Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ruleslawyer" data-source="post: 3131674" data-attributes="member: 1757">I'm not a fan of kicking people out based on some quasi-competitive mechanism. I don't know the social dynamics of your group (and it's not clear from your post how many of your prospective players are casual acquaintances or friends), but I know that if I were in your place, I'd prefer to keep things inclusive. It is a game, after all!My suggestion would be that if any of your prospective players are casual acquaintances or pick-up players, you say that the group's too big and limit it to just close friends. That's something that people can understand pretty well. OTOH, if your group doesn't break down quite that way, I'd go with the following methods in order of preference:1) Anyone else want to run a game? Rather than you running two groups of four each, see if there's another DM in the area who might like to run a game. Then you spin off 4 players to him and keep 4 yourself. Everyone's happy, and you can game just as often.2) Reward consistency. If there are players with a poor record of showing up, those guys don't get to play in this round. Explain that it's not a slam against them, but that you'd rather run a group of 6 all of who show up than a rotating bunch of 4-8 players.3) Large group + co-DM. While it's clear that you've got serious DM-ing experience, I have to say that you may be underestimating the time benefit of having a co-DM. I've done it before for large groups (8-12), and it works great. IMX, narration and campaign structure are not tasks that vary in difficulty with the size of the group; running combats and NPC interactions (uses of "processing power," as Dave Noonan put it a while back), are. A co-DM takes care of this stuff right quick. It does sound like your friend Sean may not want to do this; otherwise, I'd suggest this one as Option #1.</blockquote>

Verification