What is your "COOL!" party size?

[Jarno Mikkola]

Well, in a game like Baldur's Gate etc. 6+ would be COOL, as I played ToEE with 8 chars, and still lacked the thief abilities, a little, so I cheated them for my ranger. But if the game doesn't have much options for classes etc. ala KotORs, 1 to 4 is enough, but I don't really know of the NWN...

So it really depends on the game and the rules that are played with.

[jester]

3 Which gives me all the classes I need and all the romance, quabbling and micromanaging I need. Having said that I always enjoyed soloing the most. Nothing shouts adventure at me like being outnumbered and barely making it, I soloed BG2 as a Ranger/Cleric and a Thief/Mage and it was a hell of a ride.

[Eleima]

If I could have 8 in my party, it would be perfect.

Edit: assuming, like Jastey says, they are controlable by the PC. Otherwise, it would be like supervising a class trip of sixteen year olds.

What Berelinde said!

For me, it's the more the merrier! If I could've played BG2 bringing along every single PC who was of my alignment (ie, all good parties with some neutrals), I would have!

[CoM_Solaufein]

Probably 8 or more. In BG1 it would have been nice to be able to have more than a total of 6 since there are a lot more NPCs than in BG2.

[Fyorl]

Well with GemRB, it'll be possible to mod the game so you can have as many NPCs as you want. I'm not sure how it'd be balanced though. Either your party will be obscenely powerful or the XP-splitting will mean you're pathetically low-level and a single Emotion spell renders your entire party unconscious.

[BigRob]

Depends a little on the game. For me, about 6 (NPCs) is a good number, it lets you have relatively few banters available and make it seem like there's a lot going on. I think as long as not many personal quests (if there are any) are timed, then larger numbers of NPCs aren't too much of a problem.

 

 

The other proiviso though, is that I'e found a large party in NWN2 does tend to get weaker members killed during battles, especially at high levels. For some reason, I find that mages explode on the first attack after their defences wear down.

[Edwyn]

Every since I played Ultima IV, I've always preferred 8. More Tactical battles & more Party interaction. Of course, realistically it would depend on the Game engine being used. But 6+ is my vote.

[ericp07]

Depends on the game and the rules set, for me. I'd love nothing better than a D&D 3.5e CRPG, in which case I'd stick to the recommended party size of four. With BGII, though, I've found myself wishing (mostly because of all the wonderful joinable NPC mods out there!) that I could have a party of eight, as was the old AD&D maximum recommended party size. There comes a point, though, at which you have an army at your command, and that's too much for me to handle *L* As for soloing, I don't see how I could ever survive doing that, but I'm sure curiosity will one day get the better of me, and I'll try it.

 

Happy gaming,

Eric

[Elfen Lied]

If I could have 8 in my party, it would be perfect.

 

There is enough room in the side panel in BGII for 8 portraits.

 

I've always thought, man it would be cool to have 8 people, I could try out some new classes/combinations faster. 8 at a time instead of 6 at a time.

 

 

 

But 6 works just as good, so long as they aren't complete muppets.

[Fyorl]

There is enough room in the side panel in BGII for 8 portraits.

 

Only if you're playing in 800x600 resolution =P

[Elfen Lied]

I've never played on the smaller size, so I didn't know that.

[ericp07]

Perhaps it depends less on the screen resolution, and more on the size of one's display, whether or not there's room for more than six along the right side of the screen. I play in 1024x768--the only workable setting for me--and, on my 20" display, there's more than enough room along the right side for two more characters in the party. This is with the game in full-screen mode (I'd never play in a window).

 

- E

[Jarno Mikkola]

Perhaps it depends less on the screen resolution...

It's resolution dipendent, as the character portrait is the determing fact. With Baldur's Gates with large resolution, if you hadn't noticed.

[Fyorl]

Perhaps it depends less on the screen resolution, and more on the size of one's display, whether or not there's room for more than six along the right side of the screen. I play in 1024x768--the only workable setting for me--and, on my 20" display, there's more than enough room along the right side for two more characters in the party. This is with the game in full-screen mode (I'd never play in a window).

 

Uh... your display may be 1024x768 but BGII only has settings for 640x480 and 800x600. What actually happens when you play fullscreen is your display gets turned to the appropriate resolution and then back again when you quite.

 

You'll see what I mean if you set BGII to 800x600 and windowed mode. Then it will be in 1024x768 resolution but the area it occupies on your screen will be 800x600 pixels.

[ericp07]

Perhaps it depends less on the screen resolution, and more on the size of one's display, whether or not there's room for more than six along the right side of the screen. I play in 1024x768--the only workable setting for me--and, on my 20" display, there's more than enough room along the right side for two more characters in the party. This is with the game in full-screen mode (I'd never play in a window).

 

Uh... your display may be 1024x768 but BGII only has settings for 640x480 and 800x600. What actually happens when you play fullscreen is your display gets turned to the appropriate resolution and then back again when you quite.

 

You'll see what I mean if you set BGII to 800x600 and windowed mode. Then it will be in 1024x768 resolution but the area it occupies on your screen will be 800x600 pixels.

 

Not so! With unsupported modes unlocked, I can go higher than 800x600. I've viewed the game in all avaliable resolutions up to 1600x1200, and I get the same screen real estate in the game as I do at the desktop. There is more to see on-screen with the higher resolutions, but everything is smaller than at lower resolutions. That's why I go with 1024x768, as I can see more of what's around the center point of the viewable area, but things aren't too small to see.

 

Just wish I had an even bigger display...and here I was thinking that 20" was pretty darned large *L*

 

- E