|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We're starting a RotRL campaign with all new RPG players. Nobody in the group of 6 players wants to play an arcane spellcaster. While I haven't read all of the adventure path yet, I was under the impression that an arcane spellcaster would be necessary. For those of you who have run or played through the adventure path, what do you think? If I let everyone play what they want we will have:
Ranger
Fighter
Barbarian
Thief
Druid
Cleric
Any input is appreciated!
|
I would say of all the classes a Wizard is a MUST. A wizard is even more vital here than any fighter type.Some stuff will basically be near impossible without a wizard. With no wizard a GM would have to do a lot of shifting rewriting for the players to make progress.
You might be able to get away with a Sorcerer who chooses spells smartly.
My current group has a Magus and a Bard and they are severely lacking in the flexibility a wizard can bring.
Besides tell the players that of all the classes in the game this Ap will make the wizard a GOD. So much fun and yummy stuff for a wizard.
I would say of all the classes a Wizard is a MUST. A wizard is even more vital here than any fighter type.Some stuff will basically be near impossible without a wizard. With no wizard a GM would have to do a lot of shifting rewriting for the players to make progress.
You might be able to get away with a Sorcerer who chooses spells smartly.
My current group has a Magus and a Bard and they are severely lacking in the flexibility a wizard can bring.
Besides tell the players that of all the classes in the game this Ap will make the wizard a GOD. So much fun and yummy stuff for a wizard.
Hm. That's a touch concerning. Our current group make-up looks something like this (we just started).
Halfling ArcheologistKitsune Sorcerer (Fey Bloodline)
Human Urban Barbarian 2/Lore Warden X
Human Urban Barbarian 2/Archer X
Half-Elven Master Summoner
Now that's three arcane spellcasters but no Wizards. Is there a reason to think we are going to have some difficulty?
|
Don't worry about it. If nobody wants to play a wizard, don't play any wizards. Unless the GM doesn't understand how to make adjustments, you should still have plenty of fun.
However, I would recommend the "Thief" (which I assume is a Rogue) should definitely take maximum ranks in the Use Magic Device skill. And probably have a high charisma to increase it further. And the Cleric and Druid are going to have to do a lot of spellcasting later on in the Adventure Path.
If you're the GM, I'll advise you that you'll need to make sure that there's always a solution to every problem that doesn't require having a wizard. You will probably have to add solutions of your own invention at certain places in the campaign.
In general, keep in mind that the Adventure Path as-written is just a guideline for your own game. No Paizo commandos are going to break down your door if you change things to fit your group.
And don't be afraid to take chances and make mistakes. You're all just learning. if you get some rules wrong, it's okay. Just focus on having fun.
I haven't had a chance to read through the entirety of Runelords yet, but I just started running the Anniversary Edition last week. We have a Wizard in the party, but what parts of the AP should I keep an eye on in case said Wizard eats it and I need to start adjusting?
|
|
I haven't had a chance to read through the entirety of Runelords yet, but I just started running the Anniversary Edition last week. We have a Wizard in the party, but what parts of the AP should I keep an eye on in case said Wizard eats it and I need to start adjusting?
By book 5 the wizard is pretty much the star of the AP. It can be done without a Wizard/Sorcerer if A. The GM is nice and changes things so the party can complete things that the Wizard would do normally (I do not GM that way, if my players choose poorly their game goes poorly).Or B. the GM just straight up removes and lets the PC's go on out of pity.
|
|
I would say of all the classes a Wizard is a MUST. A wizard is even more vital here than any fighter type.Some stuff will basically be near impossible without a wizard. With no wizard a GM would have to do a lot of shifting rewriting for the players to make progress.
You might be able to get away with a Sorcerer who chooses spells smartly.
My current group has a Magus and a Bard and they are severely lacking in the flexibility a wizard can bring.
Besides tell the players that of all the classes in the game this Ap will make the wizard a GOD. So much fun and yummy stuff for a wizard.
Hm. That's a touch concerning. Our current group make-up looks something like this (we just started).
Halfling ArcheologistKitsune Sorcerer (Fey Bloodline)
Human Urban Barbarian 2/Lore Warden X
Human Urban Barbarian 2/Archer X
Half-Elven Master Summoner
Now that's three arcane spellcasters but no Wizards. Is there a reason to think we are going to have some difficulty?
Like I said it depends on spell selection, or the ability to use items that your GM will have to add for the party to succeed.
There are lots of nice things for a wizard in that AP!
|
|
Thanks for your responses. The player I thought was playing a barbarian is thinking about a sorcerer. What can a wizard add to the adventure path that a sorcerer cannot?
Basically have every spell a Wizard/Sorcerer can cast in his spellbook vs the limited spells known of the Sorcerer. A Sorcerer will work fine but they have to be much choosier/smarter with the spells that they pick with their spells known. Basically Wizards are much more versatile than the Sorcerer.
And like I said a Wizard is given such a massive amount of goodies in this adventure path that he will need a few bags of holdings just to carry hi toys.
Is a Witch+Cleric combo OK for the arcane/divine part of a RotR party? (we don't have a wizard)
EDIT : we also have a urban ranger and a pally with unsanctioned knowledge.
It should be fine. My group has witch (hedge witch)/ alchemist (surgeon) / fighter (2-handed) / ranger / druid and they're doing very well! The alchemist has haste and AoE (non-magical, which turns out to be a good thing), whereas the witch handles the debuffing and the druid the summoning.
A wizard is definitely a plus when considering the theme of this AP, but it isn't necessary.
|
|
Is a Witch+Cleric combo OK for the arcane/divine part of a RotR party? (we don't have a wizard)
EDIT : we also have a urban ranger and a pally with unsanctioned knowledge.
Without the GM changing things up I think book 5 could cause your group problems. But if your GM is willing to change things considerably you will be fine.
I will GM RotRL in a few weeks and my party contains of:
Human Ranger (Archery)
Human Ninja
Elf Witch
Fighter or Paladin (Race unclear, probably Human)
Will they have bigger trouble without a cleric or real wizard?
(We will be using the Strain/Injury rules though)
P.S: Sorry for thread-jacking...
Remember that the iconics for Runelords were Kyra (cleric), Valeros (fighter), Merisiel (rogue), and Seoni (sorceress). So, no, a wizard isn't a must. However, there are a lot of spellbooks in the game, which only benefit wizards.
It's my philosophy that a GM tailors the game for the characters, for the most part. So, if you're running a game without an arcane spellcaster, be sure to craft alternate ways to accomplish things. It's pretty much just Book 5 that emphasizes arcane spellcasting, but even then, a clever party can compensate.
I will GM RotRL in a few weeks and my party contains of:
Human Ranger (Archery)
Human Ninja
Elf Witch
Fighter or Paladin (Race unclear, probably Human)Will they have bigger trouble without a cleric or real wizard?
(We will be using the Strain/Injury rules though)
P.S: Sorry for thread-jacking...
The witch works as your primary arcane caster, so that's covered.
Between a paladin, witch, and ranger, you should be set for healing and defeating undead, althought you might want to make sure that a bad guy has a wand of cure light wounds that the party can claim fairly early.
My group consists of:
Barbarian
Cleric (battle focused, but will be casting)
Ranger
Magus (me, going for battlefield control)
The cleric should be able to cover the divine side of things, but will my magus be able to cover the arcane side well enough?
|
In general, keep in mind that the Adventure Path as-written is just a guideline for your own game. No Paizo commandos are going to break down your door if you change things to fit your group.
This. I'm not worried. (MetalPaladin's GM here.)
He's already said he plans on keeping max ranks in UMD, and the Magus' spell list is diversed enough that so long as they've got the rare helpful wand laying around, everything should be fine.And even if that fails, I can just move things around.
I for one find it impossible to believe that they would release an entire 6-month AP or a revised 10th anniversary edition of one that could only be successfully completed - or even properly enjoyed - if the party doesn't include 1 specific class that no one really even has any idea of ahead of time.
|
|
I for one find it impossible to believe that they would release an entire 6-month AP or a revised 10th anniversary edition of one that could only be successfully completed - or even properly enjoyed - if the party doesn't include 1 specific class that no one really even has any idea of ahead of time.
If you look at pretty much every AP that has been released they all pretty much assume that you will have a balanced group. I do not think any Ap could be finished without GM intervention if say you had a entire party of Fighters.
And yes if the GM were not to change/modify RotRL and the party had no casters it would basically be impossible to complete.
I'm planning on running this later this year, so I haven't got that far in my reading yet, but what in particular is it that makes this AP impossible without an arcane caster?
Could you give a specific example of problems that the GM would have to anticipate? My group has no full arcane caster, although the oracle has UMD. I know there's the difficulty of finding a way out of the Runeforge, but I believe there's a cape that lets you activate a portal.
I hate being in a party without any of the four food groups. If I must be I can live without the Rogue, but no Wizard and I mean Wizard can be a difficult pill to swallow in any AP. To many bench mark spells lost IMHO. My Carrion Crown currently is without a true arcane caster and it worries me. The leadership feat is certainly in our future lol!
I for one find it impossible to believe that they would release an entire 6-month AP or a revised 10th anniversary edition of one that could only be successfully completed - or even properly enjoyed - if the party doesn't include 1 specific class that no one really even has any idea of ahead of time.If you look at pretty much every AP that has been released they all pretty much assume that you will have a balanced group. I do not think any Ap could be finished without GM intervention if say you had a entire party of Fighters.
And yes if the GM were not to change/modify RotRL and the party had no casters it would basically be impossible to complete.
I didn't say 'casters', I said a specific class. You've gone on and on about how necessary having a Wizard is and made the point that the AP might be able to be accomplished with other kinds of casters IF the GM made accommodations and even then they would be at a disadvantage or unable to fully enjoy all that it had to offer.
For some reason I find that unlikely, particularly if its not announced outright at the beginning of the AP.
I recently finished running a group through this AP; six characters, no Wizard. They had a Sorcerer, a Cleric, Bard/Ranger and a Spellblade/Paladin among them and I made no adjustments to the adventure based on their mix of classes. They did fine, but as someone upthread mentioned, there were a lot of spellbooks in the game they could not take advantage of.
I recently finished running a group through this AP; six characters, no Wizard. They had a Sorcerer, a Cleric, Bard/Ranger and a Spellblade/Paladin among them and I made no adjustments to the adventure based on their mix of classes. They did fine, but as someone upthread mentioned, there were a lot of spellbooks in the game they could not take advantage of.
With your party composition, I'd think it would have been relatively easy to exchange at least some of those spellbooks for divine and arcane scrolls, wands, potions, etc. rewarding the players with magical equipment they can use without changing the game noticeably.
I'm going to have a similar problem, but without ANY full casters. I am about to run the game for a group of five (four veterans and a beginner) and have the following:
Human Paladin (this is the beginner)
Human Rogue[Burglar]
Elf Alchemist
Aasimar Bard
Tiefling Fighter[Cad] (may not be playing)
Now, I figure with a paladin, an alchemist, and a bard they have plenty of healing and buffs. But I'm worried about the lack of arcane power. Adding to that, I'm a PhD student and don't want to have to spend too much time making adjustments - I'd prefer to run the thing straight as written. Is there going to be anything they simply cannot overcome? I'm okay with things being difficult for them, but I don't want it to be impossible.
I just want to know what it is about this adventure that is going to prevent a party without a wizard from completing the adventure as written.
I just want to know what it is about this adventure that is going to prevent a party without a wizard from completing the adventure as written.
Absolutely nothing. While the AP has some good stuff in it for Wizards, its starting to sound more like an issue with big killa's personal preference for Wizards over Sorcerers.
Its nice to have the 'versatility' of knowing every spell out there - but you can ONLY cast what you've prepared which is often times severely limiting. Sorcerers get more spells per day and can cast anything in their repertoire anytime they want. If you don't mind finding occasional spellbooks that you have no use for, you should be 100% fine.
the Wizard is indeed a must.
somewhere around book four. but especially so in books 5 and 6. the loot piles will be literally built around spoiling the wizard. lots of spellbooks, lots of foes with wizard levels, and specific foes like Mokmuran are especially nasty without a wizard due to him being a stone giant with 14 levels of wizard gained via the non associated class levels rule. Xanesha and the other Lamia matriarch is also nasty.
I say let 'em play what they wanna play. The AP is very lethal and with so many character deaths there will be plenty of opportunities for a player to switch to an arcane class later in the adventure.
In our group every player except one is on his/her second or third character and the party has composition has changed drastically (and for the better) from out initial layout.
I recently finished playing through the original adventure as a multi-classed sorcerer and our party's only full-caster. Although I managed to keep up with our party's arcane & divine casting needs with a fair bit of planning and bookkeeping, I did feel occasionally cheated by all the wizard-love featured in the A.P. Sometimes I felt as if I was being made to pay some unfair "sorcerer tax" for opting to play a spontaneous caster.
Although not absolutely necessary, my advice to anyone thinking of playing an arcane caster in this A.P. would be to play a wizard and to think twice and then thrice about playing anything other than a wizard. Runelords was made for clever wizard-loving players and playing anything else is a missed oppurtunity.
I recently finished playing through the original adventure as a multi-classed sorcerer and our party's only full-caster. Although I managed to keep up with our party's arcane & divine casting needs with a fair bit of planning and bookkeeping, I did feel occasionally cheated by all the wizard-love featured in the A.P. Sometimes I felt as if I was being made to pay some unfair "sorcerer tax" for opting to play a spontaneous caster.
Although not absolutely necessary, my advice to anyone thinking of playing an arcane caster in this A.P. would be to play a wizard and to think twice and then thrice about playing anything other than a wizard. Runelords was made for clever wizard-loving players and playing anything else is a missed oppurtunity.
I have to believe that if the only real reason why a Wizard is a must-play over a Sorcerer or similar caster is the loot, it would be a VERY easy fix for the GM to drop some party-appropriate treasure in place of spellbooks or whatnot.
(hopefully non-spoilery)
Book 5 was given as an example for something where the party really needs a wizard. I can't think of anything where you really need a "wizard", though I could just be missing spots. I've read through pretty much everything, but it's not all available to me in random-access mode, so to speak.
Unless someone posts actual examples, I'm thinking you don't really need an arcane caster, at least any more than a "normal" campaign. It's nice to have access to arcane spell lists, and I think a party without an arcane caster is missing out, but it is not completely necessary. That said, if your party includes a wizard, the player of said wizard will feel like a kid in a candy store a few times during the game.
A character with a good UMD score and a nice collection of emergency scrolls, or a divine caster with domains that import in certain utilitarian arcane spells, can make things nicer. The ability to fly is also useful, but it can backfire... Bring those safety nets, people :-)
Edit: As Ambrus indicates, loot heavily favors wizards in certain cases. If my party included a sorcerer rather than a wizard, I would certainly change up loot so that the loot doesn't taunt the player!
there is more wizard love than just the loot. even though 75% of the loot in books 4 and after is tailored to wizards. most of the boss fights involve wizards who found ways to overcome their weaknesses. the most iconic of these boss fights is Mokmuran in fortress of the stone giants. he is a 15th level stone giant transmuter who beats foes due to having almost 30 hit dice, full casting up to 8th level spells, and a better combat ability than any party tank you have at this level. you basically need a wizard to beat him because he is such a melee powerhouse, that your tanks need a wizard's godly contributions to defeat him.
there is more wizard love than just the loot. even though 75% of the loot in books 4 and after is tailored to wizards. most of the boss fights involve wizards who found ways to overcome their weaknesses. the most iconic of these boss fights is Mokmuran in fortress of the stone giants. he is a 15th level stone giant transmuter who beats foes due to having almost 30 hit dice, full casting up to 8th level spells, and a better combat ability than any party tank you have at this level. you basically need a wizard to beat him because he is such a melee powerhouse, that your tanks need a wizard's godly contributions to defeat him.
Again... only a Wizard could be a difference-maker in this battle? Somehow I suspect our Kitsune Sorcerer (Fey Bloodline) with astronomical DC's on her Enchantments might be of use here... I can't say for certain since I haven't read it, but a handful of DC 29 Hold Monster's or a nice Feeblemind (for instance) could have an impact - even if the caster isn't a Wizard.
|
|
Mokmuran in fortress of the stone giants. he is a 15th level stone giant transmuter who beats foes due to having almost 30 hit dice, full casting up to 8th level spells, and a better combat ability than any party tank you have at this level.
In the original he was, in the Anniversary edition he is a wuss, only 11th level, only up to 6th level spells, they took away his immunity to mind control/possession. Most parties will probably walk over him now.
Mokmuran in fortress of the stone giants. he is a 15th level stone giant transmuter who beats foes due to having almost 30 hit dice, full casting up to 8th level spells, and a better combat ability than any party tank you have at this level.In the original he was, in the Anniversary edition he is a wuss, only 11th level, only up to 6th level spells, they took away his immunity to mind control/possession. Most parties will probably walk over him now.
A CR 15 encounter intended for a party of four, level 12 or 13, at the end of long adventure when they have already exhausted most of their resources?
Most parties would probably disagree with you.
Reducing a TPK encounter to just a very hard encounter was exactly what they should have done in this instance and in several others and it would take an optimized, well-prepared, and cannily played group to come out of the final battle whole - hell, to even have a chance to.
there is more wizard love than just the loot. even though 75% of the loot in books 4 and after is tailored to wizards. most of the boss fights involve wizards who found ways to overcome their weaknesses. the most iconic of these boss fights is Mokmuran in fortress of the stone giants. he is a 15th level stone giant transmuter who beats foes due to having almost 30 hit dice, full casting up to 8th level spells, and a better combat ability than any party tank you have at this level. you basically need a wizard to beat him because he is such a melee powerhouse, that your tanks need a wizard's godly contributions to defeat him.Again... only a Wizard could be a difference-maker in this battle? Somehow I suspect our Kitsune Sorcerer (Fey Bloodline) with astronomical DC's on her Enchantments might be of use here... I can't say for certain since I haven't read it, but a handful of DC 29 Hold Monster's or a nice Feeblemind (for instance) could have an impact - even if the caster isn't a Wizard.
normally, it wouldn't make sense for a sorcerer to pick up feeblemind, but rise of the runelords pits you against a lot of wizards. against mokmuran, if you stripped his casting, he is still a dangerous melee monstrosity.
hold monster, nice if you are a kitsune and you bind a lone foe for the enemy to coup de grace. this works, but there is a save every round, and like feeblemind, it only affects one target.
unless the DM is going easy on the party, Mokmuran won't be alone. even with the 15th level 30 hit dice version. and before you say stone giants are 5 CRs too low. they can still land a hit reasonably well due to their massive size greatly enhancing their strength and will take more than a fireball or two to drop. Mokmuran commands a whole community at his disposal.
|
|
So.
My players (5-6* depending on the week...) are as follows:
Half-Elf Magus
Elf Cleric of Shelyn
Aasimar Paladin
Gnome Druid
Teifling (Beast-Brood) Sorceror (Abyssal Bloodline)
Teifling (Beast-Brood) Gunslinger*
I feel that between the Magus and the Sorceror, they'll have little trouble with anything in book 5. It will take a little modding, but I'm certain they'll rise to the challenge, especially since both the Magus and the Sorceror are interested in Thassilon. How's the rest of the party's composition to you guys?
So.
My players (5-6* depending on the week...) are as follows:
Half-Elf Magus
Elf Cleric of Shelyn
Aasimar Paladin
Gnome Druid
Teifling (Beast-Brood) Sorceror (Abyssal Bloodline)
Teifling (Beast-Brood) Gunslinger*I feel that between the Magus and the Sorceror, they'll have little trouble with anything in book 5. It will take a little modding, but I'm certain they'll rise to the challenge, especially since both the Magus and the Sorceror are interested in Thassilon. How's the rest of the party's composition to you guys?
Halfling Archeaologist
Elven Paladin (Oath of Vengeance)Human Invulnerable Rager
Kitsune Sorcerer (Fey Bloodline)
Half-Elven Master Summoner.
The Halfling is only a part-time player and the rest of the time is NPC'd by the GM. Kind of his mouthpiece when the group needs a nudge, but just as often leads us astray. The other four are full-time PC's.
I GM'd this to the end long ago. None of the players were arcane casters, but some wished they were because of all the good caster loot.
There were no issues though.
I have to believe that if the only real reason why a Wizard is a must-play over a Sorcerer or similar caster is the loot, it would be a VERY easy fix for the GM to drop some party-appropriate treasure in place of spellbooks or whatnot.
It may be easy enough to swap out loot, but many GMs simply don't like changing up APs in such ways; preferring to keep things as written for the sake of authenticity. And there's nothing wrong with that. Besides, if you're going to start modifying Runelords loot to better suit the party, then there's no one who deserves more love than the party's warrior-types. I'm looking at you giant-sized armour and weapons!!! Once you start tailoring though, it may be hard to stop. ;)
A better reason perhaps than mere loot however is the nature of the arcana underlying the whole A.P. As stated above, many of the Runelords big players are ancient Thasilonians steeped in a wizardly culture or modern students of that ancient arcana. For those players wishing to explore forgotten lore in hopes of mastering the ancient mysteries of Thasilonian sin magic, there's no better way to do that then by playing a wizard. Other arcane spell-casters can certainly make use of some of the loot discovered but without the ancient Thasilonian wizardry mystique to give it real life that's all it'll be; loot. As a player of a spontaneous spell caster, I couldn't help but feel that I was brushing up against but ultimately just dabbling in something with the potential to be awesome. Don't know if I'm making sense or not...
most of the boss fights involve wizards who found ways to overcome their weaknesses. the most iconic of these boss fights is Mokmuran in fortress of the stone giants. he is a 15th level stone giant transmuter who beats foes due to having almost 30 hit dice, full casting up to 8th level spells, and a better combat ability than any party tank you have at this level. you basically need a wizard to beat him because he is such a melee powerhouse, that your tanks need a wizard's godly contributions to defeat him.
In our campaign, Mokmurian's spell-casting was quickly neutered with a silence spell (a mere 2nd level clerical spell) cast on a token which was moved into his vicinity. His fallback melee abilities were no match for our two ranged archers fronted by two melee warriors. Just saying, one doesn't always need arcana to counter a wizard.
In our campaign, Mokmurian's spell-casting was quickly neutered with a silence spell (a mere 2nd level clerical spell) cast on a token which was moved into his vicinity. His fallback melee abilities were no match for our two ranged archers fronted by two melee warriors. Just saying, one doesn't always need arcana to counter a wizard.
Our entire Curse of the Crimson Throne campaign centered around a gnome rogue in shadow armor and boots of spider climb who would have Silence cast on her, who would then roll a Stealth check in the 40's, and whose entire job was to just hang out around the enemy spellcaster without ever attacking.
Effective? Yes!
Thanks for the responses, Ambrus.
We may not have a dedicated prepared caster on the roster, but one of the players will be running a Halfling Archeologist who specializes in ancient history and linguistics and has a particular fascination with ancient Thasilonia. I'm sure he'll be one of the primary 'pulls' towards some of the areas or encounters above and beyond those who are simply looking for something to kill and something to loot. As far as not needing Wizards to be successful in a fight, you're preaching to the choir.
In our campaign, Mokmurian's spell-casting was quickly neutered with a silence spell (a mere 2nd level clerical spell) cast on a token which was moved into his vicinity. His fallback melee abilities were no match for our two ranged archers fronted by two melee warriors. Just saying, one doesn't always need arcana to counter a wizard.Our entire Curse of the Crimson Throne campaign centered around a gnome rogue in shadow armor and boots of spider climb who would have Silence cast on her, who would then roll a Stealth check in the 40's, and whose entire job was to just hang out around the enemy spellcaster without ever attacking.
Effective? Yes!
Heh - no one will ever explain to my satisfaction why a Bard can't cast a Silence spell.
Our entire Curse of the Crimson Throne campaign centered around a gnome rogue in shadow armor and boots of spider climb who would have Silence cast on her, who would then roll a Stealth check in the 40's, and whose entire job was to just hang out around the enemy spellcaster without ever attacking.
Heh. I usually assigned mobile silence duty to my air elemental familiar; it's hard for a BBEG's to outpace a readied air elemental!
When our group finally went up against Special-K, I decided to step things up and so cast antimagic field on my character and had my familiar carry him right up to Karzoug's side. I didn't get to cast any other spells that fight but I figured it was a worthwhile tradeoff to effectively strip Special-K of all his buffs, items and spell-casting. I was hoping to at least slap Karzoug with a tanglefoot bag for fun but my companions slew him too quickly for that. :)
Heh - no one will ever explain to my satisfaction why a Bard can't cast a Silence spell.
Cause... Silence is counterintuitive to a bard's performance schtick? Silence: music's original alternative! :P
|
Heh - no one will ever explain to my satisfaction why a Bard can't cast a Silence spell.In our campaign, Mokmurian's spell-casting was quickly neutered with a silence spell (a mere 2nd level clerical spell) cast on a token which was moved into his vicinity. His fallback melee abilities were no match for our two ranged archers fronted by two melee warriors. Just saying, one doesn't always need arcana to counter a wizard.Our entire Curse of the Crimson Throne campaign centered around a gnome rogue in shadow armor and boots of spider climb who would have Silence cast on her, who would then roll a Stealth check in the 40's, and whose entire job was to just hang out around the enemy spellcaster without ever attacking.
Effective? Yes!
Silence = Bard Level 2 spell.
You can be satisfied!