The One Character Limit?

[Kagamine]

In the game you mentioned, Kestrel, most actually had two characters a'piece. Figured I would correct that first.

Other than that...

I think most everyone here is right in some way. Because... this stuff is really subjective.

But to me, it all boils down to this. A crappy GM and/or crappy players are going to make for some crappy character experiences, whether they have one character each or twenty. Conversely, a great GM and/or great players are going to make for some great character experiences, whether they have one character each or twenty. Letting players have multiple characters might give a GM more of a headache at some point, but only if one of those players turns into a flaky, crappy, ass-hat or if the GM doesn't know how to handle the number of characters he/she has allowed. And then again, that's not really a character number issue, it's a crappy player issue (which is something every roleplay has to deal with at some point if it hangs around long enough) or an unprepared GM issue.

I agree completely.

[Hellis]

I don't really like that standing. You are not worse as a GM because you do not want multiple character players, nor are you a BETTER player because you like and use more then 1 character. I could even argue that it makes a you a worse player as you cannot properly convey and add to the story unless you had more then one character. But that'd be the same kind of weak argument. . But as you stated unlit, it comes down to preferences both as a player and as a GM. And in that regard, previous experiences. And every gm has the right to set a rule because of said preference and it's not something anyone should really argue against.

Its also the fact that you are ignoring the metagaming problem. That doenst neccarily have to with a bad player, but because you are writing several characters and the brain will simplify things for you. You WILL oversee certain facts.

[Disciple Cain]

Indeed it does allow for too much oversight.
Ever try running a Dwarf Fortress with more than eighty dwarves? Let me tell you, unless if you spend hours upon hours nitpicking every little detail every so ten or twenty ticks, you're going to miss something and they're going to do something dwarfy (see: Dumb as hell). Vampires will undo your fortress because you weren't paying attention to the one part of your fort where they suddenly made a meal out of your mayor. Autopsy was never done and you think he just died by drowning in the river, because apparently that's where his body showed up. He couldn't swim, so it seems legit. Then, Urist McBastard III, your night creature resident, gets into office by popular vote and there goes your fortress.
The point I'm trying to make is that oversight like that, due to having too many characters, will bloat posts to the point of not wanting to really read them (or at least for me) and have a very good chance of derailing an RP by too many means to bother recalling right now. I have ADD and a lower attention span than most, so a dauntingly large post taking place over what seems to be an amount of minutes simply because it has so many characters becomes a pain in the ass. It doesn't make anyone a bad GM to not like something that they believe is a pain in the ass, and it's really subjective what you find as a more 'rewarding' experience especially since that too is up to personal preference.

- - - Updated - - -

Or something like that.

[Kestrel]

In the game you mentioned, Kestrel, most actually had two characters a'piece. Figured I would correct that first.

Fair enough, I didn't check past the OP, which I'm assuming doesn't list who dropped out.

[Rilla]

In general, it's mostly to keep everything contained and easier to follow. Sometimes you might have a person playing Character A and B, with B being somewhere far off; and another person, who is with Character A, talking to Character B as though it's there. Also, most of what Kestrel said, if not all of it.

In Allaria, I generally only let people play one character, until I see how they do with that.

[★LunaLight★]

I just don't like handling too many characters. When I'm the GM, I feel responsible for knowing what characters are up to so I can trigger events and other GM like stuff. I have enough time to observe only so many characters. Besides, I only enjoy looking out for so much. If you want to be in charge of the character limit, you should be GM.

[Maktesh]

There is another reason to only allow single characters. Sometimes you have that person who wants to join the RP that is terrible. They can barely write, their ideas are painful and everything about their character is excessive and annoying. You can say no, you can't join the RP. But personally, I'd feel like an asshole. Like that jerk on the playground who tells certain kids that no, they aren't allowed to play with them. So you let them join, you can handle one person throwing up posts that make you roll your eyes, but you sure don't want them doubling the number of posts they are putting into the RP.

[Nereid]

The last time I gm'ed, I had 4 characters. It allowed me to interact with a lot more characters. It was a testing facility role play, and I played the manager, a test subject, a member of staff, and a security guard. I spent a lot of time playing all four, and they each developed distinct personalities.

[LambentTyto]

Well, if a player who's controller multiple characters and NPCs quits you RP you just lost a lot of characters, lol. Unless of course you have players waiting to join your RP as backups for those who quit!

[Kadaeux]

Highly HIGHLY dependent on the RP being run.


A survival RP around a small group of survivors? Yeah one character per person might be plenty.

An adventure around a slightly larger group? Sure play one or two characters.

A scifi surrounding the events of a full ships crew, let people have three or more if you think they can handle it.

A nation or clan based RP, the player can and will have to have a few main characters and probably dozens to hundreds of named NPCs that will randomly appear not including the faceless hundred to thousands to millions or billions of citizens they rule.