What is your preferred session length?

[LordCdrMilitant]

6 hours.

3 is just too short. Any more than 6 and people are tired by the end of it.

[Kiero]

3-4 hours, with everyone focused on playing, not chatting or other digressions. That's what my group does, we have a short break in the middle.

[Quertus]

Haven't read the thread yet, but I'd say my preference is probably in the 6-8 hour range. I'd prefer longer like up to 16 being great if my mind and body could consistently handle it like it used to. I remember the all-day gaming marathons, sleep, repeat. Those were the days.

On a bad day, after work, when I haven't eaten well, 3-4 is probably optimal. Or, in at least one case, where I was just too out of it to roleplay, "no game" really would have been better than "bad game".

[overlordseamus]

3-4 hours when i DM. 6-7 when i play. Go figure.

[jonahtherogue]

it all depends on the campaign and your particular players. light hearted and jovial i can play for more than 8 hours. serious and intrigue heavy then it needs to be broken up with breaks. but if your players are fiddle-farters, a longer session ensures more messing about and distraction.

[Velaryon]

I prefer the longer sessions, 8-12 hours depending on everyone's energy level. I don't have the opportunity to play every week, so when I can get a session in, I like it to be a long and memorable one. Also as a DM, I hate planning, so having fewer but longer sessions allows me to put it off a bit longer.

[mephnick]

We go for like 6 hours, but there's lots of chat and a lunch break. So I bet we get 4 hours of actual gaming in. We're all friends and we like to catch up so it's kind of hard to stop the talking.

If I was playing with strangers or acquaintances, I think a focused 3-4 hours would be perfect.

[Tinkerer]

I prefer the longer sessions, 8-12 hours depending on everyone's energy level. I don't have the opportunity to play every week, so when I can get a session in, I like it to be a long and memorable one. Also as a DM, I hate planning, so having fewer but longer sessions allows me to put it off a bit longer.

Ah, I think I've found my antithesis. I switched to the shorter sessions because if I had to wait for a day where we could all be together for 12 hours it would most likely be about 3-4 months between play sessions. And as a GM (while I don't necessarily dislike planning) I've found that shorter sessions allows me to spend less time planning since I always have my players announce their intent for next session at the end of the previous one.

[Quertus]

I always have my players announce their intent for next session at the end of the previous one.

Best GM life hack ever. I heartily approve.

Now, that having been said, I personally prefer having a group of players who can really dig in to even a single objective, explore the world, and turn it into a lengthy session. So spending two consecutive 16 hour sessions negotiating with the giants, or investigating rumors of a ghost ship, for example, are not unheard of.

[RazorChain]

And as a GM (while I don't necessarily dislike planning) I've found that shorter sessions allows me to spend less time planning since I always have my players announce their intent for next session at the end of the previous one.

I have a group that's very invested in the world and they sidetrack a lot. That means I usually have an abundance of things ready. They and I enjoy the sidetracking so getting through some adventures takes time.

We usually play 6 hours and sometimes 8 hour sessions. biweekly. I dont have any trouble keeping up. When I was younger I would run marathon sessions, starting friday afternoons until sunday evenings with sleep breaks.

But I usually ask the players what they're going to do next when they finish an adventure as there are lots of things to choose from and they know they can't be everywhere

[Velaryon]

Ah, I think I've found my antithesis. I switched to the shorter sessions because if I had to wait for a day where we could all be together for 12 hours it would most likely be about 3-4 months between play sessions. And as a GM (while I don't necessarily dislike planning) I've found that shorter sessions allows me to spend less time planning since I always have my players announce their intent for next session at the end of the previous one.

The way my life has been going, meeting only rarely is kind of how it is anyway. And I also talk to my players between sessions and try to get an idea what they have in mind for next time, but I also like to throw them curve balls now and then. I try really hard to make sure that the world is alive around them, so that while their deeds definitely make an impact, there are also more things going on that happen whether or not they get involved. And sometimes those things trample across what they're planning to do in a way they don't always see coming. It's delightfully chaotic sometimes.

A lot of the planning time comes down to encounter planning, which I find necessary but really tedious. I have a somewhat nonstandard party that's very good at what they do while missing things that most adventuring parties have (like a dedicated healer or skillmonkey), so that creates some unique complications when planning encounters.

But most of all, I'm a horrible procrastinator and so when I finally do manage to sit down and get ready for a game, I like to let it run as long as possible.

[SirBellias]

When I was younger/over the summer we usually went for about 5 or 6 hours, which was nice.

Seeing as how that has become unfeasible do to a variety of factors (most of them being college related) the games I've been in recently/seen around have been more like 2-4 hours, on a schedule. Generally 3.

It still works, and is entirely necessary, so I see no issue with it. I like games, and I'll get them where I can. Barring all other variables, I think 4 hours of relatively concentrated gaming is pretty good.

[Professor Chimp]

As a GM, I prefer 3-4 hours. As do many GMs, it seems.

I can pull longer sessions, but after about 6-7 hours of continuous play my concentration starts to wane. Whenever our fellow GM or I do a marathon session, it's really more like a couple of 3-4 hour sessions spaced apart by 1-2 hour breaks (usually dinner/go for a drink).

Come to think of it, I prefer the same thing as a player.

[Guizonde]

i prefer 7+, both as dm and player. for years i played 12h sessions, broken up by a meal in between. now, it's "however long we can all stay together". sometimes it's 7, other times it't 17 hours. my personal record as player was 49 hours, with meal breaks and a 4 hour "night". my record as dm was 21 hours straight after being up for the past 3 days. insomnia has its perks but i crashed hard after that marathon session.