Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dannyalcatraz" data-source="post: 6464391" data-attributes="member: 19675">RPGs are also one of the few game types in which there are no hard set rules on how many or few can play at one time.&nbsp; So what happens when your group is bigger or smaller than normal?Let's take the second scenario first: If you're running a store bought adventure- we're all trying to learn the game, right? so the commercial adventure lightens the DM's load- and it presumes a party of 6 and you have 4 players, MCing might be necessary simply to ensure the party can do everything it needs.Or if you're running a homebrew for 3, and you have a single classed wizard, rogue and cleric, who steps up when you need the warrior's not-so-gentle touch?&nbsp; Absent MCing, the party is going to be paying mercenaries a princely sum on a regular basis.In the case of a large group (like the one I've been in since 1998), it is impossible to have 100% niche protection even without MCing.&nbsp; Sure, a party may only have one Fighter, but I bet it will have multiple characters with some kind of &quot;warrior&quot; aspect to them.Now, I will say that doesn't mean there won't be flare-ups.&nbsp; As I have recounted in the past, in a 2Ed Player's option campaign, another player and I both decided to play priests.&nbsp; They had mechanical similarities: both subbed out some clerical power for some warrior aspects.&nbsp; Mine also subbed for a single school of Wizardry...and had more clerical domains than his.&nbsp; The other player complained loudly about my PC being &quot;superman.&quot;Here's the thing: our PCs were night and day.&nbsp; While mine could wear armor and use martial weapons, his had bigger HD and used the warrior attack chart.&nbsp; And as for spells?&nbsp; 99% of the spells my PC could have access to were buffs, with only 3 direct-damage dealing spells in the lot.&nbsp; His were more about wiping out foes directly.&nbsp; Most of my domains were minor access- topping out at 3rd level, which is why I had so many.&nbsp; My wizard school was Abjuration (which included Blade Barrier, one of my 3 potential damage dealers).I explained that to him, but it made no difference.&nbsp; I tore that PC up in front of him- inches from his face- and ran something entirely different.&nbsp; And his priest wasn't as good a healer as mine would have been...That disagreement happened more than 12 years ago, and hasn't been repeated.&nbsp; Nobody gives a damn anymore what someone else plays, as long as all the bases are reasonably covered.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dannyalcatraz, post: 6464391, member: 19675"] RPGs are also one of the few game types in which there are no hard set rules on how many or few can play at one time. So what happens when your group is bigger or smaller than normal? Let's take the second scenario first: If you're running a store bought adventure- we're all trying to learn the game, right? so the commercial adventure lightens the DM's load- and it presumes a party of 6 and you have 4 players, MCing might be necessary simply to ensure the party can do everything it needs. Or if you're running a homebrew for 3, and you have a single classed wizard, rogue and cleric, who steps up when you need the warrior's not-so-gentle touch? Absent MCing, the party is going to be paying mercenaries a princely sum on a regular basis. In the case of a large group (like the one I've been in since 1998), it is impossible to have 100% niche protection even [i]without[/i] MCing. Sure, a party may only have one Fighter, but I bet it will have multiple characters with some kind of "warrior" aspect to them. Now, I will say that doesn't mean there won't be flare-ups. As I have recounted in the past, in a 2Ed Player's option campaign, another player and I both decided to play priests. They had mechanical similarities: both subbed out some clerical power for some warrior aspects. Mine also subbed for a single school of Wizardry...and had more clerical domains than his. The other player complained loudly about my PC being "superman." Here's the thing: our PCs were night and day. While mine could wear armor and use martial weapons, his had bigger HD and used the warrior attack chart. And as for spells? 99% of the spells my PC could have access to were buffs, with only 3 direct-damage dealing spells in the lot. His were more about wiping out foes directly. Most of my domains were minor access- topping out at 3rd level, which is why I had so many. My wizard school was Abjuration (which included Blade Barrier, one of my 3 potential damage dealers). I explained that to him, but it made no difference. I tore that PC up in front of him- inches from his face- and ran something entirely different. And his priest wasn't as good a healer as mine would have been... That disagreement happened more than 12 years ago, and hasn't been repeated. Nobody gives a damn anymore what someone else plays, as long as all the bases are reasonably covered. [/QUOTE]

Verification