Party Size

[oldmanpaco]

So the IE games have been thrown out as inspiration. Does this mean there is going to be a 6 person party like those games?

 

What do people think the party size should be?

[twincast]

I really, really want it to be an even number, ideally 6 or 8.

[oldmanpaco]

Ah the 8 man party. Just like U4!

[Oerwinde]

I say either allow us to take every party member with us, or have actual in game reasons to leave people behind and have varying party sizes.

[Tigranes]

3 is too small, 8 is too cumbersome, 4 or 6 would hit the spot.

[DAWUSS]

Fewer companions = fewer camp dwellers.

 

$0.02

[Zed]

Depends on how classes work. If it's anything resembling D&D, then 6 or 8. Or 7. 6-8. 5 could work if the focus is on inter-party **** and there's tons of banter between NPCs. But for combat etc, more is merrier.

[oldmanpaco]

Depends on how classes work. If it's anything resembling D&D, then 6 or 8. Or 7. 6-8. 5 could work if the focus is on inter-party **** and there's tons of banter between NPCs. But for combat etc, more is merrier.

 

Maybe you could be a little less clear. I'm not saying you could but maybe.

[LadyCrimson]

3 is too small, 8 is too cumbersome, 4 or 6 would hit the spot.

Ditto.

[Tychoxi]

I like 6 but I should state that:

a) having a stat (like charisma) modify the maximun can be good.

b) you have them with you ALL the time (unless the story takes some companions, they decide to leave or you decide to leave them). The modern "you have this crew but you have to choose only 2 to go with you JUST BECAUSE" is no good.

c) I'm willing to accept a lower maximun if it means more developed characters and/or bigger pool of potential companions.

Edited September 15, 2012 by Tychoxi

[trulez]

6 seems like a crowd. 4 or 5 would be better I think. 5 is number not often seen so let's go with 5.

[Humanoid]

Probably a ceiling of four or five for mine, but, as I rambled on about in another recent post, designed such that smaller (not necessarily solo) parties are also catered for with a reasonably consistent difficulty curve, and are properly playtested as a valid, supported gameplay style. (As opposed to the IE games where soloing seemed more of a happy accident with certain dual/multi-class combinations than a design choice)

 

Three for example is a fairly small party, but given the option is the one I'd go with on my personal playthrough, while still acknowledging that a majority will probably go for a larger, full-sized party.

 

 

Something to keep in mind here is that a larger maximum party size may increase the pressure for the character designers to add to the quantity of potential party members at a potential loss of depth in each. Choosing four from say, ten potential members leaves much more room to develop each one than say, eight from a pool of twenty inconsistently realised ones.

[Skyhawk02]

I say either allow us to take every party member with us, or have actual in game reasons to leave people behind and have varying party sizes.

 

I really like the idea of having ingame explanations for the game mechanics, it makes it easier to get absorbed into the world.

[Zed]

Depends on how classes work. If it's anything resembling D&D, then 6 or 8. Or 7. 6-8. 5 could work if the focus is on inter-party **** and there's tons of banter between NPCs. But for combat etc, more is merrier.

 

Maybe you could be a little less clear. I'm not saying you could but maybe.

How many roles can a single class fill? Can NPCs use social skills or is it just the PC? Are there dedicated healers and "tanks"?

If there are many roles to fill, then more characters are needed.

 

In D&D you'll want people to unlock stuff, identify items, "tank" or summon meatshields, heal, buff/debuff etc. The IE games had good party sizes, but they also allowed for fewer NPCs.

 

So if it's similar to the IE games, which they say it will be, I would say 6-8 is a good max but the players should also be able to play with fewer or even solo.

Edited September 15, 2012 by Zed

[Metabot]

6 seems like a crowd. 4 or 5 would be better I think. 5 is number not often seen so let's go with 5.

 

Exactly lol.

[Catamite]

4 preferably, or maybe 6... hopefully there are mixed classes so one doesn't have to have a cleric, mage, warier and thief in every party

[Jozape]

I say either allow us to take every party member with us, or have actual in game reasons to leave people behind and have varying party sizes.

 

I really like the idea of having ingame explanations for the game mechanics, it makes it easier to get absorbed into the world.

 

Agreed, and it's just better from an in-character perspective.

 

Imo either leave the party cap unlimited, or create reasons why you can or can't have a certain number of followers(like in Dead Money). And if you don't like the management of more than N number of characters, then don't get more than that in your party.

[Semper]

4-6, depending on charisma/perks/feats... and please no forced party members.

[Lohi]

Variable party size is nice, especially if we pick them up along the way. As opposed to the style where you create them all at the start. Too many characters and it gets confusing to keep track of them all and their side quest lines. They should all feel like individuals and not just a big faceless party like Icewind Dale had.

 

I think 6 is too many. I voted 4 but overall I think we could have 3 to 5. Some may just be temporary though.

 

I do not want to see the case however where you're about to help someone out with some problem they have but they say "sorry, your group looks full"! Anyone should be able to join the party and hang out if you let them. Interesting if they could leave and come back over the course of a story instead of just being your pack mule that sticks it out with you all the time. Even more interesting if they could be more normal NPCs at times who travel along with you; ie, the shop vendor who you have been dealing with wants to travel along to the next city, the jail guard you took hostage while escaping, or even the completely inept peasant you rescued on the road. Of course that can get a bit complicated.

[Gorth]

I voted 6, but that is just some Icewind Dale nostalgia. It is really going to depend on your "recruitment pool" as to what is the sweet spot party wise.

[ComradeGoby]

I think smaller is better.

 

I'd rather have 4 or 5 great charcters than many mediocre ones

[oldmanpaco]

5 or 6 work for me. But like Zed finally clarified it would depend on how classes are handled. I always like two grunts, a healer, two mages and a thief type. Good fun.

[Tamerlane]

Six is ideal for me, though down to four is alright. Really, so long as I have an actual, in-game reason for party limits and am not just fighting at half strength for no discernible reason (aside from game balance/ease-of-management), I'm cool with whatever.

[Delterius]

5 or 6 work for me. But like Zed finally clarified it would depend on how classes are handled. I always like two grunts, a healer, two mages and a thief type. Good fun.

 

6 mages, no pack mules.

 

=D

 

I suppose six is a given, Infinity Engine and all.

Edited September 15, 2012 by Delterius

[oldmanpaco]

5 or 6 work for me. But like Zed finally clarified it would depend on how classes are handled. I always like two grunts, a healer, two mages and a thief type. Good fun.

 

6 mages, no pack mules.

 

=D

 

I suppose six is a given, Infinity Engine and all.

 

Heh, 6 mages is too easy in the IE games.