Solo play? Or rather, 1 GM, 1 PC? Anyone done it? Any advice?
Two things I’m considering. One is stealing a page for D&D 3.5 and rolling with “Gestalt” classes to offset the the problem of being all by your lonesome in the fearsome dungeon: basically you get the start moves of two classes, the best of HP and class damage between the two, and each time you level you get a move from each.
The other idea is starting with a hireling for each bond (or if I do gestalt, half the bonds or something) as your “adventuring party”, although it’s clear who the star is.
Kasper Brohus did this
Ben Wray, my wife and I played 1-on-1, and it works great. As I asked questions, we found out that she had a friend, called Pox, whom I statted out with +2 loyalty, +2 Warrior and +3 Defender.
However, we eventually decided to turn him into a fully fledged fighter, since we felt that a one-man party wasn’t versatile enough. Everything had to play to the strength of a Thief, I mean, with the occasional “show a downside to their class”. While we haven’t actually played since then, the intention was that she would control his actions.
I would as “Jackie, what do you do?” when it was time for her own character to act, and ask “Jackie, what does Pox do?” when it was his turn. That way, the entire story would be seen through the eyes of her own character.
In other words, he was still pretty much an NPC. If she asked him stuff, I would speak for him, but she would control him.
I’d go with just the base class, the fiction will wrap around them and develop based on what’s cool about that class. I like the idea of one or two henchmen but make sure that there are some other people or “monsters” for them to interact with as well. Look for PC-NPC-NPC triangles where the character can mediate, take a side, or be the odd one out.
I’ve done this! I pretty much ran it rules as written, and let her use Bonds to create/identify NPCs that were important and got plot immunity as a result.
Hmmm, Kasper Brohus, I do sort of like that. Basically like an old-school D&D Caller!
Yeah I’m down with that. Like having a sidekick!
I tried this, and it’s immensely difficult! Unlike a party (where you can expect the players to discuss things among themselves, speculate, and go to the bathroom), one player will constantly, constantly act and react to your descriptions.
If DMing Dungeon World for one is Neverwinter Nights, then DMing for one is being a calculator. You ARE reaction.
Bret Gillan did this the same as me — use bonds to generate NPCs, otherwise rules as written. I’ve played about eight sessions this way, as DM or player — both are really fun. It is fun to just meet the challenges given your particular limitations from being whichever class. The first time we tried, I had generated a companion character, but he was quickly abandoned — haven’t tried since then. YMMV, of course!
Adam Goldberg Personally, I’d say that “immensely” is an overstatement. It’s harder, sure, but it’s not that much harder. The game will lack that “together we stand” feel that you get from playing with a group, but you also have more opportunities to focus the action around that one character, which just convey an entirely different experience.
For that matter, having only two players has other problems. I find they don’t talk much about what they are going to do, they just do stuff. For some reason, the players seem to know what the other one is thinking. It baffles me. This is especially true, when the players know each other well. I guess I’m missing out on some visual cues.
James Myers It’s fun throwing things at my wife’s Thief, totally disregarding her lack of options sometimes. She always comes out on top any, although often with some bruising 🙂 Most of the time I try to give her challenges suitable for her class. I love class moves 😉
It’s harder in person…it reminds me of the programming scene from The Master. With a group, I can describe a room, change songs on my playlist, and let them ask a bunch of questions at once. With one person, there’s the social need to respond immediately.
Adam Goldberg Not being able to respond immediately is fine. The players often think a little before they act, too.
Kasper Brohus Thief in one on one play is really great! I’ve also enjoyed playing as a paladin in one on one, but thief did seem particularly well suited. I think the wizard would be entertaining as well but I haven’t tried it yet.
Adam Goldberg I disclaim decision making considerably more often in one on one play. Trying that may help rebalance the conversation. But, in my experience, not all players go for that sort of thing equally.