one on one

[dsellars]

Hello,

I'm afraid that this is a bit of a cross post from the forge in the thread below.
(many thanks to Mayuran in that thread for his input)

http://www.indie-rpgs.com/forum/index.php?topic=21805.0

I just wanted to see if there was any way to play burnig empires with just one player and the GM? Teh response in teh other thread basically said it was not reallt possible.

I don't have the book yet (but I will) so I've not had chance to get in to the rules properly.

From what I have seen though it look like a very fun game.

Best regards,
Dan.[/url]

[khelek]

There certainly no rules against it, though at the same time it was written for a group of three to five. That said you could up the number of building scenes for the character, or allow the player to have 2 building scenes that he may use for any minor character that is allied and theyhave a relationship with.

You could also play each phase as a different character, with the current one bing the figure of note.

While I think you lose something in a game like this, you also gain something! I love one on one games.

[Skywalker]

I just wanted to see if there was any way to play burnig empires with just one player and the GM? Teh response in teh other thread basically said it was not reallt possible.

I would say yes but the biggest thing to get around would be the imblance in scenes i.e. the players gets 3 to the GMs potential 5 to 10. To resolve this I would either:

1. Have each player run 3 FoN and have each player act as a GM to the other.

2. Reduce the number of GM scenes by having no more than 1 scene per FoN or having no allied FoN (just the 3 opposed FoN).