feartheminotaur
First Post
The only issue I've ever seen in an uneven player/PC situation is when you have Single PCs with Multiple Players. Unless you enjoy ten minute arguments over which hex to center a flamestrike
D&D 5E Single Players with Multiple Characters?
Greenstone.Walker
Adventurer
This is how we used to play. Three players, 2 or 3 characters each.
When AD&D modules said "for 6 to 9 level 6 characters", three characters wasn't enough.
Then again, this was also the days when we wouldn't actually give our characters names until they survived to 3rd level.
When AD&D modules said "for 6 to 9 level 6 characters", three characters wasn't enough.
Then again, this was also the days when we wouldn't actually give our characters names until they survived to 3rd level.
Mishihari Lord
First Post
I've run 2-3 PCs per player for many years, and it works quite well. There's been no particular problem with RP. The players swap back and forth between characters and their mindsets quite easily.
It has some big advantages too: 1) If one of your PCs dies or is incapacitated, you're still in the game, 2) easier to split the party without leaving some players with boring downtime, 3) players get to play a greater variety of abilities, which makes the game more entertaining.
It has some big advantages too: 1) If one of your PCs dies or is incapacitated, you're still in the game, 2) easier to split the party without leaving some players with boring downtime, 3) players get to play a greater variety of abilities, which makes the game more entertaining.
the Jester
Legend
I run multiple overlapping groups in the same setting, so many players have two or three pcs. But I have a fairly firm "one pc at a time" rule. There are very rare exceptions- so far the only one has been when a pair of pcs were prisoners in a local megadungeon and got rescued by another group of pcs, including ones played by the prisoners' players.
Zaran
Adventurer
My small group does it all the time out of necessity. A lot of times the secondary character takes a backseat to the favored character but they do get some spotlight when their background comes to fore. Also it helps try out multiple character ideas without having to change campaigns or switch out. In a Shadowrun game I played twins, one which was very shy and that one stayed didn't do a lot of social interaction but when there was a chance to surf on a bus, she was there!
delericho
Legend
It's something I generally try to avoid, as I find the game works better if each player has only one character. However, if you're low on players, and especially if you're running a game that has well-defined roles that it expects are filled, then it may be better to allow multiple characters than to try to run with an under-manned group.
In general, my advice would be to have each player generate a 'real' character for general use and then one or more secondaries who exist basically to fill a role, but who mostly fade into the background unless specifically called on act. That way, you should hopefully still get some meaningful roleplay, as the players only really have one PC personality to work with.
(Oh, and also: if and when the party splits, try to ensure that it splits such that each player has a representative in each sub-group. Even if you have to do this through metagame discussions. It's just better that way.)
Halivar
First Post
I have a player that interrupts everyone's action for a group discussion of what the current acting player should do. Talk about analysis paralysis... sheesh.
I think it's good for the players to have characters with varying levels of importance and plot centrality... But they should all be "real".
Splitting them up frequently is definitely a good way to handle them as well. In the game I'm running they currently control two different nations on two different parts of the map, a small mine in a third location, and have a vested interest in maintaining counterintelligence efforts in a hostile empire.
Not to mention that they are trying to secure new trade deals with far flung neighbors, negotiate permission with several kingdoms so that they can build a system of Beacons between their holdings, and locate a serious enemy who has gone into hiding.
They aren't always pursuing all these goals simultaneously. But with at least 7 characters per person they can afford to split their attention quite a bit.
yes, we have three players and each has 2 characters, as others have mentioned this works well both in RP and combat
Player 1: Mage and a Fighter
Player 2: Cleric and a Thief
Player 3: Warlock and a Ranger
this way when the party splits up, everyone is involved.
I haven't had any problems with RP as the players seem to manage the dual roles quite well. Player 3 had an in game argument between the Warlock and the Ranger. Perhaps I need to call some medical services?
bottom line if it works for you then do it
Similar Threads
