Best way to cope with less than 4 players?

[Stormborn]

We have never had more than 3 players, and now we are down to 2. I am currently dealing with it in a d20 M Pulp game, but when Ptolus comes out we are going to move into a more traditional fantasy campaign. Given CR and other level based assumptions of DnD, what is the best way to adjust to this situation:

1. Have a player or players run more than one PC (in my case 2 each)
2. Have each player make a gestalt PC
3. Have the GM run NPCs to make up for the party's lack
4. Adjust the adventures to compensate for fewer PCs.
5. Something else.

Of the above my group has done 1, 3, and 4. I don't really like 3 because with this group, when I am running a game, they tend to look to the NPC for direction/ideas. 4 is OK somethimes, but I always get suprised by what they can and can't handle so its not my ideal choice.

What would you do?

 

[francisca]

Really depends on the party, all of your answers can work under the right conditions.

In additions, being an old-school guy, I'm quite used to the idea of henchmen and hirelings a-plenty. It's a nice answer, as you let the players do most of the running of them, with die roll checks (or flat out DM fiat in some extreme cases) to determine how they behave under adverse conditions.

Most commonly in my 3e games, the players ran more than 1 PC each when needed.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

In additions, being an old-school guy, I'm quite used to the idea of henchmen and hirelings a-plenty. It's a nice answer, as you let the players do most of the running of them, with die roll checks (or flat out DM fiat in some extreme cases) to determine how they behave under adverse conditions.

That's what I do, too.

 

[Rika]

It really depends on the game, GM, and players.

We usually have NPCs fill gaps if they're needed. However my GM runs only his own stuff so he can fit the game to the PCs rather than the PCs fitting the game.

 

[Rothe]

With you on the downside of running the NPCs as a DM. The suggestion to use NPCs to fill the gap is a good one, but if the players object to running 2 PCs each they may also objest to having to handle the NPC. In a sense, if the players run the NPC then are they not just running a "waeker" PC they do not have complete control over? If the DM runs the NPCs we're back to the problems Sormborn mentioned.

Here's a somehting else. Instead of adjusting the encounters how about adjusting the gear and maybe upping the level a little of the PCs? Give them a few more healing potions, resurrection scrolls etc. so they have the number of hit points equal to 4 PCs. You may also want to up the weapons some so the damage they are dishing out is more on the 4 PC level.

I'd suggest 1 is the easiet most balanced solution with the least work on the DMs part solution if they will go for it and not abuse it.

 

[Aesthetic Monk]

In additions, being an old-school guy, I'm quite used to the idea of henchmen and hirelings a-plenty. It's a nice answer, as you let the players do most of the running of them, with die roll checks (or flat out DM fiat in some extreme cases) to determine how they behave under adverse conditions.

I would have added this, too.

I said Gestalt because while I'm not averse to running 2+ PCs, my enjoyment is higher when I can focus on one. For really tiny groups, though, gestalt's not going to help much because even though the characters are more powerful than standard, they don't get extra actions that would make up for more people.

 

[wedgeski]

Care and attention to difficulty rating at low levels, (maybe) free Leadership feat and cohorts at mid levels, and something else at high levels which I'll think of when it becomes a problem. I really don't like players operating more than one PC; more often than not, both characters suffer.

 

[diaglo]

make the adventure goals more bite sized.

 

[mmu1]

I just adjust the game to make it work with fewer players. I basically don't use CR anyway, so I don't care what the MM says an appropriate challenge is - I always customize encounters (and monsters) based on the party, even when it's full-size.

 

[sckeener]

I just adjust the game to make it work with fewer players. I basically don't use CR anyway, so I don't care what the MM says an appropriate challenge is - I always customize encounters (and monsters) based on the party, even when it's full-size.

I can agree with that...

when running a game of 8 players built with 34 points, a normal 4 party vs appropriate CR/ECL encounter get a bit squished. It becomes a fine dance to make sure they can handle the encounter without getting smushed....vs walk in the park.