Players' Poll - Splitting the Party

[Nephet]

As Custer learned, never split your forces in the face of superior numbers. This usually applies to the party as well. But sometimes you can split the party to effect an ambush and win a fight without taking any casualties.

In D&D however since most characters are very specialized, it's usually a bad idea to split up since there are some things certain classes have no attack or defense for.

 

[Umbran]

Splitting your party is only effective if your DM can handle it without half the group being bored at any given time. This is no mean trick.

 

[Cloudgatherer]

Bad, even when in the RPG world it would be a "good" idea.

Bad from the DM's perspective because now he has to run simultaneous timelines. Also, what happens to one group doesn't affect the other (and the other group might be sitting there, listening).

Bad for players because, even assuming splitting up is a good idea, the two mini-parties have to take turns with the DM, and one group can't interact with the other.

So, in general, don't split up!

 

[Angcuru]

Actually, splitting the party may be a good idea. If you split up a party and take turns focusing on one or the other group, you give the group you aren't focusing on time for bathroom breaks, OOG comments, and generally keep the game running smoothly. It also gives you opportunity to run several sub-plots at once, making the game that much more interesting. Also, a player will not be bored simply because he isn't in on the action. If the DM is doing a good job, the non-playing player will get enjoyment out of listening the the game as it progresses for the other group of Players. But in the end, this works for some groups, but not for all.

 

[durath]

good question

This is a good question and hopefully DM's will take notice.

I'll agree with those who feel it is a bad idea to split up the party.
In game it may make the most sense in the world to do this. Maybe the party wants a sneaky PC to scout ahead, or for RP reasons the party would split up.

This is one case where out of game should overrule in game. Unless you are a DM of the caliber I have yet to see there is no way to split up the party and also:

1.Have those not playing at the moment know what is going on. Even if you have good players who try not to use out of game knowledge it is hard to know how you would have reacted once you know something.

2.Bore the hell out of those who are not in on the action. Let's face it, what a DM may consider an opportunity to let a certain PC shine(being sneaky, doing private negotiations etc.) is sure to take some time, and if combat ensues we all know how long some combats can turn out to be.
Which boils down to what is usually the majority of your players sitting there with the ol thumb up the bum.

The group I play with is pretty big. We currently have seven players. Each of us gets precious little "shine time" as it is so we try to avoid splitting up the party at all costs so as not to further bore people.

Our DM routinely punishes us for this by setting up encounters where if we would split up it would make more sense but we muddle through it as team so no one gets bored.

 

[Reika]

I voted bad because the few times I was playing where the group was split up, things turned ugly, very quickly. Like the time in a Shadowrun game I was in, my char came face to face to an Awakened spider that was almost as big as she was.

Damn near my pants irl as well as IC.

 

[Psiblade]

I definitely agree that splitting the party is bad. Almost time that happens half the party runs into a major combat and gets wiped.



-Psiblade

 

[BiggusGeekus@Work]

it's almost never a good idea because everyone who isn't currently involved gets BORED.

Yup. Nothing my half-orc barbarian/cleric loves more than being told to stay out of the way while the bard "handles the talking". Half the time a fight breaks out and my poor little clobber-guy doesn't even know about it.

 

[John Crichton]

I voted other.

There are a few variables that I take into account:

1) Party size. A larger party can handle more and sometimes dividing the resources is a good challenge. A smaller party is harder pressed when separated. In both cases, the DM should be prepared or bad things can happen. As a PC, the tension increases when either I am alone or isolated without a key party member ("You mean we don't have the cleric with us!?").

2) DM skill. When I run I try and keep the group together however there are plenty of chances for the PCs to split up if they like, especially in towns. As a player I need to have confidence that my DM will take proper care of time and be able to handle the different PCs doing different things as other players (myself included) can get bored when not in the spotlight. On the converse, some PC's like to 'watch' from time to time.

3) How long the split lasts. Goes along with the bored aspect. Unless the DM really knows what he is doing, long splits can be very tedious. Especially if the party dynamic is strong and they need to feed off each other to roleplay.

Bottom line: It REALLY depends on the DM. When I play, I try to keep the party together as I know it is stressful in general if not prepped for...

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Generally speaking, splitting the party won't make you do stuff faster in real time because the DM can only deal with one group at a time. And it does reduce your strength considerably. So I think that splitting the party is a generally bad idea, unless you're really short on time (in-game, naturally).

Well put.

The time at the game table is a limited resource. While you may get more 'in game' time by splitting up, each player is less involved. Furthermore the overhead cost to the DM of keeping track of the split party drains even more time away.

Splitting up the party means getting less done during that game session, and players have less fun as a result. Therefore, we strongly discourage it except for quick errands.