Player Engagement

[Mark CMG]

GMs: Do your players have their heads more in the game or more on the game?


Sometimes just getting enough players to gather around a table is enough but two sorts of players always seem eager to play: those who love to get into the game through their character's role and those who love to come at the game through the mechanics of the rules. (Some players can be both!) Which sort of players do you mostly have? Share some of the positive results these players have engendered at the table, please.

 

[Mark CMG]

In addition, how many players do you have at your RPG Tabletop games?

What is the ideal number for you to have?

What are the minimum and maximum number of players you can reasonably handle?

 

[Hand of Evil]

I think my players are more in the game. I think this is because it has been a long term setting, the players have been playing in it for six or is it seven years now, I do think that makes a difference. They have become invested in the setting and while not the same characters or campaign, they have grown to know that setting.

Just four players but has every now and then gone to six. I find five or six to be a good size group, you can control the table and have enough characters for balance.

 

[Mark CMG]

I think my players are more in the game. I think this is because it has been a long term setting, the players have been playing in it for six or is it seven years now, I do think that makes a difference. They have become invested in the setting and while not the same characters or campaign, they have grown to know that setting.

So, do you feel they have a sort of shorthand and ingrained knowledge of the setting now? That can be very useful for introducing new setting tidbits as well as for them to be able to spot the unusual things you introduce.

 

[Umbran]

In addition, how many players do you have at your RPG Tabletop games?

Typically 4 to 6.

What is the ideal number for you to have?

Probably about 5 or 6. I find this strikes the maximum in variability of inter-PC interactions, while not slowing the game down too much with the GM bottleneck.

What are the minimum and maximum number of players you can reasonably handle?

I have run tabletop sessions with 12+ people. I have run larps with 30 to 80 people. The latter isn't an answer to your question, so much as a note that my definition of reasonability may differ from many others'.

 

[Umbran]

And, to answer the original post...

I first met my wife when she showed up to make a character for a D&D game I was running. Does that count as player engagement?

My current players have their minds more in the game than on it. Several of them are quite excellent rules-people too, but the rules are not their reason for coming to the table.

 

[delericho]

In addition, how many players do you have at your RPG Tabletop games?

At the moment, 5 players plus GM.

What is the ideal number for you to have?

Anywhere between 3 and 6 players plus GM.

What are the minimum and maximum number of players you can reasonably handle?

At the moment, anywhere between 3 and 5 players plus GM.

(And, yes, I know that the top of my 'ideal' range is higher than my 'maximum' value. The reason for that is that our current venue has seating for 6 people, and so there's a hard limit. If we were using a different venue, that would open up one more space.)

 

[Hand of Evil]

So, do you feel they have a sort of shorthand and ingrained knowledge of the setting now? That can be very useful for introducing new setting tidbits as well as for them to be able to spot the unusual things you introduce.

Yes, I do. I am a big believer in "reaction for every action" and keeping information flowing to the players in game via gossip and news. Things like the Monarch Bridge was destroyed and is being re-built would carry over in the setting for d12+2 months and it being re-open very much noted. Or things like, someone being appointed to oversee the lands of the last big bad.

You just have to remember to ask yourself "what happens now?" and just keep the players in the loop.

 

[steenan]

I typically have 3-4 players in games I run.

For me, it is the perfect number in play. Is enough for interesting interactions between characters and for non-trivial tactics in combat, but it gives a lot of spotlight time to each player. I run very character-driven games, so it is crucial that players are able to engage their arcs.


I have ran and played fun 1-on-1 sessions, so I think that the minimum number of players for me is 1. But I definitely prefer having 2 or 3 players.

As for the maximum number, I wouldn't go above 5-6, but even that is a lot. I would run a game for 5 or more players only if we agreed to never split the group and to reduce interpersonal interactions. While I have ran such games, that is not my preferred playstyle.


My players typically engage with their characters, situation and setting more than with the system. It's not that we ignore mechanics - we usually play by the book and avoid games with "rule zero" - but we mostly play games where the rules help focus on the fiction, not games where mechanics are fun by themselves.
I think that in my group I am the person who enjoys playing with mechanics the most.

 

[Mark CMG]

You just have to remember to ask yourself "what happens now?" and just keep the players in the loop.

Might be good to have that across the inside top of the GM's screen.