Why does modern DnD games decrease the party member from 6 to 4?

[BattleCry]

like DAO and Bg3. I want to have 6

[cl656]

Swen said that the reason is because 4-man parties are easier to balance combat for.

[✙205🍉🐆→]

6+2 summons

Originally posted by cl656:

Swen said that the reason is because 4-man parties are easier to balance combat for.

This is true, but balance in RPGs is a fiction

[Lambi]

I don't know anything about DnD, so can't speak for that. But just from a gameplay perspective, I think that 6 party members would be a bit too much for many people. Even 4 can at times be overbearing. But of course like many others have stated, it's also in regards to balancing and everything. I'm sure modders will quickly find a way to implement it for anyone that's interested.

[Cruddy]

After playing both Pathfinder games with 6 party members it's way too ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ much, trash fights take up 300% more time than they should, leveling up and keeping track of all the abilities/spells is a headache, and if you have summons you end up with too much clutter, my Lich game I quit halfway through WoTR I had 11 entities in the party screen from items, class abilities and such.

4 is perfect.

Also getting 4 adults together is difficult enough for this game, let alone 6.

[Penitent Pilgrim]

I want 9 because of the Fellowship of the Ring.

[GrandMajora]

Originally posted by Cruddy horse:

trash fights take up 300% more time than they should,.

That's the drawback of using turn based mode, not from having a larger party.

If you have more allies to control, that means you can thin the enemy numbers faster, and thus resolve combat quicker. With feats like Cleave being in the game, even a martial class is able to function as an AoE in combat.

[Arakus]

4 is ok, when you have 6 then there must be more opponents in fight.
When all this opponents concentrate their attacks on a tank it could be difficult to get him alive.

Also when i remember my time in paper and pen roleplay we had mostly 4 players and one dungeon master, so 4 is realistic.

If you want more allies to control use a hunter or someone else who can call them.
(Maybe hire Minsc to your group, he has Boo the mighty Hamster)

[Slightly_Smaug]

5th edition is built around a four person party. This came from playtest data.

[Penitent Pilgrim]

Try playing Low Magic Age, it allows 6 characters. The game uses the 3.5e rules and has a retro look that reminds me of the old Gold Box games.

[Ashe]

I do wish they allowed more since, in EA, we only have origin characters and since Astarion is the mandatory rogue, unlessni fill that slot, I'm stuck with Shadowheart being my most competent lock picker since rogues are a Swiss army knife of the party.

It'll be nice in the full when hireables are a thing but party crafting can feel icky sometimes when considering having a rounded party on 4 members.

[EricHVela]

Ultima (1981-1994 or so)—for the majority where they allowed parties—had 4 characters. It was usually the player and a choice of 3 from several story-defined NPCs. It was turn-based. Though depending on the game, you'd have to go find the ones you dismissed if you wanted them back.

...but the tabletop games I watch typically have 5 and one has 4 though that one frequently has repeating guests for 5 total.

[Mosey]

Because a number needed to be chosen, and 4 looked both workable and convenient. Plus it had a pleasing shape.

If you're trying to read tea leaves on this one, best of luck but the best answer is probably 'because most successful team cooperative games have chosen 4, therefore we will choose 4.'

Which, really, is as good a reason as any other you care to pick out of your magic hat.

[Kyutaru]

It didn't really reduce anything role wise, it just consolidated classes into more than one-trick ponies. You still have all the same elements in a party as OG D&D had. It's just that in order to have all those elements in old D&D, you needed to heavily multi-class and run 6 party members. New D&D compacts so much into party roles that you no longer need the extra party members. Wizards aren't just spellcasters now, they can actually contribute damage with their crossbows and sticks while having a reasonable chance of hitting. They also have cantrips that let them contribute damage using their primary casting stat, unlike 2nd edition wizards who DID have to rely on their flimsy crossbows most of the time because spell slots were precious. Fighters used to have only one thing they could do on their turn and it was attack. Now they can do a wide assortment of actions as well as subclass into being wizard hybrids. Thieves actually contribute insane damage now and aren't just for their lockpicking skills. The party limits changed because the game has changed and you don't need to bring along hyperspecialized team members that are grossly incompetent outside of their narrow field of expertise.

[Demiurge]

The owlcats pathfinder games had 6 and I loved those games. The larian DOS 1 and 2 may have had only 4 but I used a mod to play with 6 and it was much better that way.

[soul like that be capable of]

with 6 you are always have perfect group . 1 fighter, 1 mage , 1 rouge , 1 healer , 1 paladin ,you get the point. you have easier time to make a group. with 4 you have to always think what the best .