I've been toying with the idea of running two distinct adventuring parties at the same time and keeping those two seperate 100% of the time except at the trading post.
I guess it would somewhat reduce the time for the completion of the first AP at least..then some of those characters can be left in a ruling position while only one party moves on.
Pros:
-Exploration is faster
-Players seem to like the idea of two distinct group dynamics
-Trying new things is fun
Cons:
-Vermissilitude..stuff can get weird(No grouping up on the Stag Lord Fort for example)
-The transfer of information between the two groups(Meta-gaming ahoy)
-Less treasure per character
Just curious if any of you guys tried something like that or if you're seeing any problems that could come up that I might have missed.
I've been toying with the idea of running two distinct adventuring parties at the same time and keeping those two seperate 100% of the time except at the trading post.
I guess it would somewhat reduce the time for the completion of the first AP at least..then some of those characters can be left in a ruling position while only one party moves on.
Pros:
-Exploration is faster
-Players seem to like the idea of two distinct group dynamics
-Trying new things is funCons:
-Vermissilitude..stuff can get weird(No grouping up on the Stag Lord Fort for example)
-The transfer of information between the two groups(Meta-gaming ahoy)
-Less treasure per characterJust curious if any of you guys tried something like that or if you're seeing any problems that could come up that I might have missed.
A Few other things, Meta Aside. The Party gets 100 exp per hex explored. 42 hexes for the first book. Thats being cut down to split now.
Also how would 'trading' work? "Wow my mage would love this staff of ________ that my fighter can't use... and i have this +2 basterd sword he can. Seems like a fair trade to me"
What happens when half the party wants to play group 1 and the other half want to play group 2?
what happens If / When they take leadership?
Which group makes the kingdom?
There are so many ways to abuse it, and there is always atleast one player who will try to min/max the ability to do it. Like talking his own 2nd character in to free spell casting, etc etc.
Just my 2 copper. -shrug-
Thanks for the answer Goraxes.
XP:
I'm thinking about giving the xp earned by one PC to the two characters without dividing it.
Trading:
Items found by group 1 are not to be traded to group 2 unless there is a concensus. I'm not expecting a lot of fighting over treasure from my current players.(phew..)
Playing group 1 or 2:
Thinking about playing both at the same time. 50% session time on each of the two groups(a bit hard to do in practice I'd say..)
What happens after the first AP:
Roles are divided between the 8 PCs and players can pick a character they want to continue playing for the next part of the AP..not sure if I'd keep up the two party dynamic past the first book..I like the idea that most of the roles will be covered by PCs.
Min/max and abusing:
This is the grey area. Less wealth per PC but more opportunities to use item creation feats. Not sure how it would affect the balance..
Trying to keep it more into perspective for the first three books since it'll take forever to get up to book 4.
Well this discussion pretty much falls into what I'm doing currently with my campaign, so I'll share the insights I've had so far from how my game's been playing out.
I started with two competing groups, each player per party with approximately 1 to 3 characters each, each party consisting of 3 to 9 players each (this number has fluctuated over the months, recently settling on about 5-6 each). That's not including the occasional helpful npc recruited to lend an extra hand when needed. The theory was that one character would be a leader type, intended to get a little xp early on, but that their role would be aimed for a political post once we got to KMpt2. The second character was intended to be the explorer, while the third would be restricted to an npc with classic stat array, there to be in a supporting role and show just how dangerous the Stolen Lands actually were if they actually found themselves dealing with what the adventurers were supposed to be dealing with (also giving players to do extra role-play on the side). I did have some worry about xp distribution, given that is a huge pile of pcs to sort through, but using abstract XP keeps the math both easy and establishes a base default so that the periodic large group still gets a reasonable share per individual. I have added in a few extra encounters as the campaign goes along, but honestly, nowheres near the amount I expected I'd have to. The real game balancer has been wandering monsters, which - as has been mentioned elsewhere on these forums - can be very brutal, but very rewarding.
No plan survives impact with the players, of course. While I have had a good number of casualties in the adventure path, having the extra characters along to soak up the punishment meant the bite out of loosing a PC, and the time it took to replace them, was relatively minimal. It also meant most players preferred to focus in on one PC after a certain point, what ever their original role was intended, and both groups ended KM1 with the majority of players having at least 1 PC at 3rd level. The exp for hex exploration ended up being negligible in that leveling - the monsters they stumbled into, however, proved to more than make up for it.
Moving into KM2, each group founded their own kingdom (one around the Stag Lord's Fort, another at the Temple of Erastil). Despite my original intent, both groups followed the model folks here on the forums have been discussing - filling every available post with a PC, leader or no. Due to character attrition, each court still had a few holes in their administrations, pushing them to recruit from key npcs they'd met (Akiros from KM1, Lily Teskerten from KM2, for example), but one of the two teams solidly prefers to pack in their poorly stated terciary characters over npcs better suited for the job, while the other happily ceded several key roles (including Ruler) to powerful npcs they encountered. Though this splits the Kingdom building xp still further (thank goodness for Abstract XP devision), it does mean the non-adventuring PCs are still gaining at least some xp.
So, all in all, the xp ends up not being an issue. Treasure, especially magical item devision, has been a bigger concern (at least for me - my players honestly haven't seemed to notice, given the fun they've been having). You could give some thought to putting together an assortment of random (or not so random) loot-drops to go along with those wandering monsters that keep cropping up, or tie rewards to home made quests, but as of yet, again, I haven't found much need. Instead, I find letting the characters that now have kingdoms to manage have their own method of rebalancing at their fingertips. As long as they're willing to take a withdraw action now and again (within moderation - they're paranoid about accruing unrest, which keeps the possibility of abuse small, and again, self moderated), they can usually pull out enough money to buy what they need, or better, build what they need. Making friendly contact with the Old Beldame, for instance, provides an incredible resource for PCs with flexible funds but lacking in their own magical crafting feats.
All in all, the general flexibility of this particular AP has proved much more flexible for trying this campaign out with unusual group sizes and arrangements, with only a modest amount of tinkering. If you're curious about reading a perspective based log of my campaign so far, you can check it out on the forums here, which should give you a good idea of just how such a game might run.
|
I'm running this campaign for 12 players, who split into two groups of six to take on quests. It's been quite a logistical challenge. My advice is increase random encounters to make up for XP, and encourage people to take item creation feats (as there's plenty of downtime) so that way they can make up for any treasure deficit.
Thanks a lot for the answers guys. Sorry for the delay, my battles with the post-eating monster left me battered and really annoyed.
Your campaign is a great read Grendel! Too bad for the name butthurt. Rarely seen such idiocy..a name for a D&D character is original work... yes. Better share those royalties!
___
On topic:
I guess I'll be going with a one charter approach instead of two competitive groups since some of my players are creating links between their two characters already..
I'll be trying to avoid having the PCs play two characters at the same time except maybe for the assault on the Stag Lord Fort which can be prepared in advance.. balancing everything depending on the number of characters present is something I'm trying to avoid.
As for xp, I'll see how it goes in-game and then adjust accordingly I guess! Counting on item creation to adjust the treasure once it kicks in.
Thanks a lot for the answers guys. Sorry for the delay, my battles with the post-eating monster left me battered and really annoyed.
Your campaign is a great read Grendel! Too bad for the name butthurt. Rarely seen such idiocy..a name for a D&D character is original work... yes. Better share those royalties!
___
On topic:I guess I'll be going with a one charter approach instead of two competitive groups since some of my players are creating links between their two characters already..
I'll be trying to avoid having the PCs play two characters at the same time except maybe for the assault on the Stag Lord Fort which can be prepared in advance.. balancing everything depending on the number of characters present is something I'm trying to avoid.
As for xp, I'll see how it goes in-game and then adjust accordingly I guess! Counting on item creation to adjust the treasure once it kicks in.
That seems to be how it ended up working in my game (everyone tying their character sets together with mutual back-stories). I particularly like one of my player's sets, the Jessup family, which revolved around a "Ma," "Pa,"& "Jr." I have two players who ended up strattling both groups, which use their characters to keep the rival Baronies up to date on what the other is doing (in one case as an out right spy).
The Stag Lord fight can be brutal, but it should work reasonably well for any team of 4-5 if they can do so without getting bogged down, fighting everything at once, head on (which is what both my groups did, one after the other - and the larger, 8+ man team still had a hell of a time).