D&D General Player Numbers - The Sweet Spot?

[Stalker0]

4 is the perfect number, I like 5 total players because often 1 can’t make it…giving me my perfect 4.

I will run 6, though it becomes more unwieldy, 7 I forbid…I have seen good games gone bad because 7 players just made things too slow and diluted.

 

[Zardnaar]

Prefer 4 or 5

 

[The Green Hermit]

Assuming we are talking "non-DM players," I picked four. In my experience, that's the point where there are enough players to entertain each other, generate ideas and story material, and generally reduce the burden on the DM; but not so many players that it becomes a logistical nightmare to keep track of what they're all doing (both in and out of combat).

I'd say the next best number of players is five, and the next after that is three. Six is barely manageable. Anything less than three or more than six is right out.

Unfortunately, I frequently have only one or two players, so the more experienced player has two characters and I have one as well. We only have household members, and that fluctuates, depending upon what kids we are fostering at the time.

 

[Baldurs_Underdark]

3, 4 or 5 all work fine. The poll did not allow 3 options, so I chose only "4 players". I want everybody at the table, so I cannot imagine the organisational hell of having >5 players with busy adult lives (even when playing short sessions online, on working days).

I can manage the groups of 5 just fine, and can usually balance the player development well. With 5 you have lots of creativity and players can easily find other players to energize their roleplay. Larger groups tend to be more chaotic, which I do not mind.

In a smaller group of 3, there is a lot more room for character development of the PCs. This can also be nice, especially if the players are creative. But there is a real risk that two players connect better, and the 3rd player receives less attention from his/her fellow players. Combat in a smaller group is easily balanced with one or a few NPCs controlled by the players (i.e. pets, mounts, sidekicks) which level up with the players.

 

[GuyBoy]

I’m happy to run with three. Sometimes that means an NPC might be required. I ran Frog God’s Northlands with three and it was great, but it was a low magic setting and also didn’t need sophisticated “city skills” of thievery.
Four or five is definitely my optimum as it ticks most boxes, both mechanically and in terms of story. I’m currently playing in The Sword’s Odyssey of the Dragonlords and we have a front line fighter, an Amazon ranger, a rogue and a bard.

My record is 16 players in a Night Below campaign. It was great fun, but combats could be a nightmare. I also had 12 for a 3e game of Gygax’s Necropolis.

 

[Scott Christian]

My record is 16 players in a Night Below campaign. It was great fun, but combats could be a nightmare. I also had 12 for a 3e game of Gygax’s Necropolis.

Yeah, we ran a Masquerade campaign with 16 players one time. Two GMs, but it was still a slog and too chaotic for my taste. But the character interaction was very fun.