Rebellious Golem's page

Dotting...

Another fun option could be a Stealth group. Go with, say, a stealthy Gnome Wizard Illusionist and a Dark Tapestry Halfling Oracle with the Deaf curse (free Silent Spell!) and bypass as many encounters as possible, then blast the unavoidable ones into submission. Sneaky sneaky

Does seem neat...

Or you know...

Roll two bards...

And make a mother f*#&ing band! One half-orc who plays a guitaraxe and another who plays war drums and bashes heads in with drum sticks.

Or two humans rocket guitarists...

Or two halfing flutists who laugh while mond controlling their enemies.

Hmm... This idea seems pretty fun, maybe not effective though

Rebellious Golem wrote:

nicholas storm wrote:

Your party has no damage. The cleric is useless against giants and the wizard can't blast enough to kill them, so that leaves disabling giants with spells. Sooner or later one is going to make his save and kill the wizard.

If you are SO insistent that it won't work, why don't you give your own ideas? Huh?

Let me share my ideas for the proper 2 man team composition to beat a 5 man basketball team:

AKA why the downvote system should exist.

I would have your spellcaster be a witch or a shaman. Have that be your healer as well as your blaster. Then go with a slayer for fighting and skills.

Will look into that, thanks

Have you considered a Magus and a Warpriest for your party of 2? You would then have characters who are a bit more combat capable than a Wizard and a Cleric but who otherwise function in a similar manner. As they gain levels, they would pick up combat options at the expense of their spell progression.

I did consider warpriesr and he looks pretty good, but I am worried he might not have the punch for the later books in rotrl and/or s&s.

I despise magus because because it is too "gishy" for me and I don't like it's spell/combat mechanics.

Inquisitor with an Animal Companion would pack more punch than a Cleric in this situation. Inquisitor casting isn't as fantastic as the Cleric's, but you get more skills and more combat abilities to compensate.

If you're really set on being a Cleric, you could consider the Evangelist or Herald Caller Cleric with the Animal domain or Feather subdomain. This gets you an animal companion and either some BAB-substitute hit bonus bard buffs (Evangelist), or more bodies on the field (Herald Caller). If you go this route, you should consider switching the Wizard over to a more martial arcane caster, such as the Magus, Investigator, or Bard (Assuming you don't pick Evangelist, or select a self-focused Bard archetype like the Archeologist).

I don't need to play cleric, but they are quite self sufficient and are full casters, so I suggested them.

Rebellious Golem wrote:

I would agree resources could be a littlle of a problem but only at lower levels

Not sure what you are talking about with skills... Wizards are a soley int based class and always pump it, plus they have access to every knowledge skill.

Depending on how your GM is modifying the adventure path, you might be taxed even at higher levels. I'm playing a 7th level Cleric in a modified Curse of the Crimson Throne with a 5-6 man party, and I still end up running totally dry on spells AND domain abilities about two thirds of the way through every dungeon we go into, and that's with other healers in the party. Without the consistent muscle of our Ranger and Paladin we'd be boned. Ask your GM how he feels about long rests in dangerous areas.

Wizards are good knowledge monkeys, yes, but their class skill list leaves something to be desired. Just look at the class skills of, say, the Investigator and you may realize that a Cleric/Wizard party is going to be skill starved.

Paizo wrote:

The investigator's class skills are Acrobatics (Dex), Appraise (Int), Bluff (Cha), Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Diplomacy (Cha), Disable Device (Dex), Disguise (Cha), Escape Artist (Dex), Heal (Wis), Intimidate (Cha), Knowledge (all) (Int), Linguistics (Int), Perception (Wis), Perform (Cha), Profession (Wis), Sense Motive (Wis), Sleight of Hand (Dex), Spellcraft (Int), Stealth (Dex), and Use Magic Device (Cha).

Yah, resources will be limited. But having 5-6 people could also be part of the problem. More people to heal and buff.

Wizard would work with lots of summons or minions. I would switch out the reach cleric for a damage dealer.

Already said it doesn't have to be a reach cleric... More than once

Your party has no damage. The cleric is useless against giants and the wizard can't blast enough to kill them, so that leaves disabling giants with spells. Sooner or later one is going to make his save and kill the wizard.

If you are SO insistent that it won't work, why don't you give your own ideas? Huh?

Similarly to your other thread you're going to see a lot of suggestions that you should choose options that get you companions/cohorts. Action Economy is the key to PF more frequently than not.

If you are dead set against that and want to solo/duo an AP without such things then the combo you've selected is just as good as any really.

Basically since it's going to be difficult no matter what, you might as well give it a try. Just play your characters very cautiously, and pay lot's of attention.

I'm assuming you're doing this as some kind of challenge mode?

Yah, It is supposed to be a challenge :)

I am pretty sure that without fudging, a reach cleric+wizard would TPK at some point in rotrl.

It doesn't have to be a reach cleric, just a suggestion.

It could be any cleric that could tank like a battle cleric.

Also I have seen wizards solo rotrl...

The problem with wizard is that they have low HP and generally low AC. In a normal 4+ man party, they can hide behind other party members. In a 2 man party, they won't be able to do that. That makes it very difficult to play that without being invisible at encounter starts or using mirror image before encounters, etc.

Reach cleric won't be getting many attacks of opportunity against giants (rise of the runelords has lots of giants) unless you are also enlarged. You won't do enough damage to take out giants with a longspear.

I understand your first point, it is harder for a wizard to survive at lower levels.

By the time you would fight giants shouldn'f the wizard be high ebough level?

I'd be very worried about running out of resources with a party like that. A lone cleric would need to rely on his magic to be able to handle melee combat singlehandedly; if you run out of spells for both characters, you're pretty boned. You're also going to be very low on skills.

One arcane and one divine is a nice combination, but I would swap out one or the other for something with a little more martial prowess and versatility. Perhaps the Cleric for a Paladin, Warpriest or Inquisitor, or the wizard for a Magus, Alchemist, or Investigator.

If you want two full casters, consider an Oracle. The Battle and Metal mysteries give you access to martial weapons and heavy armor, as well as several other survivability boosting revelations. Nature gives you an animal companion and some handy wilderness survival skills. Either way, Charisma as a casting stat and two extra skill ranks per level makes you a much better party face.

Oh, and beware your saving throws! If you both get knocked out by one nasty spell, it's an easy TPK.

I would agree resources could be a littlle of a problem but only at lower levels

Not sure what you are talking about with skills... Wizards are a soley int based class and always pump it, plus they have access to every knowledge skill.

If a wizard is clever and can make it past the early levels it's definitely possible.

I have played pathfidner for a couple of years and I am into optimizing/ min-maxing.

If you are playing Runelords, Wizard is by far the most important party member. You need one.

Without any spoils, could you say why?

Also is it really important in other ap's?

yeah but in a 2 man party, wizard is very difficult to work with at low level. Just don't play rorl.

Since it is one of the two campaigns I own and I don't want to waist my money that isn't a very great suggestion...

I realize it is hard for a wizard at low level but past 5th level they start picking up, the reach cleric will help at low level and we will probably start with extra money or extra feats or somethinf.

I gave seen countless wizard builds that can SOLO most campaigns btw.

Thanks for the help! I notice a lot of people say a druid or summoner would be better than a wizard, I am open to playing a summoner but I hate druids mechanics.

Hey y'all!

I made a thread yesterday about soloing but I talked things over with my gm and I think he will let me build two characters. We are still going to do eithee rotrl or s&s. I am sorry if making too many threads is frowned upon here and if I am making to many threads :)

So back to the original topic, now that I can run two characters, how would a reach clerix and a divination wizard make for a two man party? I know they may have trouble early on, but they will be fully optimized and the cleric will be tanky. I think a cleric/wizard party would cover most basis, The cleric would act as a tank, a fighter/dps, a party face, a healer, a support and the wizard would cover utility, battlefield control, skills/knowledge, debuffing, and versatility.

If not a wizard/cleric group, what would you reccomend?

Again sorry if I am making too many threads.

Rebellious Golem wrote:

Anyone else have input on bards or other classes soloability on different ap's?

What your failing to understand is action economy. If you get,say, 4 orcs attacking a party, a group could handle that.

If a cleric gets hit by 4 orcs he's going to die. Even if he heals himself for some of the damage...that's his turn. And he's still got 4 orcs on him.

So even something simple will wipe you out.

The link I gave near the start is for adventures where you are challenged by something not meant to challenge groups of 4 to 6. I'd suggest starting there. And then, by all means, make a bard.

Yah, I see your point.

Anyone else have input on bards or other classes soloability on different ap's?

Rebellious Golem wrote:

lemeres wrote:

While archaeologist is obvious (since it helps you survive saves), I might as well toss out the dawnflower dervish.

Once you abandon the 1 weapon/1 handed style it comes packaged with, it is a frightfully powerful archetype.

It gives you double bonuses on inspire courage. That is the same as rage early on, and later on you are directly comparable to a barbarian (ie- you get enough bonus that you are on par with a full BAB class that has a boost feature). So you can take care of your own DPS with it.

Would you reccomend archeaologist, cleric, druid, or inquistor?

Tough call. A cleric has both healing spells (which is important, since you can't shove that on someone else), and there are well known builds that combine reach weapons and summoning to help ease up the action economy problem.

But it only has 2 skill points per level, and clerics often don't get as many spells as arcane classes that might work around certain skill problems.

Druids lack the healing, but they have 4 skill points (still not enough, but better) and wildshape has versatility (both in straight melee, and in problem solving, such as turning into a tiny bird to sneak into places). Their summoning is worse, but they also have animal companions.

Archaeologists and inquisitors have skill points and nice self buffs, but they have problems in sheer punch- scarce summoning, and less spell levels.

So you would reccomend which? I would think clerics downside wouldn't be that bad would it?

While archaeologist is obvious (since it helps you survive saves), I might as well toss out the dawnflower dervish.

Once you abandon the 1 weapon/1 handed style it comes packaged with, it is a frightfully powerful archetype.

It gives you double bonuses on inspire courage. That is the same as rage early on, and later on you are directly comparable to a barbarian (ie- you get enough bonus that you are on par with a full BAB class that has a boost feature). So you can take care of your own DPS with it.

Would you reccomend archeaologist, cleric, druid, or inquistor?

Dalindra wrote:

And pray to the dice gods.

One failed save can = RIP

Yah

You also want high saves, that is what I am most worried about with bard...

Have you guys experimented with solo play before? Is your GM experienced?

What Drahliana Moonrunner said above is no joke. Something will have to be seriously altered to make this possible (or at least to make it enjoyable). Either the adventure or the character rules will have to be altered (probably both).

If he's willing to do the work it can be done, but if he just runs the AP as is, there is no class you can use with standard creation rules and have a successful game.

You are sure to see killer build advice show up in this thread because it's a fun challenge to think about, but the reality is your GM is going to have to make some changes to turn a team game into a solo game. IMO

Not out first time soloing, but first with one of paizos campaigns.

Do you know if your GM is planning to give you NPC lackies?

Do you know if he is modifying the AP?
If he is not modifying or rebalancing the AP, will he let you use non-standard character creation parameters of some kind?

I'm having a hard time seeing how even a hyper-optimized character could solo an AP if it isn't modified in some way.

I agree with people above who say Bard would be good if you have NPC helpers. If you don't have NPC helpers and you really have to do it all alone, I think a Cleric or Druid would be a good idea. 9 levels of spells and you can still fight somewhat and take a punch. A summoner would be good too, because action economy is really important in pathfinder.

Personally, I would ask the GM to allow Gestalt classes, 25 point buy, hirelings and action points, otherwise it could be a lot of frustration

Ok thank you, not sure if I will be allowed to use npc's.

So if not, cleric?

Also would oracle or cleric be better for soloing than the bard?

Archaeologist Bard would probably be good.

Was thinking about that...

Played a monk with insane armor and s*+~ attack. The battle lasted forever and my person passed out of exhaustion but still didnt die. Got reduced to one hitpoint and then my guy woke up and ran away. He killed himself by trying to punch a tree. (Housebrew rules dor our campaign is if you roll a one on a attack you hit your ally and if there is nobody in rande you hurt yourself) then bled out because my hand burst.

Yeah I agree bard may have the best chance. You'd need a lot of skills and charisma. Just.. I've wiped out at least 6 characters running it and they were a large group.

I did a little searching. Here's a book of one on one adventures that's on this site.

http://paizo.com/products/btpy89ux?One-on-One-Adventures-Compendium

For this ap or for most ap's?

I doubt any single class could solo skull and Shackles well. A bard may have a lot of tricks up its sleeve (in fact enough to last a lot longer than other classes) but that's a full party AP. I've run it. You...wouldn't do well alone

Which ap would you reccomend?

Also is bard good in general for soloing?

Not positive what ap we are going to run, but most likely skulls and shackles.

Is bard any good at soloing this campaign or any other campaign?

If not, which class and which campaign would you reccomend?

Bards seems to be the most loved class.

I know it used to have a bad rep.

Anyone know what happened?

'Aye guys lookin to make a support class for an upcoming campaign and wondering what are some good ones. I was thinking maybe witch, bard, or oracle. So what do you guys and gals think?

For a party of three what is your recommendations for classes.

Please explain why and please give a little more specifics on the class (ex. Abjuration wizard, Darkness cleric etc.)

Hey. I am new to the forum and I will be starting the hells rebels ap soon.

I was wondering what you guys think are good classes for the hells rebels campaign.