Alright guys, i have no idea what to do here. I'm running a 3 session campaign and i invited along my normal group, and since I'm constantly trying to improve i let in a few more players (to see how well i could handle 8 adventurers rather than 5) and it just so happens 8 other people wanted to be in a game, i dint mind since this wouldn't last longer than three sessions.
so this is where it goes wrong, with a party of 8 you can plan strategic encounters the enemies use strategy to fight since they don't have numbers, an if need be i could throw like 10 enemies at them, a large enemy party.
But when everyone came in with their character 4 out of the 8 of them are summoners, with plans for multiple summons, and the necromancer intends to raise every enemy they slay.
the hell do i do? now every combat is going to take anywhere up to a couple hours unless we just want this army to roflstomp everything they see. and theres no chance of tight corridors or strategic encounters. then it comes to the puzzles i was planning, how do i incorporate that many beings???
>>45948595
ya done goofed
this, all of this is fucked.
what experience do you guys have with large encounters?
>>45948595
Well you could just go along with it. Switch up major battles to be army vs medium group/summons. Might take longer but it'd be cool to do a big-ass war. Try and manage it to where they'd be low on man power by the time the last few guys show up.
>>45948595
you might wanna listen to that guy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3s0CcEnmXw
relly like his videos
You need AOE traps
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=waa2ucfgVgQ
>>45948595
with so many people why not have 2 or 3 groups working against each other?
it deasn´t have to escalate in a full on war if you plan your campaign and give them some more decicive options to damage each other or advance before other groups - just try to balance the groups as far as possible to prevent the mentioned roflstomp
>>45950266
and this
get a second GM, ya goof
Play a miniature skirmish game that can handle medium sized warbands?
>>45950334
Working against each other? that may be quite difficult, that would leave the other party sitting there doing nothing and id have to be switching back and forth between the two, then if one of them gets into combat that will take awhile. ill need a minute to figure some of this out, but it might work.
>>45950506
Im our groups only GM, well there is one other but he's... he doesn't care about GM'ing he's the least enthusiastic GM ever, he doesn't even care about his own stories it seems, and it affects the players, they quickly end up entertaining themselves with other things during game
Read the combat section of Rogues to Riches (attached), and port the way initiative works to whatever you're using. (Summary: everyone on a side goes in whatever order they want, then everyone on the other side. Surprise rules reduce how much the first turn advantage wrecks people.) It's not so magical that it's going to fix this, but I think it will help.
For roleplaying, hand out the job of roleplaying NPCs to the players as you go. That keeps the conversation moving in multiple directions instead of 8 vs 1 conversational tennis. With your huge group, you can add more bit characters (shopkeepers have assistants, kings have grumpy courtiers that think you skipped your place in line, etc) to take advantage of the chaos. You need enough plates spinning to keep everyone engaged, but the only part you actually need to be in direct control of is the part that moves the plot forward.
>>45952101
Nigga, if you're doing what >>45950334 is suggesting and having a couple of groups play off of each other (which you absolutely should do, jfc), don't have everyone there. Actually split them into different sessions on different days, so that way
One) Antagonists don't see what the guys they're trying to shank are doing, and plan against that;
2) Any sort of combat doesn't bore people to tears, regardless of whose group it is;
III) Even with summons, zambies, and the like there's still some gaps in the party to0 have to overcome;
أربعة) You don't go absolutely nuts either from dealing with 15 other dumbshit niggas and/or the relentless nerd cacophony they'll inevitably create.
I mean shit, I'd give my left nut to have two groups working against each other. I'd like to even have a group right now, tell you the truth. You've got mad motherfuckers who want to be in your game, might as well use that to your advantage.
I will say, though, don't let on that you're gonna play the groups against each other. Just be like, "Yo, I don't think I can do double what I was planning all at once. I'd be happy to split off onto another day though, and take whomever with me." And have Group B either follow behind Group A or lead them on their own way some distance apart and slowly nudge them together. There's been a couple of decent stories regarding this, I'd check whatever archives are up for storytimes.
Do not do this. You'll want to die after every session.
Plan for 12 hour sessions
Cry
This is a fucking mess. I honestly have no idea how to solve it. Kick people out? Ditch the game? Tell them you can only have x players and hope some volunteer to leave? Lock yourself into your room and cry?
Dunno man.
But this is just shit whistling insane. I only run for 3-4 people. I think five was only successful for me once and even then it was a stretch with five people who could handle it and I trust. Six I would flat out not do. Eight? Eight is fucking madness and I wouldn't even consider that many people, I don't even have eight friends who like rpgs. There's no way I'd have room for that many people anywhere. And I'm not sure if I have thirteen friends, which is a stupidly high number.
>>45954606
I used to run seven player games of D&D. >>45953048 actually addresses most of the problems. The #1 problem is initiative order, and #2 is losing people's attention because too much is going through one person.
I ran like 13 once. I can tell ya what worked and what didn't.
1) All pets operate at the same time as their "owners".
2) Free-for-all turns of enemies and players is good. Although you may want to split up the players into smaller groups of 5 or so.
2.5) You group them by how well they'd actually work together based on their mechanics, and how they work together as people (keep friends together)
3) DONT HAVE THEM AGAINST EACH OTHER! Very bad thing I did in the past. Just give them DIFFERENT, BUT EQUALLY IMPORTANT OBJECTIVES. Can also serve in helping to split people into smaller groups.
3.5) This means you'll make a huge ass map to actually fit all people in, but it will keep players focused on "their" parts of the map and have it all be cohesive.
And that's all I learned from my time as a "I'll run everybody" nut job. Good luck anon, you're gonna need it.
>>45956080
Thank you very much, seriously everything helps.
I'm praying to every god out there that one or two of them can't make it for some reason.
>>45954684
im not as worried about initiative order luckily because of roll20, it will just be a pain in the ass to check that everyone actually rolled.
but i am seriously worried about losing attention because of the long time between turns
Never done anything near 15, but I've played in groups of 8-9 before and it's been bad news nearly every time.
The biggest problem was people had to go too long between doing things, and I'm not just talking about combat. Players get bored waiting around for their turn to do something and be the center of attention. Then, when their time finally comes around, they often do something really dumb or outrageous to maximize their time in the spotlight.
>>45956162
Yeah, you need to check out the way Rogues to Riches does it.
The point isn't just that you skip sorting 15 random numbers, it's everyone falling asleep when it's not their turn. Even if the players get stuck debating what order to do their turns in, debating is still awake.
>>45953048
Holy fucking shit niggah increments of 300 squares map? What kind of monstrous graphing paper does this author masturbate too?
>>45953048
Damn, the druid can mind control party members with small furry animals. This will make for some interesting rage.
Also, give each player a time limit in which to respond and describe what they are doing on their turn.
If they run out of time, they lose their turn. This helps forve players to pay attention so you dont have to describe everything to each player.
Otherwise each turn can take upwards of 30 minutes.
>>45957893
That's a 5x6 area you silly silly person.
>>45960828
More like 17x18.
>>45948595
Man the fuck up and roll with it, this has potential to be fucking amazing.
>>45948595
Split them into 3 parties of 5. Alternate which group you GM each week.
