Ive recently started a campain for 9 people with this being my first 5E, or DnD campaign for that matter, game that I am the DM for. To get a bit of backstory, the game shop this is located at had a previous series of games going where there was about 6 DMs all running in the same world but in separate sections of the world. The DMs communicated for the most part but each one had plenty of home rules for their areas and with players bouncing from area to area it became a headache real quick. That game collapsed due to out of game reasons and now Ive got 9 players used to rules (and lack of rules) I dont care to deal with and have come to expect them in a game. This has led to two main problems.
1) Players have come to expect use of rules/ exceptions created by other DMs and get upset and argue when I wont allow them in my game leading to lost game time trying to get them to sit down and allow the game to continue. They also continue to argue about my refusal to allow unearthed arcana, or anything by Matt Mercer into my game without reviewing it first. I made them aware that I would only allow WotC created and published content that I can hold on my hand with the exception of the revived artificer for setting purposes, the expanded feat list from the DMs Guild because I feel the PHB list is lacking, and the ranger revisions.
2) Players keep making mountains out of molehills. Here last week when I was trying to introduce the second half of the group who was unable to make session 1, the other half was more focused on getting an elderly NPC to realize his perceived passage of time was wrong instead of the note given by the elderly NPC that detailed a planned ambush (on the other players waiting to join). This resulted in myself becoming increasing agitated and railroading them towards the ambush so the other players could join and actually participate.
I leave these games agitated and regretting starting the game to begin with. These people are great to game with but now that I'm on the other side of the screen, adjusting expectations to be more understanding that I am not the other DMs and this setting is nothing like the other games but is very much like how I described it when proposing the game has proven to be more than difficult.
What are some suggestions on how to keep such a large group on task, and get them to understand that I wont be DMing like the other DMs?
I often see DM's suggest to stop participating in groups that make you feel negative and drained. Before you do there are steps to take.
As a first time DM I think having such a large group of players can be quite overwhelming. There is so much to keep track off and deal with that it is easy to lose control. Combined with the first part... Would it be an idea to decide and run a game with fewer people and build up experience? It also gives you a reason to get rid of some players that are the disturbing elements.
Everyone mentions how communication and respect and trust from both sides of the DM screen is important. Take the time to sit down and talk, or set aside an entire game session to talk things over with everyone as a group if that is what it takes. Tell them what kind of campaign you want to run. How you want to run it. And make some concessions on reasonable requests and suggestions from their side. If the disagreement is too large then its best to just stop it in order to prevent further discontent. Or take the few players aside and remove them from the game while resuming with the few that do want to adjust to your style of DM.
But yeah... Running a campaign/world with multiple DM's rarely ends well. Especially in your case where they all have a wide diversity of home rules. Even the best organized ones have problems they didn't foresee. These things should, in general, be avoided by default.
Most of my experience involves DMing for large groups and there are a lot of differences between DMing for a large vs a normal sized group. Here are some changes that will help you to control a large group.
1) Do not accept back talk. Explain to your players that while you are at the table, it is very important that you facilitate the continuation of the game. This means implementing strict rules and sticking to them. Tell them that rulings made at the table will stand (even if they are WRONG! Zomg) and that if a player wishes to discuss a ruling, they may do it after the game and/or via email.
2) Keep it moving. 9 players means that 90% of the table time (for each player) is going to be spent NOT taking actions. Players will be inclined naturally to tune-out, engage in side chatter, ignore what's going on in-game. Every time somebody says "uh, what? it's my turn? Let me take a minute to look at the board" that's even MORE wasted time.
2a) the 6 second rule. A round of combat represents 6 seconds of real world time, and in D&D a character's actions are synonymous with a player's agency to move them. Whenever it's a given player's turn, your players have 6 seconds to convey to you their entire plan for their turn(you can go to 10 or 15 seconds, that's fine. I find that the "6 second rule" conveys the urgency of being prepared when I get to you.) Move, attack, bonus action, retreat, whatever. If they are busy looking up a the exact wording of a spell or counting squares, that's what your character is doing in-game too. It's a harsh rule, but if you can't figure out what you want to do with 8 other people (plus the monster's turns) going before you... well I've never met someone who couldn't. And, it really is important. People argue for a lot of reasons, one of it is that they are frustrated.
2B) Consider relaxing some rules regarding action economies. If a player wants to cast 2 spells on their turn (healing word PLUS Fireball as an example) LET THEM. It will make them feel good, having more to do on their turn, and it will shorten combat. Win, win.
2C) Time management. Think about how much table time you devote to combat vs exploring and role play. Try to be consistent in that ratio. I find that it is INCREDIBLY hard to keep a player's attention beyond 1 combat/encounter every 2 hours, and even 1 combat every 4 hours can be incredibly satisfying.
2D) Don't use trash mobs. The amount of table time you waste drawing out/setting up a combat scenario is poorly balanced against the enjoyment that comes from a single round of beating up on an ogre. Run complex, dynamic encounters that force the players to react to changing circumstances (but use them sparingly.)
2E) Tell remind people of the initiative order (constantly.) "Amy, you're up, sam be ready." (amy goes) "Okay sam, what's next? Jack, you're on deck"...
2F) Keep initiative going even out of combat. Check in with each player, whether they are searching the wizards library or shopping in the market.
2G) Be prepared to say skip mundane ability checks. Player X says "I kick down the door" You could say "roll str" or you could say "you kick down the door." I encourage you to do the latter, unless you have a reason to set the DC above what would be a 15-16 in a 4 person game.
__________________________
Personally, I don't allow matt mercer's stuff at my table, but I do allow UA. I have yet to come across anything that was game-breakingly broken. In my opinion, giving the players more options for THEIR characters very rarely impacts me and what I'm doing, which is running encounters (smoothly), revealing bits of map, describing things, talking in funny voices and throwing out bags of loot. I find that I'm still able to control combat just fine, and once I get a feeling for their damage output, I can adapt to it; but to each, their own.
I can't see a setup where being nine players is fun for them or you. Perhaps for a one-shot at a convention, it could work but in general? - No!
For combat, it will take forever for a player to get his 6-seconds of fame. If that round is ineffective, then it's another 20 minutes of waiting before she can do something again. In roleplaying situations, 6 out of 9 players (or more) will not have a meaningful part in the scene and once again get bored - and perhaps lash out because of it or distract the table. Maybe puzzle solving could work for a larger team, but I worry that some players will take over that as well (and I don't like puzzles that much).
Can you divide them into two teams? Or limit the number of players each week?
As to the rules *****ing - I've learned that it's okay to try to set up expectations ahead of time. I try to have session-0 where I go through expectations and house rules. For my next campaign, I will take time to go through how my game is different from Critical Role from both a flavor and rule side. Perhaps you can try to articulate what you allow in an e-mail now?
If I had to DM a large group, I would flat out say: "Only WotC published material" or perhaps even "Adventure League Rules!". Each house rule, UA addition, or Critical Role rule makes the game more complicated for the DM, and with nine players it's already too large to handle.
I can't see a setup where being nine players is fun for them or you. Perhaps for a one-shot at a convention, it could work but in general? - No!
For combat, it will take forever for a player to get his 6-seconds of fame. If that round is ineffective, then it's another 20 minutes of waiting before she can do something again. In roleplaying situations, 6 out of 9 players (or more) will not have a meaningful part in the scene and once again get bored - and perhaps lash out because of it or distract the table. Maybe puzzle solving could work for a larger team, but I worry that some players will take over that as well (and I don't like puzzles that much).
Can you divide them into two teams? Or limit the number of players each week?
As to the rules *****ing - I've learned that it's okay to try to set up expectations ahead of time. I try to have session-0 where I go through expectations and house rules. For my next campaign, I will take time to go through how my game is different from Critical Role from both a flavor and rule side. Perhaps you can try to articulate what you allow in an e-mail now?
If I had to DM a large group, I would flat out say: "Only WotC published material" or perhaps even "Adventure League Rules!". Each house rule, UA addition, or Critical Role rule makes the game more complicated for the DM, and with nine players it's already too large to handle.
It does mean dialing back on encounters, A LOT! But players are really only in it for those big epic fights with wave after wave of warriors or dynamic battlefield conditions, any how. The other fights are just there to deplete your party's resources before the big fight, anyhow, and there are more efficient ways of handling that for a large group than running a small fight where, as you say, 6 of 9 players don't even take part! But yes, combat can get long, and it never hurts to take a break mid fight to recharge.
Running a game for 9 players is doable. It does require a different approach, though. Some people might even say it has advantages!
Need to reduce you population of uppity, argumentative, disruptive players who argue your rulings at every turn? Do they make dire emergencies out of every inconvenience?
Have their most recently equipped item turn out to be a mimic. One biding its time before biting time.
Player character still alive? Player still being argumentative and disruptive? "WELL WILL YOU LOOK AT THAT! That mimic wasn't alone! Boy, Anon, you really need to be more careful with what you strap onto your body."
Player takes offense that you keep pulling random mimics out of thin air? "You mean like this?" and another mimic appears.
"Please stop with the mimics!" "Did someone say mimic?!"
And the cycle continues until the disruptive player leaves, or is left a broken and apologetic mass of compliance.
SURGEON GENERAL ADVISORY: Following Sam_Hain's advise can lead to unexpected and undesirable side effects such as sudden loss of players or friends, unexplained increase in haters, bouts of authoritarian power trips, or an unhealthy obsession with or fear of common every day objects being mimics.
Thank you for the replies. I believe I need to clear up stuff a bit.
I am not a new DM, this is just my first time DMing the 5e system but I am used to the rules as a player. I am much more used to running games for Pathfinder and World of Darkness.
There was a session 0. This is where I introduced the setting and how players should expect their characters to be treated by npcs for each class, and my rule of WotC created and published material only but no UA material without approval, meaning nothing written by Matt Mercer is allowed even though WotC now publishes his material.
There are no other DMs. The game where multiple DMs ran is dead and gone. The players are just used to the rules created by those DMs and keep expecting me to accept those rules into my game.
As for size, I am not that worried. My pathfinder game I run is 7 people and it goes fairly smooth. I'm also needing to get used to 10+ size groups as I am attempting to start up a Minds Eye Society domain (LARP club so its a whole different animal all together) for either Vampire the Masqurade or Werewolf the Apocalypse and those games can run 30+ people and with myself being the only person familiar with the club and system, I'm the defacto ST.
With regards to point 1: Are you comfortable explaining to your players that if they're uncomfortable with your rulings that they're free to leave the table and then following through if they argue?
Like someone already mentioned divide the group into 2. I found myself unable to handle a large group due to too much down time between turns in combat and too much limelight hogging during social interactions. They can be two arcs of the same finale. You can bring the groups together for shall we say cross overs once in a while. You will also soon find yourself learning tricks from one group to try with other.
BUT if it is a case where the whole large group is a large group of friends that want to hang out...change up your style to accommodate your friends.
Splitting the group is not an option. I work swing shift so my weekends are the only nights I can game and I already am running a pathfinder game on the night prior to my 5e campaign and I am a player in a 5e campaign the night before that. I simply can not pick up a second game for this world.
I've already had to set my foot down with a player during game that if he does not keep his family drama out of my game he won't be welcome to participate.
I've come to accept that with a group this large I will need to fast track or even bypass mundane events such as shopping, traveling, and searching towns during game and have planned on having them submit over email downtimes for their characters so over the week I can take care of single character RP that would occur between sessions if appropriate over email
First of all, Sam Hain's mimic idea is hilarious and can be considered stolen.
Secondly, as someone who has ran a 6 to 9 person group for 6 months you just have to stick to what you say, everyone knows that my ruling is final and I always go back and look things up to iron out and amend things for next session, arguing with me is pointless and mostly just pisses the table off because they know I won't budge, time is precious and we have loot to find.
If you told them in session 0 what was up then that is it, you gave them the rules of the game, ride that line and if some people are causing headaches or complaining then asta la vista baby, you can spare a few players anyhow. the 6 to 10 second rule for each turn is gold and usually takes one or two people missing their actions before the point is driven home. No one likes a DM on a power trip but you ARE the authority figure and you need to own that.
The only negative I see to this scenario is if you are running at a game shop or other open location (eeeww) It is much easier to control a group in a controlled environment, a basement, a living room etc.
Side Note: Not paying attention has repercussions in my games, I assume if you are day dreaming then your character is as well and things tend to go awry when you are wandering a dungeon on auto pilot.
In a nutshell, be firm and run your game.
P.S. I say my group is 6 to 9 because some people don't make every session, I have yet to have anyone quit
SURGEON GENERAL ADVISORY: Following Sam_Hain's advise can lead to unexpected and undesirable side effects such as sudden loss of players or friends, unexplained increase in haters, bouts of authoritarian power trips, or an unhealthy obsession with or fear of common every day objects being mimics.
Oh. And please sign these waivers and release forms...
Ive recently started a campain for 9 people with this being my first 5E, or DnD campaign for that matter, game that I am the DM for. To get a bit of backstory, the game shop this is located at had a previous series of games going where there was about 6 DMs all running in the same world but in separate sections of the world. The DMs communicated for the most part but each one had plenty of home rules for their areas and with players bouncing from area to area it became a headache real quick. That game collapsed due to out of game reasons and now Ive got 9 players used to rules (and lack of rules) I dont care to deal with and have come to expect them in a game. This has led to two main problems.
1) Players have come to expect use of rules/ exceptions created by other DMs and get upset and argue when I wont allow them in my game leading to lost game time trying to get them to sit down and allow the game to continue. They also continue to argue about my refusal to allow unearthed arcana, or anything by Matt Mercer into my game without reviewing it first. I made them aware that I would only allow WotC created and published content that I can hold on my hand with the exception of the revived artificer for setting purposes, the expanded feat list from the DMs Guild because I feel the PHB list is lacking, and the ranger revisions.
2) Players keep making mountains out of molehills. Here last week when I was trying to introduce the second half of the group who was unable to make session 1, the other half was more focused on getting an elderly NPC to realize his perceived passage of time was wrong instead of the note given by the elderly NPC that detailed a planned ambush (on the other players waiting to join). This resulted in myself becoming increasing agitated and railroading them towards the ambush so the other players could join and actually participate.
I leave these games agitated and regretting starting the game to begin with. These people are great to game with but now that I'm on the other side of the screen, adjusting expectations to be more understanding that I am not the other DMs and this setting is nothing like the other games but is very much like how I described it when proposing the game has proven to be more than difficult.
What are some suggestions on how to keep such a large group on task, and get them to understand that I wont be DMing like the other DMs?
I often see DM's suggest to stop participating in groups that make you feel negative and drained. Before you do there are steps to take.
As a first time DM I think having such a large group of players can be quite overwhelming. There is so much to keep track off and deal with that it is easy to lose control. Combined with the first part... Would it be an idea to decide and run a game with fewer people and build up experience? It also gives you a reason to get rid of some players that are the disturbing elements.
Everyone mentions how communication and respect and trust from both sides of the DM screen is important. Take the time to sit down and talk, or set aside an entire game session to talk things over with everyone as a group if that is what it takes. Tell them what kind of campaign you want to run. How you want to run it. And make some concessions on reasonable requests and suggestions from their side. If the disagreement is too large then its best to just stop it in order to prevent further discontent. Or take the few players aside and remove them from the game while resuming with the few that do want to adjust to your style of DM.
But yeah... Running a campaign/world with multiple DM's rarely ends well. Especially in your case where they all have a wide diversity of home rules. Even the best organized ones have problems they didn't foresee. These things should, in general, be avoided by default.
Most of my experience involves DMing for large groups and there are a lot of differences between DMing for a large vs a normal sized group. Here are some changes that will help you to control a large group.
1) Do not accept back talk. Explain to your players that while you are at the table, it is very important that you facilitate the continuation of the game. This means implementing strict rules and sticking to them. Tell them that rulings made at the table will stand (even if they are WRONG! Zomg) and that if a player wishes to discuss a ruling, they may do it after the game and/or via email.
2) Keep it moving. 9 players means that 90% of the table time (for each player) is going to be spent NOT taking actions. Players will be inclined naturally to tune-out, engage in side chatter, ignore what's going on in-game. Every time somebody says "uh, what? it's my turn? Let me take a minute to look at the board" that's even MORE wasted time.
2a) the 6 second rule. A round of combat represents 6 seconds of real world time, and in D&D a character's actions are synonymous with a player's agency to move them. Whenever it's a given player's turn, your players have 6 seconds to convey to you their entire plan for their turn(you can go to 10 or 15 seconds, that's fine. I find that the "6 second rule" conveys the urgency of being prepared when I get to you.) Move, attack, bonus action, retreat, whatever. If they are busy looking up a the exact wording of a spell or counting squares, that's what your character is doing in-game too. It's a harsh rule, but if you can't figure out what you want to do with 8 other people (plus the monster's turns) going before you... well I've never met someone who couldn't. And, it really is important. People argue for a lot of reasons, one of it is that they are frustrated.
2B) Consider relaxing some rules regarding action economies. If a player wants to cast 2 spells on their turn (healing word PLUS Fireball as an example) LET THEM. It will make them feel good, having more to do on their turn, and it will shorten combat. Win, win.
2C) Time management. Think about how much table time you devote to combat vs exploring and role play. Try to be consistent in that ratio. I find that it is INCREDIBLY hard to keep a player's attention beyond 1 combat/encounter every 2 hours, and even 1 combat every 4 hours can be incredibly satisfying.
2D) Don't use trash mobs. The amount of table time you waste drawing out/setting up a combat scenario is poorly balanced against the enjoyment that comes from a single round of beating up on an ogre. Run complex, dynamic encounters that force the players to react to changing circumstances (but use them sparingly.)
2E) Tell remind people of the initiative order (constantly.) "Amy, you're up, sam be ready." (amy goes) "Okay sam, what's next? Jack, you're on deck"...
2F) Keep initiative going even out of combat. Check in with each player, whether they are searching the wizards library or shopping in the market.
2G) Be prepared to say skip mundane ability checks. Player X says "I kick down the door" You could say "roll str" or you could say "you kick down the door." I encourage you to do the latter, unless you have a reason to set the DC above what would be a 15-16 in a 4 person game.
__________________________
Personally, I don't allow matt mercer's stuff at my table, but I do allow UA. I have yet to come across anything that was game-breakingly broken. In my opinion, giving the players more options for THEIR characters very rarely impacts me and what I'm doing, which is running encounters (smoothly), revealing bits of map, describing things, talking in funny voices and throwing out bags of loot. I find that I'm still able to control combat just fine, and once I get a feeling for their damage output, I can adapt to it; but to each, their own.
I can't see a setup where being nine players is fun for them or you. Perhaps for a one-shot at a convention, it could work but in general? - No!
For combat, it will take forever for a player to get his 6-seconds of fame. If that round is ineffective, then it's another 20 minutes of waiting before she can do something again. In roleplaying situations, 6 out of 9 players (or more) will not have a meaningful part in the scene and once again get bored - and perhaps lash out because of it or distract the table. Maybe puzzle solving could work for a larger team, but I worry that some players will take over that as well (and I don't like puzzles that much).
Can you divide them into two teams? Or limit the number of players each week?
As to the rules *****ing - I've learned that it's okay to try to set up expectations ahead of time. I try to have session-0 where I go through expectations and house rules. For my next campaign, I will take time to go through how my game is different from Critical Role from both a flavor and rule side. Perhaps you can try to articulate what you allow in an e-mail now?
If I had to DM a large group, I would flat out say: "Only WotC published material" or perhaps even "Adventure League Rules!". Each house rule, UA addition, or Critical Role rule makes the game more complicated for the DM, and with nine players it's already too large to handle.
Running a game for 9 players is doable. It does require a different approach, though. Some people might even say it has advantages!
I think the answer is pretty obvious.
Need to reduce you population of uppity, argumentative, disruptive players who argue your rulings at every turn? Do they make dire emergencies out of every inconvenience?
Have their most recently equipped item turn out to be a mimic. One biding its time before biting time.
Player character still alive? Player still being argumentative and disruptive? "WELL WILL YOU LOOK AT THAT! That mimic wasn't alone! Boy, Anon, you really need to be more careful with what you strap onto your body."
Player takes offense that you keep pulling random mimics out of thin air? "You mean like this?" and another mimic appears.
"Please stop with the mimics!" "Did someone say mimic?!"
And the cycle continues until the disruptive player leaves, or is left a broken and apologetic mass of compliance.
Ongoing Projects: The Mimic Book of Mimics :: SHARK WEEK
Completed Projects: The Trick-or-Treat Table
My Homebrews: Races :: Classes :: Spells :: Items :: Monsters
Thank you for the replies. I believe I need to clear up stuff a bit.
I am not a new DM, this is just my first time DMing the 5e system but I am used to the rules as a player. I am much more used to running games for Pathfinder and World of Darkness.
There was a session 0. This is where I introduced the setting and how players should expect their characters to be treated by npcs for each class, and my rule of WotC created and published material only but no UA material without approval, meaning nothing written by Matt Mercer is allowed even though WotC now publishes his material.
There are no other DMs. The game where multiple DMs ran is dead and gone. The players are just used to the rules created by those DMs and keep expecting me to accept those rules into my game.
As for size, I am not that worried. My pathfinder game I run is 7 people and it goes fairly smooth. I'm also needing to get used to 10+ size groups as I am attempting to start up a Minds Eye Society domain (LARP club so its a whole different animal all together) for either Vampire the Masqurade or Werewolf the Apocalypse and those games can run 30+ people and with myself being the only person familiar with the club and system, I'm the defacto ST.
With regards to point 1: Are you comfortable explaining to your players that if they're uncomfortable with your rulings that they're free to leave the table and then following through if they argue?
Like someone already mentioned divide the group into 2. I found myself unable to handle a large group due to too much down time between turns in combat and too much limelight hogging during social interactions. They can be two arcs of the same finale. You can bring the groups together for shall we say cross overs once in a while. You will also soon find yourself learning tricks from one group to try with other.
BUT if it is a case where the whole large group is a large group of friends that want to hang out...change up your style to accommodate your friends.
Splitting the group is not an option. I work swing shift so my weekends are the only nights I can game and I already am running a pathfinder game on the night prior to my 5e campaign and I am a player in a 5e campaign the night before that. I simply can not pick up a second game for this world.
I've already had to set my foot down with a player during game that if he does not keep his family drama out of my game he won't be welcome to participate.
I've come to accept that with a group this large I will need to fast track or even bypass mundane events such as shopping, traveling, and searching towns during game and have planned on having them submit over email downtimes for their characters so over the week I can take care of single character RP that would occur between sessions if appropriate over email
Ah, family drama. The gift that that was rendered ineligible for returns...
Ongoing Projects: The Mimic Book of Mimics :: SHARK WEEK
Completed Projects: The Trick-or-Treat Table
My Homebrews: Races :: Classes :: Spells :: Items :: Monsters
First of all, Sam Hain's mimic idea is hilarious and can be considered stolen.
Secondly, as someone who has ran a 6 to 9 person group for 6 months you just have to stick to what you say, everyone knows that my ruling is final and I always go back and look things up to iron out and amend things for next session, arguing with me is pointless and mostly just pisses the table off because they know I won't budge, time is precious and we have loot to find.
If you told them in session 0 what was up then that is it, you gave them the rules of the game, ride that line and if some people are causing headaches or complaining then asta la vista baby, you can spare a few players anyhow. the 6 to 10 second rule for each turn is gold and usually takes one or two people missing their actions before the point is driven home. No one likes a DM on a power trip but you ARE the authority figure and you need to own that.
The only negative I see to this scenario is if you are running at a game shop or other open location (eeeww) It is much easier to control a group in a controlled environment, a basement, a living room etc.
Side Note: Not paying attention has repercussions in my games, I assume if you are day dreaming then your character is as well and things tend to go awry when you are wandering a dungeon on auto pilot.
In a nutshell, be firm and run your game.
P.S. I say my group is 6 to 9 because some people don't make every session, I have yet to have anyone quit
Ongoing Projects: The Mimic Book of Mimics :: SHARK WEEK
Completed Projects: The Trick-or-Treat Table
My Homebrews: Races :: Classes :: Spells :: Items :: Monsters