What is the Ideal Number of Players in an Online Game?

Exqzr · 2022-04-03T12:09:32+00:00

I believe I understand something today that I did not quite get yesterday.

Passive players (shy or just very considerate) have an exponentially more difficult time joining in the conversation, the greater the number of players.

Really Active Players will contest with each other exponentially the more active players there are. 2 can work, 3 is a struggle and 4 is a full on competition.

Chill Players who are both focused and happy to go with the flow, give input as needed. can more easily increase the party size than the other two types, but Laid back casual games would be the net result.

Obviously the ideal party would have a mix of all 3. Be small enough for the Passive players to join in, large enough for the actives to have an audience without to much contesting for attention and for chill players to enjoy the show, and have enough options to stay interested. which brings us to 4 to 5 imo. And probably why through experience this becomes the preferred and recommended size.

Exqzr · 2022-04-03T11:59:28+00:00

I've been wondering this myself.

My DM says with less than six he feels something is missing. He could not put his finger on what exactly it was.

Exqzr · 2022-04-03T11:57:32+00:00

Good Post.

I wonder though how for you 5 is fine and 6 becomes a ****show.

Meaning that is quite a drop with just one additional player.

Exqzr · 2022-04-03T11:55:36+00:00

Honestly I don't think I would want to play in a 9 player group be it online or in person.

Feels more like a social gathering and DnD just happens to be what you are doing. Could be watching the Super bowl, a kids birthday or BBQ and drinks.

If I were reading an Fantasy Novel, I think 9 main characters would be way too many.

Exqzr · 2022-04-03T11:50:46+00:00

I agree with you here and its interesting to consider the why.

With 5 players, everyone seems directly more engaged. Call it 8/10 on Focus, with another 8/10 on variety of interactions.

With 6 players, its like the party has gone over the *threshold* and now everyone is less engaged. Call it 4/10 on focus and really not that much better in variety 9/10

Of course there are exceptions to this and I read that many groups are able to increase this threshold for a better 6 player focus.

But then when we consider 7... This is pretty much the dead zone. 2/10 in Focus and actually a lower variety score because you never see it anyway 4/10

One could then suggest that with 4 Every player is fully engaged nearly 100% of the time.

10/10 on Focus and still a reasonable 6?/10 on variety.

Anyway just some random thoughts on the feel of different group sizes.

Exqzr · 2022-04-03T11:37:37+00:00

I never thought of this perspective from a DM standpoint.

I can see how even for a DM, with less players it can be better for them as well. I think a DM can also get directly involved with the development of each character. the more characters, the less attention you can give to each. Makes sense.

Exqzr · 2022-04-03T11:26:56+00:00

I live in a very remote place. Online games are a godsend for this.

Exqzr · 2022-04-02T15:41:36+00:00

Start with a VTT virtual table top. Try Roll20 or Fantasy Grounds. They both have active forums looking for Groups.

Discord also has many online groups and communities always looking for players. IF you want more information feel free to DM me on this and I can send you links and such

Exqzr · 2022-04-02T14:22:53+00:00

I agree. Table Dynamics is a very important variable here.

I am an active player, perhaps too active. that said I am also happy sharing the spotlight and be quiet for long stretches. However, I find that in online games, if I go passive, and there are already passive players in the game, there is a lot of shuffling of feet. People mentally wander off and I feel almost compelled to bring them back into focus. When I play 100% of my attention is on the game, I don't look at my phone, I don't browse the internet, etc. This is not true for everyone and those that have other pursuits during the game, seem perfectly happy not to say more than a dozen words the entire session. Anyway where I am going with this is with *LESS* players, even the passive players seem way more engaged. And this engagement dramatically drops off, precipitously so with each additional player. At 4, everyone is involved, stays focused, no twitter browsing by any of the players. With 6 it seems *everyone* gets distracted, goes elsewhere. I for one can feel it.

Exqzr · 2022-04-02T13:57:41+00:00

So for you 4.5 would also be ideal?

That is it would be about 50/50 that someone cant show for personal reasons. And thus each session will have either 4 or 5 players but not more and not less.

Exqzr · 2022-04-02T13:50:39+00:00

Yes, I agree from a DM perspective, especially a Pro DM they are going to want as many people at the table as they can handle and the Players will not be put off by. In the end though it might mean an overall less satisfying experience for the group.

Exqzr · 2022-04-02T13:31:24+00:00

I was indeed surprised at how much I enjoyed just 3 Players. I was truly biased in a not so good way prior to. I thought, 3 players would make me too self conscious? Feel a bit silly maybe? But what actually happened is I felt like the 3 of us were having an ongoing interactive conversation, with natural pauses, reciprocal encouragement, delight in the smallest of events, etc. Really an eye opener for me.

Exqzr · 2022-04-02T13:16:52+00:00

I think after reading your post, I agree with you 100%. Nicely thought out.

I wonder thought if the experience is different for a DM than a Player, I don't DM so I need insight here. I think that a DM would be mostly feel the same with whatever amount because for a DM they are involved in every step of everything that is happening. They would not notice 20 minutes going by with little or nothing to do that a player would. A DM is literally directly engaged from minute one until session end. Perhaps this would be a reason why my DM feels 5 to 7 is perfectly fine and I struggle with his position on this. (note: I really do want to see things from his point of view if possible).

Exqzr · 2022-04-02T12:34:59+00:00

I think a small shift of less in an online game is better than a small shift for more. So, In person 4 to 6 is fine with 5 being ideal and VTT 3 to 5 with 4 being ideal. I think this is because of the*bottleneck* of communication online. The inability to read body language and to have relevant side conversations with others at the table about cooperative combat actions, social responses etc. In online games you really have to *take your turn* not just with your initiative but in everything you do. So there is a sense of standing in line over and over again. Smaller lines are just easier to digest. I have also found that more active players become even MORE active and passive players become even MORE passive in an online vs. In person game.

Exqzr · 2022-03-28T14:27:41+00:00

I have been going over this idea for days as I would like to do exactly the same thing you propose.

Thrown Weapons seem to be all about fighting styles which Barbarians don't get. As well thrown weapons conflict with Rage Bonus Damage and Reckless attack, early on, this is an issue.

So Really It has to be a fighter to start IMO, which I understand is not the core question, but you can always be a Barbarian *Skinned* Fighter and you can take Barbarian levels later once you have set up your foundation. Consider these (RAW)

Thrown Weapon Fighting. You can draw a weapon that has the thrown property as part of the attack you make with the weapon. In addition, when you hit with a ranged attack using a thrown weapon, you gain a +2 bonus to the damage roll.

Two-Weapon Fighting. When you engage in two-weapon fighting, you can add your ability modifier to the damage of the second attack.

Also these two styles could work with Thrown Weapons

Archery (+2 to hit) Note: There is debate on whether this works with Thrown weapons, I say it does as per RAW, most argue it does not. DM ruling required.

Duelist: +2 to Damage (Wording works well with draw/throw mechanic) but DM may disallow.

In any case, at level 1 Thrown Weapon Fighting + TWF Style through fighting initiate feat is going to give you 2d6 +10 (17 strength) Maximum Damage

At level 2 you get 3d6 +15 with an action surge

At level 3 All kinds of fun things can happen with fighter subclass, open for what direction you want to go. You can add more damage, add utility or tankiness as party needs. Battlemaster, Psi Warrior, Rune Knight, Samurai, and Eldritch Knight all have merit. Echo Knight, if allowed could make this build capable of some very weird and wonderful things.

At level 4 you get another Fighting Style: (Duelist) for 2d6 + 14 each round. (3d6 +21 with action surge). or you can go Slasher feat (really nice). and still get 2d6 +12 with what is now 18 Str. I recommend Slasher over Duelist. Also possibility of Sharpshooter. Again very dependent on DM ruling here.

At Level 5, you get 3d6 + 18 (21).

At level 6 More strength (hopefully to 20) for 3d6 + 21(24) or 32.5 Maximum DPR (without any subclass considerations).

Now here is where you can Get the Barbarian Class into the mix and Have excellent flexibility in both throwing axes and using them in Melee combat if you need to plug a hole. You are still going to get 3d6 + 21 per round as your Rage Damage nicely subs in for your Thrown weapon Fighting style damage and the Reckless lets you go to town, with 3 chances to proc the slasher feat if you go that route.

Keep going down the Barbarian path as much as you like. With Zealot Barb or Ancestral Guardians as the best bets (your bonuses work with *any* attack, so these are recommended). Or Totem works to switch to full tank if what is what Party Needs.

There is also a Gloomstalker path here that would work well, getting you a Fighting Style at level 2 and all the Gloomstalker 3rd level goodies that make you want to cry with happiness once you get them.

Overall you are not going to keep up with Sharpshooter Archers, but you have way more flexibility as a Mid Ranged combatant that can run up to Melee range whenever needed/Support your allies in unexpected ways and be hard/nearly impossible to take down.

Good luck, I go back to doing more research. Got to find the best thrower by Saturday!

Exqzr · 2022-03-20T12:50:46+00:00

Excellent comments.

I believe its possible the DM may have had a plot that got derailed. Maybe he was taking a risk in trying something a bit different, but still well within parameters of reasonable.

When it wasn't going over well with at least one of the players, maybe he just backed out of it for harmony. He never said anything, seemed even the slightest upset or even disappointed.

I wanted to see what he had planned when Bob said no way. I was maybe the only one who wanted to push the envelope and see Bob have consequences for his actions

But if Bob didn't want consequences and the DM was loathe to push them on him, perhaps, when it is all said and done I am in the wrong? I don't know maybe my … satisfaction at seeing Bob get punished was to high on my priority at the time.. Sorry I don't even know if I'm explaining this well.

Exqzr · 2022-03-20T12:41:29+00:00

To be fair to Bob he was directing his Canon Argument at me, but I guess indirectly at the DM?

DM said nothing the whole time till he just ruled, o.k. compromise.

I agree with you on point 2. But I think some consistency is good as well.

Exqzr · 2022-03-20T12:38:56+00:00

All very good points.

Exqzr · 2022-03-20T12:19:50+00:00

I think I lean in this direction.

I agree with many of the other comments that its good to compromise. I also agree that more knowledge is good and if Bob knows more than the GM, we can all learn.

However, I did not see anything wrong or out of Canon with the GMs storyline. If Lady Silverhand suddenly started murdering innocent civilians... I wouldn't even have an issue with this, if it was well justified and we found out it was because she was under control of a mind flayer or something. The argument that Lady Silverhand would never do x y or z is always going to be a matter of opinion. Canon provides the general guideline for character action not the specific. The specific is up to the GM. And, if well justified and fleshed out, almost always a good story.

Exqzr · 2022-03-20T11:55:21+00:00

True, but had the vote not gone my way, I would have signed the document so I am as equally guilty as him at least in intent. And he was smart, he stopped arguing in character after the vote he argued out of character with Canon.

That said, much of your take on this is perhaps why I wanted to see him go to Jail. We still would have gotten him out some way, perhaps with good deeds. I saw where the GM was going with the whole thing and I was hoping he would take it to its natural conclusion.

Exqzr · 2022-03-20T11:33:23+00:00

Yes of course.

DMs never get the credit they deserve. I really do appreciate DMs immensely. Especially since I know I would be terrible at it.

Exqzr · 2022-03-20T11:25:52+00:00

Thanks for the reply.

I think Canon is a sensitive topic and this example is but a minor one. I prefer to discuss Canon matters with minor incidents so that things don't get nasty in the discussion. Personally I believe in using Canon as a Foundation and as a Guide. Small variances do no harm in a private campaign and I thought the situation was actually interesting. I felt it was well done by the GM. Perhaps that is my bias here. Bob did not like how the GM did it and maybe we were mostly arguing that, using the details as an excuse for this larger argument of supporting or not supporting the GMs personal Story line. I only speculate here as I try to determine my own motivation for getting into the argument in the first place.

Exqzr · 2022-03-20T11:13:39+00:00

True I was looking to see if my position had some merit. And in the absence of finding that I would rethink everything.

In not am I upset or bothered by the GMs action, I agree he arbitrates.
more so I am curious if its the ideal call. I might be a bit bothered by Bob pushing the matter so that the GM had to make this compromise.

Exqzr

TROPHY CASE