My group has dwindled down to two of us. We still yearn to play...

My group has dwindled down to two of us. We still yearn to play. We're also the two who regularly end up with DM responsibilities.
Would it be gay to just start a two man game? We each have a character and split the dming, switching off each adventure?
Pic unrelated

>Pic unrelated

It would be gay not to use the Barbarians of Lemuria system, OP.

Why not play a co-op board game?

Honest question, why do you shill this game so hard? You've been on the board for at least a few years, one would assume that you'd get bored by no. I know it's not multiple people because it just keeps popping up out of any sort of context, but usually when anything D&D is discussed outside of generals.

What? I've honestly stumbled on it the day before yesterday, it's the best system I know of for a series of episodic adventures. I wasn't aware it was being over-shilled.

>Pic unrelated
that's a shame shame

>Statement
>Image
>Intention

Post an advert somewhere, anywhere. You need human contact beyond the object of your fetish (who likely doesn't return it).

Scarlet Heroes was explicitly designed for one-GM one-player games, and I wouldn't be surprised if there were a handful of others.

With Mythic GM Emulator, you can both get to continue as players.

Don't worry, it's not gay if your swords aren't touching.

One PC, one GM, some sort of weird descent into madness game (CoC is the obvious one but there are loads more) that you and he both know will end up with the PC solving a mystery and then either dying or being carted off to the asylum. Then swap roles and his new PC is investigating what happened to the last guy!

Walk outside.
Proceed to the nearest place where humans you would call "nerdy" congregate. Like a library, a Game Store, a University.
Put out some posters advertising a D&D game, or just "Role Playing Game".
Screen your applicants.
Accept no more than 2 or 3.
There. You now have a full group.
If you've screened well, only one should leave, maybe 2 if you're unlucky.
That's when you get in contact with some of the other people.

Or use the goddamn internet and find someone in your town that wants to roll the dice. I'll bet you there's someone.

>playing with strangers

eww, gross.

They’re only strangers until you’ve played a bunch of games with them over the course of several weeks.

Some of the best campaigns I've been in / run have been 1-on-1 affairs. It requires a bit of a different skill set and you really need to have a good dynamic with the other person, or things will fizzle out. But if you've got the dynamic and can cater very specifically to your player and his character, then it can be great. You really need to get good at playing NPCs though, because your player will need to have other characters to interact with, and since you're the only other person at the table, that will always be you.

It's a fun game. There are a few people on Veeky Forums who still enjoy fun games.

Does it pop up out of context a lot? I'm not the person you're replying to, and I'll often post about it if I see people asking for rules-lite or noob-friendly games.

...

> Assuming any positive recommendation for something that's not a monolithic franchise is shilling

you only found it two days ago and you're telling other people to play it?

Yeah, then they become horrible people that you know, which is even worse.

Seriously. Is it really so unbelievable that someone on a board for tabletop RPGs might actually have a game they like?

I know only criticizing feels safer, because that way no one can make you feel bad by saying your thing sucks, but come on. Some people still like things.

I don´t think there´s anything wrong with a one on one game. As a matter of fact, I DM a game of Scion set in the Mythic Age for a friend of mine and we´re having a blast.

You need to post more unrelated pics.

Okay OP here is what you do
>Start DMing a one on one game, really tailor it to your friend's tastes
>A tale of grand adventure or grim misfortune really focus on making it to exactly what he likes
>Have lots of really detailed NPCs, people that help, or hinder, put lots of emotion and effort into them
>Really pay attention to which NPCs your friend takes a liking to
>Wait until he likes one of the opposite sex
>Start having them return the affection, maybe they want him to stay, or even follow him on his adventures
>Things get more and more steamy with your friend's PC and this NPC, they learn to trust each other, work together, really a perfect combination
>Eventually you'll reach the climax of your story, your friend's PC and this NPC defeat the big bad and there is a question of "what happens after?"
>The NPC wants to marry
>Now look into your friends eyes

That's as gay as it can get, user.

Sounds exceedingly awkward. In my experience, even three man games lack a little. I think the best minimum number is four.

somebody post that one image about two guys playing pretend

>Would it be gay to just start a two man game?
Yes.

Find more friends.

I feel like two days of experience wouldn't be enough to make that claim.

Sounds fake

Do you not have any mutual friends at all who weren't already part of the original group?

This

call of Cthulhu would be perfect. One investigator vs the twisted world that the DM has to throw at them

One DM one player is great. Shit moves quicker and you can focus on actually developing a character. That long, indulgent plotline of a character's past and personal growth that wouldn't be viable in a group game because it would require the spotlight to be on them for too long? Totally fucking viable.

It's honestly not that great. Like it's not bad, but its main selling point is being simple without going into narrativist weirdness, but it otherwise plays about as well as a low-level OSR game.