Addressing Lucus's points:
1. I think we should trust in the GM.
2. Okay, but we've been given a choice. We may as well exercise our ability to choose - if he doesn't like the choice we make because it's too much work, he can very well railroad us into something else. I wouldn't begrudge him that.
3. I suppose BMM's statement about not underestimating him re: single/few person maps is a little concerning, given that everyone not in the map(s) might not have anything to post in IC for a while if true. Unless that's not what you mean.
I understand risk aversion, but I'm still sticking with what makes sense IC.
I'd like to address these too.
1. Thank you Gaterhyme. I will state however that maps with fewer people are going to be riskier, just because its going to increase the degree to which a couple unlucky rolls might affect you guys in a tight spot. I will of course endeavor to make them achievable, since there's no fun to be had in insta-gibbing you guys, but I feel like its a fair point to address.
2. Unless you guys try to, I don't know, be part of two maps running simultaneously (not that I can think of any reason that I would need to do that), I don't think there will be a problem for me in terms of effort.
3. If it comes to pass that I do need to do separate maps for two or god forbid three groups, I will do it and think nothing of it because it is within the nature of the choice I am giving to you guys. That would undoubtedly slow down the pace of the game for a bit, but I'm not particularly uncomfortable with that.