One Player, One DM

[AMFV]

Hi, I've recently come into a situation where my gaming group is not able to meet consistently. So I've been looking to develop some smaller scale games. I'm curious if anybody has any experience, resources, or advice for running a Pathfinder game with as little as 1 player and the DM. I have quite a bit of 3.5 experience but I'm definitely interested in the Pathfinder side of things. I'd also be interested in how one might convert a standard adventure or an adventure Path to feature fewer players than might be expected and how people would rework some of the challenges to remain challenging and interesting without being overwhelming. Any advice is greatly appreciated.

[AMFV]

So this is pretty much uncharted territory then? Any theoretical advice would be good also, what sort of challenges would one use for a single player over a group, how would one get the most out of the experience?

[BWR]

I've played one on one games with my gf for about 10 years. Highly modified version of 3.5 mostly, but some PF briefly. The same things should apply to both cases, I think.
The most important thing to agree on is what you want out of the game. In several of our games, the PC is basically the star of the show - if s/he dies, the story ends. This makes traditional D&D a bit difficult,especially if resurrections aren't available. You want any combat that comes about to carry the risk of dying but you don't want to actually die. You can always run more traditional D&D and let death be the end of a character but not the story.

Apart from that it's mostly obvious stuff. You'll have to remember to scale down encounters significantly from normal levels, for combat, first of all. Second, lack of versatility can be a killer. No one person can do everything at low levels, so a varied approach may be a real pain for a single PC. You might want to allow henchmen, Leadership, DMPCs or the player to play more than one character. No matter what, you'll have to tailor adventures to the PC. If the PC is a fighter with little by the way of abilities beyond killing stuff, don't throw a lot of social encounters with any difficulty or flying invisible sorcerers against her. If the PC is a rogue with lots of sneaky and charm, make most encounters such that he can use his abilities and avoid stuff he isn't too good with. Henchmen etc. with abilities to help cover weak areas are nice, and run the game to allow them to work. If the PC is a wussy wizard who hires a meat shield, let most enemies attack the meat shield rather than do the smart thing and attack the caster. If the PC is a barbarian who has a bard from his tribe along to sing his praises, inspire courage and tend wounds after combat, don't have the bard targeted for termination by canny opponents. You might want to consider giving some bonus mechanical advantages to the PC to compensate for being alone, like extra HP, better saves, opponents mostly avoiding save or suck abilities, powerful allies who can be called upon in a pinch, etc.

That's just the mechanical side of things. The single most important thing we've found in 1on1 is NPCs/DMPCs. You will need a lot of them and they need to be developed characteres. ALL interaction and RP will be between DM and player with no player on player stuff to ease the burden on the DM. Even in games with minimal RP and development, you have the rest of the party to react to and play off. Without that, all connection to the game comes from NPCs and your ability to present the world. If, like me, you have to continually work on your ability to convey information properly, it is doubly important in these games.

[AMFV]

I've played one on one games with my gf for about 10 years. Highly modified version of 3.5 mostly, but some PF briefly. The same things should apply to both cases, I think.
The most important thing to agree on is what you want out of the game. In several of our games, the PC is basically the star of the show - if s/he dies, the story ends. This makes traditional D&D a bit difficult,especially if resurrections aren't available. You want any combat that comes about to carry the risk of dying but you don't want to actually die. You can always run more traditional D&D and let death be the end of a character but not the story.

Apart from that it's mostly obvious stuff. You'll have to remember to scale down encounters significantly from normal levels, for combat, first of all. Second, lack of versatility can be a killer. No one person can do everything at low levels, so a varied approach may be a real pain for a single PC. You might want to allow henchmen, Leadership, DMPCs or the player to play more than one character. No matter what, you'll have to tailor adventures to the PC. If the PC is a fighter with little by the way of abilities beyond killing stuff, don't throw a lot of social encounters with any difficulty or flying invisible sorcerers against her. If the PC is a rogue with lots of sneaky and charm, make most encounters such that he can use his abilities and avoid stuff he isn't too good with. Henchmen etc. with abilities to help cover weak areas are nice, and run the game to allow them to work. If the PC is a wussy wizard who hires a meat shield, let most enemies attack the meat shield rather than do the smart thing and attack the caster. If the PC is a barbarian who has a bard from his tribe along to sing his praises, inspire courage and tend wounds after combat, don't have the bard targeted for termination by canny opponents. You might want to consider giving some bonus mechanical advantages to the PC to compensate for being alone, like extra HP, better saves, opponents mostly avoiding save or suck abilities, powerful allies who can be called upon in a pinch, etc.

That's just the mechanical side of things. The single most important thing we've found in 1on1 is NPCs/DMPCs. You will need a lot of them and they need to be developed characteres. ALL interaction and RP will be between DM and player with no player on player stuff to ease the burden on the DM. Even in games with minimal RP and development, you have the rest of the party to react to and play off. Without that, all connection to the game comes from NPCs and your ability to present the world. If, like me, you have to continually work on your ability to convey information properly, it is doubly important in these games.

Fair enough! Thank you! Do you have any specifics on how you normally scale down encounters? I do figure that avoiding SoD things is a pretty good bet, but the question is how would this affect what would normally be a part of an encounter? In addition would you say, one would be better off converting a published module, or writing their own?

[facelessminion]

If you're looking towards the Pathfinder side of the pool, I'd personally allow for the character to make a Gestalt character and slowly bring in Mythic Adventures. Mythic gives heroes a decent chunk of extra survivability, and some interesting powers, but doesn't crack the game's balance any wider open then things like mages already do. It also seems thematically appropriate in this case, with a lone hero going against seemingly-insurmountable challenges... and having the action economy playing against him for once.

[AMFV]

If you're looking towards the Pathfinder side of the pool, I'd personally allow for the character to make a Gestalt character and slowly bring in Mythic Adventures. Mythic gives heroes a decent chunk of extra survivability, and some interesting powers, but doesn't crack the game's balance any wider open then things like mages already do. It also seems thematically appropriate in this case, with a lone hero going against seemingly-insurmountable challenges... and having the action economy playing against him for once.

I'm mildly leery of Mythic, personally, I read through it and it didn't seem all that well constructed, if thematically appropriate. I'm curious if it would allow a single character to compete where a party might or if it would just create more power imbalances. Gestalt, I loathe, it adds a lot of complexity, and it's harder to calculate player capabilities and therefore present interesting challenges, at least for me. As such I imagine adding that to an area when I'm already having to calculate irregular challenges would be non-productive.

But Mythic might be worth looking at, what would the impact of that be? I mean in as much mechanics as outlook?

[facelessminion]

Mechanically, your heroes will do everything a bit better, have a limited ability to speed up your action economy, makes out of combat healing faster, and end up much more survivable. It also allows for a few rather darn neat magic items!

If you are against Gestalt, then Leadership may be an acceptable substitute - have a second minion-character as a healer, or something.

[facelessminion]

There are definitely some power spikes, but they can be rather useful for a one-man-show. Mythic characters get Mythic Points, a finite resource that restores itself over the day. Casters can spend Mythic Power to cast any spell on their lists, for one. (They can create their own, pimptacular mansion demiplane for another... Low power, but could be very useful as a base of operations for a solo game!) Warrior types can combo into Mythic Vital Strike with a legendary weapon to KILL ALL THE THINGS, smashing through foes.

[AMFV]

There are definitely some power spikes, but they can be rather useful for a one-man-show. Mythic characters get Mythic Points, a finite resource that restores itself over the day. Casters can spend Mythic Power to cast any spell on their lists, for one. (They can create their own, pimptacular mansion demiplane for another... Low power, but could be very useful as a base of operations for a solo game!) Warrior types can combo into Mythic Vital Strike with a legendary weapon to KILL ALL THE THINGS, smashing through foes.

So it would help to fix some of the potential action economy issues that'll probably start to come up?

[facelessminion]

It definitely can, but only for a limited while a day. Still, it's pretty darn useful for a single or two-character game.

Edit: If the player uses Leadership, there is a feat that lets their cohort get a mythic point, and count as mythic - which isn't terribly important, until the times it is terribly important.

[dysprosium]

My wife and I play games one on one. Her character is the definite star. But I have not changed any encounters due to the amount of DMPCs that make up her party.

Yes I know it is a dirty word around here but these characters compliment my wife's character's capabiliites. The party has six members altogether (really five plus her one cohort). She is responsible for three of them mechanically during combats but I maintain their personalities. She has learned more about the game through the abilities of her cohorts than her own character alone.

That playstyle might not be right for you if you are not interested in running innumerable amounts of NPCs.

We are going to start a new campaign that will have just her character and my one DMPC. I'm interested to see how that will turn out myself.

[BWR]

Scaling down basically means taking what you throw at a normal party and dividing by number of players in said party. Really, you have to look at how tough the PC is and what s/he can do, and what the player is likely capable of and likely to do, and adjust things based on that. You must surely know the player and PC better than we. Depending on build, tactics and luck, 3 goblins can be an insurmountable obstacle for a 1st level PC or a brisk morning exercise.
I've run premade adventures for parties about 4-5 levels lower than the PC. Action economy really hurts single PCs which is why you want a significant power difference to even the odds. Think of it this way - an party can take on encounters with a single creature with a CR several points above their level and win. Just imagine that the single boss monster is the PC and you generally want the PC to win,and adjust from there.
For PF I've run converted BECMI modules for a cleric PC and cleric DMPC. Mostly they did fine until 5th level but they died due to an unfortunate decision on the player's part.

Our more homebrewed rules games have generally been less combat focused and had more politics, intrigue and romance than most D&D games I've played. While combat certainly does occur and can have fatal consequences if handled incorrectly or the dice are against you, we've generally toned it down compared to other stuff. Those have been purely homebrewed adventures so all encounters were designed for a single player and whatever DMPCs/NPCs happened to be around.

[AMFV]

It definitely can, but only for a limited while a day. Still, it's pretty darn useful for a single or two-character game.

Edit: If the player uses Leadership, there is a feat that lets their cohort get a mythic point, and count as mythic - which isn't terribly important, until the times it is terribly important.

Well what would be your estimate on how many encounters per day it could help with? I know that the advice for a standard Mythic Campaign is CR + 1/2 Mythic Level, although many folks claim that isn't adequate. Basically how much of a bump am I looking at? Would it be enough to push one character up to par in standard encounters? Or would it not be sufficient for that? Is the power increase in a curve with regular level? I apologize for all these questions I'm just not all that familiar with the system.


My wife and I play games one on one. Her character is the definite star. But I have not changed any encounters due to the amount of DMPCs that make up her party.

Yes I know it is a dirty word around here but these characters compliment my wife's character's capabiliites. The party has six members altogether (really five plus her one cohort). She is responsible for three of them mechanically during combats but I maintain their personalities. She has learned more about the game through the abilities of her cohorts than her own character alone.

That playstyle might not be right for you if you are not interested in running innumerable amounts of NPCs.

A full party might be a bit much for me. What do you think a happy medium point would be, based on your experience?



We are going to start a new campaign that will have just her character and my one DMPC. I'm interested to see how that will turn out myself.

Good luck!


Scaling down basically means taking what you throw at a normal party and dividing by number of players in said party. Really, you have to look at how tough the PC is and what s/he can do, and what the player is likely capable of and likely to do, and adjust things based on that. You must surely know the player and PC better than we. Depending on build, tactics and luck, 3 goblins can be an insurmountable obstacle for a 1st level PC or a brisk morning exercise.
I've run premade adventures for parties about 4-5 levels lower than the PC. Action economy really hurts single PCs which is why you want a significant power difference to even the odds. Think of it this way - an party can take on encounters with a single creature with a CR several points above their level and win. Just imagine that the single boss monster is the PC and you generally want the PC to win,and adjust from there.
For PF I've run converted BECMI modules for a cleric PC and cleric DMPC. Mostly they did fine until 5th level but they died due to an unfortunate decision on the player's part.

Our more homebrewed rules games have generally been less combat focused and had more politics, intrigue and romance than most D&D games I've played. While combat certainly does occur and can have fatal consequences if handled incorrectly or the dice are against you, we've generally toned it down compared to other stuff. Those have been purely homebrewed adventures so all encounters were designed for a single player and whatever DMPCs/NPCs happened to be around.

So you're saying that sans action economy, a Level 4 character should comfortably be able to handle CR 1 encounters? Or is it not really applicable as a general rule? Obviously certain things would hurt a player more, like SoD abilities, or abilities that they don't have a specific counter for.

So my takeaways are DMPCs, possible character power bumps (to include Mythic stuff) is there any other advice people have?

[BWR]

So you're saying that sans action economy, a Level 4 character should comfortably be able to handle CR 1 encounters? Or is it not really applicable as a general rule? Obviously certain things would hurt a player more, like SoD abilities, or abilities that they don't have a specific counter for.

So my takeaways are DMPCs, possible character power bumps (to include Mythic stuff) is there any other advice people have?

1. Generally yes. Again, it depends on the bulid and tactics of the PC and you know better what they are capable of than we. Anything that can incapacitate a PC in one go is going to be a potential auto-lose situation for the PC.
2. DMPCs, hirelings, henchmen, possibly allowing the player to run two or more characters (we've generally found that running two PCs is doable, any more gets a bit much). Fudge. If the PC is down to nearly zero hp and the random mook rolls a crit, fudge it to a normal hit instead. If the PC falls conconscious, allow her to autostabilize and don't cut her throat, or take her prisoner. Sure, penalize for the loss (like losing gear) but death need not come quite so often as most D&D worlds have it.
Perhaps the PC has gotten some sort of life insurance with a good temple - in the event of death (checked up on with scrying sessions every so often) the temple will raise her. Horrendously expensive even beyond the basic costs for Raise Dead or Ressurection or True Ressurection, but it can get the PC back.

[AMFV]

1. Generally yes. Again, it depends on the bulid and tactics of the PC and you know better what they are capable of than we. Anything that can incapacitate a PC in one go is going to be a potential auto-lose situation for the PC.

Well the player is fairly new, and is intending to play as a Mad Dog Barbarian. So there'll be at least a cohort for that. She's also is fairly new, so I'm not sure I can't count on her grasping tactics quickly. Although at least in early levels there shouldn't be so many problems since Barbarians don't have tons of options and the only complex bit will be the handle animals rules.



2. DMPCs, hirelings, henchmen, possibly allowing the player to run two or more characters (we've generally found that running two PCs is doable, any more gets a bit much). Fudge. If the PC is down to nearly zero hp and the random mook rolls a crit, fudge it to a normal hit instead. If the PC falls conconscious, allow her to autostabilize and don't cut her throat, or take her prisoner. Sure, penalize for the loss (like losing gear) but death need not come quite so often as most D&D worlds have it.
Perhaps the PC has gotten some sort of life insurance with a good temple - in the event of death (checked up on with scrying sessions every so often) the temple will raise her. Horrendously expensive even beyond the basic costs for Raise Dead or Ressurection or True Ressurection, but it can get the PC back.

Well I think we'll probably have a discussion about how she wants to take death. I assume that the Mythic attributes could indicate that something is interested in her enough to keep her alive. Again since the player is relatively new, I don't think two PCs is going to be the best idea initially, although the Cohort could help. I might give her AC a boost, particularly since Mad Dog doesn't really give that much for the amount of Rage Powers it eats.