|
After some character deaths, my players' 7th level party is pretty one-dimensional:
- melee paladin, non-casting archetype
- melee cavalier (since 1st level)
- melee inquisitor (since 1st level)
- archery fighter
They're now competing for much of the same loot, have only one character who can use a wand (aka one healer), no arcane ability, no ability to "restore" or revive the dead, and cross-over skill sets. The inquisitor player is beginning to resent having to be the only "healer" as she chose this class to not have to do so.
I've always been a "let the dice fall as they may" GM and I hate the idea of telling players what to play, but this seems a formula for disaster down the road. The inquisitor player is unhappy.
Should I take my own advice and let the dice (and players) land as they will, or has anyone ever had to step in and make some suggestions?
You playing an AP or a specific campaign? If AP... not sure what to tell you.
IF it's custom, tailor the campaign around the martial group. :)
If you're not running anything PFS-official or the like, then your solution is a simple one - fudge. Bittersweet dark fudge. ;)
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Give your party a lower-level chirurgeon alchemist cohort with healing infusions ; as "reward" of a quest. Good RP opportunities if said chirurgeon is the group's girl. They shall not be punished for being original with their party composition.
At higher levels, and after going through a BBEG alchemist formulae-book, let this cohort produce resurrections potions from extremely rare components, just rare enough that they get their resurrection at most one or two sessions after death... but they shall never feel like it is an unlimited ressource. A good way to do so is having only a single potion handy at a time. Your players will not fail to notice that there are more than a single individual in the party, and thus not enough potion for everyone.
|
Kill a couple of them off and hopefully they'll reroll with caster classes?
Seriously, you can make it work as the GM. The players have to understand that they're risking their lives.
Another option would be to throw an NPC along with them. For real fun, make it a Mystic Theurge with healing (cleric) and utility (wizard) spells. Should be able to alleviate the healing burden on the Inquisitor while providing basic utility (like identifying magic items, casting alarm, etc).
(Did the Inquisitor player seriously think they wouldn't wind up being a healer when they've got every cure spell on their spell list?)
|
|
@Eben: running AP (Kingmaker); with the exception of a few forum-inspired alterations, I largely run it as-is and I roll dice above table. This has led to a few PC deaths, but I don't like to coddle and the players like the grittiness.
@Thorkull: Inquisitor player feels she's done nothing last few sessions but run around waving a wand. Hasn't even activated bane ability. I've advised her to tell the group she can't keep up and healing them in combat is no longer an option. But with a purely hack-n-slash party, there is no debilitation of enemies with the wave of a hand, and they're going to take a lot of damage in melee at times.
We don't use NPCs unless a player is absent to take us below 4 PCs, at which point we play the absent player's PC.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
IF its known that you run things as-is and that you roll above-board... it would seem that the players are responsible for what happens to their martial-heavy group.
Honestly, it could be fun to run a group like this. you'd have to get really creative with handling certain encounter types, but that's not to say it's impossible.
There's a big difference between "I have healing spells on my list" and "it is my job to cast healing spells, in combat, on a regular basis".
Now if you're at a point where healing is just tapping the wand out of combat, I doubt there's an issue with happiness from that.
You've got three basic options here:
1. Ensure that the encounters and treasure suit the party. That means a lot of melee equipment, relatively low incoming damage (so that in-combat healing isn't a regular thing), and relatively few things that can only be handled with resources they lack (arcane spells, higher end spells, so on).
2. Run a game according to normal assumptions and watch them, most likely, suffer, die, and decide to build a more standard party makeup, regardless of what individual players want to play.
3. Provide them with a cohort / GMNPC / similar who can fill in the gaps, and be that sweet voice of reason and provide the hints they totally missed... but doesn't otherwise contribute much other than party interaction.
I'd not complain too much, this party seems like one that makes preparing a challenging encounter much easier, on the other hand you might have to take things a bit easy on them and possibly give them a little more WBL with items to compensate for their lack. buffing items and healing will be greatly appreciated.
The Paladin should be able to keep himself up with Lay On Hands, or he's doing something wrong!
.
@Eben: running AP (Kingmaker); with the exception of a few forum-inspired alterations, I largely run it as-is and I roll dice above table. This has led to a few PC deaths, but I don't like to coddle and the players like the grittiness.
Fortunately, Kingmaker gives out about twice the expected WBL. The party should be able to make up for some of their gaps by choosing magic items wisely.
.
@Thorkull: Inquisitor player feels she's done nothing last few sessions but run around waving a wand. Hasn't even activated bane ability. I've advised her to tell the group she can't keep up and healing them in combat is no longer an option. But with a purely hack-n-slash party, there is no debilitation of enemies with the wave of a hand, and they're going to take a lot of damage in melee at times.
Potions, potions, potions! If the party invests in wands of CLW for after combat and keeps plenty of big potions around for during combat, they could do OK.
.
We don't use NPCs unless a player is absent to take us below 4 PCs, at which point we play the absent player's PC.
I totally endorse your choice not to have NPCs travel with the party. NPC party members are a huge distraction from the game and frequently blur the line between GM and Player in unhealthy ways.
They're high enough level that dumping skill points into Use Magic Device could let them use wands quite reliably. That could save money over potions in the long run. Another option would be for a character to take one level of a divine class, thereby gaining the ability to use healing items without UMD rolls.
|
|
We don't use NPCs unless a player is absent to take us below 4 PCs, at which point we play the absent player's PC.
We don't play our NPC healer. It is a DM NPC open to roleplaying opportunities which provides healing and some circumstancial, not plot-breaking extracts when we ask for it (to understand foreign languages, for example), but she follows us on our quest and basically stands outside of danger, only striking with a bomb if need arises.
Believe me, we have her since 4th level, and not having her talk and play like a real PC doesn't break suspension of disbelief, especially if it means we can play the concept we want without having to follow the classic assumptions of "healer/buffer".
We weren't for NPCs either, but this is a tested and approved method for unusual party compositions. It makes for cool roleplay opportunities while allowing everyone to play whater he wants.
We are still against any NPCs interrupting the game though, so no "real" NPC spellcasters. Nothing better to break the fun than NPC #2 solving the situation with magic.
If they're in Kingmaker and they're The Leaders of The Kingdom, the AP gives them various opportunities to pick up stray NPCs, if really needed.
One or some of these (don't go overboard) could become a Cohort, or if you'd rather avoid the whole Leadership Feat thing, a battle buddy NPC.
I believe in letting the dice fall where they may and whatever happens, happens but to have that happen and be fun the PCs need to be setup for success ahead of time so the campaign doesn't just implode or need to be "fixed" after the fact. Unless you really want it to implode. Or they need to see it implode.
One support NPC that accompanies the Great Leaders of the Realm is easy to justify. That guy can participate in battles but hang back and be overshadowed (He's just there to support his/her betters, not to do their job). Then if they do die anyway, well, whatever happens, happens.
Anyhow a fair amount of helpful entourage is justifiable for characters who are basically rulers. The main problem might be keeping it from getting out of hand. But as DM you can contain that, too.
There are a few solutions:
1: Talk with you players:
Do they want kingmaker? NO/Yes?
If they do, they have to except the currunt situation or change some classes. The adventure pahts need all four 'jobs' tank/melee, Arcane/mass damage, Trap disable and Healing. This does'nt mean that for every player one job!
Explain the consequenses of a missing 'job'. If they think its no problem.
Sorry foget one sentence:
I they think its no problem, its their choice.
|
|
Let the dice fall where they may.
I had a very similar issue in Carrion Crown - over emphasis on Melee and minor amounts of Clerical do-goodery. Worked real well until they ran into a threat that was better at dishing and soaking melee damage than they were. Instead of running, they tried to blow through and it would have been a TPK except I forgot several bad guy abilities.
The three folks who did go down rolled up new characters, and now the party is much more balanced.
I think you do a disservice to the players if you change things TOO much. Let them find a way around problems. Let them work out their differences in character. Don't, under any circumstances, start littering their path with treasure that is only martial, but do give them the opportunity to get what they need if they are clever about making good in-game allies and friends. Let them haul around a bunch of wands and scrolls until they can convince a Wizard to be their patron enchanter in return for all the arcane crap they find. Give them the opportunity to have a clerical organization back their cause and provide major healing in return for influence in their kingdom.
I think atypical parties are great opportunities!
Wut level is that "Badger-in-the-Pants Symbol" spell?
I'm from Wisconsin and I need that for my Spellbook.
Kill 'em if the dice tell that tale. Sooner or later they will ... :D
The fighter in our party has geared himself out to heal himself. He's got a belt of healing, a helm that heals him, and the healing crystal, all from the MIC.
He did this because the party lacked a primary healer. The fighter never goes down, as she has concentrated on raising her AC as high as possible, while still dishing good damage.
Your party needs to outfit themselves to function without a healer if they want to exist without a healer. If the inquisitor doesn't want to heal, and would rather use her other abilities, that is a choice the party has to work around. We had a cleric who said he wanted to roll a cleric but didn't want to heal. Took a martial god, and martial feats, and self buffed to fight in the front line. Everyone was on their own for healing.
Healing during combat always strikes me as a waste, unless its to keep someone from dying. I'm sure the inquisitor would be better served in damaging the enemy than by trying to out-heal the enemy's damage.
Thanks! *scribes it*"Symbol of Badger-in-the-Pants
School Conjuration [not-quite-evil, pain]; Level sorcerer/wizard 5,
CASTING
Components V, S, M (Chipped glass and phosphorus, plus badger hair and a bad attitude)
Edit: Yeah, I'm a bad person.
Does scribing it make me a bad person, too? It's "not-quite-evil"
Well that might make me two-dimensional, though: I can become evil just by casting summonings with the [evil] descriptor, so I could become good just by casting summons with the [good] descriptor. The "one day a diamond, one day a stone" cycle, lets call it. I could then be a useful addition to any one-dimensional party, by automatically giving them multiple dimensions, including of kinds they might not want!
The fighter in our party has geared himself out to heal himself. He's got a belt of healing, a helm that heals him, and the healing crystal, all from the MIC.
He did this because the party lacked a primary healer. The fighter never goes down, as she has concentrated on raising her AC as high as possible, while still dishing good damage.
Your party needs to outfit themselves to function without a healer if they want to exist without a healer. If the inquisitor doesn't want to heal, and would rather use her other abilities, that is a choice the party has to work around. We had a cleric who said he wanted to roll a cleric but didn't want to heal. Took a martial god, and martial feats, and self buffed to fight in the front line. Everyone was on their own for healing.
Healing during combat always strikes me as a waste, unless its to keep someone from dying. I'm sure the inquisitor would be better served in damaging the enemy than by trying to out-heal the enemy's damage.
I agree very much with this. If you are a primarily melee-focused character, and you KNOW you are in a group of mostly the same, then it if you don't want to die you should invest in ways of making that not happen. If you go balls-out melee anyway then its your own fault if you die, not the Inquisitor.
If you are a primarily melee-focused character, and you KNOW you are in a group of mostly the same, then it if you don't want to die you should invest in ways of making that not happen. If you go balls-out melee anyway then its your own fault if you die, not the Inquisitor.
Yup! This is the correct answer.
I'm currently in a party of 9 PCs with only 2 having significant healing ability, and 2 having decent (but lessened) ability ... at least two players have chosen to create characters that cannot heal to replace characters that could.
It has been made pretty clear that when the you-know-what-hits-the-fan, the two primary healers will try to save 1 other person in the party, and keep each other alive. This leaves a possibility of up to 5 PC deaths in a truly dangerous, bloody, all-out battle. And I've said more than once, hopefully after such a situation, those 5 players will not choose to create 5 characters that all cannot heal.
If the inquisitor is unhappy ask him/her if (s)he wants to reroll for a pc without healing spells. :)
About Kingmaker giving way over WBL:
I didn't do the math on our WBL but even if we got a pc with craft wondrous item I don't think our party is above WBL.
|
|
They're feeling the pinch already, I think, in one session by toting around newly acquired magical items and having no way to identify what they do as well as toting around arcane items that are useless. Considering no one has put points into UMD, going to be a lot of loot that goes to market.
Updating, the inquisitor player just posted that she can't keep up with healing and isn't going to do it in combat. Not her diety's style anyways. I think it's good that's out in the open.
Because this really came to light this past game session, haven't done much nudging to any other players to consider whether 4 fighter-types is what works, especially when that +5 weapon of awesomeness drops and everyone wants it, or when a PC dies because the one with the healing wand didn't run over and save them in time. It's not the party success I'm so worried about as it is heading off sore feelings at the pass.
Good, let them feel the pain! A party needs versatality to servivive.
Just make sure that, or tell the party that this is needed:
1: mass damage in some way.
2: melee power
3: Healing
4: Trap disabling.
5: skills/knowledges.
it does'nt mean that one person should cover one part. You can make healing a deal with 3 or 4 players. I cast, Remove: , you HP and the other a little of both. A battle Clerec could cover a part of melee and healing.
A Bard skills and Healing, The inquisiotro skills and healing, The paladin Healing and Melee power, A city ranger or rogue for Traps.
Battle cleric/fighter of a C/L Neutral god, take versatile channel selective channel, extra channel and quick Channel, go holy vindicator.
You get respectable BAB, stacking channels to boost damage, and healing.
If a player dies suggest someone do this, and give some incentive, like the awesome rare weapon they want, and some divine spellcasting. But they still play the Melee bruser they like.
Actually, I'm not sure you need trap disabling. Traps, if there are any, can often be cut seamlessly and their only purpose is to force someone to play a rogue. I don't think Paizo is fond of serious traps besides alarms.
Traps are also a useful way to weaken the party a bit before a BBEG fight without resorting to a combat. You can get creative with traps too, to add interesting poisons or mind effecting zingers. Then you have a party that's not at 100% and doesn't necessarily overwhelm the BBEG with many actions super easily
YOu can ofcourse skip all the traps, that is a personal choice of the GM and players.
How about being creative with magic item crafting? The Kingmaker Adventure Path has plenty of time for that.
What if the party found a book entitled The Creation and Care of Unusual Magical Shields that allowed them to make a few select magic items -- such as a shield that could do heal half its wearer's hit points once per day, a shield that could cast Restoration on the wearer but drain 3/4 of the wearer's hit points, and a shield that could cast Dispel Magic as a full round action (10' radius up to 3x per day, but two or three uses could be used at once to create a 20' or 30' radius).
Such an option would obviously not be the full "craft magical arms and armor" feat since it only created a few select shield options. But it would help you as GM not need to work so hard redesigning the published encounters.
Has any of the pcs anything with him with which to hurt swarms?
I like this very simple alternative rule. Eliminates the need for *snore* healers. Which clearly no one wants to play.
Got to read that one, but it looks good from a first glance. Thanks for the link.
Back to topic: I would let the party learn it the hard way. A party only of melee types will not be successful in the long run, as not all encounters are pure melee. You need stealth, knowledges and other skills (survival, diplomacy, to name just two) to be really good in this AP, to say nothing of magic. Give the players a hint that they won´t get to the top with their current setup, and let it run its course after that. They could even multiclass to work around some of their problems. Yeah, its not as effective as single-class characters, but it can be really helpful.
|
|
We took this week off with a few players gone and while playing some board games instead, spoke with my crew about the challenges awaiting.
A dilemma because those who always play the casters are wanting to play the melee - which is great - and due to party deaths, that's become a reality all at once, which isn't great. They know it's a challenge, so I'm hoping they don't think I'm a bloodthirsty GM when things get rough (and oh yes, they will!)
The inquisitor player spoke with the others who did hang out this week, and the others agreed it wasn't fun having her run around with a wand considering the inquisitor can really do some combat damage. Still don't have anyone leaping to "retire" their character. Communication is great, love my players.
@ Umbranus: swarms come up often enough in kingmaker and the players have learned to run rather than hope they have enough alchemist fire in hand. Won't always work, but for now...
re traps: Kingmaker doesn't have a lot of traps, but the ones that do pop up always seem to get this party. I know there's a really deadly one coming up in 1-2 sessions...
@ Count Duck: As to what the party needs, I think only #2 (melee power) is covered. No mass damage, no healing outside a cure wand, no trap disabling though one character should be able to spot trouble, and limited knowledge skills. So much flavor text going to waste with no well-rounded knowledge skills...