Two Characters??

[pseudo_hero]

In my last campaign before I started my vacation I was low on players so they suggested that the each play 2 characters(4 characters total). I was DMing modules so I thought "Oh well". And let them. Boy was that lame. Talk about a cohesive party! It was like one big well oiled machine. I don't get along with myself that well, let alone other people! Rogues telling wizards what to memorize, fighters shouting "Heal!" from across the hall knowing that there will be no argument. And boy did personality go down the tube. They basicaly made the one character they realy wanted and filled in the munchkin gaps with the other character. So there was a Paladin with his own little Rogue, and a Cleric with his own little Super-archer fighter. Almost every time I called for initiative I would get ONE number from each of the players. Tell me that isn't a psycholigical "I'm playing one guy" give away!

Any one else had this happen? Ever seen any one seriously able to play 2 characters with some realism and personality? I think it's totaly lame and would never do it again.

 

[BiggusGeekus]

You could pretend they were all in the same military unit or something (that wouldn't explain the lack of personality though).

Failing that....

Suggested New Feat:

Hive Mind

Benifit: You can read the minds of every other person in the party who has this feat as a free action. You are also inclined to agree with whatever those people say and ignore any odious personal habits such as drinking the milk straight out of the carton, trimming toenails with their own teeth, or mild acts of human sacrifice.

Normal: You let other party members die and prevent the saving of the kingdom because they wouldn't give you the magic item that matched your cloak.

 

[radferth]

I've seen it done well before, but only with powergamer-averse types. If it is an abosolute necessity due to low numbers, I would suggest giving players NPC that they can run during combat. This prevents the characters being made to order for their main characters, and gives you a veto if needed.

 

[ForceUser]

I once played in a short-lived Forgotten Realms campaign where I played two characters, a wizard and a fighter. The wizard had hired the fighter as a bodyguard and, being a snooty horse's rear end, treated her like a lackey. Taking it all in stride, the fighter robbed him blind at every opportunity. The dicotomy was a lot of fun to roleplay, and the other players were often in stitches at how my two characters were so different and so obviously despised each other. It was great fun for me as I really got to stretch my roleplaying legs.

These days, I most often encounter one player playing two characters if the main character has the Leadership feat: it's often easier for the DM to let the player roleplay both the main and the cohort. The cohorts, of course, DO work cohesively with the main characters, as that is their purpose, although being cohorts they are generally in the background when we roleplay downtime and non-violent encounters.

You know, I'm of the opinion that Leadership is probably the most powerful feat in the game because it comes close to doubling a character's power and versatility, especially if you choose a class that is complementary to your main character's class. Anyone agree?

 

[Orco42]

You know, I'm of the opinion that Leadership is probably the most powerful feat in the game because it comes close to doubling a character's power and versatility, especially if you choose a class that is complementary to your main character's class. Anyone agree?

Yes it does. In most of the games that I have played in (that made it to level 6) leadership was the most common feat.

 

[phoamslinger]

it's not impossible, or even difficult. you just have to make each one an individual.

just look at the DM's with their casts of thousands . . .

 

[Wolfen Priest]

The one thing I do like about players playing 2 characters is that one of them can die and it's not that big of a deal.

In fact, I wouldn't mind playing (or DM'ing) two characters who were sort of a hero_and_sidekick type of thing. The paladin and rogue is a bit much, but I could see a paladin and a cleric possibly, sort of like the wise old mentor (the cleric) showing the ropes to a more naive and brash younger paladin.

 

[Chun-tzu]

A variation you might want to try is to make some PC/NPC hybrids. Have the 2 players create their PCs, and ask them what other 2 party members they'd like to play. Then you create the other characters, and play them in non-combat scenarios. You define the characters, and set the tone on how they interact and relate to the others. But during combat, hand the reigns over to the players. This serves to take a lot of the burden off the DM during combat, as there's much less they have to keep track of.

 

[Kershek]

A variation you might want to try is to make some PC/NPC hybrids. Have the 2 players create their PCs, and ask them what other 2 party members they'd like to play. Then you create the other characters, and play them in non-combat scenarios. You define the characters, and set the tone on how they interact and relate to the others. But during combat, hand the reigns over to the players. This serves to take a lot of the burden off the DM during combat, as there's much less they have to keep track of.

This is exactly what I do with my party of two players, 4 characters. I manage the non-combat interaction with the NPCs and what they do with their money, but the players get to run them when they get into a fight.

 

[OaxacanWarrior]

Each player playing 2 characters can be dificult for them unless they're good roleplayers. I have had it work in the past when we had maybe 2 or 3 people playing total, but I like one charater per player a lot better. Sometimes however I will let a player control an NPC in combat or something like that. That seems to be a good way to get around them playing two characters as one.