Down to two - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Down to two

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
jedipiiman
Sep 09, 2008 17:41:50 Alright so my group has just went down from having a four person party to having a two person party and DM. So my question is in your opinion what would be a good choice for a a two person party. now out of the three people in our session 2 of them like to be DM's so I actually have two different guys to make. Also there might be a DMpc but neither GM will tell me if there will be one.

All I know is my partner is going to be a 2h fighter for the 1st sesion and the 2nd session was thinking about being a sword mage.

My thought was a melee cleric for the fighter and a fey lock for the sword mage

any thoughts?
#2
stanks
Sep 09, 2008 17:48:13 Firstly ask yourself this question, in a perfect world what do you want to play as? In this 2 player scenario the DM is going to have to build the challenges in the campaign around the 2 PC's.

Personally I think every party needs a rogue, because rogues can do almost anything apart from tank effectively. They help the fighter out, they can use a lot of magic at later levels with UMD. Cleric is also a good option because of the healing and buff spells that allow you to get around a lot of tough encounters easily.

I am assuming its a 3.5 campaign, mostly because their arent splat books yet for 4e, and I dont think sword mage was in the phb 4e (not that id know given my group doesnt want to play 4e).
#3
doomsought
Sep 09, 2008 20:00:00 Small parties are good for sneaky campaigns. Theyt should have high ranks in sneaky skills.
#4
minja_dup
Sep 09, 2008 22:31:24
Small parties are good for sneaky campaigns. Theyt should have high ranks in sneaky skills.

I agree, quick, fast, and quiet. That is the way to go.

In and out, nobody gets hurt.
#5
kurenaiyami
Sep 10, 2008 1:24:04
I agree, quick, fast, and quiet. That is the way to go.

In and out, nobody gets hurt.

As the DM of this campaign, I'd just like to state that we've tried the sneaky thing before. We actually played Shadowrun, even, if you're familiar with it. Even in a game that caters exclusively to the "everything can kill me in one shot so I better not get shot" crowd, this group tends to go with the "kick in the door" style of gaming.

The OP also tried being a social character once, so I placed a number of social interractions (read: Interesting NPCs with which to interact and tangible benefits to doing so), and...he just didn't feel like talking to any of them. His character being the party face, min-maxed in social skills...didn't want to talk to anybody. So I have a feeling that a political campaign won't work well either.

I personally encourage Piiman to be whatever he feels like he would like to, and personally hope it's something he can tolerate being for a while. One of these days, one of these two will have a character who levels more than once before starting anew.

I am assuming its a 3.5 campaign, mostly because their arent splat books yet for 4e, and I dont think sword mage was in the phb 4e (not that id know given my group doesnt want to play 4e).

Nope, 4th. Swordmage is in the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide. Piiman's brother (the other DM/player) saw the preview, and I guess liked it enough to want to be it before even seeing the class. Which I find odd, but if he digs the flavor so much that he doesn't care about the crunch, then awesome.
#6
jedipiiman
Sep 10, 2008 12:38:33 Sneaky huh, the only problem I see that is the fighter and the swordmage might not be that sneaky
#7
minja_dup
Sep 10, 2008 13:17:34
We actually played Shadowrun, even, if you're familiar with it. Even in a game that caters exclusively to the "everything can kill me in one shot so I better not get shot" crowd, this group tends to go with the "kick in the door" style of gaming.

I do miss my Elven Samurai; swords, slug throwers and flash grenades.

You can always make up a stealthy fast fighter, instead of a tough and brutish fighter. Be creative, and have fun! :D
#8
doomsought
Sep 10, 2008 18:37:14
I do miss my Elven Samurai; swords, slug throwers and flash grenades.

You can always make up a stealthy fast fighter, instead of a tough and brutish fighter. Be creative, and have fun! :D

D20 modern (true heir to the title 4.0) or home brew?
#9
minja_dup
Sep 10, 2008 20:49:27
D20 modern (true heir to the title 4.0) or home brew?

FASA. I do miss it, very creative GM, only a couple of sessions.

Same summer we played the reissue of Gamma World, I was a killer clown, Harlequin style. :D

Have done D20 modern, but not Shadowrun D20 modern. We did post apocalyptic Zombies, and a Kill Bill style ultra violent Hong Kong action fest. I did the hair extension assassin. Much fun.
#10
doomsought
Sep 10, 2008 21:00:24 yes, much awesome, had enough balance to tell 4ed were to stick it and was still, in format, D&D unlike 4ed.
#11
m-bark
Sep 12, 2008 4:53:32 Simple.

One Cleric.

One Druid.

The world cries.
#12
doomsought
Sep 12, 2008 13:23:37
Simple.

One Cleric.

One Druid.

The world cries.

:D I've heard about those builds. I haven't actually looked them up, but the term 'zilla' is used for one of them.
#13
minja_dup
Sep 12, 2008 13:38:34 There is nothing like Druids. :D

You get to be the raging voice of NEUTRALITY!

Passing judgment on all the lawful, the chaotic, the good and the evil of the world. Whate other class out there can you make enemies of EVERYBODY!

The world cries, indeed.

Feel the wrath of my cudgel.
#14
jedipiiman
Sep 12, 2008 14:40:58 what Druid? This is a 4.0 campaign so im not sure what druid you are talking about.

But my borhter decided on a melee ranger
#15
minja_dup
Sep 12, 2008 14:48:07
what Druid? This is a 4.0 campaign so im not sure what druid you are talking about.

But my borhter decided on a melee ranger

Oh sorry, Druids in 3.x were way cool.

As far as Druids go in 4.0, just give it a little time, the supplement will surely be out before long. :D

Can't wait.
#16
zillah
Sep 12, 2008 15:24:33 I would say make one tank and one leader. Paladin/warlord. yummy mix
#17
jedipiiman
Sep 12, 2008 17:44:50
I would say make one tank and one leader. Paladin/warlord. yummy mix

well for the 1st session we have a cleric/fighter so we sorta did but as the other we have a ranger and something (that something is what I want to be) im thinking warlock just cause I wanted to play one
#18
lord_karsus
Sep 18, 2008 23:30:58 -My game, which has been going strong for over two years now, only has two players. Each player plays two characters (Half-Elf Bard, Spirit Folk Samurai, Half-Orc Rogue, Human Druid), and I've never had any problems about balance, or role playing issues, or anything.
#19
need_a_life
Sep 19, 2008 11:52:45 Well, my campaign currently has two players (though a third is in the works :D ).

They're playing:
Human Swordmage [Aegis of Assault; Longsword]
Halfling Rogue [Artful Dodger; Dagger]

Haven't had any problems thus far. They tackled an encounter meant for 5 players just fine (they took some hits, but no second wind OR action points were used!). I used a lot of minions and a couple of brutes.
Granted, the encounter would naturally end after 5 rounds (the fight itself was a distraction from the ritual spell being cast in the next room), where the fight had gone down to a couple of brutes and a single minon.
The players dropped one of the brutes with an OA, as the enemies retreated, but despite being injured they were well on top of things.

Next session, they'll be joined by a Changeling Warlord [Tactical; Spiked Chain].
#20
kurenaiyami
Sep 19, 2008 22:42:59
-My game, which has been going strong for over two years now, only has two players. Each player plays two characters (Half-Elf Bard, Spirit Folk Samurai, Half-Orc Rogue, Human Druid), and I've never had any problems about balance, or role playing issues, or anything.

I pitched the "play two characters" thing to my players. One seemed put off at the idea, and the other seemed indifferent, so it didn't happen.
#21
lord_karsus
Sep 21, 2008 21:12:04
I pitched the "play two characters" thing to my players. One seemed put off at the idea, and the other seemed indifferent, so it didn't happen.

-Oh well. Why, would you happen to know, was that one person put off?

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 jedipiiman Sep 09, 2008 17:41:50	Alright so my group has just went down from having a four person party to having a two person party and DM. So my question is in your opinion what would be a good choice for a a two person party. now out of the three people in our session 2 of them like to be DM's so I actually have two different guys to make. Also there might be a DMpc but neither GM will tell me if there will be one. All I know is my partner is going to be a 2h fighter for the 1st sesion and the 2nd session was thinking about being a sword mage. My thought was a melee cleric for the fighter and a fey lock for the sword mage any thoughts?
#2 stanks Sep 09, 2008 17:48:13	Firstly ask yourself this question, in a perfect world what do you want to play as? In this 2 player scenario the DM is going to have to build the challenges in the campaign around the 2 PC's. Personally I think every party needs a rogue, because rogues can do almost anything apart from tank effectively. They help the fighter out, they can use a lot of magic at later levels with UMD. Cleric is also a good option because of the healing and buff spells that allow you to get around a lot of tough encounters easily. I am assuming its a 3.5 campaign, mostly because their arent splat books yet for 4e, and I dont think sword mage was in the phb 4e (not that id know given my group doesnt want to play 4e).
#3 doomsought Sep 09, 2008 20:00:00	Small parties are good for sneaky campaigns. Theyt should have high ranks in sneaky skills.
#4 minja_dup Sep 09, 2008 22:31:24	Small parties are good for sneaky campaigns. Theyt should have high ranks in sneaky skills. I agree, quick, fast, and quiet. That is the way to go. In and out, nobody gets hurt.
#5 kurenaiyami Sep 10, 2008 1:24:04	I agree, quick, fast, and quiet. That is the way to go. In and out, nobody gets hurt. As the DM of this campaign, I'd just like to state that we've tried the sneaky thing before. We actually played Shadowrun, even, if you're familiar with it. Even in a game that caters exclusively to the "everything can kill me in one shot so I better not get shot" crowd, this group tends to go with the "kick in the door" style of gaming. The OP also tried being a social character once, so I placed a number of social interractions (read: Interesting NPCs with which to interact and tangible benefits to doing so), and...he just didn't feel like talking to any of them. His character being the party face, min-maxed in social skills...didn't want to talk to anybody. So I have a feeling that a political campaign won't work well either. I personally encourage Piiman to be whatever he feels like he would like to, and personally hope it's something he can tolerate being for a while. One of these days, one of these two will have a character who levels more than once before starting anew. I am assuming its a 3.5 campaign, mostly because their arent splat books yet for 4e, and I dont think sword mage was in the phb 4e (not that id know given my group doesnt want to play 4e). Nope, 4th. Swordmage is in the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide. Piiman's brother (the other DM/player) saw the preview, and I guess liked it enough to want to be it before even seeing the class. Which I find odd, but if he digs the flavor so much that he doesn't care about the crunch, then awesome.
#6 jedipiiman Sep 10, 2008 12:38:33	Sneaky huh, the only problem I see that is the fighter and the swordmage might not be that sneaky
#7 minja_dup Sep 10, 2008 13:17:34	We actually played Shadowrun, even, if you're familiar with it. Even in a game that caters exclusively to the "everything can kill me in one shot so I better not get shot" crowd, this group tends to go with the "kick in the door" style of gaming. I do miss my Elven Samurai; swords, slug throwers and flash grenades. You can always make up a stealthy fast fighter, instead of a tough and brutish fighter. Be creative, and have fun! :D
#8 doomsought Sep 10, 2008 18:37:14	I do miss my Elven Samurai; swords, slug throwers and flash grenades. You can always make up a stealthy fast fighter, instead of a tough and brutish fighter. Be creative, and have fun! :D D20 modern (true heir to the title 4.0) or home brew?
#9 minja_dup Sep 10, 2008 20:49:27	D20 modern (true heir to the title 4.0) or home brew? FASA. I do miss it, very creative GM, only a couple of sessions. Same summer we played the reissue of Gamma World, I was a killer clown, Harlequin style. :D Have done D20 modern, but not Shadowrun D20 modern. We did post apocalyptic Zombies, and a Kill Bill style ultra violent Hong Kong action fest. I did the hair extension assassin. Much fun.
#10 doomsought Sep 10, 2008 21:00:24	yes, much awesome, had enough balance to tell 4ed were to stick it and was still, in format, D&D unlike 4ed.
#11 m-bark Sep 12, 2008 4:53:32	Simple. One Cleric. One Druid. The world cries.
#12 doomsought Sep 12, 2008 13:23:37	Simple. One Cleric. One Druid. The world cries. :D I've heard about those builds. I haven't actually looked them up, but the term 'zilla' is used for one of them.
#13 minja_dup Sep 12, 2008 13:38:34	There is nothing like Druids. :D You get to be the raging voice of NEUTRALITY! Passing judgment on all the lawful, the chaotic, the good and the evil of the world. Whate other class out there can you make enemies of EVERYBODY! The world cries, indeed. Feel the wrath of my cudgel.
#14 jedipiiman Sep 12, 2008 14:40:58	what Druid? This is a 4.0 campaign so im not sure what druid you are talking about. But my borhter decided on a melee ranger
#15 minja_dup Sep 12, 2008 14:48:07	what Druid? This is a 4.0 campaign so im not sure what druid you are talking about. But my borhter decided on a melee ranger Oh sorry, Druids in 3.x were way cool. As far as Druids go in 4.0, just give it a little time, the supplement will surely be out before long. :D Can't wait.
#16 zillah Sep 12, 2008 15:24:33	I would say make one tank and one leader. Paladin/warlord. yummy mix
#17 jedipiiman Sep 12, 2008 17:44:50	I would say make one tank and one leader. Paladin/warlord. yummy mix well for the 1st session we have a cleric/fighter so we sorta did but as the other we have a ranger and something (that something is what I want to be) im thinking warlock just cause I wanted to play one
#18 lord_karsus Sep 18, 2008 23:30:58	-My game, which has been going strong for over two years now, only has two players. Each player plays two characters (Half-Elf Bard, Spirit Folk Samurai, Half-Orc Rogue, Human Druid), and I've never had any problems about balance, or role playing issues, or anything.
#19 need_a_life Sep 19, 2008 11:52:45	Well, my campaign currently has two players (though a third is in the works :D ). They're playing: Human Swordmage [Aegis of Assault; Longsword] Halfling Rogue [Artful Dodger; Dagger] Haven't had any problems thus far. They tackled an encounter meant for 5 players just fine (they took some hits, but no second wind OR action points were used!). I used a lot of minions and a couple of brutes. Granted, the encounter would naturally end after 5 rounds (the fight itself was a distraction from the ritual spell being cast in the next room), where the fight had gone down to a couple of brutes and a single minon. The players dropped one of the brutes with an OA, as the enemies retreated, but despite being injured they were well on top of things. Next session, they'll be joined by a Changeling Warlord [Tactical; Spiked Chain].
#20 kurenaiyami Sep 19, 2008 22:42:59	-My game, which has been going strong for over two years now, only has two players. Each player plays two characters (Half-Elf Bard, Spirit Folk Samurai, Half-Orc Rogue, Human Druid), and I've never had any problems about balance, or role playing issues, or anything. I pitched the "play two characters" thing to my players. One seemed put off at the idea, and the other seemed indifferent, so it didn't happen.
#21 lord_karsus Sep 21, 2008 21:12:04	I pitched the "play two characters" thing to my players. One seemed put off at the idea, and the other seemed indifferent, so it didn't happen. -Oh well. Why, would you happen to know, was that one person put off?