I'm about to start a campaign as the only player. I'll be running 4 characters. Anybody have experience running multiple characters? How many? Comments or suggestions?
I always found it easier to have one "main" character and thus have him order the other ones around.
Quote from: rgrove0172;1073728I'm about to start a campaign as the only player. I'll be running 4 characters. Anybody have experience running multiple characters? How many? Comments or suggestions?
I have 6 characters, and 2 hirelings in one home brew. It's a lot to keep up with, even at low levels; unless you run a very simple rule set. The hirelings are brothers, so they care about each others' safety.
Barbarian
Bard
Cleric
Fighter
Sorcerer
Thief
It's crazy, to tell the truth.
Is it D&D? Frankly - I think that it would be awkward in any edition of D&D. Other systems could work better for 1 GM 1 Player play, and might not even require you to run multiple characters to work well. (or at least not 4)
Quote from: JeremyR;1073730I always found it easier to have one "main" character and thus have him order the other ones around.
That's the way to do it - lead PC plus retainers & allies.
It is much easier to run 1 or 2 characters, plus some hirelings.
The scenario I described above borders on craziness; but it is doable if you have all the character stats spread out in front of you, and pencils with erasers......
Quote from: Charon's Little Helper;1073733Is it D&D? Frankly - I think that it would be awkward in any edition of D&D. Other systems could work better for 1 GM 1 Player play, and might not even require you to run multiple characters to work well. (or at least not 4)
Actually, early editions and early modules sometimes suggested players taking on an extra character or getting some hirelints if the party/player count was low. The usual suggestion was hencmen, hirelings, and retainers. Or for the DM to add in some NPCs the DM handles. Keep on the Borderland was the first I recall but there probably were ones prior that had the option as well.
Quote from: Omega;1073755Actually, early editions and early modules sometimes suggested players taking on an extra character or getting some hirelints if the party/player count was low. The usual suggestion was hencmen, hirelings, and retainers. Or for the DM to add in some NPCs the DM handles. Keep on the Borderland was the first I recall but there probably were ones prior that had the option as well.
I can confirm henchmen/retainers are pretty easy for players to run in B/X D&D-derived ACKS. The simple split was that the players run them in combat, the GM voices them outside.
Quote from: Omega;1073755Actually, early editions and early modules sometimes suggested players taking on an extra character or getting some hirelints if the party/player count was low. The usual suggestion was hencmen, hirelings, and retainers. Or for the DM to add in some NPCs the DM handles. Keep on the Borderland was the first I recall but there probably were ones prior that had the option as well.
Quote from: Kiero;1073758I can confirm henchmen/retainers are pretty easy for players to run in B/X D&D-derived ACKS. The simple split was that the players run them in combat, the GM voices them outside.
I realize - but I still feel that even OD&D works better with multiple actual players. It definitely works better for solo play than later editions, but I still say that there are other entirely different systems which would do it better. But - just my opinion, and it might not be worth learning a new system for.
I've seen it done in D&D 4e. It worked rather well in combat, where one player can actually maximize the effectiveness of his game pieces with synergies. It did make it feel more like mini/wargaming though.
Back in our AD&D days, we routinely ran two PCs each, since we had four players and published adventures back then presumed 8-10 PCs. Typically one would be melee-focused and the other would bet a caster or thief. The difficulty really depends on which edition of D&D you're playing and how familiar you are with the abilities. But there's nothing fundamentally wrong with running multiple PCs.
When I played in an Edge Of The Empire campaign years ago, I played a merchant/fixer type. Because my character wasn't stat'd for anything past self-defense, I negotiated with the GM to "hire" (bribe GM 200c) an NPC bodyguard. I forget the title of NPC level but it was the one between minions and the bosses if I remember right.
Bodyguard was straight watcher and beat the shit out of people with a baton, had nothing else going for them.
That's kinda what you need to do here.
Sorry should mentioned D&D 5th
Quote from: rgrove0172;1073895Sorry should mentioned D&D 5th
I like 5th Edition. It's going to be a little challenging running 4 characters, but you can do it.
I play a modified (cough, cough) take on 5th Edition. I try to approach it like a Neapolitan swirl of OD&D, D&D 5E, and Dungeon World. Having fun is the most important part of playing an RPG.
I run 5E spells by the book; area of effect, duration, etc. I also love the random spell effect table the Wild Mage Sorcerer uses too. However, I don't get hung up on all the finite details of 5E.
Quote from: rgrove0172;1073895Sorry should mentioned D&D 5th
This would be most practical using just the Basic Rules for 3 of the 4 PCs. At any rate I would recommend not allowing Feats or Multiclassing for them.
Quote from: S'mon;1073908This would be most practical using just the Basic Rules for 3 of the 4 PCs. At any rate I would recommend not allowing Feats or Multiclassing for them.
Yes, I intentionally chose very straight forward, conventional characters and mechanically will run them pretty vanilla. In contrast I gave them some interesting personalities which is where the real joy of the game will be found, I hope!
Quote from: rgrove0172;1073728I'm about to start a campaign as the only player. I'll be running 4 characters. Anybody have experience running multiple characters? How many? Comments or suggestions?
We had this in our old RQ games, but generally don't have it now.
It is useful if your game has a wide mix of PCs and some might not want to adventure with the others.
We had a strict Chinese Wall system, whereby one PC wouldn't just help that players other PCs for no reason other than they had the same player.
Apart from that, it went very well.
Normally, we had a main PC and a backup PC, if the main PC was busy or didn't fit the scenario. Sometimes, both played at once, but that got a bit complex.
Quote from: rgrove0172;1073923Yes, I intentionally chose very straight forward, conventional characters and mechanically will run them pretty vanilla. In contrast I gave them some interesting personalities which is where the real joy of the game will be found, I hope!
That sounds good. I don't use Feats or Multiclassing. Just simple takes on core classes.
Quote from: rgrove0172;1073728I'm about to start a campaign as the only player. I'll be running 4 characters. Anybody have experience running multiple characters? How many? Comments or suggestions?
You mentioned 5e. Have you given any thought to what races/classes the PCs are?
My experience is mostly in the "run two; one as main, one as sidekick/retainer" vein in 1 GM/2-3 player games and we generally found that having one of the characters be on the simple side made things run a lot better than two complex ones (the Essentials Knight, Slayer, Thief, Hunter and Scout worked REALLY well as secondaries; builds like the Champion Fighter who skips feats for ASIs to keep complexity to a minimum would be a good equivalent in 5e).
In your case one thing you really should take advantage of is the opportunity for is tailoring a party with inbuilt connections; think "a noble and his retinue (noble as desired with a fighter/bodyguard, bard/overqualified valet and a wizardly scribe) or "traveling circus (a bard as the ringmaster, the fighter is the strongman, the rogue is the acrobat, a warlock or wizard is the magic act)."
You've got the rare chance to completely control the party's composition and goals without negotiating with the other players so take advantage to go high concept if that's where your interest lies (ex. all the PCs are bards from a different college).
Quote from: rgrove0172;1073728I'm about to start a campaign as the only player. I'll be running 4 characters. Anybody have experience running multiple characters? How many? Comments or suggestions?
DCCRPG has its funnel of 4 0 level characters per person, and I have to say it is fun and it works. When I ran some funnels, I told the unsure players to pick a leader character and all of their other characters would sort of 'mill around' in the background, like so many secondary characters on
Lost. But with other systems, I think using hirelings or other NPCs is probably better, because then you can focus your role-playing on being the leader.
Quote from: Lynn;1074087DCCRPG has its funnel of 4 0 level characters per person, and I have to say it is fun and it works. When I ran some funnels, I told the unsure players to pick a leader character and all of their other characters would sort of 'mill around' in the background, like so many secondary characters on Lost. But with other systems, I think using hirelings or other NPCs is probably better, because then you can focus your role-playing on being the leader.
I joined a new group recently and we each played two characters. What I found was one character became the dominate while the other was no better than a hireling.