[3.5] Running A Two Player Game

[Thurbane]

So, through some real life commitments, out DnD group had dwindled a bit recently.

We did have three regulars (plus the DM- me), which was fine. Each player ran a character, and I threw in a support NPC.

But now it looks like we might be down a player, and I was wondering - should I just retire the NPC, and let the two remaining players roll up another PC each? We had players run two PCs each in low number games before.

Thoughts?

Cheers - T

[Eldariel]

You could do that or give them some lowkey cohorts that don't draw too much time. Roleplaying two characters fully can be difficult for some but given how experienced your group is, I suppose they should be able to pull it off.

[LordOfCain]

Maybe you could let them gestalt with another class? What are the characters currently running?

[GilesTheCleric]

I would ask the players. For me, a two player game sounds great, since you could get a lot more roleplay in, and any plans you come up with are much easier to get agreement on and execute. It also makes playstyles that have a lot of failure points, like stealth, more feasible.

[Esprit15]

Much as I love my friends, I've been in many games where I wished for fewer people. It lets combat go faster, and prevents any things that require the party splitting from taking too much focus away from everyone.

[Thurbane]

You could do that or give them some lowkey cohorts that don't draw too much time. Roleplaying two characters fully can be difficult for some but given how experienced your group is, I suppose they should be able to pull it off.

We've run two PCs each in the past in our games, so I think they can handle it.


Maybe you could let them gestalt with another class? What are the characters currently running?

...no gestalt in any games I run, sorry. It's a concept I just wouldn't enjoy DMing.

Their characters are currently Human Warmage 4 (shooting for Sand Shaper) and Human Ranger 5. The support NPC is a Human Favored Soul 5, and the "retiring" PC is an Aasimar Paladin 4.


I would ask the players. For me, a two player game sounds great, since you could get a lot more roleplay in, and any plans you come up with are much easier to get agreement on and execute. It also makes playstyles that have a lot of failure points, like stealth, more feasible.

That's true - although as a DM, I prefer throwing challenges at a party that are intended for 4 PCs. 4 PCs also allow a lot more variety in roles and challenges that they can handle.


Much as I love my friends, I've been in many games where I wished for fewer people. It lets combat go faster, and prevents any things that require the party splitting from taking too much focus away from everyone.

I find a group of 6 or less generally pretty manageable.