For resale, three and one.

Usually the spaces provided in a house are based upon the required functional needs of owner and not given up to a democratic process.

I like applesauce.

It depends on your needs and the configurations of each. How many adults and children will be living in the house, how often will there be guests, how often will said guests stay overnight ... how good are the residents at sharing ... How big would the spaces be in the different scenarios? Is one layout more practical in terms of flow? Are there other possibilities, like 3 bed, 1.5 bath? If you post the different layouts, it would be easier to vote.

Give us a clue as to how many folks regularly live with you.

Three bed one bath would be my choice for most homes. If I were single or retired and had no plans to sell again I’d do two and two

It’s going to just myself living there for now, so this more or less for resale

Two and two. I love having 2 bathrooms and will try never to move into a place with only 1 bathroom again -- when a plumbing issue strikes, having that second bathroom might be important.

Don't lock yourself into those questions only.

With limited space (though 1375 isn't particularly tiny), consider that you might do a jack-and-jill bath ... a full bath opening to the hallway, which attaches to a half bath connected to the master.

And if you don't really need that third bedroom, perhaps you could make it a small bunk room. This would "free up" space to make the other two bedrooms a comfortable size.

"With limited space (though 1375 isn't particularly tiny)....."

To me, that's a good size and nothing I'd call "limited". I'd go so far as to call it big for a single or couple, and reasonable for a family of 4. We obviously come from different worlds.

I'd go with two and two. You can always put two twin beds or bunk beds in a room for extra kids, but the extra bath would be a necessity in my opinion. The extra bath will also work better for you now for use as a guest bath. The main question I have is why not a 3 bed, 2 bath. If the space is designed right, that would be the best option.

My vote is for 3 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms. A master en suite and a hallway bathroom for the other two bedrooms (and guests) to share.

The first house my husband and I owned together was 1410 square feet. Living room, dining room, family room, kitchen, 3 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms. You can easily do 3 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms in 1375 square feet.

In another thread of 1925 house plans, most of the houses have 1 bathroom, and 2-3 bedrooms. Only if there is a 4th bedroom is there a second bathroom. And no powder rooms. And it looks so strange. (Makes me wonder if people in 1925 had better bladder control?)

Anyway, for resale, 2 bathrooms is the way to go. But, 2 bedrooms seems like it would limit resale.

"most of the houses have 1 bathroom, and 2-3 bedrooms. Only if there is a 4th bedroom is there a second bathroom. And no powder rooms. And it looks so strange. (Makes me wonder if people in 1925 had better bladder control?)"

I bet it had more to do with the limitations of plumbing than it did the needs of their bladders, LOL.

Well, some houses had more, so I don’t think it was the plumbing limitations, but really just expectations.

More reality of expectations. Bathrooms were a pretty new in many areas of the country in 1925.

3 bed, 1 bath. That will give you your master, a guest room and an office.

But For 1375 sq ft, you could fit in 3 bed, 2 bath but that will depend on what you want the “common areas” to be.

Can you do 3 and 1.5, a bath and a powder room?