How many Players in your game?

[MerricB]

That'd make sense if it were true. Too bad in the DMG they didn't explicitly provide a way to determine ELs assuming a group of 5 characters.

Tell me about it.

Oh well, there are worse things to worry about.

Cheers!

 

[Knightfall]

My DMs current Greyhawk campaign has 5 to 6 players, depending on the night. One of our players just left for Medicine Hat, so my DM is insisting that we get a 6th player before continuing on.

Thus, the campaign has been on hold for over a month (closer to two now). Frustrating.

I'm thinking I should just try to start my own game and be done with it. Yet, it took me forever to integrate myself into this group.

sigh

KF72

 

[diaglo]

Oh well, there are worse things to worry about.

and worse things in there.

 

[Cerubus Dark]

Because their (questionable, IMO) market research showed that the majority of groups consist of 4 players.

ENWorld supposedly isn't representative of the gaming population.

I think it has something to do with an average (SP) count, if 4 groups are 7+ while 3 others are only 3 they try to get a mid-ground for the whole thing. Or it could be easier to scale for them, since they might not have as many friends.

 

[Umbran]

Uh... didn't I say that ENWorld isn't representative?

You said it was "supposedly" so. Right after questioning the validity of the largest known market research on RPG players. That read to me as "Supposedly this is so, but I doubt it". My apologies if I read you incorrectly.

(But, until I see clear market research that makes a definitive distinction of what the "majority" is, the word "supposedly" stays.)

You don't need market research to see that the majority is not comprised of heavy fan message board users. You can get that information by looking at how few folks actually frequent EN WOrld, the WotC boards, and places like RPG.net.

Until such time as clear market research makes a definitive distinction of what the majority is, one should not take a small selective community to be representative of the whole.

Too bad in the DMG they didn't explicitly provide a way to determine ELs assuming a group of 5 characters.

That's probably a good thing. The DMG is pretty straightforward that the whole EL and CR system are guidelines. They cannot be any more stringent than that, as the game has far too many variables. Even when using it for the archetypal party, it needs DM oversight. Rather than trying to extend the system, it seems wise to me to instead make it explicit that it needs even more oversight when used for other cases.



Oh, and I realize I didn't answer in the thread: my group has 5 players and 1 DM.[/QUOTE]

 

[Arnwyn]

My apologies if I read you incorrectly.

You did, but I understand now how it could have been read differently.
[UOTE]You don't need market research to see that the majority is not comprised of heavy fan message board users.[/QUOTE]
Ah, but you do if you want to determine how the views of "heavy fan message board users" correlate with everyone else.

That's probably a good thing. The DMG is pretty straightforward that the whole EL and CR system are guidelines. They cannot be any more stringent than that, as the game has far too many variables.

Indeed - but I noted that it would be useful based on MerricB's comment that WotC research actually showed a mix of groups with 4 players and 5 players - thus, 5 is just as valid a group as 4. I can see not extending it too much - but just sticking with one possible group size (and no real guidelines for anything else) wasn't particularly helpful.

Oh well. As MerricB said - there are certainly other things to worry about.