I'm about to try out 4E D&D, and I've run into a snag. I may have more players than the game is designed for "optimally." (Which is the game's default of 5.)
This isn't about D&D so much as the idea of party as a conceit. While I like a group that works together and fills certain niches, it can become problematic for play.
The problem of course is real life which interrupts one persons life--the rest of the play group may still want to play, but your now down a set of abilities that are designed to cover a niche.
Now you can NPC the character, as GM, or assaing another player to pick up the slack, but to me that looses the whole reason for having the other person in the playgroup. Their unique choices and the personality they interject into the character.
Maybe this is why I generally pick games where characters aren't class or explicitly niche driven. Where overlap is going to be possible without stealing spotlight from the specialist who fills a possible niche.
Of course, D&D doesn't make it about niche, they make it entirely about size. (Albeit the specifics of the classes can make it about niche.) This is another problem but a related one--what happens when the design of an adventure is aimed for so many people, and more or less impairs its smooth functioning?
This is why I chose to write my own (King of Kobold Caverns) rather than use the one in the back of the book--because I know my aims in the level of challenges, and know the core groups makeup. So I can build to make it challenge them and modify it for any added or removed players. D&D has improved in 4E in the building of challenge--it gives you idea on how to do it, and mechanics (spending XP), but that of course makes it more complex than trusting my own intuition and common sense. I'm not saying its bad, just the opposite it is good in many ways because OTHERS don't have to trust my intuition and common sense, or willingness to make it fun without being a TPK Gm.
Yet I'm still bothered by the idea of both "Party" and its opposite--the lack of any core "need" for the group to be together in game. Now I have run many games in both fields. So how do we optimize towards the middle? Giving enough fun to the group and individual without over designing the rules that support a given "build" of player characters or party. But also doesn't leave it entirely to a person's common sense or lack thereof?
Well, in my experience with 4e, it's fairly easy to scale (either up or down) to the number in your party if it isn't the optimal 5 member party. The concept of minions make this tremendously easy in 4e.
As an example, I am currently running a 4e FR campaign and I used the Raid on Loudwater adventure from the FR Campaign Guide. My group consisted of an elven ranger, dragonborn cleric, and human fighter. The adventure as written called for 10 goblin minions. I cut the number in half to 5 minions, and it played smoothly.
One thing I've noticed with 4e (and keep in mind that I could be totally bullshitting/my observations are largely irrelevant) is that an encounter becomes a lot more trying if you're party doesn't align with the game's assumptions concerning class roles.
Like, my party needs a defender or needs a striker, or some of the balanced encounters are no longer balanced, even if the size of the group is more or less the same.
I could be wrong, of course. Just something that I think I've picked up on during play. I suppose I just prefer systems where there are no real class roles (like the OP). Since 4e doesn't emphasize alternative solutions to combat situations, the assumption toward having certain roles filled makes things go wonky if you play the game strictly as written.
Again, I'll nod to Savage Worlds in this arena and then wait for Settembrini to come in and say something stupid about it.
I am in a 4e campaign with a Wizard, Rogue and Warlock. We have no Defender or Leader so we do a very poor job of healing in combat and a poor job of keeping monsters off the Wizard.
We're doing just fine because smart players play to their strengths to minimize their drawbacks. Two strikers and a controller mean that we either kill stuff fast or we lay down some hell and run away. Its very fun because we are working within our limitations to achieve goals.
I have run 4e with 8 players and here's my advice: make sure the encounter area are big enough to accommodate the 8 players and 8+ foes. Enlarge areas so movement matters and area effects don't dominate the battlefield.
Every RPG I have ever played had niches. They are good things because it helps the players understand their role in the team. When that character is missing, the rest just step up to the plate and think out of the box.
This is easier in 4e because the smaller skill list and +1 per 2 level skill bonus means that even small parties have a good range of skills to use in most challenges. Also, the ease of multiclassing and ease of changing feats means that skill deficiency areas can be dealt with swiftly.
Quote from: Silverlion;252788The problem of course is real life which interrupts one persons life--the rest of the play group may still want to play, but your now down a set of abilities that are designed to cover a niche.
Sure, but I mean... games are meant to be
played, so you can't really expect to cover for an absence of
players. The very minimum any player can be expected to do is show up. What does a soccer team do if its goalie can't come? They have a backup goalie. If they don't, then the opposition says "tough", and a lot more goals are going to get through for that match.
Players should show up. If players are absent, then the group suffers from their absence, and encourages the absent one to show up next time.
If you have a group where before each session you've no idea who's going to show up, forget roleplaying games, try board games and stuff like that.
Because however specialised the character roles are, you also mentioned the ideas and personality of the player being put into the character, the buzz they add to the game table. No rules can make up for the lack of that. If you want to play roleplaying games, you just have to get people who show up regularly.
Quote from: Spinachcat;252841I have run 4e with 8 players and here's my advice: make sure the encounter area are big enough to accommodate the 8 players and 8+ foes. Enlarge areas so movement matters and area effects don't dominate the battlefield.
That is excellent advice. Thank you.