Do You Prefer 4 Or More Players (+ DM) When RPGing?

[Hussar]

Holy Thread Necro. Damn, a 12 year old thread with Eric Noah actually posting in it. Yikes.

That being said, I prefer 5 myself. 5 players means that you almost never have to cancel sessions due to scheduling issues. Losing 1 out of 5 doesn't really change how 5e plays much and it is very easy to spackle over. Even losing 2 players doesn't always mean cancelling. I can usually run something for those three even if it's some sort of side quest.

If I've only got 3 players and one doesn't make it, we usually cancelled the session.

 

[Sunseeker]

Holy Thread Necro. Damn, a 12 year old thread with Eric Noah actually posting in it. Yikes.

That being said, I prefer 5 myself. 5 players means that you almost never have to cancel sessions due to scheduling issues. Losing 1 out of 5 doesn't really change how 5e plays much and it is very easy to spackle over. Even losing 2 players doesn't always mean cancelling. I can usually run something for those three even if it's some sort of side quest.

If I've only got 3 players and one doesn't make it, we usually cancelled the session.

I generally agree. 3 people is my bare minimum for even setting up my stuff that day. I can adjust the game to a degree but slicing things down by half just makes it too swingy. There's a certain special party dynamic that kicks in around 3 people too, with less than that you can run into magnified personality issues that are normally lessened by the presence of more people and less focus time. There's also the risk that the dynamic duo will actually be smart and advance the game and then we get to spend the next session going LAST TIME ON LOS...D&D!

Depends on the game tho, when I run my "Infinite Dungeon" I don't care how many people are present. 15? 8? 2 and 3/4ths? 1 & 1/3rd? W/E. We throw some dice at the wall and if the players present die, *shrug*, if they gain eleventy bajillion XP also *shrug*. But for a campaign that requires any level of setup and story, 3 is the minimum, 4 is preferred. 5 is ideal (yay, spare bodies...I mean players!).

 

[Lylandra]

What a necro

I'll go with 3-4 players + GM. More players and we'd have issues with individual roleplaying spotlights. 2 and 5 is okay as well.

 

[Yaztromo]

The "right" number of players (for me) is three to five, plus the GM, so it is difficult to me to vote in the poll, as I am half way through.
Let's say that I take the average (four players) and move on from there.

 

[Legatus Legionis]

.

 

[Shadow21X]

5 is a nice number, 5 PCs and the DM.

 

[Campbell]

4 Players (Including the GM if there is one) is both my minimum and most preferred number of players. I can handle up to 6, but I find that as the number of players increases the less individual attention can be paid to an individual character and my preferences lend towards character focused gaming. When it comes to something like Stars Without Number or B/X played in a more war game oriented style the more the better.

 

[Ogre Mage]

5 players and a DM is the perfect number for me.

This is true for me as well. The folks in my group tend to be busy and it is not unusual for one player to be absent. We can be down a player and still run well. If everyone is there, there is still easy to give everyone spotlight time. With 5 I think it is also a little easier to make sure your bases are properly covered.

 

[DammitVictor]

Sweet spot is six. Five or seven is good. Four or eight is okay. Three is bad.

Nine causes flashbacks to the Night of Elves and the end of AD&D forever.