Board Thread:Hosting Game/@comment-30105631-20161223222406/@comment-27398195-20161231152456

Addfire wrote: Because a bigger group is more difficult. A smaller group, like yours, that's... three stabs. With us it's four, and we have more liberty to take shifts as we have more people.

Once again, food is important, you need 2000-2500 calories a day to survive.

And if this is about intelligence... you weren't learning about punnet squares in fifth grade.

'''Did you have to create a 15,000 word story, draw a map of Italy's landforums and do a speech about it, A math assignment that would prepare you for life were you got "money" based on grades and you would have to pay rent every month? How about having to catch up on 1 and 1/2 months of missing assignments because you had to pack up the house? Yea, still managed all that because I am smart.'''

I'm young myself, only 13, but I pride myself on being intelligent.

Same here

Now about small groups v big groups, here's the lowdown: Small groups are better on the move. I've played a lot of D&D, and I can tell you that you want all your bases covered. You want a fighter, two different kinds of magic-users, a healer, a rougue, and either a paladin or a ranger.

'''I don't play D&D, but I assure you that smaller group is better for survival in a game where you can't trust others, mainly because I have a less chance of being killed alone because not many people will find me because I leave less tracks while moving and make less noise, which I think is smarter when trying to get away from a bear or wolf. And once again, food is important. I don't need to get as much food as 6 people.

In Humanity, our fighter is Ghost. The magic-users are the survivalist and me, the healer is Playful, and the Paladin is Basilio.

And then you get swarmed and die

I think that a larger group is better, here.

And I still say smaller