I've been thinking about GMing a game for when our regular GM can't make it. Now, I generally know what I'm doing as a player, but I have basically no experience running games.
Here is how I am planning on running the game (subject to change):
1- 15 point buy
2- max hit points at first and second level, half hit die plus 1, plus con modifier thereafter
3- CRB base classes only (other non-core content is fine pending approval [prestige classes and feats for example])
4- No automatic failure or success on anything.
Point 3 is in effect because I'm a 3.5 guy that only recently switched to pathfinder and I have no idea what to expect from oracles, gunslingers, inquisitors etcetera.
point 4 may be controversial... I just despise the jarring, random weirdness of that mechanic. The actions of highly trained, competent fighters (and if we are talking about characters who are otherwise the die numbers should be sufficient to represent luck) are not nearly as unreliable as the game makes them out to be. I can guarantee that the chances of a high-level warrior missing an unarmoured, untrained, unsuspecting (flat-footed) level 1 commoner are not as high as 5%. The chance exists, but is infinitesimal.
Something I'm kind of concerned about would be the number of players, 3 at most but more likely 2. That would seem to alter the dynamic a bit. Any recommendations for a new GM running a game for 2 players?
I run a game with three players, you shouldn't have a problem. I would suggest a 20 point buy (25 if you have two players). I do like the idea of the no auto hit/miss.
My recommendation would be you might want to consider including those non-core classes.
Basically with a small party, you want overlap in roles. While there are a few 'mixed' classes in the core rules (druid, paladin, bard), there are several more that do it better in the other books (witch, summoner, inquisitor, magus, some oracles). With classes that have overlap in the classic 4 roles (warrior, thief, priest, wizard) you have a better chance of a small party being able to handle itself in most pathfinder situations. Particularly if you consider the 'pet' classes (druid and summoner), where they lag less on action economy. Or with the magus who has a class feature that offers an action economy advantage.
I would also say, particularly with a small group, offer a higher point buy. You have fewer people to cover different tasks, allowing them to be more well rounded with more points would be a considerable boon to a 2 man party.
My RotRL group often only has 3 people playing: two-weapon fighter, two-handed barbarian, and enchantment wizard. It gets dicey at times. We're on a 25-point buy and using Hero points. The fighter/barb have both had to burn at least 3 hero points each to negate a killing blow. We are now level 11.
It's survivable, but can be difficult.
Definitely do at least a 20pt buy, but I'd push towards 25pt. Another possibility is to allow them to control a second PC each, or at least have a "floating" PC that they alternate controlling. I knew a 2.0 DM who ran a 2-person game where each player had 2 characters.
|
The Auto-fail and Auto-hit only apply to rolls "to hit" - 1 being the auto-miss and 20 the auto-hit. There are no auto fails or successes for saves or skill checks.
And honestly, I consider that auto-miss on a 1 to be something that helps keep PCs alive slightly longer when fighting tough opponents - in my experience, it always seems to come up more often on my side of the table than theirs. :)
I should point out that I won't be running an AP, It will be modules or my own stuff.
Now that it has been mentioned, a higher point-buy does seem like good idea.
I'm still very leery of the non-core base classes. I don't really want to deal with unfamiliar mechanics in my first foray into GMing. I more or less know exactly what I'm dealing with if someone plays a Conjurer, But a summoner? not so much.
I should point out that I won't be running an AP, It will be modules or my own stuff.
Now that it has been mentioned, a higher point-buy does seem like good idea.
I'm still very leery of the non-core base classes. I don't really want to deal with unfamiliar mechanics in my first foray into GMing. I more or less know exactly what I'm dealing with if someone plays a Conjurer, But a summoner? not so much.
AP or homebrew, 2 players will have a lot of trouble dealing with most typical situations in a fantasy rpg. If you are really deadset against Additional classes, I would recommend considering using the gestalt rules for character creation (essentially each player character has 2 character classes). This would allow for greater versatility in a small party without doing alot of pigeonholing in terms of concept.
|
3 person games are totally doable.
Been as a player in a Kingmaker game, with only 3 players and a tried out Carrion Crown with only 2 players.
Things I would suggest:
1) 20 point buy.
With less players, you want to give your players higher ability scores. This allows them to make characters, without needing to focus on just party survival.
2) Give a flat +2 skill points per level to all characters
Again, with lesser players, means that the chances of players not having the proper skill or knowledge is higher.
Giving them more skill points so that classes with low skill point don't have to go out of their way to get skill points or ending up just placing points in 1-2 important skills like perception and ignoring the rest.
Example, cleric not having knowledge religion as his 2 skill points ended up in Perception and Spell craft... embarrassing... :P
Also keep this bonus a FLAT +2. Meaning classes like bards that already have a large number of skill points don't end up as Omniscience gods of Knowledge.
3) Allow more classes and feats. Some Classes like the Cleric with Sacred Summons feat or the Master Summoner, can take on multiple roles. Acting as "tanks" by using their pets to block the attacks of enemies and being able to buff or heal allies.
Usually with a 6 player party you don't have to open up all the books, but with only 3, you will want players to be able to take on multiple roles.
4) OPTIONAL! - You could create 3 "roles" that you want for the part.
for example, you can state that you want 1 "Melee-combatant", 1 "Spell-caster" and 1 "Range-attacker" in the party and have the players pick with of these "roles" they want to take on.
This allows you to plan for games, without having to change the encounters due to you having a all fighter party or an all caster/support party.
Examples of the above 3 roles could be a party of :
1) Fighter, Wizard, Range Rogue/Alchemist
2) Master Summoner, Bard, Ranger
3) Barbarian, Cleric, Blaster Sorcerer
4) Battle Oracle, Sorcerer, Archer Fighter
and so forth.
All combinations have the ability to fight, take on range targets, tackle skill challenges, RP and heal.
3 players games may need more careful handling of the players by the GM, but its totally doable.
I've been thinking about GMing a game for when our regular GM can't make it. Now, I generally know what I'm doing as a player, but I have basically no experience running games.
Here is how I am planning on running the game (subject to change):
1- 15 point buy
I HIGHLY recommend against the point buy system.
The point buy system robs your players of roleplay opportunities. To give you an example, I'm currently running a game where the rogue rolled a character with a 6 in intelligence and a 5 in wisdom. He took it in stride and enjoys the hell out of roleplaying an idiot rogue.
There was one scene in particular where the PCs were handed a bag in a crowded inn. The rogue looked in the bag and saw there was a severed head inside - but he wanted the bag (it was a very nice bag). So, he simply dumped the head out of the bag, sending it rolling across the floor. You can well imagine the scene that unfolded. It was extremely entertaining for everyone involved.
Generally speaking, most players aren't going to handicap themselves like that using a point buy system.
Obviously this is purely opinion, so do with it as you will :)
The Auto-fail and Auto-hit only apply to rolls "to hit" - 1 being the auto-miss and 20 the auto-hit. There are no auto fails or successes for saves or skill checks.
And honestly, I consider that auto-miss on a 1 to be something that helps keep PCs alive slightly longer when fighting tough opponents - in my experience, it always seems to come up more often on my side of the table than theirs. :)
Well, actually saving throws are also subject to automatic failure and success. From the PRD:
Automatic Failures and Successes: A natural 1 (the d20 comes up 1) on a saving throw is always a failure (and may cause damage to exposed items; see Items Surviving after a Saving Throw). A natural 20 (the d20 comes up 20) is always a success.
I've been thinking about GMing a game for when our regular GM can't make it. Now, I generally know what I'm doing as a player, but I have basically no experience running games.
Here is how I am planning on running the game (subject to change):
1- 15 point buy
I HIGHLY recommend against the point buy system.
The point buy system robs your players of roleplay opportunities. To give you an example, I'm currently running a game where the rogue rolled a character with a 6 in intelligence and a 5 in wisdom. He took it in stride and enjoys the hell out of roleplaying an idiot rogue.
There was one scene in particular where the PCs were handed a bag in a crowded inn. The rogue looked in the bag and saw there was a severed head inside - but he wanted the bag (it was a very nice bag). So, he simply dumped the head out of the bag, sending it rolling across the floor. You can well imagine the scene that unfolded. It was extremely entertaining for everyone involved.
Generally speaking, most players aren't going to handicap themselves like that using a point buy system.
Obviously this is purely opinion, so do with it as you will :)
I totally understand what you're saying. As a player I wouldn't even mind taking this to an extreme and doing 3d6 in order. However, we are already playing in a game with rolled stats (and crit decks) and for my game I really wanted to get rid of as much randomness as possible, So I'll probably keep it to point buy.
What would be an appropriate encounter (I find CR kind of unreliable) for 2 level 1 characters?
For example what if we had:
- Dwarf battle cleric 1
and
- Human blaster sorcerer 1
Or instead maybe:
- half-orc paladin 1
and
- Human rogue 1
Would encounters need to be balanced differently for these parties?
Anyone?
I HIGHLY recommend against the point buy system.The point buy system robs your players of roleplay opportunities. To give you an example, I'm currently running a game where the rogue rolled a character with a 6 in intelligence and a 5 in wisdom. He took it in stride and enjoys the hell out of roleplaying an idiot rogue.
Generally speaking, most players aren't going to handicap themselves like that using a point buy system.
Of course they will. Look at the various "guides', nearly every one suggests a "7" in one stat or another.
Next of all, playing with a idiot isn't very fun past the first encounter, nor is it heroic being a idiot.
Then there is nothing less fun than rolling up a 11, 12,9, 8, 10, 11- esp if the next guy gets a 17, 13, 9, 16, 15,14.
Finally, with point buy the whole character creation thing can be done off line.
OP, do a 20 pt buy.
Two PC's? Both need to do some healing then. Bard & Paladin works. Or Inquisitor.
Be very careful with allowing a Summoner. It's great for small parties, but it's very easy to "miscalculate" the "buy" for the eidolon, or forget some important rule.
Of the APG classes, Inquisitor, Oracle or witch works , the cavalier is meh, the alchemist can be confusing. But the Witch isn;t all that good for small parties.
I HIGHLY recommend against the point buy system.The point buy system robs your players of roleplay opportunities. To give you an example, I'm currently running a game where the rogue rolled a character with a 6 in intelligence and a 5 in wisdom. He took it in stride and enjoys the hell out of roleplaying an idiot rogue.
Generally speaking, most players aren't going to handicap themselves like that using a point buy system.
Of course they will. Look at the various "guides', nearly every one suggests a "7" in one stat or another.
Next of all, playing with a idiot isn't very fun past the first encounter, nor is it heroic being a idiot.
Then there is nothing less fun than rolling up a 11, 12,9, 8, 10, 11- esp if the next guy gets a 17, 13, 9, 16, 15,14.
Finally, with point buy the whole character creation thing can be done off line.
OP, do a 20 pt buy.
Two PC's? Both need to do some healing then. Bard & Paladin works. Or Inquisitor.
Be very careful with allowing a Summoner. It's great for small parties, but it's very easy to "miscalculate" the "buy" for the eidolon, or forget some important rule.
Of the APG classes, Inquisitor, Oracle or witch works , the cavalier is meh, the alchemist can be confusing. But the Witch isn;t all that good for small parties.
Actually, that group is level 7 already and the rogue is still having a blast :)
What would be an appropriate encounter (I find CR kind of unreliable) for 2 level 1 characters?
For example what if we had:
- Dwarf battle cleric 1
and
- Human blaster sorcerer 1
Or instead maybe:
- half-orc paladin 1
and
- Human rogue 1
Would encounters need to be balanced differently for these parties?
I would go with skeletons.
They come in a wide variety of challenge ratings. So, for a first encounter, I would probably throw the weakest ones at them, maybe like 3 or 4 of them, and see how they do. If they defeat them with ease, maybe try one or two harder ones - and so on.
|
If you are running homebrew, use any monsters you want in around your characters levels. Modify them in your head as you play them to be an appropriate challenge to the PCs.
For example, you can throw 15 goblins at the PCS if you wanted to. One stops to scratch its butt, two others get into an argument and fight each other. One trips and stabs himself. One runs away in fear. One sees a piece of chicken dangling out of the backpack of another and tears into the backpack, making th either one turn to attack the first one. One goblin actually attacks!
For tougher fights, you decide how long the bad guy should be "on screen". That is, how many rounds do you want the bad guy to menace your PCs. Say the line skeleton should prove a problem for three rounds. Then just have the skeleton have enough HP to last for three rounds, regardless of the amount of damage dished out. A level boss might last seven rounds for example, for a great fight.
Another way to do it is calculate the average damage your party deals. Find the average damage for every attack they have, add these together, and look for monsters with HP to last a few founds based upon that number. Then just run the monster out of the book. For example, assume your fighter does 10 points average damage, and your wizard does 8 points. So with an average of 18 points and a fight of at least 3 rounds you want a monster with 54 hit points, or roughly in the ball park of 9-14 hit dice (assuming d8s which are an average of 4.5 HP per hit die).
Personally, for homebrew, I would just wing it, make up HP on the fly and just have fun that way. Gives you more creative license as well.
I run a 3 party group too, I'm having no problems with Skull and Shackles at the moment but that's because i'm using a modified Hero point system.
20 point buy instead of 15 point buy works fine.
The hero points im using are used in the same way as the APG but each PC has 3 points per session, they never have more than 3 and they dont pick any up for role-playing etc during the game and they re-fresh every session. I have dicided to let them use 1 point to save them from dying but they will lose that point forever (in effct this gives the players 3 lifelines but if they use them they have no Hero points to fall back on,in s&s I use plastic dubloons for flavour).
My players love them as it gives them an edge in an otherwise very challenging game and kind of gives that swashbuckling feel too. It has also helped me as a GM as I don't have to pull punches and modify any encounters for 3 players (I nearly had 3 deaths last sessions but the hero points saved them, mostly through +8 to checks or re-rolls, the players didn't mind at all as it makes them think more and judge when to throw in or keep a point back). Its not for everyone and im not sure if I would use the same system if I had more players either but for now it works great.
Just my 2 cents... but as realistic or unrealistic as it may seem -- Pathfinder is a game, and having a small but conceivable chance of failure (or relief when it happens to the other guy) is a mechanic that adds suspense and makes the game more fun.
...I would be leery of removing it. If you're a new GM let me give you a bit of free advice: Don't do anything to sacrifice fun to burn your campaign on the altar of what is "realistic" -- in a game where everyone hopes something fantastic happens, sometimes that fantastic thing is missing a sure shot. or the devil himself throwing a punch and whiffing it.
S'fun.
Yep I agree, thats the other house rule we have the group have used this for every game they played long before I came along from 1st ed onwards.
A 1 is ALWAYS a fumble even if its a skill check and the hero points can't be used to change that, just as a natural 20 is ALWAYS a crit even on skill checks, no need to re-roll. Adds in the elemnet of suspence and...oh no I got a 1...
|
I'd keep the auto success and failures. Once you go unconscious or if you get CDG a lot of the time it gets to the point where the only chance you have for success is a natural 20 and its nice to have that happy moment where you succeed when you maybe shouldn't have.
If you have concerns with stat buy then I recommend just using the Heroic Stat Array in the book. Everyone will have the same starting stats and you will be ready to go.
The only 2 classes I'd say not to allow (and this is just do to you being a new GM) is the Gunslinger and Summoner. They cause more problems than anything I've dealt with otherwise.
So after experimenting with a few different arrays I've decided to go with a 25 point buy.
I think I'm also going to keep out automatic failure and success, unless after playing the game that way my players want to go back to the usual method.
|
|
Yep I agree, thats the other house rule we have the group have used this for every game they played long before I came along from 1st ed onwards.
A 1 is ALWAYS a fumble even if its a skill check and the hero points can't be used to change that, just as a natural 20 is ALWAYS a crit even on skill checks, no need to re-roll. Adds in the elemnet of suspence and...oh no I got a 1...
BTW this is wrong.
1 is a failure on Attack Rolls and Saving Throws NOT skills. Skills fail when you don't meet the required target.
20 is a success on Attack rolls and Saving Throws NOT skills. You can just as easily fail on a 20 as you do a 2 when it comes to skills. You need to make the roll and meet or exceed (depending on whether it is an opposed check or not) the required target.
Ossian I may not have been too clear there sorry, its a house rule, thats the way we play it, its not RAW. We as a group find it works for us, its not for everyone and you don't have to play by the rules all the time.
No problem :)
I'm also a new DM, and been playing pathfinder for two years now (came from a text role play background rather than D&D).
I'm currently running Carrion Crown for two PCs. We started out with three, but one moved. I've introduced a handful of NPCs that can help out the party in whatever capacity they want - including a semi-permanent NPC witch/rogue to help out by being another target for the bad guys to hit. We went with rolling out the stats, and everyone has fairly decent scores. I run with rules pretty much as is, but keep the party one level higher than what the AP calls for. I also am doing the Harrow Cards for one time bonuses for each book as well as the party Harrow Cards called for the AP. And so far, the sorcerer and paladin/cleric is a very good combination who could do it by themselves if they wanted to.
What I've learned as we've been going is to just keep watch on how the fights go and adjust up or down as needed (either during the fight or for future fights). Being that both my players are far more experienced than I am, its been a great experience for me and for them. There were only two spots that made us sweat, but I had back up plans in case everyone was incapacitated due to just not having the numbers needed (who knew that a basilisk would terrorize the party more than the spell casters?)
I wish you luck!