I know a decent amount about dungeons and dragons and I'm excited to become a DM but only 1 of my friends wants to play. Is it possible to have 1 on 1 games for a while until we get more members?
Yes, although you need to adjust difficulties and challenge ratings appropriately from the books (a level 1 player is not a challenge rating 1) as most assume a party of players. I've had great games that were 1 dm and 1 player. Discuss class and type of game the player wants to play then adjust the game to fit. If they are a Rogue and want a stealthy play style, create more trap and stealth-oriented games.
It's possible, but trying to even out encounters with monsters with just on PC is hard. I recommend having some NPCs tag along, to cushion the blows. If a new player wants to join, then you can let them make a character, or give them full control of the NPC to use.
A city setting with less combat would be helpful. If the PC gets in trouble, the guards showing up in the nick of time is more plausible than having someone save them in a dungeon or wilderness setting. An NPC bodyguard would be easier to explain in the city too, he just wants to get paid. An NPC following a PC into a dungeon needs more of a background to explain why he would want to go. Giving the NPCs a personality is good but you want to keep the focus of the story on the PC.
It is usually frowned upon for the DM to have characters in the party, but a 1 player campaign might be the best time to do something like an anime with the PC being the main character, but the DM controlling a handful of support party members.
You can also let the player control multiple characters, or give them some decently powerful followers and/or pets.
If you go the NPC route, use stock NPCs from the appendices In the back that have little to no personality or creativity. Give them a name and basic personality traits with no added class levels. This helps alleviate the GM-as-a-player problem.
Sure. The player just controls the whole party of NPCs if the DM thinks he can handle it. It can get a little slow while the player constantly checks a half-dozen Character Data Sheets to decide how he wants to role play a verbal exchange, but you'll both fall into a groove after a bit. Good Luck.
Yes, it can. It is not easy though. There is a furious debate in the DM section of this site concerning one possible thing you can do to make the game easier for the player character. In my solo campaign, my wife controls her character and the two NPCs in combat. She has been running this Troupe style of game for decades so she is pretty fluid. I occasionally add to or overrule a choice based on information I know about the NPC and she doesn;t know, but for the most part she is in charge.
Troupe style play, I find neatly circumvents the old DMPC argument. I talk and plot for the NPCs out of combat...in combat she controls their actions.
Don’t see why it is a problem with the DM running a PC of his/her own. It is all dependent on the DM. I run a PC as a DM and I never make any kind of decisions for the group. Any loot I leave it up to the group to decide who gets what. DMs PC never asks for anything. It is what it is. D&D is meant to be played however you want. There is not hard righ/wrong. As long as all involved have fun, that’s the main point.
Don’t see why it is a problem with the DM running a PC of his/her own. It is all dependent on the DM. I run a PC as a DM and I never make any kind of decisions for the group. Any loot I leave it up to the group to decide who gets what. DMs PC never asks for anything. It is what it is. D&D is meant to be played however you want. There is not hard righ/wrong. As long as all involved have fun, that’s the main point.
I like your train of thought, back in 2nd edition when I DM'd I ran a PC as well. My group had rotating DM's which we all used the same character, so when I was a player it was my character when I DM'd it was an NPC. Rules we had was when Character was an NPC they earned 50% EXP, made no story or loot decisions. I cannot see why the same wouldn't still work out with 5th edition.
Has anyone considered a scenario where the player controls a team of characters? You would miss some of the personality collaboration/conflict, yes, but it would run similar to modern small squad games (Dragon Age, Mass Effect, etc.)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Characters:
Grishkar Darkmoor, Necromancer of Nerull the Despiser Kelvin Rabbitfoot, Diviner, con artist, always hunting for a good sale Bründir Halfshield, Valor Bard, three-time Sheercleft Drinking Competition Champion, Hometown hero
Has anyone considered a scenario where the player controls a team of characters? You would miss some of the personality collaboration/conflict, yes, but it would run similar to modern small squad games (Dragon Age, Mass Effect, etc.)
This is mostly what my wife does. Although, there is a lot of role playing in her group...it is just a group of her PC and two NPCs.
Has anyone considered a scenario where the player controls a team of characters? You would miss some of the personality collaboration/conflict, yes, but it would run similar to modern small squad games (Dragon Age, Mass Effect, etc.)
Yes. Someone considered that scenario 35 days ago.
Noticed I skipped over the post mentioning the DM Guild 1-on-1 campaigns.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Characters:
Grishkar Darkmoor, Necromancer of Nerull the Despiser Kelvin Rabbitfoot, Diviner, con artist, always hunting for a good sale Bründir Halfshield, Valor Bard, three-time Sheercleft Drinking Competition Champion, Hometown hero
This is how I learned back in '76. Sometimes there are only 2 of you and you still want to play.
Another thing you can do is co-DM the world, you both have players and you both DM. It can be challenging but also fun if you both align well.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Ancient GM, started in '76, have played almost everything at some point or another.
I run/play Mercer-style games, heavy on the RP and interaction, light on the combat-monster and rule-lawyering. The goal is to tell an epic story with the players and the players are as involved in the world building as the GM is. I run and play a very Brechtian style, am huge into RP theory and love discussing improv and offers.
It would be quite a logistical challenge, since all the classes in DND all have ceartain weaknesses that other classes cover up. In the meantime though, you might wanna decrease the difficulty of the monster by simple health, AC and damage tweaks. Also playing a multi class character, as this negates the previous downside. Have fun playing DND. PS. It’s also very hard to role play with on person unless your playing a haunted one backstory.
The only advice I would add here is that you would need to prepare your player to lose their character. A few bad rolls in a row could easily end them without a party. If it happens, there is no one to bring them back either. If they are completely solo, the previously mentioned rogue would work well for utility. If they like to fight, they may want to consider a barbarian since it can take a lot of punishment. If you plan on rolling HP, you may want to give them their maximum at level 1 to give them a safety net. You could alternatively have them find healing potions fairly frequently or make them cheaper in your campaign.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I know a decent amount about dungeons and dragons and I'm excited to become a DM but only 1 of my friends wants to play. Is it possible to have 1 on 1 games for a while until we get more members?
Yes, although you need to adjust difficulties and challenge ratings appropriately from the books (a level 1 player is not a challenge rating 1) as most assume a party of players. I've had great games that were 1 dm and 1 player. Discuss class and type of game the player wants to play then adjust the game to fit. If they are a Rogue and want a stealthy play style, create more trap and stealth-oriented games.
DMsguild has some solo adventures that can be run as DM & PC if you need some ideas/resources.
Perpetually annoyed that Eldritch Knights can't use Eldritch Blast, Eldritch Smite, and Eldritch Sight.
It's possible, but trying to even out encounters with monsters with just on PC is hard. I recommend having some NPCs tag along, to cushion the blows. If a new player wants to join, then you can let them make a character, or give them full control of the NPC to use.
A city setting with less combat would be helpful. If the PC gets in trouble, the guards showing up in the nick of time is more plausible than having someone save them in a dungeon or wilderness setting. An NPC bodyguard would be easier to explain in the city too, he just wants to get paid. An NPC following a PC into a dungeon needs more of a background to explain why he would want to go. Giving the NPCs a personality is good but you want to keep the focus of the story on the PC.
It is usually frowned upon for the DM to have characters in the party, but a 1 player campaign might be the best time to do something like an anime with the PC being the main character, but the DM controlling a handful of support party members.
You can also let the player control multiple characters, or give them some decently powerful followers and/or pets.
If you go the NPC route, use stock NPCs from the appendices In the back that have little to no personality or creativity. Give them a name and basic personality traits with no added class levels. This helps alleviate the GM-as-a-player problem.
There's the new sidekick UA that would certainly be useful on making some quick allies for your one friend till you get more.
Sure. The player just controls the whole party of NPCs if the DM thinks he can handle it. It can get a little slow while the player constantly checks a half-dozen Character Data Sheets to decide how he wants to role play a verbal exchange, but you'll both fall into a groove after a bit. Good Luck.
Yes, it can. It is not easy though. There is a furious debate in the DM section of this site concerning one possible thing you can do to make the game easier for the player character. In my solo campaign, my wife controls her character and the two NPCs in combat. She has been running this Troupe style of game for decades so she is pretty fluid. I occasionally add to or overrule a choice based on information I know about the NPC and she doesn;t know, but for the most part she is in charge.
Troupe style play, I find neatly circumvents the old DMPC argument. I talk and plot for the NPCs out of combat...in combat she controls their actions.
Don’t see why it is a problem with the DM running a PC of his/her own. It is all dependent on the DM. I run a PC as a DM and I never make any kind of decisions for the group. Any loot I leave it up to the group to decide who gets what. DMs PC never asks for anything. It is what it is. D&D is meant to be played however you want. There is not hard righ/wrong. As long as all involved have fun, that’s the main point.
I like your train of thought, back in 2nd edition when I DM'd I ran a PC as well. My group had rotating DM's which we all used the same character, so when I was a player it was my character when I DM'd it was an NPC. Rules we had was when Character was an NPC they earned 50% EXP, made no story or loot decisions. I cannot see why the same wouldn't still work out with 5th edition.
Has anyone considered a scenario where the player controls a team of characters? You would miss some of the personality collaboration/conflict, yes, but it would run similar to modern small squad games (Dragon Age, Mass Effect, etc.)
Characters:
Grishkar Darkmoor, Necromancer of Nerull the Despiser
Kelvin Rabbitfoot, Diviner, con artist, always hunting for a good sale
Bründir Halfshield, Valor Bard, three-time Sheercleft Drinking Competition Champion, Hometown hero
This is mostly what my wife does. Although, there is a lot of role playing in her group...it is just a group of her PC and two NPCs.
Yes. Someone considered that scenario 35 days ago.
Noticed I skipped over the post mentioning the DM Guild 1-on-1 campaigns.
Characters:
Grishkar Darkmoor, Necromancer of Nerull the Despiser
Kelvin Rabbitfoot, Diviner, con artist, always hunting for a good sale
Bründir Halfshield, Valor Bard, three-time Sheercleft Drinking Competition Champion, Hometown hero
HOW HAVE I MISSED THIS
This is how I learned back in '76. Sometimes there are only 2 of you and you still want to play.
Another thing you can do is co-DM the world, you both have players and you both DM. It can be challenging but also fun if you both align well.
Ancient GM, started in '76, have played almost everything at some point or another.
I run/play Mercer-style games, heavy on the RP and interaction, light on the combat-monster and rule-lawyering. The goal is to tell an epic story with the players and the players are as involved in the world building as the GM is. I run and play a very Brechtian style, am huge into RP theory and love discussing improv and offers.
It would be quite a logistical challenge, since all the classes in DND all have ceartain weaknesses that other classes cover up. In the meantime though, you might wanna decrease the difficulty of the monster by simple health, AC and damage tweaks. Also playing a multi class character, as this negates the previous downside. Have fun playing DND. PS. It’s also very hard to role play with on person unless your playing a haunted one backstory.
heheh get rickrolled xdddddd
The only advice I would add here is that you would need to prepare your player to lose their character. A few bad rolls in a row could easily end them without a party. If it happens, there is no one to bring them back either. If they are completely solo, the previously mentioned rogue would work well for utility. If they like to fight, they may want to consider a barbarian since it can take a lot of punishment. If you plan on rolling HP, you may want to give them their maximum at level 1 to give them a safety net. You could alternatively have them find healing potions fairly frequently or make them cheaper in your campaign.