PDA

View Full Version : DM Help How to deal with too many players?



Rainman3769
2014-03-07, 07:55 PM
Hey all, just joined today and after posting my intro thread I wanted to get right into the thick of things. I was hoping the fine folks here could offer some insight into my conundrum.

So, with D & D Next coming in the summer, my RPing group decided my campaign ideas sounded the most interesting, and voted me to DM once the new edition goes live. I am really excited, as this is my second time DMing a game, and I think its gonna be awesome!

I run into problems with the number of players though. My RPing group has about 15 members in it. No, we have never tried the insanity of all playing at once, we are more of a loose collective of friends who like to RP. However, recently I've discovered that 9 of the 15 want to participate in my campaign. As flattering as that is, I just don't know how to handle that many people, all wanting to have agency in my game world and also have their backstories woven into the setting. I am afraid that if I allow this many people to join, in my efforts to please everyone, I will please no one and in the end, the campaign will suck.

How have you all dealt with alot of people wanting to play? Or if you took on the challenge, how did you keep everyone interested?

Stoneback
2014-03-07, 08:35 PM
1. Group initiative.
2. Have them write out their combat actions, one each, on note cards. When actions are declared, have them reveal their cards simultaneously.
3. Limit it to six players. Have them jello wrestle for it or something.

Magikeeper
2014-03-07, 08:58 PM
9 people can work.. in a PbP where you then split them into smaller (or even solo!) groups all over the place.

I don't think trying that at a table is going to work. Hard as it is, streamlining combat is the easy part. How are you going to handle out-of-combat? Or even the party doing stuff at town? I just don't see there being enough time for everyone to do stuff unless some really tight subgroups form.

I guess if the 9 became three groups of three that act like singular individuals it could maybe work? Maybe each subgroup has its own goals and has a reason to always travel in that subgroup. So in any non-combat situation you are dealing with three three-headed people instead of nine people.

Still, there will definitely be situations where several people are twiddling their thumbs.

--------------

But if you are really worried about this, don't be afraid to tell them you don't think you can handle 9 people.

Like, just get them all together and say "Guys, I am flattered, but I really don't think I can handle 9 people. Could we possibly split into two groups?"

Jeff the Green
2014-03-07, 11:39 PM
But if you are really worried about this, don't be afraid to tell them you don't think you can handle 9 people.

Like, just get them all together and say "Guys, I am flattered, but I really don't think I can handle 9 people. Could we possibly split into two groups?"

This. If you can handle the time commitment (maybe 1.5x the prep, depending on the kind of campaign—pre-published less, sandbox less, "normal" more—and 2x the play) it's a much better solution. If you can't handle the time commitment, see if you can get a player to co-DM. Set up the world together and each run your own version or a different group in the same world.

DrBurr
2014-03-08, 12:48 AM
There's always the option of dividing your group in two and run two games but that might result in burnout pretty quickly.

9 is doable, my first game shot up to around 8 players before I started thinning the crop.

First I'd alter initiative slightly, Who ever rolls the highest gets to go first then rotate to the left or right like you would if playing cards, when it circles around to you run the monster, it sucks for guy #2 but it makes running combats easier. Also definitely consider initiative or at least round robining for things like exploring, shopping or gathering information in town, chances are your mages and fighters are going to be heading in different directions anyway once they get to Hammerfast or w/e the town is.

One of the benefits of a large group is they can efficiently split the party and tackle multiple obstacles in the dungeon. So I'd suggest getting a giant wet erase mat so you can draw multiple battlefields quickly because it is going to happen.

After a couple sessions your crowd will probably become only around 5 or 6 consistent players, I'd focus creative energies on those groups when designing quests, if someone no shows it won't be a big deal so you can just have them fade into the background for the episode but still gain XP as if they were there.

Also budget your time appropriately this is absolutely necessary for running a big group, if you schedule a game for 2 pm on Sat expect people to be at least 30 mins late and about 2 hours of goofing off. So really you should expect your game to start around 5 pm, and be strict on that once it turns 5 get every in to position to play because playing with a group is frequently playing against the clock because of some text from a girlfriend or new tweet will interrupt the game at some point.

Also welcome to the forum and goodluck with your game.

Felhammer
2014-03-08, 01:07 AM
Split the groipup into two separate but more consistent groups.

Or run a West Marches Game.

Honest Tiefling
2014-03-08, 02:39 AM
Ask if someone is willing to DM a second group? There has to be someone nearly as interesting as you! :smallwink:

Rhynn
2014-03-08, 06:30 AM
Yeah, either split up or run a slightly different kind of game...

Basics of a West Marches/Flailsnails/Rients' Wessex/whatever game:
- Sign-up is public somehow (mailing list, website, whatever).
- First X people (6 is a good upper limit, but whatever you feel like handling) to sign up get in, but they have to show up, too. Set a minimum, too: 3 is good.
- Every session starts at home base and ends at home base.
- The setting is a traditional sandbox: wilderness hexmap filled with adventure locations and dungeons, maybe one central megadungeon, and the PCs get to decide what to explore.

You can work in plot threads, but there's probably no one big plot that is constantly followed.

FWIW, splitting up the group and running the same game for both of them can work great, too; they'll get to compare experiences ("You killed the ogre witch? We allied with her!") and you can shake things up with small changes to key locations or encounters.

Jay R
2014-03-08, 12:18 PM
Try it for two session before giving up. I had a party of twelve people once. It was rough, but doable.

I urge you to remind them regularly that it's difficult to track twelve PCs, and ask them to focus on the game.

Also, I recommend this approach:

DM: OK, Jon, it's your initiative. What does Stronginthearm do?
Jon: Hmmm. I'm not sure, which was the goblin who shot at me?
DM: Stronginthearm looks around and takes his bearings. Somebody help bring Jon up to speed, and I'll get back to you later in the round. Val, what does Bramblerose do?

Airk
2014-03-08, 05:22 PM
I think pretty much all the suggestions are going to come down to some variant of "split the group". One that my quick skim didn't detect as having been mentioned yet is a "troupe style" game, where different groups of characters go on different adventures depending on who's there/who has a stake/etc. So one week it could be A/B/C/D/E/F against the goblin lair, and the next week, G/H/I/B/C/F track down the blood mage coven, and the week after that...etc.

This requires you to keep your adventures to one-session lenght or find a way to switch people out, and it doesn't solve the problem of how to weed down to 'just' six players (which, IMHO, is still 2-3 too many, but that will depend on the type of game.)

Slipperychicken
2014-03-09, 03:49 AM
3. Limit it to six players. Have them jello wrestle for it or something.

If you ask me, cap it at 4 or 5. This is because 2-4 is a healthy number of players (i.e. you move quickly and get lots of stuff done every session. Especially if they're good players), five starts pushing it, and I find the gameplay experience noticeably deteriorates past 6. At nine or higher, you have no spotlight time, and you're lucky if you take one action every 30 minutes of play.


The quality of your players matters a lot, of course. In a theoretical game where every player

Had the rules down cold
Could look up rules unassisted
Payed attention
Adhered to roleplaying etiquette

Then maybe you could go up to 6-7 players while still having a tolerably good game.

Cikomyr
2014-03-09, 10:11 AM
The bigger a group becomes, the more pressing the need for some sort of structured hierarchy becomes. You need someone who can actually cut the decision short when an argument about What To Do runs too long, and who can encourage certain players into taking the spotlight in turns (because some players do it naturally, and may hog it too long).

A good leader is not necessarily the best tactician/strategist, but it's someone who will be able to draw all players into feeling they contribute.


I never had a problem getting a group to accept a formal hierarchy, as long as the leader in place is not just another selfish bastard player who thinks he's always right. You would be surprised how much a single person cutting a dragging discussion short helps the group dynamic.

Rhynn
2014-03-09, 04:13 PM
DM: OK, Jon, it's your initiative. What does Stronginthearm do?
Jon: Hmmm. I'm not sure, which was the goblin who shot at me?
DM: Stronginthearm looks around and takes his bearings. Somebody help bring Jon up to speed, and I'll get back to you later in the round. Val, what does Bramblerose do?

This is an absolute must. If a player isn't ready to act when their turn comes up, too bad. (You might be more lenient on first turns, but not really; they should have planned tactics beforehand.) They pass and either forfeit their turn that round, or act last after everyone else.

Also, players are responsible for keeping notes on their spells and abilities (index cards are great; my party's mage just started his index card spellbook, it's really easy when you start it at first level), so there's no looking them up on their turns. Keeping, say, a spreadsheet character sheet with condensed descriptions of your abilities and spells is really quite easy, and you can print it out every time you level up or whatever. (Leave blank spaces for anything likely to change a lot during play.)

You might also institute some really old-school party roles, like the "decider" (who tells the GM what the party does), and so on.

valadil
2014-03-09, 06:30 PM
For the sake of my carpal tunnels I'm going to link you to a blog post I wrote on the topic. http://gm.sagotsky.com/?p=225#more-225

WrathMage
2014-03-10, 03:50 AM
I am going to throw my weight behind the "split the group" options. I once ended up with a 3.5 game with 9 players. It was... tough to say the least. It was do-able (kind of) but it ran so slowly that several players got bored and drifted away over the course of 4 sessions. It didn't make for a satisfying feeling as a DM to see peoples energy fade out like that (although that may have been largely my own faults as a DM in such a large game).

However, kudos to you for having so many people want to play in your game, that's always a great feeling!

lytokk
2014-03-10, 07:09 AM
Maybe not a popular thought, but I had a DM do something like this with me. Start with the 9 players, that way you can get exposure to more of what 5e has to offer. Run a lethal type game after the second session. Let the players know, that if your character dies, they're out. Once you've whittled it down to 5 players, keep the lethality, but everytime someone dies, that player is out, and waiting in the pool. Bring in the player that died first, give them a session to get their bearings (ie, if they die in their first session back, they get to bring in a new character, just to understand the group dynamics). Keep a rotating player pool based on when characters bit it. This way, everyone keeps getting a chance to play, and players are a bit more conscious and don't want their characters to die. Also, no PVP.

ElenionAncalima
2014-03-10, 07:57 AM
The biggest challenge is probably going to be keeping combat going quickly, so that players aren't waiting an hour for their turn. I would suggest getting initiative rolls at the beginning of sessions.

As another poster said, there should be a "You snooze, you lose" attitude regarding player turns. If someone doesn't know what they are doing, despite having 8 players turns and any number of NPC turns to figure it out...thats really not your fault. No one is going to want to miss their turn, so you will either teach them to be prepared or thin out a player who may not be suited for such a large group.

I would imagine that the other challenge will be making sure everyone is heard outside of combat. Unlike combat, where I would suggest keeping things moving as fast as possible, here I would suggest taking a little extra time to make sure no one is being cut off from roleplaying.

MagpieWench
2014-03-10, 08:08 AM
For the sake of my carpal tunnels I'm going to link you to a blog post I wrote on the topic. http://gm.sagotsky.com/?p=225#more-225

7. Appoint a rules lawyer.

Love this! :)

This would make my husband happy. He is a rules lawyer, and often an annoying one. :)


I've played in a game with 12+ people, most of them in the same room, some of them online. Whoo! The best rule? No cell phones. We keep chitter chatter to a minimum, and everyone paid attention during combat. Usually there was less than 20 seconds between initiative call and declaration of action. Sometimes that was "Uh... holding action because I don't know what to do yet."

(I will admit to passing notes during combat *and* role playing bits though... made for great quotes in the house book...)

hellmonkeyd2
2014-03-10, 11:17 AM
Running for huge groups is a different animal than small groups, but can be done. Delegating the many responsibilities of keeping track of separate parts of combat is the big one, Initiative keeper, Rules lawyer as mentioned above, map keeper, and finally ensuring players plan out their turn beforehand also as mentioned above.

Out of combat, I have had great success in going from right to left around the table with out of combat actions, limit to quick scenes for anything where the whole group isn't there, and dedicate each session to giving a different player the spotlight so they can have some character development. If you warn your players they will have their day, it typically goes over alright.

The last piece of advice: work with your players out of game on what their characters are intending to do during the next session so that you can prep for what they are wanting to do and if at all possible combine two characters scenes. Be this through E-mail, text, or what have you.

Studoku
2014-03-10, 11:32 AM
Is running a system other than D&D an option?

D&D (any edition) starts to fall apart with high numbers of players, mostly because of large scale combats taking ages. More narrative based, rules-light systems can handle far more players.

hellmonkeyd2
2014-03-10, 12:24 PM
Kind of an obscure system- SLA industries is built for fast combat, and the structure they use for rounds makes splitting the party delightfully easy. Its a bit of an odd rules set though, so run through a combat round together and break down the way every part works so as to avoid confusion down the line.

The Oni
2014-03-10, 12:27 PM
Start the campaign with all fifteen players. No character rerolls until you're down to four. 1st dungeon is Tomb of Horrors. All your problems solved within one session.

SowZ
2014-03-10, 05:17 PM
I play with a maximum of six players. I have had to tell people no, we're full multiple times. It is no fun, but even less fun is nine people all trying to play and I can't keep everyone relevant so three people or so end up sitting out 90% of the time any given session.

Rainman3769
2014-03-10, 05:25 PM
A hearty thank you to all who have responded so far! I would not have thought of some of the ideas I've seen on here. I had a good feeling about the community on this forum :smallbiggrin:

Averis Vol
2014-03-10, 06:08 PM
man, I thought my current game was bad at 7 players :P.

Yea, I'm going to second the notion that you might have to change the nature of your game if you want to accommodate all those people; I just don't think they make a battle map the correct size for that groups dungeons :P

I'd be straight up with them though (Normally not this guy but it seems like the right thing to do this time) and tell them that that is a ridiculous number of people, and that it just wont work; explain that turns will take forever, dungeons would have to be massive and there would potentially be a lot of toe stepping and party disparity. none of which are inherently big deals, but in such bulk, it would get way out of hand. It's also hard to give that many people their individual spotlight moments.

Jay R
2014-03-10, 06:58 PM
Try it before you decide.

Not only might you find out that you can do it, but if you can't, the group will understand why. They will have seen the problem, and will offer suggestions that fit that group of people.

Tessman the 2nd
2014-03-10, 07:27 PM
Have a mass culling, keep the ones you want

Figgin of Chaos
2014-03-11, 11:44 PM
My rule of thumb is based on the idea that 4 is the optimal party size, with 3 and 5 being acceptable alternatives. So if you have 6-10 players, split them into two groups.

You could spread out the GMing load by having one GM for each of two groups, potentially letting each GM be a player in the other group.


Sidenote, 15 is about enough friends to start a small Live-Action Role-Playing group. Just saying.

Anlashok
2014-03-12, 12:54 AM
Run them through a first edition game first. The people who survive get to stay.

Rainshine
2014-03-12, 02:07 AM
A lot of good advice here. One thing I didn't see touched on was mass rolls and probabilities. I'm not familiar with the Next rules, but... For instance, there's a chance to search the room, or recall some information. In a "normal" sized group, if 50% of the people are interested/have the skill, you've got two or three dice being rolled. Move to 15, now you have seven dice in the air. The statistics don't change, but your turnover is greater, so you're going to be seeing a higher incidence of high rolls for a given challenge.

Kiero
2014-03-12, 06:19 PM
Split the group, 10 people is two groups. So someone else in the remainder needs to run a game.