About 8 sessions into my first campaign, in which my player count was bumped from my planned 4 to 7, the players are complaining about round time seemingly taking forever. I'm already consolidating a lot of monster/npc rolls when there are larger groups. Short of throwing out attack descriptions, which honestly do add up on time, and making the game a mechanical experience I'm not sure what else to do.
Also, last week I offered the party a branch in the story. Some RPed it for about 20 minutes, while a few became obviously annoyed by the lack of hitting things. They ultimately voted on the direction to continue but one party member outright refused to go along with it nearly splitting the party on what would both be fairly long multi session legs of the campaign. Everyone left the session angry with a couple considering dropping the campaign due to the disagreement and complaints about each other not playing their alignment correctly.
I honestly don't feel like it's worth investing several hours each week making custom maps and encounters when it's just a giant salt mine.
ahhh the delicate balance of players who want to just hit things a lot and players who want to spend time roleplaying and investigating.
It sounds like your best middle ground would be to focus for a little while on enemy encounters that hit hard but have weak HP. That way there is still the element of danger in each encounter because a couple blows can knock a PC unconscious but also avoids a long drawn out fight trying to chip away at a high enemy HP pool.
Above that it sounds like there is some out of character animosity of players who wanted a small party and just generally are upset that 3 more people than they'd like are there. It may have nothing more to do than just that the party size is larger than what people originally signed up for.
Out of curiosity, before adding additional players, did you get the party's buy in to adding some more PCs? If not they may just feel upset that more people were added without getting their buy in.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
May your rolls be crits and your sessions be frequent
You're probably going to be better off talking to the players. Figuring out what each one expects from the campaign. If you do it as a group remember that some people go along with others simply because others are around. So a one on one conversation helps. Even if it's in text or email.
Never good to have conflict in a group. If there is any it should be addressed asap.
Players are the most important aspect to the game. I wanted 4-6 players for my campaign and got lucky with 4 good people. Others have wanted to join but I've told them no because the party is fine and people are having fun. Adding more people can create chaos as you've experienced. Sometimes have to tell people no and even have to ask people to leave.
For round time - are the players taking too long? Have a timer out and skip them if they take too long to make a decision. I don't have experience with a group that size, but I would say 1-2 minutes max each person, because they should be paying attention the whole time and thinking of what they're going to do next. They should also be familiar with their abilities and/or spells to help move things along.
As far as the rp vs. battle animosity and alignment complaints, that's something that should have been discussed in a session zero. Everyone needs to be on the same page, after all.
I personally mention what I think about it (ex. I do a balance of both, making them fully aware that there might be some sessions where there is no combat, and some where there is only combat; I don't care about alignment until some mechanic requires it (magic items).), then ask them how they want to play it.
Make the group make a decision for the table. If they can't agree on how they're going to play a cooperative game, then they probably shouldn't be playing the cooperative game together.
Ulimately, people need to be willing to make compromises. The game isn't about each individual player, but the group. (something else I bring up in my session zero - be prepared for sessions to have little or nothing to do with their character, and others that have everything to do with their character. Be humble and respectful in both situations)
Rounds can take a long time. And describing combat is a delicate balance. You can definitely have too much, particularly if it’s not a big moment in the story. Description style should also match combat style. If there’s heaps of guys, arrows and swords all over the place, make it short and punchy. “He swings low, deflecting off your chain mail” then move on. “He swings low, light dancing on the scimitar as it moves. You feel a dull thud as it glances off your chain mail, and the delicate tinkle as a couple of links fall to the stone floor. He grunts as the follow through takes him ever so slightly out of position” serves no one here. Keep it moving. Know your initiative order.
I'm like a lot of people. Combat is fast. Hit or miss. It's only the kill shot where I ask the player to describe it. That only changes if a player does something unique or hits for a lot of damage like a critical.
Edit. Players can also roll to hit and same time roll damage.
Sounds like you have 2 parties mashed together. One of them is a higher paced, minimum fluff, must-do-things group. The other is a very detail oriented, act-everything-out group that loves to RP. Out of character, everyone needs to sort that aspect of the problem out.
The simple fact is that a group that large is going to slow everything down. It's unavoidable no matter what you cut down or avoid. Both because the party size will force encounters to be more complex, have more enemies, and smarter enemies, but also because each person will have to think their way through their turn against more targets and threats. You will have to make your players understand this. It will be particularly hard for the do-things part of your group, because roleplay and social interactions always take a lot of time.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
About 8 sessions into my first campaign, in which my player count was bumped from my planned 4 to 7, the players are complaining about round time seemingly taking forever.
I'm already consolidating a lot of monster/npc rolls when there are larger groups.
Short of throwing out attack descriptions, which honestly do add up on time, and making the game a mechanical experience I'm not sure what else to do.
Also, last week I offered the party a branch in the story. Some RPed it for about 20 minutes, while a few became obviously annoyed by the lack of hitting things. They ultimately voted on the direction to continue but one party member outright refused to go along with it nearly splitting the party on what would both be fairly long multi session legs of the campaign.
Everyone left the session angry with a couple considering dropping the campaign due to the disagreement and complaints about each other not playing their alignment correctly.
I honestly don't feel like it's worth investing several hours each week making custom maps and encounters when it's just a giant salt mine.
Any advice?
ahhh the delicate balance of players who want to just hit things a lot and players who want to spend time roleplaying and investigating.
It sounds like your best middle ground would be to focus for a little while on enemy encounters that hit hard but have weak HP. That way there is still the element of danger in each encounter because a couple blows can knock a PC unconscious but also avoids a long drawn out fight trying to chip away at a high enemy HP pool.
Above that it sounds like there is some out of character animosity of players who wanted a small party and just generally are upset that 3 more people than they'd like are there. It may have nothing more to do than just that the party size is larger than what people originally signed up for.
Out of curiosity, before adding additional players, did you get the party's buy in to adding some more PCs? If not they may just feel upset that more people were added without getting their buy in.
May your rolls be crits and your sessions be frequent
Have you tried sitting your players down and talking to them?
You're probably going to be better off talking to the players. Figuring out what each one expects from the campaign. If you do it as a group remember that some people go along with others simply because others are around. So a one on one conversation helps. Even if it's in text or email.
Never good to have conflict in a group. If there is any it should be addressed asap.
Players are the most important aspect to the game. I wanted 4-6 players for my campaign and got lucky with 4 good people. Others have wanted to join but I've told them no because the party is fine and people are having fun. Adding more people can create chaos as you've experienced. Sometimes have to tell people no and even have to ask people to leave.
For round time - are the players taking too long? Have a timer out and skip them if they take too long to make a decision.
I don't have experience with a group that size, but I would say 1-2 minutes max each person, because they should be paying attention the whole time and thinking of what they're going to do next. They should also be familiar with their abilities and/or spells to help move things along.
As far as the rp vs. battle animosity and alignment complaints, that's something that should have been discussed in a session zero. Everyone needs to be on the same page, after all.
I personally mention what I think about it (ex. I do a balance of both, making them fully aware that there might be some sessions where there is no combat, and some where there is only combat; I don't care about alignment until some mechanic requires it (magic items).), then ask them how they want to play it.
Make the group make a decision for the table. If they can't agree on how they're going to play a cooperative game, then they probably shouldn't be playing the cooperative game together.
Ulimately, people need to be willing to make compromises. The game isn't about each individual player, but the group. (something else I bring up in my session zero - be prepared for sessions to have little or nothing to do with their character, and others that have everything to do with their character. Be humble and respectful in both situations)
idk, those are my thoughts for now. Good luck!
Rounds can take a long time. And describing combat is a delicate balance. You can definitely have too much, particularly if it’s not a big moment in the story. Description style should also match combat style. If there’s heaps of guys, arrows and swords all over the place, make it short and punchy. “He swings low, deflecting off your chain mail” then move on. “He swings low, light dancing on the scimitar as it moves. You feel a dull thud as it glances off your chain mail, and the delicate tinkle as a couple of links fall to the stone floor. He grunts as the follow through takes him ever so slightly out of position” serves no one here. Keep it moving. Know your initiative order.
I'm like a lot of people. Combat is fast. Hit or miss. It's only the kill shot where I ask the player to describe it. That only changes if a player does something unique or hits for a lot of damage like a critical.
Edit. Players can also roll to hit and same time roll damage.
Sounds like you have 2 parties mashed together. One of them is a higher paced, minimum fluff, must-do-things group. The other is a very detail oriented, act-everything-out group that loves to RP. Out of character, everyone needs to sort that aspect of the problem out.
The simple fact is that a group that large is going to slow everything down. It's unavoidable no matter what you cut down or avoid. Both because the party size will force encounters to be more complex, have more enemies, and smarter enemies, but also because each person will have to think their way through their turn against more targets and threats. You will have to make your players understand this. It will be particularly hard for the do-things part of your group, because roleplay and social interactions always take a lot of time.