Looking for opinions

[Taelorn76]

I was just wondering what others opinions are on Players having more than one character in a single campaign? I am wondering if there is any disadvantages to the players and or the characters?

One of our players decided not to play anymore, so I was thinking about letting the two remaining players roll up another character each. This is my first time DMing so I don't want to have to juggle a couple NPCs and my duties as DM.

 

[Crothian]

In more tactical oriented games I think it works well, but in more role playing oriented games that do lots of player to player interaction it doesn't work so well.

 

[Ourph]

All of my players have at least 3, if not more, player characters in my ongoing campaign. Most of the time, the PCs of a single player don't adventure together, but it does happen on occasion. I don't have a problem with it and don't think it is detrimental to the game. Our group is not especially focused on amateur theatrics or in-depth persona-building so it's not like the players are being asked to stretch themselves too thin.

OTOH, I usually prefer fleshing out the party with NPC retainers. As the DM, I usually allow the players to control these individuals as a virtual second character, but step in to make decisions for the NPCs when appropriate. In combat, the NPCs are usually handled 100% by the player who is employing them unless a situation arises where something I know about the NPC that the player doesn't comes into play.

The option I like least is fleshing out the party with NPC "partners", i.e. NPCs who are not subordinate to the PCs. That IS a lot of work for the DM and I avoid it as much as possible.

 

[the Jester]

In more tactical oriented games I think it works well, but in more role playing oriented games that do lots of player to player interaction it doesn't work so well.

I really think this depends. The best single roleplaying experience I've ever had took place in a party with many pcs per player, and about a half dozen players at that time.

 

[Keeper of Secrets]

I think it can be a good idea depending on the kind of campaign. I am the kind of GM who does not mind seeing people roll up characters to be used in a different part of the world for an epic campaign. I am much more leery of people wanting to use two characters in the same party (unless it is necessary). I am more likely to let the players control the person in combat, with me providing the personality and motivations.

When I run Call of Cthulhu I ususally have the players make a few characters and explain why the characters know each other so that when the inevitable occurs (death or serious injury for awhile) a new character can be brought in.

 

[BlackMoria]

It will depend on the ability of your players to a large degree. A number of players can handle two characters without any problem. A number of players find the experience slightly overwhelming and prefer to stay with one character.

Try it. If you find that players focus more on one character and the other character is just a tag along, they may be having difficulty in running more than one character. Options in this case is to allow this or go back to one character each and the DM provides NPCs to fill out the party.

 

[MonsterMash]

I would allow it, but be reluctant for both characters to be in play at the same time all that often as it isn't easy to think how two characters will react in a situation. I tend to prefer there to be cohorts (NPC) making up party numbers with them controlled by the PC's for combat, but actually characterised by the DM.

 

[S'mon]

I would allow it, but be reluctant for both characters to be in play at the same time all that often as it isn't easy to think how two characters will react in a situation. I tend to prefer there to be cohorts (NPC) making up party numbers with them controlled by the PC's for combat, but actually characterised by the DM.

This is my approach. I've found that letting players have 100% control of roleplaying cohorts, especially _when their primary PC is present_, does not work well at all and raised some major problems (and in one case a major *ick* factor).

Having numerous PCs in the same world is fine, and running several characters in a combat is usually fine too (although a few players go into 'chess' mode and happily sacrifice their 'pawns'). In a tabletop game, unless you have players who are darn fine roleplayers of the authorial type, I recommend against having a player play more than 1 role at the same time. Leave that to the GM. GMs know best.

 

[shaylon]

I would say that you should maybe try it out and see how it works. If it affects the game, then toss the idea out.

In my current campaign, we usually let a person run another's character if they are out. It works well, but I find myself not doing a good job roleplaying either of the characters when I have 2 characters to run. I think I do a decent job but it is easier to focus when you only have one to worry about.

So, in essence, it depends on what your players can handle.

Good Luck.
-Shay

 

[Stormborn]

I was just wondering what others opinions are on Players having more than one character in a single campaign? I am wondering if there is any disadvantages to the players and or the characters?

One of our players decided not to play anymore, so I was thinking about letting the two remaining players roll up another character each. This is my first time DMing so I don't want to have to juggle a couple NPCs and my duties as DM.

I have actually done this. We had a player leave and I inherited the character. It was difficult to Role Play both of them, and the second character wound up being more of a Cohort than a real PC. I have also run NPC party memebers for the DM during combat, and that too can get difficult. I don't think its for everyone.

I would suggest just a change of campaigns, either oriented toward 2 PCs or let them gestault to make up the difference.