D&D General DMs, how do you handle 'split party' situations?

[TiQuinn]

I just bust out a timer and set it to two minutes and switch between the groups. Combat can be tricky but usually combats are scaled to be handled by the party, not individual PCs or small groups of PCs. Most of the time, the party that gets into combat disengages pretty quickly.

 

[zottel]

I personally think splitting the party is fine but with caveats.

As a player, I don't mind to just sit back and watch for a while, take time to think about what's going on, quietly chat with other players and discuss the events of the game (having a separate room is a godsend), and also go for a smoke, text my boyfriend a little, and otherwise take a break from the game. Obviously I don't want to do that the whole session, but 30 minutes? Sure.

I would be significantly more annoyed if the GM was like "okay, meanwhile, and what are you doing?" every five minutes, thus requiring my actual attention, while not being able to do anything. That's exhausting! I don't want this spotlight, keep it.

That's why as a GM I do it exactly like that -- give one group a significant chunk of the time, then the other, instead of them being simultaneous. I also aggressively skip time to keep all the groups more-or-less in sync.

I also don't worry much about players learning things their characters don't know. It's okay, and, frankly, it's better if they act on it! Like, that's the benefit of someone going for a scouting mission -- to give intel. If players then are forbidden from using that intel until scout returns and tells them that in character, what's the point? It's annoying.

That, to me, is a very surprising take. I really like split parties, but I switch between players often, when the possibility arrives. Just like I do when the party is not split, actually.

 

[loverdrive]

That, to me, is a very surprising take. I really like split parties, but I switch between players often, when the possibility arrives. Just like I do when the party is not split, actually.

Most people do, and I think it's a big reason people at large aren't fond of splitting the party.

At least to me, a longer break means that I can just disengage from the game completely, recharge and then return invigorated, but if I have to actively pay attention it's draining, and when spotlight is finally returned I both didn't do anything fun and didn't get any rest. It's also even more annoying from the other side, when you are playing and GM keeps constantly getting distracted, so you can't get anything done. I think it's preferable to play a scene to its logical conclusion, then ask the group "okay, what are you going to do next?" for sort of "downtime" actions that will be done when the spotlight returns back.

As a game master the big plus is that now you don't have to worry about players needing to go to the bathroom, or call their partners, or go buy to the store soda, or whatever in the thick of the action -- them bastards had enough time beforehand!

 

[Swarmkeeper]

That, to me, is a very surprising take. I really like split parties, but I switch between players often, when the possibility arrives. Just like I do when the party is not split, actually.

Very much this. I mean maybe it depends on the length of the session but, for our 3ish hour sessions, I can’t imagine spending more than a few minutes at a time on each group of a split party before cycling back to the others.

I don’t really grok the idea that it is somehow draining to pay attention to play when your character is not in the spotlight. That’s kinda the point of D&D, IMO - to see how each of our unique characters contributes to the larger shared story whether they are all together or doing their own things.

 

[loverdrive]

I don’t really grok the idea that it is somehow draining to pay attention to play when your character is not in the spotlight. That’s kinda the point of D&D, IMO - to see how each of our unique characters contributes to the larger shared story whether they are all together or doing their own things.

If you play videogames, I think there's a difference between:

• actively playing the game (equivalent of, well, being in the scene that is currently being played)
• passively watching a cutscene (not being in the scene and just watching other people play)

And if a cutscene starts, and you only just get comfy and lean back in your chair when bang! QTE! Mash R1 and L1 to fight back! it's infuriating. And then you are sitting there, anxiously, not knowing for sure when you can put the controller down, not being able to enjoy the show properly.