So I see a lot of this in Looking for GM. There are a lot of people wanting a GM for a solo game. Now personally if I wanted a solo game I would be writing fan fiction or writing a book. Don't really get the appeal of solo gaming....

But I want to.

There seems to be some definite appeal for some people in the idea of having one person run a game just for them and I may not understand but I would like someone to kind of break it down for me if you would.

I don't think it's so much that it's solo gaming; at least for a lot of people.

It's that with only one other person; the game should (in theory) move relatively quickly.

Another reason for solo gaming would be the player is playing a character concept that would gel with other characters in a group setting.

So, as someone who solo gamed for a while, I can tell you the reasons I play with only a GM, or as a GM for only one player.

The main reason is, well, it's intimate. I don't necessarily mean romantic, I just mean that there's a closeness between a GM and a single player that's difficult to establish when the game gets bigger. Your GM gets to know you very well, and you get to know them.

As willvr said, it's fast too. When you only have to wait for one person to reply, you can play much more quickly, and the better you get to know the other person, the easier it is to know when they'll post and exactly what you need to do in reply.

Most other things are a variation on those two themes, as far as I'm concerned. It's a lot different than writing a novel. It's writing a collaborative novel, which is something that any author can tell you is a lot harder than doing it alone.

At any rate, I hope that helps.

I run a lot of solo games for my wife(disclaimer: in meatspace, not on RPoL). The main appeal of them over group games is much more in-depth interactions with NPCs. In a solo game, you can spend half a session just chatting with NPCs getting better characterization for them if that's what you want to do. Also having one character pretty cleanly be the "main character". The story focuses around them, around what they want to do, without any regard to having to share screentime.

Group games are great for hanging out with friends, but I find that if full immersion in the world and the game is what you're after, that's what solo games are best at.

When you write a story, you know what's coming, you decide what happens. You get freedom of choice, but you get no surprises, shocks or excitement.

When you play in a group you get camaraderie, you get a lot of different people to interact with, but you're one of many, you take your turn and it's all about compromise.

When you play a solo game, you are the centre of the universe, it's all about you and your fun, but it's not predictable, you never know what's around the next corner. Your life is full of surprises.

With a good GM, it can be the best of both worlds.

damn wheres a like button when you need one!

I've never done explicit 'Solo Gaming' before, but I do personally enjoy scenes that are one-on-one with either NPC(s) controlled by a single person or a singular PC. The reasons are many of the above: More intimate, and usually faster paced play. I find I get to know a character better in these one-on-one scenes then I ever would in a group.

Most of the players and GMs I've done this sort of thing are people that I enjoy playing with. Others that I don't mesh with can really ruin the fun of it, so that is something to consider in this as well.

One of my all-time favorite gaming experiences was a solo campaign that my friend set up as the continuation of the last adventure our group ran together.  We finished up Ravenloft (back when it was a single module, rather than a whole setting), and I wanted my characters to set up shop as the caretakers for the village there.  We talked about it a few times, but nothing ever came of it...

Until a youth group we were both in set up a Christmas tree at a charity event.  We both got bored with the conversations everyone else was having about rather inane subjects...so he came up with an idea for the continuation adventure, and we started playing.  It was not only solo, it was also diceless...very much built around the 'well, that sounds logical, so it should work' premise with occasional reliance on 'the rule of cool' to do stuff that might otherwise require a dice roll.

We didn't finish it that night...it got set on the shelf for several months, until he made a road trip to his college of choice to take part in interviews for on-campus jobs.  I had family that lived in the area...so I went with him, and we stayed at my cousin's place overnight.  Two minutes after I got in the car, we picked up right where we left off...this time, we used coin-tosses to replace dice rolls, but it still moved along at a very brisk pace.  The entire drive down, the three or four hours waiting in line for him to get a number, the drive back to my cousin's place, the drive back to campus the next day for his interview, and the drive back home...we finished up about ten minutes before we got back to my place.

So, basically, three nights' worth of gaming time.  But we carried out, in that time, an adventure that would have taken our group about a year or so to get through.

That, to me, sums up the primary interest in solo games.  I've always enjoyed role-playing games as a social occasion, the way some people play bridge or poker with their friends...but that one-on-one adventure holds a special place in my memory.  I wouldn't want to play nothing but solo games...but I certainly enjoy it when the games I'm in provide solo opportunities.

So you mean "Single Player Game".
I thought you meant something like using Mythic GM Emulator.
In the case of using Mythic, all you need is your imagination and some dice.
You are not dependent on syncing your vision of the setting with someone else's and you still get surprises, shocks and excitement.
With it, unlike the "Choose Your Own Adventure" games, anything can happen with the right/wrong rolls.

Thank you guys, I see so many people in Wanted - GM asking for Solo games and it seems strange to me. Though now that I think about it it could be really useful if you are writing a story to play just the characters and have someone else be the world.

I've moved up from solo games to solo party games. Basically the player runs multiple characters and this allows a difference for typical solo gaming in that you can really focus on teamwork and/or inter-party drama.

I can choose to allow RP to effect combat (like the time my bored sorceress missed half the combat because she fell asleep in the sun waiting for the ambush) without worrying about damaging someone else's character or good time. I can run through a published module or AP without a bunch of DMPCs or AFK party members slowing things down.

Plus it really helps me get along with my multiple personalities :P

In reply to Illfirin (msg # 1):

I think it's alright. It's not the kind of gaming I look for often and I wouldn't look for it here. I prefer one on one gaming as a freeform over a chat. I don't see it as one GM to one player, but two writers having a good time. We take turns building the setting, characters and adventures.

For all the positives that were mentioned (quick/regular responses, getting to know the GM, world immersion) I get all of that out of fantastic rule based, group roleplaying. It is possible to explore the environment, explore your character and get to know your GM (as well as the other players and their characters) while furthering the plot and meeting team objectives. But I know that not everybody agrees with my way of playing.

I don't think that solo games are any better or worse than group games. I think the problem is that some people settle. They join group games that seem almost perfect. And they hang in there just waiting for the game to become something else. I've done it.

This message was deleted by the user at 04:10, Thu 09 July 2015.