Poll and discussion: one PC per player, or many?

[Pants]

I definitely prefer 1 PC per player, but back in ol' 2ed, a few of us had multiple characters. I never did, but some of the other players did.

 

[MonsterMash]

One per player in each session - sometimes let a player run two to cater for absences, but otherwise the second character is normally more like an NPC or follower anyway.

In a campaign it might be viable for a player to have more than one character, but I wouldn't normally allow both to be in active play at once, i.e. while the wizard goes off to study the fighter can go to look for active adventure as a mercenary/caravan guard, etc.

 

[broghammerj]

If we didn't have enough players (ideal was 4-5), then we would run a PC by committee. Occasionally someone would have a henchmen due to the leadership feat, but it was usually just one player to PC ratio.

 

[mythusmage]

I was thinking of something else when I read the title. I do agree with one PC per player, since folks tend to be worse than they think when multi-tasking.

1 main character, 1 secondary character, and a couple of supporting characters. Then a pool of extras available to the group as a whole. (Yes, I have read Ars Magica. )

And a stable of PCs for those occasions when one needs a PC for a particular adventure and either one's favorite is unavailable or inappropriate.

"Sir Thomas is on jury duty, Lich Hand Joe is recovering from injuries, Gunsel Mike's in jail, and Lady Brigit has just entered the 3rd trimester. Besides, she's 9th and this is a 3rd level adventure. Timorous Tom is available, but he's 2nd. Guess I'll just have to be careful with him and refrain from stupid moves."

 

[Frozen DM]

Is that all a matter of how gaming preferences evolved over time, or is it a regional thing? Does anyone still game with lots of PCs per person? If you've tried both, Which do you prefer? I think I like our old way. Combat rounds did tend to be lengthy, but role playing lots of characters was fun.

While our gaming group has done both methods, when I DM I allow only a single PC per player. I would rather alter the challenges in my adventures then let players divide their attention amongst multiple PCs. I generally find that the quality of RP goes down when a player has more than one character to deal with. In general, I find our sessions end up more like glorified chess games where each player sees their character as a tactical resource and not a real character. It's like everyone is playing a CRPG. When they have one character each, my players actually end up roleplaying through encounters.

On the other hand, one of our group's DMs often allows, or even requires mutliple characters. He refuses to have parties of fewer than 4 members, even if there are only 3 players. He seems to be under the impression that having less than 4 characters prevents D&D from being playable.

 

[sniffles]

My group doesn't have a hard and fast one PC per player rule, but generally we feel that it's too difficult to run more than one PC and do it effectively. I have seen one player manage two PCs reasonably well in recent years, but that was unusual. Generally we have at least 4 players and that seems to be plenty, with perhaps an NPC or two. But I do know of one campaign a friend is involved in where there are only two players and the DM has decided to allow both of them two PCs. We'll see how that works out.

I find that my roleplaying would suffer running more than one PC, and as you go up in levels in D&D the complexity just becomes too great. I have enough trouble keeping track of spells or feats for one character, let alone two.

 

[EdL]

Way back when, with only 2 or 3 players it was acceptable to play more than one character. Of course, role playing was pretty poor. Thankfully, I haven't had that experience for quite some time.

 

[Sejs]

We run it as one PC per player, but with one exception: If you have a Cohort (via the Leadership feat), then that character is handled by another player that agrees to take the job. You do not play your own Cohort. They're a seperate person and you've got to deal with them as such.

 

[Woas]

I've played in a D&D game where the players had more than one character, but it was something like the Ars Magica setting, where the players only controlled one character. The other characters were like "in the garage" so to speak.

 

[Mishihari Lord]

My preference has always been two characters per player. This lets everyone continue to play if one of their characters is killed or disabled, or if the party needs to split. With more than two per and it starts to become difficult to properly roleplay them all.