In my last post I talked about digging on the full group of six players I currently have. Of course that might change before too long (in the last year I’ve had a total of four new players come and go, and three regulars who have not missed a game), but after many years of no gaming it’s kind of a treat to see six players at the table. In all honesty, six is about as many people as our current host can handle (and I stand up for the entire session) in the spot we have (his wife’s fabric workshop in the back studio).
OK, so I got some comments that mentioned the amount of players those particular GM’s preferred in their gaming sessions. Here’s what some of the had to say:
Barking Alien said: …”Its also funny what a full group consitutes for some GMs as opposed to others. I pretty much don't feel like gaming if there aren't at least 3 or 4 players. For me a full group is more like 7 or 8. My current Mutants & Masterminds campaigns averages 8-9. If everyone showed every time we'd have 11 people…”
Sir Larkins sez: …”Seven or eight players for me is way too many. I'm most comfortable with three to four…”
Felipe Budinich said: …”Heh the full group concept also strikes me as funny, usually I have two players, over 4 players and i feel that it gets too crowded…”
So like a lot of things it’s “to each his own.” Space restrictions probably have a lot to do with it. For instance, at this point I can phone in AD&D 1st ed. (30 damn years), so I’m pretty sure I can handle seven or 8 people without serious detriment to the amount of role-playing or amount of time combat takes in my game. But for now I think 6 is going to have to be the cap. The only exception I might make to that is if a girl comes along wanting in on the campaign, if only to keep poor Terry from being the only girl in the group (I actually think she likes that, but that may be a subject for another post).
So I like six for D&D, but what about my couple of other favorites that I had successful campaigns with over the years? Well, in the past I was usually able to get all my players into other alternate genres, specifically Call of Cthulhu and Champions. In the 90’s when I tried to turn the groups on to one of these games, half of them groaned about it (especially the girls), but once they got characters created and got a game in under their belts, they often preferred them to my D&D!
For Champions it was hard for me to handle upwards of six people. Just so much math and crunch. This one particular regular player of mine from the 90’s, “Planet” Janet, was so bad at math (and usually so stoned on tequila and pot) that I had to do it all for her. Champions actually helped my math – heaven forbid you should actually learn or grow in some way from gaming.
I really preferred 2-4 players for Champs. If I only had three players, I would usually do the “street level” type characters. Fighting gang members and serial Killers was usually pretty easy to adjudicate. Ironically, when I had five or six players, it made sense to do the “Super Group” type games, even though it would include tons of super-attacks and tons of crunchy stuff that was just so time-consuming. Those powerful superhero fights took forever. With our current sessions happening for just three hours on a Wednesday night, I doubt we could have Champions as an alternate.
Call of Cthulhu was also a game I think I would have preferred to have like three players for, but my players in the 90’s ended up liking it so much that when we played it as our D&D alternative everyone showed up.
There was one memorable CoC game I ran in the mid-90’s with just three players that was kind of a gas. On a Saturday afternoon my three female players were hanging out in Lisa’s pad above the Hollywood Bowl, and they called me (at home…dateless) to see if I felt like coming over there to run some Call of Cthulhu. That was a session that went late into the night, and there wasn’t even anything of a supernatural nature going on (although I added in a “bump in the night” or two). Basically it was around 5 hours of the girl’s characters hanging out in Arkham shopping, cruising for guys at the Speakeasy, and looking for fun at the nightclub (that one of the characters was a torch singer at). It was one of those games that just would not have worked that well with 5 or more players. I would have needed some beastie to show up to spice things up.
Preferences aside, different group sizes usually create different gaming experiences. But what is your preference?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
For D&D type games I want 6 to 12. Two or three just seems underwhelming; 4 or 5 is okay. But I really want more players than I can handle. It keeps me on my toes.
ReplyDeleteI have a group that consists of five players and 1 DM... it's a good size, I suppose. I don't know... I enjoy the "epic level" group that we have too... three players with 1 DM.
ReplyDeleteI think it really boils down to who works together and how.
I love three players. Everyone gets plenty of space. There ample time for each PC to be in the spotlight. We can move along at a nice pace. Having said that, it's good to have four players in case there's ever a cancellation.
ReplyDeleteI hear you on the Champions thing. Math is hard. More PCs = more math = more hard.
Minimum of 3 players and a maximum of 6. I'm enjoying our group of 5. Depends on the players and DM and their ability to focus to have a group larger than 7.
ReplyDeleteA year ago I would have said 4-5 as the perfect group size, but I think that was mostly because I had never had larger groups to run for.
ReplyDeleteNow that my Mutant Future campaign is in full swing, we have 6-9 people every session and a whopping 12 people that rotate in! I have been absolutely loving DMing for these larger groups.
Jeff Rients' comment above about large groups keeping a DM on their toes is right on. I have learned that I can throw almost anything at these guys, and with that many minds at the table they will come up with a way to deal with it. It definitely forces a DM to roll with the punches and make decisions on the fly, and I have been having more fun with this group than any other in my 17 years DMing (I know, I know, I am just a young pup next to all you old timers!).
Three to six players is the size I like. Less than three and we'd just as soon drink and talk, more than six, and I don't feel like I can keep each one busy.
ReplyDeleteI like our nice comfy five-plus-the-DM group. That way if one (or even two) guys don't show up, it's not a huge burden for us to adventure with one person sidelined or ask a player or two to double-up on characters for one session. Any group smaller than that runs into serious trouble when players don't show.
ReplyDeleteAs for larger groups, ours is a small house with not much elbow room...and our DM who is a little hard of hearing finds it easier to manage the game when there are not a lot of people shouting at and over one another.
I mostly run Call of Cthulhu, and my preferred number of players for that (aside from myself) is four. Five is my upper limit, as I find that six people clamouring for my attention is a bit much, and someone gets left out. I can run for two players, although I find it a bit strange; I don't really know why.
ReplyDeleteI prefer 6 to 10 players - but I'll play for as few as one (solo game w/wife - OD&D) or as many as 12. I've not hit 12 yet, but 10 players and combat is hellacious fun!
ReplyDeleteI think for me, it totally depends upon the game system, how long the players have "played" together (i.e. gel, think and act as a "group") and the space.
ReplyDeleteI've played 2E, 3.X, Shadowrun and a few others with up to 11 players. It's fun, but tough. I've run games w/ up to 11 players but not w/ a "lighter" rule set. 3.X was a nightmare with that many players. In fact, I found 6 players w/ 3.X to be the absolute limit. There was just way too much going on for me.
I've also played AD&D w/ as few as one. I was in the ski industry for years and they used to house us in these wee-little dorms. My room mate actually played D&D and we used to sit up after work and play till the wee morning hours. Good times.
My eldest daughter and I have played 1 on 1 D&D with Labyrinth Lord and it works well.
So it depends. I'd love to give a larger group another go with something like Swords and Wizardry. That might be a hoot. But at the moment, after our last group melted down, it looks like we've got 4 players and on DM. That's about perfect in my eyes.
I think if I had 1 or 2 players the game would run differently, but that would still be interesting. You definitely need to run it for a small crowd and not as usual.
ReplyDeleteI honestly always think of a D&D session requiring 3+ players and the DM. Anything over 6 players and I feel like I can't give any special attention to one or another - the others get bored. And certainly with more players the chance of a split-up is greater.
I liken it to teaching. I teach karate, and it works very differently if you have 1-3 students or you have more than that.
With a small (1-3) class you can give individual attention. You can stand at different angles and look at body position and weight distribution and movement form. You can see what the student's eyes are doing and whether the student is having trouble thinking something through. You make some corrections and then move on to the next student and do the same.
But in a larger class you can no longer split up your time as easily. You either switch to lecture style, where you lead the class in a single exercise at a time, or you split the class into two or three groups where everyone in a group is doing the same exercise. You try to catch the people who need more help, and you try to touch on each student at least once. But it gets very difficult to give the same quality instruction.
Past 10 students you're just leading the class. There isn't much change in what the student receives between 10 and 20 students (limited by the size of the workout space of course).
I've heard the same issues from public school teachers. Class size reduction doesn't help the student unless it goes below 10 or so. And when you tell administrators they'll need to triple the number of teachers, they balk. So it goes.
But the exact numbers vary from teacher to teacher. There is the lower threshhold of "personal instruction" which for me is 3 students, and the upper threshhold of "maximum class size" which for me is about 20.
The lower threshhold limits how many people you can attend to in a personal and direct manner. The upper threshhold is how many people you can keep moving along, like a plate spinner on a talent show.
As this relates to D&D, I think the lower limit is the minimum I'm comfortable with because I'm not used to devoting 1:1 time with players. I'm used to the more relaxed lecture style where there is a two-way interaction that bounces back and forth and my attention is on the group rather than an individual.
And I guess this means I'd be unable to handle a game with more than X players (that being my D&D equivalent to the 20 karate students).
So for me anyway it's not just skill as a DM but style of DMing that determines how many players I'm comfortable with.
Also if the DM is used to playing in a small environment he will be used to handling the number of players that fit in that space. The habit forms and he feels uncomfortable with a larger crowd even though his skills would allow for it.
ReplyDeleteAlso my teaching comparison is a bit off: in class I walk around to see everyone and if I talk with someone I'm right there. But a DM has to speak across a table. So distance between the DM and the seated player may limit the maximum party size.
Also the way a karate class works doesn't prevent the teacher from teaching. But a group of D&D players talks a lot and this may prevent the DM from DMing. So player volume and frequency of side conversations can reduce maximum party size.
Our main game is 3.5E with house rules. The sweet spot for me is 4-5 players. 3 players seems thin and I generally do not run for fewer unless there is special circumstances. There also can be a problem with small numbers and having all the character capability needed for a given adventure. Currently we have 6 players and I find that it is difficult giving everyone the attention they desire and combat drags a bit. Our group is a mix of old war gamers and those with less interest in rules. It is still manageable and fun.
ReplyDeleteBarad
http://gnotions.blogspot.com/
In High School my good friend and the best damn superhero game GM I've ever met, Will, ran Champions. He ran it daily, Monday through Friday, for at least 6 hours a day (often spaced out between before school, lunch and after school periods) for a total of 14-16 players.
ReplyDeleteOn the average only 6 or 7 players were present per sitting but on those rare occaisions when everyone was together it was huge. It was also Champions, so you had 15 some odd PCs and however many NPCs flying, teleporting, moving invisibly, moving at superspeed, battling in NY, battling in the upper atmosphere and searching the sewers for a villain's hidden base. Somehow he kept it all straight, kept it fast moving and made it awesome. To this day I think Will must've had some superhuman powers of his own.
Between early necessity (Between the ages of 8 and 14 I was the only one of the dozen or so gamers I knew interested in (and willing to) GM) and what I later learned from watching other GMs (Will especially), I simply developed a comfort zone that made larger groups feel natural and even preferable. In addition, I often base my plots and subplots on background ideas the players have provided for their characters. Fewer players actually means more work for me in a sense. If I only have 2 PCs for instance, I think of it as having only two sources of ideas (outside of my own). More players equals more ideas equals long lasting, more detailed campaign.
Barking: I for sure would have liked to see that Will at work. Sounds just impossible, but when youe're gifted you're gifted.
ReplyDeleteYeah, I count pretty heavily on ideas that pop up related to the characters in the game. Often takes my plans in entirely new directions.
As many as will fit. I typically DM for 5 or 6 players but I think there is more fun to be had with 1 or 2 players or with large groups. There's lot of room for free form adventure with 1 or 2 players and with 10 or more players lot's of chance for payer motivated actions and cut scene with adventurers all over the place.
ReplyDelete