Has anybody tried this? Is it possible?

I couldn't find a minimum number of players in the book, apart from that you need one player as the Investigator and one as the Authority - if you are not one of those, you are the Adviser with less formal, mechanical, impact on the game's fiction. I was wondering if this makes it possible to play with only two players?

What are your thoughts, Seth, does it go against the game as such?

Per

I've never played the game with just two people, but I see no reasons why it wouldn't work.  Indeed, I've wanted to try it out myself, and I'd be very interested in hearing from someone who gave it a whirl.

The one possible issue is that there would be no way to Uphold, since there wouldn't be a third person who would be eligible to do it.  That means that anything that enters the fiction must be tacitly agreed to by both players.  This isn't necessarily a bad thing, though.  Just be aware of it going in.

If you do this, Per, please post about your experiences and let me know!

Whoops!  Thought of one more thing.  The initial setup rules assume three players minimum, because you need an investigator Character, a victim Character, and a suspect Character.

My current thinking would be to have an empty seat, who holds one Character card without actually writing anything.  So, the Investigator starts with the investigator Character card, the Authority starts with the victim Character card, and the suspect Character card is at an empty spot next to the Authority.  Then, each player fills out a Demographic.  Then, the Investigator passes to the Authority and takes from the empty seat.  The Authority passes to the empty seat and takes from the Investigator.  In this way, everything still gets filled out without it becoming too confusing.

But I haven't tried this out or anything, so use at your own risk, and so on.

Luckily I got a chance to play with three players, which is probably a good idea before experimenting.

Regarding the missing Uphold option when you are only two players: one way would be to borrow slightly from Polaris's "You ask far too much" - an Appeal would mean that the narrator has to come up with an alternative narration, and then the Appealing player can choose between the two. Just a loose thought, didn't think it through too deeply.

Seth, could you perhaps share your thoughts on how the initial characters in the game are written - why did you choose this approach, and why are characters created during the game done differently?

Per

Per wrote:
Seth, could you perhaps share your thoughts on how the initial characters in the game are written - why did you choose this approach, and why are characters created during the game done differently?