Is it possible to be successful without leaders?

Keep on the Shadowfell scaled for three players. One fighter, one paladin, one rogue. And the paladin misses every third session.

We buy as many potions as we can afford every time we visit town, and knock those things back like water.

It's come a little close on more than one occasion, but no character deaths yet, and we'll be finishing next week. So, yes, certainly doable provided you stock up on potions.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Well, I ran for a group that was a swordmage, fighter, ranger, wizard this weekend and they were having no problems at all. It was for LFR so they really only had to deal with 3 combats per day, though, so they weren't having problems not running out of surges. One of the combats was starting to scare them, but they were in no danger of anyone dying I don't think.

I just played a game last night that was a paladin with four warlocks (one of each flavor, how could we resist doing it?) - we obliterated everything, with ease. I just had my dwarf infernal warlock acting as a secondary defender, but we didn't even use lay on hands...

So it depends a lot on the campaign.
 

Keep on the Shadowfell scaled for three players. One fighter, one paladin, one rogue. And the paladin misses every third session.

We buy as many potions as we can afford every time we visit town, and knock those things back like water.

It's come a little close on more than one occasion, but no character deaths yet, and we'll be finishing next week. So, yes, certainly doable provided you stock up on potions.

Using all your money on potions is going to effect you in the long run - the wealth system is assuming that you gather enough money to acquire a new magic item every few levels to fill in the gaps in the default treasure parcel system.
The combat is balanced around an assumed magic item power progression.

Obviously if your DM is compensating with treasure handouts then this is a non issue.
 

Trending content

Remove ads

Top