Skip to content
0
  • Home
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
  • Home
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Sketchy)
  • No Skin
Collapse

Wandering Adventure Party

  1. Home
  2. rpg
  3. An epic Classic Traveller campaign of 17 players all at once? (And easier to run than a table of 4)

An epic Classic Traveller campaign of 17 players all at once? (And easier to run than a table of 4)

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved rpg
rpg
9 Posts 6 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • C This user is from outside of this forum
    C This user is from outside of this forum
    copacetic@discuss.tchncs.de
    wrote on last edited by
    #1
    This post did not contain any content.
    Link Preview Image
    An epic Classic Traveller campaign of 17 players all at once? (And easier to run than a table of 4)

    Voidstein Part 1- An ambitious, Classic Traveller Braunstein

    favicon

    (mythicmountainsrpg.substack.com)

    kathmandu@lemmy.dbzer0.comK 1 Reply Last reply
    26
    • C copacetic@discuss.tchncs.de
      This post did not contain any content.
      Link Preview Image
      An epic Classic Traveller campaign of 17 players all at once? (And easier to run than a table of 4)

      Voidstein Part 1- An ambitious, Classic Traveller Braunstein

      favicon

      (mythicmountainsrpg.substack.com)

      kathmandu@lemmy.dbzer0.comK This user is from outside of this forum
      kathmandu@lemmy.dbzer0.comK This user is from outside of this forum
      kathmandu@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      Good read, it’s interesting how this differs from DND. Crazy cool how they are juggling 17 people, and DND falls apart with ~5.

      H C 2 Replies Last reply
      2
      • kathmandu@lemmy.dbzer0.comK kathmandu@lemmy.dbzer0.com

        Good read, it’s interesting how this differs from DND. Crazy cool how they are juggling 17 people, and DND falls apart with ~5.

        H This user is from outside of this forum
        H This user is from outside of this forum
        HubertManne
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        I don’t get these low numbers. pathfinder’s default assumes four but back in the day 6 was kinda the ideal party. If we did not have enough players sometimes someone would control two characters.

        Pteryx the Puzzle SecretaryP JyekJ 2 Replies Last reply
        0
        • H HubertManne

          I don’t get these low numbers. pathfinder’s default assumes four but back in the day 6 was kinda the ideal party. If we did not have enough players sometimes someone would control two characters.

          Pteryx the Puzzle SecretaryP This user is from outside of this forum
          Pteryx the Puzzle SecretaryP This user is from outside of this forum
          Pteryx the Puzzle Secretary
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          Have to agree about six. The classic D&D videogames didn't choose a party size of 6 by accident in their designs.

          That being said, the push towards four instead definitely started in 3.0's playtesting, on the assumption that parties would have one of each basic archetype (warrior, rogue, arcane caster, divine caster) for some reason. It probably also had a lot to do with how scheduling a dedicated table becomes exponentially more difficult with each added player.

          H 1 Reply Last reply
          1
          • Pteryx the Puzzle SecretaryP Pteryx the Puzzle Secretary

            Have to agree about six. The classic D&D videogames didn't choose a party size of 6 by accident in their designs.

            That being said, the push towards four instead definitely started in 3.0's playtesting, on the assumption that parties would have one of each basic archetype (warrior, rogue, arcane caster, divine caster) for some reason. It probably also had a lot to do with how scheduling a dedicated table becomes exponentially more difficult with each added player.

            H This user is from outside of this forum
            H This user is from outside of this forum
            HubertManne
            wrote on last edited by
            #5

            we often did not have six but it was not uncommon to have 3 players playing two characters and a gamemaster.

            1 Reply Last reply
            1
            • H HubertManne

              I don’t get these low numbers. pathfinder’s default assumes four but back in the day 6 was kinda the ideal party. If we did not have enough players sometimes someone would control two characters.

              JyekJ This user is from outside of this forum
              JyekJ This user is from outside of this forum
              Jyek
              wrote on last edited by
              #6

              I just watched a SciShow episode about this. Good watch. https://youtu.be/0pc9Uf3vFDU

              H 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • JyekJ Jyek

                I just watched a SciShow episode about this. Good watch. https://youtu.be/0pc9Uf3vFDU

                H This user is from outside of this forum
                H This user is from outside of this forum
                HubertManne
                wrote on last edited by
                #7

                I like that channel so will give it a look when I get a chance.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • kathmandu@lemmy.dbzer0.comK kathmandu@lemmy.dbzer0.com

                  Good read, it’s interesting how this differs from DND. Crazy cool how they are juggling 17 people, and DND falls apart with ~5.

                  C This user is from outside of this forum
                  C This user is from outside of this forum
                  copacetic@discuss.tchncs.de
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #8

                  I have read stories that D&D in the 70s it was normal to have groups of 10-20 people. There were player roles like “mappers” for drawing the map. There was a “caller” who summarized the player moves for the GM.

                  D 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • C copacetic@discuss.tchncs.de

                    I have read stories that D&D in the 70s it was normal to have groups of 10-20 people. There were player roles like “mappers” for drawing the map. There was a “caller” who summarized the player moves for the GM.

                    D This user is from outside of this forum
                    D This user is from outside of this forum
                    Davel23
                    wrote on last edited by davel23@fedia.io
                    #9

                    D&D in the '70s was more like a strategy wargame than a TTRPG as we know them now.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0

                    Reply
                    • Reply as topic
                    Log in to reply
                    • Oldest to Newest
                    • Newest to Oldest
                    • Most Votes


                    • Login

                    • Login or register to search.
                    Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                    • First post
                      Last post