Optimal number of players?

[Wycen]

Our Saturday game died recently and had started with 7 players. That was too much for me during character creation because I couldn't hear everything. After a month or two it dropped to 6 players and that was better. As others have said it means if one or two people can't make it we can generally still play.

My Wednesday group has 5 players, but that's one player too many - one is an attention hog but can't really bring that out into the open without pissing off somebody since her mother is the DM.

The Sunday group has generally about 5 players. Once we had 7, but one was a guest star and it was for a climatic battle. Generally we have 4 or 5. If everyone invited to play (before one was recently kicked out) showed up, we'd be playing with 8 (or 9 if you count the guest star). But two of the players have only shown up twice. I'm assuming they feel like they can't show up now because they don't know the story or don't want their 2nd level characters to be speed bumps. Or they just could be busy with real life.

I think 5 is the best number. Not too many and if you are down a player you still have 4 players to meet the preconceived encounter factors.

Now, with the right players, more is certainly doable, but it depends on group chemistry, which really is important even for a group of 3 or 4, maybe more so in smaller cases.

 

[Systole]

Either have 6 players and expect 4 on any particular night, or have 2-3 and enforce 100% attendance. Personally, I don't like playing more than 5, no matter the system.

 

[Mark CMG]

Regardless of the game played, 4 is optimum, with 3 and 5 also working quite well, but everything else not.

This has been my modus operandi and that of most groups with which I've gamed since starting back in 1974, from OD&D, through both AD&Ds, 3.XE, and onward. Generally, five players plus a DM/GM for many RPGs has worked well for me: fits round the table well; if one or even two are missing, the game can go on; on off nights it can be a good number of gamers for many alternatives, such as board games or wargames; etc. I've run games for somewhat larger groups but am often concerned about the amount of time each gamer is directly involved. With smaller groups with but one or two players it just feels like a very different dynamic, more inherently adversarial (not by DM intent, of course) without a group who can put their heads together and face challenges with more esprit de corp.

 

[Nytmare]

For me, the perfect number is four.

 

[NewJeffCT]

I played for a DM that would effortlessly DM groups of 8-12 people in 2E days. He was a master - he kept things running smoothly & swiftly almost all the time, and everybody got their chance to shine each session. (When he needed a break once, i tried to DM the group when it was at 9 people and it left me with a major headache...)

When 3E came around, he continued DMing the same group, though I had to drop out due to getting a crazy job that required a ton of hours. (Then I got married, and then spawned...) But, they went through a long campaign that took the players from leve1 to epic level (mid 20s). I came back to gaming briefly at the end of the campaign

Unfortunately, the DM had health issues and is no longer actively gaming, or DMing. So, I don't know how he would have done with 3.5E or 4E.

when I DM now, I prefer 5 or 6 players. When I ran 1E/2E games back in the day, most of my groups tended to be smaller because I was kind of shy and didn't have a lot of friends. So, it was mostly 3-4 gamers. More than 6 players kind of puts the challenge system of 3E/4E out of whack, I've found. The bigger groups are often exponentially more powerful (My 3.5E group of 8 players were 13th level and almost KO'd a souped up & fully buffed CR:16 blue dragon in the first round, despite the dragon crushing 2 of the PCs in its surprise round.)