PDA

View Full Version : DM Help Playing Multiple concurrent characters - Pros and Cons



Ghost49X
2019-07-23, 08:00 PM
While not for everyone or suitable for every system, I want to discuss the merits of playing more than one PC in a game.
And whether it would work better or worse with a PBP medium rather than an online voice game.

I see clear advantages for filling out the party when there's otherwise not enough interest to run the game.
At the same time it probably requires more mental focus and discipline than a single character. Who hasn't had one player who takes forever to finish his turn with a single character to keep track of?
I also like the idea of trying out a large party with 6 or 9 characters. Party tactics take on a different level with that many pieces.
Splitting the party can be more manageable if players have characters on each side so they can continue to have agency regardless of where the focus is.
Dying doesn't relegate you to a back bench while waiting resurrection.
Roleplaying wise, having multiple characters to choose from means that you don't have to role-play a fighter throughout a long discussion about the nuances of magical theory.

What say you?

Yuki Akuma
2019-07-23, 08:04 PM
I don't have much experience with it, but this is basically the default way to play Ars Magica. In that game, each player creates two major PCs - one Magus and one Companion - and then the group as a whole creates bit-part PCs called Grogs.

It's done this way so that players can have their Magus spend entire years studying in their crystal towers and still get to go on adventures using their Companions or random Grogs. It can also be used to have multiple adventures happen around the same time - you generally only go on one adventure a season but multiple adventures per season are doable if you use different characters in each.

Plus, if someone attacks your sanctum... well. You have an entire special forces team of Powerful PCs and an entire army of Specialised Bit-Part PCs.

False God
2019-07-23, 08:11 PM
I don't enjoy playing multiple characters simultaneously in person. Many of my characters differences are superficial and tailored to the game (they all maintain undercurrents I enjoy, knowledge, adventure, goodness, etc...) so when you put them side-by-side it becomes difficult to tell them apart, and difficult for me to roleplay them distinctly.

My experience with large parties is it tends to overwhelm the basic assumptions of the game. Sure you can double-up on monsters, but that just increases the tracking and the workload.

I don't mind having multiple parties that may or may not be working together, just as long as when I'm rolling dice, it's just for one PC.

Honestly, I specifically design my characters so that if I want to engage in something, I can. If I'm not interested in engaging in it, I'll probably not build it into the character, and then "being bored during the discussion of magical theory" just means it's my turn to use the bathroom or get some snacks.

Ghost49X
2019-07-23, 08:11 PM
this is basically the default way to play Ars Magica.
Does it allow players to control multiple PCs in the same combat or scene?

Yuki Akuma
2019-07-23, 09:20 PM
Does it allow players to control multiple PCs in the same combat or scene?

Sure. There's nothing saying you couldn't. Characters are complex but combat generally isn't unless you're getting fancy with improvised spells - and even then, only one of your characters can cast spells.

Algeh
2019-07-24, 12:46 AM
Way back in the AD&D 2nd Edition days, I was playing two characters in the same game for quite a while. Basically, our group started out with 8 players, each with one PC, and then at the end of the year about half of the group left because of changing schools (I went to a k-12 school but a substantial chunk of 8th graders went somewhere else for 9th grade), so I ended up playing both my long-established character and the long-established character of one of the players who left.

It worked pretty well, mostly because both characters had established personalities that were nothing like each other and very different party roles. (My original character was a very tentative NG bard who tended to hang back in new situations, keep an eye on escape routes, and look for possible peaceful resolutions before rushing into combat as part of an elaborate backstory that I had going because I was used to playing in more character-driven systems with less combat when I built the PC. The other PC was a CN melee fighter who was...not known for those traits. The two characters didn't like each other very much and had actually had something of a low-level passive-aggressive prank war going on before the other player left, but I dropped that once I was playing both characters since it didn't make sense to take up table time with me doing both halves of that interaction.)

The important thing is, unless there's some solid reason why the two characters should be acting in concert, to play them separately based on what each PC would actually be doing rather than having them always take optimally coordinated moves. I think that's hard for the really strategic players to do, since it means playing non-optimally.

Particle_Man
2019-07-24, 01:18 AM
I have no objections to it but would personally have trouble keeping everything straight in my poor old head.

But this person could do it no problem:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatiana_Maslany

Dimers
2019-07-24, 02:25 AM
The important thing is, unless there's some solid reason why the two characters should be acting in concert, to play them separately based on what each PC would actually be doing rather than having them always take optimally coordinated moves. I think that's hard for the really strategic players to do, since it means playing non-optimally.

Pretty much what I was going to say. I've tried this in a couple versions of D&D and one time in Shadowrun, and that was my result. It's not a bad thing if you're focused on the 'Game' part of 'RPG' -- in fact, it could make the game better and let combat run more smoothly*. But I haven't experienced it improving actual Role Playing, and it's often detrimental. Soooo ... depends what you want.

I've also played Ars Magica a couple times, but never as multiple PCs in the same adventure.


* Some players will take less time to decide on actions because they're not trying to predict what everyone else in the party might do. And some will take less time just because they're more engaged, due to more frequent turns and a more frequent sense of control. My limited experience shows a net positive for combats and action sequences, unless the characters are highly complex. And that's "highly complex" for D&D and Shadowrun, mind you.

Quertus
2019-07-24, 06:13 AM
I am saddened to hear multiple posters discuss potential negative impact on role-playing, when what I came to add from the OP was the advantages for role-playing.

When a player is running a character, it can be difficult to distinguish what is the player, and what is the character. But when they run multiple characters, either simultaneously or in rapid succession, it becomes much easier to appreciate both their role-playing range, and even the more subtle differences between their characters.

Ghost49X
2019-07-24, 06:29 AM
Some players will take less time to decide on actions because they're not trying to predict what everyone else in the party might do. And some will take less time just because they're more engaged, due to more frequent turns and a more frequent sense of control. My limited experience shows a net positive for combats and action sequences, unless the characters are highly complex. And that's "highly complex" for D&D and Shadowrun, mind you.
Some players also wait for the GM to tell them that their turn is up before they start thinking about what they want to do. While getting distracted by many things including their own mental picture of what's going on.


I am saddened to hear multiple posters discuss potential negative impact on role-playing, when what I came to add from the OP was the advantages for role-playing.

When a player is running a character, it can be difficult to distinguish what is the player, and what is the character. But when they run multiple characters, either simultaneously or in rapid succession, it becomes much easier to appreciate both their role-playing range, and even the more subtle differences between their characters.
Players can also focus on Roleplaying one character and treating the other one like a henchmen if they aren't comfortable roleplaying both at the same time. And like I mentioned above when splitting the party, if everyone has a stealth capable character they can join in on the sneaky fun instead of waiting on the rogue to do his solo play.

RNightstalker
2019-07-25, 10:31 PM
It's not something for everyone, you're right. I've always enjoyed it though.

It can definitely allow for larger encounters and helps w/ players being engaged when the party is split. It can also allow for greater variety than your standard party roles. It can make the GM's job a little more difficult as there is more room for people to specialize for certain situations and have more bases covered.

A con would be the person that can't handle the multiple characters doing it anyway and taking up too much time...especially if their initiative is in order.

Ghost49X
2019-07-26, 06:55 AM
It's not something for everyone, you're right. I've always enjoyed it though.

It can definitely allow for larger encounters and helps w/ players being engaged when the party is split. It can also allow for greater variety than your standard party roles. It can make the GM's job a little more difficult as there is more room for people to specialize for certain situations and have more bases covered.

A con would be the person that can't handle the multiple characters doing it anyway and taking up too much time...especially if their initiative is in order.

True, though people get better at it if they're motivated to try. It also depends on what characters people choose to play, some characters require more thinking than others. A player who brings a Fighter, a Rogue and a Wizard is one thing. A player who brings a Cleric, a Wizard and a Druid isn't making things easy on himself.