Concept for running a game...

[ReluctantDragon]

I've been mulling this over a bit.

I'm having some difficulties within my gaming group that are political in nature. And by political, I mean, "I'm more important than anyone else!"

To assuage this, I'm taking a bit of a break and considering a foray into an idea I had a while ago. This is something that I'm thinking of trying via PbP, but could also potentially be fun IRL.

I humbly inquire of you, O Playgrounders, would you find it fun to play in a game wherein you are the only player and you have 4 different characters?

Essentially the DM would be running a normal game, but you have 4 different characters as the player.

Is this a good idea? Too much bookkeeping? What do you guys think? Would you want to be the player in this game?

[Story]

It sounds fun to me, though I've never actually tried it. One thing though is that I think a set up like this will encourage people to treat it as a wargame, and not bother much with RPing.

[ReluctantDragon]

It sounds fun to me, though I've never actually tried it. One thing though is that I think a set up like this will encourage people to treat it as a wargame, and not bother much with RPing.

Agreed. Intra-party interaction would be nil, as that is essentially talking to yourself. However NPC and character conversation would be good still, and might even open up some opportunities for the player to interact with different personalities or voices. In other words the player will have the opportunity to feed their inner schizophrenic(multiple personality disorder) tendencies. :smallbiggrin:

[prufock]

Are all the characters present at the same time, or are they split into 4 different - but related - story threads? It's an odd idea either way, but I suppose it could work.

I'm having images of the first TMNT game for NES, where you have 4 characters but have to switch them out!

Or maybe a game where you're the only character but you have dissociative identity disorder, and you keep switching to different personalities.

TANGENT: Misuse of the term "schizophrenic" bugs me, as a psych graduate. I'm not sure why that term came to be associated with multiple personalities, but that's not what it means! I guess because it literally means "split mind."

If you want to be literally schizophrenic, though, the other 3 characters could be figments of your imagination.

[limejuicepowder]

TANGENT: Misuse of the term "schizophrenic" bugs me, as a psych graduate. I'm not sure why that term came to be associated with multiple personalities, but that's not what it means! I guess because it literally means "split mind."

If you want to be literally schizophrenic, though, the other 3 characters could be figments of your imagination.

You're a psych grad, so you're a good person to ask: isn't "multiple personality disorder" (which, if I remember correctly, is a non-clinical term) rooted in schizophrenia?

Either way, I'm sure that's what Reluct is referring to.

[ReluctantDragon]

You're a psych grad, so you're a good person to ask: isn't "multiple personality disorder" (which, if I remember correctly, is a non-clinical term) rooted in schizophrenia?

Either way, I'm sure that's what Reluct is referring to.

Indeed.

And no, this would not be a TMNT or Lost Vikings(better game imo) scenario. This would be you as a player having 4 character sheets in front of you, playing an entire party by yourself.

[Yuki Akuma]

You're a psych grad, so you're a good person to ask: isn't "multiple personality disorder" (which, if I remember correctly, is a non-clinical term) rooted in schizophrenia?

Either way, I'm sure that's what Reluct is referring to.

Dissociative identity disorder hasn't even conclusively been proven to actually exist as a mental disorder.

You can pretty much run it however you like and no one can call foul because there isn't a unified definition of what "multiple personalities" even means.

[Rogue Shadows]

All I can say is that Icewind Dale is my least favorite of the various Black Isle games due to the lack of inter-character interaction. It's just...not as fun.

[SowZ]

Dissociative identity disorder hasn't even conclusively been proven to actually exist as a mental disorder.

You can pretty much run it however you like and no one can call foul because there isn't a unified definition of what "multiple personalities" even means.

There's a reason it is called the american disease and most major cases have been shown to be exaggerated or made up. I would think the most realistic way to play DID would be to play someone with schizophrenia that presents itself in a way that the person is confused about their own actions and applies them to others/hears voices/occasionally is confused and believes they are someone else. As opposed to, you know, having a brain that sections of memories and personality traits. Of course, this is a fantasy world and you can claim that humans in D&D-land have brains that work however you want them to work.

EDIT: Oh, you're a psych grad? Das cool. I get most of my info from my parents, mental health pros, not myself, hehe.

[yougi]

I am currently playing in a 4E games with 2 players, each of us controlling 3 characters. It is indeed very wargamey: we don't focus on RPing those inter-character relationship much. However, we did give each of our characters a side-story line to solve along the way, could be an interesting aspect to add to your game.

Another way of doing it is making one character the main, with which the player would RP, and having the others help in combat, or be used as "alternate voices": when your main wouldn't do/say something, you use one of the secondary characters.

It is indeed an interesting idea if well done, but doing it well is not easy.

[Chilingsworth]

I'd jump at a chance to play such a game.

Though I might end up trying to turn it into something of an empire-building sim, lol.

Even if I was expressly forbiden from doing that, I'd still jump at the chance.
:smallbiggrin:

[JaronK]

I prefer to work with other players, but if I were controlling four characters, I'd have a reason for the low interaction. Maybe something like a Necromancer's cohort party... so an Archivist master necromancer character who's got his bodyguard (a Necropolitan Hexblade/Paladin of Tyranny/Ur Priest/Bone Knight who debuffs enemy saves and hacks people up), his scout/assassin (Necropolitan Whispergnome Factotum/Mindbender) and his undead creation general (a Necropolitan Dread Necromancer with a one level dip in UA Necromancer). They don't talk much because the Archivist made them all and he controls them. But that could be fun to play with.

JaronK

[Story]

It would also be a good excuse to pull out your OP Fu because you don't have to worry about overshadowing the rest of the party. Time to see what a Wizard/Druid/Cleric/Artificer party can really do.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

Before I moved away from my old gaming group, I'd playtest homebrew and test out new published material by having one of my friends build up a party of four that included the new material and run them through a short adventure. It can work well as long as you don't mind the lack of intra-party RPing or, as JaronK suggested, can find a reason to have only party member with any real personality like an enchanter with his thralls, a necromancer with his minions, a ranger with his gruff and untalkative survivalist buddies, a drow priestess with her slaves and underlings, and so forth.

[prufock]

You're a psych grad, so you're a good person to ask: isn't "multiple personality disorder" (which, if I remember correctly, is a non-clinical term) rooted in schizophrenia?

Testing my memory here...

MPD is another term for DID, but DID is what clinicians generally use, and is the term used in the DSM. There is no conclusive causative link between DID and schizophrenia. DID is comorbid (occurs at the same time) with a bunch of different mental disorders, schizophrenia being one of them. Both often show a history of trauma. But DID has a differential diagnosis - for one thing, periods of amnesia (you have no memory of times when your other "personalities" are active, but other people can report seeing you, talking to you, etc).

Yuki is correct when he says it's controversial, but I'm not sure it's the case that it's exaggerated or made up, as SowZ said. It relies on case studies because it's so rare, and it's difficult to study because it often presents along with other disorders.

It DOES have a specific diagnosis, however, as found in the DSM, but interpreting behaviour isn't necessarily that easy. IE: what counts as an "enduring" second personality?

Schizophrenia, in short, is a difficulty telling reality from fantasy. You have hallucinations, delusions, scattered thought patterns, poor emotional response, etc.

[Darius Kane]

I'd be interested in such a game. I would make one character be my primary PC and the leader of the team. The rest would be his loyal underlings or something like that. There would be no need for complex interaction, because they are payed to work for my primary PC.

[Chilingsworth]

A fun(ny) group for this might be:

A cleric and wizard (parents or guardians of)

a pair of (creepy) druid twins.

...

Not sure why I think that's a good idea.

[SowZ]

Testing my memory here...

MPD is another term for DID, but DID is what clinicians generally use, and is the term used in the DSM. There is no conclusive causative link between DID and schizophrenia. DID is comorbid (occurs at the same time) with a bunch of different mental disorders, schizophrenia being one of them. Both often show a history of trauma. But DID has a differential diagnosis - for one thing, periods of amnesia (you have no memory of times when your other "personalities" are active, but other people can report seeing you, talking to you, etc).

Yuki is correct when he says it's controversial, but I'm not sure it's the case that it's exaggerated or made up, as SowZ said. It relies on case studies because it's so rare, and it's difficult to study because it often presents along with other disorders.

It DOES have a specific diagnosis, however, as found in the DSM, but interpreting behaviour isn't necessarily that easy. IE: what counts as an "enduring" second personality?

Schizophrenia, in short, is a difficulty telling reality from fantasy. You have hallucinations, delusions, scattered thought patterns, poor emotional response, etc.

I'm not saying there isn't something that acts vaguely like how DID is supposed to act, but it probably doesn't present itself like Sybill, (who was a hoax.) Now, I'm not an expert. But the idea behind MPD denial as far as I can tell from what I've read and from my dad is that the human brain doesn't work in a way that it can partition itself to have totally seperate personalities with selective amnesia.

Too many factors, including genetics and environment, affect our behavior and personality for a person to have partitioned personalities. Which is why a number of psychologists think people with DID don't actually have two personalities, persay. But have trouble distinguishing their actions from others actions and whose 'voices' and such can be more dominant than they should. Which would make it a rare form of schizophrenia. My point isn't that I know this is true. I don't. It makes more sense to me than the alternative, though, so I don't believe in DID in the way an atheist leaning agnostic doesn't believe in a diety.

My point is that it may not be accurate to say that schizophrenia and MPD are different disorders. People often claim this, and it may be true, but then again it may not.

[docnessuno]

I've been mulling this over a bit.

I'm having some difficulties within my gaming group that are political in nature. And by political, I mean, "I'm more important than anyone else!"

To assuage this, I'm taking a bit of a break and considering a foray into an idea I had a while ago. This is something that I'm thinking of trying via PbP, but could also potentially be fun IRL.

I humbly inquire of you, O Playgrounders, would you find it fun to play in a game wherein you are the only player and you have 4 different characters?

Essentially the DM would be running a normal game, but you have 4 different characters as the player.

Is this a good idea? Too much bookkeeping? What do you guys think? Would you want to be the player in this game?

I actually did run some games like this, and unless it's a pure "tactics" game it din't work out very well.

Reducing the array to 2 gestalt characters would help a lot.

[nedz]

I once ran quite a long campaign like this, but with 1 player and 6 PCs.

It was OK, but a group is very much better.