recommended group size?, big or small? Options

[GlassJaw]

Hi all, I'm just getting back into SR and was wondering what the typical group size is out there. I come from the D&D world mostly where 4-5 is pretty much the best size. I've recently bought a bunch of modules on ebay and most of them say 4-8.

I haven't delved much into relative power levels but it seems combat can get very deadly (especially for the players) if both sides are of equal number and ability. With a smaller group (say 3-4), they will be outnumbered almost all the time if the modules are run as-is.

Anyway, I'm just wondering what the typical group size is and if anyone has any advice is the group is a little on the small side. Thanks!

[Backgammon]

I've played small groups and large groups.

With a smaller group, you can do much more roleplaying and mood setting.

With a big group, you can't do that otherwise it'll take forever to get anything done and people will get bored. I therefore focus on more action.

So my advice is, don't run modules cause they suck anyway.

[Tanka]

[bitrunner]

"all modules suck"...well, that's pretty heavy-handed...i found a couple of them to be quite good and enjoyable - good background story, good overall mission, good characters, etc...

as for group size, as a GM, i like 5 players...good balance of role playing, surviveability during combat, good balance of archetypes/skills for successfully completing the mission. the "perfect team" (IMO, of course) is:

Tech Wiz/Decker
Rigger
Hermetic Mage (usually also the Face)
Melee expert (usually Adept)
Ranged expert (usually cybered)

[Tanka]

[Kagetenshi]

Four to six. Must-haves are a mage, a rigger, and a decker; fourth guy should be some sort of combat support. If you’ve got more, you can either specialize further or add redundancy.

~J

[Euphonium]

I've found 3 to be the absolute minimum, and you need to be aware of the skill-gaps in the party. With more than six I've found both as a player & a GM, things get slow/unmanagable/boring too easily.

IMO the must-haves are as follows:-
Face, Techie/B&E, Magic User. Everyone should be capable of basic 1-on-1 self-defense. If there's no gun-bunny, they just need to learn stealth, or hire one. Muscle seems to to be the cheapest & most available backup.

[FrostyNSO]

I'd say the melee expert is next to worthless. Most characters should have some sort of unarmed skill anyways, and a B&E guy is going to give you a lot more mileage.

[Backgammon]

My approach is to base jobs on what PCs are there, so there really aren't any "must-haves". I'll simply design missions suited to the skills.

[failhelm]

I also work the games around the characters, but not all the games. After all there has to be some realism right?

I agree that 3 should be the minimum, but not for skill reasons, just because 2 + GM isn't as much fun,although I am sure there are plenty that find it just fine.

Inexperienced GMS: 3-4
Experienced GMs: 5-6
Very Experienced GMs: 7+

My largest session was 12 players - TOO MANY, and I consider myself very exp.

I don't allow any more than 8 players, but require @ least 3.

[Backgammon]

[Botch]

After playing RPG games for 2 decades I have to say that 3 is the minimum with 7 per GM the max in regards to good flow/roleplaying/action. What we have found though, is that you don't have to stick to 1 GM. We ran a campaign with 2 GMs and 11 players. This was awesome for the players 'cos when they split into different groups in the game we had concurrent RPing with neither group having 1st hand OOC knowledge of the other groups activities.

As a single group, always try to have a odd number of players, the group dynamics are better.

Also you can have more characters than players if they are being swamped.

[JaronK]

Well, I'm running a group right now with 4 members and a 5th that comes and goes (his character is a shapeshifter, so I'm just getting him kidnapped now and again by people who want to study him, poor guy). It works pretty well. And I don't worry too much about skill gaps... they didn't want to play riggers or deckers, so I just have an NPC rigger and decker that get hired to join the group when needed... they're starting to like the decker by now I think, so that works. As long as NPC characters aren't doing much other than taking care of what's obvious, they work well, they shouldn't be a driving force for the group. The decker, for example, is never actually seen... she gives them a phone to call her when needed, and a transmitting dataline tap to jack her in to secure facilities.

JaronK

[GlassJaw]

[Kagetenshi]

There aren’t any. A group of 3-statted, 3-skilled runners with time to set up and prepare will waste an unprepared group of 6-statted, 6-skilled runners, while a 8-statted, 12-skilled group might waste or be wasted based on tiny details that the players or GM notice or miss.

Generally, if position is superior stats can be inferior and still be a more or less equal fight. Reverse, inverse, etc. as desired.

~J

[Wireknight]

It's not the number of characters involved so much as the roles they fulfill. I'd say that 3-5 is the golden area where you have enough pairs of hands to take care of most tasks, but aren't overburdened by the sheer number of players doing things and demanding the spotlight.

For roles, in order to have a well-rounded runner team, for on-site work, you'll need at least one character with primary magical skills(sorcery, spell defense, astral perception), one with primary technical skills(decking), and one character with primary covert skills(stealth, electronics, lockpicking). You should ideally have someone with secondary technical and covert skills, as well, and it really helps to have a secondary Awakened character just in case.

Everyone should have at least some minor skill in stealth and unarmed combat, and I recommend at least two characters have high skill in some form of ranged combat and melee combat, including unarmed(but they needn't be the same two characters).

An example of this layout would be the following sample group of runners:

Basic:

Adept Stealth Specialist(Covert and Martial Arts skills primary, Pistols and Social skills secondary)

Combat Magician(Magical and Pistol skills primary, Martial Arts and Social skills secondary)

Heavily Cybered Combat Decker(Decking and Assault Rifles skills primary, Covert and Martial Arts skills secondary)

Additions:

Lightly Cybered Face(Social and Covert skills primary, Pistol and Club skills secondary)

Biotech Augmented Pointman(Pistols and Submachinegun skills primary, Martial Arts, Social, and Covert skills secondary)

The above listing gives you, even at 3 characters, a diverse array of skillsets that can be applied to almost any job without the need for specialized training or contracting outside help. At 4 or 5 characters, additional roles can be filled out to enhance areas that might be slightly lacking, such as pure combatants and negotiators.

Likewise, the adept in question may possess abilities including Killing Hands, which will allow them to damage magical creatures, and Astral Perception, which makes them a secondary magical scout.

Your mileage may vary, as there are literally thousands of possible skillset combinations that may work as well or better than the one I outlined above, depending on the goals and style of the campaign. My point, essentially, is that the skillset, not the number of runners, determines a team's effectiveness and the variety of jobs they can take.

[mfb]

the nice thing about GM'ing for SR is that you can adjust the difficulty on the fly--literally, right in the middle of a firefight. the secret is how effectively the opposition uses their pools. if the bad guys are wasting your runners, have them doing stupid things like using their CP to soak high-power attacks instead of dodging, or spending too much CP on their drain resistance rolls. if you're in a real bind, just have them stop using CP and SP altogether.

[Skeptical Clown]

I don't like groups larger than 6. It's just too much to keep track of. Really I prefer 3-5. Most of my games have been run with just three players. My D&D games these days are usually 6-players, but that's a different game.

[JackWill]

Ok ok... i have been in 2 person games... up to 7 person games...

I have GMed.. .between 3 and up to 10.. but with an average of 5-6.

Shadowrun is loved by my RPing Group... We do DnD.. and SR isn't as combat heavy.. so you know sometimes it's just fun to bust out and RolePlay like mad.. and then bust a cap in some drekfaces head.

I've found SR combat to be easily advoidable.. just don't start shooting or being stupid... duh! If you arne't stupid, combat won't just pop out and happen. The same laws that apply to you .. apply to NPCs... and sometimes more to them than you.. the only problem is the law! but the Law can't outright comeafter with an APC and shoot rocks from a wasp on ya.! oooorr can they? :wobble:

[GlassJaw]

[Lindt]

Cause when it boils down to it, everyone gets in fist fights. Even the albino gnome otaku.

[Kagetenshi]

Unarmed really isn't that useful at low levels. If you're going to get any, max it. If you're not going to max it, don't bother.

~J