Solos with just 3 Players
- Thread starter Baumi
- Start date
well, off the top of my head, I'd say :
* Hit points (it takes a lot longer for 3 vs 5 PCs to take down a sack of HP; maybe something like down 10% - i might suggest going a tiny bit lower than that, like 15%-20% down at most, if the missing PCs are the heavy hitters of the group or else you'll get stuck in a grindy combat)
* Damage (damage can't get spread around to 5 PCs and instead concentrated on the 3, making it deadlier and fewer allies to get around to helping the PCs if one goes down. Maybe something like -2 damage or -4 damage per attack might suffice - I'd probably lean towards the -4 damage if the missing party members are the leaders/defender types of the group)
* Skill Challenge complexity. If there is a skill challenge that acts as an Achilles heel to the solo (ie stop the ritual he's guarding, or shatter the gem that feeds his powers and weakens him, etc) then lower the number of successes needed since there are fewer PCs available to contribute to the skill challenge and keep the solo occupied at the same time.
Stuff that shouldn't need to get changed:
defenses, attack bonuses, initiative, etc.
Something that is tricky:
tactical spacing... the PCs will have a harder time flanking or holding a line or getting the solo busy with some while the others hang back, etc. you can't really account for this in a clean and easy manner though, so (short of adding in companions or random allies that might be there to help) ... i think it's one of those things you'd have to accept as a fact of missing players and not adjust...
(I'm probably missing something obvious. but I'm tired so this is all i could think of at the moment
-- but hope that helps.)
* Hit points (it takes a lot longer for 3 vs 5 PCs to take down a sack of HP; maybe something like down 10% - i might suggest going a tiny bit lower than that, like 15%-20% down at most, if the missing PCs are the heavy hitters of the group or else you'll get stuck in a grindy combat)
* Damage (damage can't get spread around to 5 PCs and instead concentrated on the 3, making it deadlier and fewer allies to get around to helping the PCs if one goes down. Maybe something like -2 damage or -4 damage per attack might suffice - I'd probably lean towards the -4 damage if the missing party members are the leaders/defender types of the group)
* Skill Challenge complexity. If there is a skill challenge that acts as an Achilles heel to the solo (ie stop the ritual he's guarding, or shatter the gem that feeds his powers and weakens him, etc) then lower the number of successes needed since there are fewer PCs available to contribute to the skill challenge and keep the solo occupied at the same time.
Stuff that shouldn't need to get changed:
defenses, attack bonuses, initiative, etc.
Something that is tricky:
tactical spacing... the PCs will have a harder time flanking or holding a line or getting the solo busy with some while the others hang back, etc. you can't really account for this in a clean and easy manner though, so (short of adding in companions or random allies that might be there to help) ... i think it's one of those things you'd have to accept as a fact of missing players and not adjust...
(I'm probably missing something obvious. but I'm tired so this is all i could think of at the moment
-- but hope that helps.)knightofround
First Post
Why not just have one or two of the other players play the missing characters in combat? That way you don't have to change anything.
But if you wanted to make a solo for a split party...a good rule of thumb is divide maximum HP, bloodied HP, and action points by 2. If you spend more time than that, you might as well downgrade it to an elite.
But if you wanted to make a solo for a split party...a good rule of thumb is divide maximum HP, bloodied HP, and action points by 2. If you spend more time than that, you might as well downgrade it to an elite.
Baumi
Adventurer
Thanks for the advice!
I went for the easy way and simply created Companion-Versions of the missing Characters (since they were defenederes I used their Mark-Version instead of the sucky Companion Power and gave them there most iconic at-will and encounter powers).
I just hope they don't screw it up and kill a missing player...
I went for the easy way and simply created Companion-Versions of the missing Characters (since they were defenederes I used their Mark-Version instead of the sucky Companion Power and gave them there most iconic at-will and encounter powers).
I just hope they don't screw it up and kill a missing player...
surfarcher
First Post
No one mentioned companion characters
Last edited:
Tony Vargas
Legend
A few weeks ago, our DM was faced with exactly that problem. She had planned to have the Solo encounter at the end of an adventuring 'day,' after two or three other encounters. She finagled the time line a bit to let us get in an extended rest before facing the Solo. A tough fight, but we were able to pull out all the stops and prevail.
Baumi
Adventurer
Mine weren't so happy ... 3 of 5 character dead (this includes one Compaion), one dying and the last one draged the dying out of the room with one hitpoint.
The Compaions worked fine, but Tomb of Horrors is BRUTAL!
By the way we played M3, M4 and S1 of the second Adventure. That there is no short Rest between M4 and S1 was the real killer.
The Compaions worked fine, but Tomb of Horrors is BRUTAL!
By the way we played M3, M4 and S1 of the second Adventure. That there is no short Rest between M4 and S1 was the real killer.
Similar Threads
