1 on 1 campaign

>>54328314
Should add a DM PC just to make up for the lacking elements for only having one player, otherwise reward them more often, and give more overpowered rewards so they fare better

>>54328335
this DESU. I GM 1 on 1 games regularly and my player seems to enjoy having access to one or two members of a mercenary group that are all friends.

Even though I am the GM, the adventure plays like its the pair of us. I have them take the lead and use my henchmen characters give information & advice but not leading too strongly. Otherwise, just plan the campaign as normal but be prepared to adjust things on the wing.

>>54328314
1 on 1 can be very fun, but the fewer people you have playing a game, the more important the dynamic between them is. In my experience, most 1 on 1 games quickly fizzle because the dynamic isn't good enough to provide the energy necessary for the game to thrive. But it's a fizzle, not a crash and burn, so it's not a painful experience; it's just disappointing.

Still, if you can find a person you have a good dynamic with, and who is suitably active in the game, then it's a unique experience. Without trying to sound all homoerotic, it's a much more intimate experience, because everything revolves around the PC, and you can focus on them and the things they do in much greater detail than you could in a multiplayer campaign (because you'd never get anywhere if you did that with a bunch of different PCs).

I had a lot of fun doing a 1 on q campaign with a friend of mine. The thing about it is more than with a campaign where there is a group you are able to focus on their character and really roleplay and engage them because everything can revolve around their character. This isn't to say there isn't a world and you don't have things going on in the background, but the clarity of purpose and direction in a 1 on 1 is really good. It let's you do much more intricate things than I think you can with a group.