The optimal number of participants (player AND DM)!
- Thread starter Decamber
- Start date
Re: The optimal number of players!
Perhaps you should reword the poll's question to read: How many participants (number of players and the DM) should there be in an ultimate gaming group?
My first response was to answer, "5 players", thinking that did not include the DM (since he's not, technically, a "player"). I almost selected that answer and clicked "Vote!"... but then I decided to read the first reply, past the poll itself, which explained that the DM is to be included. So, my answer turned out to be "6 players".
Anyway, I think 5 players and a DM is ideal because with this number you tend to get well-rounded adventuring parties, able to handle practically any situation or challenge; along with a good mix of different ideas and veiwpoints from the players themselves. Any more than 5 players, and the DM is less able to give enough attention to the needs and particulars of each individual player.
Decamber said:
Perhaps you should reword the poll's question to read: How many participants (number of players and the DM) should there be in an ultimate gaming group?
My first response was to answer, "5 players", thinking that did not include the DM (since he's not, technically, a "player"). I almost selected that answer and clicked "Vote!"... but then I decided to read the first reply, past the poll itself, which explained that the DM is to be included. So, my answer turned out to be "6 players".
Anyway, I think 5 players and a DM is ideal because with this number you tend to get well-rounded adventuring parties, able to handle practically any situation or challenge; along with a good mix of different ideas and veiwpoints from the players themselves. Any more than 5 players, and the DM is less able to give enough attention to the needs and particulars of each individual player.
Last edited:
Liquid Snake
First Post
Unsure
I voted five (including DM), but to be honest I'm not quite sure of it. This has been an eternal inner question for me.
The poll question should clarify the number includes DM, it's misleading several people.
I voted five (including DM), but to be honest I'm not quite sure of it. This has been an eternal inner question for me.
The poll question should clarify the number includes DM, it's misleading several people.
Durifern
First Post
depends on the players
I'd say four PCs and three players.
But the problem is what kind of are your players?
We´re a group of four friends. Because one of 'em has hardly time to play we started a side campaign where we can play even if someone is missing and here the problem starts: the total number of PCs is no problem at all but the constellation of players is one.
There's the roleplayer who loves to interact with NPCs and he's the only one who's a li'l bit into powergaming (which is good cause the others don't use their powers to the fullest).
Then there's the guy who likes to roll the dice but otherwise he's very passive and indecisive, sometimes to a fault. But he's also the one who likes to solve the riddles and comes up with solution to some of the problems the others don't think of.
But if we three play it gets obvious pretty fast that something is still missing: The one who decides, commands and pushes the plot forward.
So it´s always best when we play together.
Most likely there are even more "necessary" categories I didn't think of but these are the ones I see at our table.
I'd say four PCs and three players.
But the problem is what kind of are your players?
We´re a group of four friends. Because one of 'em has hardly time to play we started a side campaign where we can play even if someone is missing and here the problem starts: the total number of PCs is no problem at all but the constellation of players is one.
There's the roleplayer who loves to interact with NPCs and he's the only one who's a li'l bit into powergaming (which is good cause the others don't use their powers to the fullest).
Then there's the guy who likes to roll the dice but otherwise he's very passive and indecisive, sometimes to a fault. But he's also the one who likes to solve the riddles and comes up with solution to some of the problems the others don't think of.
But if we three play it gets obvious pretty fast that something is still missing: The one who decides, commands and pushes the plot forward.
So it´s always best when we play together.
Most likely there are even more "necessary" categories I didn't think of but these are the ones I see at our table.
MojoGM
First Post
I also voted 2 or less.
I really prefer the smaller games. Ran a 2 person Spelljammer game for many years, and it was great. You can really develop a story and not worry about players getting bored.
That being said, my two current games have 5 and 6 players, so the 2 or less was my wish, not my reality.
I really prefer the smaller games. Ran a 2 person Spelljammer game for many years, and it was great. You can really develop a story and not worry about players getting bored.
That being said, my two current games have 5 and 6 players, so the 2 or less was my wish, not my reality.
Cloudgatherer
First Post
I think anywhere from 3-6 is acceptable (voted for 4). 2 is too small a group, while 7 can run into a management problem (too many people wanting to do too many things at the same time).
Later.
Later.
