Kevin Siembieda prefers running groups of 8-14 players!?!

[cyberdon]

And has run a regular group as large as 26!?!

Holy *%#^#@$!

P.S. I'm reading the Rifts Adventure Guide.

[Akashic Soldier]

I do it.

The hardest part is when folks talk over one another.

[cyberdon]

Again: holy *%#^#@$!

[Killer Cyborg]

And has run a regular group as large as 26!?!

Holy *%#^#@$!

P.S. I'm reading the Rifts Adventure Guide.

If there's another Open House, or if Kevin runs a game at a Con, try to get in on one of his games.
It's educational.

[MaxxSterling]

That is absolutely too large. I could only imagine how terrible of a game it must have been.

[The Galactus Kid]

That is absolutely too large. I could only imagine how terrible of a game it must have been.

In you're opinion.

Everything I've read about Kevin's games is that they area blast.

I all the years and at all the Cons I've been to with Kevin, I've never, I repeat NEVER, heard anyone say anything but glowing reviews of Kevins games.

[kaid]

I do it.

The hardest part is when folks talk over one another.

God I have enough problems with that in smaller groups. I imagine its a matter of learning how to manage things and break down smaller groups to help resolve action faster during fights.

[Grand Paladin]

Everything I've read about Kevin's games is that they area blast
I all the years and at all the Cons I've been to with Kevin, I've never, I repeat NEVER, heard anyone say anything but glowing reviews of Kevins games.

Agreed. The games that I played in at the OH events were run very smoothly, and they flowed quite well, and there were by my reckoning, about 14-16 people playing. Kevin is great at creating smaller sub-groups of players and handling the independent offshoot situations and then merging them back together when needed.

[Shawn Merrow]

The most I can handle is six, anymore and my brain starts melting.

[cyberdon]

I had 8 one time, and it was almost unworkable.

Ideally, 5-6 pour moi.

I'd be really interested to see how one pulls off a game with 14 players or more.

[Damian Magecraft]

I have done 30 and routinely run 14 to 15 in my groups.

[Josh Sinsapaugh]

I prefer 4-6, but for awhile 8 people (not counting myself) was pretty standard.

Largest groups I ran was 14 people (not counting myself). I was definitely out of my element and more than likely will never do it again. Sad too, because I always have more people that want to join a game... and capping it at 6 just seems like a jerky thing to do sometimes... But, it needs to be fun for everyone, including the GM.

Kevin? He is a superhuman GM.

~ Josh

[Damian Magecraft]

I had 8 one time, and it was almost unworkable.

Ideally, 5-6 pour moi.

I'd be really interested to see how one pulls off a game with 14 players or more.

the cliff hanger moment is your friend... (plus never fear the party splitting up (if anything that makes your job easier...)
You run the group build the tension and just when you got em on the edge of their seats you hit em with "meanwhile back with group B..." Group A will be staring at you dumbfounded for all of three seconds; and then they will put their heads together to plot out their moves when you get back to them.

Learning to run a group that size does take time however...
for me it was a gradual and wholly unintentional thing...
I started like most with a modest sized group of 6 (including myself); then Bob brought a friend one day and we just tossed him in and played on with 6 PCs instead of 5, and so on...
next thing i knew the group was at 15+ and still growing.
Now the group is grand total 30 but with being adults with those pesky jobs these days its usually only 15 PCs and me except for the Memorial Day, Independence Day, labor day, and Christmas get together's then its the full gang. (I tend to run special one shots or epic finales at those.)

[cyberdon]

That's totally amazing. I'd like to develop this skillset.

[Akashic Soldier]

I had 8 one time, and it was almost unworkable.

Ideally, 5-6 pour moi.

I'd be really interested to see how one pulls off a game with 14 players or more.

the cliff hanger moment is your friend... (plus never fear the party splitting up (if anything that makes your job easier...)
You run the group build the tension and just when you got em on the edge of their seats you hit em with "meanwhile back with group B..." Group A will be staring at you dumbfounded for all of three seconds; and then they will put their heads together to plot out their moves when you get back to them.

Learning to run a group that size does take time however...
for me it was a gradual and wholly unintentional thing...
I started like most with a modest sized group of 6 (including myself); then Bob brought a friend one day and we just tossed him in and played on with 6 PCs instead of 5, and so on...
next thing i knew the group was at 15+ and still growing.
Now the group is grand total 30 but with being adults with those pesky jobs these days its usually only 15 PCs and me except for the Memorial Day, Independence Day, labor day, and Christmas get together's then its the full gang. (I tend to run special one shots or epic finales at those.)

I just constantly go BLAM BLAM BLAM! So my players have to think fast and on their feet so things don't slow down to a crawl. Sometimes I have one of the players across the table keep track of the initiative phase for me on some paper but only because the game sessions tend to run into the early hours of the night and I lose focus on the important things like NPCs actons if I have to keep track of the initiative and all the players and where everyone is on the board at the same time. I think you could already do it Don, youre a good GM.

[Mech-Viper Prime]

Combat is always fun with those numbers best adventures are with 16+ people

[cyberdon]

I think you could already do it Don, youre a good GM.

Thanx man. I think I'd eventually like to give it a go, just for curiosity's sake.

[Damian Magecraft]

That's totally amazing. I'd like to develop this skillset.

find the number of players you are most comfortable with... then up it by one or two...
run that number until you are comfortable with it... then up it again.
Do it this way and you will be running 14+ in no time.

[cyberdon]

Brutal. I'm floored that people do this.

[Damian Magecraft]

Brutal. I'm floored that people do this.

Old school Grognard...
The idea of only 4 to a party is a new development in the hobby (I blame "competitive" play).
back in the day it was any and all are welcome; the more the merrier.

[cyberdon]

Lol -I've been gaming 28 years, and well, I'm still floored, but very curious.

I picture in reality two or more parties under one GM, and many, many people waiting forever for a turn.

[Damian Magecraft]

Lol -I've been gaming 28 years, and well, I'm still floored, but very curious.

I picture in reality two or more parties under one GM, and many, many people waiting forever for a turn.

nope... its more like one group but three to four parties and each one hanging on every word being spoken...
Pacing helps as well...
I run my games like they are a long running TV show with an ensemble cast.
I even refer to my campaigns as seasons and adventures as episodes...
so that flash/smash cut to the next group just as something dramatic is about to happen or a twist has been revealed keeps everyone hooked.
Plus I make sure I have something for everyone to do...
Heck we have even had sessions where only 2 or 3 guys were central (the rest of the group insisted) and they watched and listened to the entire 8 hr session entranced by the goings on (it was a comedy relief tertiary side plot that begged to be completed) we laughed, we cried and in the end that side plot laid the ground work for the next seasons over all story arc.

[Damian Magecraft]

I've never ran a group over 10-11.

I would love to see how some of these higher numbers are done.

pretty much the same as with a group of 10 or 11 just with larger numbers...
its hard to explain really its easier to see when you are in the thick of it.

[cyberdon]

It seems like combat sequences would really become long with over 20 players-but then again more bullets kill quicker I suppose.

I'm thinking that must be part of it.

[Hystrix]

It seems like combat sequences would really become long with over 20 players-but then again more bullets kill quicker I suppose.

I'm thinking that must be part of it.

I was a player in a KS run Palladium Fantasy game at U-Con in 2003. He had about 15 players. He ran a very smooth game. Combat was never an issue.

Now, I couldn't run a gaming group that big that smooth, but KS handeld it like a pro...

[earthhawk]

I prefer smaller groups, but they have drawbacks as well:

1. Someone, somewhere, will miss a game for whatever reason. With a smaller group it's harder to compensate for that missing player, "Crap! Our cleric can't find a baby sitter. Anyone want to play her character?" *crickets*

2. Rules lawyers love to hijack groups during game play; the smaller the audience the better. With a large group their voices of dissent tend to get lost in the wash.

3. Small groups can fall apart a lot faster than larger ones. Disagreements happen during game play, this we know. A disagreement between players in a small group (4-6) can effectively kill that campaign and the group.

[cyber-yukongil v2.5]

I've ran games with a dozen or more players and played in games with a dozen or more players and in both cases the experience sucked. My smaller groups is already like herding stray rabid kittens, add to that another 7+ people who are required to be entertained or they become a distraction and its something I've vowed never to do again. I don't need to pour hours of work into a game, comeing up with something for everyone to do, make NPCs, blah blah blah just for some jackhole who can't be quiet for 3 whole minutes while the story is focusing on not them, to start singing about "welcome to my shop, let me cut your mop!" and in my experience, every group has somebody like that (it's especially bad when its someone you can't just chuck out of the game)

[Damian Magecraft]

I've ran games with a dozen or more players and played in games with a dozen or more players and in both cases the experience sucked. My smaller groups is already like herding stray rabid kittens, add to that another 7+ people who are required to be entertained or they become a distraction and its something I've vowed never to do again. I don't need to pour hours of work into a game, comeing up with something for everyone to do, make NPCs, blah blah blah just for some jackhole who can't be quiet for 3 whole minutes while the story is focusing on not them, to start singing about "welcome to my shop, let me cut your mop!" and in my experience, every group has somebody like that (it's especially bad when its someone you can't just chuck out of the game)

yeah but those guys will disrupt a small game just as quickly...

[ZINO]

The most I can handle is six, anymore and my brain starts melting.

the max I ran a few time 21+ player not including NPC which were five for each group, then in one there the betrayal , trick all 21 player either fight each other stop from fight each it up to the individual PC OMG that the fun part

[ZINO]

hahahah... the Large group thing only works when everyone has experience... inexperienced and trollish people are never good in any situation.

I been luck
seen experience PC help the inexperienced PC I seen this many time

[ZINO]

big groups are easy
1. The players know the game
2. The Gm Will skip players who are indecisive.
3. The next person gets to go.
4. The players will actually fight groups instead of run away making combat easier.
5. When running such large groups, Npcs don't need to be fought to the last MDC point to be taken out of comission...

love this man !!!

[cyber-yukongil v2.5]

I've ran games with a dozen or more players and played in games with a dozen or more players and in both cases the experience sucked. My smaller groups is already like herding stray rabid kittens, add to that another 7+ people who are required to be entertained or they become a distraction and its something I've vowed never to do again. I don't need to pour hours of work into a game, comeing up with something for everyone to do, make NPCs, blah blah blah just for some jackhole who can't be quiet for 3 whole minutes while the story is focusing on not them, to start singing about "welcome to my shop, let me cut your mop!" and in my experience, every group has somebody like that (it's especially bad when its someone you can't just chuck out of the game)

yeah but those guys will disrupt a small game just as quickly...

yeah, see my line about stray rabid kittens. This is just my personal experience, others differs greatly. If you are blessed with a group that can stay somewhat focused and not become huge distraction, I tip my hat, I have just never been so fortunate.

Hell, you want to know what type of group I have, go read my thread "You can lead a horse to water..." Now imagine that x5

[escargotini]

I ran 16 once. In high school I occasionally did groups of 8-10, but realistically 6-8 is no problem.

[Chronicle]

im just amazed you you can find that many locally these days

[Kovoston]

Combat is always fun with those numbers best adventures are with 16+ people

I agree!

[TechnoGothic]

Tabletop my highest number was 30 (twice). Most of the large game had 10 however.
However I prefer 2 players only. Because the games run much faster, even if i have to run more NPCs.

LARP ... my highest was well over 100 (Vampire the Masquerade) we rented out a MALL after hours.

[CyCo]

These days our group has dwindled down to 4, including the gm. I'm not currently running a game, but I have had a campaign with 12 players. Or 14. I can't remember, it was about 20 years ago. And to make it even more fun, one player was running two characters. But then ke lost both in one session. So I gave everyone a 10 minute break, and he had to decide who he was going to keep. I was going to tweak it so he got to keep playing one. Kinda sucky to loose both in one night I thought. Anyway, That group started out at about 8 players, and after a while I had 12 (or 14). I actually had to turn people away because we simply didn't have room for more at the place we gamed (in the main bedroom at the place I rented with my then g/f, who was also a gamer). I had a couple og mates in the group who smoked pot, but told me they never touched the stuff from the day before we gamed, so they didn't miss out any of the cool stuff in my games. lol

But as Damian said, the cliff hanger is your friend. Also, with the player dynamics (not I said player, not character...), I could typically get more adventure ideas out of their crap, I mean shenanigans. Or they'd a couple would want to have a go at the other, and some of the party would act as peace keepers (typically the paladin, but sometimes others), and would police themselves. I'd let them go do their stuff and watch the show. When I felt they had gone long enough, or decided to shock them, I'd throw something at them. Since it was a Ravenloft game, it could simply be mentioning that while the party was getting heated in arguments, the moon had slipped behind a cloud. That could get them spooked enough to get back into the game. other times it may be more direct, an attack by a pack of wolves or a werewolf would snap them back into the game.

With combat in large groups, I found that the simple rule of one combatant for each PC wasn't a great idea. You'd typically have a leader for the encounter (say a ogre for a gang of orcs), but I'd either add in a 'hero' orc or two, or lessen the number of orcs and instead make them tougher. It can take a little while to get into the swing of the idea, but it lessens your die rolls. Sure all the PCs still have to make their dice rolls, but now you have fewer.

Another idea with big groups is to have one of the players who knows the game backwards, to act as a co-gm and help run the combat. Especially if his character isn't there for that particular combat. I've often had fun by letting a player run one of the monsters in a combat that he's character was either not there, or already rendered unconscious or killed. The look of the rest of the players when you hand control of the fire giant to a unconscious characters player can be most rewarding!! lol But you obviously veto anything you think would be out of character, or remind them of powers the monster may have that the player can use on his now enemies.

lol

[ZorValachan]

Back in the late '80s, I was a boy scout and cut my teeth GMing Robotech for about 8-10 other scouts during some of our camp outs (other than that it was me and my brother). In college '91, I joined a gaming club with 30-40 people who regularly came each week and they would divide into 2-4 groups, so 10-15 people per group was common. Since then, I've gotten to where I like 6 people, with 9 the max, but mainly because in my personal tastes, 10+ people make for great 'epic' adventures/campaigns, or the opposite of not really needing anything cohesive (as players/characters will come and go), but that 'magic' 6-9, I can pay more attention to the player/characters and develop their story instead of my story.

Also with strangers/gaming aquaintances it's easier for larger groups, everyone is more focused on the game. With good friends, meeting only once in a couple of months (when back in college is was every day) more socializing/catching up needs to be done.

[Vrykolas2k]

My average gaming group is 8, and have run for more than that.
Not that difficult