Harry, having flown both multiengined FW & RW I have to say I'd much rather be in a helicopter.
The main reason is that you don't have to go thru the 5 degree AOB into the failed engine with half a skid ball out manual dexterity routine when flying RW. Also when it comes to loss of power the cumulative result on a plank is far more than a 50% I have forgotten but I think the figure is about 80%.
With a helicopter you don't have all the assymetric hassle and handling characteristics remain unchanged.
Legislative requirements (pax charter) dictate that that you gotta have varying levels of OEI performance at LSALT IFR or VFR. So all things being equal you shouldn't be in a powered glide to the impact point aka light twins. Personally I think you have more options because as AOTW says you want to be landing somewhere close to a calming ale.
I dont think pay should be based on the number of engines per se but more as a result of the planning complexities and considerations the pilot is required to cover, that come with having to reach the ground safely when you lose one.
Pays do vary between companies and also within the company. Differences in pay may not be solely based on type but role based as well. If you are required to hold instrument ratings or ATPL or other quals this may also vary pay levels regardless of type.
Hope this helps