| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Purely hypothetical but a fun exercise in theorycraft nonetheless, what would you consider the ideal Carrion Crown party?
I'll give it a whirl:
1. Fighter- sword and board TWF tank to hold the line
2. Cleric of Gorum - high dpr battle cleric with channeling and buffs
3. TWF Rogue - Striker with scout and utility
4. Archer Paladin - Striker with channeling and undead scourge
5. Summoner Wizard - Battlefield control
Fighter. 2h or dual-wield, damage-oriented. (Alt: Melee ranger, paladin, barbarian)
Cleric. Shield or reach weapon. Gets in melee, both to channel and to cast spells. (Alt: Oracle)
Ranger. Attacks from range with bow. (Alt: Gunslinger, TWF Rogue)
Bard. Is a caster who sings, but gets in melee. (Alt: Alchemist)
Wizard. Free casts from behind the wall. (Alt: Sorcerer)
Have everything covered there.
Interesting thread.
I should point out, though, that we assume 4 players in an AP, not 5.
I realize that, I used 5 because our party was traditionally 5, although I'm GM'ing 4 pc's this time around. Also most of the 5 player lists can easily be snipped into a 4 player party but if anyone wants to post a 4 player variant as well feel free!
Interesting thread.
I should point out, though, that we assume 4 players in an AP, not 5.
Although our campaign hasn't started yet, character creation is done and looks like I'll be GM'ing the party in the OP sans the archer paladin. (S&B fighter, battle cleric, TWF rogue, and Conjuror (teleportation subschool) Wizard). I threw the archer paladin in, because if I were playing this as opposed to running it, that's what I would go with. :P
Fighter. 2h or dual-wield, damage-oriented. (Alt: Melee ranger, paladin, barbarian)
Cleric. Shield or reach weapon. Gets in melee, both to channel and to cast spells. (Alt: Oracle)
Ranger. Attacks from range with bow. (Alt: Gunslinger, TWF Rogue)
Bard. Is a caster who sings, but gets in melee. (Alt: Alchemist)
Wizard. Free casts from behind the wall. (Alt: Sorcerer)Have everything covered there.
Nice grouping!
Nice grouping!Fighter. 2h or dual-wield, damage-oriented. (Alt: Melee ranger, paladin, barbarian)
Cleric. Shield or reach weapon. Gets in melee, both to channel and to cast spells. (Alt: Oracle)
Ranger. Attacks from range with bow. (Alt: Gunslinger, TWF Rogue)
Bard. Is a caster who sings, but gets in melee. (Alt: Alchemist)
Wizard. Free casts from behind the wall. (Alt: Sorcerer)Have everything covered there.
All except for the Ranger, I would replace him with a ranged Fighter, either Archer or Weapon Master archtype from APG.
All except for the Ranger, I would replace him with a ranged Fighter, either Archer or Weapon Master archtype from APG.Nice grouping!Fighter. 2h or dual-wield, damage-oriented. (Alt: Melee ranger, paladin, barbarian)
Cleric. Shield or reach weapon. Gets in melee, both to channel and to cast spells. (Alt: Oracle)
Ranger. Attacks from range with bow. (Alt: Gunslinger, TWF Rogue)
Bard. Is a caster who sings, but gets in melee. (Alt: Alchemist)
Wizard. Free casts from behind the wall. (Alt: Sorcerer)Have everything covered there.
Paladin Archer would be insane for this AP but I guess I'm partial to my own suggestion. :P
Wizard (never leave home without one)
Paladin (aura of courage is your friend, smite makes bad guys weep)
Inquisitor (skill guru and angry man, knows some magic to)
Cleric (keeping you alive)
Wizard
Cleric
Fighter Archer
Bard(archer)
4 clerics with the Sun domain powers.
Or
Two-handed paladin tanking up front (damage and loh survivabilty)
Life Oracle (healing and channel for haunts)
Elven Evoker (Boom boom and utility)
Rogue/Ranger (melee/range dps with skill monkey flavor)
It is not an undead campaign, but it would still be nice for certain sections most likely.
|
if we're talking about survivability & successful completion of the AP:
Dwarf Cleric (Sun/Glory/Defense/Travel/Feather domains are good)
Elf Diviner (go first, know the enemy, cheat to win)
Human (or Half-Orc) Fighter (non-archetype archer guy. Replace with Ranger if you want another talky fellow)
Gnome Bard (consider 1 level of Rogue for trapfinding, or an archetype that grants it. Buff/talk/sing FTW)
Everyone takes stealth, perception, and at least pretends to be an archer.
Wizard summons, cleric summons, bard & fighter tag-team to assassinate high value targets.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
1. Cleric of Sarenrae - Sun domain with channelling feats
2. Paladin - Undead Scourge
3. Wizard - Straight up nothing fancy
4. Inquisitor of pharasma - ranged combat
extra
5. Fighter/rogue - Because why not have one.
Cleric, Cleric, Cleric & Wizard
I feel like most of the posters in this thread haven't actually been reading the modules?
So far everything I've seen from the modules has suggested that it's incredibly skill heavy, and there's very few undead creatures to battle.
Interesting thread.
I should point out, though, that we assume 4 players in an AP, not 5.
I don't know about anyone else, but my party's traditionally 8-9 players.
Good news is, when two or three people have to skip, we still have an operational party, and in general, we cover most-to-all of the roles.
Bad news is when everyone's there, things are crazy-heavy. Oy.
Also, XP & treasure budgeting is kind of rough.
Our party so far consists of:
- Paladin
- Sorcerer (Fey)
- Cleric (Sun / Good)2 more to come! what would you suggest?
We have 2 beginners in the group (Paladin / Sorcerer) and I am also quite new to pen & paper but will DM Carrion Crown. We played some D&D before and especially the 2 beginner (girls) did not like the ueber tactical combat.
Maybe a bard, which, rogue?
Ranged Bard is nice, great support buffs and some ranged damage. Rogue is always nice to have around for flanking and the skills that rogues specialize in. There are myriad ways to fill the void here. I would have the players read the players guide and make their own decision. They should feel free to play what they want and it's up to you, as GM, to make it work.
Ranged Bard is nice, great support buffs and some ranged damage. Rogue is always nice to have around for flanking and the skills that rogues specialize in. There are myriad ways to fill the void here. I would have the players read the players guide and make their own decision. They should feel free to play what they want and it's up to you, as GM, to make it work.Our party so far consists of:
- Paladin
- Sorcerer (Fey)
- Cleric (Sun / Good)2 more to come! what would you suggest?
We have 2 beginners in the group (Paladin / Sorcerer) and I am also quite new to pen & paper but will DM Carrion Crown. We played some D&D before and especially the 2 beginner (girls) did not like the ueber tactical combat.
Maybe a bard, which, rogue?
It seems like my players are the only ones who use rogues anymore. It may be because a certain DM (<--) loves to use insidious traps but hard to believe they aren't a standard anymore. Our campaigns invariably have one, any other combinations will change, but that is the one constant.
|
|
It seems like my players are the only ones who use rogues anymore. It may be because a certain DM (<--) loves to use insidious traps but hard to believe they aren't a standard anymore. Our campaigns invariably have one, any other combinations will change, but that is the one constant.
not so...
when I get to play (maybe 1/5-1/6 of the time we play) I usually go Rogue or at least a bit of Rogue. Skills + Sneak Attack is just too nice to pass up.
It seems like my players are the only ones who use rogues anymore. It may be because a certain DM (<--) loves to use insidious traps but hard to believe they aren't a standard anymore. Our campaigns invariably have one, any other combinations will change, but that is the one constant.
not so...
when I get to play (maybe 1/5-1/6 of the time we play) I usually go Rogue or at least a bit of Rogue. Skills + Sneak Attack is just too nice to pass up.
Not to mention lack of trap management usually translates into a TPK at some point.
I feel like most of the posters in this thread haven't actually been reading the modules?
So far everything I've seen from the modules has suggested that it's incredibly skill heavy, and there's very few undead creatures to battle.
I think out of the whole AP undead will be the most common enemy. No doubt there will be a ton of other stuff though as well.
I think out of the whole AP undead will be the most common enemy. No doubt there will be a ton of other stuff though as well.I feel like most of the posters in this thread haven't actually been reading the modules?
So far everything I've seen from the modules has suggested that it's incredibly skill heavy, and there's very few undead creatures to battle.
Lots of constructs, lycanthropes, and aberrations as well. Channeling is still a weak option for a cleric imho because you are targeting undead's best save, and the damage scales poorly relative to spell abilities, or the melee capability of a battle cleric build. As for paladins, the storyline will present them with significant moral dilemmas. I suppose you could tune an entire party specifically to be the bane of undead, but in the end you'd be far better off with a versatile party overall.
I think smite evil alone will be one of the best abilities to have, but I agree well rounded is the way to go.
Rage Prophet (haunted curse)
Witch
Inquisitor of Pharasma
Sword and Board Urban Ranger with undead favored enemy.
One thing in the ranger's favor: if he has favored enemy: undead, he can be really effective throughout.
It seems like my players are the only ones who use rogues anymore. It may be because a certain DM (<--) loves to use insidious traps but hard to believe they aren't a standard anymore. Our campaigns invariably have one, any other combinations will change, but that is the one constant.Ranged Bard is nice, great support buffs and some ranged damage. Rogue is always nice to have around for flanking and the skills that rogues specialize in. There are myriad ways to fill the void here. I would have the players read the players guide and make their own decision. They should feel free to play what they want and it's up to you, as GM, to make it work.Our party so far consists of:
- Paladin
- Sorcerer (Fey)
- Cleric (Sun / Good)2 more to come! what would you suggest?
We have 2 beginners in the group (Paladin / Sorcerer) and I am also quite new to pen & paper but will DM Carrion Crown. We played some D&D before and especially the 2 beginner (girls) did not like the ueber tactical combat.
Maybe a bard, which, rogue?
Parties without a rogue just feels, well...wrong to me somehow.
Parties without a rogue just feels, well...wrong to me somehow.It seems like my players are the only ones who use rogues anymore. It may be because a certain DM (<--) loves to use insidious traps but hard to believe they aren't a standard anymore. Our campaigns invariably have one, any other combinations will change, but that is the one constant.Ranged Bard is nice, great support buffs and some ranged damage. Rogue is always nice to have around for flanking and the skills that rogues specialize in. There are myriad ways to fill the void here. I would have the players read the players guide and make their own decision. They should feel free to play what they want and it's up to you, as GM, to make it work.Our party so far consists of:
- Paladin
- Sorcerer (Fey)
- Cleric (Sun / Good)2 more to come! what would you suggest?
We have 2 beginners in the group (Paladin / Sorcerer) and I am also quite new to pen & paper but will DM Carrion Crown. We played some D&D before and especially the 2 beginner (girls) did not like the ueber tactical combat.
Maybe a bard, which, rogue?
But a party with three rogues and a bard feels right?
How is it that if the party is missing a rogue it feels wrong, but if it is missing a fighter, or a healer, or a mage it's not wrong?
Just to update, my group ended up going with the following:
1. Chelaxian Paladin of Iomedae (Undead Scourge Falchion build)
2. Ulfen Battle Cleric of Gorum (Demon and Heroism subdomains)
3. Varisian Rogue (Short sword TWF)
4. Varisian Wizard (Conjuror/Teleportation subschool)
We shall see how they fare! :P
1. Human Gunslinger
2. Half-elf Summoner w/ Serpentine Summon
3. Dhampir Wizard
4. Human Cleric
(5. Human Phalanx Fighter)
This seems like our load out for this AP. Should be fun, with fighter/wizard/cleric/bard/ranger roles pretty much filled.
just curious as to what race's people are playing as, seems those that listed are almost exclusively going the human, half-elf and dhampir route. just wondering why that is, feat optimization?, newness?, fits better thematically?, etc. i'm sitting this one out (more due to financial constraints then not wanting to play, i dig horror as much as the next person).
just curious as to what race's people are playing as, seems those that listed are almost exclusively going the human, half-elf and dhampir route. just wondering why that is, feat optimization?, newness?, fits better thematically?, etc. i'm sitting this one out (more due to financial constraints then not wanting to play, i dig horror as much as the next person).
Ustalavian racism, really. The Phalanx Fighter wanted to be a gillman until I told him he'd probably be attacked on sight.
Ustalavian racismjust curious as to what race's people are playing as, seems those that listed are almost exclusively going the human, half-elf and dhampir route. just wondering why that is, feat optimization?, newness?, fits better thematically?, etc. i'm sitting this one out (more due to financial constraints then not wanting to play, i dig horror as much as the next person).
+1
Alot of the first module is based on building trust in a crazy little town full of superstitious paranoids.
So being weird or odd things aren't going to work in your favor, and things like Dhampir are both thematic and new. ( i really puke at the whole dhampir bandwagon i keep seeing)
There should be some kind of clarification dhampir can't channel positive energy and there for can't be classes that would channel positive energy (like clerics and paladins)
I could see s dhampir witch, (arcane healing) but not a dhampir paladin, of which there are too many being made.
Our group has two humans, a half-orc and an elf.
the human inquisitor (me) is that way because a) I needed the two feats for character concept at level 1 (I almost needed to be a split class 1/1 with what I was trying to do) and b) I WAS going to be a tiefling (but that required the split class) c) last two characters I played were a dwarf and an elf.
The witch is human because the last witch she played was half elf, and she trying to make a different witch as possible (she didnt like my idea of a chainfighter half orc witch..no! she always has to be pretty!) and her charater concept of a counterspelling action economy character needed the extra feat.
The Barbarian is a half orc because we needed the race to biuld the character concept (were wolf in her blood line, melee fighter who primarily claw claw bites)
The Alchemist is an Elf because well I dunno. It's an Elf. The longsword and Longbow at level 1 are nice, because the alchemist doesnt get much to do otherwise at level 1. Plus I dont think she's ever been an elf before. Maybe we could have had her be human. she's always a dwarf, or half orc, or a gnome, or a talking rock or something odd.
thanks everyone that explains alot.
i also have noticed a sudden profusion of dhampirs (ugh, half vampire paladin, so 1990's). they're okay not my cup of tea myself, out of the new races from bestiary 2 my personal favorites were the sylph and oread. my idea for sylph is he is from land of linnorm kings, has a long mustache that is always blowing in a slight breeze (a ranger with bow), for oread my idea is that he is from orision his skin is colored like granite with eyes that look like gems (a monk or desert paladin with a falchion). otherwise i almost always have been a dwarf or halfling.
thanks everyone that explains alot.
i also have noticed a sudden profusion of dhampirs (ugh, half vampire paladin, so 1990's). they're okay not my cup of tea myself, out of the new races from bestiary 2 my personal favorites were the sylph and oread. my idea for sylph is he is from land of linnorm kings, has a long mustache that is always blowing in a slight breeze (a ranger with bow), for oread my idea is that he is from orision his skin is colored like granite with eyes that look like gems (a monk or desert paladin with a falchion). otherwise i almost always have been a dwarf or halfling.
My players almost invariably choose a core race, the last time we had otherwise was a late '90s Planescape campaign, where we had a tiefling in the party.
My players almost invariably choose a core race, the last time we had otherwise was a late '90s Planescape campaign, where we had a tiefling in the party.thanks everyone that explains alot.
i also have noticed a sudden profusion of dhampirs (ugh, half vampire paladin, so 1990's). they're okay not my cup of tea myself, out of the new races from bestiary 2 my personal favorites were the sylph and oread. my idea for sylph is he is from land of linnorm kings, has a long mustache that is always blowing in a slight breeze (a ranger with bow), for oread my idea is that he is from orision his skin is colored like granite with eyes that look like gems (a monk or desert paladin with a falchion). otherwise i almost always have been a dwarf or halfling.
my players also usually play as core races the sylph and oread was wishful thinking as no one in my group gms so i hardly (by that i mean never) get to be a player, tho for serpent's skull i'm running a (gm)pc a previous person was running but had to bow out due to a move and new job. he is a dwarf cleric/barbarian.
my players also usually play as core races the sylph and oread was wishful thinking as no one in my group gms so i hardly (by that i mean never) get to be a player, tho for serpent's skull i'm running a (gm)pc a previous person was running but had to bow out due to a move and new job. he is a dwarf cleric/barbarian.My players almost invariably choose a core race, the last time we had otherwise was a late '90s Planescape campaign, where we had a tiefling in the party.thanks everyone that explains alot.
i also have noticed a sudden profusion of dhampirs (ugh, half vampire paladin, so 1990's). they're okay not my cup of tea myself, out of the new races from bestiary 2 my personal favorites were the sylph and oread. my idea for sylph is he is from land of linnorm kings, has a long mustache that is always blowing in a slight breeze (a ranger with bow), for oread my idea is that he is from orision his skin is colored like granite with eyes that look like gems (a monk or desert paladin with a falchion). otherwise i almost always have been a dwarf or halfling.
Due to always GM'ing, I haven't had a chance to play since that late '90s Planescape campaign, so I know the feeling. :P Don't get me wrong I love GM'ing but it would be fun to get a chance to play again.
|
I'm currently running Haunting of Harrowstone. Just got through session one on Monday. The group consisted of:
1. Dwarf Fighter
2. Half-Elf Ranger
3. Gnome Sorcerer
4. Human Inquisitor
5. Human Bard
http://exoknight.livejournal.com/
That's where our campaign info is. We run it on Skype/Open RPG which is pretty fun.
It has some spoilers so don't click on the link if you don't want to know certain stuff.
|
How many daily castings of Lesser Restoration do you assume that players will have to get through part 2 where more than half of all encounters do ability damage?Interesting thread.
I should point out, though, that we assume 4 players in an AP, not 5.
The DC 12 & 13 fort saves were nearly universally made in my group. When the barbarian failed his saves against disease, the party had to take a week off of dungeon smashing so that they could treat his disease in the cheapest way possible (heal checks, aid another, 24hr bedrest). They also avoided a certain room with an area effect that damaged an ability score after the first encounter with it.
It seems like my players are the only ones who use rogues anymore. It may be because a certain DM (<--) loves to use insidious traps but hard to believe they aren't a standard anymore. Our campaigns invariably have one, any other combinations will change, but that is the one constant.
not so...
when I get to play (maybe 1/5-1/6 of the time we play) I usually go Rogue or at least a bit of Rogue. Skills + Sneak Attack is just too nice to pass up.
We recently had a new player join our group, and the only reason I didn't make a rogue character for him was he kind of wanted to play a ranger.
So I made him a dual-classed ranger/scout. Basically a rogue, especially once you factor in the Swift Hunter feat. Hello sneak attack vs. non-critable enemies! And especially deadly once you take the full Manyshot feat tree.
He's going to be liking the Clustered Shot feat a lot.
In the group that I'm running we have
1. A paladin of Iomedae optimized for sword and shield
2. A cleric of Saranrae who's basically a buffer/healer
3. A Witch who is an insane debuffer
4. A Ranger designed for ranged combat
The biggest problem I've had so far is that witch paladin combo, they literally have destroyed almost everything they've gone up against until the 4th part where the Lovecraftian horrors sent them running to regroup and rethink their strategies, when we play again and they head back into combat i'll let you guys know how it turns out.
We'll be starting this AP next week or the week after that. Don't know the classes yet, but it's going to be an all-gnome party.
My party:
Changeling cleric of Saranrae
Human Paladin of Saranrae
Human Inquistor of Sarenrae
Huamn Magus (staff)
Tons of healing, but not a lot of ranged firepower.
This party wipped out the first AP but they struggled against the golems in the 2nd part of the 2nd AP. Against the final Golem they were 1 strike away from total defeat, a very close combat. 3 PC's were grappled and paralysed the 4th had retreated leaving only the beast with 13 HP left to strike the final blow aainst the final golem. They did not prepare well for any of the fights against Golems. They didn't buff at all beyond a bless spell. It was funny they are an undead killing machine but clueless against how to deal with powerful golems.
I'll see how they do against werewolves which we will tackle next week.