Solo adventure design


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

Grand Lodge

Okay, rules are pretty clear for designing adventures for groups, and small groups, but what about just one PC?

Often times I found that encounters made by the book are a bit soft for an average group, but for a single PC seems a bit too tough. So what do you guys do as a general rule?

Shadow Lodge

Told my wife to play a summoner :)

More seriously, the one person adventures I've seen have been designed for a specific character class and have appropriate challenges for that class. My suggestion is you lighten up challenges which are difficult for a given class and leave the class appropriate challenges mostly intact. Also, have the single player play adventures 1-2 levels below their CR and possibly reduce the number of opponents so they don't get swarmed.

Grand Lodge

0gre wrote:

Told my wife to play a summoner :)

More seriously, the one person adventures I've seen have been designed for a specific character class and have appropriate challenges for that class. My suggestion is you lighten up challenges which are difficult for a given class and leave the class appropriate challenges mostly intact. Also, have the single player play adventures 1-2 levels below their CR and possibly reduce the number of opponents so they don't get swarmed.

lol. Summoner. Lol

I like that one.

Only problem is I can't design it for any one class. It has to be suitable for all classes. Tough chore.

1-2 levels seems right sometimes. Sometimes not enough. Fewer opponents at a time is a must. I can see that.

What about lacing the game with cure potions and other aids? Does it start to feel to video game like?


Designing a solo campaign is more difficult in some ways and easier in others, but only if you know what class you're designing for. Making a suitable solo adventure suitable for ANY class is extremely difficult. Just out of curiosity, why don't you know what class will be used?

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Krome wrote:

Only problem is I can't design it for any one class. It has to be suitable for all classes. Tough chore.

1-2 levels seems right sometimes. Sometimes not enough. Fewer opponents at a time is a must. I can see that.

What about lacing the game with cure potions and other aids? Does it start to feel to video game like?

Certain classes are simple not independent enough to go soloing. In the past I gave a solo character an amulet that gave them healing equal to 1hp/ level 3x per day... a bit silly in a normal group but for a solo ranger she would have had to rest for 2-3 days after some of the encounters. Healing for non-healers is a big issue.

One of the things I like about the new classes is their relative independence. Inquisitor, witch, summoner, alchemist, oracle... all can solo and be fairly self sufficient. In the original classes you have bard, druid, cleric, who can be fairly independent. Ranger, Sorcerer, and possibly rogue can also get by with wands/ scrolls but wands aren't much different from potions ultimately. Wizards can be somewhat independent by using summoned creatures and staying out of trouble with spells (invisible, fly, etc).

By independent I mean, they can heal themselves, handle at least light combat, and overcome most classic dungeon obstacles.

Summoner... is great because he fights with disposable creatures.


you can wrap an ally up in the adventure, an injured dog the player helps get back on his feet or something similar, a flanking partner or bodyguard is a great help.

It might be the mount / pet of a halfling ranger / bard that got captured by a band of goblins, easy to write in and easy to write out off an adventure, do keep notes though, players generally enjoy meeting colourful npc's from their early days once they have grown up a bit.

A few expendable or reusable items of minor power are good as well, encounters that lend itself well to be solved in multiple ways are fundamental, single players tend to overlook the obvious every once in a while.

A little more starting gold or gear, masterwork weapon or alchemical items maybe.

Grand Lodge

Mynameisjake wrote:
Designing a solo campaign is more difficult in some ways and easier in others, but only if you know what class you're designing for. Making a suitable solo adventure suitable for ANY class is extremely difficult. Just out of curiosity, why don't you know what class will be used?

a friend and I are looking into publishing adventures. I'm rewriting an adventure for a group to be suitable for a single player. So, the darn thing has to fit all characters.

If it works out we will be selling PDFs and books.

Still very early in the planning stages. And rewriting that adventure sucks but is a real challenge.

So far I'm looking at introducing NPC allies and more loot in the form of potions.

We will see how it goes.


If you want it to be played by any class, take each class and ask yourself "How would class X handle this situation?" If you can't think of anything for a given class, add in an extra element that is only EASILY accessed by that class (a secret door for a rogue, a clue written in Druidic, etc.)

RPG Superstar 2015 Top 8

The main challenge for a solo adventure is that the PC has no one to bail you out if you have a crazy run of poor die rolls. Therefore the one thing I would include, inspired by video games though it may be, is some kind of "Town Portal" -- or rather, some way the character can have to escape quickly, should it become necessary. Perhaps a magic item, limited or one use. So it's there if the PC needs it, but they still have to think carefully about if and when they activate it.

Obviously this item needs to come with a safe place with friendly NPC(s) to teleport TO. Theoretically the friendly NPC who gave the PC the item in the first place.

If it's a high level adventure, you might want to have an alternative item for spellcasters who can teleport themselves anyway.

About leaving things like Cure potions around and the like... just make sure it makes sense. They shouldn't be sitting in a barrel for no apparent reason or be dropped by every monster ever, but perhaps the previous owner of the area left himself caches in case of emergency, or such items are on the fallen corpses of adventurers that came before the PC (this is always fun because on one hand, score, treasure! And on the other hand--what killed this guy? Am I next? There's an opportunity to leave clues there, as well as treasure.)

The other thing is to make sure that for the major problems/obstacles in the game--things that the player absolutely must accomplish to progress--that if there's a magical solution to the problem, there should be a non-magical one as well. Solo fighter breaks the slightly crumbling wall down; solo wizard casts Stone Shape or Rock to Mud, solo rogue climbs the wall and finds the secret hole in the ceiling which will take him above the wall into the next room. [eta: Ninja'd by Kane]

You could also add DM's notes to the adventure, so say you've got a monster that's probably a fair challenge for most character, but certain builds might be screwed. You could provide notes with how to adjust the encounter for certain kinds of PCs if they are having trouble.

Strangely, this is a case where higher level adventurers might be easier to design for than lower level adventurers. Most high level PCs are a little more flexible and have more tricks under their belts that they can perform a variety of tasks. Low level characters it will be harder to do a "something for everyone" kind of feat.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Have you looked at the expeditious retreat 1 on 1 products? I bought one of them and it seems pretty cool. I'm planning on scooping up their 12 adventure book shortly also.

They are targeted at a single class and character level, my one gripe about them is there is no real way to make them into a campaign which would be fun. The pregen character in the adventure I have has a massive cache of healing potions.

Some other ideas:

  • Have a safe retreat for the character so they can rest/ gear up.
  • Plan a big encounter or a series of encounters then offer a few days where the character can rest.
  • I'm ambivalent about NPC henchmen. We don't use one when my wife and I play but she is playing a summoner so she has a henchman of sorts.
  • Rather than dumping potions all over maybe consider dumping a ring of regeneration into the game. Maybe Sean's variant which is less expensive and probably more suitable. You could also craft a variant which offers something even less than Sean's variant.

  • The Exchange

    0gre wrote:

    Have you looked at the expeditious retreat 1 on 1 products? I bought one of them and it seems pretty cool. I'm planning on scooping up their 12 adventure book shortly also.

    They are targeted at a single class and character level, my one gripe about them is there is no real way to make them into a campaign which would be fun. The pregen character in the adventure I have has a massive cache of healing potions.

    There is one series of three adventures in that book for rogues and they do have something in common running through it and you can get a PC to run it through one after another. The first one is rather interesting and enjoyable. I'm not a big fan of the second one really, though I should read it again to get the feel of it before running it. The last one looks like it'll be fun to run.


    Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

    If you want to make a solo adventure accessible to everyone, things I would recommend.

    Make hirelings available. Player cant pick locks but needs to sneak into the lords home through locked doors? Hire Jack B Nimble to help you out.

    Signficantly reduce the difficulty of encounters and the amount of encounters per day. One or two fights per day max, and they should lower CR then normal.

    Find ways to really focus on the character. Things like romance or close friend NPC's are great in a one on one game. You dont have to worry about leaving players out, so make the NPC's matter to the player. Make the story about him/her. Make it personal.

    Have alternate solutions available. Do not assume the player will have access to any specific skill or spell. A 5 balance check to not fall into the pit while crossing a makeshift bridge is no big deal to a dexterous rogue, the wizard might fly over it, but the full plate fighter may very well fall right in regardless of role.

    Dont start bellow level 3. The player is on his own. Give him a few HD cushion to prevent the 1 crit party wipe.


    Loved solo adventures had a bunch of them both as DM and PC.

    As I recall they were mostly one shot (4-6 hours long) and the character would often level up in a basic way +1 to hit, saves, damage, +10 hit points.

    Campaign world that sets up a reason for the individual to be alone, low population, extreme heat, oceans of lava, alot of the game was player vs the elements/world and trying to survive.

    Otherwise PC hangs out in town and joins a group of NPC's (and then you are back where you started, except more work)

    Alternative is design adventures with pit stops or persons they are going to meet along the way...I am thinking a courier job for a king in a war torn country...

    Up to you that was my 2 copper peices


    There was an ODnD module called "Eye of the Serpent" that used a "path" system that was made for solo characters of different classes. You might want to take a look at it.


    Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

    Looking for advice to run a 1-on-1. This is helpful stuff. Thanks.

    Grand Lodge

    Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
    Krome wrote:
    0gre wrote:

    Told my wife to play a summoner :)

    More seriously, the one person adventures I've seen have been designed for a specific character class and have appropriate challenges for that class. My suggestion is you lighten up challenges which are difficult for a given class and leave the class appropriate challenges mostly intact. Also, have the single player play adventures 1-2 levels below their CR and possibly reduce the number of opponents so they don't get swarmed.

    lol. Summoner. Lol

    I like that one.

    Only problem is I can't design it for any one class. It has to be suitable for all classes. Tough chore.

    1-2 levels seems right sometimes. Sometimes not enough. Fewer opponents at a time is a must. I can see that.

    What about lacing the game with cure potions and other aids? Does it start to feel to video game like?

    You don't really have a ton of choices if you're going to make it generic. You might consider making a scenario that's less combat intensive and more deduction, puzzle solving and roleplay instead.

    Why does it have to be suitable for all classes?


    Actually, when I run solo stuff* (again, it's usually my wife and I**; brofist, Ogre!), I often use pre-published things, but drop in good NPCs into them to supplement when the PC(s) run into things they can't handle on their own. This NPC usually doesn't hang around long, if I can help it, but might for a single foray or adventure, before retiring to a "normal" life again (or whatever they most often do, even if it's not "normal").

    Outside of that, as everyone else has said, basically examine a challenge in nine different ways (three broad ways and three specific aspects of those) in order to best accommodate all classes and play-styles:
    1) what's the brute force way to handle this
    ... 1a) brute force magic? (spell = "goodbye wall/obstacle/challenge!")
    ... 1b) brute force via skills? (intimidate v. will = worship me!)
    ... 1c) brute force combat (or similar)? (hit it 'til I get the result I want)

    2) what's the finesse way to handle this
    ... 1a) finesse via magic? (spider climb, charm, etc)
    ... 1b) finesse via skills? (climb the wall, bluff the guard, etc)
    ... 1c) finesse via combat? (disarm, grapple, feint, etc)

    3) is there a way that this can be circumvented entirely?
    ... 3a) via magic? ("Divination says, this tunnel dumps out over there, so we could just go around...")
    ... 3b) via skills? ("Well, I've manage to negotiate peace so the war will never occur!")
    ... 3c) via combat? ("I just crit'ed on that dead pansy mage, so he can't possibly complete his ritual and summon the demon now!")

    Now, to be complete, you need to look beyond the basic class abilities as well. With magic, you need to examine how divine casters and arcane casters each handle it, but clerics and druids get diplomacy, which can fall under skills. With skills, you might be surprised at the brute force behind them (or vice versa): rogues might sneak attack the daylights out of the BBEG, while monks passively convince others to surrender. Once you've answered the three questions (and sub questions) above, briefly check all classes to see if they fit into those categories. If so, and you've made it so that all others are engaged and having a blast, you've made the perfect solo adventure!

    (Hint: no one will ever make the perfect solo adventure for all classes and players.)
    (Hint 2: that's okay.)
    (Hint 3: no one's ever made the "perfect" non-solo adventure either.)
    (Hint 4: that's okay too!)
    (Hint 5: Why am I framing these in terms of "hints"?)
    (Hint 6: I don't know, and now it's just getting silly.)
    (Hint 7: Now the word "hint" just sounds funny.)
    (Hint 8: Ooh! Ooh! Almost to my completely arbitrary nine-point standard!)
    (Hint 9: I made it to nine!)

    Regardless, making it more role-play and less combat doesn't necessarily make it better for all play styles (though it does for us when we do so), though it usually doesn't hurt when it's built well. Over all more-role-play/less-combat is an easier way of making it good for all class choices.

    * Also when I run small groups, ranging from 1-3.
    ** Sometimes we have available nerds to play. Sometimes we don't. But we still got da itch. Hm... that sounded not like I meant.

    Liberty's Edge

    Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber
    Krome wrote:


    a friend and I are looking into publishing adventures. I'm rewriting an adventure for a group to be suitable for a single player. So, the darn thing has to fit all characters.

    If it works out we will be selling PDFs and books.

    Still very early in the planning stages. And rewriting that adventure sucks but is a real challenge.

    So far I'm looking at introducing NPC allies and more loot in the form of potions.

    We will see how it goes.

    Personally, I would focus on narrative over mechanics.

    For example, instead of just asking the PC to roll disable device, design a puzzle for the player to solve. If the player does have the skill give her hints for reaching certain DCs on the roll. That way, you still include some sort mechanical lock/trap/puzzle that won't stop non-rogue types in the their tracks, but still gives some benefit for those who have the skill.

    Similarly, in social situations have the PC role-play rather than roll-play by not requiring a certain DC for success. Again, a PC that is strong in social skills could obtain additional bits of information or extra assistance on a good roll so they receive some benefit from having their skill.

    Otherwise, I'd think you have to make the adventure pretty bland or generic in order to make it work for all classes.


    Krome wrote:
    Mynameisjake wrote:
    Designing a solo campaign is more difficult in some ways and easier in others, but only if you know what class you're designing for. Making a suitable solo adventure suitable for ANY class is extremely difficult. Just out of curiosity, why don't you know what class will be used?

    a friend and I are looking into publishing adventures. I'm rewriting an adventure for a group to be suitable for a single player. So, the darn thing has to fit all characters.

    If it works out we will be selling PDFs and books.

    Still very early in the planning stages. And rewriting that adventure sucks but is a real challenge.

    So far I'm looking at introducing NPC allies and more loot in the form of potions.

    We will see how it goes.

    the Potions will be a definite plus especially at low levels.

    Shadow Lodge

    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    Something to remember, though, is the module's content isn't immutable until it is described to the player. Imagine 'Situation 4'. Now consider how to modify it for each class. 'Situation 4a' is for Fighters, Barbarians, etc. Use 'Situation 4c' for arcane casters. So long as you can think of modified versions of the situations that make sense AND can present this in a workable format, there's really no reason why you couldn't cover all the classes in the books to date.

    It's more work, and inflates the word count a lot, but also adds to the re-use possibilities, which a lot of customers would appreciate.


    mcbobbo wrote:

    Something to remember, though, is the module's content isn't immutable until it is described to the player. Imagine 'Situation 4'. Now consider how to modify it for each class. 'Situation 4a' is for Fighters, Barbarians, etc. Use 'Situation 4c' for arcane casters. So long as you can think of modified versions of the situations that make sense AND can present this in a workable format, there's really no reason why you couldn't cover all the classes in the books to date.

    It's more work, and inflates the word count a lot, but also adds to the re-use possibilities, which a lot of customers would appreciate.

    This is actually a really, really good idea. Excellent point mcbobbo!

    To build off his "example", even if the three elements of 4a, 4b, and 4c are all different in mechanics from each other, they need not be different in narrative from each other.

    Example wrote:


    4a) [magic]
    The [Big Bad Name (Adept X)] taunts the PC from the comfort of his throne, two stories above, content in the knowledge that no mere apprentice could best his magical traps. *Apprentice proceeds to best his magical traps*. Suddenly concerned for his own safety, he decides to make a hasty exit, promising his adversary doom to come. "We'll meet again!" (exit stage back)

    4b) [skill]
    The [Big Bad Name (Experit X)] taunts the PC from the comfort of his throne, two stories above, content in the knowledge that no mere apprentice could best his deadly traps. *Apprentice proceeds to best his deadly traps*. Suddenly concerned for his own safety, he decides to make a hasty exit, promising his adversary doom to come. "We'll meet again!" (exit stage back)

    4c) [melee]
    The [Big Bad Name (Warrior X)] taunts the PC from the comfort of his throne, two stories above, content in the knowledge that no mere apprentice could best his deadly troops. *Apprentice proceeds to best his deadly troops*. Suddenly concerned for his own safety, he decides to make a hasty exit, promising his adversary doom to come. "We'll meet again!" (exit stage back)

    In that example given above (sparse as it is) all three elements are different, but the narrative structure is the same. One requires skill, one requires magic, one requires brute destructive force, but in all cases the story progresses forward regardless.

    One other element that this could be great for (and to enhance the replay value) would be to account for character death in more than one way. A character might be replaced, raised, or worst of all, animated (as in, as an undead), and sent right back in to finish the job... this time the force commanding him or her being even stronger. Having the mechanics and story elements behind the force now commanding the PC is important: the PC must have some liberty to exact the events as needed, as opposed to feeling pulled by the nose into specific actions.

    So, for example, being animated as a kind of Juju zombie (or something similar) by a benevolent (though still possibly sinister-seeming) Juju oracle (or other necromancer) and being forced into allegiance (but not specific action) to finish the job because, otherwise, the ultimate results would doom many to death. The oracle would send them back in, and they would still be themselves, but the oracle can't go because of his/her curse (whatever that might be) would negatively impact the results (or some similar divination has been revealed to them). This basically gives the PC the autonomy to act as they see fit, but still have them beholden to a new "master".

    Or perhaps being raised or reincarnated by a fey lord or lady, and paying the associated cost, including finishing the job, as the fey have some interest in it, as discussed elsewhere on this forum. This, again, would bind them to a powerful liege, but one who, for whatever arcane fey reason cannot or will not directly involve themselves in outside of raising and sending in a pawn in their stead. Their orders could be two fold: do the deed you'd planned on, and get APPARENTLY WORTHLESS MAGIC BAUBLE (tm) for me.

    Or perhaps the local QUEST GIVER (tm), whether that be the local dukedom, barony, old wise man, or whatever, have noticed the lack of progress, and have sent a new, young recruit to a) find out what happened to the old young recruit, b) stop the bad thing. This could even have a narrative punch where a few weeks or even a month has passed and things have gotten worse. While some repairs are inevitable, depending on the first PCs progress, much of the damage might still be in place. So, there'd be a kind of standing on the shoulders of giants feel.

    The best idea would be to take all the possibilities for a powerful patron into account for the different player and game tastes. With three different Apparently Worthless MacGuffins, you choose one to be in the treasure horde at the end as the payment for services rendered. This also allows the insertion of a powerful, persistant patron into the PCs career and gives a great jumping-off point for new adventures.

    EDIT:
    Sorry, I somehow lost this part in the original post...

    Realmwalker wrote:
    the Potions will be a definite plus especially at low levels.

    One thing I'm thinking of doing for a game without a healer is providing a) a patron, and b) a wand of cure light wounds with exactly a number of charges equal to ([number of players]x2)+1. So if I had three players, the wand would have 7 charges (3x2=6; 6+1=7). Or if I had four players, the wand would have 9 charges (4x2=8; 8+1=9). This would allow everyone to get healed quickly twice, with one spare in case anything goes wrong. This might be an easy way not to over-power the adventure and to avoid breaking verisimilitude. I have not actually tried this idea, but it's what I've been tinkering with. The patron, by the way, would be the provider of the wand, and would provide the proper command word and control protocols (bypassing the UMD-to-guess-or-boom problem).


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    I ran a solo campaign for a friend that went from level 1 to level 13.

    He played a (3.5) dwarf ranger and used a waraxe-shield combination. To this day, he says it was his most enjoyable DnD experience.

    The plus side of solo campaigns is that a character can be really, really fleshed out as they level. The focus on one person can really capture subtle changes in attitude, alignment, etc. that are tough to eke out in larger games.

    Oh! And combat moves much, much faster and more fluidly.

    The downside (as I saw it) was that I absolutely had to intermittently toss in a few NPCs to assist him or for him to lead and direct.

    If I were you, I'd give the player a sidekick early on, preferably one with NPCish stats (that is, low) and even a level or two behind the player. Keeping the NPC alive and directing them in and out of combat sort of makes it into a more tactical game for the player and maintains the semblance of 'soloing' while also not derailing the campaign's longevity.

    But! Don't just dole out healers! Giving a warrior a skill-user also makes things a bit on the easy side sometimes. And I remember having to auto-confirm a few things that would have been impossible for the player to get through without dedicated mages too.

    There were quite a few NPC allies that weren't his friends, but toward the end of that campaign the player had a group of perhaps half a dozen loyal followers, all of them a few levels lower than him and with very specific foci.

    You kind of have to think more cinematically with just one player, too. Let them do things that skill checks don't always cover.


    The problem with solo campaigns is the reduced versatility of the character. Power is not really a problem as the cr system is flexible enough to accommodate to (nearly) all power levels (possible requiring correct ALP adjustment for a single character).

    I'm just gonna thrown this out there but the gestalt rules (maybe take the average of overlapping abilities rather than the best) seem create specifically for this. To increase versatility without increasing power.

    I would divide the classes in different groups (probably divine, arcane, combat, skill) or fractions of groups, make the player select two classes from different group. Combine this with elaborate stats to accommodate for the MAD aspect of the gestalt rules and I think you may be a lot closer to the creation of framework for solo campaigns.

    [edit]
    And consider offering certain class abilities as feats. Trapfinding and/or trap-spotting might be interesting feats for characters don't take levels of rogue or one of those archetypes.
    There are probably more examples to be found.


    Lots of good ideas here. Kudos to all!

    I think the gestalt idea is a good one. A bard/barbarian could be good at lots of things AND be able to fight and survive well when he can't rely on his skills and magic, for example, or maybe a druid/ranger in an outdoor setting, or some other combo.

    I'd take a little inspiration from Conan or Xena: Heroic loners who still usually have a sidekick or two along on their journeys. It gives them someone to talk to and to act as a witness to their exploits. Sometimes it's the sidekick who saves their bacon in a pinch, other times they have to save the overcurious/noisy/inept follower from getting in over his/her head.

    It's easier for everyone if the character has at least one person he really trusts to tag along for some things. He's one failed roll away from being killed by a trap he missed, incapacitated by a spell, or caught sneaking into the temple of doom with nowhere to run.


    Don't have enough time to go into detail, but!

    While I love gestalts, and generally would recommend it, I don't know that's what the OP is looking for here. They might find a great way to integrate it (as part of the introduction to their adventure, for example), but over all I think they were looking for a more main-line approach.

    But man, I love gestalts. So much goodness there.

    Sovereign Court

    Benicio Del Espada wrote:
    Lots of good ideas here. Kudos to all!

    Ditto that!

    I built a little solo adventure using the friendly NPC idea and I've seen it used elsewhere too.

    I'd also expand on what has been said by looking at terrain / location. The BIG BAD ENEMY might only have a few weaknesses, but there should be a number of ways to attempt to attack/defeat him. Combat is a staple of fantasy role playing, so provide terrain that is useful to the PC: cover, raised areas to attack from, narrow spaces that are easily defended and so on. If there are hazards the PC can use to win, like a barrel hanging from a rope over the villains head, not only does it add flavour, but it gives the PC chances to be creative.


    I nearly always (well, in two of the three instances it's come up), use the NPC friend system. Even a single NPC friend (usually I make them really simple) helps smooth out combat and skill use and the like quite a bit, but - and this is at least as important and maybe way more - it gives the player someone to interact with at all times.


    just about any class can solo

    the killer in writing the scenario is the less mechanic things like race and alignment

    for a 1 to 1 adventure the pc really has to be involved

    how you make a generic adventure that will suit a LG dwarf, CN halfling, and NE half-orc is the real challenge


    I am running my 8 year old son through Rise of the Runelords solo. The way I get around it is similar to Final Fantasy 3. He always controls himself and can give the GMPCs orders to attack, defend, buff or debuff. I used Shalelu, Ameiko and Brodent Quink as characters that would accompany him. I made up a rogue and a cleric that would accompany him if he wanted them too but could only take two people with him at a time.
    Assaulting Thistletop was creative since the rogue had an idea to use a boat to approach and climb the cliffs. While Shalelu wanted to attack from the forest. He had to decide who went where and how to best split the groups. He (a Paladin) decided that Shalelu, the cleric and him would attack from the forest. Both groups met up in the lower levels to battle Nualia and friends. Bruthazmus vs Shalelu. Orik vs the Paladin. Cleric vs Nualia. Yeth dog vs rogue. And finally Brodent vs Lyrie.
    He found it tough until he started switching targets then the rogue backstabbed Lyrie while Brodent casted sleep on Orik. After that, it was good.
    The next adventure, everyone went their own ways (but will be available later) and I am introducing an inquisitor who is tracking down the "Skinsaw man" in order to help him with the investigation of the murders and what to do next.
    Cool thing is, he shares the treasure with the GMPC's.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    Add a few magic items like the healing belt that was in 3.5.

    I have found that you can for the most part run a single well built 20 point buy character though an adventure for a party four levels lower, without to many problems.

    If you look at the 12-2 table in the core rule book the share for a single character in a 4 person party is the same as the hole amount for a party 4 levels lower.

    Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Solo adventure design All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.