The group got together this past Friday. We had a great session.
What I found especially rewarding was that we had six players! One old hand who hadn't been there for a while returned, and we had two new guys show up--including one who had never played D&D before. Everyone seemed to have a great time. Since the party in this campaign consists of six characters, each person played just one character and did not have to divide his attention among two or more.
This was a switch from our last two or three sessions. For some time now, we've only managed to get three players together. Now, we've had some awesome sessions with these three. (One such adventure ended with a player blasting the theme from The A-Team on his phone. At the time, nothing else captured the sheer brilliance with which the party had conceived and executed their plan of action.) Still, having six players added some real excitement and energy that I as the GM found especially invigorating.
This leads me to a question. What is the optimum number of players for a D&D campaign? Three? Five? Seven? Ten? I'd like to know what people think. I'm not sure myself. Now I know it's not one. Unlike some RPGs, D&D is not well-suited for play with just one player and one GM. And, although I've never had this problem myself, I could certainly see how too many players could get unwieldy. So what's the sweet spot, if there is one?
P.S. This question addresses how many players are optimal, not how many characters. That's a related question, but it's not precisely the same. I may solicit thoughts about that later.
I don't think the answer is a specific number. Instead the answer focuses on the group. The question to ask is: "Is everyone able to contribute and talk?" If everyone is able to participate, then it is good and well. Once you notice one or two people are not able to join in and are feeling left out, then it is too many. The exact umber will vary depending on the groups.
ReplyDeleteThe general consensus of all three comments here is that a party of 3 to 6 players is optimal, but that can also vary depending on who the players are. That seems about right to me. With the guys in my particular gaming group, it's now grown to 7 if everyone shows up. (That rarely happens, though.) I don't think this is a problem, however, because of the personalities involved. Everyone just wants to have a good time.
DeleteThat's one aspect of the game that I've particularly enjoyed since I started playing again last year. We're all so much older now. No one really has any desire to control the group, power game their character, or otherwise be annoying. We're just grateful to get together once in a while. Age does sometimes bring a little wisdom......
I think more than 2, but no more than 6. If you only have 2, there's no way to break a tie in case of a dispute over the direction the party wants to go.
ReplyDeleteIf you have more than 6, each round starts taking a long time, and cramming that many people around one table is pretty much a guarantee that someone won't be able to see what's happening on the map, or important information will get lost in the inevitable side conversations that will spring up as everyone is waiting their turn.
I hadn't thought of the tie-breaking issue. It's interesting to think that this might be necessary, but it's never come up in any games I've run so far.
DeleteIt depends on the players, but I like 3-6.
ReplyDeleteIt's good when players each have one character. They can devote more attention to role playing vs. managing characters, which makes the game more fun.
For characters, most adventures work best when there is one of each archetype - fighter, mage, cleric, thief. It doesn't hurt to have an extra fighter type, and if you have a sixth character, you can get creative - monk, bard, illusionist, druid, etc.
I agree that having one character per player is a good idea. Players become more invested in a character when they are just running one. As for the other issue about what classes those characters should be, that's worth a completely different post of its own! I may get to that.
DeleteI agree with everything said above. I've had a lot of fun with 3 and 6, but I could see how adding a few more might start to get unwieldy. Of course, the most important thing is how the personalities mix, and we are lucky there!
ReplyDelete