Café de Nuit

Don't worry, Kel-Nage : our group has been playing/DMing for years now and we almost ALWAYS forget about the NPCs. In fact, anything that suddenly falls off the radar is said to have "NPC Syndrome" - they just sort of hang there with their mouthes half-open with drool leaking out...

Then you realize: "I geez! What about Inquisitor Draczjik? He should have has 3 attacks so far... let's see, that 2 flame strikes... " (And this is after slaving over making the perfect NPC for hours... oh well... somehow it still worked out in the end...)

when I was in high-school, I played some one-on-one games with my brother, which were alot of fun. I think the most difficult part is keeping the solo player interested - you have to make sure he(she) is the center of attention, and not all the fancy NPC's...

I've never had a full-blown 1 on 1 campaign, but I've used 1 on 1 sessions as supplemental RPing to my current campaign. It works well, and lets me add more depth to certain NPCs that the PCs don't interact with much as a group.

JinnTolser wrote:I've never had a full-blown 1 on 1 campaign, but I've used 1 on 1 sessions as supplemental RPing to my current campaign. It works well, and lets me add more depth to certain NPCs that the PCs don't interact with much as a group.

I've also never done a 1-on-1 campaign, but in my current one, a player has decided to stray from the party and try it alone. I made a new plotline only for him and he concluded, but he has told me that it was not really fun, and he wants to reintegrate with the party. From what he said, it had nothing to do with the story or how the campaign was handled, but he found it much funnier to be with a whole group in the same situation. Anyway, this is just one opinion.

Ail

While a group is definitely good, I tend to enjoy 1-on-1 games (as a DM), if only because it lets you develop character so much more easily. With a group, it's hard to focus on how each individual PC feels about a certain NPC/situation/object/history/whatever. But when you only have one PC, you can really give him a chance to show off his great history and/or RP skills (hopefully!).

In alot of ways, I think that 1-on-1 games are the best way to capture the "essence" of Ravenloft. In the stories from which we find inspiration, how many times do you find a whole company of well-equipped and balanced characters setting out to fight Evil? And how many times is it a lone individual who is drawn into the story through his relationships or history? I think that individual games give the player & DM the best chance to develop that kind of feeling...

Anywho, that's all IMHO...

A lot of thriller novels and horror novels proceed on the fact that there is only one hero or heroine. I'd think a 1 on 1 campaign can derive wonderfully from them.

Here's another question on one-on-one campaigns. What do ya'll think about a DM who also plays a PC? For example, say you only have one PC, who's a fighter. Could the DM also play a cleric or rogue, to balance the PC's abilities? Would that be a conflict of interest? Can it work?

The danger which I first see is that the DM's "character" might overshadow the PC. The player might naturally look up to the DM's character, since, obviously, the DM knows what's going on (we hope!). How do you avoid that?

Alarnik wrote:Here's another question on one-on-one campaigns. What do ya'll think about a DM who also plays a PC? For example, say you only have one PC, who's a fighter. Could the DM also play a cleric or rogue, to balance the PC's abilities? Would that be a conflict of interest? Can it work?

The danger which I first see is that the DM's "character" might overshadow the PC. The player might naturally look up to the DM's character, since, obviously, the DM knows what's going on (we hope!). How do you avoid that?

I don't call them PCs, they're simply NPCs who go along in the party. Treat them as any other NPC, with their own motivations and possibly an alignment different of what the party would expect.
I have one in the party, and I may it's the most disfavoured character there kind of.... she is really struggling to be accepted as a party member, recognized, heard, consulted, befriended... and there has been some good interaction in there.

Ail

Yeah, I never understood the concept of "DM PC's". If the DM is controlling them, they are by definition not PC's. They are NPC's. Now, NPC's overshadowing the PC's is still a problem, but less so if the DM doesn't think of them as a PC. If the NPC is part of the party and the Player can handle it, I'd rather give control of the NPC over to him. That's one less thing for the DM to worry about, and it makes it more like a 2 player / 1 DM campaign, rather than 1 on 1.

gonzoron wrote:Yeah, I never understood the concept of "DM PC's". If the DM is controlling them, they are by definition not PC's. They are NPC's. Now, NPC's overshadowing the PC's is still a problem, but less so if the DM doesn't think of them as a PC. If the NPC is part of the party and the Player can handle it, I'd rather give control of the NPC over to him. That's one less thing for the DM to worry about, and it makes it more like a 2 player / 1 DM campaign, rather than 1 on 1.

That being said, when I and my group first began playing RPGs, many years ago (feeling old ), we did 3 campaigns in row with 3 different DMs (each of the 3 starting members) and each of us created an PC. While one of us was DMing (that means, one whole campaign), the other players would decide what the DM's PC would do. That happened because there really was an emotional attachment from the player to the character, and even if we could not play it, because it would be unfair, we wanted it to develop with the others.
If that's what you're talking about, a Character you want to use for yourself in other campaigns, then remember you just have to be fair regarding what you give each of the characters, irrespectively of what you call them.

There are DMs known for stuffing one of the characters in the party with goodies leaving the others with way less, because that is THEIR character somehow. Try not to do. That lumps in the same pack of advice as
"Don't bring player grudges into the game, persecuting a character because you have something against who plays it." or more generally, "separate cleanly what is character and what is player".

Ail

That's good advice (from everyone). I think the best thing to do is to remember that everyone I play is "only" an NPC, just by virtue of the fact that I am playing them. Therefore, the lone PC is the heroine of this story, and my NPC's can only be her sidekicks...