Soloing D&D Games?
- Thread starter Thanatos
- Start date
Magic Slim
First Post
One of the people I sometimes play with decided to try DMing, and, to begin, played a solo game with each of the players (4).
I was the only one not to survive the initial, introductory adventure. An ogre wielding a greatsword cut down my elven archer cleric. That was the character that I played for the least amount of time ever
With solo adventures, the risk is very high. I suggest you don't plan too many combats. If you do, make it so the player has a couple of NPC allies.
A social adventure (or at least one that is set in a social setting, city, etc.) will probably be more adapted to a single player.
Also, one character won't have much versatility. A party thrives on the many facets of the characters that compose it. A single character is, well, pretty much alone
Hope this helps a bit!
Slim
I was the only one not to survive the initial, introductory adventure. An ogre wielding a greatsword cut down my elven archer cleric. That was the character that I played for the least amount of time ever
With solo adventures, the risk is very high. I suggest you don't plan too many combats. If you do, make it so the player has a couple of NPC allies.
A social adventure (or at least one that is set in a social setting, city, etc.) will probably be more adapted to a single player.
Also, one character won't have much versatility. A party thrives on the many facets of the characters that compose it. A single character is, well, pretty much alone
Hope this helps a bit!
Slim
yes...I have considered that the risk in combat would be exceptionally high and the lack of versatility could be an issue...npc allies would of course alleviate that..
More social, intrigue and detective/investiagation type adventures might be order.
thanks for the comments/suggestions!
More social, intrigue and detective/investiagation type adventures might be order.
thanks for the comments/suggestions!
This is Totally Do-able
My wife and I are stuck in a part of the country with few D&Ders. We do the 1 Dm, 1 PC game all the time. It is fun, emphasizes roleplaying, and allows for a lot more indepth plots, imho.
My advice would be to talk to the player about the limitations of the game. If you both understand it's a different game than a multi-player game is, you'll both be happy.
Tips:
1) Make sure the challange rating for any encounter is viable for your PC. Know their combat abilities and be prepared to scale the game to fit them. Usually an NPC out of the DMG of equal level is a decent encounter. For Monsters look for a challange rating around 2 less than the PC's level. Multiple lower level monsters also work well.
2) Make sure that your PC has a bit better equipment than the average character his/her level. I don't mean pass out the vorpal swords, but healing potions are pretty important to those who don't have healing magic.
3) It's not a good thing to limit the PC's choices, but be smart about your classes. Rangers, Rogues, and Fighters are a lot more viable solo than say a wizard, or bard may be. Although a solo wizard or bard game can be very interesting, they just need extra tweeking and perhaps some henchmen, or NPC party members.
The biggest thing about 1 on 1 d&d is that mentally it's a lot different, more about quest type story lines, more about mysteries, and less about hack and slash. Most modules can't be scaled down for one PC, so you have to be creative, but there are a LOT of resources out there on the www.
For example, I was the PC of one of our single player games. I was a rogue. I arrive in a town and the city officials hire me to explore an abandoned asylum that they wanted to knock down. I go explore, meet some NPC ghosts to talk to, I figure out the mystery, and I get trapped in a "mental health test" that the old head master set up to torture his patients with. I had to face down a lot of riddles and traps, and deal with the undead head master once I got through his maze.
All that in leather armor with 6 hit points. It was a lot of fun.
I hope this helps, have fun.
My wife and I are stuck in a part of the country with few D&Ders. We do the 1 Dm, 1 PC game all the time. It is fun, emphasizes roleplaying, and allows for a lot more indepth plots, imho.
My advice would be to talk to the player about the limitations of the game. If you both understand it's a different game than a multi-player game is, you'll both be happy.
Tips:
1) Make sure the challange rating for any encounter is viable for your PC. Know their combat abilities and be prepared to scale the game to fit them. Usually an NPC out of the DMG of equal level is a decent encounter. For Monsters look for a challange rating around 2 less than the PC's level. Multiple lower level monsters also work well.
2) Make sure that your PC has a bit better equipment than the average character his/her level. I don't mean pass out the vorpal swords, but healing potions are pretty important to those who don't have healing magic.
3) It's not a good thing to limit the PC's choices, but be smart about your classes. Rangers, Rogues, and Fighters are a lot more viable solo than say a wizard, or bard may be. Although a solo wizard or bard game can be very interesting, they just need extra tweeking and perhaps some henchmen, or NPC party members.
The biggest thing about 1 on 1 d&d is that mentally it's a lot different, more about quest type story lines, more about mysteries, and less about hack and slash. Most modules can't be scaled down for one PC, so you have to be creative, but there are a LOT of resources out there on the www.
For example, I was the PC of one of our single player games. I was a rogue. I arrive in a town and the city officials hire me to explore an abandoned asylum that they wanted to knock down. I go explore, meet some NPC ghosts to talk to, I figure out the mystery, and I get trapped in a "mental health test" that the old head master set up to torture his patients with. I had to face down a lot of riddles and traps, and deal with the undead head master once I got through his maze.
All that in leather armor with 6 hit points. It was a lot of fun.
I hope this helps, have fun.
Some of my most memorable experiences in D&D have come from 1-on-1 games. I wouldn't suggest it as a way to introduce a new player to the game, though, as in my opinion it has an entirely different feel. One especially good part is that you get to make an adventure completely tailored to that character's motivations, backstory, etc, without annoying other players.
the other player is not new to the game..she's played about 5 years and is my roommate..when we were in Texas, we played with a group...but due to me needing tech work..I took a job in Iowa and moved up there to become her roommate a gain...she had to go back to Iowa for a similiar reason...so here we are, stuck without a gaming group.
Thanks for these suggestions and pointers...they have definitely given me a few things to consider and think about. I really appreciate it.
Thanks for these suggestions and pointers...they have definitely given me a few things to consider and think about. I really appreciate it.
SnowDog
First Post
I GM'd a one-on-one for some time. It was a challenging way to play but it had its rewards. I would not choose to do it again, but we had some fun anyway.
My advice runs a bit counter to other folks here, actually. Don't worry about which character class, or combat being too lethal. You are the GM and you can adapt everything to make it work so that whatever character the player wants to develop can become the star of the story.
That was I think the biggest reward of playing solo -- we really got to take the gloves off a bit in terms of making a really heroic and epic story. In a traditional game, if one player out of four has a character who is an ancient god reincarnated, or discovers a really cool power that manifests itself in odd ways, it can disrupt the game quite a bit. When there's only one player, all those concerns go away. You can really develop that single character in exciting ways that fit some fantasy story archetypes that are really difficult to match in a group setting.
The difficulty is that there is no margin for error. In a group game, characters converse among themselves. The GM can listen to the group talk about what to do and realizing, "Whoa, if they do that, my plan for blah-blah-blah is ruined, let me think about how to fix that." Likewise, while the GM is talking with Player A, Players B, C, and D are all thinking about the game and what to do with their characters. This is lost in the solo game. You must be always "on" with the other participant. You have to either be really quick on your feet or not mind telling your player, "Hold off a minute, I need to look at some notes and jot some stuff down. Let's take a quick break."
I ran a solo game for my friend for several months. The story was cool; we adapted the character and the game through two different game systems. In the end, however, we both realized we craved the bigger interaction of a group and set about trying to find one. The ideas I had for the culmination of the campaign still drift around in my head, though. It's too bad they'll probably never see the light of day....
My advice runs a bit counter to other folks here, actually. Don't worry about which character class, or combat being too lethal. You are the GM and you can adapt everything to make it work so that whatever character the player wants to develop can become the star of the story.
That was I think the biggest reward of playing solo -- we really got to take the gloves off a bit in terms of making a really heroic and epic story. In a traditional game, if one player out of four has a character who is an ancient god reincarnated, or discovers a really cool power that manifests itself in odd ways, it can disrupt the game quite a bit. When there's only one player, all those concerns go away. You can really develop that single character in exciting ways that fit some fantasy story archetypes that are really difficult to match in a group setting.
The difficulty is that there is no margin for error. In a group game, characters converse among themselves. The GM can listen to the group talk about what to do and realizing, "Whoa, if they do that, my plan for blah-blah-blah is ruined, let me think about how to fix that." Likewise, while the GM is talking with Player A, Players B, C, and D are all thinking about the game and what to do with their characters. This is lost in the solo game. You must be always "on" with the other participant. You have to either be really quick on your feet or not mind telling your player, "Hold off a minute, I need to look at some notes and jot some stuff down. Let's take a quick break."
I ran a solo game for my friend for several months. The story was cool; we adapted the character and the game through two different game systems. In the end, however, we both realized we craved the bigger interaction of a group and set about trying to find one. The ideas I had for the culmination of the campaign still drift around in my head, though. It's too bad they'll probably never see the light of day....
Interesting indeed...I appreciate your comments. I had been considering some kind of culmination into an epic and heroic journey...and possibly sprucing the character up, say ala Midnight Heroic Path (but not in the Midnight setting, since that would be far too deadly).
We are feeling about for a group...but it looks pretty scarce here in Des Moines...not to mention, once we do find one..we have to see if we're all compatible in style, age, outlook, etc.
We are feeling about for a group...but it looks pretty scarce here in Des Moines...not to mention, once we do find one..we have to see if we're all compatible in style, age, outlook, etc.
Thaumaturge
Wandering. Not lost. (He/they)
Wyvern's Claw produced come good solo adventures. They haven't done much for a couple of years, but you can still get their origionals.
Dimwhit
Explorer
My favorite campaigns are without exception 1-on-1 campaigns. My friend was usually the DM, and he is a writer, so he often used them as methods of developing a story.
Here's my advice: the DM needs to think of it differently. It's not a standard campaign. Normal modules won't work well. It works best when developed as a story, with a lot of roleplaying. Encounters need to be planned carefully with the character in mind. It can be very rewarding.
Here's my advice: the DM needs to think of it differently. It's not a standard campaign. Normal modules won't work well. It works best when developed as a story, with a lot of roleplaying. Encounters need to be planned carefully with the character in mind. It can be very rewarding.
Similar Threads
