Do split-play /tg/ exist and how do you play them?
>>47757576
>Split-play
Dafuq does that even mean?
I am unfamiliar with this concept. Please explain.
I bet this is gonna sound dumb
>>47757576
No. How on earth could you make a traditional game split-play? And even if you did, how would the players keep track of of the game?
>>47757576
Explain OP
>>47757576
Do you mean like split screen? What would be the purpose to a medium that is mostly nonvisual and when it is it's got very little virtual assets. Please explain further.
>>47757576
>split-play
What are you even talking about? What do these words mean?
>>47757576
I'd split her play.
>>47757576
>split-play
You explain that shit right fucking now.
>>47757799
It's arghle-fargle-bargle.
![[HorribleSubs] Shouwa Genroku Rakugo Shinjuu - 11 [720p].mkv_snapshot_00.44_[2016.03.30_15.48.21].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/NV58dCh.jpg "[HorribleSubs] Shouwa Genroku Rakugo Shinjuu - 11 [720p].mkv_snapshot_00.44_[2016.03.30_15.48.21].jpg")
A thread died for this
Split-play is where you let players split from their party and do stuff on their own for longer periods of time and where they could ultimately divert from the campaign and do other things or their story could evolve into a completely different campaign.
Or they'll rejoin the original campaign after they have done something on their own.
>>47757874
They've died for less
Maybe OP means like, seperate paths where the players arent together so you split them up to do each path individually or something. Like with Pierce in Community
>>47757874
>>47757914
It was probably a quest so who the hell cares.
>>47757904
>>47757923
Never split the party, anon. This is basic stuff.
>>47757923
OP probably means when each player is playing 2 PCs because of the high lethality of hte game, and each player can see two character sheets in front of them as they're playing.
Probably.
>>47757576
Nono you get headpats
Evidently, this thread is about figuring out "what is split-play?"
This is what I think OP might be talking about.
>>47757904
There are plenty of games like this. Hell, there are games that don't even assume (or outright reject) a "party" structure.
>>47758080
But what happens when a party of schizophreniacs (or whatever multiple personality syndrome is called these days) splits up?
Is that Double Split-Play or Half Split-Play?
>>47758251
Stand aside, young'un. The TeeGee professionals on the case, ready to solve this mystery.
We'll figure out what op meant by split-party soon.
Thank you for this thread, /tg/, I'm still kekekeing.
>>47757576
>>47757904
Different chat rooms desu. Never had a group not-online
>>47758400
Wish I was a hot girl.
>>47758080
Yes, let's solve this mystery!
I think split-play might be Noumenon.
All the characters are different and independent, but they share the same health pool, and we're pretty sure that they're going to have been one character all along.
>>47758251
>>47757904
That's silly. Any RPG could allow for split-play. It's usually horrible unless you have two separate sessions doing things in places where they couldn't feasibly influence each other. Then it's still horrible.
>>47757576
All my players are co-working friends, so I can run splinter campaigns on RPGs and narrative boardgames pretty much any time. Doing it in the usual weekly session format would require some serious organisation and devotion to the campaign.
>>47758477
I just wish you weren't ugly.
>>47758588
Me too but I wish I was a hot girl most of all.
If you mean "splitting the party" it's a suggested and valuable game mechanic in a lot of narrative RPG's like Monster Hearts, Poison'd, and Dogs in the Vineyard.
I don't know any game except those where's it's a good idea, though.
>>47757576
Pretty sure OP means, like, have two different groups of players that represent two different parties, but in the same campaign, and each party's players is unaware of the other party's actions unless they are made known to them in-game.
>>47758515
This game is goddamn incomprehensible.
>>47757576
>>47757904
I've been inforum PbPsfitting that modus operandi.
One was more of a GM round robin - players took reins in GMing short arks when they had ideas for plots. But within those plots, parties were split and reorganized as situation called.
Although I dropped out, it's still going on.
The other had one GM with main plot thread, but people forming groups on their own to deal with it.
That one ground to a halt when a group of cunts decided that they wanted both to have endless slice of life animu shenanigans AND be vital to all plots.
So whenever somebody tried doing plot, they endlessly bitched about being left behind; and if somebody tried pulling them in, they bitched that others were rollplayers and hated character development.
They killed the game, killed the sequel to the game, killed the reboot and killed the reboot of a reboot.
(No don't ask me why the fuck the GM didn't cut off ties with them, I have no idea either.)
>>47757904
Yeah, if it comes up, sure. It's not nearly as bad as it's made out to be. As a GM you just have to make sure to be fairly brisk in switching focus from one player or group of players to another. Let them do something meaningful, build up to something important then switch and let them consider what to do next while you do the same for the others.
With that said, you usually don't want to more than two separate groups. Three is doable but it's the absolute max before play gets really bogged down.
It's also not a style of play for a group who is unfamiliar with the system. It's vital that players can make swift decisions and that the GM can make swift resolutions.
It's also not a style for a players who can easily get distracted. Usually you want your players to be the types who will listen intently and derive enjoyment from listening to the other player's adventures. Or you want the types who will revel in planning between scenes.
>tl;dr
It's viable for people who play a lot and have a tight group to play withso not /tg/
