I run a game with 2 player and a DM ran Character, I allow pretty high stats and Max HP every level, that kind of compensates for low party numbers. It really helps if at lest one person plays a healer, and then the DM Character kind of just hangs back in a support roll most of the time.
I have also done 2 people each playing 2 Character, this can be fun but it dose not work for every one
You could also go the with the Gestalt path which is ok, but I don't like that much.
I have a lot of fun with only 2 players, I try to leave it open for other players to show up from time to time, and My weekly game runs as long as 2 people can show up and they don't have to be the same week to week, all my plays pretty much have full time job and crazy schedules so that is how we have to Roll.
any way good luck
|
I typically play games with low players where the DMNPC is a default healer/adept of some sort, and let the players worry about what else to be.
2 players is about as small as I like, and I'd prefer a third. I generally would have less combat and more intrigue in a game with that few players...combat as THEY want it, not as specific planned encounters.
I've done solo, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 player games. My favorite is probably 4 - 5. It has nothing to do with healing or challenge or skills, those are easy to tailor to any party; 4 or 5 players plus a DM gives plenty of voices to roleplay against without being too crowded. Solo campaigns are just player and DM talking back and forth, and if there's more than two characters in a scene, somebody's talking to himself.
I currently run a game in which there are only two players, and another one for just my fiance, in which I play her traveling companion. In the two player game, I have created a pair of NPCs to fill in the Big Stupid Fighter and Healer roles.
In the single player game I play far more of a true DMPC, since he's as much a focus of the story as my actual player's character. Interestingly, I don't have any other permanent members of that party working with them. There's a bit of a revolving cast of friends and fellow adventurers in various locales who might agree to accompany them for some particular event.
It works fine, so long as you adjust your expectations of what the party can handle. Don't expect to run encounters with a CR equal to the pair's level as a standard encounter. Lower the difficulty a bit and pay close attention to the particular things that your player's characters can't do.
My ideal groupsize is three. More than that and combat gets slow, tabletalk reaches a tipping point, and it's just too hard to give everyone the spotlight.
YMMV.
FWIW - most pre-printed modules are balanced for and assume four.
The paizo modules work easily with 4-5. Any more or less and you have to make adjustments.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
My preferred party size is 5. You can cover all the bases and still have enough flex room that everybody can pretty much play what they want. If 1 person can't make it, the game can carry on with 4. 6 is crowded; 7 is too many. In small dungeons like Crypt of the Everflame, everybody ends up holding actions until they can get to the front and do something. 8 is nearly unplayable--a single encounter will take hours because you have to beef up encounters to challenge the party, and you wind up with 16+ characters acting on each round of combat.
When I ran the Crypt of the Everflame series of modules, I had 5 players and it was perfect.
keep in mind who your DMing, no sense in adjusting down a game if the player can handle it.
my role of thumb is:
new or bad player =1/2 player often miss simple things or just dont know all they can do quite yet
player with some time in =1 player note this is whom they make modules over 3 lvl for.
people who have been playing forever =2 why make it easier if the group can take the challenge, its more fun if the group is pushed to do crazy stuff .....that works