Alright. I'm in the midst of a campaign right now, but the end of our party's semester is nearing, and thus the end of the campaign. Next semester will bring a new campaign, considering there will be significant schedule shifts and the formation of a new party.

The issue is, in the environment I have, there are enough people interested in playing in my Edge/Age game that I could run two separate six-man parties. However, I do not have the time or resources to make a commitment to two games. I am in absolute love with the party I have now, all of them excellent players, creative and engaged and cooperative; however, due to scheduling, I know we won't be able to keep the same party.

Schedules matter. I'm capping the party at six people. I want the best party possible, criteria being that first, a candidate has the time to stick with the game and the want to stick with the game, a consistent players. Second, that they are a good player - concerned with the overall narrative, active and creative yet knowing when to let the spotlight shine somewhere else, engaged and attached to their character (doesn't have to be thespian-level, though many of my current party are actual thespians!).

So... The simple question is: "how do I choose who to be in the party?" I figured I'd run an audition session or two to see who we add to the party in place of those who won't be able to play.

Now... I want to execute this well. The simple answer is to play a beginner box of the audition group's choosing and see how they handle it. However, I'd also like to get a glimpse of how they mesh with a party with their own character concepts. I can throw together a character quickly, but for a party new to the system, it would be considerably more time consuming. Note that only one person in my current party ever played a beginner game; the rest jumped straight into the game after a bit of explaining and character creation.

I'd like to keep the audition to a single session of four or five hours. I could construct an adventure on the fly as a one-shot to see how they'd interact with it. The question is, though - do I allow them to make their own characters, or simply run pre-gens? If so, how do I keep that under half an hour without hampering their creativity?

Also, what's everyone's thoughts on this sort of thing as a whole?

- Parthenopaeus, brainstorming at an ungodly hour of the morning when he can't sleep.

I probably wouldn't be too concerned about an audition. I'd say it would be better to select the people you have the best hunch about, and if one of them doesn't work out for whatever reason you have a selection of other members to replace him with.

Plus also consider how bad someone might feel if they don't get into a game because they failed at an audition? I'd feel far worse than I would if I was simply told "We're out of spots, but if something opens up I'll let you know."

I'd be worried that an audition would send out the wrong message about how I run the game. "There are four players at this table and only two spots" is a little too competitive. I generally wait until I know a person well enough that I think they'd be a good fit for a group or a game, and that kind of call usually isn't based on anything gaming-related.

I also listen to the recommendation of my players. I'm currently two for two in listening to a player's suggestion for a new player and having it work out very well.

The big issue here is if i give advice now after people have said "don't audition" this forum tends to descend like locusts to defend the first position. I wish you luck though.

Hmmm. This is just idle brainstorming (from a restless mind at an ungodly hour), of course, as this would be the relatively distant future.

I don't think I'd tell them. I think I'd run an "interest meeting/learn to play" and run a one-shot and be looking at who would mesh best with a group.

I'm also two for two with adding players based on the party's recommendations (we originally started with four), and I don't regret it. But of course, there's always a couple of good friends who didn't get in who sometimes ask me why they didn't...

I'm just concerned that I might pass up someone who we'd all really love to have in our group.

I don't think I'd tell them. I think I'd run an "interest meeting/learn to play" and run a one-shot and be looking at who would mesh best with a group.

This is something I would never do. Being honest with the Players makes for a healthier game. If you are going to audition, tell them, don't hide it.

I don't think I'd tell them. I think I'd run an "interest meeting/learn to play" and run a one-shot and be looking at who would mesh best with a group.

This is something I would never do. Being honest with the Players makes for a healthier game. If you are going to audition, tell them, don't hide it.

True, true...

I guess I shouldn't be too terribly worried about the future; I'm just worried about next semester in general, beyond running an Edge campaign, though I really want to make sure I can run a good game then, too.

Thanks for the feedback and setting my late-night, sleep-deprived mind straight!

In my experience the most relevant factor in keeping a gaming group together is whether people will keep attending. Whether they'll be on time, whether they'll flake at the last minute, or whether they continually have scheduling conflicts that leave you down one or more players when it's game time.

That kind of stuff is hard to predict.

Yeah, like your looking for people who wouldn't make the kind of decision you are making.

But its definitely hard I understand, I wish I could just GM for everybody because its nice to introduce things to people and see them have fun but I just don't have that kind of brain power.

I don't know if you ever play as a player, but maybe you could try train someone else to be a GM for the extra people. Then maybe one weak you can just be a player if you aren't prepared to GM

Or maybe eventually even find a way to mix both the parties at least narratively.

I think a good part of this question is, do you know these people? If you don't know anyone, then auditions might make some sense, but if you know these people, you probably already have a good idea of what kind and quality of player they are. That pretty much just leaves the schedule and the characters.

In any case, I would start by asking for schedules and character concepts/willing roles before setting up any game. You might find you can only get 6 at the same time, at which point nothing else matters. From there you're looking for characters who will mesh together into a usable group. If someone says they're bringing the CN rogue, well, you know who say maybe next time to.

If you do move forward to auditions, you have to decide well beforehand how you're going to judge people. As you might see often in this forum, there's a lot more issues that come up from table-talk and OOC meshing issues then anything related to what they actually do in the game. Any player/group can miss clues you think were obvious, or come up with the brilliant and unexpected solution - at least every once in a while, but players that don't interact well with the GM or with the other players can pull down a game. The difficulty of auditioning this is you won't know how Group A player 4 interacts with Group B player 2 unless they're playing together.

Have you considered grooming one of your current players to GM for the other group?

As to your question, run some short sessions, no longer than an hour, with two or three players. Winnow it down through those. Put the players in situations that would be possible to encounter in the game and see how they handle it. Make sure to include a little bit of combat (no more than a round or two), some social skills (especially for those who aren't trained in it) and some tech/research checks. The point is to push them out of the comfort zone they'd imagine for that character and see how well they handle the RP aspects of the game.

That said, managing personal dynamics are always the most difficult aspect of any RPG. To that end, make sure that all the players actually get along with one another and that there's no budding resentment, jealousy or disdain between and among them.

And then I'd go form my own group. But with prostitutes and gambling. . . .

I don't think I'd ever tell players they had to 'audition' to be in my group.

However I do my best to make it very clear that not only do I have a job and a wife and a one-year-old but gaming is important to me, so I'm willing to make time in my schedule to host games at my house and do all the planning that's involved in GMing a game.

That mainly means that I have a low threshold for gaming situations involving flaky players or people whose schedules are wildly inconsistent.

I have good friends that I'd love to have in my game because they're creative and add a lot to the table. However if they regularly flake on game day, "Oh I forgot", "I was taking a nap", "work is crazy this week (just like it was last week and the week before)"... that's just not going to work out for that player as a member of our group.

Let's hang out or go see a movie sometime, but I try to prioritize people with reliable schedules for recurring RPGs.

And then I'd go form my own group. But with prostitutes and gambling. . . .

On second thought, skip the gambling. . . . .

I capped my game at four plus an Astromec Droid I play, I think thats the best sized party for a game like this. Plenty for everyone to do and it rewards PCs that aren't too min-maxed.

We were starting a D&D 5th ed game and there were a lot of people interested, so many that we split into two groups. I let all of them that I was doing an EotE game as well with four players, the type of game I was going to run, and that whoever really wanted to play should let me know. I got eight people who were interested so I said that I could teach someone to GM and loan them the Basic game and that it wasn't personal but I only wanted to run for four and let them work it out. It worked out well.

This is something I would never do. Being honest with the Players makes for a healthier game. If you are going to audition, tell them, don't hide it.

Agreed, honesty and forthrightness between players and GM is vital in this game.

If I were going to do this, what I might do is run a short tournament, and let the players know that the best players will be given the option of moving forward to play in the campaign. You could even have assigned alternate slots.

For each game in the tournament, you run one of the boxed Beginner games, or other suitable start games. Use pre-gens, but make sure that players know they’ll be able to create their own characters (if they want), if they go into the campaign.

For each game you run, at the end you rank the players from best to worst. And you have each of the players rank each other. Total up the player votes using an “instant runoff” system [0], and that is 50% of the score each player gets for that game. Your rating for them is the other 50%.

Make sure that each player gets a chance to be in at least two or three games, they don’t play the same scenario more than once, and they get to play a variety of characters and character types.

When you’re done, total up the scores again, using the instant runoff system. Take the best six overall players, and those are the ones that make it into your campaign. Take the next two and they are your alternates. Make sure that the others know that if things fall through badly enough, they might still get called.

Oh, and make sure that everyone knows the rules up front, both about how 50% of their score will come from the other players, and 50% will come from you and how well you think they played in the game. Make sure to give them Specific, Material, Actionable, Reasonable, and Testable (SMART) goals to achieve during the game, especially with regards to party cohesion, avoidance of inter-party conflict, and whatever things you think make for an a good game to play.

[0] Or other type of fair voting scheme, e.g., Condorcet.