Amount of time in areas

Hard to know what your travel preferences are. They may not be the same as mine. I had three nights in Florence and that was enough for me (it is a good base for day trips; I day tripped to Siena too, which I loved). I am not a "museum buff" and didn't really fall in love with Florence; I have visited only once. I just got back from my fourth stay in Venice, which I think is amazing

I think your plan looks good. From Florence you can day trip to Siena (only 1 'n', the other is a car) and Lucca. From Venice you might want to add a day trip to Padova. From Rome, I like spending a day at Ostia Antica. Orvieto wouldn't be too far either. With the number of days you have in each city you might find restaurants or cafes that you really enjoy - and have the chance to go back.

As Andrew is pointing out it is pretty personal depending on what you like to see and do. Personally I would cut Venice to 3 nights and Florence to 4 with Rome for a week. BUT -- we have been in Rome for close to 30 days over the past 12,15 years and still haven't seen everything. Personally not the biggest fan of Venice so three days at one time is enough for me. But you need to decide what works for you.

Sienna’s also a color - wonder if you can get a Burnt Sienna Toyota Sienna minivan?

But anyway, cutting 1 or 2 days from Venice would allow more time for art-and-museum-and-historic-sight-rich Florence and/or Rome. And easy day trips (or part of a day) from Rome can include Ostia Antica or Hadrian’s Villa in Tivoli.

And this wouldn’t necessarily involve more bouncing around, as it’s right on the way between Florence and Venice, but especially if you’re a foodie, Bologna might be worth a stop overnight or at least for a good part of a day. All should be less crowded in October/November - have a jacket, so you’ll be comfortable if it’s cool, and enjoy!

Adding a day or two in Venice would give you scope to visit Vicenza - especially if you love Palladian architecture - and Verona - if Verona is a attractive, or Bologna, or Bassano del Grappa, or Soave, or any of the other many fabulous Veneto and other nearby locations.

I have had probably enough Florence - 3 days over 2 trips was plenty for me - but everybody is different.

Me, or anybody else here, just saying what our preferences are (I'd probably split the trip between Rome and Venice and the Veneto - I've done that many times) won't help you much because we don't know what motivates you. Right now you have a pizza cut in thirds. Do each of the slices attract you the same way?

Yes, there are plenty of easy day trips from Venice by train. In fact, I like getting out of Venice during the day when it gets so crowded. It's much more pleasant in the morning and at night - just magical and much more quiet.

In the past, I've day tripped out to Padua, Verona, and (recently) Vicenza - all really nice towns.

But there are plenty of day trip options from Florence, too.

Thank you all so much for taking the time to respond. I’ve found this forum very helpful. I know everyone has a different opinion/experience. I do love art, architecture, history, museums, a big foodie and also just wandering getting lost. Being my first time to Italy I’m sure I’ll fall in love with one area more than the other, but hard to know. Guess I just have to experience them, and go back.

Sabes we all love helping new travelers

It is always agonizing trying to decide what is 'best' when one has no idea of what your reaction will be to a place. Waaaay back when, I didn't think I would like Rome but I loved it. When I finally got to Venice, which I thought I would never want to leave, I was very luke warm about it. I think it had more to do with travel fatigue, rain, and (pre-wifi days) difficulty finding 'anything' practical - laundry, internet cafe, grocery store. We were also there 3 full days and still didn't get to the Accademia or the outer islands. I know next time to rent an apartment with wifi, a washer, and something close to a vaperetto stop....and a vapretto card. We didn't buy a card and even in 2002 it was 7euro a trip so we wore out our feet instead. I will do everything I can to be more comfortable and hope that la Serenissima captures me.
So, my advice is to do some research on day trips from each of these 3 cities and keep them in your back pocket in case you want a change of scenery or you aren't as enamoured as hoped.

I am also going to say put aside some money for a 'just in case' situation so that if you hate a place, you can afford to cut your losses and move on. Bologna is a mid stop that people suggest, but just a little further along is Fererra, a little gem that might be cheaper for last minute lodgings. Still on the main train line to Venice, and even handier for Vicenza, Padua, or Ravenna (for its famous Byzantine mosaics). I am not going to suggest these areas over your current plan, but that if things don't go well in Florence or Venice, they are easy day trips or alternate locations and if you do change, don't beat yourself up over your original plan. Travel is as much a learning experience as an entertainment.
Too often we get caught up in making the 'perfect' plans and are disappointed if it doesn't go to plan. No one likes to waste money, but if you accept needing to change enroute, you will be more likely to be glad you did than bummed because you spent the money. You will also be bummed longer if you didn't and 'endured' something you didn't like.

On my side, Venice is my favorite of the three cities. I see no reason to change your current plan.

I like your plan as is. You'll want more time at each.

I'm with you, I don't like bouncing around. We just spent 5 days in a small French village followed by 5 days in London (not counting travel). I'm coming to the conclusion that 5 days in one spot is the minimum.

I also suggest you set aside one day in each as a "down" day, where there's nothing on the agenda. You can slow down the pace and just see where the day leads. This often ends up leading to the most memorable adventures of the trip!

I would give Rome more time.

Florence with a day trip to Sienna is good, even Pisa would not be a bad idea.

5 nights in Venice is more than I would spend there. We've been to Venice several times, it is special, but you can see most everything in 3-4 days.

I've been to all three....six nights in Venice at one time...three would have been enough. I would add to either Florence or Rome. I'd go back to Florenece and Rome again and again, to Venice, not so much. But again...preferences.

I will suggest that you look at the tide tables for Venice for October and November as those are high-tide months and that could impact your enjoyment of the city.

Again thank you all for your responses, and not thinking I’m crazy for asking. I find it all very helpful. I think I’m going to stick with my original plan. An just keep a day trip or two in mind if I need a different scenery, especially for Venice. Am a bit nervous about the high-tide.

I've spent a total of 2 weeks in Venice, 6 weeks in Florence, and maybe 4 weeks in Rome (with only 3 half-day trips in the entire time), and would happily return to each for many weeks. I do know what people mean when they say such-and-such a place is only worth a few days, but I don't really understand it. Your list of what you like to do is just like mine, and all three places are superb for all that.

Here's what I would do if I were you. Make some kind of a realistic list or even a schedule of what exactly you want to see and do in each place --- maybe you'll find that you COULD take a day from one place and add it to another. I don't see any way to decide this in the abstract or based on what other people like or don't like. Make sure that you are staying in a neighborhood that you like in each place and in an apartment or B&B or hotel that you like --- nothing turns you off about a place as the wrong neighborhood for you or a bad night's sleep.

Likewise, how do you feel about crowds of tourists? You are going to Italy at an EXCELLENT time of year, but these three cities will still be very crowded at the sights that most people go to see. Not everywhere, just those main sights. If you only go to those sights, you will think Rome, Venice, and Florence are awful. So, you strategize.

People on this forum can help you do all this, once you have some specific ideas of what you want to do. My very first question on this forum was very specifically about riding the electric buses in Florence and I got great advice.

My thought about the 5 - 5 - 5 plan is that it is probably fine. Venice is the one that's the least likely you'll be able to easily return to (it's not a hub like Rome and Florence are, and it's way out to the northeast), and so 5 days there will mean you have really seen Venice pretty well. If you love it, you can return. If you saw and did what you really wanted to see and do, you can feel at peace about not returning.

5 nights in Venice is more than I would spend there. We've been to Venice several times, it is special, but you can see most everything in 3-4 days.

I am struck by what seems to be a contradiction.

Why the several trips if you can see everything in 3-4 days?

Care to add some clarifying comments?

Am a bit nervous about the high-tide.

Usually that isn't much trouble unless you are there for what are called "spring tides" where the water is already high and then a scirocco or storm blowing through makes it a bit more interesting.

Have you consulted tide tables to see if the time you will be there coincides with a particularly high tide? There's an app for that.

Venice is used to acqua alta and has alerts and special walkways for the occasion.

People on this thread (and most others in fact) talk about number of days you "need" to see things - "you can see everything in 3-4 days". I guess if you travel with the intent of visiting a list of specific museums, churches, palaces, etc. and the "in between time" is just incidental, then you can decide how long you need to "see" those things (and therefore, the city). For me, the "in between" IS the main reason I go, just to be there. Sure I want to visit museums, churches, etc. but the real reason I go, and the majority of my time, is spent just "being" there. Wandering around, poking into shops, stopping for coffee, sitting on a bench and absorbing the atmosphere. People who travel to the same city/country/region repeatedly are probably doing this. If this is the way you travel then you can't nail down exactly how many days you "need" in each place. You don't know what you don't know. So you don't know how you'll feel about a place till you've been there.

Based on this philosophy just keep the 5 days in each, but have lots of info about possible day trips. In fact, from these three very heavily touristed cities, day trips are a great idea as these cities are most pleasant when the people day tripping TO them (the tours, the cruisers) are gone - evenings and early mornings. So going to a less visited place mid day is a good thing.

I agree with Isabel. The very best travel memories and experiences for me have never been museums, or architecture, or history (although I love all those things). The best travel memories for me are moments like the time we sat in a cafe on the main square in Siena eating a pizza and watching the rest of the tourists frantically snapping pictures. Or finding the best Gelato store in Florence, or sitting in a train station in Taiwan late one night waiting for a train. The best travel memories for me are the little insignificant moments that come from just being there.

About your question, though, I think 5 nights in each place is fine. We've spent 9 days in Rome, and we spent 15 days in Florence. Personally, I really loved Florence. Rome was nice, too. We haven't been to Venice yet.

Thank you all so much this advice is all so empowering. Yes, thank you Isabel, Nancy, Marty as much as I’m excited for the museums and sites I’m so exciting to wander, get lost, sit at a cafe, people watching, just taking it all in. Can’t wait to create exciting memories whatever may come up in my travels. Thank you all!