|
I really like to run modules for public PFS events, but after running a lot of them I have come to the realization that they don’t scale well to 6 players. They are written for 4 and when 6 play they are a walk over and not much fun for anyone.
Is there a way to legally limit modules to 5 players at a public PFS event? Doing this makes the modules fun for everyone, having them play as cake walks take out the fun. Since it’s a PFS event a GM is limited to Run as Written which means the mods. can’t be amped up to accommodate more players like they could otherwise be tweaked in a home game.
|
I agree that the modules are more fun with 4 or 5 players. I think you do like Rob suggests. Heck, limit it to 4 players if you want. How many people do you know who are going to insist that you HAVE to seat them as long as there is space for a 6th player? Realistically who is going to have the nerve to lodge a complaint when you already said 5 was the ceiling? You just have to be firm and you won't have any issue.
|
It's not addressed in the rules, roysier, so I guess that leaves it up to the event organizer and GM to work out. Just be aware that the official upper limit is 6 players, and some players may be upset if you don't allow them to play when you haven't hit that cap.
Heck, I recently had a player storm out of a gameday because I wouldn't take a 7th player at my table.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That's disappointing. The store organizers likely want to avoid any chance of a complaint. If they don't have the confidence to help you, then your only option is to make it a private event.
What sign-up system do you use in your area? I'd never suggest that you make a couple of fake Warhorn accounts and fill one or two seats with phantom players who are never going to show. On the gameday you're left with the actual number of players you desire. That would be inappropriate of me to suggest.
|
|
As Jon mentioned, the organizer does have influence here, particularly if you are using their resources to setup the table. An organizer has responsibilities that go beyond an individual table, such as providing consistency of experience to the attendees.
That said, as long as you have an independent right to a table at a location (they aren't reserved), you can theoretically invite whoever you want to the game. But try to work with your organizers and VO's, it works out much better in the long run.
Edit: There was some good points above about Average Party Level. If you're running a L.5 module, which allows 4th-6th level characters, 5 4th-level's can easily be overwhelmed (depending on the module). You might take into account the 'Total Levels'.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have left several tables when a 7th player has been seated. There are so few things I'm able to play I would rather wait till a smaller table is available. I understand the organizer not wanting to send the new player/walk-in away and am happy to vacate my slot.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I generally push to avoid 7 players at table I GM. I find that with that many people some people get left out and do not enjoy the game.
At 7 players there is enough to split the table legally.
I push to avoid a 7-player table when I am a player. I have offered to run a second table, and I have offered to go home instead of playing. I dislike 7-player tables that much that I won't play at one again.
I absolutely refuse to GM a 7-player table. I am a pretty good GM, but I know my limits. One of those limits is that I cannot run a table for that many people.
|
|
I generally push to avoid 7 players at table I GM. I find that with that many people some people get left out and do not enjoy the game.
At 7 players there is enough to split the table legally.
I push to avoid a 7-player table when I am a player. I have offered to run a second table, and I have offered to go home instead of playing. I dislike 7-player tables that much that I won't play at one again.
I absolutely refuse to GM a 7-player table. I am a pretty good GM, but I know my limits. One of those limits is that I cannot run a table for that many people.
I can definately do it.
I just notice it is much harder to give everyone as fun of a time then if I had less.
I will never turn people away if I can avoid it.
One of the most offensive things I have ever seen was I has 9 people come and 2 were new to our area and some of the others shamed the new people to leave while I was in the bathroom. I had drawn extra maps and had an extra printout of the scenario.
I would have loved to have you there. I never saw those people again.
|
|
I just scheduled dragon's Demand in campaign mode, we're starting next week. I limited it to 4 PCs.
This would be a much tougher sale for a convention I'd think, as they clearly want to get the most money out of their slots.
though, I also have 2 other tables scheduled, so it's a slightly different situation.
|
Roysier:
There is nothing in the rules stopping you running the thing with 3 players and a pregen if you want to. Nor is there anything saying you cannot run with 4, 5 or 6 players at a public event.
What occurs is that VL's and VC's want as many people as they can playing. Thus you get 6 players on a season 0 table (for example). More people playing means in a sense more perception of what PFS is about, more players who can go and tell their friends about the game and so on. So you might have one say ' Well I dont mind you running that module but you need to have spots for 6 players there'. Its up to you to make the choice then to run it or not.
Thats a great view to take, the issue is though what happens if the players get a negative view because they are playing as effectively excess baggage in a scenario that dosnt have enough challenge for them. Or they get to their turn in combat and everything has been vanquished already. Id be inclined to think they might develop a negative view of pathfinder.
(thats not to say this cant happen in other variations in different ways. You can find a higher level character sitting at your table destroying the opposition)
Roysier: You could run it again. You say
Im running X on this date, then If i have the numbers I will run in again on Y. im limiting it to 4 (which you can say first in best dressed, or arrange it on tier lines, arrange it on balance or lottery)
If you advertise ahead of time that you are only accepting the first 4 players, then there should not be any problem here.
Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area South & West
|
It's not necessarily the VOs who are insisting on seating 6 (or more) players - far more often it's the event coordinators. In fact the only two tables I'm aware of that have been run recently with a limit of less than six characters have, in fact, both been run by a VO.
I know most of the event coordinators in the area where Roysier steps up to GM (who appreciate the fact that he does so). Unfortunately, though, it's often hard to get enough GMs for the number of players that sign up. This means an event coordinator has to choose between sending players home, and asking a table to seat an extra player. That's a hard call to make.
Just what restrictions can be placed on a game played at a public venue is a contentious area. You can't turn somebody away from a table just because you don't like the character they signed up to play, as long as it is a PFS-legal character. But limiting the table size is generally considered to be acceptable - in fact most places I know will only seat a 7th player if everybody else at the table agrees.
If an event coordinator pushes a GM into running a table over a voiced objection, there's a risk that that GM will stop volunteering for those events. I'd hope that event coordinators could be persuaded to take the long view, and make the decision that is best for PFS as a whole.
I'd support limiting the number of players, or possibly the total party level; a party of six 4th-level characters playing in a tier 4-6 module could well have a much harder time than a party of four 6th-level characters, especially if the party make-up isn't well suited to the adventure.