PDA

View Full Version : Hosting RPG get-tpgethers - Questions



CindyKay
2007-04-17, 01:34 AM
A little background info:

I am (in my actual life) a program coordinator for a public library. One of my fairly recent, ongoing monthly programs is Game Guild - which is basically, thus far anyway, a group of Dungeons & Dragons players.

Right now, we have 2 groups - one for "beginners" and one for "experienced players". Most of the people in the groups have been attending since the first month, but I have a few new people who will be showing up this month. The players are mostly teens, but there are adults as well.

My questions?

How many people in a group are too many? My current DMs are amenable to adding another person or 2 to their group, but each group has 5 or 6 already and at the rate the Guild is growing, I foresee 8 or 9 for each group soon.

Should I find (or be) a 3rd DM and start another group for these newest
"beginners"? No one has expressed any resentment of being called beginners; however, I have several first-time players who will be attending this month. They are beginners for certain, but are the players on their 2nd adventure, and who have been playing for 5 months now, also still
"beginners"?

What do I call them if they aren't beginners any longer? Intermediate players almost sounds as if I'm judging their abilities and is NOT something I wish to imply. Should get the 2 or 3 groups to choose a name for their group?

I will appreciate any insights and/or advice - even if you have never been in a similar situation because each of you know how you would feel in this situation. Thanks!

Starsinger
2007-04-17, 01:41 AM
Maybe have one beginner's group, for those who are new, and then have two groups for people who've had more experience, and let them discuss with the DMs what sort of game it will be, what the DM expects, and let them choose? Or have the DMs choose?

Tallis
2007-04-17, 01:44 AM
Number of players in each group really depends on what each DM is comfortable with, but personally I don't like running for more than 6, I think it slows down the game too much when combt comes arround. So I would recommend starting a third group.
As far as naming the groups, instead of calling them beginners or advanced or whatever, why not refer to them as adventuring guilds (like they have in the Forgotten Realms) and let them name themselves. "The Grey Company", "Dengeon Delvers", "Dragonslayers", etc. It gives them the feeling of being a team and gets them involved right away. Also there's no value judgement implied in the names that way.

Hazkali
2007-04-17, 05:43 AM
I second Tallis' suggestion. Whilst everyone accepts that each of the groups have different levels of gaming experience, the idea of calling them "intermediate", "beginner" and so on is a poor one as it suggests some sort of arbitrary advancement could get you moved up into a a higher group, which isn't really something you want to encourage, as players work better with players they know and feel confident with. Adventuring group names would be perfect here.

I'd certainly split the groups up, though, if they are getting to 8 or 9 players. That's far too many for any group. My absolute maximum is 6, but even then some players get bored by long periods of inactivity, especialy if one player has a tendency to hog the limelight. If you have groups of 8 or 9, the best solution is to split them into groups of 4 or 5.

Another idea you might want to consider is splitting them by the type of game they want to play. Some players might prefer a grittier, less heroic style of play whilst others might prefer something more high fantasy. With the luxury of two groups you can put people in groups by the type of game they wish to play, as well as by their level of experience.

Matthew
2007-04-17, 04:22 PM
Indeed, do not name people as beginners in a formal sense. Consider running the others as normal D&D groups and have a 'beginners table', where people totally new to the game can be introduced. A great deal depends on how permanent the groupings are and whether they are short term or long term campaigns / adventures.

Ditto
2007-04-17, 11:03 PM
If you worry about creating some crazy heirarchy, I'd just call Experienced experienced, Beginngers beginners, and Rookies rookies. After you complete an adventure, Rookies become beginners. Then you have Beginners I, Beginners II...

It's not a major distinction, really. You've played some, or you've not. Just numbering the groups is good enough.

Hario
2007-04-17, 11:45 PM
If you worry about creating some crazy heirarchy, I'd just call Experienced experienced, Beginngers beginners, and Rookies rookies. After you complete an adventure, Rookies become beginners. Then you have Beginners I, Beginners II...

It's not a major distinction, really. You've played some, or you've not. Just numbering the groups is good enough. Sounds like you're trying to progress them like children do at swimming lessons or at skating lessons. That can get degrating easily. Also note different people learn at different rates, some players catch on quick, some you need to explain 5' steps and Aoo every session for the next 3 years. So if you want to make it nice, you can seperate them by years not exactly by adventures, like have people who have played for 3+ years be on a 'gold' team and those under be on 'green' this can be tweeked to make campaigns run smoother.

Fhaolan
2007-04-18, 12:08 AM
Yeah, you should try to get a 3rd or 4th DM. Not necessarily to open up a third gaming group, although with that number of players I'd recommend it, but so DMs can switch off. DMs can handle larger groups, but it does tend to increase the chance of DM burnout.

Don't bother labelling the groups, or categorizing them by skill. They'll probably come up with their own names for their subgroups. Also, if this is meant to be a long-term 'Guild', the DMs will eventually want to switch off and play occasionally, players will move between groups, campaigns will end and new ones started with completely different player mixes... Fixing the groups with labels tends to discourage this. Much better to just let the players handle this on their own, without an authority figure telling them what to do. :smallsmile:

Epiphanis
2007-04-18, 08:14 PM
I don't think a palying-experience gradation system is necessarily a bad thing. However, the less experienced the players are, the more experienced the DM must be.

I would recommend breaking up the players into at least three groups. As a DM I've never managed to hold a group larger than 8 together as a cohesive team (6 is my ideal.) That's not to say it can't be done. The greatest DM I've ever met at one point managed to singlehandedly run a group of SEVENTEEN PCs and have everyone satisfied enough to show up week after week. Very, very few of us have the mad skillz to pull that off.

Fat Daddy
2007-04-18, 08:24 PM
Everything I thought to say was already said by Tallis. So, in short, follow Tallis' advice. :smallsmile:

CindyKay
2007-05-03, 08:32 AM
Thanks to all of you who answered my question.
I am definitely going to drop the Beginners/Intermediate/Advanced labels idea.
I think I'll leave it up to the players to name their groups as Tallis suggested. I'm also looking for a 3rd DM for certain.
And as we get rookies or newbies, we'll help them create a character, learn the basics of how to play, and go from there.