Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="random user" data-source="post: 1518459" data-attributes="member: 16581">This situation just came up in my campaign:One of the players just moved and isn't sure he can make it each week for our gaming session.  He has suggested that he alternate playing his character with another person (who currently is not playing).My initial thoughts on the matter was that it was a bad idea.  The campaign I run is largely character and roleplay driven.  There is some chance for death, but luckily I have some people who hate to lose, so the fear of failing or being made fools out of is almost as good a motivation as the fear of death.  I've taken advantage of this to create a campaign where they can truly create memorable and unique characters, ones who I hope they get attached to as more than just numbers on a page.  As a way to reinforce this, many player actions have a habit of having consequences on the world... whether they intend to or not.  They have (hopefully) learned that they are responsible for the consequences (good and bad) of their actions.To me, having multiple people playing one character reminds me too much of Everquest (which I also play, but is a completely different experience than D&D), which is fine in a hack-n-slash or highly combat driven campaign, but if I wanted that I would just play Everquest (please don't hijack this thread into EQ please <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />So my initial reaction was that I didn't think two different people could play one character consistantly, know what was going on with the story (which weaves in and out of the adventures), and care about what their actions did.  I'm not sure, at least without a lot of preperation, they could create a cohesive and compelling singular character.  And even if they did for now, could they guarentee that they would continue to have the same goals as the game progressed?If the character is presented with a true dilemma, could each player always act in a way that is satisfactory to both players?I have offered to let him do this if he really wanted to do it if his character suffered from multiple personality disorder, but he didn't like that idea.  (Personally I think that would be kind of cool... different at least).As I thought about it more, though, I thought I should seek some advice, or at least see what other peoples' opinions were instead of making a quick judgment.  So, any thoughts?</blockquote>

Verification