Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ancalagon" data-source="post: 7595183" data-attributes="member: 23">HelloSo I've been doing this playing by post thing here for oh, maybe 2 years now.&nbsp; I've seen a few games succeed, a few fail, some peter out... and I think I've realized something important.(tl, dr:&nbsp; Small groups are better) First, the biggest threat to a game is loss of momentum and interest.&nbsp; As long as everyone is excited and motivate about the game, it can move fast (... well fast for a pbp game).&nbsp; But when posting slows down, the odds people dropping out for various reasons, including &quot;life happens&quot; increase because it takes longer to complete an adventure.&nbsp; There was, last time we discussed this, general agreement that big adventures are not really feasible, and that there has to be concrete goals in view.&nbsp; A piece of common wisdom I see here is to recruit large groups, that way when some people drop out there can remain a core of dedicated players to carry the game through.&nbsp; And... I think that's the mistake.&nbsp; IRL, a small group is &quot;vulnerable&quot; because just one person missing can be cause enough to cancel a session.&nbsp; If you have 6 players and one isn't there, you can just play.&nbsp; HOWEVER, the odds of one player missing on any given session increases!And in PBP, almost every day is a &quot;session&quot; - it's a game you devote a few minutes every day instead of a big session every week or 2.&nbsp; So if you have a large group, it's almost *guaranteed* that on any given day, one player is &quot;missing&quot; - they are busy, their internet is down, whatever.&nbsp; It's not because they are &quot;bad&quot; players, it's just that life happens.&nbsp; I've been guilty of slowing down the game a few times.&nbsp; So doing a round in 1 day is almost impossible, because there is always one player missing.&nbsp; The game slows down, momentum is lost and... So wouldn't it be better to have a small group, and have the game move at a faster clip?&nbsp; Of course, if someone is missing, skipping their turn may have a larger impact, and it might be better to wait for them, but that will happen more rarely.&nbsp;&nbsp; This way momentum is conserved, the game moves quicker, and the initial enthusiasm may last longer...I'll note that a balanced 3 people pary, even duo, in 5e is quite achievable.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ancalagon, post: 7595183, member: 23"] Hello So I've been doing this playing by post thing here for oh, maybe 2 years now. I've seen a few games succeed, a few fail, some peter out... and I think I've realized something important. (tl, dr: Small groups are better) First, the biggest threat to a game is loss of momentum and interest. As long as everyone is excited and motivate about the game, it can move fast (... well fast for a pbp game). But when posting slows down, the odds people dropping out for various reasons, including "life happens" increase because it takes longer to complete an adventure. There was, last time we discussed this, general agreement that big adventures are not really feasible, and that there has to be concrete goals in view. A piece of common wisdom I see here is to recruit large groups, that way when some people drop out there can remain a core of dedicated players to carry the game through. And... I think that's the mistake. IRL, a small group is "vulnerable" because just one person missing can be cause enough to cancel a session. If you have 6 players and one isn't there, you can just play. HOWEVER, the odds of one player missing on any given session increases! And in PBP, almost every day is a "session" - it's a game you devote a few minutes every day instead of a big session every week or 2. So if you have a large group, it's almost *guaranteed* that on any given day, one player is "missing" - they are busy, their internet is down, whatever. It's not because they are "bad" players, it's just that life happens. I've been guilty of slowing down the game a few times. So doing a round in 1 day is almost impossible, because there is always one player missing. The game slows down, momentum is lost and... So wouldn't it be better to have a [B]small group[/B], and have the game move at a faster clip? Of course, if someone is missing, skipping their turn may have a larger impact, and it might be better to wait for them, but that will happen more rarely. This way momentum is conserved, the game moves quicker, and the initial enthusiasm may last longer... I'll note that a balanced 3 people pary, even duo, in 5e is quite achievable. [/QUOTE]

Verification