the Jester
Legend
Wow. I totally disagree- especially with earlier versions of the game, 4 is definitely NOT optimal! 6-8 works far better IME and IMHO.
It really depends on the group. There is no one size fits all answer.
Optimal number of players?
- Thread starter AwesomeOpossum74
- Start date
Wow. I totally disagree- especially with earlier versions of the game, 4 is definitely NOT optimal! 6-8 works far better IME and IMHO.
It really depends on the group. There is no one size fits all answer.
kitcik
Adventurer
I agree with what most people have said
- 4 is a great number
- edition matters (older edition --> more)
- game matters
- group matters
And I will add (or emphasize, if I missed it in someone's post):
DM MATTERS!
Some DM's can not only handle larger groups, but can use the larger size to advantage by creating more drama and interplay. Some can handle it, but not create the added drama etc. Some can't handle it at all, but are still great DM's for smaller groups.
I once played Castle & Crusades with Steve Chenault as GM in a group of like 12 and it seemed like a small group he was so adept at it.
- 4 is a great number
- edition matters (older edition --> more)
- game matters
- group matters
And I will add (or emphasize, if I missed it in someone's post):
DM MATTERS!
Some DM's can not only handle larger groups, but can use the larger size to advantage by creating more drama and interplay. Some can handle it, but not create the added drama etc. Some can't handle it at all, but are still great DM's for smaller groups.
I once played Castle & Crusades with Steve Chenault as GM in a group of like 12 and it seemed like a small group he was so adept at it.
saskganesh
First Post
Last year I got to run a group of six players, which I had never done before. It went great. Right now my sweet spot is 4-6.
I'd say it depends on the players.
Quiet, cooperative and humble players. I'd take 5 of those. Maybe even 6.
Talkative, neurotic and confrontational players. Ideal would be 3... 4 maximum.
Of course you might ask "why would you play with that sort of players". Well, sometimes they are like this but it doesn't get out of hand. They might be a bit or occasionally confrontational. Nevertheless, I need a smaller group if some or all of the players have strong personalities or need a lot of attention.
Quiet, cooperative and humble players. I'd take 5 of those. Maybe even 6.
Talkative, neurotic and confrontational players. Ideal would be 3... 4 maximum.
Of course you might ask "why would you play with that sort of players". Well, sometimes they are like this but it doesn't get out of hand. They might be a bit or occasionally confrontational. Nevertheless, I need a smaller group if some or all of the players have strong personalities or need a lot of attention.
Altamont Ravenard
Explorer
Chalk me up for 3 (DM writes his own adventure) or 4 (DM uses a premade adventure).
AR
AR
TerraDave
5ever, or until 2024
Agree, there is an element of group dynamics. 2 players often have a hard time maintaining the pace and energy level. 6 or more, people go into meeting mode (in social situations, this is where people may get bored or split into side groups).
It is true in faster playing versions of the game you can cycle through people more easily (and I guess for higher level 3E or any 4E, there is a lot for each player, on the other hand). Though given the scope for things like henchman in AD&D, 4 or 5 players is still a good number.
Mattachine
Adventurer
I prefer three players and a DM.
In some editions, especially at low level, each player can use a couple of PCs.
In some editions, especially at low level, each player can use a couple of PCs.
JamesonCourage
Adventurer
I like five players, but I can get along just as well with three or four players. Five gives just the right amount of energy for me, and lets people really bounce ideas off of each other. Three players makes for a more focused game, which is nice, but there's not quite enough fun intra-party conflict for my tastes. Four players falls somewhere in the middle.
From experience, I don't really want more than six players; anything beyond that and people get sidetracked too often. By that I mean that the goals of the characters really start to become very varied, and there's usually people pulling the group in different directions, rather than just some nice, interesting intra-party conflict.
I've never been a GM to just one player, but I think it would work well enough. I've played as the only player, and it went fine. I definitely like group stuff more, but one-on-one is still fun stuff. As always, play what you like
From experience, I don't really want more than six players; anything beyond that and people get sidetracked too often. By that I mean that the goals of the characters really start to become very varied, and there's usually people pulling the group in different directions, rather than just some nice, interesting intra-party conflict.
I've never been a GM to just one player, but I think it would work well enough. I've played as the only player, and it went fine. I definitely like group stuff more, but one-on-one is still fun stuff. As always, play what you like
Mishihari Lord
First Post
When I DM I like to have about 6 players. Anywhere between 4 to 8 is fine, but outside of that range the game is less fun for me.
AwesomeOpossum74
Explorer
Wow, lots of feedback, and quite varied input! You guys have given me some things to think about, such as the possibility of boredom from too many players, and a game moving too slow. Obviously an opportunity to play is an opportunity to play, and as a DM, I doubt I'd deny anyone else the opportunity to join in. Based on your input, I'm thinking 4 to 5 players (plus DM) is a good target.
