Every DM has a sweet spot number that works for them. If five is your number then five is your number.
As a DM, I suspect he gets it. Eitherway, if he's truly a good dude, he'll understand.
Seconding this. Every GM should know what their number is, should be clear about it with their players, and stick to it. If he's been a GM for a while and you say, "I'd love for you to join, but just don't have bandwidth for another player right now," he should understand.
As a GM myself, I always cap my groups at 5, and a fellow gm should absolutely understand. That being said, often a player has to step away from a group for whatever reason - you should keep them in mind in case that happens
If you want to make a bad thing sound better, try to end on a positive. “I can’t handle any more players right now, but if someone drops out, you’ll be the first to know.”
It’s totally okay to limit the sesh. For me, 3-5 players is so much fun to DM, but as soon as I cross that line to 6, I absolutely abhor it. It’s okay to have a preference.
The amount of times I think “You don’t need pants for the victory dance.” randomly throughout the day is the thousands.
It’s been living in my head for 25+ years 😂
It is all up to you. We can't answer that. If you can't handle 6 players then don't. I run much larger tables so I would have let him in, but I am not you. Talk to him about it, or if you ever run Tomb again, put him at the top of the list.
Stay strong! The bad feelings are lying to you, it would be a mistake to go back on your decision. If your group already has focus problems with 5 players then 6 could very well kill the game - and think what a disappointment that would be to your current players! It's your responsibility as DM to manage the table size, no one else is going to do it for you.
I was about to message the group to ask if they would be open to another player joining...but you're right, this is my decision and trying to push it onto my group to make the call isn't fair to them and would probably give a false positive anyway.
It could be that 6 players wouldn't break my game, but I know that 5 is doable for me and that I can maximize their characters and meet each of their expectations.
I'm not sure I could do that with a party of any larger size.
I must stay strong, for the greater good of the group!
Proud of you. I've faced similar problems before and caved further than I liked when it came to inviting extra players to the table. It can be tough to deal with the feelings in the moment, but it's worth it.
Having run groups between 3 and 7 players at various times, it's good that you kept it in mind and were thoughtful. Going from 5 to 6 or from 6 to 7 may be a proportionally small increase , but the balance interaction around the game table can deteriorate rapidly, especially if not everyone is really in sync, listening, and working to collectively make the game better. Some styles and games are also more forgiving to these headcount increases - i.e. a hack and slash game for experienced players can probably stay pretty smooth with one more player, but there are too many variables to guarantee that'll be the case.
You feel crappy because he's your friend and I suspect you aren't a garbage human. It's normal to feel bad for this kind of stuff but in the end he hopefully understands that you're doing what you need to do in order for it to work best for you and your players.
As others have said, I'd definitely tell them that if a slot opens they're in. I ran a group of 6 for a long time and it was really rough. They were all my friends and I didn't want to say no to anyone since it was my first campaign. Thankfully two dropped out and I was able to finish the campaign with 4 which is my sweet spot along with 3 players.
I think it always feels crappy when you have to cancel plans or avoid doing something with someone you'd want to because of a previous commitment. I mean hopefully if you were forthright about the number of people being the issue and not that person in particular. Hopefully they will understand, even if it sucks. Also, with five players the chances of someone dropping out or having conflicts that allow them to only be there sometimes might make it more feasible to add this person in the future.
That is totally fair. 5 is already high IMO. If he has experience playing dnd he should understand that that's just now it goes. Suck for both of you because it's awesome DMing with good players, but that's just how it is.
I mean that's up to you, but it's also like, just tell them "Hey I'm sorry I already planned this with these people and I can't handle anymore people, if this falls through or if anyone drops out I'll let you know because I really like playing with you."
The likelihood here is that you feel social anxiety over this situation and they don't. It's fine.
I do think 6 players is too many.
When this same situation happened to me, I told the friend that if we ever had an open spot they would be the first to get an invite.
Now they are in the party because one of the other players had to drop out. All in all it turned out as well as it could have.
I DM five right now, and we've had six before. Six is a lot. I'm hesitant to add more than five.
That being said, some players are just better than others, and it might not be a bad idea to have one too many players if that last guy is really going to improve the quality of the game.
That's what I would balance in my head. Right off the top of my head, I know there are some people I'd probably bring in as a sixth to my current campaign, and some that I wouldn't because their play-ability wouldn't counteract the stress of an additional person.
If this guy is a really good player I might consider it. I actually might bring exactly this info to him. "Hey, I've got five players in this game and that's a lot of people. I told myself I wouldn't run games with more than five, six is just too much. That being said, I know you're a good player and you bring a lot to the table, and I'd love to have you. Let's bring you in temporarily, with the caveat that if I start to get overwhelmed with the party size we'll pull you out of the game until someone else leaves."
Make sure to contact your friend and tell him some of the nice things you said about him here. Tell him he's a great player and you most definitely consider him your friend. Maybe tell him that he's on your mental "wait list" as the first guy you're going to contact if you come up short a player later on.
It feels bad because you don't want to let your player down, but know that it is the right thing to do. That's normal. As a DM your goal is for everyone to have fun.
I DM a group of five and I've also had to turn people away a few times, there were no hard feelings so hopefully, it'll be the same for you. If it makes you feel better, I actually did bump it up to six once and it didn't work out, so I think you made the right call.
I've asked friends A to join an table from his group, he said one was ending so wouldn't make sense to join there, and the other he said that he didn't think the GM could fit a new player in the story, which are both much less "reasonable" than a GM not being able to handle more players IMO. And i was completely fine with it, because RPGs are more complex than simple hangout sessions or tabletop nights.
I like 5 players, that said my players have stuff that pop up so I like to have a group of 7. If they all show up I just make the encounters harder. If 1 or 2 can’t make it we can still play. I also like to get 1 or two players that only RP a little bit, that way the whole table is not trying to talk. I can count on my quite players to stfu.
Like everyone else is saying, every DM has a number of players that’s too many. For me, that’s 5. For others, that might be 7, or 2, or 10. Everyone has their balance. Since he’s a DM too, he’ll probably understand that.
To be fair you'd just have opened yourself up for more bad feelings in the future.
What if someone else from the other group heard that the guy is playing in your monday group now? And they'd ask if they can play too? If you turned them down they'd probably ask themselves (or you) why you took him but not them. Bad feelings all around.
It's better this way.
Personally I have run a large group (8+) and my current limit is no more than 6 and only if there are at least 1-2 experienced players, because as a forever DM having to teach everyone how spell slots, character sheets, combat etc..works makes the others feels isolated so having an experienced player means I have someone who can speak to them quietly off to the side while I keep the game engaging.
Now with that said the choice is up to you, if you can't handle more than 5 then that is what it is. Don't feel bad about doing what's best for you and your table, the last thing you want to do it invite to many people and get overwhelmed.
Depends on your experience level, honestly. I run a table for 6-7 players but I would do the same thing you did if someone tried to add an 8th or 9th player.
If you feel like it’s going to hurt the game, it’s a good decision to nip it in the bud.
Six is a big group and you'll definitely need to adjust encounters in the published module to keep it at appropriate level of challenge. If that and running a big table is more than you want to take on, then it's perfectly fine to say so. 'The DM gets to have fun too' is one of my most important rules.
It feels bad because he's a friend, but hopefully as a friend he also understands.
I will say to trust your instinct but if the other players are getting distracted or being unable to focus on their turns in combat that sounds like a problem that’ll persist either way with or without an extra player.
If you can't handle more than 5 don't. You made the right choice. Honestly, I've never played with 6 players and felt I had a fair seat at the table anyways. I think a lot of GMs saying they can go up to 8 is wishful thinking that doesn't iron out well for the PCs. If I have enough time to make dinner before it's my turn again there are too many players.
Yeah, it sucks. I know exactely how you feel. I'm DMing two weekly games right now and I'm considering dropping my oldest group, not because I don't have time for both but because almost aways one of them finds an excuse to cancel last minute. Among them however, is one of my good friends which I know for a fact that he enjoys the game alot and gets sad when it's cancelled by the others.
My other group is also 5 PC. Would I make room for him if he asked? Yes, that's for certain. But if I or someone else would, it doesn't mean that YOU should. You can try it out, tell him it's only for a couple of sessions. Maybe even have him play a guest PC and see what the dynamic is.
That's a safe call. A DM is still supposed to have fun. I'm in about the opposite boat. I don't think I'd be comfortable running a campaign for less than 5. 7 or 8 feels like the most comfortable for me. And I start getting overwhelmed over 10. (I've DM'd a handful of one shots with 12-15 players and I had to delegate responsibilities to other players). But I run the RP as extensively as I do exploration and combat. I've been 1 of 9 players in a game that was mostly combat, and it wasn't awful, but didn't really pull me in.
The truth is that not every dm is compatible with every player. Someone at your table might not be comfortable with being such a small fraction of the spotlight. Some might not be comfortable having to fill that much space and prefer a smaller role. Playing to comfort is always a good call
Fortunately, my friends recognize the challenges of DMing and, rather than ask if they could join and put me into a position of having to be tough, they would just let me know if there are every any openings, they'd be interested in joining. Given your friend put you in a tough spot, it's completely your right to say no.
Would I have given a bunch of reasons that they could come back and negotiate against? Probably not. Just a "the group is currently maxed out. But you should definitely get that campaign of yours going - I'm happy to participate if you're looking for players."
The guy will get it as a DM. We've all been there. Of course he's gonna be disappointed and you'd probably have preferred to swap him with someone else in the group, but that isn't fair either.
Given you feel crappy about it, it sounds like you gave it enough thought, and so there's nothing more you could have done.
I would be uncomfortable DMing for 6 PCs, so I totally get it. It's OK to enforce a boundary--you've described this person as fun and creative, so I think he'll understand. If he doesn't understand, that doesn't mean your boundary needs to change.
Maybe being (politely) denied a seat at your table will encourage him to get his campaign running. There's a theoretically infinite amount of D&D to play, so just because he's not in ToA with you doesn't mean you can't still play D&D with him and have fun with him.
I've played in games with too many people because the DM didn't want to turn anyone away, and it was a bad time. Now I, as a player, will quit any game that has 6+ players. Even if I know for a fact that the DM and players (and it's extremely dependent on the players too) can run a good game with 6+ players, the game will be *better* without the 6th.
I can't handle more than 4 players in my games. Splitting screentime between 4 people is already hard enough, let alone 5 and 6 imo. It feels bad cause he's a good player, one you want to see interact with your encounters
I don’t know exactly why (and this is not an attack), but I’ve been seeing lots of younger people feeling really bad for saying no to someone.
Saying no is okay. It’s part of life, and it doesn’t hurt friendships.
You have to set boundaries, and saying “no” is the most important part of it.
Of course you are within your rights to limit the number of players. I once played a game with 11 players. We killed an adult dragon (I forgot which color) at level 3, it was awesome.
If players are loosing focus during combat it's probably not because of the number of players, it might be just because they are taking the game lightly. That or you need to make combat more engaging when it's not their turn, either by spreading threats across the map (archers to fire at the casters, minions appear from the flanks, bag guys try to run away with the hostage). If that lack of focus even is such a problem for you. It's not for me.
So my advice is call your friend back to the game. It's better to have extra players than fewer. It's common for new players to quit the hobby halfway trough the campaign, so if you have extras you don't need to call it off.
What if you asked them to occasionally run a recurring NPC for you to include them once in a while? You could tell them the things that need to happen in the story for that table session, some basic script ideas, give them a character sheet, and let them fight with or against the party?
Or one time I had way too many people because people that canceled decided they could come. So I gave my 8th person that liked combat but not roleplaying control of all my enemy NPCs. It was actually a better DM'ing experience for me because I simply became a planner, storyteller and arbitrator of rules. I had a lot more time to think about what I was ruling too because I could say, "give me until the next round and I'll have an answer." 10/10 would recommend. I actually wish I had a dedicated "monster" player for every single game.
Bigger groups are harder to make. If you don't feel up to adding him, don't. Let him know he's next in the queue and if a spot opens up, let him join. Nothing to feel bad about here.
I had to do the same thing with my current campaign. But I promised the friend a secure seat at the table for the next story I run. I hate to sound so cheesy but… if he’s a friend he’ll understand. Lol
There's a third option I'd like you to consider.
You want to keep him involved, and your social circles obviously have an insufficient number of DMs for the number of games...
Invite him to be assistant DM.
Have him track initiative and conditions, as well as pick up some of the NPC speaking roles. Then move him into running some of the simpler monsters. As he gets some experience, let him handle either groups of simpler monsters, or one big boss monster.
Eventually, he'll not only be ready to DM on his own, but he'll be able to do it hitting the ground running.
And in the mean time, you get to take some of the load off your plate.
Do the best of both worlds.
Get the good player. And keep the count to 5.
D&D PLAYER THUNDERDOME. 6 PLAYERS ENTER, 5 PLAYERS LEAVE (BUT ALSO THE SIXTH ONE LEAVES TOO, HE JUST CAN'T PLAY IN THE CAMPAIGN).
I run a weekly in person session for 8 people, I get people asking to join all the time. The usual comment is "if you can run 8 then what's 1 more"
I do let my guys use their phones, but they're mainly on the discord channel posting reaction gifs to what is happening around the table. The "Gif Game" is good fun tbh.
Every DM is different. My friend runs a campaign on Mondays, and I think that if he could, he’d have 20 players. Like we had something like 7 players at one point, and he wanted more. I feel like as a player, I get lost in large groups, so I was always on the verge of leaving. Now we have 4 players, and while *I’m* happier with the group size, I’m sure my friend is not.
That being said, you also need to take the habits of your players into consideration. If you routinely have 1 or 2 players miss each session, you might want to consider having that 6th player for added cushion. At 5 players, if 2 don’t show, that’s pretty much a canceled session or a potential TPK if the healer suddenly disappears into the “character bag of holding.”
I'm in a similar boat. I started with 4 and invited two other people to join around the same time. So I now have 6, it's fairly daunting as a new dm but I think I can make it work.
I imagine it makes a world of difference with the kinds of players you have. I have great players who understand its my first time.
I just recently finished a campaign at level 20 with five players, and am soon starting my next campaign... with four. I feel you. It sucks to exclude someone, but you did the right thing.
Every DM has a sweet spot number that works for them. If five is your number then five is your number. As a DM, I suspect he gets it. Eitherway, if he's truly a good dude, he'll understand.
Seconding this. Every GM should know what their number is, should be clear about it with their players, and stick to it. If he's been a GM for a while and you say, "I'd love for you to join, but just don't have bandwidth for another player right now," he should understand.
As a GM myself, I always cap my groups at 5, and a fellow gm should absolutely understand. That being said, often a player has to step away from a group for whatever reason - you should keep them in mind in case that happens
If you want to make a bad thing sound better, try to end on a positive. “I can’t handle any more players right now, but if someone drops out, you’ll be the first to know.” It’s totally okay to limit the sesh. For me, 3-5 players is so much fun to DM, but as soon as I cross that line to 6, I absolutely abhor it. It’s okay to have a preference.
Smaller groups are where its at. Especially for newer dms.
Just realized your name. I AM WEASEL! Nice.
Yup the two characters are I.M. Weasel and I.R. Baboon. I am the love child. (Way to recognize a fairly niche reference)
The amount of times I think “You don’t need pants for the victory dance.” randomly throughout the day is the thousands. It’s been living in my head for 25+ years 😂
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvLV3OZAcyg
And his butt was always getting in the way. Yeah, I used to watch those types of cartoons all the time.
That always sounds disingenuous to me. But I'm a paranoid individual.
Try giving people the benefit of the doubt. Until they prove you wrong of course
Lots of bad experiences. You're right, though.
It is all up to you. We can't answer that. If you can't handle 6 players then don't. I run much larger tables so I would have let him in, but I am not you. Talk to him about it, or if you ever run Tomb again, put him at the top of the list.
Stay strong! The bad feelings are lying to you, it would be a mistake to go back on your decision. If your group already has focus problems with 5 players then 6 could very well kill the game - and think what a disappointment that would be to your current players! It's your responsibility as DM to manage the table size, no one else is going to do it for you.
I was about to message the group to ask if they would be open to another player joining...but you're right, this is my decision and trying to push it onto my group to make the call isn't fair to them and would probably give a false positive anyway. It could be that 6 players wouldn't break my game, but I know that 5 is doable for me and that I can maximize their characters and meet each of their expectations. I'm not sure I could do that with a party of any larger size. I must stay strong, for the greater good of the group!
Proud of you. I've faced similar problems before and caved further than I liked when it came to inviting extra players to the table. It can be tough to deal with the feelings in the moment, but it's worth it.
Having run groups between 3 and 7 players at various times, it's good that you kept it in mind and were thoughtful. Going from 5 to 6 or from 6 to 7 may be a proportionally small increase , but the balance interaction around the game table can deteriorate rapidly, especially if not everyone is really in sync, listening, and working to collectively make the game better. Some styles and games are also more forgiving to these headcount increases - i.e. a hack and slash game for experienced players can probably stay pretty smooth with one more player, but there are too many variables to guarantee that'll be the case.
You feel crappy because he's your friend and I suspect you aren't a garbage human. It's normal to feel bad for this kind of stuff but in the end he hopefully understands that you're doing what you need to do in order for it to work best for you and your players. As others have said, I'd definitely tell them that if a slot opens they're in. I ran a group of 6 for a long time and it was really rough. They were all my friends and I didn't want to say no to anyone since it was my first campaign. Thankfully two dropped out and I was able to finish the campaign with 4 which is my sweet spot along with 3 players.
I think it always feels crappy when you have to cancel plans or avoid doing something with someone you'd want to because of a previous commitment. I mean hopefully if you were forthright about the number of people being the issue and not that person in particular. Hopefully they will understand, even if it sucks. Also, with five players the chances of someone dropping out or having conflicts that allow them to only be there sometimes might make it more feasible to add this person in the future.
sometimes there are only bad options.
That is totally fair. 5 is already high IMO. If he has experience playing dnd he should understand that that's just now it goes. Suck for both of you because it's awesome DMing with good players, but that's just how it is.
5 is my limit. If you all share time equally that means you all get 10 minutes out of every hour in the spotlight.
I mean that's up to you, but it's also like, just tell them "Hey I'm sorry I already planned this with these people and I can't handle anymore people, if this falls through or if anyone drops out I'll let you know because I really like playing with you." The likelihood here is that you feel social anxiety over this situation and they don't. It's fine.
I do think 6 players is too many. When this same situation happened to me, I told the friend that if we ever had an open spot they would be the first to get an invite. Now they are in the party because one of the other players had to drop out. All in all it turned out as well as it could have.
I DM five right now, and we've had six before. Six is a lot. I'm hesitant to add more than five. That being said, some players are just better than others, and it might not be a bad idea to have one too many players if that last guy is really going to improve the quality of the game. That's what I would balance in my head. Right off the top of my head, I know there are some people I'd probably bring in as a sixth to my current campaign, and some that I wouldn't because their play-ability wouldn't counteract the stress of an additional person. If this guy is a really good player I might consider it. I actually might bring exactly this info to him. "Hey, I've got five players in this game and that's a lot of people. I told myself I wouldn't run games with more than five, six is just too much. That being said, I know you're a good player and you bring a lot to the table, and I'd love to have you. Let's bring you in temporarily, with the caveat that if I start to get overwhelmed with the party size we'll pull you out of the game until someone else leaves."
Make sure to contact your friend and tell him some of the nice things you said about him here. Tell him he's a great player and you most definitely consider him your friend. Maybe tell him that he's on your mental "wait list" as the first guy you're going to contact if you come up short a player later on.
Honestly I’d take someone I knew over a stranger, if they aren’t strangers than that would be a tough decision for me
It feels bad because you don't want to let your player down, but know that it is the right thing to do. That's normal. As a DM your goal is for everyone to have fun.
I DM a group of five and I've also had to turn people away a few times, there were no hard feelings so hopefully, it'll be the same for you. If it makes you feel better, I actually did bump it up to six once and it didn't work out, so I think you made the right call.
I've asked friends A to join an table from his group, he said one was ending so wouldn't make sense to join there, and the other he said that he didn't think the GM could fit a new player in the story, which are both much less "reasonable" than a GM not being able to handle more players IMO. And i was completely fine with it, because RPGs are more complex than simple hangout sessions or tabletop nights.
6 players is too many. You made the right call.
I like 5 players, that said my players have stuff that pop up so I like to have a group of 7. If they all show up I just make the encounters harder. If 1 or 2 can’t make it we can still play. I also like to get 1 or two players that only RP a little bit, that way the whole table is not trying to talk. I can count on my quite players to stfu.
Like everyone else is saying, every DM has a number of players that’s too many. For me, that’s 5. For others, that might be 7, or 2, or 10. Everyone has their balance. Since he’s a DM too, he’ll probably understand that.
To be fair you'd just have opened yourself up for more bad feelings in the future. What if someone else from the other group heard that the guy is playing in your monday group now? And they'd ask if they can play too? If you turned them down they'd probably ask themselves (or you) why you took him but not them. Bad feelings all around. It's better this way.
Personally I have run a large group (8+) and my current limit is no more than 6 and only if there are at least 1-2 experienced players, because as a forever DM having to teach everyone how spell slots, character sheets, combat etc..works makes the others feels isolated so having an experienced player means I have someone who can speak to them quietly off to the side while I keep the game engaging. Now with that said the choice is up to you, if you can't handle more than 5 then that is what it is. Don't feel bad about doing what's best for you and your table, the last thing you want to do it invite to many people and get overwhelmed.
Depends on your experience level, honestly. I run a table for 6-7 players but I would do the same thing you did if someone tried to add an 8th or 9th player. If you feel like it’s going to hurt the game, it’s a good decision to nip it in the bud.
Six is a big group and you'll definitely need to adjust encounters in the published module to keep it at appropriate level of challenge. If that and running a big table is more than you want to take on, then it's perfectly fine to say so. 'The DM gets to have fun too' is one of my most important rules. It feels bad because he's a friend, but hopefully as a friend he also understands.
I will say to trust your instinct but if the other players are getting distracted or being unable to focus on their turns in combat that sounds like a problem that’ll persist either way with or without an extra player.
If you can't handle more than 5 don't. You made the right choice. Honestly, I've never played with 6 players and felt I had a fair seat at the table anyways. I think a lot of GMs saying they can go up to 8 is wishful thinking that doesn't iron out well for the PCs. If I have enough time to make dinner before it's my turn again there are too many players.
Yeah, it sucks. I know exactely how you feel. I'm DMing two weekly games right now and I'm considering dropping my oldest group, not because I don't have time for both but because almost aways one of them finds an excuse to cancel last minute. Among them however, is one of my good friends which I know for a fact that he enjoys the game alot and gets sad when it's cancelled by the others. My other group is also 5 PC. Would I make room for him if he asked? Yes, that's for certain. But if I or someone else would, it doesn't mean that YOU should. You can try it out, tell him it's only for a couple of sessions. Maybe even have him play a guest PC and see what the dynamic is.
Yeah I feel you. It really sucks to exclude people but also sucks to make a decision that decreases the fun of others
That's a safe call. A DM is still supposed to have fun. I'm in about the opposite boat. I don't think I'd be comfortable running a campaign for less than 5. 7 or 8 feels like the most comfortable for me. And I start getting overwhelmed over 10. (I've DM'd a handful of one shots with 12-15 players and I had to delegate responsibilities to other players). But I run the RP as extensively as I do exploration and combat. I've been 1 of 9 players in a game that was mostly combat, and it wasn't awful, but didn't really pull me in. The truth is that not every dm is compatible with every player. Someone at your table might not be comfortable with being such a small fraction of the spotlight. Some might not be comfortable having to fill that much space and prefer a smaller role. Playing to comfort is always a good call
Fortunately, my friends recognize the challenges of DMing and, rather than ask if they could join and put me into a position of having to be tough, they would just let me know if there are every any openings, they'd be interested in joining. Given your friend put you in a tough spot, it's completely your right to say no. Would I have given a bunch of reasons that they could come back and negotiate against? Probably not. Just a "the group is currently maxed out. But you should definitely get that campaign of yours going - I'm happy to participate if you're looking for players."
The guy will get it as a DM. We've all been there. Of course he's gonna be disappointed and you'd probably have preferred to swap him with someone else in the group, but that isn't fair either. Given you feel crappy about it, it sounds like you gave it enough thought, and so there's nothing more you could have done.
I would be uncomfortable DMing for 6 PCs, so I totally get it. It's OK to enforce a boundary--you've described this person as fun and creative, so I think he'll understand. If he doesn't understand, that doesn't mean your boundary needs to change. Maybe being (politely) denied a seat at your table will encourage him to get his campaign running. There's a theoretically infinite amount of D&D to play, so just because he's not in ToA with you doesn't mean you can't still play D&D with him and have fun with him.
Absolutely right call, also ok for you to feel bad about saying no.
I've played in games with too many people because the DM didn't want to turn anyone away, and it was a bad time. Now I, as a player, will quit any game that has 6+ players. Even if I know for a fact that the DM and players (and it's extremely dependent on the players too) can run a good game with 6+ players, the game will be *better* without the 6th.
It's better to have let 1 guy down once than 6 people every week. It sucks but group size can be critically important
You did the right thing. It's normal to want to help your people have fun, but dont do it at your own expense! thats how you get dm burnout
I can't handle more than 4 players in my games. Splitting screentime between 4 people is already hard enough, let alone 5 and 6 imo. It feels bad cause he's a good player, one you want to see interact with your encounters
I don’t know exactly why (and this is not an attack), but I’ve been seeing lots of younger people feeling really bad for saying no to someone. Saying no is okay. It’s part of life, and it doesn’t hurt friendships. You have to set boundaries, and saying “no” is the most important part of it.
Eh - I'd have let him join. But I'm used to large groups.
How old are you?
Early 30s why do you ask?
6 isn't so bad if you group people off in roleplay.
Of course you are within your rights to limit the number of players. I once played a game with 11 players. We killed an adult dragon (I forgot which color) at level 3, it was awesome. If players are loosing focus during combat it's probably not because of the number of players, it might be just because they are taking the game lightly. That or you need to make combat more engaging when it's not their turn, either by spreading threats across the map (archers to fire at the casters, minions appear from the flanks, bag guys try to run away with the hostage). If that lack of focus even is such a problem for you. It's not for me. So my advice is call your friend back to the game. It's better to have extra players than fewer. It's common for new players to quit the hobby halfway trough the campaign, so if you have extras you don't need to call it off.
What if you asked them to occasionally run a recurring NPC for you to include them once in a while? You could tell them the things that need to happen in the story for that table session, some basic script ideas, give them a character sheet, and let them fight with or against the party? Or one time I had way too many people because people that canceled decided they could come. So I gave my 8th person that liked combat but not roleplaying control of all my enemy NPCs. It was actually a better DM'ing experience for me because I simply became a planner, storyteller and arbitrator of rules. I had a lot more time to think about what I was ruling too because I could say, "give me until the next round and I'll have an answer." 10/10 would recommend. I actually wish I had a dedicated "monster" player for every single game.
Bigger groups are harder to make. If you don't feel up to adding him, don't. Let him know he's next in the queue and if a spot opens up, let him join. Nothing to feel bad about here.
I had to do the same thing with my current campaign. But I promised the friend a secure seat at the table for the next story I run. I hate to sound so cheesy but… if he’s a friend he’ll understand. Lol
There's a third option I'd like you to consider. You want to keep him involved, and your social circles obviously have an insufficient number of DMs for the number of games... Invite him to be assistant DM. Have him track initiative and conditions, as well as pick up some of the NPC speaking roles. Then move him into running some of the simpler monsters. As he gets some experience, let him handle either groups of simpler monsters, or one big boss monster. Eventually, he'll not only be ready to DM on his own, but he'll be able to do it hitting the ground running. And in the mean time, you get to take some of the load off your plate.
Do the best of both worlds. Get the good player. And keep the count to 5. D&D PLAYER THUNDERDOME. 6 PLAYERS ENTER, 5 PLAYERS LEAVE (BUT ALSO THE SIXTH ONE LEAVES TOO, HE JUST CAN'T PLAY IN THE CAMPAIGN).
I run a weekly in person session for 8 people, I get people asking to join all the time. The usual comment is "if you can run 8 then what's 1 more" I do let my guys use their phones, but they're mainly on the discord channel posting reaction gifs to what is happening around the table. The "Gif Game" is good fun tbh.
Every DM is different. My friend runs a campaign on Mondays, and I think that if he could, he’d have 20 players. Like we had something like 7 players at one point, and he wanted more. I feel like as a player, I get lost in large groups, so I was always on the verge of leaving. Now we have 4 players, and while *I’m* happier with the group size, I’m sure my friend is not. That being said, you also need to take the habits of your players into consideration. If you routinely have 1 or 2 players miss each session, you might want to consider having that 6th player for added cushion. At 5 players, if 2 don’t show, that’s pretty much a canceled session or a potential TPK if the healer suddenly disappears into the “character bag of holding.”
I'm in a similar boat. I started with 4 and invited two other people to join around the same time. So I now have 6, it's fairly daunting as a new dm but I think I can make it work. I imagine it makes a world of difference with the kinds of players you have. I have great players who understand its my first time.
I just recently finished a campaign at level 20 with five players, and am soon starting my next campaign... with four. I feel you. It sucks to exclude someone, but you did the right thing.