Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 stanoje Jun 26, 2009 2:13:14	In a game with only 3 PCs, which roles should be covered? Which ones can you live without? Any particular classes that are good at taking on a bit of another role? How would you handle using WotC adventures? Just use lower-level ones, or do encounters need to be completely re-built with the mini-party in mind?
#2 silent_stone Jun 26, 2009 2:28:56	In my (limited) experience, it seems that it is easier to make do without a dedicated controller than any of the three other roles, and a warlock can handle a fair amount of the controller work.
#3 Goober4473 Jun 26, 2009 2:33:26	Generally, controller isn't nearly as necessary as the other roles. I'd go with a striker, a defender, and a leader. Bards, clerics, swordmages, wardens, and warlocks can all do some reasonable controlling. And bards are good at multiclassing into wizard. For encounters, I think you can generally just cut down on the number of monsters. You probably don't want to lower the levels of things, as a lot of lower level enmies causes problems. So take a normal encounter, and drop one monster per missing party member. Solos complicate things a little, since you can't just drop monsters. Cutting hp down to 3/5 should probably do for a quick fix on solos.
#4 canamrock Jun 26, 2009 4:46:08	Most classes have either a striker subcomponent or controller subcomponent built into them, whereas good leader and defender suites are harder (but not impossible) to find in out-of-role classes. I'd therefore recommend a 3 PC party consist of: A primary leader A primary defender A striker or controller At least one character (maybe two) specced to cover the missing role As strong a group synergy as possible It's possible to even go leaderless or defenderless, given that in 3P encounter design, you should have an easier time negotiating threats, but that requires even more group cohesion to handle effectively.
#5 stogoe Jun 26, 2009 7:02:37	I've never played with a controller, and only a few sessions with a defender, and I don't see a 'need' for either. I'd take one leader and double up on strikers. Just make sure your leader has some healing in addition to his "X Word" powers.
#6 JayM Jun 26, 2009 8:19:46	In a game with only 3 PCs, which roles should be covered? Which ones can you live without? Any particular classes that are good at taking on a bit of another role? Controller is the best one to skip, it's the least important role and the easiest one for other classes to cover when need be. With 3 characters, you will want one to be a leader. Probably more important from a design standpoint is making sure the characters are reasonably flexible and not too fragile. With only 3 characters, they are all going to get into melee from time to time and you will want to avoid characters who are specialized to the point they are only good at one thing. How would you handle using WotC adventures? Just use lower-level ones, or do encounters need to be completely re-built with the mini-party in mind? You could use lower level ones, but you will need to check the encounters and rebuild some. Particularly those that put the characters at a disadvantage or can put disabling statuses on the party can be deadly with a small party. Jay
#7 ChrisTheS Jun 26, 2009 10:23:37	What roles do the players want to play? Contrary to popular belief, no roles are essential - just the lack of certain ones necessitates some changes in tactics. For the official adventures, you're probably going to want to reduce the level of many of the creatures, particularly if you're short on classes that grant other players to-hit bonuses. However, you're probably going to want to do that anyway because the monsters in official adventures tend to have over-high defenses.
#8 williamhm75 Jun 26, 2009 11:00:55	you could look at hybrid characters as well.
#9 cromag Jun 26, 2009 17:30:52	A lot of people don't play with a controller and accurately see they're not needed. A lot of people see defenders are good (however they aren't really needed either). What you really want is 1: One or more people that can prevent damage -Defenders and Controllers both do this, it's just easier for a defender to do at lower levels. 2: 1 or more people that can do decent damage. 3: A way to remove damage -Leaders are good at this, but the second wind and rotating who's in front as well as using healing equipment (cloak of the walking wounded, dwarven armor, etc.) can work too. As long as you balance those three things you'll be fine. 3 leaders with heavy armor? Their damage will blow but they'll burn enough healing to win. 3 defenders? They'll live through it too if they have even decent armor and damage output. 3 strikers? Most things should be dead before they have to worry. 3 Controllers? Most things will find themselves being destroyed in a gout of flame or torrent of thunder as long as they keep things locked down and maintain range/cover. -- If you are going to miss something you think is important just plan ahead of time what you'll do to make up for it in the other methods. The tricky part is skills, with less people you'll want to make sure everyone diversifies their selection. A party of people that are insanely skilled at endurance may sound cool, but blows chunks in a skill challenge.
#10 dark_lambo Jun 26, 2009 17:51:18	Skip Controller, definitely. If necessary, you can get minion control via things like multiclassing, or items like Wand of Fire. They'll give you 1/enc AoEs, which should suffice to clear minions.
#11 trobon Jun 26, 2009 18:33:22	you could look at hybrid characters as well. This is my suggestion as well. I am currently playing in a group of three. One of those players wanted to play a monk and the other an artificer so I decided to check out any good defender|controller hybrids. I settled on a swordmage|wizard and I think the group looks good and will probably work well. A lot of people say that controller is the least needed because its abilities can be picked up elsewhere. However, this is like saying that because a Paladin can heal it means that if you have one you don't need a leader. Controllers can make the enemies wish they never had attacked you. Between status effects, AoEs, walls, and generally nice utilities the controller is a very powerful role. I strongly suggest that one person in the group hybrid class rather than just getting rid of a role off-hand. Although, as another person said, its also important to play what people want to.
#12 _Mithreinmaethor_ Jun 26, 2009 18:41:51	I would go with: Hybrid Fighter/Warlord or Paladin/Warlord (Dragonborn) Hybrid Ranger/Rogue Cleric
#13 karldark_dup Jun 26, 2009 18:43:04	Druid, Leader, Defender
#14 Dark_Stryke Jun 26, 2009 20:23:03	I think a dedicated leader and defender are great to have, and make the battles go a lot more smoothly. For your third character, I'd recommend either a striker with some controller-ish abilities (warlock, sorcerer) or a controller that can function decently as a striker (invoker, druid). Really though, you can drop any role so long as the other characters pick up the slack. No leader? Get a Thaneborn Barbarian for your striker, a paladin for your defender, or better yet, both! No striker? Grab a Great Weapon Fighter and a War Wizard. No Defender? Put your Warlord or Rageblood Barbarian up front. While controller is the easiest role for the rest of the party to pick up the slack for, any combination of 3 roles is workable. Other combos (Like striker/striker/leader or controller/leader/leader) will require a lot more creativity on the part of your players, though.
#15 silvermesh Jun 26, 2009 20:28:06	what the classes are and how they are built is basically just as important a question as what role. for instance a warding swordmage is going to be a lot better at defending than an assault or ensnaring swordmage. however, a rogue and an ensnaring swordmage can make a particularly deadly combination. as well, a pursuit avenger and an assault swordmage can make a deadly team. an artificer makes an excellent leader for a shorthanded group due to his ability to basically decide after the combat whose surges get used by his healing(thus, draining party resources uniformly, rather than just whoever was getting hit the most). Someone with a pet or summons would be an excellent addition, just to get another flanker in the mix if nothing else. regardless of the party makeup, everyone is going to want to watch their defenses and expect to be in melee at least once or twice an encounter. there just aren't enough bodies to make it easy to "sit in back and unleash fury"
#16 salla Jun 26, 2009 21:07:47	I'm having a similar issue ... so far, the other two players have a Kalashtar Cosmic Sorcerer and a Changeling Cunning Bard. My leaning is to Tempest Fighter at the moment ...
#17 tiornys Jun 26, 2009 21:30:57	I'm going to agree that it's easiest to skip the Controller, but not because Controller is the "least valuable" role. The Controller role becomes more valuable as you face more enemies. In a large PC party (7+ characters), I'd expect the Controller(s) to be the most valuable role. In your case, with only three characters, I'd expect it to be rare for you to fight large groups of enemies. When you do face larger groups, I'd expect most of them to be minions. Minion control can be easily handled by a few encounter AoE effects, which many classes have access to, and almost any character can multi-class for. t~
#18 red_castle Jun 27, 2009 5:04:01	What roles do the players want to play? Contrary to popular belief, no roles are essential - just the lack of certain ones necessitates some changes in tactics. That's also my advice. I run a 3 player campaign and two of them are striker (barbarian, ranger) and the other is controller (wizard) and it works just fine. The lack of leader to heal can be compensate by healing potions. I don't think that imposing players to take some ''role'' is the way to go. You're the DM, let them make their character and then, compose with it. That's how I deal with it. I can't help you with the WoTC adventures because I have yet to include one in my campaign, but I think they cover it at the start. I might be wrong here.
#19 MusicOfCreation Jun 27, 2009 8:09:02	Controllers can do some pretty amazing things besides just killing minions. We've had fights where utilizing immobilizes and slows allowed us to completely negate some creatures. We did pretty well for the first three levels without a dedicated leader. Dwarf Paladin, Dwarf Wizard, Human Avenger, and Human Rogue was pretty decent as a comp.
#20 chaosfang Jun 27, 2009 8:24:27	I'd say any class would do, as long as all roles are covered. Anyone can minor as a minion-sweeper/status inflicter (for instance, if grab is the worst sort of control, but still a control, anyone can grab), and anyone can do damage give or take, that pretty much puts controller and striker as second place. If all the leader is good for in your group is heal slave then second wind would lower the need for leader/heal slave, and if defender = blocker, anyone can block [although not as well as true defenders], so that puts out all roles as required... although heals and buffs for everyone would always make an encounter easier. So as long as your party has fun and can cover the basics (someone to handle groups or distract or weaken, someone to cover others who need covering, someone to aid and support, and someone to deal the damage), just go for it
#21 bill_bisco_average_adventurer Jun 27, 2009 10:48:06	*Ahem* Roles don't exist. The way to have a good party is often sameness. Have 3 Orb Wizards, or 3 Stealth Archer Ranger Horsemen, 3 Clerics, 3 Str/Wis Paladins. Those are all very good options.
#22 MusicOfCreation Jun 27, 2009 11:18:18	*Ahem* Roles don't exist. The way to have a good party is often sameness. Have 3 Orb Wizards, or 3 Stealth Archer Ranger Horsemen, 3 Clerics, 3 Str/Wis Paladins. Those are all very good options. Lol, thats a good 'un.
#23 quijonsith Jun 27, 2009 13:15:31	The group I'm currently running through KotS for most of the time has only a dragonborn wizard, half-elf warlock, and eladrin fleric (cleric, but acts like a healing/radiant fighter). They've been able to take alot more than I thought they would be able to. The DMG also has guidelines on what monster types will be the most trouble for a group of 3 with XXX role "missing", such as brutes being harder without a defender. It really all depends on how well your group works as a team and how well they use terrain and strategy. My group is excellent at both. The warlock uses her misty step along with the bushes to get total concealment and hide, the wizard uses sleep and orb of fire to take out minions and crowd control, and the cleric makes himself appear to be as threatening as possible with intimidate and being "in your face" with the enemies. From my point of view, as a DM it's up to me to adjust encounters to fit the group, not the other way around. I don't want to dictate to the players what they "need" to play, because I don't believe in "needing" specific group make-ups.
#24 silent_stone Jun 28, 2009 21:21:32	The way to have a good party is often sameness. Have 3 Orb Wizards, or 3 Stealth Archer Ranger Horsemen, 3 Clerics, 3 Str/Wis Paladins. Those are all very good boring and unimaginative options. Fixed that for you, good sir.