'So, er, you're sitting in the Cowardly Centaur, and you look up, and there's this wizard, and there's a thief at another table, and you become a party, and go adventuring.'

Painful, isn't it? Too often this kind of thing is necessary; a forced meeting of characters who for no readily apparent reason decide to travel around and risk their lives together. Adam Taylor offers a few alternatives to the above, and discusses the whole idea of an adventuring party (group, cabal, coterie, call it what you will).

First thinss flrst - why the party thing? To some the answer is obvious, but I'm sure we've all met players who just don't get it. The concept of an adventuring group occurs because most role- playing involves several players and one referee. Referees cannot realistically divide their time between separate groups, and so the characters have to remain together most of the time.

The problems arise when one or more PCs are created who won't fit. Sometimes they're terminal loners with black facemasks and stealth abilities, sometimes they worship a god who advocates sacrificing one of their friends every Thursday. The creation of deep, interesting and quirky characters is to be encouraged whenever possible, of course, but players who insist on playing rabid misogynists or man-hating amazons in mixed-sex parties should be quietly taken aside. Sharp bits of wood may be useful in these circumstances.

Other options include play-by-mail, dividing the party into smaller and more compatible groups, and employing more refs. Each has its attendant problems, however, which are why we usually end up with the'all-for-one' situation as it stands. Of course, it can be useful to temporarily split a party when in a relatively safe locale, especially for information gathering, but usually it's not a good idea.

This is why 'Don't Split The Party' is even more famous then 'Don't Fire Into Melee'. Multiple referees are required, or else an elegant method of time-sharing the one referee you've got. Players who feel they're being ignored may get bored, or (even worse) eat all the Sour Cream and Onion Pringles while everyone else is concentrating.

Rationale

This covers the out of game reasons why parties exist, but does nothing for in-game rationale - why does this odd set of people hang around together? Answers are easier to come by in some games than in others. AD&D characters are mutually dependent, in that a wizard can do things that a warrior can't, and vice versa. White Wolf vampires are far less specialised, and need damn good reasons to associate with each other. In Mage the PCs share a common enemy, and moreover can usefully Countermagic for their allies in need. Call of Cthulhu groups need a good spread of skills to cope with their investigations. Superheroes naturally seem to form teams, probably because having other people around in skin-tight spandex helps one to feel confident in one's own outfit.

It really all comes down to the amount of power an individual character has, and how dependent they are on each other. Most diffficult of all is Amber, in which everyone's a near-god and has little reason to trust anyone else. Amber seems to be a PBM game masquerading as a tabletop RPG.

The best parties are those designed by the players to fit together - it's not necessary that they get on swimmingly, but it's nice if they argue in an interesting fashion, bearing in mind the adage that no character conception survives contact with other PCs. A group created in a more piecemeal fashion, without players consulting each other, will inevitably have a higher rate of dropout and replacement until the correct mix of characters is found.

A little discipline is necessary here. Putting a strictly loyal ex-Imperial Space Marine in a group with a wild-eyed member of the Rebellion is asking for trouble. It is rare to find a player who is happy to have a character killed by another PC rather than by the referee's creations.

It is perfectly possible to play evil parties without having characters murder one another. Iust because PCs are bad guys, they shouldn't automatically be thinking of ways of planting knives in each other. They can still be allies, or even genuine friends. To portray them otherwise is poor roleplaying - villains are just as 3D as good guys, and being honourable is not solely a hero's trait.

Leadership

Generally the group is lead and/or motivated by the most idealistic or strongly aligned member - the priest, the paladin, or similar personage. A party built to work with and around a central character can be surprisingly satisfying. For class-based systems, this brings up the rarely-used idea of single-class parties, such as an AD&D party made up entirely of thieves. The group will usually be smaller but easier to motivate for the ref. There may be some problems if skills are duplicated between characters, and it will be best if each specialises in a different area, much as do mixed-class parties.

Something for the referee to think about is party size. Different game systems have different minimum and maximum party sizes for efficiency. Groups with too few characters may find that they are missing vital talents. Far more serious is the situation of too many characters, when players may feel left out simply because they can't get a word in.

The ideal party size is a matter of choice and comfort, and is often dependent on the complexity of the system - anyone who has tried to referee a Champions punch-up with more than three or four players will know what I mean - but the game background can have just as important a say on the size of a group. Call of Cthulhu parties are often small - once a good set of talents has been assembled, extra characters are just so much tentacle-fodder. Torg has a complex system, but parties often benefit from a good mix of different outlooks and power-bases. Someone should be able to throw spells, another use miracles, a few gunmen, a stealthmeister, perhaps a psionicist, etc.

Finding Companions

So how do these misfits find their companions? Suggestions include the family party, in which everyone is related. perhaps brought together by an inheritance or will. What of the band party (shades of Spinal Tap) - the dull bass player, the egotistical lead singer, and of course the crazy drummer? Other external agencies that the PCs could belong to include guilds, merchan caravans, companies, and of course Secret Organisations. An excellent idea that I came across at a past GenCon involved RNA pills that were sent to unknowing 'sleeper' agents.

When taken these stimulated suppressed memories of spy training -- instant 007, just add water! Groups based around single religion can be very interesting. As well as the obvious priests and holy warriors, devout wizards and thieves are just as possible. Stealing from unbelievers isn't a sin! In extreme circumstances, this kind of party can be engaged in a crusade to wipe out enemies of the faith.

Perhaps the characters are a military unit, allowing for priests, soldiers, camp followers, advisors, 'scouts' end the rest. The conflict may have just ended, leaving a set of people who met at the siege of Ironhill Castle adrih together. This was an acknowledged problem in the medieval era, when hastily assembled troop levies were leh to their own dubious devices once th war had finished.

Call of Cthulhu investigators may well meet each other for the first time as inmates in their local loony-bin, or share a horrible curse because they each visited the Forbidden Tomb Of Nephren-Hotep in the past.

Or characters may have a long-term mutual enemy - the PCs each realise that they're not the only person to have been cheated out of their last credit by the Microshah corporation.

The most elegant way of constructing a group is to have them linked together in lots of different ways - the reporter's sister was kidnapped by aliens, and her ex-husband is a cop out for revenge on them, while the conspiracy-theorist saw them land and the government agent is trying to prove they don't exist.

Reasons

However, PCs thrown together by circumstance for the first adventure need good reasons to carry on together afterwards - otherwise they may well go their separate ways again. The same applies to groups ordered to stick around by higher powers - they may resent the imposition so much that they separate through sheer bloody-mindedness (something which most PCs possess in abundance).

A word or two should be said about 'troupe-style' play, as put forward by Ars Magical This system suggests a pool of characters based around a central set of mages, so that on a given adventure one of the wizards is played while the other players take on the roles of companions, warriors and apprentices.

The next occasion would involve another mage. This works admirably, given players good enough to take on different roles from adventure to adventure, and does away with many of the traditional problems mentioned above. It is dependent, however, on a worthwhile system for downtime, in that mages can profitably experiment and advance while not adventuring. Ars Magica has such a system; few other games do. Perhaps Amber might benefit from something similar?

Once a party has been put together and has survived an adventure or two without lasering itself into oblivion, the future beckons. Having faced dangers and saved each other's lives a few times, characters should grow to know, if not necessarily trust each other.

After all, the average PC lives through more excitement and danger day-to-day than anyone in real life, and they will naturally develop a bond with the people who experience it with them. 'Mucho Grande. We'll never get over Mucho Grande.'

Ideally the PCs will become friends happy to drink together in the Starport bar between jobs, not just people who see each other 'et work'. This provides much more scope for sub-plots and PC-oriented missions and adventures.

Entire adventures have been created by drunken characters plotting to marry off the group's paladin without telling her. A party with its own atmosphere and its own dynamism is a joy to behold, and a damn sight easier to referee, as well.