I am about to start running a Pathfinder game (Core+APG+UM) for the first time. I will have 3 players, my wife and 2 friends. My style as a gm is usually to tailor the game to the players backgrounds and strengths while still making the game feel like a challenge. I have played or GMd over 20 differant roleplaying systems but have the greatest experiance with Warhammer fantasy roleplay and storyteller games, so i have some d20 related questions.
Players so far are:
1. Human Paladin (planning on staying pure)
2. Aasimar Monk 1(zen archer) Sorc X (Empyrial/Celestial)
3. -no race yet- Rogue -pure or multiclass-
My main questions are arround balance and relative power, I like all my players to feel like they are all a usefull part of the team.
Will Sword and shield be a good route for Paladin? should he think about and archtype?
Does having 1 level of monk bring the Sorc back into relative power balance with the imo weaker classes of the Pala and Rogue? while still providing enough benefits (AC CMD low level archery) to not just be a straight up nerf?
What should my Rogue player do, any good archtypes? he wants to play a trap finder D&D thief type guy, maybe a small race like a halfling?
what should i give the other players not playing Aasimar to compensate for the stronger race of that 1 player, i was thinking another floating +2 to any stat
I was planning 25 point build as i only have 3 players, any other thoughs on party make-up, will the pala and sorc be able to cover healing later on? is CR-1 still a good level adjustment for this group for encounters? etc
TLDR. Help a new (to pathfinder) GM out with some tips for running with 3 players, pala, sorc, rogue.
Thanks guys, and go easy on a first time poster.
Steve
As far as classes for a 3 man party go, it's not a terrible spread. You're missing a cleric, but a well-built paladin can make up for it. The Hospitaler archetype is a decent way to help make a paladin a better healer.
A monk/sorcerer isn't exactly a 'strong' class. The level splash is delaying their spellcasting even further behind a wizard, meaning they won't be getting 2nd level spells until the point a wizard would be getting 3rd level spells.
Sword and board is classic, but honestly the paladin is better off using a two-handed weapon, as it's the easiest one to support with feats and gear and can do some serious damage. Build the rogue for high DPS as well (like a TWF or brute build) so he can be a good flanking buddy for the paladin. A Trapper archetype ranger might also be another option for the rogue player, as they'd be much more durable and combat-capable.
Make sure the sorcerer picks up a lot of control spells. Combat strategy would pretty much revolve around the caster controlling the enemies while the rogue and paladin flank it and wreck it.
From a GM point of view, I'd say just stay away from encounters with too many enemies, even of low CR. With 3 players, action economy isn't on their side. They're likely to do better against tougher single enemies than mobs of weak ones, if only because the nature of Smite and flanking/sneak attack make it easier for them to pour out the hurt on a big enemy, ideally one who's been debuffed by the sorcerer.
If you think the Aasamar is too powerful, compared to the other characters, give them 20 points instead of 25 points.
The party dynamic is a little off, but not badly enough that I would ask someone to change their character. It COULD work. Any party of 3 players is bound to have a weakness somewhere. My style is to let the players choose their party, so if everyone wants to play the same class, that is their decision, and they have to deal with the consequences. Were I GMing your group, I'd let the players choose thier own archetypes.
The thing you should keep in mind with such a small group is that if 1 character dies, it could quickly snowball into a TPK (Total Party Kill). Three-character parties have very little room for error, because if anyone falls, a higher percentage of the party's combat effectiveness falls with them. Give them slightly easier encounters.
Even though someone is playing a rogue, I would limit the number of traps I throw at the party, because they are encounters where 1 die roll (the rogue's) could mean doom for everyone. That doesn't mean I would abandon traps entirely, after all, someone did choose a rogue, but I would use them sparingly and give them traps at -2 CR.
As far as the relative power of your characters' classes, it completely depends on the build. I don't think the sorcerer is inherently more powerful than the paladin, but it COULD be, depending on the builds.
Pretty sure the Monk/Sorcerer was taking advantage of the Emypreal bloodline using Wisdom for its primary stat to take a dip in monk for longbow proficiency, the AC/save/skill bonus, and a free feat. Not a terrible idea, overall, but I'd still say a pure caster might be better.
Monk/sorcerer does not synergise as much as monk/rogue or monk/cleric, but it's their choice. I would consider the multi-classing the rogue into wizard (they work quite well together) for more spell-power or duelist if you want more combat ability.
Otherwise, you have a good hitter with the paladin, and adequate healing. You have some spell-power with the sorcerer, but there's your biggest weakness, and you won't deal well with swarms or multiple foes.
Otherwise not a bad bunch.
For the rogue:
Are the players allowed access to the chelliax book (becuase of cornugon smash)?
If the rogue hasn't access to the above mentioned books i recommned against a small race (pick any medium race) and do the following:
1st level trapper ranger (UM), in order to get trapfinding (i get the impression that the player wants it) and a bunch of good stuff, 2nd level and on scout and thug rogue (both APG), pump up STR and pick a mithril breastplate as soon as he afford it.
If access to UC is given do the above but instead of scout and thug go scout and knife master BUT here you can go (if you wish) with a small race and go the TWF route.
Alternative with access to UC either a medium sized or a small sized character can use the rake (APG) rogue (after the 1st level being trapper ranger) and go for the feint feats.
If there is access to the chelliax book, do the above (1 lvl trapper ranger, medium race, rest lvls rogue) but go scout and thug, use cornugon smash and go for the shatter defenses.
The trapper ranger level is recommended because i got the impression that the player wants to be able to disable magical traps so he needs trapfinding. The ranger level also gives him +1BAB, more hitpoints at first level, maybe one or two skills as class skills, martial weapon prof. and medium armor prof. (that's why i said go for a mithril breastplate ASAP) and finally a boost to fort saves.
For the paladin:
Yes sword and shield can be done with a paladin but it going to be very tough to do so because the sword and shield route requires quite a lot of feats and the paladin doen't get bonus ones.
Anyway here is a way that it can be done:
Human Paladin. always use light shield so that are able to use LoH and later cast spells. No archetype comes to mind that can help a sword and shield paladin.
Have a DEX of 15 after racial mods.
Feats:
1st Two weapon fighting
1st Improved shield bash
3rd Double Slice
5th Power Attack
7th Shield Slam
9th Improved Critical (Scimitar)
11th Shield Master
13th Bashing Finish
Now why do you think that paladins are weak? Do you plan on a heavy non-evil campaing?
For the sorcerer:
I recommend against multiclassing, be aware that celstial isn't a good bloodline and if the sorcerer isn't human... well... how should i put it... it takes a VERY good player to play that character and be truly usefull.
On the aasimar thing i say the following:
On different circumstances i would advice something along the lines of 1000 xp penalty or using a lower point buy, BUT in the case of the character this player wants to play i say cut him some slack and let him play an aasimar.
Thanks for all the tips.
I dont think paladins are weak, not so sure with rogues, its just I have read casters can maginalise melee at higher levels, I think it might be more a wiz problem though so sorry if I caused offence or confusion.
As for the monk sorc, because emperial sorc uses wis for casting the monk splash gives five to ten ac plus five to ten cmd as well as flurry with bow, precise shot without having to take point blank is nice for low level, monk also gives good saves and the ability to threaten and flank unarmed, with trait magical knack its not a caster level drop.
The sorc is less powerful than a pure sorc in spells but it really fits her char concept.
The no uc is because I dont have it, I could buy the pdf though if it would really help the rogue.
Thanks
Thanks for all the tips.
I dont think paladins are weak, not so sure with rogues, its just I have read casters can maginalise melee at higher levels, I think it might be more a wiz problem though so sorry if I caused offence or confusion.
As for the monk sorc, because emperial sorc uses wis for casting the monk splash gives five to ten ac plus five to ten cmd as well as flurry with bow, precise shot without having to take point blank is nice for low level, monk also gives good saves and the ability to threaten and flank unarmed, with trait magical knack its not a caster level drop.
The sorc is less powerful than a pure sorc in spells but it really fits her char concept.
The no uc is because I dont have it, I could buy the pdf though if it would really help the rogue.
Thanks
Start another thread on the Paizo products sub-forum and ask what rogues get from UC (in order to make an informed decision), be prepared for some ninja vs rogue flame war to threadjack you.
Also remind your rogue to take the APG talent (or advanced talent i don't remember correctly) called defensive offense (or something like that).Magical knack only keeps your caster level unchanged, not when you get new spell levels and spells known (in the case of the sorcerer).
You are going to have to be very careful in what you throw against them to prevent a TPK. The only one who can affect a swarm is the sorcerer and he's losing a caster level and probably will not have a great saving throw DC because he's putting points in Wisdom.
Empyrial bloodline.
Other than that you are correct.
Realizing two rounds into combat that you have made an encounter too easy is a very small problem compared to realizing that you have made it too hard.
If the encounter seems to be too easy, you can have the foes use expendables like potions or scrolls, you can have reinforcements arrive, or you can just secretly increase their hit points. Foes who see that they are being trounced may flee.
If the encounter seems to be too hard, you can have the foes use poor tactics like attacking the fresh PC instead of the one about to fall; stopping to eat, loot, or haul off a fallen PC; wasting a round with low-impact buffs or heals; or switching between ranged and melee when the other was more advantageous.
Of course you can just fudge rolls, but players eventually notice.
I think that the rogue might do well to go ninja for a more combat minded rogue, giving up trapfinding and evasion in favor of abilities that are more commonly useful, or possibly monk/rogue would be a good way to go allowing some decent ninja tricks if you can give up either evasion from monk or rogue with an archetype that fits.
A ranger could make a rogue type character that is more martial, and possibly comes with the benefit of an animal companion.
We have played several campaigns with just two players pretty successfully. In some cases, the player's each played two characters, which is fine at lower levels but becomes difficult at higher levels. On a recent campaign I was GM, we had two players but one of them played two characters. For a fourth, I played a stripped down healer/cleric as part of the party. This was a pretty easy character to run as GM and it really helped the party heal up when necessary. As we moved to a different GM, I decided to keep playing the cleric because I had become so fond of her!