More than one PC per player?

[Umbran]

Back in high school, we played games with multiple characters per player. As time went on, I found I preferred somewhat more detailed roleplaying of character personality, and running multiple characters got in the way of that.

You think that a player can't split their attention efficiently between 2 characters, but you as the DM can split is efficiently between MANY NPC's?

I don't think it is a manner of efficiency, but of depth of characterization. Certainly, if a person is focused upon running a single character, they will be better able to get "in-character" than if they are running multiple characters at the same time.

I don't think any GM is fooling themselves that they are able to get as much depth in their many NPCs ad the players can get in their one PC. For many roleplay-heavy types, this is one major rason why they don't like the GM's chair much.

And I'm fascinated : what exactly is a "gamist game", and why wouldn't the PC be the playing piece for the player?

Surely, reaper, you're aware that some folks like to play D&D as something more akin to a tactical wargame, and others prefer to head towards deeper-immersion role-play? The former is sometimes referred to as a "gamist" approach.

 

[Sigurd]

Discoveries become a problem

Multiple characters per player has some bad side affects. You have to tell something to a pc as they discover it but you are also telling the players other characters.

I would be clear with your party that they have to stay together. If they seperate doing parrallel things time is not going to be realistic. Encounters will be resolved in appropriate manners.

 

[Foundry of Decay]

I honestly can't remember a time when the very small group I've had has had just one character each.

Its a little tricky to find players in Edmonton it seems, they either get nabbed up by other groups, or disappear from radar, so I've had a group of 2 players (sometimes even a single player at times) for quite some time. Both tend to play 2 characters each, though I've had one newer player play up to 3 at one time without any problems.

The big one to avoid when running multiple characters seems to be the classes where you have to memorize spells and such. Fighter types are much easier to run, and psions/wilders/etc seem to be a godsend to those wanting to run more than one character.

 

[BASTON!!!]

Well, personnaly, I hate playing two characters. I prefere to concentrate on only one. Especially when we are high level, like for my Wizard level 15. I like to have enough time to plan a good strategy with my spells before my next turn.

So, as often as possible, I try to avoid "taking care" of the NPC. But I'm in charge of the loot and the music!

In one game, we are four player's and there is a NPC mostly played by the group and he his treated as a PC in all way: xp, loot, etc.

In another game, we are only three player's. The DM decided that there was not to be a NPC. So, one of us took the feat Leadership to add a rogue to the party. She is played by the DM. And sometimes, it is the same for my familiar, but mostly to add some humour...

BASTON!!!

 

[Taloras]

In the game im currently running, we have one person playing two characters. One is a barbarian/ranger, the other is a barbarian/cleric. Both Half-Orcs. However, he does -really- well at keeping the two separate. Of course, we have a rogue thats half NPC. My brother only can play every few times, so I run his character when hes not there....which makes interesting plot devices, because I knew he couldnt always play, so i had him make the character as something i could use this way. I find that having one person with 2 characters helps out, due to the fact that there are only 3 players....a monk/sorceror, a bard, the half npc rogue, and the 2 barbarians.

 

[MonsterMash]

In my campaign we avoid it. At the moment I've got four players with one PC each, I do sometimes add an NPC or two who I will sometimes get one of the players to control. Usually the only time we have a player run two characters at once is due to someone not being able to make it to the game and the party needing to be complete as there is no easy way to write the character out for that session.

 

[Pravus]

Played in many campaigns with multi-PC for each player, I have also played in a one player, one DM where I controled 5 PCs. It has it chalanges, I can recall one instance where my barbarian got himself killed in a kobold pit trap (with scorpions). Once that was resolved I then remembered that the barbarian was with the another PC who went down a different passage. The DM didn't see my arguement that he wasn't there and therfore shouldn't be dead. After that experience I took steps to increase my organization of the various PCs in my control.

As a DM I have run many games where the players has had more then one PC though it was usually 2 or the occasional 3 PCs. This has never really been a problem in the game.

In my current game, it is one PC per player and it has been amusing as the three players who routinely show for a session don't play clerics. The two guys who always seem to miss the sessions play a druid and a cleric. So this has forced the other three to rely on other means for healing (including massive donations to a local church in the hoopes of securing an NPC cleric).