So I just wrapped up the final arm of my Gathering Storm campaign, and I must say that the final battle did NOT go very well...as in, everyone seemed pretty miserable and bored, and/or irritated. Now I know that part of that was due to the fact that the PCs faced insurmountable odds (I tweaked the ending of The Gathering Storm, making the supposedly dead Andreas Von Bruner the Necromancer "Lazurus Mourn"...etc) of going up against a Necromancer, two Chaos Marauders and three Orcs, but at the same time, since the session was spent ENTIRELY in a single combat encounter, everything moved slower than molasses!

When I started this game, I had three players, then four, and now five. I find managing this many players, plus NPCs, plot archs, dice pools, and so on, to be too much to handle. In the future I'm considering limiting the number of players to three, four max (and then only for one or two adventures at a time).

After playing several dozen sessions over the past couple of years, I can say without a doubt that we've had the most fun when the focus is NOT on strategically centric combat encounters, and is more-so on investigation, social interaction, and the like. This isn't to say that we haven't had inspired and exciting combat encounters, but they were short and sweet, and very very dangerous. I feel that this style of play (less players, less hack n slash) seems to fit more with the system, as it allows each player time to assemble, roll, and creatively interpret the results of their dice pools in a way that contributes to the dramatic and story-telling aspects of the game.

Sigh. I think I'm just suffering from GM burn-out.

Anyone else had this sort of problem?

If so, how did you remedy it?

I have shitloads of dice, and everyone has their basic dice pool made up in front of them; if they can't get their act together , I just move 'em to the bottom of the initiative ladder. I also have a timer which we only ever used once (everyone got so excited that we knocked the cards over - up to that point it was a lot of fun). That being said, I now play with 4 pc's and it is harder than with three; the dynamics are different and they often split up. I also reward mine a lot for good behaviour (like an extra fortune dice for being quick, but disguise it as something game related). You could always get more beer.

Hey,

I am the GM of a party of 8 players. I has been always like this since the 1st edition of the game and it is hard, but it can be a lot of fun also.

The trick during combats is to speed up things and to make everyone participate in the decisions taken by others. During story mode you have to be skilled at managing splitted parties.

As for the 3rd edition, well here I got some problems, first of all the game the rules of the game are thought for a party of 3 to 4, there are many small rules than simply do not scale to larger parties and encounters. But the main problem here was card, tokens, dice...

What I did

Buy dices, as many as you can. My players bought some extra die and I got those from the core set and the players vault or gm vault I don't remember.

I scanned every single card in the game and we developed a sofware to manage encouners. It works like an excel file, your page is the party sheet where the jpeg of the npc party sheet appears together with counters etc. Every tab represents a monsters with its jpg card and there you can load wounds, action cards, conditions with their own counters, etc. An alternative to this is Fantasy Grounds II.

I have run several long campaigns with groups of 5, 6 and 7 players and whilst it ran pretty well I always think it places a lot of strain on the GM and that a game with only 4 players might produce a better experience for all involved (although this is probably true for all games). Don't underestimate GM burn out. That will turn your game into a snore fest faster than any inherent problems with the game. Taking a break from GMing can be a good thing occasionally (although as I find GMing to be far more fun than playing I find it hard to do).

Tips:-

Try and educate the players as well as possible. I've run too 6 months campaigns with different group. The first prepare their dice poles 'out of turn' knew the system and effectively shared the running. With this group of people 6 players ran fine and it was only when a 7 joined that things got slow (and this is a group that likes to split into 3 sub groups to explore!). The other group never really seemed to learn the system and things were always slow.

WFRP is modular so drop a few bits. The party sheet can go without effecting much. Ditch some trackers. ACE pools for NPCs can be handled 'behind the screen' (ie just make it up).

Try giving some of the players a job - like reminding people to remove delay counters, keeping track of stressed and strained conditions and sorting out temporary insanities.

Run less Combat focused games (which are probably more true to the spirit of the game anyway).

I would also note that The Gathering Storm can be a bit of a wearing adventure. Whilst it starts out with some investigation it ends up as a bit of a combat fest. My players got a bit bored with this element and it I ran it again I would split it into bits and install some more roleplaying and investigation between the scenes.

I am looking to start a game with no more than 4 players because I think it will help me get the best out of the system.

My congrats to anyone who runs large groups but I think the system works best with 3-4 players. 4 so one player not making it leaves you with 3 and game night goes ahead. I had 5, we dropped to 4 - and while every player is great and I wish the 5th had never left, even so the nights we are 3 are the nights that typically "zing along best".

That gives people space for their stuff around table and keeps the "round robin" moving along. It means it's never too long before a player is back in spotlight. It also makes keeping plots PC-relevant easier as you have fewer PC threads to tug on/feed.

I have had problem myself with large partyn (5-7 players) with any other rpg.

I think this is the players concern as much as the GM. If you have large groups I think it´s good for the players to take an active part when it comes to recharge tokens, progession tracks, dicepools etc.

The GMs most important role is to hold the story together. If you give a wrong call for some reason, that´s not a big deal.

There is a danger when the game is too slow for some players. They tend to do stuff off the game.

I think it´s good to take short brakes, going for a short walk. The players can talk about the session so far and it gives you hints how to make the plot more interesting.

Two of my 4 players flat out told me last session that they do not like the WFRP3 system and my tuesday night group (that now plays Arcanis) half told me last year that they didn't like the system either (and one bastard doesn't even like the world..too grim I guess eh? Of course, I'm a player presently and it could be difference in current GM style, however I cannot disagree about combat. Everything has to run like clockwork to be at its best. I push my players hard to get ready for their turns, prep their dice pools, and roll as soon as is optimally possible. When I run, it's a bit faster, but my current GM isn't necessarily running a lot slower game..it's just more combat-oriented (Blackfire Pass). We'll see how it goes this thursday. I'm trying to keep my group from burning out before I get back to GMing next month.

A tip for you might be to simply have a guest GM run a session o r two. I've been doing this with increasing frequency over the years and it's really helped me reduce burn-out (and it makes my family happier when I'm not "obsessed" with GMing..and my work production picks up as well).

GM burnout is a very real possibility, but consider that sometimes you need to grease the gears a bit with the players. Sometimes it doesn't hurt to take 2-3 minutes before the game starts and do a simple review:

* Bob, tell me about your character and what each of his abilities do (go around the table). Any confusion?

* Everybody, how do you feel about each of the components of the game? This has helped tailor my house rulebook and really sped up our game. Now, my current GM likes to use all the components, and I think my fellow players are balking a little.

Like you, I prefer the investigative portion of the game: That's why I switched to running more of those types of scenarios ( download the witch hunter scenarios from Pinnacle - they're free , easy to adapt to WFRP, and they are geared towards investigation type scenarios). I also ran some old Ravenloft scenarios and more Call of Chtulhu-type scenarios. When I looked through the 2005-2008 fan scenarios, they too are very investigation oriented. I especially liked A Question of Breeding, Unfinished Symphony, Worse then the Disease, and Doge eat dog world (combined with Howls..ravenloft scenario).

One last note: Kill your PCs. Kill the often. Let the players know that you're going to kill their characters (preferably with insanity/corruption/disease than with wounds). Tell your players that they will ALWAYS need a back-up character prepped. Why on Sigmars Green Empire would you ever say that to your players? Psychology. I've discovered that being a rat-bastard GM who pretends to openly take pleasure in killing off PCs stopped the incessant whining that my old D&D players brought with them. "How cuz' u-cant raize deds?" Also, it gets players interested in creating "interesting" characters. Another benefit is that you won't ever subconsciously pull punches on a character who's in a bad place. They have to die..and that's it. You, as the GM, will have finally created a grim and gritty world with out the whining and pandering to wussy players. TO have this, though, each player needs to spend the couple bucks for a copy of the PDF of the Players GUide (if they didn't already get a copy of the hardcover). I've noticed that players who are invested in the game by buying the book are MUCH more likely to find themselves enjoying the game.

jh

Yepesnopes said:

Yes, I am very interested in this, just for the sake of speedy combat with lots of players.

Can you please contact me to share your rescource? I would be very, very thankful, and my players too.

@Emirikol: taking the call of cthuhlu approach always helped me as well

My lifetime of tabletop RPGing has taught me there are two schools of tabletop roleplayers: the right-brain driven Interactive Storytellers and the left-brain Simulationist Character Builders. The former are attracted by potentials of storylines in engaging settings, the latter are attracted by the potential of a rules system to create an entertaining experience.

Both paths of gaming are legitimate but rarely are they compatible with each other in the real world. Myself, I'm in the Interactive Storyteller camp - I could care less about simulationist crunch within a play setting that is entirely fictitious and malleable by the gamemaster at any time anyways. I don't need to codify his or her raw ideas for the purpose of realism. I do want the experience of self-immersion in an entirely different world environment and have coherent, dynamic interactions with its contents that move steadily and engagingly.

To me, WHFRP3e lies down the path of the Storyteller camp. Its encouragement of GM judgement on applying rules as he sees fit to build the story will be a struggle to accept for the Simulationist. I also find Storytelling oriented campaigns are best run with 3 players and a 4th being the next best scenario. With larger groups than this, it is very difficult for the GM to continue to maintain the sense of immersiveness among all the players.

Portal said:

I agree with the above.

But I GM a group of six players ! 4 is the best number, by experience, but being all over 30 and with kids, having 6 means 4 will show up most of the time. This said, the adventure I'm GMing has got them super involved so nobody wants to miss a session and I've been running full house sessions very frequently lastly !

After bumping into some problems (rythm too slow, player focus wandering...), we implemented a few simple rules that have absolutely turned tables around for us.

We call those rules the Jeudy code. (Jeudy is my last name)

1) We play in bouts of 75 minutes with a 10 min. break between them. No smoking, no toilet break, no out-of-game conversations during play, keep that for the break. That works fabulously well.

2) One conversation at a time max. Even when party splits up. The idea is that we are all collaboratively telling a story. If we were the audience for a single real storyteller, everyone would listen and shut up. Same thing in roleplaying. When you are not active, you become the AUDIENCE. The beauty of this is when people have an audience, they roleplay better ! We are all here to give a show to each other and we try to remember that in all gaming circumstances. Roleplay has to be brisk, lively and entertaining !

3) During combat, people must prepare dice pools in advance as much as possible. With the initiative system, it's easy, when a player "takes" a slot, he must be ready. Any delay here and I krank up the Party tension and give the slot to somebody else who's ready. Combat must be stressful and confused, as it is in real life.

4) Avoid gamist vocabulary. I don't want to know the name of the card your using ! Roll the dice, consult the card, and entertainingly describe to us what happens ! Throw the mechanical results at GM quickly.

Also, as GM I do these additional things to keep things flowing and everybody involved.

1) In Story mode, I try to always go around the table, as in Encounter mode, just to make sure everyone can act regularly. It also helps deciding when to recharge. A "round" is thus as useful in Story mode as it is in Encounter mode. Of course, Story mode is more flexible as people interact, but I just keep in mind to ask passive players if they want to take part regularly, before people recharge.

2) I use a prebuilt tracker for hours of the day (night, dawn and early morning, morning, midday, afternoon, evening, night). Every hour each player gets to do one thing. This is very useful when in investigative parts of any adventure. Keeps days and nights coming along a keeps a sense of time flowing by. What you want to avoid at all costs is the feeling that everything comes to a stop.

3) For combats, I track ACE more or less, often winging it. Action recharges also often get decided by story and drama purposes more than rules. In a tight battle I might track things a bit more closely, but often, minor enemies attack a few times only before being killed, so... (All characters Rank 4...)

4) Again in combats, I use boons and banes for pretty severe effects as much as I can. One or two boons/banes will remain fairly minor, but 3 or 4 of them calls for game changing input ! People will fall flat on their belly losing their weapons, be pushed back into a wall or an armoire filled with silverware, etc... The resulting bonuses or minuses are often what will decided of the victor. It will precipitate an outcome and reduce the number of dragged out boring combats. I tell my players that in V3, combats are quickly decided, so they must strive to make the most of their rounds to quickly take the upper hand. That encourages them to use multiple manoeuvres and makes the first few rounds furious and often decisive. My NPCs often do the same. Most combats last maximum 5 or 6 rounds in my game. After that, one side is winning so clearly that the other routs or surrenders.

5) I use minis and the abstract range system. I put d12 beside the minis to record NPC wounds. Cards for crits and conditions also go beside or under the mini. Works really well. The abstract system means my minis will take only a little space in the middle of the table since ranges aren't visually represented in inches. I find that very useful. When distances become confused, I always rule on a case by case basis. Visualize the scene from the acting character's perspective and determine range band accordingly. Even if illogical things might appear occasionally. By experience, they don't appear that often really, and if you screw up by a manœuvre or two, it just means that someone will take or lose a fatigue point he shouldn't have.... Who cares ! Will you sacrifice flow and ease of use for that risk ? No.

Lastly, I've been GMing for 20 years, I know how unwieldy big groups can be and I have suffered. This time it works for me because my players understand that without the Jeudy Code, the game will inevitably get bogged down and be boring. Just as in any board meeting with many members, you need a system or else nothing gets done. Trust me on that one, you won't regret trying it out.

Portal said:

I think there is probably a lot more than that. One of the things like about roleplaying is that there are so many ways of enjoying it (conversely one of the things I hate most is when someone declares that their way is the "right way" and anything else "isn't really roleplaying".)

I would generally consider myself to be a storyteller but when in a different mood I can drift into simulationist or gamist style and enjoy that just as much.

I don't think that having a particular type of player will govern how many players you will be able to handle (with a table full of good character led players the GM can often just sit back and watch them play). However the fact is that for most groups you will have several players who enjoy different aspects of the game and that is where the difficulty comes. Trying to balance each session to have elements that appeal to each player can be a challenge. In my last group I had two players whose primary pleasure came from building and developing their characters (mechanically), two who were most interested in developing their character's personalities and interacting with NPC, and a fifth who only appeared to wake up when a fight broke out. Four of these are pretty easy to handle but the fifth was a pain. I wanted her to enjoy the game but, try as I might, nothing but combat seemed to get her attention. Therefore I basically ended up shoehorning some kind of encounter into every session.

However, back to the subject of the original post. One thing I would say is 'keep working at it'. I have been GMing for about 30 years and generally find it pretty easy. However it is only recently that every game I run seems to have 6+ people in it. I do my own post mortem on each session I run taking notes of things that have not gone well, and things I could have done to improve them. I use this as the basis for preparing for future sessions. Hopefully I should get better as time goes on (I would currently classify myself as a 'Good' GM but I hope to achieve the title of 'Ninja' GM at some point).

Great post. In your example of the 5 player group (two being "Storytellers", two more being "Character Builders", and the other who knows what ), I'd probably resign from that campaign as a player. Too many people involved with competing priorities from the gameplay experience. Bigger RPG group size is rarely better unless you're running a LARP and seeking to build a self-interactive game world. IMHO, but I just have never seen it go a different way and I've been RPGing for 25+ years.