Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Experience with 4 players vs. 6/7
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 7629945" data-attributes="member: 7006"><p>My two current groups both have 7 players and the nights when everyone shows up... the combats definitely end up in the party's favor, much oftentimes to my chagrin. But now having done this through 5 different year-plus campaigns, all with 7-9 players... I've accepted what have become true facts regarding our tables when it comes to combat:</p><p></p><p>- The more players at the table, the longer each individual round takes. Because obviously there are more PCs, but also because I need to put more enemies on the table just to try and give a bit of combat parity.</p><p></p><p>- The longer an individual round takes, the more the players are exceedingly happy when their turn produces a substantial result. If they have to wait 20 minutes for their turn to come around again, they want to really do something cool with the turn they have. Which means me accepting and not getting bothered by my enemies dropping like flies. Because heaven forbid someone like a spellcaster uses their turn to make a Spell Attack and then botch their attack roll. At least the weapon-users usually have 2 or more attacks to do <em>something</em> in the round... that spellcaster who up-casts their one spell and then rolls a '4'? They don't even get the satisfaction of at least doing half-damage... they instead end up having waited an entire 40 minutes (on both sides of their turn) wherein they have done absolutely nothing. That is not something I enjoy doing to my players by any stretch.</p><p></p><p>- This has led me to believe that the true enemy during combats with 7+ players is not the monsters I throw down, but actually is BOREDOM. As a result... I accept that fights will really be steamrollers for the party because the challenge they all want is remaining engaged with the scene, and not specifically the fight mechanics itself. Especially when you add in the fact that with 7+ players there's going to be probably at least 3 or 4 characters that have healing at their disposal, so any damage I attempt to do to them to make the fights "challenging" are going to be wiped away every round anyways.</p><p></p><p>At the end of the day... interesting and compelling "combats" occur much more readily at my tables when I have people absent and there are like only four PCs. Because then I can throw more enemies down on the table so there will be more damage thrown about and more chances of really getting hurt (without it being wiped away so easily from massive amounts of in-combat healing). Plus the rounds will still go by fast enough so that each player can get several turns in pretty fast succession, thereby keeping them all engaged with the fights despite the large numbers of HP both sides have to burn through.</p><p></p><p>Given my choice, I'd <em>prefer</em> to just play with four people and 4 PCs because it allows for faster and more challenging combats... but I just have a lot of very interested friends who all want to play, so I feel an obligation to give them all chances to play. And I just I presume that my less-than-lethal combats at 7+ players does not actually bother any of them, since they all keep coming back to play in my games.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 7629945, member: 7006"] My two current groups both have 7 players and the nights when everyone shows up... the combats definitely end up in the party's favor, much oftentimes to my chagrin. But now having done this through 5 different year-plus campaigns, all with 7-9 players... I've accepted what have become true facts regarding our tables when it comes to combat: - The more players at the table, the longer each individual round takes. Because obviously there are more PCs, but also because I need to put more enemies on the table just to try and give a bit of combat parity. - The longer an individual round takes, the more the players are exceedingly happy when their turn produces a substantial result. If they have to wait 20 minutes for their turn to come around again, they want to really do something cool with the turn they have. Which means me accepting and not getting bothered by my enemies dropping like flies. Because heaven forbid someone like a spellcaster uses their turn to make a Spell Attack and then botch their attack roll. At least the weapon-users usually have 2 or more attacks to do [I]something[/I] in the round... that spellcaster who up-casts their one spell and then rolls a '4'? They don't even get the satisfaction of at least doing half-damage... they instead end up having waited an entire 40 minutes (on both sides of their turn) wherein they have done absolutely nothing. That is not something I enjoy doing to my players by any stretch. - This has led me to believe that the true enemy during combats with 7+ players is not the monsters I throw down, but actually is BOREDOM. As a result... I accept that fights will really be steamrollers for the party because the challenge they all want is remaining engaged with the scene, and not specifically the fight mechanics itself. Especially when you add in the fact that with 7+ players there's going to be probably at least 3 or 4 characters that have healing at their disposal, so any damage I attempt to do to them to make the fights "challenging" are going to be wiped away every round anyways. At the end of the day... interesting and compelling "combats" occur much more readily at my tables when I have people absent and there are like only four PCs. Because then I can throw more enemies down on the table so there will be more damage thrown about and more chances of really getting hurt (without it being wiped away so easily from massive amounts of in-combat healing). Plus the rounds will still go by fast enough so that each player can get several turns in pretty fast succession, thereby keeping them all engaged with the fights despite the large numbers of HP both sides have to burn through. Given my choice, I'd [I]prefer[/I] to just play with four people and 4 PCs because it allows for faster and more challenging combats... but I just have a lot of very interested friends who all want to play, so I feel an obligation to give them all chances to play. And I just I presume that my less-than-lethal combats at 7+ players does not actually bother any of them, since they all keep coming back to play in my games. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Experience with 4 players vs. 6/7
Top