GMing a One player campaign

[NMI]

I have been a player in several one on one games.
Just keep things interesting. 1 maybe 2 main NPC's help. A good story, etc...
Look at Batman, he is effectively a one on one PC. Take your clues/hints from comics/movies/etc...

[Natasha]

I wouldn't bulk him up with a lot of friendlys. Keep them to a minimum, unless he seeks them out.

[Dog_O_War]

I have a few questions that will help me offer advice.

What setting are you running?

What style or theme is the game; are you trying to do the global or continental adventurer-thing, or are you keeping things relatively localized to a city or state/province?

What power level does your brother want?

What character archetype is he playing?

[Mercalocalypse]

I did a one on one with a PC that started the game with amnesia. Needless to say it was a great game and one of my favorite RP games.
I did alot of Recon games one on one also playing SEALs.
At leats one NPC partner is a good idea in my opinion.

[LostOne]

I find in a 1:1 situation having a single NPC that is complementary is helpful. So a psychic or mage to go with a juicer, etc.

[KillWatch]

Character development is more important the fewer players there are. You need to know their history really well. Old lovers come into the picture, friends get in trouble, enemies get in the way of social lives etc.

You can base entire arcs on alignment, disposition, class, race, a favored skill, npc's, or any number of things. One on ones are great as they allow for you both to explore the game without a lot of pressure. If the game fails you can always pull a do-over. Also though you don't have to worry about everyone getting enough spot light time. Internal dialogues anc character narations add a lot of flavor to a game.

[Aaryq]

I played one-on-one in my first 2 years of gaming (with the occasional 2 or 3 other players). What I tended to do was have a core of NPC's. Since the PC in question is a loner, that core will do well. At any given time there was never more than 2 (usually just 1) NPC's with the character when he wanted NPCs with him.
We'd usually play rifts (and this was back when we just had the core book, triax, mercenaries and conversion 1). To me, playing one on one is the best way to build your GM'ing skills. It allows you to work on your storytelling and finding the right scenarios for your player. As long as your campaign is more story-based than combat-based, you should have no problems.

[Noon]

One idea is a simulated second player - you have another 'PC', and you determine what that 'player' is doing by rolling on charts. Just think up crazy stuff players often try to do, write it in a list then write numbers next to them so you can roll on it. Every so often the other 'player' gets a turn...

That'll mix things up like you had two players!

[KillWatch]

well that's just cheating.
If you develop a NPC/PC then they should be as fleshed out as a normal PC and therefore there should be no guess work. Basing it on other "players" actions is robbing the NPC of their individuality and their personality.

[Noon]

Nay, you'd just need to stretch your imagination to see the personality - and your declining to stretch.

[KillWatch]

I don't see the disconnect

[Noon]

I don't see the disconnect

Well, just because your not interested in doing it, doesn't mean it's cheating.

[KillWatch]

Stretching your imagination? Is that what you call taking elements of your players? Unfortunately too many players are one dimensional goal oriented fops.
Q What's the mission
A Save the princess
Q Is she cute?
A She is the fairest of the land
Q I am going to get her and do her
A Not a good idea
Q Why are you railroading me?
A

NPCs shoul d not be amalgamations of the players. Each player should have their own overriding goals and personalities and so should significant NPCs

If the PLayer really wants to show up some corporatte sleaze ball maybe the NPC has better ideas, disagrees with the vengeance, disagrees with the cause of vengeance (so he took your favorite booth, did you really have to set fire to his condo?) NPCs should be real people with their own ideas and thoughts. Maybe most of the time they don't conflict with the players but sometimes they should have their own crap to deal with that the PCs can help out with. Maybe the PC referred to the NPC as fodder one too many times and begins to actively sabotage that one player.

But I guess I painted myself in the corner. If the PCs are one dimensional lame brains then yes so should the NPCs, don't want to hurt their head, or make you out to be a creative snob who doesn't know how to have a good time banging cute NPC princesses

Q What's her PB?
A 20
Q 20?!?!? I thought you said she was cute? What a rip.
A

[Noon]

tangled