Help! I have too many players!

[Dausuul]

First thing is tell the whole group that you think you at at or slightly beyond your limit of players for DMing. If the others haven't DMed, explain that prepping, controlling and most importantly responding in session becomes much harder as the group grows. Else, you may find the group growing again.

Yeah, this. First rule of holes: When in one, stop digging. Or in this case, stop your players from digging for you.

Now, to the mathematical challenge of adjusting monster stats, I would suggest the following:

When possible, simply increase the number of opponents to match the increased number of PCs, and don't concentrate fire too heavily. This is the easiest way to keep things in balance.

When that isn't feasible (e.g., the party is fighting a single monster which would not logically have minions), you'll need to adjust the monster's stats. My suggestion is to double its hit points and add 40% to its damage output.

<math geekiness follows>

The way I came up with those numbers was a calculation of "combat power," which is the product of average damage output per round times hit points. I find this is a very useful tool for coming up with ballpark estimates of monster effectiveness.

Let's say you've got 4 PCs, each with 10 hit points and dealing 1 point of damage a round. How tough does a solo monster have to be in order to be an even fight? Well, for simplicity, we'll say the monster hits for 10 points of damage a round--killing one PC every round. The monster will take 4 points of damage the first round, 3 the second, 2 the third, and 1 the fourth; so if the monster has 10 hit points, it will die at the same moment the last PC drops.

This means the monster must have 10 times the combat power of a PC (10x damage, same number of hit points). You'll find that any combination of hit points and damage output resulting in that ratio will lead to the same outcome. The monster could have 20 hit points and deal 5 damage a round (5x damage, 2x hit points), or 50 hit points and 2 damage a round (2x damage, 5x hit points). The fight will last longer, but it will end the same way.

Now, run the same calculation for 7 PCs. Turns out, the monster dealing 10 damage/round now needs 28 hit points in order to be an even match. So the monster must have 28 times the combat power of a PC.

Hence, if you're transitioning from 4 PCs to 7, you need to boost the monster's combat power by a factor of 2.8. You can do this in any number of ways. If you emphasize increasing its hit points, the fight will get longer and grindier; if you emphasize increasing damage, the fight will get swingier and more lethal. I think 2x hit points and 1.4x damage strikes about the right balance, but YMMV.

Obviously, this doesn't come close to reflecting the full complexity of monster and player combat options. Be especially careful with monsters that inflict status effects, have save-or-die attacks, and so forth. Still, as a rule of thumb, the combat power calculation is one I've found fairly useful.

(I am assuming here that you don't mind making quick-fix adjustments to monster stats. If it's important to you to follow the monster creation rules to the letter, you're going to have a lot more work on your hands.)

 

[Remathilis]

I'm a bit in the same boat as you; I had five players for a PF game and now I'm looking at seven. Being as I'm one of the last D&D/PF DMs running in my circle of friends, I have a few people who are looking to play still. (and like you, I had one sprung on me).

I don't have any advice for you, but my condolences go out. I plan on handling it mostly through modules (Goodman Games and Paizo mixed, and perhaps Kingmaker AP later).

 

[Tortoise]

I agree with several folks here . . . be clear with your players, set a limit to the number participating and explain why.

For handling the current 7, beef up the monster HP a little bit, increase their damage output a tiny amount, and in the appropriate situations add one or two more weaker critters.

Also, don't forget to use terrain and other factors to modify the fight. Sometimes you can use these other things instead of messing with any monster math.

When I was running 1e/2e, my favorite group size was 7 players. With 3e/3.5e I found that while I like the group dynamics of 7 players it was easier to handle 4 or 5 players.

I've only run 1 session of 4e so far, so I have no idea what group size will be the most fun for me, but I suspect that going back to 7 can be done as long as I make good use of terrain and special effects.

 

[TarionzCousin]

Woot, I get to be the hardass! My opinion is that no one can take advantage of you without your permission

I agree with several folks here . . . be clear with your players, set a limit to the number participating and explain why.

By not saying "Hey, wait a minute! I can't handle this many players comfortably. You guys can't just invite other people into this game without my/our permission in advance" you are implicitly giving people permission to do exactly that.

I would definitely recommend that you talk to the sister as she made a terrible assumption AND acted on it. That sort of behavior can (and obviously did) cause a serious problem. If you don't say something about this and simply hope it doesn't happen again, you are actually telling the other players "This sort of behavior is fine with me." One of them might feel that it is perfectly acceptable to invite yet another player into the mix.

Maybe tell the sis's boyfriend that he is welcome to watch and can play his monk if someone misses the session.

 

[Blackbrrd]

I have a group of seven players and it worked at pretty well. The biggest problem with seven players is combat getting slow, but it shouldn't be that much of a problem at lower levels.

Regarding the monsters - I would just increase the amount of monsters by about 70%. Instead of 3 monsters you have 5, or you add a couple of big ones.

The other solution that would work in 3.5 is just letting the slower progression even things out. It doesn't work in 4e because your players start missing a bit much, but in 3.5 characters usually hit and uses power attack to adjust their attack.

One more thing to think of is how the party dynamic works with 7 players. It might work really well, or there might be a lot of bickering. It's something you will have to be aware of and try to intervene if the game slows down.

 

[Agamon]

My game is going to be 7 players, too. But over the past year, I haven't had much luck with everyone being able to show up when it's 4 or 5 players, so I'm hoping we can go every other week, even if 3 people can't make it, we can still go. And if everyone can make it, I just adjust the encounters.

Back in college, I had an AD&D game with 10 regulars plus a few others. Now that was unwieldy....

 

[dvvega]

I've had similar experience but it has been on the 10 player side. I handled he night well enough. The great thing was that the players themselves started "fixing" the problem without me saying a word.

The combats ran a bit too long since there were 10 combatants, roleplaying was a mess since everyone wanted to participate, they all began to realise the problems. I had a natural attrition rate happen and they went down to a group of 6.

In your case you already had a no-show on the first game. Perhaps there will be something similar at future games. The only major thing I have against what you described was the texted boyfriend. She had no right to invite someone to play especially when she herself was a bolt on with the brother.

Three choices here as far as I can see - you can let it run its course and hope for natural attrition, you could state that you are unhappy with invited players wihtout consultation but you will let it slide this one, or you could be a hard DM and say "go away" (you will lose the GF player as well most likely).

D

 

[OnlineDM]

I'm definitely an advocate of limiting the number of players in your game to the number you want. You're the GM, and that means you're in charge. You don't have to be a jerk about it, of course, but it's perfectly okay to say, "I'm sorry but we already have the five-player party that I'm going to be running. You're welcome to sit in or be an alternate, but there's no room in this campaign for more players right now."

When I started my online game, I intentionally recruited more than the five players I wanted, figuring that online players in particular might flake (they think a new game sounds like a good idea at the time, but they can't make the schedule work, etc.). I thought I had seven, but I actually had eight (one guy had his girlfriend playing, too).

As the size of the group became clear, I started looking for ways to scale things down. Fortunately, several of the players were interested in starting their game at higher level (I wanted to start at level 1), so we played one session with eight players with the understanding that this was a one-shot and that we would subsequently split into two groups.

I've since had other players express interest in joining the game, but I've held firm - friendly, but firm. One player sat in to watch one week and played as an alternate the next week when a regular player couldn't make it. Another player has a friend who wants to join, and I've offered him the same arrangement (lurk and maybe play if someone else can't). I'm happy with the way it's worked out.

 

[frankthedm]

Who is host? That is the only person the DM has any obligation to regarding who plays. The sister of the new guy really stepped over the line inviting her BF to the host's house.

While I think it's old-fashioned for the GM to have some sort of veto power regarding new players,

I'd hope this situation is helping you understand why the old ways are the best ways.

 

[Alzrius]

Thanks to everyone who has replied so far! I appreciate the advice and the sympathy.

A few things I wanted to specifically address.

Woot, I get to be the hardass! My opinion is that no one can take advantage of you without your permission.

By not saying "Hey, wait a minute! I can't handle this many players comfortably. You guys can't just invite other people into this game without my/our permission in advance" you are implicitly giving people permission to do exactly that.

I would definitely recommend that you talk to the sister as she made a terrible assumption AND acted on it. That sort of behavior can (and obviously did) cause a serious problem. If you don't say something about this and simply hope it doesn't happen again, you are actually telling the other players "This sort of behavior is fine with me." One of them might feel that it is perfectly acceptable to invite yet another player into the mix.

That was painful for me to hear (read?), because it's true.

In hindsight, I should have immediately spoken out when I realized that the sister's boyfriend was acting under the assumption that he was just going to join in.

Instead, since I tend to shy away from being assertive (unless I've moved past that to being aggressive and lashing out at someone), I only managed to ask him what his name was and what character he was making...which, if anything, probably made the implied message that I was acknowledging his joining the group even more explicit.

Simply put, I'd prefer not to have a group of more than six - in fact, five is closer to what I'm comfortable with, but I can work with six. Seven, however, is where I draw the limit...at least right now.

Now to just try and find a way to doing this without coming across as a hardass, or hurting anyone's feelings.

There are a couple of threads on the Paizo forums for helping with larger party sizes you might want to look at

Woot! Thanks for those! I didn't even think to look on Paizo's forums, but the second link you provided led me to this thread:

Converting Kingmaker: Stolen Land (Chapter 1) for 6 PC's

Which solves a lot of problems, at least for now.

When possible, simply increase the number of opponents to match the increased number of PCs, and don't concentrate fire too heavily. This is the easiest way to keep things in balance.

When that isn't feasible (e.g., the party is fighting a single monster which would not logically have minions), you'll need to adjust the monster's stats. My suggestion is to double its hit points and add 40% to its damage output.

<math geekiness follows>

The way I came up with those numbers was a calculation of "combat power," which is the product of average damage output per round times hit points. I find this is a very useful tool for coming up with ballpark estimates of monster effectiveness.

Thanks for that - I'll probably be using your formula after we finish the first adventure (and the above link has exhausted its usefulness).

Also, kudos for the math to back up your point - I love it when people show the underlying mechanics for how these things work.

(I am assuming here that you don't mind making quick-fix adjustments to monster stats. If it's important to you to follow the monster creation rules to the letter, you're going to have a lot more work on your hands.)

I used to rail against anything that wasn't done by-the-book. Now that I'm actually back behind the GM's screen for the first time in a long while, the shoe is on the other foot in my mouth, as it were.