|
Most of my gaming experience has been with the RPGA, which (in my region) tends to be combat heavy and story/rping lite. I agree somewhat with your other DM--your group is very playable at low and mid levels (1-10,11) but starts losing steam at higher levels. However, I disagree that all characters need to be specialists--most of the party should be, perhaps, but a party that also has support characters and a jack of all trades or two around a core of specialists tends to make the best mix.
I recommend that the players with divine and arcane casting ability take a combination of classes and prestige classes that do not cause them to sacrifice levels of casting ability and spell access in their initial core class. The additional spells from mystic theurge are nice, but it can't make up for the loss of high level spells. I have no wish to spoil the AP for you, but from what I've seen in SCAP and AoW, high level combats can be very brutal and you need access to as many high level spells, summons, healing, and buffs as you can get. I also question why the party has two dragon shamans. A dedicated support buffing caster or a knight might be better in place of one of the shamans. Best of luck.
|
As the 'other DM', I'll comment on this; excuse the snipping.
I agree somewhat with your other DM--your group is very playable at low and mid levels (1-10,11) but starts losing steam at higher levels. However, I disagree that all characters need to be specialists
Maybe I was going a bit over the top; I agree that with six PCs, you can have the luxury of a couple of support characters, but this party has an over-abundance of them.
I recommend that the players with divine and arcane casting ability take a combination of classes and prestige classes that do not cause them to sacrifice levels of casting ability and spell access in their initial core class. The additional spells from mystic theurge are nice, but it can't make up for the loss of high level spells.
I agree with this wholeheartedly. At some points (depending on who is DMing), the party will have no full-progression arcane caster, no full-progression divine caster, and no rogue. Having two dragon shamans doesn't really make up for this!
paz
I agree with this wholeheartedly. At some points (depending on who is DMing), the party will have no full-progression arcane caster, no full-progression divine caster, and no rogue. Having two dragon shamans doesn't really make up for this!
Wouldn't it be better to adjust the adventures to suit the party's strengths (flexibility, requiring different skills for jobs, creative solutions to problems - general jack of all trade kinda stuff) instead of declaring it unplayable and unsurvivable?
Maybe it's just me, but it seems kind of off to tailor the party to suit the game and thus limit what people are able to play.
~ Bryon ~
|
|
Wouldn't it be better to adjust the adventures to suit the party's strengths (flexibility, requiring different skills for jobs, creative solutions to problems - general jack of all trade kinda stuff) instead of declaring it unplayable and unsurvivable?Maybe it's just me, but it seems kind of off to tailor the party to suit the game and thus limit what people are able to play.
~ Bryon ~
Being unable to tailor the game to a party is one of the few beefs I have with playing in the RPGA. All the mods have to be run a specific way in a specific amount of time--there's a little room for the dm to provide npc flavoring, but the flow of the mod is the same for every dm that runs it (and usually the outcome).
Getting back to ericthecleric's and Paz's posts, i think their ability to tailor the game instead of the party is a function of how much spare time they have. If they're a 30 somethings like me, with a full time job and social obligations during the week and weekend, extensive conversion is possible but improbable. If they're still in college, or have a substantial amount of free time, then your advice Byron is spot on.
Personally, I recommend tailoring the party to the modules. For one, switching out a character or two is a lot easier than having to rewrite or substantially alter 12 modules. There are a few dm's I've known who could wing it on the fly, but if you do not have the time, alter the party.
Not being able to play a character that you want blows at times, but I've found that being sometimes forced to play outside your default character or character archetypes can broaden one's horizons and give an appreciation for other classes that was not there before. Go with a core of 3-4 specialists (tank, divine, arcane, face/rogue) with the rest support/jack of all trades and the group should go far.
|
|
Wouldn't it be better to adjust the adventures to suit the party's strengths (flexibility, requiring different skills for jobs, creative solutions to problems - general jack of all trade kinda stuff) instead of declaring it unplayable and unsurvivable?
Maybe it's just me, but it seems kind of off to tailor the party to suit the game and thus limit what people are able to play.
I'm running the Savage Tide adventure path, mainly because I don't have the time to write my own adventures (plus I'm not very good at it). Having to tailor things too much kind of defeats the point. I'm not quite a thirty-something (although I'm getting close), but apart from that, Tzzarg's guess as to my status is pretty accurate.
This whole thing is taken a little out of context - my original e-mail to ericthecleric was in response to a suggestion that when we swap DMing duties, I play an arcane trickster, to cover both the wizard and rogue roles. I stated that wasn't really the direction I wanted to take my character, and I then lamented how our party would find it more difficult than most due to the number of utility and support PCs, rather than specialists in particular roles. The wishes of one of the players to swap from playing a wizard to a dragon shaman (when we already have one) only seemed to add to that problem.
4 of our 6 players are relatively young and inexperienced at D&D. I'm not going to make anyone play a character they don't want to, but if they are generating a new character for any reason, I will probably drop a few hints on what character would be most useful to the party (based on general guidelines, rather than spoilers).
paz
Currently, my STAP group's wizard is thinking of changing to dragon shaman. If this happens, the party will consists of the following:
Barbarian X (possibly aiming for Totemic Demonslayer)
Cleric X (almost certainly going to geomancer/mystic theurge)
Dragon Shaman X
Another Dragon Shaman X
Ranger X-1/Marshal 1 (possibly aiming for Knight of the Chalice)While the other guy DMs, there's also a binder (my PC). When I take over DMing in part 4, the binder will be replaced by a wizard (this isn't the guy thinking of changing to dragon shaman).
I stated this on another thread, but the best progression for the cleric is probably as follows, with all of the geomancer levels improving cleric spelcasting (ending with spells as a cleric 17 and a wizard 10):
Cleric 3Wizard 3
Geomancer 3
Mystic Theurge 1
Geomancer 4
Mystic Theurge 3
Geomancer 5
Mystic Theurge 5
Geomancer 6
Mystic Theurge 7
Geomancer 7
There are two major problems for this party: lack of arcane spells (until part 4, when the binder is replaced by a wizard) and no locks/traps specialist. The lack of arcane spells can be partially compensated for if the cleric takes the Magic domain. However, the lack of a locks/traps specialist is a major weakness. I'd recommend dropping one dragon shaman for a beguiler, ninja, rogue, scout, or spellthief. The beguiler would probably be the best option, since it's also a primary arcane caster.
I'll chime in with another way of looking at the group. What a wonderful collection of characters! Could really develop a 'wilderness' type theme with that crew. (By that I mean within the group - a means of knowing and working together - not the adventure you have to run). A way to bind characters together makes for a very good campaign and helps with conflict at the table.
I have run several themed campaigns over the years and they have been our favourites. Many times a 'particular role' was not covered. But then again I am not one to follow guidelines on what 'should' be the norm, inc PC wealth etc.
I say let them go. Just try it, it may work out even better than you expected. If it doesn't, well bad luck. Maybe the inexperienced members will learn from this. Being inexperienced often means players want to play characters without too many complications (often read as 'spells'). That is cool. What you can do as a DM is show them the many 'cool' things a spellcaster can do when they meet them (meaning NPCs) ;)
I realise you don't want to start a campaign to have it end in disaster shortly after, but from my experience that often happens no matter what characters the PCs are playing ;) But it doesn't HAVE to end. Another group can continue the adventure where the previous heroes left off if the DM REALLY wants to stick with the adventure path. I mean some other members of the ship's crew may take up the challenge. What about other shipwreck survivors. (I haven't read much of the AP, but I am sure with the detail given by the folks at Paizo bringing in new PCs will have been covered somewhere, probably several times).
Don't look so far ahead and just go with it. By the higher levels your party may look entirely different after a couple of PC deaths or even change of players (especially true for a game over the net).
Nothing like letting players (especially novice players) try whatever the heck they want. Many times they get a character they love. Sometimes it doesn't work and then they 'may' choose differently. (But do not have to). Maybe, in time, the players (or characters) will come up with imaginative means to overcome their deficiencies. There is always magic that non-casters can use to help in specific areas...and that barbarian will probably be able to handle most locks (and survive a few traps) ;)
Happy gaming - I will be interested to see how this goes.
Connors
4 of our 6 players are relatively young and inexperienced at D&D. I'm not going to make anyone play a character they don't want to, but if they are generating a new character for any reason, I will probably drop a few hints on what character would be most useful to the party (based on general guidelines, rather than spoilers).
Paz
Sounds to me like you have it covered right there ;) You sound like an experienced DM and have done the right thing.
Make some suggestions, point out any deficiencies and if they choose what they choose, leave it at that. Get on with the game and have fun without worrying too much about 'winning' ;)
C
BTW how do you 'snip'/'quote' other people's entries? I don't think I did it right above???
|
|
BTW how do you 'snip'/'quote' other people's entries? I don't think I did it right above???
You use BBCode (see the first question on that page).
The easiest way is to go to the message you want to quote, then click the little 'REPLY' link to the top-right of it. The quote should then already be in place in the text box you write your message in.
paz
Connors, as you wanted to see how the campaign goes, I've started a campaign journal.
I hope it's entertaining!
Thanks Eric, I will check it out ;)
And thanks Paz, I think i just replied in snippet form ;), but could only do one :)
C
Connors, as you wanted to see how the campaign goes, I've started a campaign journal.
I hope it's entertaining!
Ah, where is this? ;)
In my Eberron campaign where I'm playing a monk2/elfwizard6/enlightened fist 10, I just keep a notebook page with my spells sorted out by level and a list of what is currently memorized, as they are cast, I check them off.
This way, your wizard would make the decision of what to memorize once, then if he forgot to choose new ones, he could just use the ones he'd chosen for yesterday.
Its just something wizards do, just like clerics praying for their spells. Unless the player wants to roleplay his hour of preparation each day, it can easily be handled by making a couple standard lists, like
this is my dungeon delving list of spells, if i'm dungeon delving today, i have these memorized.
this is my travelling list of spells, if we're travelling, i have these memorized.
this is my in town list of spells, if i know i'm heading into town or will be there for a while, this is what i memorize.
One of my friends started up a new DnD campaign for the next generation, where his daughter and another friend's son are playing their first characters. DM's wife is playing the party wizard, and came up with a cool idea of taking a photo album and filling it with printouts of her spells so that it was a physical spellbook. The kids have been around roleplaying and gaming enough to know that they can't cast fireball in school to get out of class, so we've no risks there :)
Not sure your wizard's player would find that as cool as I do, but I thought it was worth offering up.
Thanks for the tip, Jaatu. I'll pass it along.
Incidentally, because I'd like all the characters to shine in different ways, I'm a little concerned about the dwarf dragon shaman. So, I'm considering (and discussing this with Paz first) allowing the dwarf to be a dire werewolf. This way, he'll shine in the "hard-as-nails" department (at least as long as nothing turns up with silver weapons...), as well as being generally useful with his auras, and being able to freely operate underwater once he gains dragon shaman level 3. Who wouldn't want to be a werewolf?
One worry about the Dire Werewolf is it will throw the XP of the party off, he'll be chaotic evil and prone to attacking his friends and he'll generally be a bit too overpowered. How about suggesting a less powerful non-standard race, such as a kobold or lizard man? These could be interesting Dragon Shaman options.
~ Bryon ~