Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
EN Publishing
Party splitting up to follow different threads? I need advice
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="LeanAsc22" data-source="post: 9590350" data-attributes="member: 7049419"><p>Hey all. I'm currently facing a problem which might be just me and that I'm not that experienced, so I came seeking advice. I'm running Book 2 (session 2, party already at Thinking Man's tavern) for a party of 6. After the scene at the consulate, the PCs have multiple threads they can pursue, and the book itself even suggests that one possible way to resolve the adventure is by splitting up and following different leads. I like this idea, especially because I have six players, and having them all together following the same thread and talking to the same NPC makes things less interesting. It would also speed up the mystery.</p><p></p><p>The problem I see is this: let's say, for example, Thread 1: Smugglers. The PCs visit Danisca’s shop and Blander. Unlike other encounters, like the smuggler operation at the docks, or going to MacBannin's mansion, I can imagine my players thinking that visiting the Waryeyes would just be to see what they know, but I know that it could easily lead to combat. And I don’t want to end up with only two players fighting, or worse, having to run two or even three simultaneous combats just to give everyone some spotlight and action. Even if I create interesting social events for the ones who aren’t present, it’s not the same as having an exciting fight. It would be a dream to have them go together but split between her shop and his building, but they could also go to interrogate the cleric who healed Nilasa (which is something they want to do) and miss the combat...</p><p></p><p>I thought about hinting through descriptive details or prior information, that things could escalate quickly at some locations—for example, describing Danisca’s apothecaries as being guards, so the PCs who were there would potentially decide to get the whole team together. Of course, I would have to do the same for every encounter in which I want them to be together.</p><p></p><p>Has anyone run into a similar issue? Do you have a better solution I might not be considering? I understand that heavily hinting that they should be together for certain scenes might be railroading them, but I don’t think it would be fun for two or three players to be in combat while the rest are investigating Wolfgang’s hotel, or talking with Jack Byron the driver.</p><p></p><p>Ultimately, I think it would be great that they split up, but I don't love the idea of 3 players fighting the Cloudwood brigands and Lorkan Kell's men, and the other 3 investigating a hotel. Even if I can get them to go with the Waryeyes, running two separate combats at the same time would be too much for me I think...</p><p></p><p>Thanks for reading and any advice would be appreciated.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="LeanAsc22, post: 9590350, member: 7049419"] Hey all. I'm currently facing a problem which might be just me and that I'm not that experienced, so I came seeking advice. I'm running Book 2 (session 2, party already at Thinking Man's tavern) for a party of 6. After the scene at the consulate, the PCs have multiple threads they can pursue, and the book itself even suggests that one possible way to resolve the adventure is by splitting up and following different leads. I like this idea, especially because I have six players, and having them all together following the same thread and talking to the same NPC makes things less interesting. It would also speed up the mystery. The problem I see is this: let's say, for example, Thread 1: Smugglers. The PCs visit Danisca’s shop and Blander. Unlike other encounters, like the smuggler operation at the docks, or going to MacBannin's mansion, I can imagine my players thinking that visiting the Waryeyes would just be to see what they know, but I know that it could easily lead to combat. And I don’t want to end up with only two players fighting, or worse, having to run two or even three simultaneous combats just to give everyone some spotlight and action. Even if I create interesting social events for the ones who aren’t present, it’s not the same as having an exciting fight. It would be a dream to have them go together but split between her shop and his building, but they could also go to interrogate the cleric who healed Nilasa (which is something they want to do) and miss the combat... I thought about hinting through descriptive details or prior information, that things could escalate quickly at some locations—for example, describing Danisca’s apothecaries as being guards, so the PCs who were there would potentially decide to get the whole team together. Of course, I would have to do the same for every encounter in which I want them to be together. Has anyone run into a similar issue? Do you have a better solution I might not be considering? I understand that heavily hinting that they should be together for certain scenes might be railroading them, but I don’t think it would be fun for two or three players to be in combat while the rest are investigating Wolfgang’s hotel, or talking with Jack Byron the driver. Ultimately, I think it would be great that they split up, but I don't love the idea of 3 players fighting the Cloudwood brigands and Lorkan Kell's men, and the other 3 investigating a hotel. Even if I can get them to go with the Waryeyes, running two separate combats at the same time would be too much for me I think... Thanks for reading and any advice would be appreciated. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
EN Publishing
Party splitting up to follow different threads? I need advice
Top