Combat-heavy, only 2 players: seeking advice

[garriotr]

Greetings! I have a couple of questions on how to set up combat-oriented campaigns for 2 players. It is going to be a long post, because I really want to get into this but the situation is not very common. I would appreciate any advice you could share!

I am planning on playing with my friend, hopefully for at least a couple of months; there will be only two of us. We are both rather new to pnp DnD (some basic knowledge from crpgs; also, we have read through 3.5e phb).

I have also searched through the similar threads on the internet and the common answers were the following:
- it can be done, it can be fun, but still a different type of game than a full party would have
- it is not advised to play as more than 2 characters
- it's better to use combat-oriented campaigns, especially the ones oriented for 1 player

I have no problem with dropping the roleplaying aspect a little bit and concentrate on the encounters and fights since 1. it is understandable that the former will be less engaging with just two players; 2. we are both more interested in tactical combat anyway.

Now to the specific questions:

0. I have looked at some books (e.g., "Roleplaying Game Starter Set", "Dungeons & Dragons Basic Game", "Dungeon Crawl Classics") that have some great beginner combat-based encounters and I think that's a good way to start. But what is the best way to set this up, in general? Maybe we should take turns being a GM? Should a GM also control a character? What about total number of characters? How would being a GM and a player at the same time work out? (the GM would know all the checks\rolls\traps, right? Or should we just keep the campaign book open and read it as we progress?).

1. We went for 3.5ed because we at least know the basics of dnd from crpgs and we own several books already. I've heard that 4ed is more combat-based than 3ed, should we consider switching to that edition? Or maybe stick to 3.5 and then make a transition to Pathfinder? Maybe some other system (not d&d) would work better?

2. Are there any good campaign videos\channels that would be partially applicable to my situation? Any general recommendations on books\videos?

3. I've looked through the 4ed differences and what I liked was the amount of abilities a fighter has. However, having read through the 3.5 phb, I am also very excited to try out all those grapples, tripping and disarms. As I understand, you can also perform almost any action like trying to throw sand to render the opponent blind, so you can make your fighter more than just an autoattack machine.

But I am still very confused on what exactly you can do as a fighter (for instance, what actions could I perform instead grapple\trip\disarm when facing animals). Is there any guide\tips for playing an interesting fighter? Maybe some campaign videos featuring a detailed melee combat scene?

I've also read that some books (for the fighter it was a "complete fighter" or something like that) introduce additional feats. Should I use them as well or should I just stick to phb? The more possibilities in combat and character planning the better.

What about other types of characters? (ranged, mages). How could you diversify your actions during the combat (something like grappling\tripping)? Again, any recommendations on tutorials\books\videos covering this? I know that a lot depends on the imagination, but having some basic examples\guidelines would certainly help.

4. Is it worth using a virtual tabletop program like MapTools? I have no problem with drawing maps by hand and writing all the numbers on paper, but those tools provide some nice visualization features, like player vision depending on light level.

I hope you will help us getting into PnP RPGs, even if our way of playing would lack in diversity or other features a full party campaign could have.

Thanks in advance!

 

[Zaruthustran]

Oh man, you're in for a treat. Some of my favorite D&D memories were in the exact setup you've got: one player, one DM. It's super fun because the DM can craft an very tight story and every single turn, every player is fully engaged. Combats seem to move quickly, the plot advances quickly, it's just an absolute blast.

My general advice is to play with a party of characters that you and the other player roll & create together. Take turns rolling stats (or you roll 2d6, he rolls 2d6, drop the lowest). Collaborate on class and race choices. Point being: there's only two of you, so you've each got to be fully invested in the characters. Make them interesting. Create two, maybe three characters in total and designate one character as the party leader; this character will wind up being the main protagonist and driving the action. Then off you go.

With so few PCs you're going to need support. Bring in low-level NPCs to fill in the gaps. Healers, loremasters, shieldbearers, mercenaries or loyal mooks, whatever. These guys allow your tiny party to get into big battles, and can go away (or be wiped out) when the DM needs to introduce tragic tension or bring the focus on down to a smaller scale. In other words they're there when you need them, and aren't there when you don't.

To your specific questions:
0. Start with a statted-out "In Search of the Unknown" or a "Keep on the Borderlands." Simple adventures that lend themselves well to exploration and combat, and let you ease into the roleplaying. Since you're new you really won't know what these characters are all about; who they are, how they talk, what they want. Some good old fashioned dungeon crawling will allow these character traits (pun intended) to emerge. You and the player will discover/create them together, when your fighter seemingly keeps rolling a 1, or your rogue scores a clutch critical hit.

Plan on taking turns as the DM. One player can play (and plan) while the other player runs. Switch off whenever a DM burns out or when the other player just can't wait to DM his cool new idea, but don't switch DM duties in the midst of a current adventure. The DM should *not* directly control a party member. He can give input through the NPCs; let the player play. As long as you created the characters together both of you should have a good idea of who the players are and where they're going. In effect, you're both playing the party, just taking turns putting that party through harrowing situations.

1. 3.5e is fine. Stick with that. It's got the tactical elements you crave, and you're familiar with the system. It'll be great. Don't go 4e. It's very much geared to the individual; it puts a giant spotlight on whoever's turn it is, and it takes too much time to for that character to select and play a power. Since you've only got one player anyway you don't need that giant spotlight and the turn-by-turn timesink it demands.

If you're feeling even a little bit adventurous, try 13th Age. It's written by the lead designers of 3rd and 4th editions, and it's terrific. And it's got some great hooks (icons, backgrounds, escalation die) that are especially useful to new players. Forbes wrote a solid review: http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkai...-of-3rd-and-4th-edition-dungeons-and-dragons/ .

2. The classic movie Krull is a good example of this style of campaign. A very small group of protagonists that gets fleshed out with occasional NPCs when needed. Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser are another great example.

3. Combat is as exciting as you want it to be. Seriously. Autoattack is only boring if you let it be. If you say "My turn? I attack. 18. I hit for 7 damage." then that's your own fault. Describe your hits. Establish trust between you and the player, so that when the player describes a particularly cool move he knows he'll get a bonus. After a few sessions you'll establish a rhythm and know when to dial up the descriptive action, and when to tone things down. All that stuff like throwing sand, pushing people around, trips--all that stuff that is reduced to mechanics in 3e and especially 4e--can be boiled down to simple verbal description or, if you really want, a quick-and-dirty ability check. Your fighter will be way more interesting if you don't limit him to the 1 cool power or maneuver choice per level, or the same list of 4 canned "special actions."

Best example/guideline is the original, 1st, and 2nd ed "examples of play." Like this one: http://www.darkshire.net/~jhkim/rpg/theory/examples/redbox_example.txt . Or, watch the "Acquisitions, Inc." videos on Youtube.

4. Don't use any tabletop programs at the table. If you're together at the same table they're not needed. I also encourage you to play with minis, but without a grid. Counting squares takes everyone out of the shared imagined scene, and onto a vinyl mat. Just have each character--each mini--move about as far as you and the other player think it should be able to move, and have attacks of opportunity occur when appropriate. Trust your judgement and don't let the rules get in the way of the fun.

Good luck! And post your experiences!

 

[Ragmon]

Yo, welcome to the RPG world.

- Start simple and slow, and work your way up.
- Start in a populated area, maybe in a big city, then the players have safety net. Fight some thugs, break into houses. And then slowly introduce them to the wilderness via visits to farms and stuff. This way you guys can get the hang of the game, maybe even slowly customize the rules to your tastes.
- The DM might want to add some NPC who accompany them, but not complete the task for them or hog the spot-light. There just there to give advice and help out now and then.
- Videos? I would say listen to some D&D podcasts listen to how other people play. Link these guys mostly play 4th ED tho.
- I wouldn't play 4th if you guys are starting out.
- If you guys want combat oriented classes with some nice combat maneuvers check out Tome of Battle, I think it would really compliment the combat heavy aspect of your game. (If you don't have it, buy it legally or just find an illegal download, torrent or something (PLZ DON'T BAN ME ADMINS. This book would really would help them, and I think it is worth a DL, ill edit this out if need.)
- Virtual table tops are nice, but I would say a white board is nicer, but if you don't wanna pay for it create a battle grid your self, buy a ton of d6s and use em as figures.

No for the tutorial part.
- Read the PHB, and make the players read the PHB.
- Make the players learn their characters abilities, write stuff down take notes, the specific function of the ability so you don't have to flip trough the PHB every time.
- Here is a very useful tip if you guys don't want to take full notes, write down the name of the ability and the page number where it can be found.
- try to run this very short adventure: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/oa/20010413a . Ok I know the PDF isn't working, but if you can find it its a very fun adventure for starting groups. (Its free, sort of, so a torrent wont hurt for this one.)
- Very good advice for the DM, before a session write down about 10 names, this way you will be repaired every time the players ask for a name. So when you check your notes after the players ask for a name, they will think that that NPC is important, but they might not be.
- Draw maps in advance.
- Read fantasy books and movies, always helps the creative juices.
- Don't be afraid to improvise, the books just provide you with guide lines and not strict rules that you must always follow (but don't stray too far)

Short recap: Keep it simple and slow at the start, start in a city, read the rules and take notes, have battle grid ready, Tome of Battle is what your looking for.

And don't forget, its a game so have fun.

 

[Shingen]

I don't think the balance needs to be tipped towards combat too much - it is just that combat goes faster with fewer people. The key, if you go this way, is creative combat setups. A long series of straight up fights can bore 2 people. But challenging, interesting scenarios can be a hoot, and make combat less of a slog.

 

[Jackinthegreen]

If you're brand new to D&D, I'd recommend just sticking with the core 3 books (DMG, MM, and PHB) until you're intimately familiar with the rules. The more supplements you add in the more complex it becomes, and that means you might have a more difficult time getting a hold of the game.

Instead of playing a fighter you might try barbarian. They have enough skill points that you can actually do something with (unlike the fighter) and they can do just as much or sometimes more damage and have a bit better survivability depending on gear and feat choices.

Another starting option is ranger, since they can get you started on spells once you're past 4th level and have plenty of skill points to let you do some other things like tracking and being a lookout. If the DM doesn't fiddle with things casters tend to be more powerful than non-casters. Even with just the core books, clerics can outshine fighters pretty handily once they're past about 6th to 8th level thanks to spells.

Be warned that there are some traps with regards to feats and such. Two-weapon fighting might look fun, but it costs more resources than using a two-handed weapon with Power Attack and doesn't provide as much gain unless you have significant bonus damage above weapon damage. Favored Enemy doesn't fit the bill there.

 

[aglondier]

My only advice for combat: use your scenery.
When designing a dungeon, or even using a module, pay attention to your dungeon dressing. The fluff text that describes what the players see. A few years back I played in a 7th Sea swashbuckling campaign, and what we did there carried on to every campaign since. Jump off the tables, or tip them over to provide cover from archers. Throw chairs to disrupt the enemy's charge, throw sand in their eyes. Swing off that chandaleir!
Offer small bonuses, either circumstance bonuses in the encounter, or xp bonuses afterwards, to encourage imaginative use and abuse of scenery. It will be worth it in the long run...particularly on the convention circuit

 

[Starfox]

If you want to alternate ad DMs, I recommend you each roll one character, and alternate being the "Hero" (player) and "Henchman" (DM). That way, both characters are present all the time, but one of them (the player at the moment) is at the forefront, the other is just a sidekick. It gives the DM a convenient "voice" to use to drop thoughts and advice when he wants to, and brings in added muscle, but still puts the player in control.

The main difference between a small and a big party is in endurance. One lucky hit can turn a two-player team into a desperate escape. Be sure to include plenty of chances to rest and recuperate. Adopt hit-and-run tactics. Sneak around, avoiding unneeded fights. Get a couple of healer henchmen or items. Or use some alternate healing rules, where hp are simply recovered between each fight. Don't expect the players to go through entire dungeons at one go.

 

[aglondier]

These days I always use some of my mages starting cash to pre-hire a couple of "Shield-bearers" to keep watch so i can sleep, a cook to ensure we all actually eat, and a labourer/porter or two to carry my loot out.

 

[Dwimmerlied]

Welcome to the boards, garriotr!

I think that playing a PC as the Dungeon Master (DMPC) is fine; effectively, you are playing this guy (or gal) as another NPC; you play them to what they know, so its not really a problem. In fact, it comes in handy at times; one of the problems with one DM and one player is that its all up to only one player to problem solve, a frequent problem. Your DMPC can be used to drop hints and give ideas.

Apparently it can be done gaming with just one or two characters; because combat is far more lethal and TPK is far more common, there are some ideas you might consider;

Try to design an escape route for every encounter
Provide for diplomacy and negotiation to solve encounters;- good diplomacy checks might even net the characters much needed allies
Tend towards having monsters capture rather than outright kill characters that they drop to 0hp
Place rest points/healing fountains in your dungeons where characters can rest and recouperate without having to head back to town
Hirelings, hirelings, hirelings
If you are very creative, design a host of cohorts that the character can engage from time to time. Each one has an interesting backstory, and each is useful for certain tasks, but the character can only engage a small number of all the possible ones at any given time
Give them special items; More powerful that you otherwise would. One particularly good idea, I think, is some sort of item that boosts constitution significantly; especially with your idea of a combat heavy game.
Fate points which can be traded in to reroll a particularly bad roll.

Another idea I had was to design a special cohort; a pixie that remains invisible for most of the time. They help with healing and sometimes search checks and such, and if you want to add another level of complexity, have the pixie be mischevious and constantly getting the character into trouble.

My personal preference however has already been covered by [MENTION=1457]Zaruthustran[/MENTION], and I agree with just about everything he/she said. I've played one on one before, and my player and I each had multiple characters, and very much loved it; the only thing we found lacking I've already touched on above; with a group of players, problem solving is much easier. Its a lot of pressure for one player to come up with all the solutions and right moves! I reccomend giving them a break by suggesting (perhaps through your DMPC) ideas, clues etc; or allowing intelligence, wisdom or knowledge checks (etc) to gain clues and such.

As for system, I can't offer unbiased advice... I've never played 4thed, and I was quite happy with how 3.0/3.5 worked.

As for the need for a combat heavy game? Perhaps; In our game, this was the underlying assumption, and actually roleplay elements kind of just ended up evolving naturally.

Good Luck!!

 

[Blackbrrd]

4e is critized for being slow, but that is most often with 5+ players. Already at 4 players it feels pretty fast and with 1-2 players it should be very fast. I believe 4e could be a better fit, since 4e is much less swingy than 3e, something that's important with few characters.

One thing with 4e is that the different roles you can choose makes a huge differance for how the combat behaves. You have: Defender, Leader (healer), Controller and Striker. For a one character party, I would probably stick with a striker. With two characters I would probably go with a striker and a Controller.

You also have some nice options with hybrid classes too, for instance the Paladin/Sorcerer hybrid is really nice and would probably be a good fit for a one man party. You get the AC* of a Defender and the damage of a striker, but sacrificing a bit of healing and hp.

*Chosing the Hybrid Talent feat, and selecting Paladin armor