Advice for a doomed DM?

[Jastermereel]

I'd like some advice, so please excuse me if this sounds like a rant. It's not meant as one, but when listing problems, one does tend to create that impression.

In a few months, it's likely I'll be taking over for the DM in my group. We've been playing the same homebrew slow and wandering campaign for a few years and we've burned out 2 DMs before only to have it be handed off to the next willing sucker. As it's my turn to be that willing sucker, I'd like some advice on figuring out how to fix some of the problems the group's been dealing with and suggestions on a pre-made adventure to try to throw into the ongoing campagin.

It's a large group. It started large around 5-6 and has slowly grown to 10 as friends of friends joined in. We've tried splitting it and running it in parallel but that hasn't worked much better as that leaves half the group in the lurch for weeks on end. Whether divided or not, it's hard for a DM to develop challenging encounters and it also takes a long...long time to go through any battle. Last night we covered buffing and 10 rounds of combat in 4 hours, give or take. Even when cut in half, two druids summoning animals is more than enough to over-fill any initiative order down.

It's a mixed skill group. While we've all been playing for a while, some people are now able to make power-game builds (but know it'd be silly to use'em here) and others are still struggling with what the numbers on their sheets are (two or three years in). Some move strategically to flank or form defensive lines in combat, and others are on their third character due to Leroy Jenkins syndrome.

It's very emphasized on "roll-playing" over role-playing. Few if any players have really thought about their character. New ones are given enough "backstory" to justify their presense in the gameworld and then are just another member of the party. The most distinctive PC trait is that the one druid is likely on some sort of drug, not as a character hook/plot device, but more as a running gag. The most distinctive NPC was a "guy in a tower who killed people", that is, a one-time sort-of ally of ours who seemed unusually brutal on a non-lethal mission we went on.

So, is there any hope? Are there any pre-made adventures that are less-combat oriented that might help to force the group to think as characters more than character sheets? That is, intrigue, perhaps, rather than battle and questing.

Oh, and we're using D&D 3.5.

Thanks in advance to all who might have any advice for this poor fool.

[Narmoth]

Okay, you're doomed.
What I'd do about combat is simple:
1. surprise encounters should dominate, so they don't get time to buff
2. tie down buffers in hand to hand-combat
3. make encounters that deliver a lot of dmg in the first round
4. make encounters that won't survive past the 2nd round
5. summoned creatures that will disappear anyway in 2 rounds are great. A simple home rule would be that you can get monster with one more hd for each 2 rounds you take from the summoning duration

Then do something about the story, to tune a bit down on hack and slash

[only1doug]

Spoiler

Show

I'd like some advice, so please excuse me if this sounds like a rant. It's not meant as one, but when listing problems, one does tend to create that impression.

In a few months, it's likely I'll be taking over for the DM in my group. We've been playing the same homebrew slow and wandering campaign for a few years and we've burned out 2 DMs before only to have it be handed off to the next willing sucker. As it's my turn to be that willing sucker, I'd like some advice on figuring out how to fix some of the problems the group's been dealing with and suggestions on a pre-made adventure to try to throw into the ongoing campagin.

It's a large group. It started large around 5-6 and has slowly grown to 10 as friends of friends joined in. We've tried splitting it and running it in parallel but that hasn't worked much better as that leaves half the group in the lurch for weeks on end. Whether divided or not, it's hard for a DM to develop challenging encounters and it also takes a long...long time to go through any battle. Last night we covered buffing and 10 rounds of combat in 4 hours, give or take. Even when cut in half, two druids summoning animals is more than enough to over-fill any initiative order down.

It's a mixed skill group. While we've all been playing for a while, some people are now able to make power-game builds (but know it'd be silly to use'em here) and others are still struggling with what the numbers on their sheets are (two or three years in). Some move strategically to flank or form defensive lines in combat, and others are on their third character due to Leroy Jenkins syndrome.

It's very emphasized on "roll-playing" over role-playing. Few if any players have really thought about their character. New ones are given enough "backstory" to justify their presense in the gameworld and then are just another member of the party. The most distinctive PC trait is that the one druid is likely on some sort of drug, not as a character hook/plot device, but more as a running gag. The most distinctive NPC was a "guy in a tower who killed people", that is, a one-time sort-of ally of ours who seemed unusually brutal on a non-lethal mission we went on.

So, is there any hope? Are there any pre-made adventures that are less-combat oriented that might help to force the group to think as characters more than character sheets? That is, intrigue, perhaps, rather than battle and questing.

Oh, and we're using D&D 3.5.

Thanks in advance to all who might have any advice for this poor fool.

Find another sucker GM and split into 2 groups. No more stress, no more burnout. have the GM's co-ordinate for occassional crossovers.
Have the tavern gossip always be the latest deeds of the other group.
Have fun.

Edit: spoilered the quote

[Flickerdart]

Tomb of Horrors. The 2-3 people left are your new, easier to manage group.

[Learnedguy]

Tomb of Horrors. The 2-3 people left are your new, easier to manage group.

I kinda laughed. In a evilly kind of way.

But yeah, aim for more puzzles and interaction aimed campaigns.

[Tsotha-lanti]

Definitely split. 6 people (GM + 5 players) is pretty much the maximum most groups can handle. I find that at 4+ people you reach a critical mass of jabbering that wastes at least half the time.

[Freejack451]

Yeah, running a game with a large group can be a pain. I use run a WOD game with between 11 and 14 people at any give time. I got really used to thinking on the fly. I was in high school then (94'), so I had the advantage of youthfull energy and large amounts of mountain dew on my side.
I personally like a group of 5. Enough variation to make sure the party has the skills they need, plus if the group needs to vote on something there will always be a tie breaker vote.
If I were you, I'd take your 5 fav players and start a new game. The one your doing now is doomed anyway as you say, so why not.

[arguskos]

Yeah, running a game with a large group can be a pain. I use run a WOD game with between 11 and 14 people at any give time. I got really used to thinking on the fly. I was in high school then (94'), so I had the advantage of youthfull energy and large amounts of mountain dew on my side.
I personally like a group of 5. Enough variation to make sure the party has the skills they need, plus if the group needs to vote on something there will always be a tie breaker vote.
If I were you, I'd take your 5 fav players and start a new game. The one your doing now is doomed anyway as you say, so why not.

I pretty much agree here. OP, you are ****ed. Sorry to use strong language, but really, you are doooooooooooomed to suckage if you don't change stuff up some. I really suggest that you grab 4-5 people and go have fun in a smaller game. It's easier than fighting with a group of 10+.

[Olo Demonsbane]

Are you sure that those people that are fumbling with their numbers after multiple years really want to play? My brother is just the same, and he doesnt really enjoy the game that much. Try asking them politely. If they are bored and dont really want to play, cut them. If this takes out 3 of them or so, it will make everything a lot easier.

Also, if the group doesnt want to split up, have one of the other players be a secondary DM. This helps a lot with speeding up combat. A house rule that helps is that a player gets 30 seconds to declare their action(s) for that turn. Otherwise they get skipped.

And man, I really feel your pain. I once had to teach 11 seperate people how to play DnD in one night

[Ancalagon]

As I see it, there are two ways you can deal with the "large" group:
A) Get rid of most of the rules or you won't have any chance of managing all that. You COULD try to outsource some of the "hard calculating" to some computer-program, but that's not going to solve the general situation.
With this solution you run into the problem that there's not much left you can do else.

B) Get a co-DM who has enough clue about the rules and the current fight (not the general plot) who can lift half of the rule-rolling from your shoulders, for example you virtually split your group in two for each fight-ROUND (like five gobbos here, seven there), then each DM deals with "his" NSC and the corresponding SC.

The more general solution would be to split the group (or more violent: kick out people who do not fit a certain kind gameplay you want to play). That, of course, will break the group and the social happending that it apparently is.
So I suggest you go for B) above. Pick one or two of the "better" players who are trustworthy enough and who also have a minimal grasp of roleplaying and let them help you in fights on a basis of "rounds".

To "force" your players into a more rpgish style of play: Talk to them. OT. Tell them first (short) what you think this should be and the SHOW them how you can RPG cool things.
Get your two reliable players and simply PLAY stuff. Do not explain how to do it, but simply show them how RPG can be.
Some players will leave, others will improve and become great players, others will improve and become "acceptable" players. Also let some people PLAY player vs. player interaction (no fight!) but have some backstory-talk or whatever. So people see it is not only about player vs. world (in a not-fighting sense). That is the suggestion I can make.

Apart from that: Find out what your players want to play. In your case: You probably have too many players to find a solution that all of them like. ;)

[Sstoopidtallkid]

One decent houserule I've used for groups that love summons/minions/cohorts/hirelings/prisoners: They act on the controller's initiative. Now, if someone(read:Druid) summons 3 monsters with one spell, and has a pet Bear, and has an Awakened Tree helping out, they all go at once, meaning he doesn't take up more actions than the rest of the group combined.

I also recommend splitting the group. 2 DMs, talking to each other a lot, and making sure the time table stays consistant, saves you a lot of the trouble. And it's humorous when one group screws the other by accident, and they don't figure it out OoC for 3 weeks. And by splitting groups, you can solve balance or personality problems most of the time, too.

[Jastermereel]

Thank you all for your responces so far.

The problem with a lot of the shrinking solutions is that the game group didn't form for that purpose. It's a group of friends that decided to start playing. Generally we'd get to hang out once a week and now do this on every other gathering. Thus, it isn't really possible to just exclude or cut back. Even the few who may not be all that interested want to participate at least a little so as to not be left out. While we're trying to work the 2 groups alternating sessions (with the off-group playing a board game or something), everyone is generally there. Thus, shifting to a single smaller group would perpetually divide the circle of friends, not an ideal situation.

I was wondering about ways to shift to a less tactical and more social focus because even with half a group, it's still a lot of people to keep engaged. If it's combat each player is only really involved 1/5 to 1/6 of the time with large gaps between each time to focus, but if they're planning, or interrogating, or trying to actually role play, everyone is generally more involved. Are there any hooks and stories that encourage that sort of direction?

[Aik]

Um - is this game actually any fun? Besides the whole hanging out with friends thing, that is.

If not, why don't you just start a new game? If you do, strongly consider making it not D&D, but a system that's going to work with ten people and doesn't involve D&D-esque tactical combat.

[Kyouhen]

Here's a good idea that would also let you keep everyone together AND split it into two groups.

1) Find a second DM to cover the second group.
2) Put the party into a fight that's 100% guaranteed to kill off half the current party.
3) Hand the half that doesn't survive to the second DM.
4) Have the second DM start an evil campaign.
5) When the two campaigns have reached an appropriate point, get everyone together again. See what happens when the two groups realize they've spent the last while thwarting/being thwarted by the other group.

[Colmarr]

It's a large group. It started large around 5-6 and has slowly grown to 10 as friends of friends joined in.

I'll second what others have said. Split the group.

The assumed group for 3.5e D&D is 4 players and a DM (5 total). You have exactly double that number, so get one of the other players to become a DM too and then split into 2 groups.

If people don't want to "split up", promise them the occasion joint battle royale and they'll probably be happy.

[only1doug]

Thank you all for your responces so far.

The problem with a lot of the shrinking solutions is that the game group didn't form for that purpose. It's a group of friends that decided to start playing. Generally we'd get to hang out once a week and now do this on every other gathering. Thus, it isn't really possible to just exclude or cut back. Even the few who may not be all that interested want to participate at least a little so as to not be left out. While we're trying to work the 2 groups alternating sessions (with the off-group playing a board game or something), everyone is generally there. Thus, shifting to a single smaller group would perpetually divide the circle of friends, not an ideal situation.

I was wondering about ways to shift to a less tactical and more social focus because even with half a group, it's still a lot of people to keep engaged. If it's combat each player is only really involved 1/5 to 1/6 of the time with large gaps between each time to focus, but if they're planning, or interrogating, or trying to actually role play, everyone is generally more involved. Are there any hooks and stories that encourage that sort of direction?

Find a Large room to game in (2 big tables), run both groups at the same time.
Everyone gets to be there, the social aspect remains intact, the pressure on the individual GM is reduced and each player gets more spotlight time.

If you truly can't arrange some fashion of splitting the group then have the party split up and switch between groups at opportune times.


I've run a CoC game with 14 players, party splitting (into groups of about 5) was common and the inactive players kept each other amused but they were an amazing group of players.

[Devils_Advocate]

Thus, it isn't really possible to just exclude or cut back. Even the few who may not be all that interested want to participate at least a little so as to not be left out.

Try letting some of the players control monsters or NPCs instead of PCs. Before the game starts, make up a list of roles for each non-PC player (e.g. goblin highwayman, angry bear, high priest, barmaid) so that each one has some role to play in at least most of the locations the party goes to. Give them short descriptions of the NPCs' personalities, knowledge, motivations, etc., but just enough to keep the story progressing in roughly the intended direction. Let them flesh the characters out for themselves, to the degree that they want to.

Of course, you'd want to first assign players the roles of the party's familiars, animal companions, cohorts, hirelings, summoned monsters, etc.: anyone who functions as a part of the party despite not being one of the PCs.

Just an idea.