Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="77IM" data-source="post: 7443241" data-attributes="member: 12377">I've seen this work really well, and I've seen it work really badly. I think it depends on the group and the players.Badly: If you already have a large group, adding more characters is just going to bog the game down. Not everyone wants to run multiple PCs, and forcing them isn't a good option either, but if there are already balance issues between PCs (either mechanical balance or spotlight balance) giving some people more characters than others is going to make it worse. Heaven forbid you let powergamers get their hands on this option, and treat both characters as functional tactical combat units devoid of personality. Worst case scenario, a player forms their own little mini-party that doesn't really need the other PCs and doesn't see much role-playing reason to interact with them.Goodly: Each player starts with one character, and only later, once that character is well-established, role-playing-wise, do you allow a second character. The player's characters role-play in tandem, like a mentor and an apprentice, but mechanically they complement the rest of the group. They are somehow mechanically balanced against people who have a single PC. (The best option I've seen for this is to award XP to the player and force them to split it between multiple PCs -- they'll lag a level or two behind the other PCs, which is still playable, but is enough of a deterrent that most people won't do it.) Best-case scenario, everyone at the table appreciates the extra role-playing opportunities.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="77IM, post: 7443241, member: 12377"] I've seen this work really well, and I've seen it work really badly. I think it depends on the group and the players. [B]Badly:[/B] If you already have a large group, adding more characters is just going to bog the game down. Not everyone wants to run multiple PCs, and forcing them isn't a good option either, but if there are already balance issues between PCs (either mechanical balance or spotlight balance) giving some people more characters than others is going to make it worse. Heaven forbid you let powergamers get their hands on this option, and treat both characters as functional tactical combat units devoid of personality. Worst case scenario, a player forms their own little mini-party that doesn't really need the other PCs and doesn't see much role-playing reason to interact with them. [B]Goodly:[/B] Each player starts with one character, and only later, once that character is well-established, role-playing-wise, do you allow a second character. The player's characters role-play in tandem, like a mentor and an apprentice, but mechanically they complement the rest of the group. They are somehow mechanically balanced against people who have a single PC. (The best option I've seen for this is to award XP to the [I]player[/I] and force them to split it between multiple PCs -- they'll lag a level or two behind the other PCs, which is still playable, but is enough of a deterrent that most people won't do it.) Best-case scenario, everyone at the table appreciates the extra role-playing opportunities. [/QUOTE]

Verification