Do you use/allow multiple PCs per player in your game?

[Argennian]

This is another one of those topics that seem to polarize different kinds of gamers and styles of gameplay. I'm curious what folks here think about this as a viable method of gameplay. I've played in games where we were able to have multiple PCs (as well as hirelings and/or henchmen). Also played in others where it was just your lone single PC and the other party members versus the campaign world.

For me personally, as a DM: In most cases, I do not allow my players to run more than one PC at a time. I do, however, allow for hirelings and henchmen or even a particular "relative" or "acquaintance" back home who could take over the reigns if the player's PC 'buys the farm'. Never like to see the party get too high in numbers unless the particular scenario calls for that, and for a number of specific reasons. If a particular player is a no-show for a game night/weekend, most times I'll npc them for that session but have on very few occassions, allowed another player to run them. As a player: I could see going either way but prefer to have just one PC. I think that it is too hard for some players to run more than one separate PC realistically as individual characters and in most examples I've seen, they all become mutliple aspects of one single-minded/motivated entity (not that that has to be wrong or a bad thing if that's how you like it! )



So, what do you think about this here, good people? Do you use or allow multiple PCs in your game? Do you like or dislike this kind/style of play and why?

[leebrown1990]

I think it's a fun challenge and experience to play multiple characters in a solo game; I'm playing through Castle Amber and I'm controlling 3 characters and I role-play their interactions for the DM's entertainment. For me the fun and challenge of it comes in that I try not to immediately approach a situation as my first instinct or even my initially devised plan would tell me; I think about it from different angles in the view of those characters. I think I can be a little bit bossy as a player and DM so when I go back to playing in a group that helps me appreciate the different ideas people have and allows me to understand what is obvious to one player isn’t necessarily so to another. Also I get kicks from this as it reminds me of my Pre-D&D days where I would play Hero Quest controlling all 4 characters against a particularly nasty DM.

As for a normal game with players with multiple PC's as a DM I would I allow it if I didn't have enough player but generally this isn't a problem. The only time this really comes up when someone plays a missing players character.

In a game my friend is running (Against the Cult of the Reptile God) there are 3 players, we each have our own characters and we have a communal Paladin. We each role-play him at different times and are building his background together. The games just started so I'm looking forward to that aspect of the game.

Cheers,
Lee

[Alethan]

Unless the situation dictates it (not enough players to round out the group), I generally have never allowed it as a DM. It can be challenging enough for most people to properly handle one character, much less two.

In a game my friend is running (Against the Cult of the Reptile God) there are 3 players, we each have our own characters and we have a communal Paladin. We each role-play him at different times and are building his background together. The games just started so I'm looking forward to that aspect of the game.

But I like this idea as a way of rounding out a party that might need just one more character to make it survivable. I'll have to keep that in mind...

[dmw71]

I'm curious what folks here think about this as a viable method of gameplay.

Back when I played regularly, there were only three of us for the most part -- two players and a DM. Typically, each of the players would control two characters. Not only that, but it was more common than not for the DM to actually run a player character (not an NPC).

Admittedly, our games back then amounted to little more than one dungeon crawl after another so unless a player was controlling a character that had more strict behavioral requirements (e.g. paladins), all the characters were played basically the same way (role playing was almost non-existent). The alignment of a character was less a determining factor in how that character acted than the race of that character (humans basically all had the same personality as their player, dwarves were typically grumpy, halflings almost always behaved like the kender from the Dragonlance novels, etc...). Even during those rare occasions when each player only controlled a single character, there was still very little actual role-playing taking place.

I'm trying to think of an accurate adjective (maybe juvenile?) to describe our old method of play, but it worked for us at the time.

Those of you in the Slave Pits of the Undercity game will probably find me still playing this way. I apologize. I am working on it, though.


- Dave