A thread with more than two replies - it's like 2001 all over again! Multiple tables vs. sign-up sheets/single tables:
My gut feeling is I'd be less attracted to the sign-up sheet/single table format. I know if I go an Irish con with an idea from the flyer blurbs(*) of what games are running that I'll want to play game x, y and z in slots a, b, and c. If there's only a single table of a game I want to play actually running - well, we run into all the problems Fergal mentioned. Plus, what's to say a shift to signup sheets *still* won't be accompanied by the disorganisation current at a lot of cons. That said - it *is* all about the game. And probably, yes, a single-table game being run by the author might be "better" as a play experience than a game handed to Emergency GM # 3, 10 minutes before the slot is due to start. Things aren't entirely static, though... at least last year and this year, Gaelcon (the con I've been closely involved with) have been asking writers to also supply/suggest GMs for their scenarios, and as well as the traditional multi-table "big" games has also been running the single-table Indy Games track. A combination of the two systems may well be best. (*) And yes, this is a bugbear of mine. There does seem to be a trend of "make my blurb as uninformative as possible so it'll appear all mysterious and have shocking twists". No, it's just as uninformative as possible. It's a 3-hour con scenario, not a 3-year campaign meisterwerk - let your players know what they're signing up for! Cheers, A.
