Solo vs Group Play

Im 46 i played lot when i was Young d&d red+blue box, rolemaster,ESDLA, aquelarre, call of chtulu, Warhammer, etc.. now all my Friends(like me)married with children no time, and discover thanks Alex,now i can play again solid and fun mechanics and awesome dark settings.Play myself any time, my rules, my tools, my wolrd, focus on my character, no discusión anyone, do my cheats without worry of anoying GM! ;P

Lost Cosmonaut hit it on the head imo 100%. I had a couple friends who played DnD and vampires etc, but they really pushed hard on the ROLE PLAY as if you were the character. Which is cool if that's what you like, it was fun watching their groups play, but that's not my thing. I want the exploration and puzzles and want the game itself for my character, or group of characters progression to be the focus, and want it more to be focused on "what happens to this character" rather than me role playing the character itself. Like a narrator telling a story of someones random quests, weather or not they live or die, instead of it being me who is on the quests. This may be because as a kid I had no one to play RPGs with, and I only had computer or console RPGs, which are solo RPGs (text based back then). Then once I found Tunnels and Trolls in my early 20s that took main stage as I could play a book in multiple ways with different outcomes, but it was still pretty linear, and I thought that was as good as solo RPGs got. Also the main problem with T&T is once you finish all the books, that's really all you can do, there's ways to do random dungeons and stuff which I did, but no story or real in depth character progression IMO, (I didnt care when my characters died, which happens a lot in T&T). Until I found your DoBaS book, which showed me that solo RPGs could be open world, and there is a way to bring that computer type of character progression and exploration into a tabletop RPG. Playing with people is a lot of fun, but I don't know why people always compare it to playing with a group. It's two completely different things. It's like how me and my wife watch different TV shows we like together, and then after the show is done will talk about it if it was good or bad etc. the problem is she hates horror and sci-fi so I watch all the horror and sci-fi stuff I like by myself. It doesn't make the sci-fi show I watch by myself any less entertaining, it's just a different way to watch it, and I still find it just as good. IMO the argument of playing with groups compared to playing by yourself to me has always been made by people who refuse to play a solo RPGs just cause there solo, or just haven't found a good one that was entertaining enough for them, or probably just played some of the solo one page RPGs or some other garbage RPG that didn't hit that wasn't what they were looking for in a RPG, or love playing the RPG mainly for the social aspect of it and not the really the game itself (which is also a ton of fun, I'm not criticizing it at all). Basically what I'm saying is I don't think the two styles should be compared (solo/group play), as it's two completely different genres. Both are under the same category (RPGs), but they are 100% different. I don't think any rpg player would compare WOW with FF7. Solo gameplay is entertaining and fun, but in a different way than group plays entertainment and fun.

I've roleplayed for most of my life -- my older brother played D&D3.5, so he made his goofy little 6-year-old sister her very own campaign (best big brother ever); then I played WoD extensively in high school (high school werewolf LARP has forever inured me to cringe); and when my husband and I moved to a new country, Pathfinder Societies helped us make new friends and was one of our favourite hobbies for years. All this to say: roleplaying has been a big part of my life! And then, I had a baby. Late night, six hour sessions were no longer really feasible, haha. We worked in short 2-ish hour sessions online with friends every couple of weeks for a while, but even that was tough. And then I found solo RPGs! I can play for 15 minutes, or for a few hours. I can ignore it for a few days, or a few weeks, and jump back in whenever I'm ready. I can switch genres or storylines or characters whenever I want. It just fits into my life (which remains super unpredictable and chaotic even five years after my kiddo's birth, haha) so well. I'll always love roleplaying with a group, but solo RPGs have become one of my go-to outlets for creativity, relaxation, and honestly just joy. :)

I started playing solo RPGs because I live in a small city and didn't have any friend who liked RPGs, so that was the only option for me. I started with T&T programmed adventures, and went from there. When VTT made possible playing in groups, I joined several groups (one of them I still play occasionally), so at the end I have both experiences. The thing is, I realized that I don't really like --or feel a little bit uncomfortable-- with all the role playing, interpretative theater stuff. Sometimes is embarrassing for me to act the character, make the voices, etc. I'm very self-consious about that, and some times, specially with new groups, is very difficult to me. When playing RPGs, I love to roll dice, hexcrawl across new land, solve riddles, fight, and develop my character. That's my favorite part. I always say that I'm a roll player, not a role player hahaha. So, even having the chance of playing with groups, I still prefer playing solo, for what I just wrote, and also because I can play at my own pace, and make things that are not that important, but for me make everything more enjoyable: draw or color maps, log my travels, follow my own directions, etc.

I played group rpg’s when I was young and it was lots of fun. I’m currently 53 years old and just enjoy getting into a world by myself and building characters in a grim dark world. Not interested in group play, kinda like ready a book. Just lots of fun experiencing the great worlds you create. Keep up the great work!!

I've been thinking my way around this topic a lot lately, particularly the mechanical possibilities of it. Sure, the group substitute aspect is real and necessary, even if it can't replicate the "full table experience". It's still neat that a single player can run a group of characters through a set of encounters that'll provide an altered yet ultimately similar outcome and satisfaction as a group session engaging with the same type of content. What doesn't come up as much in discussion is the "unique selling point" of what a solo game can do that a group game would be unable to accommodate as easily. Most group games have time constraints and would go off the rails quickly if you zoomed in on a single character and their inner workings the way a solo game can. There are way more options for a more protagonist style narrative, where your character's goal, personal development and moral compass take a much more centered approach than in a scenario where you have to also account for three to five others wanting and deserving their time in the spotlight. Solo RPGs do great in replicating a group game through GM emulation but where they really have the potential to shine is in the depths and expansiveness of narratives that group games can't easily cover to a similar extent without pausing 50 - 90 percent of the players present at the table for extended time periods.