Are you a DM for a party without fighers?

[TheGemini]

OK, so I'm a newbie DM. There is a learning curve.

The good news I have to come up with interesting NPC's and plot devices because the 3-man party doesn't have a fighter. The bad news is, combat is inevitable! At some point, they're going to face an important battle that they can't back off from. I think I know how I'm going to handle it. I'm going to cheat (fudge the numbers a bit) if it looks like the party will get wiped out.

What do you do?

 

[Gina]

OK, so I'm a newbie DM. There is a learning curve.

The good news I have to come up with interesting NPC's and plot devices because the 3-man party doesn't have a fighter. The bad news is, combat is inevitable! At some point, they're going to face an important battle that they can't back off from. I think I know how I'm going to handle it. I'm going to cheat (fudge the numbers a bit) if it looks like the party will get wiped out.

What do you do?

What classes are they? Nearly any class can manage in combat if they play it smart.

Also, consider sending an NPC for extra muscle.

 

[Scratched_back]

Okay, first of all what are the pc's in the party? You don't have any fighters... that's not always a HUGE problem... do you have any fighter types? Rangers or Paladins for example? I ran a forgotten realms game for a party of three and I had one ranger, one cleric and one rogue. Luckily for me, the cleric was a half-orc war cleric with big STR and CON so he could fight well early on, so it wasn't too bad for me.

The other suggestion I'd have is have you considered an NPC fighter? I know a few guys that DM groups that insist there is an NPC in the group, just for them to have a channel to talk to the party, as it were. Works well too, it is of course up to you though.

On the dice fudging thing... I know it's tempting, but I'd try and avoid it. Do it at the wrong time and players will sniff it out like bloodhounds, kinda take away from the game and the atmostphere, IMO.

Good luck!

 

[UltimaGabe]

My DM fudges dice a lot, and it annoys the heck out of me.

 

[EvilGM]

I, as the DM, do very little rolling. I make the players roll all attacks/damage/etc. aimed at their characters... I didn't kill you, you did!

 

[wolfen]

What happened? Strange Enworld messup.

 

[Kareyev]

If the flavor of game your group is looking for is less melee intensive give go for it! For the early levels pit them against opponents that have similar limitations (i.e. prefer to not have melee combats). That doesn't mean they can only fight librarians and sick puppies. Have them fight a small coven of witches or a school of mages. Make them a team of investigators who solve crimes/mysteries and can call on the X when muscle is needed (city guard, brute squad, the mob).

The party will need to learn when be diplomatic instead of fighting. Give them options which make this clear. They will also need to think about strategies for melee. Setup an up coming melee encounter so they have lots of time to plan so they can learn how to best use their resources. For example it might just be a matter of clogging up the possible fronts with entangle and web spells to slow their opponents down.

The real challenge I think you will find is pacing. If most of them need to rest for spells there is only so much you can throw at them before they need to rest again. Keep in mind that without a fighter type there is no real hit point battery in the party. Until you get a better feel for what they can take talior encounters to do less damage than you might be use to (e.g. stay away from two handed weapons).

I think you will find as the party goes up in levels the problem becomes less and less as spell casters tend to have some of the best defenses in the game.

Good gaming to ya!

 

[Planesdragon]

What do you do?

Nothing. I might, might, let the party advance a bit faster to catch up if they make very non-combat choices--but if you're playing D&D, then there's no such thing as a "non-fighter."

Rogues, clerics, druids, and bards can all hold their own--what they lack in raw hit points or base attack they more than make up for in their various abilities. (A bard inspiring courage can turn the tide of battle--same thing for a cleric's bless spell, a druid's summon nature's companion, or the rogue's sneak attack.)

As for Wizards and Sorcerors--just about any 1st or 2nd level spell can turn the tide in a battle. Some give an edge, while others can take an opponent wholly out of the fight.

 

[Endur]

I used to GM a game for 3 players, none of whom were a fighter (two rogues and a druid).

My thoughts:

1) You can make the game a role-playing experience that does not revolve around combat ... i.e. combat-free roleplaying (generally diceless except for opposed skill checks).
2) You can make the game a hack-fest, and when characters die, a newly created character will become a Fighter (or a Cleric for healing).
3) You could add a NPC fighter to the party, but I strongly recommend against this. The point of the game is to have the players have fun, and if an NPC fighter is handling the combats, that portion of the game will be boring for the players.
4) Wait until somebody else joins the game. Sooner or later someone will play a fighter.
5) Not worry about it. Although there are adventures where you really need a Wizard or a Cleric or a Rogue, there are few adventures that really depend on a fighter.
6) On dice fudging, I wouldn't dice fudge. If a primary character dies, oh well, that's the breaks. If the character was that important, an NPC will come along and raise the character from the dead in exchange for a quest. Or maybe the character will become undead. Or something else will happen.

 

[frankthedm]

2) You can make the game a hack-fest, and when characters die, a newly created character will become a Fighter (or a Cleric for healing).

Only fair way to do things. After all, the players would not give your monsters any breaks