Party size

[HexMozart88]

I was wondering what people thought in regards to party sizes in games. Do you prefer smaller parties where you have a set job for each of your characters, or do you prefer larger parties where you can easily play around with the different members to make a good combination? I ask because I was planning on making a side project for when I run out of ideas for my current one. 

 

[Wavelength]

Are you talking active battle party, or the total cast of playable characters?


I think different numbers work well for different types of games.  The other mechanics are part of what determines the "ideal" size, but the story itself should be a big factor as well - does it offer reasons why you should have more playable characters?  A game can work well with as few as two party members if those members play off of each other well.  There are also games where it can be fun to have 10+ party members at a given time, as long as each feels like they offer something unique and useful to the player.

 

[Slimsy Platypus]

I think that it really depends on the goals of your game and how you're managing character development (stat growth, earning new skills, equipment, class changes, etc)  Consider the following:


Does your combat system allow for many playable characters to feel and play different?  (Is there skill overlap, skill resource the same, "strictly better" skills?)


Is there going to be a compelling reason for the player to swap characters?  (Story driven absence, strengths against certain types of enemies, etc)


Are you're characters thematically varied enough to instill favoritism? (i.e. do you have a bunch of generic humans in different color outfits or do u have different races, unique sprites, battle animations, etc? Are you giving the player fun varied visual styles to choose from?)


I think once you've answered those questions you have what you need to determine an appropriate party size and whether you want to have some on the bench.  There are games like Suikoden which have tons of characters to use, with design choices that help them feel unique (unique attacks when allied with specific others, strong thematic differences, formation requirements).  Then you have games like FF7 which provide little difference in combat potency between characters and encourage party swaps near completely on thematics.


A small party that is fun to customize can be just as fun as a massive party.  Just be sure that if you add additional characters that you aren't doing so just for the sake of adding them.  They all need to feel real, feel different from each other, have dialogue, motives, etc. If they don't, absent of heavy player driven character customization (think Final Fantasy Tactics), they are just going to all feel the same and there won't be anything fun about using different characters (meaning that you've wasted a time on that feature with poor returns in "game fun").


Hope that helps!  Good luck!

 

[Astfgl66]

Party size is a tough decision to make.


I'll focus one battle party size for now.


Like both above posters mentionned, the decision should stem from the way your game is designed.


TBS can use a battle party of 10, classic RPGs 3/4 maybe 5 and action RPGs almost always go with 1.


Ultimately, battle party size doesn't really matter. I've seen outstanding systems with almost any size ( 1 - zelda, 2 - child of light, 3/4/5 - Final fantasy or Etrian odyssey to name a few, more than that - final fantasy tactics). What matters is the mechanics. So, you should decide based on what your mechanics require.


I'm going to echo Slimsy Platypus now.


For exploration party size, there's a lot that can be done, and my personal opinion is that you should not limit yourself to only battle members. Maybe your sage/cleric is an old man that can't fight? Well, that's totally fine. As long as he brings meaningful discussion and has some use in story (deciphering books, unlocking magically sealed doors, healing, for some uninspired examples) he will be useful. Just don't add anyone to the party to forget about them instantly. (Aside from games such as final fantasy tactics with replaceable characters of course.)


This opens up a lot more things to do with party members, allows a larger list of temporary party members, and alleviates much of what they are usually disliked for (training them only to be lost forever after). And it can even lead to tragic moments when they are lost/killed/put on a bus, without screwing the player.

 

[HexMozart88]

I think that it really depends on the goals of your game and how you're managing character development (stat growth, earning new skills, equipment, class changes, etc)  Consider the following:


Does your combat system allow for many playable characters to feel and play different?  (Is there skill overlap, skill resource the same, "strictly better" skills?)


Is there going to be a compelling reason for the player to swap characters?  (Story driven absence, strengths against certain types of enemies, etc)

I'm thinking that my party is going to have ten members, maximum, because I want it to be where I have a small enough party for the player to follow the story, but a large enough party so that a player can pick their favourite characters to battle with. Because I honestly hate those stories that have so many characters it's hard to keep track of who each one is and their story. But having talked about the player picking a favourite, I sometimes will force them to use different characters for different tasks. In battle, I'll probably stick to four characters at a time so as not to have too many battlers on the field at once. 


Thank you guys! That was really helpful, and I will for sure start a thread in the Project Development forum once I make some progress.