Two Players, One Dungeon Master

[Auramis]

So, I have a question to pose to everyone here! In our house, the people who play D&D are myself, my brother, and our father. That's how it's always been. As you can imagine, it makes making parties a bit difficult at times. We usually run with 2 DMPCs in every campaign and 2 PCs. That's no problem, but I was wondering if it would at all be possible to justify a two man party.

This is an open ended question to everyone: do you think a two man party could work? Would you gestalt it? Would you tell them to work it out and try to be creative?

[nedz]

Having them run 2 characters each is probably preferable to 2 PCs + 2 DMPCs.
It depends what level you start at, but you could have them each take leadership — though this is not necessary.

[Andezzar]

It will depend on the characters. Two tries 1 characters could probably handle anything, but two fighters will be unable to deal with a lot of problems.

Leadership and/or Summons can relieve some of the pressure on the PCs.

[Vhaidara]

There are a few solutions:
1. Your way
2. Give the players 2 characters each
3. 1 character each (possibly including the GM), and use gestalt (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/gestaltCharacters.htm). That's how my first campaign (GMed by one of my cousins, with his younger brother as the other player) went, and it was fun enough. Only ended badly because I was in "monks are OP" phase running a monk//wizard, and my cousin was also a first time GM who didn't get how borked CR/action economy can be. Sent a dozen formian workers at us when we were level 2.

[Auramis]

I like the idea of 1 character per participant and gestalt, but I worry about one of my players who, for the most part, ONLY plays tier 1 characters. He plays wizards and druids mostly, and he likes the arcane heirophant. I worry that, because of him, I may need to work on really powerful opponents that might outshine the other party member and could make the NPC a bit useless.

Should I enforce a rule that says you can only have one spellcaster base class per gestalt to reduce the ridiculousness? Should I limit the number of classes a player can take? Would that be unfair?

[Vhaidara]

Well, AH is banned from gestalt, being a dual progression. But if you have optimizers, you might not even need gestalt. Or you could use a version I've heard before for tier balance
T1 and T2 classes are played straight. T3 can gestalt a T6, and T4 can gestalt a T5.

[NecessaryWeevil]

Or do none of the above, and simply tailor the challenges to a 2-character party rather than 4.

[BWR]

There is nothing keeping you guys from running plain 1 PC per player, no DMPCs and nothing fancy. While lots of D&D is based on the 4-man party (with specific roles and class types), it's perfectly possible to play it with less. Did Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser need anyone but eachother?
Just write your adventures with that in mind. If they lack casting abilities, don't write adventures where they will be screwed without it (make it difficukt, if you want, but not nigh impossible). If they lack muscle don't always put them in situations where they need it.

[hymer]

I worry that, because of him, I may need to work on really powerful opponents that might outshine the other party member and could make the NPC a bit useless.

Should I enforce a rule that says you can only have one spellcaster base class per gestalt to reduce the ridiculousness? Should I limit the number of classes a player can take? Would that be unfair?

I'd talk with the group about it. Tier 1//Tier 1 gestalt compared to, say Tier 3//Tier 3 isn't that relatively different from Tier 1 compared to tier 3. My suggestion would be to have the player you're worried will be useless have a tier 1 or 2 on at least one side. Then it'll probably work out ok.
You should be more on the lookout for combinations that break the game, and you should tell your players this, so they know you may have to nerf something that just goes too far.
One downside to a Druid//Wizard is massive bookkeeping, btw. You may want to point that it also bogs the game down, potentially.

[HammeredWharf]

You can play fine even with only one player. The DM is in complete control of all encounters, so I don't know where the preconception that you need a full party comes from. Even if both of your PCs are crazy berserkers with no social skills of trapfinding, you can make a campaign that takes that into account. It could even be quite hilarious.

[Lord_Jord]

I play in a campaign with one other friend, where we trade of DM after every adventure (Or until what was prepared was completed). One of us acts as player, the other as DMPC. As has been mentioned we try to tailor our encounters for the lack of players. But at the same time we like to challenge eachother. At level 5 we killed.a Beholder in 3 rounds... If you like to roleplay, I definitely suggest it, you dont have to worry about 'out shining' anyone.

[Jack_Simth]

So, I have a question to pose to everyone here! In our house, the people who play D&D are myself, my brother, and our father. That's how it's always been. As you can imagine, it makes making parties a bit difficult at times. We usually run with 2 DMPCs in every campaign and 2 PCs. That's no problem, but I was wondering if it would at all be possible to justify a two man party.

This is an open ended question to everyone: do you think a two man party could work? Would you gestalt it? Would you tell them to work it out and try to be creative?

One way to deal with it would be a 'themed' gestalt. One plays a Druid//Ninja (or Rogue, if you're stuck Core), the other a Druid//Wizard. Divine caster? Double-check: Two Druids. Skillmonkey? Check: Ninja. Arcanist? Check: Wizard. Meatshield? Double-check: Two animal companions (Riding dogs at 1st, apes at 4th - or perhaps Fleshrakers, if you're into cheddar - grab Natural Bond to mitigate the adjustment later). You get four warm bodies in a battle (two of which are semi-disposable from a game perspective), nobody has less than a d8 hit die so the party is reasonably durable, plenty of casting, and the ability to find traps in the 'expected' manner.

[GameSpawn]

I've been running a game on these forums (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?303466-Industrial-Urban-Fantasy-3-5-IC) that has only two players. One is a bard, who took leadership (Fighter cohort), and the other is using an archery based homebrew class (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?219811-The-Sharpshooter-(3-5-Base-Class-WIP-PEACH)&p=12075383#post12075383). The game's lasted for over 9 months at this point, so I think it's working out alright. The game is more story based and pretty heavy on role play/investigation, which I think makes things easier, but we've gotten into combat a few times, and it's worked out without me having to pull punches (we started at level 11; I figured two level 11 PC's (with level 9 cohort) are about equivalent to a party of four level 9 PCs and used this as a starting point).

[Trundlebug]

Of course you can run a 2 man party. Frankly following the CR/XP rules as written is a fool's game. No DMPC's needed (nor should there ever be).

[Slipperychicken]

Of course you can run a 2 man party. Frankly following the CR/XP rules as written is a fool's game. No DMPC's needed (nor should there ever be).

The CR rules actually do account for smaller and larger party sizes. Smaller parties get easier encounters, larger ones get harder encounters.

[nedz]

The game is designed around a number of threats (traditionally four) and so this does restrict what you can do with a two character party. Either the two characters have to be able to offer multiple threats or the DM has to restrict the types of encounters he can throw at them.

The action economy issues are easier to deal with: you just use fewer enemies.

[zingbobco000]

Personally (this is just me), I believe that you should play it like it is as a two man party, sure it might be hard but it puts less stress on the players having to deal with multiple characters and/or gestalt complications. Or the possibility of you being a DMPC which I dislike but is I must admit sometimes necessary. That said, it depends on how experienced your brother and your dad are at DnD. If they are decently experienced enough to handle a Gestalt then that's good, go with that. But if they aren't that experienced it could create some problems stress and game wise. If they are stress free/experienced enough to be able to deal with two characters I wouldn't recommend it but you could go with that. Overall here's what I found.



Experience/Non-Stress Level
High
Medium
Low


Outcome of what you should do (in my mind)
Two characters
Gestalt
DMPCs/Two characters (Two characters over DMPCs because it puts stress on DM and can lead to metagaming.)

[Thiyr]

I'm actually currently running a two-man game right now. I'm threw them a few bones during chargen (HD are maxed, they could straight-up choose their stats, no limits outside of not being Captain 18s-in-everything, a few other bits and bobs), and they're doing fairly well all things considered. So far, its not all that different from my perspective than a normal game is. they've got more stuff between them they need to get done (they're both ToB-oriented chars, meaning little easy healing, no utility magic, etc), but generally I try to work around that without being a pushover.

I mean, I figure dropping them from ~90 to ~9 hp in one encounter on two different occasions is a good reason to give them some temporarily enhanced natural healing. I do take the blame for not realizing it was technically a CR9 encounter I threw at two ECL6 characters though.

That's actually the big thing right now, and the big thing to keep in mind. If they can cover anything they'd want to do out of combat, you're good. Otherwise, you'll need to figure out how to work around it (or realize that your players may walk into encounters a papercut away from collapsing on the ground). Doesn't sound like an issue given what you've mentioned though.

As far as gestalting, that's a good way to boost them up. Mixing T1s in a gestalt wouldn't actually be very beneficial overall, given they've still only got one set of actions to cast with. Its basically being an early-entry mystic theurge in a normal game: kinda cool, but a ton of overlap, and not enough time in the day to use all those spellslots.

[Applejaxc]

The 3 best options:

1. Gestalt characters. Do you have Unearthed Arcana? This rule set is basically for your exact situation. I know how it feels to have a 3 person group (1 DM 2 PCs)
2. Have both players run 2 characters each, so you still fill out the 4-man-party quota
3. Focus on roleplaying, and make combat more about tactics/stealth/creativity than Spells Per Day and actions per turn.

[Auramis]

Personally (this is just me), I believe that you should play it like it is as a two man party, sure it might be hard but it puts less stress on the players having to deal with multiple characters and/or gestalt complications.

I've decided to go with this for the time being! After I told them it's just the two of them, they started discussing the best way to handle the situation. I'm worried our wizard player might be trying to convert the other player into some mixmax/power-gaming class combination, rather than letting him decide on his own, though, so I feel like I'll have to talk with them. They're spending a long time thinking about how to handle it and not thinking about how, as DM, I might adjust things a bit since it's two people and to allow them the freedom to do what they prefer.

[RegalKain]

I've decided to go with this for the time being! After I told them it's just the two of them, they started discussing the best way to handle the situation. I'm worried our wizard player might be trying to convert the other player into some mixmax/power-gaming class combination, rather than letting him decide on his own, though, so I feel like I'll have to talk with them. They're spending a long time thinking about how to handle it and not thinking about how, as DM, I might adjust things a bit since it's two people and to allow them the freedom to do what they prefer.


I'm actually about to run a 2-man party myself, with me as the DM, I tend to run pretty brutal campaigns though, so my two players will be Gestalt (Other gestalts will be rare, or much weaker in the campaign.) with 36 point buy, and +2 free LA, this should give them the edge to stay alive and excel despite being a 2-man party, depending on how good you are at DMing, is depending on how good/bad the campaign will be, that said, I'd definitely let your players know you can and will tone it to the two of them, so they don't expect the full brunt of it, make sure they know certain things will still be there, even if they have no trap-finding they may run into the occasional trap etc, this helps keep it believable.