Need some ideas for low level characters to instantaneously travel long distances...

[RigaMortus2]

Hmm, it's a solution, but it'd take you (5280/600) or 9 rounds to show up (if you know exactly where to go).

9 rounds might be doable, but the problem is, they have 2 enemies right on them that is hampering their movement and slowing their retreat. In a few rounds the evil army will show up and they are as good as dead anyway.

 

[The Souljourner]

Ok, here we go -

Paladin 5/Sorcerer 1

Take a light warhorse as your mount, cast expeditious retreat on yourself and share the effect with your mount. It now moves 90. It has the run feat, and thus can run at 5x, making it 450 feet per round. 5280/450 = 12 rounds to get there. Not great, but paladin/sorcerer isn't a terrible class combination anyway.

Honestly, the easiest thing is just a scroll of teleport.

-The Souljourner

 

[mvincent]

Ok, here we go -
Paladin 5/Sorcerer 1
Take a light warhorse as your mount, cast expeditious retreat on yourself and share the effect with your mount. It now moves 90. It has the run feat, and thus can run at 5x, making it 450 feet per round. 5280/450 = 12 rounds to get there. Not great, but paladin/sorcerer isn't a terrible class combination anyway.

Couldn't you just use a potion (or oil) of expeditious retreat on a regular horse?

 

[Thanee]

How would you handle that?

As he said, the other group could play the monsters...

DM: “What!? You cannot drop your weapons and surrender!”



Bye
Thanee

 

[The Souljourner]

Couldn't you just use a potion (or oil) of expeditious retreat on a regular horse?

Uh... buh.... No... umm....

Seriously though... yeah, hadn't thought of that. Still, I doubt you could make a horse drink a potion, so an oil would be the best way to go.

-The Souljourner

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Couldn't you just use a potion (or oil) of expeditious retreat on a regular horse?

Nope.

Expeditious Retreat
...
Range: Personal

CREATING POTIONS
...
Spells with a range of personal cannot be made into potions.

 

[mvincent]

Nope.

Musta been a 3.0 thing. Ok then: Horseshoes of Speed.

 

[Jack Simth]

Let me ask you a question, assuming you were the DM running the game... Let's say the party had to be in two places at the same time, otherwise lives would be lost. We are also assuming you are playing with "good" PCs who care about life (altruism) even if the life is "just an NPC" (I've seen groups play supposed "good" characters who treat NPCs as canon fodder). So anway, you have to be two places at once. What would your PCs do? Or would you never present them with such a situation?

I'd be rather unlikely to present them with such a situation - simply because the logical decision IS to split up, and it's a bit of a headache to deal with a party that's in two places at once. Also, the methods for dealing with it that tend not to induce as much headache (running one segment till they get to the meeting point, then running the other section until they get to the meeting point) leaves half the players twiddling their thumbs at any given moment. If it managed to come up, however, I would permit them to do so.

Assuming they do decide to split up, what happens if one group finds themself in combat and things go awry? But the other group is successful and heading back to the "meeting point"? How would you handle that?

Do they know in character that the other group is in trouble? If not, well, sorry, you must keep your characters' actions in character.

A Paladin or Cleric (but not Druid, unless the Druid specifically had a specific diety) in the party might get a sense of urgency, though.... if I was feeling generous. Otherwise, they can't simply start running when the other portion of the party starts having problems.

 

[RigaMortus2]

As he said, the other group could play the monsters...

DM: “What!? You cannot drop your weapons and surrender!”



Bye
Thanee

We could play the monsters, but I find when that happens, players tend to play the monsters "smarter" (and with less leniency) than the DM normally would, which ends up getting the party killed.

The party could have surrendered, as a matter of fact, they still have that choice. But sometimes it comes down to a die roll that just doesn't go your way. One more successful hit could mean the difference between getting away or dieing. So of course ya just got to go for it, but when you miss, you find yourself in the situation you are in

 

[RigaMortus2]

I'd be rather unlikely to present them with such a situation - simply because the logical decision IS to split up, and it's a bit of a headache to deal with a party that's in two places at once. Also, the methods for dealing with it that tend not to induce as much headache (running one segment till they get to the meeting point, then running the other section until they get to the meeting point) leaves half the players twiddling their thumbs at any given moment. If it managed to come up, however, I would permit them to do so.

But it does happen though. If it makes sense for story purposes, and you can envision that is how your characters would act in that situation (agreeing to split up in order to save as many people as possible), then this is what you are stuck with. It is just MHO, but I don't think the story elements should suffer just because the DM doesn't want the hassel of micromanaging 2 seperate groups. I guess ya just can't have it both ways, huh?

Do they know in character that the other group is in trouble? If not, well, sorry, you must keep your characters' actions in character.

Absolutely. We are highly against metagaming, and we generally don't allow your character to speak on other's turns. So no mid-combat strategery going on. If you want your buddy to help flank, tell him on your turn, not his.

Anyway, my character is Mindlinked with some of the other characters, so I am in constant communication w/ them. I know basically how far along the road they are and what direction to head, and roughly the distance.