How do you deal with a large group of Players and PCs?

[Herremann the Wise]

Hello Everyone,

I started off my campaign with five players, which to my thinking was the optimal size (at least for my DMing skills). Since then and 11 ten hour sessions later, the group has gone from 5 to 6 and is now looking at going up to 7. One of the players was going to miss the last game and so I invited another guy who had asked me about joining in to fill in for the absent players character. Then at the last minute the guy who was expecting to be absent said he could make it after all. Not wanting to disappoint the seventh player I got him to make a charcter the night before and let him play the session anyway.

Now while this last session with 7 players went OK, I'm concerned that it will change the context of the game. With less time for individual roleplaying, I'm worried that the experience for all will head downhill.

So, my question is, should I boot the seventh player (who is very understanding of the situation but is a truly excellent role/player), should I run another session and see how it goes with seven players or should I just invite him in and try and adjust my DMing style? In terms of the other players, all are happy to have him on board but I sense that there are group-size concerns in regards to one or two of the other players.

In addition, is there any advice you can give me in dealing with a bigger group? Keeping everyone on their toes is becoming a little more difficult and any advice would be warmly appreciated.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Mark]

Maybe you can split the group into two games and recruit one more player?

 

[arscott]

Your best option is to make clear that it's perfectly fine if every player doesn't show up for every session.

Since it's likely that each player will have a reason to miss the game once every month or two, you'll rarely have a full seven players at the table.

 

[EvilGM]

I say give it a shot. Seven isn't that many more.

The largest amount of players I've run for 3E is 11. With this many you really have to enforce quick turns (a timer becomes necessary). Its helpful at times to stay in initiative outside of combat when multiple people try to act.

Have people plan ahead (as they should anyways) and roll all dice for the action at once (attack and damage rolls, for instance).

It can help to stagger multiple attacks, effectively breaking a turn around the table into multiple segments; i.e. everyone takes their first attacks, then it goes around again for second attacks, etc. This can create some rules wonkiness however.

Tell all the players to keep non-related chatter to a minimum and have all rules for things their character can do handy and ready to be used.

You will have to be very organized and prepared.

Good Luck!

 

[Heathen72]

Seven players would be too many for me, but...
If you do continue with seven players it's worth letting the players know that you can't devote as much time to any one individual player, and they not only need to understand that but they also need to actively help you in suucint and to the point with everything they do - decisions in combat, descriptions of action. They can't be wishy washy. And while there should be chances for everyone to shine as individuals, they players need to know that once they have had their shot they should really sit back and let someone else have ago. You as GM need to watch out for this as well - make sure that everyone gets a go, and don't let anyone dominate the session.

 

[Quickleaf]

So, my question is, should I boot the seventh player (who is very understanding of the situation but is a truly excellent role/player), should I run another session and see how it goes with seven players or should I just invite him in and try and adjust my DMing style?

I recommend adjusting your GMing style, in particular sharing the GMing burden. You said you have 7 players right? Assign each of them a role which takes some of the burden off of you. For example, one player could be the journal-keeper, another the cartographer, another might provide minion stats, another could help work up custom content, another tracks initiative order in combat, another could be "vibes watch" (calling a time-out if people are getting upset), and so on. Ideally each player gets a role that they're really interested in, thus lightening your load. Oh yeah, having the group decide on a "party leader" is a wise idea too.

You may even consider recruiting a co-GM who handles a specific aspect of the game/world, like recruiting the wizard player to handle spells, or recruiting a fellow GM to handle adventures that take place in a certain part of the world.

In addition, is there any advice you can give me in dealing with a bigger group? Keeping everyone on their toes is becoming a little more difficult and any advice would be warmly appreciated.

Do you mean that you're finding it difficult to challenge the party?

First, have you considered the Snap d20 initiative system? If you're committed to using the complicated 3e rules (and I encourage you checking out something less complex, like True20 or Savage Worlds, especially with your group size), this might help lighten your load.

Another idea is to use the Sweet20 experience system as a gauge of how much "screen time" each PC is getting. If everyone isn't getting equal experience under this system then it's a sure bet that you need to shift your focus. Alternately, you could ask the players after your game if they felt they had enough "screen time."

Finally, you can take a few steps to speed up game play.
* Cut out unnecessary details. Keep your narratives concise and to the point. Likewise, minimize the background material you give them. Focus on the adventure itself.
* Break down your time. If you have 3 hours to play, figure how much time each part of the adventure should take and plan accordingly. During combat give each player a set amount of time to declare what they're doing. Keep the pace moving.
* Have players write down what class/feats/spells they wish to take for their next level BEFORE advancing. This allows level ups to happen seamlessly without stopping the game, and it gives you an excuse to let them level without training if need be.
* Have most minor villains "take 10" on all rolls, including combat rolls. Also consider adopting a one-hit one-kill policy with nameless minions that don't present a real challenge individually. This saves you tracking HP needlessly.

 

[Nyaricus]

I recommend adjusting your GMing style, in particular sharing the GMing burden. You said you have 7 players right? Assign each of them a role which takes some of the burden off of you. For example, one player could be the journal-keeper, another the cartographer, another might provide minion stats, another could help work up custom content, another tracks initiative order in combat, another could be "vibes watch" (calling a time-out if people are getting upset), and so on. Ideally each player gets a role that they're really interested in, thus lightening your load. Oh yeah, having the group decide on a "party leader" is a wise idea too.

You know, having DM'd large groups, I have to say this this strikes a bell in me that I really like. I am not going to have a large group right now, but some of this stuff sounds really good. Herremann, I'd listen to all of this advice - take it from someone who has been in your shoes.

Other than that, I agree with being prepared - it really helps. I suck at running on-the-fly though, so there's that.

One thing though:

Have people... roll all dice for the action at once (attack and damage rolls, for instance).

I have to say: this idea is baaaad. I can't stand this, even with so many people. It's just asking for confusiong, like which d20 goes to which attack roll (with extra attacks) or which weapon with TWF, or which weapon on which extra attack with TWF, or which was init and your 'to hit' with which extra attack with which weapon with your TWF. I HATE this stupid, terrible suggestion from the PHB.

YMMV, of course.

 

[Herzog]

it depends....

Do you run combat-heavy games? Then 7 is most probably too much. (it would be for me).

I have run campaigns with 7 or even 8 players, and tend to run story-adventures with site-based encounters. (NB: I know why and where 'monsters' are on my map, and if the party decides to go there, they will encounter them....)

If you, like me, run adventures based on stories and heavy on roleplay, the answer is actually quite simple.

Stick to introducing the story seeds, and sit back while your group interacts among themselves. Introduce a limited number of NPC's, and let the group decide on a spokesperson when dealing with them. (this reduces the amount of talking you need to keep track of when running NPC's)

Whenever running a combat, it might help if you are able to reduce the number of optional rules used. Stick to the basics.

And, as has been proposed by others, let people run their own show. That is, if they are capable of a specific action, they need to know and be able to reproduce the rules related to that action, including restrictions and possible countermeasures. Only if you suspect someone of bending the rules (intentionally or not) should you have to look up the rule in question yourself.

Anyway, hope you can do something with this advise,

Herzog

 

[Herremann the Wise]

Hello Again,

Thanks for the advice people.

In terms of roles for each of the players, I have deliberately abandoned someone keeping a log as I found it took them away from the action too often. However, I do have one of the players tracking the initiative which is a real task. I limit the enemy to at most 2 initiative positions where I can and strive for a simple 1 most of the time. We have done initiative cards but found this failing some of the time so it was abandoned. Quickleaf, can you perhaps describe in a nutshell the initiative systems you mentioned?

As for challenging the party, I have not had trouble so far. I do a lot of preparation in terms of suitable tactics and do not find challenging the party difficult (so far at least anyway ).

Thank you Quickleaf for your great suggestions, they are very good guides to keep reminding myself of.

On a side note, the interesting one is concise information to the players. I find that if I'm too concise, I get asked for extra details during a players turn which can stall an encounter as much as providing too much. Finding the balance is something I'm trying to do well but it is something I've identified I have to work on a little bit more. The other tendency I've noticed is spellcasters taking longer than others. I've assisted them by producing spell cards for all the spells they can cast. At the start of a "day", I get them to choose their spells (and thus their cards for the day). I found this really speeds things up.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Nyaricus]

The other tendency I've noticed is spellcasters taking longer than others. I've assisted them by producing spell cards for all the spells they can cast. At the start of a "day", I get them to choose their spells (and thus their cards for the day). I found this really speeds things up.

That sounds really awesome; I might have to try that out man!

Thanks!