Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site udenva.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!hao!nbires!boulder!cisden!udenva!showard
From: showard@udenva.UUCP (showard)
Newsgroups: net.games.frp
Subject: Re: multiple characters(PART 2)
Message-ID: <1006@udenva.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 1-Jan-86 21:11:54 EST
Article-I.D.: udenva.1006
Posted: Wed Jan  1 21:11:54 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 5-Jan-86 01:34:57 EST
References: <687@ihlts.UUCP>
Reply-To: showard@udenva.UUCP ()
Distribution: net
Organization: U of Denver
Lines: 21

In article <687@ihlts.UUCP> rainbow@ihlts.UUCP (Robert) writes:
>
>I don't follow why its an advantage to have fewer players? It seems
>to be an irrelevant issue. Polling takes place regardless. It is not
>a function of party size.

  If you've ever DMed a group of 10 players (I did once) or even played in such
a group, you will appreciate the advantages of a smaller number of players. I'm
talking about complete chaos. Everything takes twice as long to do, players who
are not involved in the current activity get bored, and so forth.  I think it
is much easier for everyone to communicate and participate in the game with a 
smaller number of players.  Also, in a campaign with upwards of 5 or 6 players,
it is much harder to get everyone together on a regular basis and nearly impos-
sible to organize a "spur of the moment" game session.

  Most DMs I know would much rather have four players with two characters each
than eight players with one character each.  Personally, I'd rather have four
players with one character each than either of those two options, but that's
beside the point.

--Blore