Multiples of the same playbook?

I was wondering if anyone has ever tried having a campaign where there were multiples of the same playbook? Breaking that rule that says you are the only Angel. A party of nothing bu Gunluggers! Obviously this might not work with some playbooks (looking at you Hardholder) but I'd be curious what people think would happen in such a campaign.

The party members would all handle problems in the same way, and things would start to get two dimensional. Of course, then there is the fact that they begin to step on each others toes and steal each others limelight. Say you have two Savvyheads, why would anyone even need two savvyheads? One them of them says he wants to make something, he succeeds. Even if he wanted to keep it silent, the other player would only need to say, I want to make one too, and you answer: yes, but. What if they share workshops, does that mean they can max out everything it does? What if they both read an object, do they get different answers?

Basically, the reasons the play books work as they do is because each playbook approaches things different. This difference is GOOD, because it forces the players to be individuals, and helps break up monotony and the status quo. Mostly however, it is in the concept of uniqueness that players can create their individual. When you have two people playing the same class, they'll be able to mimic most of everything the other can do, making the game more about who rolls better rather then who they are.

A gunlugger isnt the biggest badass in town in their are three of them. Instead they're just a walking army that can do one thing and only one thing well. Kill shit. Might as well be playing D&D at that point, at least they'll be able to have some individualized flair while charging into constant warfare and battle.

I'm going to both agree, and disagree with what Ebok says. The vast majority of the time, you don't want duplicate playbooks, so if you want a simple answer, it's no. It's not the ideal situation. It's can lead to boredom and the points about it all becoming about kill shit and a whole lot of "doing exactly the same, but with a better roll" are spot on.

But, in special circumstances, it can be worked with. You can take characters in different directions, like the gunslinger who wants to look out for the little guy vs the heartless profiteer. Maybe a brainer who supplements her weird powers with being able to handle a gun or a vehicle compared to one who talks his way out when the maelstrom isn't cooperating. The starting stats, and choosing moves from playbooks option on level up will help set each player apart.

I'd only do it if the situation really called for it and it threatened the group though. The whole party wanting to be a heavily armed gun totting gang is better served with a gunslinger, a battle babe, and any other with a heavy tilt towards shooting things up (best +cool and hard stat option, sawn-off as handy weapon, barter for better gear as soon and as frequent as possible). There's no reason a savvy head can't shop around for an assault rifle or a hocus acquire a car. Consider custom moves, but be careful with balance.

Some playbooks duplicate better than others. Savvy head is probably the worst, but even then you could probably spice things up by giving them projects that require teamwork. Conversely, your example of hardholder would be one I think would work best. Two or more hardholders vying for control over a single large hold, each with their own fluctuating hold over the people can be an interesting set up for a game of thrones style politics, combat light game. I'd still think hocus and choppers would be better, but if they don't appeal to any of the players, why not multiple hardholders? There's so much to work with for pc-npc-pc triangles as you struggle to convince people that you're they should be loyal to. Do you go the fear route, or spend precious resources keeping them happy? Or up the scale and everyone has their own settlement, joined against a larger threat. How do you deal with an underling getting caught stealing from an ally? Make an example and piss off your own people, or show mercy and lose an important trade route?

Ultimately, the best solution is talking the the group openly and honestly to find out what everyone wants (yourself included) from the game.