Substandard parties

[Agback]

G'day

Suppose that you were designing a party for a game with only 2 PCs in it. How would you start off?

There are abilities that a party needs that only a rogue can have. So one character has to be a rogue. Or does it?

And for the other character I guess you need a cleric, paladin, or bard to get access to magical healing. Or can you get by with potions?

Do you need a front-line fighter? Or can you get by if both PCs are sneaky-tricksy?

Regards,


Agback

 

[MerakSpielman]

You can be any classes you like, if the players have enough ingenuity. Most deficiencies can be worked around with items or other abilities. Ex: A fighter can use healing potions and bash in doors in the absence of a cleric to heal and rogue to pick locks.

You can always hire henchmen, too.

 

[Crothian]

Have the players play what they want, then allow the games to focus on their abilities. Sure, if theirs no rogue traps might become problemsome, but they really don't have to go forward there. They can start doing things that they are good at.

 

[Balgus]

I think 2 clerics with a rogue NPC would do the trick.

edit: Then again- any class can work. the DM just has to know their limitations and modify the encounters accordingly.

 

[Sanackranib]

substandard party

I would let them start out at level 2 each and have both multiclass
1) rogur/mage
2) fighter/cleric

or
rogue/cleric - work towards temple raider PrC
fighter/mage

I wouldn't encourage the same PC to be both mage and cleric because if he goes down then the otherguy doesn't have any magical backup

Also the 2 rogue character idea is stronger then you may at 1st think. consider if they flank it's +2 hit and +1d6 each.

 

[Sir Osis of Liver]

I got to go with the majority here, it shouldn't be up to the players to emulate a well rounded four persons party. It's up tp the DM to provide an adventure suitable to what ever they end up making.

 

[Nifft]

You can make an adventure for any kind of party. It's more important -- MUCH more important -- that players really like the character they play.

A simple solution: start the 2 PCs out at level 3, and let them hire level 1-2 Henchmen / Mercenaries / etc.

-- Nifft

 

[Balgus]

nifft:
start the 2 PCs out at level 3, and let them hire level 1-2 Henchmen / Mercenaries / etc.

Why do they have to be level 3? Where in the rule does it say that you have to be of higher level than your hireling?

Personally, I would just let them play- and give them the opportunity to hire anything they need (or you feel they need) in order to run through your adv.

they can start off at lvl 1, and hire a lvl2 expert (traps) or lvl 1 rogue NPC. in any case- don't tamper with their characters by MAKING them play a MC rogue/cleric just because you think that a cleric is necessary for healing and rogues are neccessary for traps...

just DM- and if they die.. then they die... but don't kill them either- cause nothing upsets players more than a DM who says "you need a rogue in your party" and the party does not pick a rogue. and then the DM places ten traps in a row in a dungeon, and when the party dies "i told you you needed a rogue..."

 

[NoOneofConsequence]

Why do they have to be level 3? Where in the rule does it say that you have to be of higher level than your hireling?

As Machiavelli said, if you trust your fate to mercenaries then the mercenaries will take your princedom from you.

or, in D&D terms

If your hirelings are higher level than you, they'll take your pay and then they'll take everything else. If you're a higher level than your hirelings then their much less likely to screw you over, 'cause they ain't strong enough to do it. I think that's the principle that the original poster was working from.

 

[Moe Ronalds]

I'd think Paladin and Bard would be good. The Paladin has some of the main cleric abilities and the fighting ability, and the bard has some sneaking ability as well as the ability to cast arcane spells.