What do you want to do better as a GM?

[ART!]

The biggest game I've been in had 8 players. In DnD3.5, it was a nightmare. The biggest I've run has been maybe 5 players.

I'd love to learn how to run a game with over 6 players in a fun way. In some systems, I think it might be impossible.

I've run 5E for 9 players. It was a strain on my multi-tasking capacity, and combats took longer, but it worked and everybody had fun.

I tend to be a "more the merrier" kind of person, and when it comes to face-to-face gaming groups my rule is "never turn away a good player", because I've seen too many gaming groups fall apart from the inability to get enough people at the table each week.

In my experience, if the players are friendly with each other, the more players I have means less work for me when it comes to generating fun; they do that themselves. With more people my job as GM becomes more about making sure things keep happening.

So, it's not impossible, but it might not be to your tastes, which is totally valid.

 

[generic]

The biggest game I've been in had 8 players. In DnD3.5, it was a nightmare. The biggest I've run has been maybe 5 players.

I'd love to learn how to run a game with over 6 players in a fun way. In some systems, I think it might be impossible.

I once ran a table of 11 regular players, it was... uh... interesting.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

Played in a con game of S&W ran by Bill Webb and it was stunning how smoothly it ran with 20 players. Granted I'm not sure I'd be doing this on a regular basis but he ran it like a master. A lot of fun.

 

[Lanefan]

My problem in trying to run a game with more than 5 players is one of space, as in I don't have any.

The few one-offs I've run here with more than 5 players saw five sitting at the table and the rest scattered elsewhere around the room - hardly ideal!

 

[delphonso]

I tend to be a "more the merrier" kind of person. (snip)

This is a very good way to look at things. I often run first-time-games for friends and acquaintances but have limited games to 3-5 players, generally. I should branch out and try to get a bigger group of first-timers. You never know.

Played in a con game of S&W ran by Bill Webb and it was stunning how smoothly it ran with 20 players. Granted I'm not sure I'd be doing this on a regular basis but he ran it like a master. A lot of fun.

I honestly should watch Critical Role at some point solely because they have a cast of like 7 players regularly. There's probably a lot to learn from game designers and popular DMs. I was only in one game at a con before - don't recall the system, but we played with 8 players and it went super well. Forgot about that until now.

My problem in trying to run a game with more than 5 players is one of space, as in I don't have any. (snip)

No joke on space there, friend. I don't even have chairs in my apartment...

I once ran a table of 11 regular players, it was... uh... interesting.

I'd love to hear more! 8 players in 3.5 was what killed 3.5 for me (and pre-written adventures, oddly) for quite some time.

 

[generic]

I'd love to hear more! 8 players in 3.5 was what killed 3.5 for me (and pre-written adventures, oddly) for quite some time.

It was difficult. Combats were long, and social interactions dragged on because, while I wanted everyone to get a chance to interact, often, there simply wasn't enough time. This lead to long encounters of all kinds, and deeply unbalanced API to EL ratios. Once you have 11 players, you can throw CR out of the Window.

Generally, it was much harder to run.

 

[uzirath]

Another area I've been thinking about, especially as my own group grows larger (started with four players including the GM; we're considering adding a seventh for our next campaign arc), is to change the way I run battles. For small skirmishes, I would run them as usual, with detailed tactical combat. If they are likely to last for more than five rounds (with rounds simply meaning "going around the table"), then I'd like to divide them into key scenes and narrate across some of the slog. I've experimented with this a bit, but haven't yet mastered the technique. It works best when I plan the encounter out ahead of time with this play-style in mind. Instead of just thinking about the number of enemies and their abilities, it's more about thinking about what the stakes might be at different phases of an encounter and then planning out how it might change based on success or failure. I'm not ready to fully abandon tactical combat (which I enjoy), but with short game sessions, a large melee sometimes just take too long to resolve.

 

[Zhaleskra]

Thanks to videos by Lindybeige and Shad: make "dungeons" and buildings that 1.) have ceilings built to support their location and 2.) make sense for the purpose of the beings that live/work there.

 

[Razjah]

@Razjah, I don't know Forbidden Lands. System? Supplement? Something else?

Sorry the holidays were exhausting at work. Forbidden Lands is an rpg by Free League. They made Mutant Year Zero, Tale from the Loop, the new Alien RPG.

Forbidden Lands is a survival fantasy game, where the PCs are striving into wilderness to find treasure and eventually build their own stronghold. It's a hexcrawl style game with some osr vibes. It's really fun and I like the twist it presents to "traditional medieval fantasy" stuff.