![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
Andrea1 |
![Zellara](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/A07zellara_final.jpg)
Checking out the obituaries shows a number of deaths due to splitting the party, what would be good things to do if you find yourself in a group that wants to split up? Try to persuade them not to, yes, but if the four man team goes into 2-man teams just how can one pull the group back together or increase survivability?
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
Nemitri |
![Camper](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/PathfinderCover5.jpg)
I hate splitting up parties due to that fact that you HAVE to split xp and treasure, which creates imbalances in the party, I like to keep the level of people even to prevent level or loot drama.
Not to mention the DM has to multitask or keep the info from the split party from influencing the actions of the other, its a real hassle!
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
Tem |
![Toff Ornelos](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/PZO9531-Toff.jpg)
Checking out the obituaries shows a number of deaths due to splitting the party, what would be good things to do if you find yourself in a group that wants to split up? Try to persuade them not to, yes, but if the four man team goes into 2-man teams just how can one pull the group back together or increase survivability?
Well, assuming you are one of the four, you can always prevent 2-man teams. Just go with the other group to make it 3 and 1 (then have the lone guy roll up a new character... :) )
Now, if there were 5 initially, I would go with the advice already given above - go in a group of three that includes the healer. You should be fine!
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
Michael Radagast |
![Naazza](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/PZO9526-Satyr.jpg)
Mechanically, it's an entirely situational decision. I might mention - LOADS easier to split a party in pbp than tabletop. It's more fun, as well, with no waiting around or separate rooms or folded notes or anything. So, stylistically, more fun for all. Whether we discover that it was a terrible choice or not. :P
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
Anonymous Visitor 163 576 |
![Abominable Snowmen](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/snowmanrevision-copy.jpg)
Do some thinking well before this ever happens.
1) What are the best pair-ups? Can you give each sub-group a good mix of abilities?
2) How will the groups communicate with each other?
3) When will you meet back up?
4) If a group needs to retreat, do they have a way to do that?
Answers can range from message cantrips and signal horns to teleportation and telepathic bonds. But you should have some answers.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
Redwidow |
I make a point of having players roll characters who are all about unity and cooperation. I don't allow evil alignments and selfish concepts.
The game is pretty much designed with multiple players and cooperation in mind.
if your players want to split for occasional tasks (like scouting for example) I would allow it, but if it is a prolonged thing you should not allow it.
DMing is enough work as it is, doubling the effort and dealing with players whining about having to wait sucks bad. sucks even more if said player was not the one to initiate the split and has to cope with other's diva attitudes.
my two cents!
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
Richard Leonhart |
![Nethys](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/nethys_final.jpg)
stick with the bigger part, as some GMs *cough* kill the smaller part.
or watch like ANY horror flick with the group and they will see what happens.
Be sure not to be in the group with the ... coloured guy, or the cheerleader. They tend to end up badly. The ex-special ops guy is usually a safe bet, or the actor with the highest paycheck also tends to survive.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
Petty Alchemy RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16 |
![Chatterer](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/10Chattererswarm5.jpg)
I hate splitting up parties due to that fact that you HAVE to split xp and treasure, which creates imbalances in the party, I like to keep the level of people even to prevent level or loot drama.
Not to mention the DM has to multitask or keep the info from the split party from influencing the actions of the other, its a real hassle!
Not if you use ad hoc exp and just have everyone level at the same time. I find it makes life much easier.
Of course, the multi-tasking is an issue. In that case it can work if you have a 2nd GM.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
Scalwith |
![Seltyiel](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/PZO9235-Seltyiel.jpg)
Nemitri wrote:I hate splitting up parties due to that fact that you HAVE to split xp and treasure, which creates imbalances in the party, I like to keep the level of people even to prevent level or loot drama.
Not to mention the DM has to multitask or keep the info from the split party from influencing the actions of the other, its a real hassle!
Not if you use ad hoc exp and just have everyone level at the same time. I find it makes life much easier.
Of course, the multi-tasking is an issue. In that case it can work if you have a 2nd GM.
It is a problem multitasking for the GM, but if done right it can be a lot of fun. I've set up a "special guest" GMs for times when I planned to split the party and we ran parallel games where it was appropriate. When the party came back together for the final battle there was a palpable sense of relief and the post game debrief between the players (both iC and OOC) were almost as fun as the game itself. Its not something to be done often, but if you can pull it off it is more than worth it.
As for splitting the party by the characters, I don't worry about it much. I either go along with the rest of the party or I don't... Things tend to work there way out one way or another.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
mem0ri |
![Captain Elreth](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/SP3_Captain_highres.jpg)
Alright ... player point-of-view and the rest of the party wanting to split up:
1 - Suggest pairings that minimize weaknesses. If you put, for instance, the fighter and cleric together and then the wizard and rogue together ... well, the wizard and rogue are going to die (the fighter and cleric might do really well though!). Change that a bit for fighter/wizard and rogue/cleric and both have an ok chance of survival (BUT ... both might die as well because neither pairing is 'ideal').
2 - Make sure that there is a reason for splitting up (even if it's "we just want to search both hallways at the same time") and that there are definitive (and limited!) goals for what is accomplished while split up and when you regroup. Mention at the table how dangerous it is to split. We actually have a somewhat spontaneous tradition at our table when someone suggests we split up ... somehow we've all ended up saying "Let's split up so Jason can kill us individually." It's not a rule, just something spontaneous that's happened. It reminds us all how dangerous it is at the same time we suggest it.
3 - Once you've accomplished your goals from splitting up, regroup immediately at a designated rendevous. Don't let other players keep extending the split-up time. Let's say it's the "explore both hallways at once" and you each see the first "room" at the end of each hallway ... don't let anyone just keep going. Both come back to the rendevous.
Alright ... those are my few pieces of advice for you as a player.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
cranewings |
It sort of depends on what kind of GM you have. If the GM is using level appropriate challenges AND won't change what he wrote just because you split up, you can't split up.
If the GM is running a sandbox and you have no reason to believe that the things where you are can kill or catch you, splitting up is no problem.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
Isadork |
![Danse Macabre](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/b6_dance_macabre_final.jpg)
Sorry if I am late to the party but I think the deeper question is needed here.
"What would your character do?"
I as a GM would let the party split and say screw em, you live, you die, you learn.
But as a player I would not be asking what "I" can do or what "I" want to do. I would ask, what does my character want.
My character in a Rise of the Rune Lords campaign, is a brash, gun totting tiefling who thinks because she has killed everything in her path nothing can stop her. I as a player am not dumb enough to go into a room filled with baddies. But my character, knows the dangers and wants to face it. SO I do the dumb thing and hope I can shoot them all.
That being said, your character may not be as stupid and want to convince the party to stay.
As a GM I have a rule, if there is an argument within the party, could be as simple as "go left or right", and we have someone who does not want to budge. Then I have the party role an opposed Charisma check. Winner convinces the other character that his idea is better. And if the Player cannot deal with this separation of character to player. I probably don't want them at my table.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() |
![Emkrah](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/PF21-21.jpg)
I would go with the advice I would give a child, if you find yourself split from your party, find a place to stand near where you got separated, preferably elevated so you can see, and wait there. Hopefully that place isn't in the dragons lair or Kobold cook pot.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
Heimdall666 |
Haha...
last night's game.
Dwarf fighter "I'm not going down that hallway, it might be trapped"
Paladin "Good idea, lets let our (roguish synthesist) scope it out first, and drag trouble back here to the 4 way intersection (2 other choices unexplored)where we can tactically murder whatever he finds"
Rogue finds 4 ogres, then a trap. Dwarf charges down trapped hallway to fight ogres. Rogue flees. Twice as many ogres pop out at the 4 way intersection. Chaos.
As a GM, I would blatantly murder wandering PCs that wandered off, they deserve it. But as a player, you have to listen to all that whining and carrying on about lost hit points and levels and get me outta the traps BS. DON'T BE A SPLITTER!
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
![]() |
I think "not" splitting the party is over rated, as long as the right characters are splitting. My Arcane Trickster Split from the party all the time, and he never actually got into trouble while split from the party, only when he was with the party. Worse case situation, he has a +35 escape artist and dimension door. Oh, and a +54 stealth.
I played a ninja before that who always went off on his own. Pretty sure most the reason that guy did is because I stole extra treasure while on scouting missions anyway. I truly believe the rogue class is all about beating the wealth of the rest of the party (to stay competitive) and scouting is a great way to do that.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
Jason S |
![Gold Dragon](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/gold.jpg)
Sometimes splitting the party makes sense, especially if doing mundane things in a city. Splitting should be rare however and non-existent in a dungeon environment.
Checking out the obituaries shows a number of deaths due to splitting the party, what would be good things to do if you find yourself in a group that wants to split up?
1) Don't be stubborn and go with someone else's idea (even if you disagree). Most split parties are due to stubbornness and lack of cooperation.
2) Convince them not to split up. Or manipulate them if that doesn't work. :)
3) Lie and follow them at a distance. lol
4) Find a safe place to hide/wait until they return. At least only some people are rolling up new PCs...
5) Tell the GM how dangerous his campaign is and how much you like playing it. And how unwise the other player is for wanting to split the party. Maybe he will take pity on you. :)
Try to persuade them not to, yes, but if the four man team goes into 2-man teams just how can one pull the group back together or increase survivability?
If you can't convince them, travel with the most powerful PC or the PC with the best group escape skills (teleport).
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
DrDeth |
![Danse Macabre](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/A4_ballroom1.jpg)
“Hold it! Ok, guys time out. Look, D&D is a Game. The idea of a Game is to have Fun. You mostly have fun by Playing. We only have one DM, thus if we split the party, only half of us can play at any one time. Thus less Fun for all. Thus, I need a REAL good out-of-character reason for this split. “
The DM should say the same. If it’s one PC splitting off from the rest, he just tells that solo guys “You encounter nothing” then turn, spend a hour or so playing with the main group, turn to the soloist “You encounter nothing, want to rejoin now?” Then repeat until he gest the picture.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
Ganryu |
![Hyena](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/ArmouredHyena.jpg)
On the subject of splitting the party:
The group is all level 3
Human Inquisitor
Human Witch
Elf Wizard (me)
Dwarf Cleric
So we've tracked the big bad to his fortress. We have aquired a bunch of strong spirits, and some quantity of highly lethal poison. Our plan is simple and stupid:
The Inquisitor and the Cleric will act as passers by and approach the fortress, claiming that they found some alcohol on the way there at an abandoned camp of some kind (this is believable, except the true story is that WE are the people who made sure the camp was abandoned, by killing everyone :P). They will donate the alcohol and stay at the fortress overnight.
Another group, the witch and the wizard, will approach in the cover of night and climb the walls (spiderclimb), then we will attack.
So in the evening the cleric and the inquisitor approach the fortress. They're spotted and go inside and talk to the people there. Everything goes as planned.
At night, the witch and wizard approach the castle...
Then we're attacked by zombies. Witch is mauled nearly instantly.
Wizard (me) manages to stay a bit behind but I'm being accosted by the zombies. Meanwhile the cleric and inquisitor are trying to get outside and they succeed. Problem? Neither has armour on.
Yeah everyone is slaughtered, except the me who runs away.
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
Lady Ladile |
![Leaf Leshy](http://cdn.paizo.com/image/avatar/PZO1120-Leaf_90.jpeg)
Unless there's a good tactical reason for doing so, both of the characters I'm playing right now (two different campaigns/groups) will argue very strongly against splitting up.
Our DM generally does not kill characters, but even he's stated, "If a group is dumb enough to split up when it's not warranted, I have no problems with letting the dice fall where they may and killing them, if that's how it turns out."
![](/WebObjects/Frameworks/Ajax.framework/WebServerResources/wait30.gif)
karossii |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Splitting up would make sense in a lot of situations where it is avoided, simply because of the taboo.Yes it can cause problems, but it can also be beneficial at times. As said repeatedly throughout this thread, splitting up is alright, in the right circumstances (and with the right strategies involved).
It is more taxing on a DM, and it does create downtime for a portion of the players... slowing the game down overall. But honestly, is this a game you're trying to 'complete' in a given time? Do you really have such lack of interest in the setting, the story, and your fellow party members that you can't sit back for a short while and listen to the interactive narrative unfolding?
As to the XP / loot issue; in modern games, it is almost always assumed that all player characters are the same level at all times. In older iterations of D&D and other RPGs, and in some few modern systems, it is almost as certain that few of the player characters will ever be the same level (thieves are always 1-2 or more levels ahead, the wizard is a level or two behind, fighters and clerics fall somewhere in the middle, etc.)... And as to the loot; if that magic item you found works better for a party mate than it does for you, would you really refuse to hand it over just because they weren't with you when you found it? If an item is undesired by all, would you not evenly split the income from its sale, simply because the rogue was down another corridor disarming traps when the patrol stumbled upon you, or the fighter had stayed behind with the barbarian to hold the door (or any other similar circumstance where the party is split)? If you would, then you're not very good at playing a group game, are you?