I have plenty of experience with Pathfinder, but for reasons beyond my control I am only going to have two people available for my next game.
I have enough understanding of the rules and experience to handle this and have a few ideas on how to make everything run smoother if they lack certain things but I have yet to figure out some details (like how to have them cover watches with only 2 people and perhaps a familiar)
So, I would appreciate the advice of anyone that has run games with so few players and what they did for their game. Not just on the above example, but in general.
Thanks for the help
If the issue is a safe place to rest, you can give them a place protected by NPC's, or create a particularly secure location for them to discover. I was a player in the Serpent's Skull campaign as 1 player of 2, and we did very well by (a) having 2 characters that were very self-reliant and could cover a wide range of party needs (i.e. a ranger and an archaeologist bard), and the 1st adventure in that campaign gave us a group of NPC's that could watch over us while we slept. Running with 2 was a challenge, but with cautious play and creativity we held up quite well!
With two players, problem is you can TPK (total party kill and then end of the game) really easily... and you will (or almost).
Two suggestions :
- From Paizo beta test (long time ago) there is an option for HP I liked and kept as a DM : at first level, you don't add your CON bonus to your HP but your full CON (ie. a wizard with 12 CON won't get 7 HP at first level but 18 HP (12 + 6)). Great bonus at level 1 that won't get really significant with leveling but a huge boost to durability at 1st level. Remember 1st level fights is very often "one shot" attacks, specially for squishy characters.
- Get them a "backup PC" : allow each one to have a cohort (if possible).
It depends on the campaign really. If you're doing something homebrewed why not change the dynamic and setting a bit. Having a more social-focused, investigative plot with less combat could mitigate against swingy damage at low levels. Watches are less if an issue if you're mostly staying in an urban setting.
If watches are your concern then you could always attach them to a merchant caravan etc as a plot device.
Alternatively start them off at level 11 or so, where most builds are powerful enough to survive a lot of punishment. At higher levels camping or alarm spells are commonplace, and summoning, Animal Companions etc can fill in meatshield roles in a pinch.
*Edit* A shorter, focused campaign could be a lot of fun with a duo, and loads of ideas spring to mind:
A Ranger and a Druid trying to find a druidic circle which has severed contact with the outside world.
An Investigator and Rogue working together to bring down a slaver operation on the docks.
An Inquisitor and Bard uncovering corruption within a noble court.
Okay, there are multiple issues with small parties.
1) Crunchiness - If one of the characters fails a save or gets hit to go down, you lose 50% of the party.
2) Filling Roles - Traditionally, you need a combat character, a trapfinder, a healer and a finger-wiggler. Some classes can fill more than one role, but they usually do it less well than a specialist.
3) Action economy - When you have two characters, they get two standard actions in a round. That means that all fights have to have lower numbers of monsters or the PC's get swarmed.
Small parties have a big advantage: Your storytelling gets more focused on their characters. They get more screen time and you can make it very personal. One of my favorite games was 2 PCs and a GMPC.
Possible solutions:
* Let people play with 2 characters each, if they are comfortable with that.
* Bring in a GMPC (or two). Perhaps a little less powerful, perhaps just a bit deferential to the players. Perhaps a spoiled little princess that the players are expected to have to wrangle.
* Let them play gestalt characters. This doesn't help the crunchiness or action economy, but it helps them fill all the roles. You could combine it, say having to gestalt characters and a normal GMPC.
* Make the characters more powerful. Higher level, bonus hp, apply a template, give them a mythic tier. This can be something in the campaign - why do they have these abilities.
* Artificially remove elements from the game. Nobody has trapfinding? Poof, there aren't any traps in the world.
|
The easiest way to do it, and the method that goes further towards ensuring party survival is to let each player run two characters.I have plenty of experience with Pathfinder, but for reasons beyond my control I am only going to have two people available for my next game.
I have enough understanding of the rules and experience to handle this and have a few ideas on how to make everything run smoother if they lack certain things but I have yet to figure out some details (like how to have them cover watches with only 2 people and perhaps a familiar)
So, I would appreciate the advice of anyone that has run games with so few players and what they did for their game. Not just on the above example, but in general.
Thanks for the help
This.
You let them run two characters each. I have done this several times and didn't have a problem.
Running two PCs each would probably work fine. On the other hand, we had fun playing the higher level portion of the Kingmaker AP (12+) with just 3 PCs, and I'm currently running Council of Thieves for just 2 though I let them start out at 3rd level. If you're playing with less than 4 PCs Hero Points are a great option to help prevent TPK (I generally use them anyhow)
Regarding the 2 player CoT game, we felt that 1 PC per player might be better for roleplaying. The APL to CR also theoretically works out correctly, and splitting the XP between just two PCs should keep them about 2 levels ahead of where they're expected to be. It has worked fine so far. The fights have mostly been pretty easy, but there have been a few scares, and the players seem to be having fun. We're also using Background Skills from Unchained (which helps a lot with skill diversity)
I did this in Kingmaker with a Shaman and an Arcanist. It mostly depends on how smart your players are, how lucky they get, and whether or not they can fight without spells. The shaman in this group made use of Shillelagh for a few levels to good effect while the Arcanist carried a longsword for emergencies (and style). When confronted by an Owlbear while mounted they used crossbows and higher move speed to stay out of range for an easy kill. At around Level 5 I found that they desperately needed a martial damage dealer when they had to clear out a cave fortress full of trolls.
I suggest a full Arcane caster and a switch-hitter with good survivability, spells or no spells. Paladin-Wizard would be my pick - self-heal and strong defenses coupled with versatility and fast casting progression. INT-based casters have a decent amount of skills too.
|
I'm currently playing a game of Giant Slayer. With only two players one character each. With out adjustments to the AP.
1: We made the characters with a 20 point buy. Instead of the normal 15.
2: Both me and the other player are experienced with Pathfinder. So we picked a class that could cover many roles.
3: We both made the choice to pick up the torchbearer feat at level 5.
The combination of things made us much stronger then average characters. With out making us over the top powerful. The key to our success has been a combination of class, and team work feat's.
The characters
Me : Hunter (Melee Focused), Bear Animal Companion (Damage, HP), and Unchained Rogue torchbearer
Other Player : Hunter (Melee Focused), Small Cat Animal Companion (AC, Trip), and Bard torchbearer
Standouts in the team work feat's. Look Out by far is the one that annoys the GM the most. Out Flank with every one in the party with this feat. It makes flanking very good for us and if a crit happens. Even if the crit did not kill them all the AoO will.
One of my players considered Torchbearer, but since both PCs and the potential cohort have darkvision the prereq feat probably seemed particularly unappealing.
Thanks for all the help guys. There are some great ideas in here.
|
I usually discourage people from playing pet classes (because they slow down combat), so I'd probably let loose. They want to play a druid and a summoner? Great!
Focusing a little more on social situations would probably be good and also give you an excuse to have a revolving slate of NPCs that might show up.
My big rules suggestion would be to choke back on save-or-suck effects. Use them sparingly and let people try to save out every round (or accept some penalty, like damage, to act normally). One bad save can really hose the party when you only have two people. Admittedly, it might not be as bad if they go the "pet" route.
Cheers!
Landon
Hero Points are particularly great for SoD/SoL alleviation. The PC still uses up a critical resource, but you don't end up with a TPK.
|
Having two players could end up leading to a cool "buddy cop" feeling to the campaign of you want to go that direction. There are lots of great fantasy duo's out there: Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser, Elric and Moonglum, Raistlin and Caramon, etc.
If you want to stick to two PCs, here are some ideas:
- make sure both PCs have some kind of in-game support networks. Guildmasters, noble patrons, chief-of-the-watch, divine herald, etc. Someone who can haul their butts out of the fire if need be and provide healing etc.
- less time out in the wilderness, more time in civilization where they can make use of their support networks.
- A rotating cast of NPC helpers. Keep a third wheel NPC or DMPC around to lend support, but don't use the same one over and over. Change up the support NPC each adventure. (This of this as the "guest star" who comes in every episode and who is the heroes' gateway into the tale.) Changing up the support NPC also prevents them from overshadowing the PCs.
- When handing out loot, give them more defensive-focused items. This in turn lets you throw more mooks at them down the road.
Philo brought up the best points I was going to propose. Additionally...
Assuming you are running modules/paths or something else pre-built, just tune down the enemies they face... or seed them a level or two above recommended. Start the first two encounters soft and slow to gauge their ability to handle themselves. Then escalate to where you judge they are being challenged but still having fun. Just watch their body language even if they aren't complaining.
They may just surprise you if/when they pull off efforts meant for a full party, and that's just more loot/xp for them (bad advice, please do not take seriously, unless they are munchkins, then wee!).
I have played/run these kind of duo campaigns before, and minus the Bolivian Army Ending, they are manageable from the players standpoint without additional GM boons like Gestalt, templates, dual characters, extra companions, or what have you. You can either adapt them to the encounter, or casually/subtly tailor the game to them without spoiling the party. I play to win, but having fun during the endeavor is most of the fun.
Tailor the in-game events to events that the characters have invested skill points into, or from a glance at their sheets they would excel at. It makes it fun when one's silly choice of investing into swim actually pays off (swim competition, overboard rescue, sunken loot), or any Knowledge for that matter outside of Local. Random crafting/profession choice? That may come in handy... it makes some people smile when a DM periodically rewards their choices as opposed to constant NO from the God above the Dice.
Duels, small encounters, espionage, research, crafting, obviously two characters would have problems tackling problems designed for four (and well-rounded meta-style to boot, let's be honest with ourselves), but a side-story style campaign that focuses on individual and best friend/rival interaction just opened up for you, DM. Two people can sneak a lot better than four, and secrets better kept. This can be a positive, and it doesn't take much spin to justify it.
I wish you luck. I mean it.
I just ran a short campaign in the field with a co-worker. One long session cleared half the book. Unchained Rogue and Oracle (Gnome, Dual-Cursed, Seeker) in Bastards of Erebus. Did just fine. I let him shine, and he enjoyed the hell out of it. I found him scrambling, adapting, and overcoming the challenges with a cloudy-eyed oracle ally hilarious and rewarding as a DM. Heck, with less players, combat went by faster, and there was less debate on the table and more go-go-go action ^_^.
If your party of 2 people is NOT composed of 2 characters of diverse capabilities, things get more difficult.