How to cope with only 2 players

[Digital M@]

A method that I have used: Change the theme of the game. It is much easier to run a game of intrigue and investigation with 2 players than to do a dungeon crawl. Encounters become a thing to avoid, sort of like the difference between Thief and Doom...

The Auld Grump

That is the greatest thing about small groups. You get to run a more intimate game and can have politics and the like play large parts. Contacts with in cities, joining a guild, working for important people and the like are much easier.

It would be tough to keep a 2 player version of the game going if the players and yourself love hack-n-slash. If that is the case, might I suggest not using level drain and special abilities that the characters lives will depend on a single saving throw. If one player is taken out early it would be difficult for the other to survive and or rescue his friend. Action dice could help with these situations as well.

 

[Romnipotent]

Think of it in a movie way. Instead of The A Team, you have Starsky and Hutch.

 

[Jupp]

How about the good old way of giving the players more than one character, NPCs or additional PCs, doesnt matter. That is, if they agree to that kind of gameplay. I had 3 players once in a group and the NPC/multiple PC method worked quite good. There were even times where the secondary PC (or NPCs) got more powerfull than the primary PC but that doesnt really matter I think.

 

[yennico]

How about the good old way of giving the players more than one character, NPCs or additional PCs, doesnt matter. That is, if they agree to that kind of gameplay. I had 3 players once in a group and the NPC/multiple PC method worked quite good. There were even times where the secondary PC (or NPCs) got more powerfull than the primary PC but that doesnt really matter I think.

If you give players more than one PC each PCs needs time to roleplay. If a player has two PCs at best both PCs are played 50% of the time. At worst one of the PCs is only used and not played because of the abilities this PC has.

 

[VirgilCaine]

increasing thier level just meant increasing the difficluty of encoutners or they get less xp
(

What? No, you increase their level to a point where the adventure is handleable but not easy. Like my 2nd level adventure run with two 4th level characters. Or a 4th or 5th level adventurer taking on a 1st level adventure solo.

 

[radferth]

Here are some suggestions if you try and go the multiple character route: If you are actually allowing 2+ PCs per player, either make sure the characters run by a single player are very close in game (siblings, childhood friends, spellcaster and bodyguard) to explain why they work so well together, or make them some sort of bitter rivals so they don't directly cooperate for the most part. If you beef up the group through NPCs, get the players to play the more complex characters, and have the NPC's be simple characters like fighters (or even warriors), paladins, unimaginative clerics. Have the players recordkeep the NPC and control the NPCs, but let them know you will veto them and have the NPC do something else if they take advantage of this. You could have both characters take the leadership feat at 6th level, or just give them a cohort as if they had that feat.

 

[hexgrid]

If you give players more than one PC each PCs needs time to roleplay. If a player has two PCs at best both PCs are played 50% of the time. At worst one of the PCs is only used and not played because of the abilities this PC has.

The way I deal with this is to have the "extra" characters basically be cohorts. They're less powerful than and subservient to the "main" pcs, and aren't expected to be central to the plot.

Sort of like the Three Musketeers, where each of the Musketeers has at least one loyal servant.

 

[Nareau]

I'll also agree that you should consider running a "different kind of game."

One thing that works really well for me as a DM is working the PC's deeply into the plots of my game. Hardly a single event occurs in the game that isn't tied directly to a PC, a PC's close relative, etc. This can be difficult in larger groups, as it means a lot of stuff has to be going on to keep all the characters involved. But in a small group like yours, you could easily have the whole campaign revolve around these two characters.

Spider

 

[Grazzt]

The way I deal with this is to have the "extra" characters basically be cohorts. They're less powerful than and subservient to the "main" pcs, and aren't expected to be central to the plot.

Sort of like the Three Musketeers, where each of the Musketeers has at least one loyal servant.

Or similar to 1E where you had (or could have) henchmen and hirelings.

 

[VirgilCaine]

Or similar to 1E where you had (or could have) henchmen and hirelings.

Rather that this was expected in 1e.