have to make my own version of). Do I toss out my laid out plans and test Steve & Co.'s carefully crafted test materials? Hmmm.

Sounds like this will be fun either way. But that doesnt' keep me from being worried. I hate being repsonsible for other people's "good times". And I've never run more than 4 players before, and I expect 6-7 this time. And I've never run anything beyond 3rd edition.

I need a drink.

[American Valor]

Sounds like this will be fun either way. But that doesnt' keep me from being worried. I hate being repsonsible for other people's "good times". And I've never run more than 4 players before, and I expect 6-7 this time. And I've never run anything beyond 3rd edition.

I envy you Blue! It sounds like you're going to have a great time! I myself once ran a group of nine that consisted of junior high to college students. It ran great!
My secret:
Run it like you'd run any other game.
Pleasantly and surprisingly enough, they held themselves responsible for their own good time.
All I had to do was provide an "assist".
Let us know how it goes!

[comfortmd]

good luck with that game, with less than 5 players you can "go with the flow", 5-10 you need to have a white board for the speed chart and organizational notes for ernabling secret rolls for the players, 10-15 you need a secondary battle assistant to keep everything moving, along with an action clock to keep players from delaying, 15-20 you should consider secondary gm's or splitting the game up into multiple segments, and remember, test materials are just that, you have to read them to ensure yourself of the relevance of every portion, and don't be afraid to use a highliter or two

[Blue]

It actually went remarkably well. I had seven players. I've allowed them to have more than one hero on the team, but they can only play one in each scenario.

I created a simple excel spreadsheet. I type in a name, DEX, SPD, and a tie-break number. The spreadsheet automatically generates their phases. Then when the next attack phase comes up I click on a button for that phase and it sorts everyone in order, so I dont' have to fool with figuring all that out.

The only things that didn't work for me were my own problem: I ran two "starter scenarios". First one was scene 1 from "champions battlegrounds" unpublished manuscript. scene 2 was my own scene I had written before I got the playtest materials. Problem here was that there were too many similairities.

But here are my favorite things about the session: The heroes show up and one is driving an armored vehicle and another is operating big iron robots. The villain, who has magnetic powers usable only on ferrous materials, rubs his hands together wit glee. Said villain uses his Magnetic TK to grab a moving vehicle and change it's facing so that it runs right at the heroes. I could have hurled the vehicle, but this seemed more fun, forcing driving rolls, diving for cover, etc. A hapless hero got too close to a basketball pole/hoop, and proptly wound up wearing it as an entangle ("requires ferrous metal"). In the next fight a mentalist hero is floating outside the window and gets shot. He's not a physical specimin and winds up falling. A quick thinking hero flies out after him because he's unconscious and falling. He seizes the falling mentalist, and at that moment is shot by the villain leaning out the window. His duplication has a "trigger" that happens only when he takes damage. One of his selves flies the mentalist to the ground while the other flies up and KO's the villain. It was all nicely timed and purely on accident. One of the heroes manages to notice that one of the "traffic" helicopters circling the building shouldn't be there and wisely asks the cops to watch it. If he hadn't, then this whole scenario, which was a ruse to keep the heroes busy cross town, would have worked. Now they have a shot at stopping the villains crosstown, this coming session, because the cops are slowing the villains down and the heroes have just wrapped up the villains on this side of town.
These guys love the roleplaying more than the killing anyway, so half of my job was done just by letting them interact.

[dsatow]

Some suggestions:


Have players run other PCs characters. Sometimes this works, sometimes it doesn't.
Make your story line more flexible such that characters can fade in and out. In comics, some supers seem to go off fighting agents while some fight supervillains. The ones fighting agents never get a lot of screen time. We call them the cardboard heroes. They act on autopilot and either bad and embarrassing stuff happens to them or nothing interesting happens to them at all.
Run more episodic games, just like some shows on tv, where each episode is self contained but still gives tidbits to the overall arc. Then when you want to conclude the arc, you can try and ask all the players to show up for a single conclusion arc game. Hopefully, by only asking all the players to come to a single game is easier than a weekly commitment. This is actually sometimes hard, especially when you have a grand scheme in the vision of things and plot out really cool plots for certain characters and they are the ones to not be there. If you can master it, its a good talent to have in real life, as things never go they way you want it to in real life either and being able to bend with breaking is a really sought after talent.


If the players are too erratic, then it might just be time to fold the game or go to a completely episodic game. Episodic doesn't mean bad, just different. Look it the Old 60s Batman TV show. It was very episodic and is still fondly remembered today.

[Tasha]

Dude, this is quite the Thread Necro. A thread from '03... not good.

BTW he did finally get the game rolling well and we played for quite awhile. It remains one of my treasured gaming memories. When that Champions game lost steam, we played in StarGate Hero (run by someone else) which was also fun. After the StarHero game He ran a long running Fantasy Hero game which was also a ton of fun.

[Ian Mackinder]

IT"S A-L-I-V-E!!!!!

Gee, that's a relief. I was looking through this thread, and wondering why I couldn't recall most of those IDs. Anyhow, I think the idea of having a "pool" of charcters that PCs draw from has merit, depending on the group and the game.

In most campaigns I am in, Characters with absent Players are often run as NPCs. They are jokingly referred to as "Irish Mine-Detectors", and/or mention made of "... Using the unencumbered rules ..." ('Knights Of the Dinner Table' in-joke) but all reasonable care is taken with them. Can be an interesting way of shaking things up a little, if the absent Player is the customary leader or something.

In one game I'm in, the GM's practice is to control such Characters himself but, when it comes to combat, turn over the running of that Character to another Player (usually a volunteer). The understanding being that IF this trust is ever abused in any way, then the GM will take back control.

[Cygnia]

I run a 7th Sea game about once every two years for two specific players. Thankfully, I just go for self-contained "episodic" stories than an over-reaching arc. Though, I do follow my own continuity. A henchman who got maimed in a rather "special" area in the very first game came back a few years to try to get revenge. :D

[Murrkon5]

I think the comment "more of a life" is the nub of the problem.

This disparaging attitude about our hobby is what gives attending a game a low priority. Somehow, any other activity is superior and part of "having a life". We're bombarded with the stale jokes that any group sitting around a table role-playing are all loser spaz virgins. So, as much as we say we want to game, there's this little guilty twinge inside saying "loser! go out and 'have a life'"

Any activity is a valid part of a life. What tips the scales is becoming obsessive about the activity. However, if all the GM and game is asking is for one night a week, it is as valid as poker night, book club night, movie night, watching the sporting contest night, etc.

So, the point of this is to remove this guilt crap and honour commitments. Certainly, granny's 75th birthday can take priority. But if the game is being ditched in favour of a movie...heads must roll.

[steamteck]

I think the comment "more of a life" is the nub of the problem.

This disparaging attitude about our hobby is what gives attending a game a low priority. Somehow, any other activity is superior and part of "having a life". We're bombarded with the stale jokes that any group sitting around a table role-playing are all loser spaz virgins. So, as much as we say we want to game, there's this little guilty twinge inside saying "loser! go out and 'have a life'"

Any activity is a valid part of a life. What tips the scales is becoming obsessive about the activity. However, if all the GM and game is asking is for one night a week, it is as valid as poker night, book club night, movie night, watching the sporting contest night, etc.

So, the point of this is to remove this guilt crap and honour commitments. Certainly, granny's 75th birthday can take priority. But if the game is being ditched in favour of a movie...heads must roll.


True enough, It does help to destroy this attitude when Like me, your spouse is a fellow gamer. heck, we have family gaming night with the kids weekly.

[Tasha]

I think the comment "more of a life" is the nub of the problem.

This disparaging attitude about our hobby is what gives attending a game a low priority. Somehow, any other activity is superior and part of "having a life". We're bombarded with the stale jokes that any group sitting around a table role-playing are all loser spaz virgins. So, as much as we say we want to game, there's this little guilty twinge inside saying "loser! go out and 'have a life'"

Any activity is a valid part of a life. What tips the scales is becoming obsessive about the activity. However, if all the GM and game is asking is for one night a week, it is as valid as poker night, book club night, movie night, watching the sporting contest night, etc.

So, the point of this is to remove this guilt crap and honour commitments. Certainly, granny's 75th birthday can take priority. But if the game is being ditched in favour of a movie...heads must roll.

I have always wondered why gaming for a night is any worse than sport nuts spending a night at a bar or at the Stadium or park watching their favorite sport. I guess it's because it's a 'geek' hobby and many old timer gamers have been infected with the "Gaming is only for nerdy geeks in the basement" meme. Unfortunately gaming has this ugly stigma attached to it. Hell, my dad spends as much or more time on his hobby of car customization as I do on gaming. He's a Hot Rod Geek in that he can spout off just about anything you would want to know about Hot Rodding and those pioneers who started the hobby. He's fortunate in that Hot Rodding is a "cool" hobby and no one really things anything of the time he puts into his cars. Same with my mom's hobby on quilt making. She's got so much material it makes my Game and Miniature collection pale in comparison. She goes away for Quilting get aways and goes to Quilting conventions (yes there are quilting cons). Again no one thinks anything of the time she spends on it. Both of them "have a life". I game and spend my time doing stuff relating to the hobby and am looked down at.

I think that pursuing my hobby is part of my "having a life". Having a circle of friends who share similar interests getting together once a week for fun. It is a really good social outlet.

My partner and I have always thought if you have a Significant Other (SO), that cant handle the fact that you game one night a week. Then you may not have found the "right" person for you.

[Nolgroth]

I run a 7th Sea game about once every two years for two specific players. Thankfully, I just go for self-contained "episodic" stories than an over-reaching arc. Though, I do follow my own continuity. A henchman who got maimed in a rather "special" area in the very first game came back a few years to try to get revenge. :DHe lost his ear? I don't get it. ;)

[Ian Mackinder]

He lost his ear? I don't get it. ;)

Apparently, neither does he now. :D

[Nolgroth]

Apparently, neither does he now. :DGreat comeback. :)

[lapsedgamer]

As you might be able to tell from my screen name, I went through an extended period of avoiding all things gaming related because I decided that I was now too "grown up." During that time period, I "had a life" which consisted of holding down bar stools, often in crowded thumpa-thumpa bars and clubs. I spent a lot of time trying to emulate people whom I really didn't care for and had very little in common with. I had a three or four of girlfriends whom I had almost nothing in common with. They thought I was weird, nd I thought they were kind of stiff and boring.

I've gotten older, and my current attitude is do what you want and try to find like-minded people to hang out with for the most part. Of course I am a lot more comfortable with myself nowadays, geek hobbies and all, so there is that.

[Vondy]

Make sure the bodies will never be found and put up and advert for new players. :eg:

More seriously, my traditional gaming-politics mantra: "communication is king." Tell them, sans emergencies, you need a few days notice for a no show because, as game-master, planning the session is on your shoulders. If they can't extend that basic courtesy then, after 2-3 no shows without prior notice, they need to take a break until their life settles down more (if it settles down). Discussing what nights are best is also a good idea. Some things you can do to mitigate planning time and no-show impact is to rearrange the game so that its episodic rather than multi-session arc oriented. Also, you can tell the players you're going to do showcase adventures wherein each character gets a story focused on them. If you plan them out in advance (even if its just in note form) you can say "I only have 2-3 players tonight so I'm going to run the adventure for [character x]." You can't account for all the character combinations, but so long as the other players present know their character will get their "star power show," too, then they should be happy to play along as the "supporting cast." It also serves as a bigger draw: show up more and get more chances to pic up the starring role.