Monday Musings #80 🤬

Musings on session and campaign durations.

Good Monday, Gamer!

Photo by K HOWARD on Unsplash

“Time and Dice wait for no man!” – Geoffery Chaucer, impatient player

I’ve learned something interesting as more of my games moved online: I don’t need 4 hours to run a great session anymore. We can get it done in 2. Most of my online games run 2-3 hours. I think it’s all about intention. As a GM, you set the vibe and pace of the session. But what if I turn this up to say…eleven?

---

I like to hop online 10-30 minutes early for the casual chit-chat—jaw-jacking, meet-and-greet stuff. When it’s time to start, I’ll signal it by asking for a recap or framing one myself. Then we dive in. I’m not watching the clock, but I’m paying attention to the rhythm. Are we transitioning between key gameplay states? Should I stop here, tease the next scene, or throw in a cliffhanger? Can I tie up the session with a nice bow, leaving clear decisions for next time? It’s a feel, and I think most GMs will get it.

But here’s where it gets really interesting: What if we take this same intentionality to the series (formerly known as "campaign") level? How many sessions are we committing to? Setting an expectation upfront—that alone is powerful. It gives the experience a sense of purpose and an ending, which can be freeing for both GM and players.

For example, in my Twilight: 2000 game, we had no idea at session 3 that we’d still be playing 50+ Saturdays later. But we kept checking in every 5-6 sessions: Are we still into this? Are we still having fun? Should we keep going? And we extended the initial "6-8 session" deal. That game had momentum, but not every series needs to stretch that far. Nowadays, I start by setting session expectations upfront: "We’re in for 4-6 sessions." The range gives us a minimum (what I think the experience needs to feel satisfying) and +1-2 sessions in case we need extra time to wrap things up. Around session 4, I check in with everyone: "Are we sticking to the plan, or do we want to extend this?"

For some of you, this isn’t new—it’s how you already play. But here’s where my mind is going: Can a game deliver the same rich experience in 4-6 sessions that some folks would stretch across 12 or undetermined count? Can I concentrate it down without losing the fun.

That’s what I’m planning on in my two upcoming winter games: The Black Sword Hack and The Spectaculars. My prep is already focused on making those first sessions count. For me, Session Zero ideally includes an "Act 0." First we do all the session zero things and then get a mini-session of play in. Something easy to set the tone and gently introduce the game’s mechanics. Low stakes, "day-in-the-life" stuff. That way, by session one, we’re rolling in with some momentum.

I should say this approach works for me because I’m here for the game. I love seeing how a game plays, what its mechanics bring to the table, and what the experience feels like. I’m not tied to any specific narrative outcome or story arc. I’m here for the system to do its thing and for us to play within its world. That’s where the magic is for me. This isn’t about optimizing for efficiency; it’s about the intensity of the experience.

So that’s what I’ve been musing on this week. What are you doing to set expectations for your sessions and series? How do you plan for shorter or longer campaigns? Let me know—let’s compare notes.

ICYMI

Get your Bloggie Award votes in!!

Get your Dracula on from Humble Bundle! I love this whole “Against Dracula” premise!