>solo game (not challenge autists who solo a party game, but real solo games)
>3 party team
>4 party team
>6 party team
What is your preference? I can tolerate 4 party teams but I find it lamentable that the 6 party team is dead and 3 is becoming more normalized.

8

>>3797477 (OP)
However many result in each character mattering and having a distinct role. Usually this is 3-4.

>>3797477 (OP)
>original BG2, not EE
based
It's six-man squads for me. Four is okay, but I like to have the freedom to experiment a bit after I've covered my Fighter/Healer/Mage/Rogue bases. The whole point of party building systems in games is to let you build a party, and having a small roster kind of defeats the purpose.
Plus, it's nice when games let you create a smaller-than-max party and get more
experience per member. Icewind Dale + Heart of the Winter was fun with a four-man squad. When I tried that in Icewind Dale 2, the stupidly implemented challenge rating system made it so current (and difficult) enemies weren't giving me any experience at all. That sucked. Fuck J.E. Sawyer, I'm 100% sure that was the result of his misery autism.

>>3797477 (OP)
5 party members is my favourite setup, but I like games with large parties in general. It makes it less likely to be over when you lose someone.

>>3797481
8 is bloated and soulless.

>>3797477 (OP)
underrail is my favorite, and its a solo
but
I like 6 (and even 7 with wasteland 2) person crews as well
four is fine

>>3797477 (OP)
Solo a party game > Unlimited party or limit based on stats, not hardcoded > anything else.

>>3797477 (OP)
i was solo fag for most of my life and couldnt stand other rpgs, eventually got into bg1/2 and at this point i prefer party based crpgs, going solo like in Underrail feels limiting and not as fun anymore.

>>3797727
nah, that's you.

>>3797477 (OP)
>What is your preference?
I prefer to play good games instead

>>3797477 (OP)
I like it to be precisely one less than what would result in a well-balanced party, so it always feels like something is missing.

>>3797477 (OP)
One CHAmaxxed gigachad male fighter and as many hot female NPCs as possible.

>>3797477 (OP)
I don't play wrpg slop

>>3797869
why do u post on /vrpg/ you braindead mongoloid

>>3797477 (OP)
I prefer parties of around 5 members.
Are there games with huge parties of 10 or more members?

i prefered 4 for the infinity engine games, 6 felt bloated having to move through tight dungeons and there always be one ass whole just soaking exp for little in return

i always went max 8 in wizardry

kenshi and rimworld i tended towards large groups but could be happy with small tight ones

bioware for a long time had these four man groups despite all these spam companions and mobs, but four man was more natural in larian games. i defintely feel the party size and amount of enemies should be in harmony, and not just reduced to be more 'cinematic'

also prefered 4 in poe, i just dont think support characters were worth the reduced exp

>>3797477 (OP)
Me and one other person to watch my back and not get in the way.

>>3797477 (OP)
I guess it depends on the game.
>1 character.
I like it if the game is designed around it, like Dragon Quest being all 1-on-1 battles or being able to use traps, sneaking and other resources like UnderRail. Forcing myself to solo it like in The 7th Saga feels excessive.
>2 Characters.
Works well for me.
>3 Characters.
Probably my favorite way to make parties. I blame Breath of Fire games for this even though I prefer 'just' 3 characters, not going into battle with 3 that you shuffle from a pool, although that is also interesting.
>4 Characters.
The traditional way is okay for me.
>5 and more.
Too bloated, but I get it if you play something like Romancing Saga 2 where you encounter enemy groups of 6 critters and 4 of them have a bullshit instakill move.

My preference is custom 6-man. I will run solos, duos and trios to give myself a break from the micromanagement.

>>3797477 (OP)
8, but obviously it depends on the sub-genre and mechanics.

solo
i fucking hate micromanaging multiple characters since it detracts from my immersion and makes the companions feel like particularly willful puppets
independent-ish companions like in neverwinter nights was nice, even if their ai left much to be desired
it hurts how most of the best rpgs around tend to be party-based

>>3800759
>it hurts how most of the best rpgs around tend to be party-based
You are the problem. I hope you know that.

4 is enough for turn based. If you want more then you probably wanna play RTWP to avoid tedium

>>3800898
Tactics games like FE make it work just fine.

I loved the 6 party system in the Infinity games. It really felt like you were going on an adventure. Any less than 5 & it was less epic. This is probably why Divinity:OS fell flat for me. Any more than 6 members was too much for combat & you didn't have to carefully choose your party because all your bases were covered (Ultima, Wizardry, etc.) 5 felt good in MMOs.

>>3800913
Tbf, all four hobbits = one unit, so it's still a party of 6.

>>3800915
>equating Samwise to the other tardbits
disrespectful cope, to be honest

If it's a standard RPG like DOS:2, I prefer 4.
If it's a tactical game with guns like Jagged Alliance or XCOM, then 4 is too few and 6-8 is good.

>>3801057
Thank you for your honesty. May dem rangs be with u.

>>3797477 (OP)
More

>>3797481
Came here for thst.
>>3797727
It really isn't. If you can menu heal and sleep 8 hours to recover cancer, than sure, 4 are the optimum. If you only have 8 and the resources are rare, who says you will fight with all 8 in the party all the time?

The ones that suck the most are ones that restrict you to 3 party members. It never feels enough. Solo is fine.

>>3797477 (OP)
even in icewind dale and wasteland 2, I preferred having just four people
but in baldurs gate 2 I always have six (I think because quest exp doesnt get divided and the game is mostly quest exp, also more characters = more interactions, and theres so many damn items to use)

underrail is my favorite game, though I often wish it had co-op campaigns

I think games where you're limited to 3 people is a dumb idea.

>>3797477 (OP)
I just play as a solo fighter/mage/thief with all 25 god stats.

>>3808918
Childhood is doing this
Adulthood is playing a four man custom fighter/cleric/thief/wizard party, with modest all 18 stats

>>3808955
meh.
never grew up.
just a big kid with cheat engine ;)

>>3808955
>a four man custom fighter/cleric/thief/wizard party, with modest all 18 stats
that was my childhood btw

>>3808955
>a four man custom fighter/cleric/thief/wizard party, with modest all 18 stats
that was my childhood btw

>>3797477 (OP)
Depends on what roles are in play, but four usually fits cleanly
I did enjoy Underrail a lot

>>3797477 (OP)
Neverwinter Nights is pretty much solo made, you can add helpers but i always ignored them unless they were essential for a quest

>>3797477 (OP)
I like different kinds of games, so it goes from Skyrim to Ogre Battle 64 where you can have 10 units with up to 5 members each