DungeonCraft #20: The Best Size For Your D&D Group
Вставка
- Опубліковано 13 жов 2024
- So what's the best size for a D&D group? It depends on a lot of factors. Professor Dungeon Master opines & gives sage advice.
"Fury of the Dragon's Breath" by Peter Crowley
Bandcamp : petercrowley.ba...
"Managing rules and managing people" Yep! And I've found that managing people is 80% of the job, too! I agree regarding group size. I really like running sessions with 3 or 4 players. Things go quickly -- combats, exploration, social interactions -- so we experience a lot of content. Great video bumper, by the way!
0:28
So casually delivered, I Love it. This guy is crackin' me up.
I like 5 as my ideal group size.
Two simple reasons.
1) It allows the party to cover the bases with the 4 standard archetypes.
2) Odd numbers make it harder to have "Tied" decisions, but it makes it less likely that two people will gang up on the other.
Completely agree that new DMs stand a better chance of enjoying the experience if they start out with a small group of friends who are less likely to rip you apart if you screw something up.
I like five just because if one or two can't make it, you still have a viable group to hold a session.. 3-4 is a more ideal number.
Same, fighter/rogue/divine/arcane type +something extra. Also if 1 person is sick/missing/AWOL then we can still go ahead. I think 4 would be my ideal to be honest as it runs smoother but there's always 1 extra person who wants to join in lol
To me it varies according to the specific RPG. But for D&D style adventures, I'd say 5 people is the sweet spot.
I learned to play DND as a 12 year old, and started with a party of 7 other 12 year y/o with our DM being our friends Dad. He was super patient with us as the experienced DM he is, and his patients really set a perfect pace of game. I really like your goblin analogy where you double the goblins, because the seven of us took on over 20 goblins, yah was a blast. If you're really confident with your DM abilities, and have all your story line researched and planned, don't fret too much about how long you think the game may run you. Quick reference sheets are key to DMing and essential to expanding on any campaign's party size! Good video, DUNGEON CRAFT!! :D
*May all your rolls be 20's*
Gone are the days when I could literally have a session all night with my friends until the wee hours of the morning. I don't have the time or stamina. The best group that I ever played in though was with a group of about 6 of us. A friend of mine was running the campaign & it was a lot of fun. I was in my early 20s with no wife, kids etc. so time wasn't that big of a deal. I wholeheartedly agree, a group of 4 (ish) is about optimal for any campaign, especially if you're limited on time and sessions.
Pro. DM Thanks for letting me know you are making a video about running a large group. Some of the most important lessons I learned from running large groups are;
You need to have enough experience to feel comfortable running a group of 6+ and not feel overwhelmed.
Having experienced and more importantly patient players will make things much smoother and less stressful.
You should already have an idea of what type of campaign your group likes. In other words do they prefer a combat oriented game? Political intrigue? A roleplaying drama? An espionage/stealth thriller? Exploration? Etc. most groups enjoy a healthy combination of these archetypes. In Having a large group you will find it is more important to have as many players engaged in the scenario as possible. Be realistic with your groups expectations.
If you are running a combat heavy game. Ensure you use many Speedy Combat tips from DungeonCraft. Many of these things are very natural and have no real learning curve. Such as; no initiative, rolling attack and damage dice simultaneously, limiting the time players have to resolve their character actions, etc.
personally my group doesn’t roll initiative unless it comes to a situation it matters. We consider everything simultaneous. Who really cares if a character moves first unless some other character or monster is interfering with him? If you are hacking away at each other in melee, unless a special incapacitating effect goes off or you are delivering the killer blow or you are attempting to disengage from the combat. Why roll until it is necessary? We don’t and have played this way for 35+ years with new and experienced poYers. It saves a lot of time.
Limit the amount of potentially distracting things such as devices, conversations about non-gaming events that have nothing to do with the current adventure, music or reading between actions.
As the DM you really must be vigilant and ensure your players are engaged. Constantly update and give them information about the encounter or adventure through skills, background, questions, observations, etc. each time you do this it immerses the player in the content of the game and keeps their interest and focus.
Show examples via MPCs and Monsters of actions which can be performed in the game. Especially underused actions such as aid other, fight defensively, or a combat maneuver disarm, bull rush etc. Have the NPCs talk first person in character to the player characters. whenever you notice a player’s attention straying to far from the encounter or adventure bring them back with a combat knowledge or NPC interaction.
Understand running a large group of players is not impossible and can be very rewarding as a DM and player. It does take practice and everyone needs to be on board. As I said before, I’m very fortunate to have an abundance of players who want to play D&D with me. They understand I cannot run multiple games weekly due to my family and job schedule. We play once each week on Saturday nights. We were at a long where we had three DMs running weekly Games but even then our gaming appetites were insatiable some of the group would play in all three games! I’m currently trying to cultivate some new DMs as well. In my opinion, I think the number one reason more games are not 6+ beyond not enough players in a specific group is the new rules place a lot of emphasis on running a smaller game. Remember you can make simple home-brew rule changes which is encouraged in 5e to make running larger groups not only possible, but fun and exciting as well. ENJOY!
As always so insightful. Nice to see my struggles being put into a consumable video. I’m so excited to learn all these tricks but I have to remember to leave the mysticism for my PCs because as you say it is all about them. A+
I've been an on-again-off-again DM for about 20 years now. I think it really comes down to the group you have at the table with you. 7 experienced gamers for a lvl 1-7 campaign? No biggy. 2 married couples just trying out the game for the first time on date night? Oh my God, no!
I was running a pathfinder game for 4 players on my last deployment. Some other folks saw us playing and asked if they could join. I started another campaign just for them, and 9 new players showed up (was expecting 3) the first night. It was tough (for me), but we made it through.
Next week 6 of them showed up again with 5(!) more people asking to play. It was chaos. The Cav Scouts started setting up a complex ambush to kill the air force engineers...we 'ran out of time' before their plan came to fruition.
We ended up breaking that group in half, and 1 of the players in my original group took half of them and started DMing. It made it manageable as a bunch of our soldiers and airmen learned how to role play. Note: 11B's and 19D's are just murder hobos waiting to happen.
Wow, I have to say this series of videos is incredibly concise & straight to the point.
I may not always agree with everything, but the delivery is spot on.
Great job, Dungeon Professor.
-------------
In relation to the topic, this definitely explains a big part of why my first (and last) game years ago became so frustrating to manage: Too many people for a first time DM.
(That, and too much rules lawyering over the littlest things.)
I volunteered to run a game of pathfinder for some folks from my college, and we ended up with 9 people all huddled around a table in the pub trying to work out who's turn it was to take a swing at the dinosaurs that had charged out of the ancient temple.
Fun and silly, but for a serious game 4 is supreme.
Great video! Straight to the point. I like your explanation of playing with kids. Really makes a lot of sense.
I wish I'd seen this video sooner, Professor. I'm a new DM who wanted to redirect my two boys, ages 8 and 5, away from video games and into this, more creative and imaginitive pass time. Well, it worked. And now I'm running the Mines of Phandelver with a group of 7 neighborhood kids. They're absolutely loving it. But I'm completely spent at the end of each session. And we need minimum 3 hours to get anything accomplished. I've had to let my rules management take a backseat in order to keep everything moving. Looking forward to an adult adventure with a smaller group!
I'm actually doing a video on running D&D for children in the next couple of months. It's a completely different mindset. Seven kids a is a LOT. Teacher trick: when you need to get them quiet and focussed, say, "Alright--everyone needs to be quiet and focus on the DM in 5-4-3-2-1." It will work. Also, aspirin is useful.
@@DUNGEONCRAFT1 Ill be looking out for that video, thanks! Your content is really excellent, and the rulesets you've exposed me to have made it possible for me to jump in and have fun with my boys I really appreciate your work!
I think it heavily depends upon a number of factors. The most important being Experience. Just as you said the DMs experience is huge both with rules and people management.
However the experience level of the players can also factor in. I have been running and playing AD&D for 38 years. I have been very fortunate to always have a game of 8-12 players.
Of course it does take a little longer but no where near the times I see in the comments. I believe this is due to the experience level of the players and myself. Also we run a combat focused game similar to old dungeon crawls. So about 75% combat encounters with the reminding 25% being role playing exploration and espionage/intrigue.
We enjoy that aspect of the game so it works for us. My point is the number of players also depends on what type of game you and the players enjoy playing as well as experience level.
With some of the quick combat rules you use, I can get 15-20 minute combat rounds in. We are used to this as a group in fact I feel the game is quite small and empty with less than 5 players.
So for myself I would find the sweet spot in a 6-9 player game.
I’m not debating or trying to argue. Just wanted to give a different opinion to everyone. I understand there are many more challenges with a larger group but it can be quite exciting. Also as a side note the original Lake Geneva Games tan with large numbers of players as well sometimes well over 20. During the 80s most convention tournaments were set up for 8 player games as well. Thanks for the videos. I think they are great and gave shared them with my 15 player group. They have liked them as well. Keep up the great work.
Thanks for watching and sharing, Christopher! I enjoyed reading this post and am actually writing an episode about running large groups right now. If you have any additional tips, put them below!
Solid wisdom dispensed! Well done, professor.
Thanks and keep watching!
I should start calling my father "Proffesor Dad"
Great advice for anyone One rule of thumb I use glancing at the lv of the group vs CR of the encounter using a 1d6 to determine the difficulty
1-2 easy, 3-4 moderate & 5-6 challenge adding or subtracting as necessary.
I have DM-ed for 30 years, starting at
Time for a monster to take the NPC and spider out.
@@DUNGEONCRAFT1
We need the NPC who is a carpenter to make a ship to get off the deserted island they have been on for three literal and three game months. But I think once they sail, they are going to go there own way. The party already lost 40 sailors in the shipwreck....two NPCs saying goodbye is nothing!
When you have a large party, I like to keep in mind the noise of combat and normal lighting issues that will occur in real life.
Thus, I'd only have 4 Goblins in the guardroom and have 2 to 4 more Goblins just "come and see" what all the noise/light is about every few rounds of combat. This lets you concentrate on just 4 Goblins at once BUT allows you to systematically feed in new combatants to replace losses in order to challenge the group. Defense in depth also drains the potential combatants from other map areas if the combat is too difficult for the players, thus making the rest of the dungeon somewhat less difficult if the group continues.
If the Goblins get pasted, I'd have the rest of the group flee, taking any valuables with them.
5 is the perfect number, 2 fighters, 1 cleric, 1 magic user and 1 thief
As a manager and supervisor, I completely empathise with the logic and balance of time and people management. Too often the communication can go in different directions. I'd be interested with your small children video since I have two children under the age of 12.
Make the D&D game story similar to books appropriate for the age of the kids.
If they are reading "Bunny Wunny Goes to the Store"... the adventure is finding their way to the store and back home. Maybe they have to avoid an icky toad.
I played in a Pathfinder party of 9 people. It was ridiculous. We couldn’t fit into most dungeon rooms because every character took up 5 feet of space. Plus since it was Mathfinder we were stopping every round to look up some rule. I bowed out of the group.
+1 for "Mathfinder" lol
I'm an adult and I still can't understand why other adults don't like Captain Crunch for breakfast.
Captain Crunch rules!
I am kinda partial to lucky charms myself, haha.
@@optimisticallyskeptical1842 My son once ordered an entire feed bag of just "charms" off Amazon.
@@DUNGEONCRAFT1 Hahaha, I believe it.
my group once reached the apex of 13 players, now i hard cap it to 6, and i still need to pester them for backstory, and some didn't' elaborate more than a short paragraph
Thanks for commenting. I understand why you capped the group. But here's the good news--you can spit them into two groups and play TWICE as much D&D! Happy gaming!
@@DUNGEONCRAFT1A little bit of clarification not D&D but IK(iron kingdoms), and the 13 players+1/2 warjacks situation happenned at the previus campaign, witch they finished by delivering the apocalyps by big fuck off necromancer dragon, and that was what i did separeted in two groups, but one of them imploded thanks to interpersonal conflict, and high level of player stupidity
If its your first time id say 2-3 is a good starting point. You can run 2 seperate groups and once you're comfortable you can merge the groups together.
But really each DM has their own preferred size and it changes over time.
I played with a group of 8 for years and we took turn being the DM. When a scenario ended whoever had a ready scenario would be the next DM.
Ive done small groups, Ive done large groups. I find that the larger the group gets I prefer to run more investigation style games and dial down combat. Rolling dice is fun. Watching 10-12 players roll dice between each of your turns is not.
When the game is centered around uncovering secrets with very little combat the different players will concoct their own theories to who the killer is and how to catch them. And the DM can just lean back and watch the game play itself because the core of the game becomes the player-player interactions.
I like GMing a group of 3-4. I'm at 5 right now and I can definitely tell the difference. Party dynamic changed, lime line is shorter for everyone. I find it harder to make sure I equally engage with everyone.
I think of everyone in my group, I'm the least experienced. I only have a total of 2ish years of GMing experience and 4ish years of player exp.
Five is the tipping point. I sometimes run 8 players and when I go BACK to 4 it's hard. It's a different skill set. I'm not used to moving so fast between them.
I run a table at my local game store and have to adjust things constantly on the fly. I had 5 players last week and 7 this week, and will probably have 6 next week. I'm also seeing how the 5 room dungeon is perfect for one session, but the one I ran today had 10 rooms and they made it to the boss battle and we had to end the session on a cliffhanger. I like the suspense, but I think my next dungeon will be a little smaller.
Five player group is the biggest I can run. We had six or seven back in the day. I do remember kicking in a lot of doors because I got bored with the debate.
I got killed a lot. There wasn't much sympathy from the rest of the party.
We did run with three people but they each had a henchman. That seemed to work better. We could take on bigger challenges but each got to do more.
Professor, have you ever run a game with 1 or 2 players?
My preferred size is 6 players, provided they are all grown-ups. I ran a game at a convention this past January for 8 players (6 of which were in junior high or high school) and it was pretty rough. If I had to choose a number of players for kids in school, I would say 5, tops.
We had 14 one night. It was chaotic! DM didn't really like the lack of attention/distractions of the players that weren't engaged at that moment. So it seems like less than DM+6 is a good limit. Solo isn't my cup of tea. One on one also is a bit one dimensional. DM+2 now you can cook pretty good.
Yeah. 14 is nuts. The largest group I've ever run is 11, but that was at GenCon, where everybody is TOTALLY focussed on the game.
@@DUNGEONCRAFT1
Do not give them time to get distracted.
INITIATIVE!
2 min egg timer goes out
Players have that long to hand in slips of paper with their plan for the round.
Resolve in initiative order.
You can be evil and make them hand in the slips THEN roll initiative every round. That REALLY makes them pay attention.
As the players get used to this system, they will rapidly learn to have their slips turned in with half the sand still in the top half of the timer.
Woah, I'm an adult and I like Cap'n Crunch for breakfast.
I like running 1-4 people, with 3 being my ideal
@DUNGEONCRAFT1 Is this real or..?
Adults don't like Captain Crunch for breakfast? Heathens!
I recently mixed regular WITH Peanut butter Cap'n Crunch. That was like eating a bowl of heaven.
I completely agree, ,particularly with the comments about younger players. I've played with 7 & 8 year old dungeon crawlers and they are loud, obnoxious and need to be engaged at all times.
Eventually there will be an episode about running games for small children, including with ADD and dyslexia.
Just had my first group of 8 players, we'll see how many return for another session lol as a new DM I'm about 12 sessions in exp.
4 players is the optimal number, that why I play with 5 players, so when one of my players miss the session (and they will), I can still run it with 4 players.
My 8 year old and 6 year old have lots of empathy. I’m curious now if that’s actually abnormal.
LOL. Compared to the savages I have raised, it is! Congratulations on being a great father!
Very good ideas!
Im usted to groups from 5-6 players, but i love run the Game for 10+ players, is just amazing. As a GM You need to run arround the table all the sesión.
And I love running for 1-3 players, You can describe Even more
Also, running for 1-2
For me 5 is an ideal number, not including the DM. 3-7 is the range I'm ok with. More or less and I just don't like it. I also prefer odd number of players. So 3, 5 or 7 is what I like.
I’ve been a player since 1980 and a DM since 1989, and still prefer playing in or running a game for a smaller group. For me the ideal is 4 to 5 players. More than that, the game slows down too much for me.
My group has grown in size from 4 to 5 and now 6
I fear them splitting into 4 or 5 groups and slow the adventure to a interstellar water planet. (When they are back together, years would had pass in the real world lol).
Sooo...
After they made their characters I related how they awoke in a crash site with.... Wait for it....
Split brain syndrome 🤯
So now I have two characters per body (I do let them control the whole body during their turn because of... Magic lol... Otherwise technically one character per set should be mute).
That way at most they will always be together or at least split into just 2 groups.
I just run the first session so will see what they do with their dilemma.
2 to 12 people.
Its hard to play when you have a DM and no players, or a player and no DM.
Its really hard to find a space for more than 12.
**************
Large group combat:
Pre-roll initiative for the first combat as soon as people sit down.
read this aloud SLOWLY:
"A Combat Round Is SIX Seconds"
Then tell the players:
That statement took six seconds.
I will not give you 5 minutes each to decide what to do.
Immediately at the start of each round write a brief description of your plan of action:
1 Bonus action
2 Action
3 Movement (who you move toward will be resolved based on where they moved if their initiative went before yours)
(You can change the order of 1, 2 and 3)
We will resolve those in initiative order.
If your slip is not in on time, your character stands confused for the round.
As DM, I had the action plan WRITTEN DOWN for all my NPCs and/or creatures before all the slips got to me.
I had combats resolved VERY FAST running a game of 9 to 11 players. in a 3.5 year campaign.
Combat was exciting for everyone... and nobody had time to not pay attention.
Dam
wow, this is amazing.
my player limit is 6, dread the dark time when i ran 12 players. don't ask they were dark times.
Me too! In college, I ran a 10-man team with 3 members who were at war with each other (love triangle gone bad). It was my senior year and they drove me to go Active Duty Army! RESTORE HOPE (Somalia, 1993) wasn't as bad as DMing that group!
Everyone wants toys !
They sure do!
i have 3 players right now...and it's great. perhaps i'd add 1 more. but I'm not capable enough to do 5+
My absolute maximum is 5 players. I think 3 players and 1 DM is perfect.
I like a party of 3-6 players it's the most manageable anything over or under that it's boring or hard.
I agree. I plan to do an entire video on running large groups.
@@DUNGEONCRAFT1 awsome! I love your channel! you and Aj Pickett your the best professor! 😎
4 players for storytelling and close interactive gameplay. 5 if you want to be optimized for combat.
My group size is 2. Me the GM, and a singular player.
....I like getting toys for Christmas....
When are you going to run a campaign?
3 to 5 max for me to be honest. 4 is optimal for me
Interesting, I'd say 4 players squarely. In my experience, it is too hard to come up with good scenarios for only 3 people. The game isn't balanced for it so most premade adventures will skew too hard and with new players, that's a double whammy. Also unless you are giving your players premade characters you have a good chance of ending up with a weird lopsided party with no rogues, or no magic users, or nothing but. With 3 characters if one goes down the chances of even escaping the encounter are severely slim. I actually think 3 players might make your job harder as a DM. Go with 4 and don't worry as much about rebalancing the adventure or game rules. I'd say an advanced DM can handle 3 or 6+ characters to varying degrees.
Why you gotta hate on Cap'n Crunch?
It's garbage
I'd rather roll silicon twentys
so....size matters....
"The more players you have the exponentially longer all of your encounters are going to take"
"If I desing an adventure for 3 players and it's going to take 2 hours in my mind. That same scenario for 6 players is going to take 4 hours."
Dude. You just doubled all the numbers. That's not exponential, and it bothers me way more than it should. >.
I pray to God I don't have 7 or 8 people around me doing anything at anytime for any reason unless I am in the ER or the OR and under the gas. that would be a nightmare of epic proportions. I don't even want that many people in my life at once. I have 1 friend, my mom, and my sister....that's the only people in my life, other than my doctor. period. that's sometimes more than I can handle. not a people person. I have one player.... ONE and I can barely handle that. hmmm. going to the movies...me and 7 or 8 people...in the same building, much less the same theater....deciding anything.... I would need more than Excedrin. a .357 magnum pistol and 30 rounds. one for each person. and probably the cops, the manager, the candy counter girl, and myself and some random person in line of sight.
1dm, 2 players
.... Fin, Ray and Poe doesnt realy have alot of backstory.
we know Ray was a scavanger, we know she lives alone. Thats about it.
Fin we dont even have a propper name for. He was a storm trooper. Tahts the amount of backstory given to the dude-orc with a claw in Hobbit movies. He belonged to the evil McEvil clan of Evil.
Poe was a Rebellion fighter pilot. We learn that he had something going on with someone who was in the movie for about a minute or so, and we kinda get that it turned sour. And thats it.we might have more in expanded materials, i dont know, i dont care. The Movies, the primary medium for us to learn about the characters, teaches us almost nothing about the characters.
More importantly, their backstory never realy gets put into play, beyond woind what their classes assign them to do.
Poe flies stuff, Rey is a tech-wiz kid whit unreliable force control, and Fin shoots things. And runs away alot.
Grievous had backstory, even if we were not given much about it, everything about him hints toward it, his very title and apperance tells us something about it. The way he acts tells us more.
Dooku had alot of backstory, and just like Grievous we learn tangentiell pieces of it throughout his apperances and conversations about him. We learn more about small details such as that glance he gives Palpatine before he looses his head.
Obi-Wan had alot of backstory, even if you never see the prequels you learn some, and can figure out more. And there it certainly comes into play, huis dynamic with Vader is basicly Backstory placed in the Forefront. Its a Character moment, there for the character and the character is remembered for it, affects others by it.
this has nothing to do with the overarching point your making, its a good point, but i simply find it to be a bad example.
P.S
as a bonus, here is a scenario free of charge, rule-less and made to introduce roleplaying to kids: The Brave Goblin Champions Versus the Cat of Evil.
The players play goblins, 5 inches large creatures living peacefully under a berry bush. Suddenly their village is attacked by the Cat of Evil, who goes berserk through the village, laying waste to it and taking away the holy shaman, he who knows the secret of the berries. Without him there can be no berry pie. The village points out our characters as the champions, who must rescue the shaman.
and now the selling point: All Character to Character speach is in Made-Up Goblin language, and that is what the players speak to each other. Gobeltygook, pure nonsens, and gestures.
I've found that if you run this adventure, you will not only have alot of fun, but you will cement the Roleplaying aspect, prevent future Meta-gaming, and have players who quickly learn how to adapt and think outside the box.
Adults that don't like toys?!? They need to grow up...
jesus, can you turn the intro/outro music down? your blowing my ear drums
Walnut Enthusiast Yes. I’ve adjusted it in more recent episodes.
Dungeon Craft cool, thanks!