I'm running from the beginning of RotRL for two 4th-level half-orc brothers: an Inquisitor of Torag and a rogue. So far, we're one game in and having fun. (These two are starting to look more and more like Moonknight and Batman, and everyone involved knows there will be vigilantism in the game just to appeal to their characters.) I intend to toss in a 3rd-level DM PC to help round out the group, and I'll probably be swapping out this last character for others as the campaign goes on.
So what pitfalls do I need to be aware of? Will they -- even at higher level than the CR they're facing -- suffer greatly without a dedicated healer? Or without a "tank"? For that matter, an arcane caster?
|
Short answer: yes.
Longer answer: Pathfinder makes some general assumptions about your party - the general assumption is that the AP encounters are balanced against a party of four PCs built with a 15 point buy spread. Of those four PCs, one is an arcane caster, one is a divine caster, one is a skill monkey, and one is a beatstick.
The further you go away from these assumptions, the more you will need to adjust the AP to balance things. In your case, the two PCs outclass the goblins they're facing. So, yes, they're cleaning things up. However, as you level, you'll find that they are facing things with better defenses and greater offenses. Goblins are pushovers, but the two of them will find themselves severely challenged by Erylium, and that's to say nothing of Nualia or Malfeshnekor. After that, take a look at the boss encounters - if you don't have ways of dealing with spells like cloudkill or guards and wards, you're pretty much up a creek without a paddle.
Currently, the two of them have the skill side of things wrapped up. They desperately need arcane, and they also need someone that can take a hit. Magus is the obvious choice to fill both gaps.
I mostly agree with Misroi. At some point, the lack of a full caster of some kind is going to be a problem. You have the capacity to make a few things easier for them. Erylium for example is easier if they think to use powder on her, or if one of them is packing cold iron arrows.
Depending on how experienced they are they can probably do fine for a while, but book 2, and especially book 3, they will have problems unless you change some stuff.
A GM PC could fix some problems.
If they really want to go with we are Batman and Moonknight, you could offer them sidekicks, basically give them leadership before they would normally have access to it, so that Batman can have Robin(or 2nd Robin, or 3rd Robin, or Batgirl, or Batwing, or 4th Robin, or Red Robin, or Blue Bird, or others I am missing) and Moonknight could have Midnight(I think that was his sidekicks name)
I can certainly see the virute of having 2 DM PCs to round out the group. But I also want to keep as much of the focus as possible on my two buddies (largely so I don't spend a huge chunk of the game session RPing with myself while the PCs look for a chance to interject). I may just have to bite the bullet and invite another player, which is a shame. I was really looking forward to the RP possibilities of these 2 orcish brothers making it to epic level.
|
|
Mark Twain's got the right idea. In essence, give them Leadership for free now rather than forcing them to wait. Run the numbers, and see what level NPCs that grants them. Build the characters along with each player - let them give some input into what they want to play. Alternatively, if they've had some good relations with people in town, maybe they could have them join up as the sidekicks. Kaye Tesarani might be convinced to leave the Pixie's Kitten and join them as the arcane, while Sir Jasper Korvaski might be able to pick up his sword again and strike out against the people attacking Sandpoint.
I can certainly see the virute of having 2 DM PCs to round out the group. But I also want to keep as much of the focus as possible on my two buddies (largely so I don't spend a huge chunk of the game session RPing with myself while the PCs look for a chance to interject). I may just have to bite the bullet and invite another player, which is a shame. I was really looking forward to the RP possibilities of these 2 orcish brothers making it to epic level.
Action economy is a really big issue in the game. Simply being a higher level then the adventure expects doesnt even this out, it actually makes it worse (it just makes things more uneven at both ends).
However, there is a fix for this if people are willing to re-gigger their characters a bit.
I have run pathfinder adveture paths and modules for 2 person parties without major issues and without dmpcs. I did this by doing a couple things.
First, I had the players be 'Gestalt' characters. This basically means they get the class abilities of 2 classes, and take the higher of each 'side' of their build for hp, saves, skills and bab. This allows them to cover more of the 'bases' without running multiple individual characters. Details of how this works can be found in the 3.5 srd under the unearthed arcana rules.
Second, encourage, or even enforce action economy boosting class choices. Here, I would have the inquisitor take druid or hunter as it's second class, and have the rogue take summoner. This way the druid or hunters animal companion, and the summoners eidolon even out to 4 characters. Normally lots of pets can be a problem, but in a 2 person party, they are a great solution. The inquisitor/druid will have plenty of divine casting, and the rogue/summoner should have enough arcane tricks to handle most of the issues you will face in the ap.
And ofcourse you dont have to worry about losing focus on the 2 brothers roleplay wise since neither the animal companion, nor the eidolon really need much roleplaying. They are automatic sidekicks, and by their very rules, followers that can be more or less handwaived in roleplay situations, or even left outside when dealing with social situations.
As mentioned druid and summoner are the best choices to gestalt here, but there are a few other choices. Magus with its ability to cast and fight is a slight action economy boost, particularly when he has time to buff, same thing with the warpriest from the advanced class guide, and to a lesser extent the paladin since it can swift action heal itself. An inquisitor paladin, and a rogue/warpriest could work, but not as well as mixing in druid and summoner because of the action economy the pets grant.
I also allow a slightly more generous point buy or other stat generation method when doing this due to the split in focus gestalt characters can cause.
If you do these things you dont have to invite another player, you wont have to make significant alterations to the ap, you can run the characters at the level the AP recommends, and you can continue to focus on the two brothers and their adventures instead of having to add focus for other characters.
|
I have run characters in situations where the party was short handed. I found that having the players hire a wizard and a cleric (or whatever classes they feel they need) to follow along and help them with healing and magic as needed. The players get some control over what type of NPC they are willing to hire and some control over what the NPCs do without giving them leadership as an early feat. Later on, if the PCs want to take leadership they have ready made followers with an existing relationship.
Hey I am running RotRL with 2 players. Our group just started the final book, so maybe I could give you some insight. Like you, I wanted my players to dedicate themselves to roleplaying only 1 character instead of 2 characters a piece. I wanted my players to really feel attached to THEIR character instead of needing to split attentions between 2.
First up, just having 2 PCs will not work for all the reasons outlined above. Even if you buff the PCs with levels or mythic tiers, that will not fix the issues with action economy and you will find that you NEED a full caster of some sort eventually. I went with 2 PCs up until glassworks, which is where I added a GM PC. Even a 3rd wasn't enough, so we fleshed it out to 4 at thistletop.
My solution was at first the addition of a GM PC, but I decided I really wanted them to make their own tactical decisions and I felt uncomfortable as GM controlling one of "their" guys in combat. So I ended up with the following solution:
Each of my players controls one guy each. That is who they roleplay, that is who they level up, that is who they control. Then I tell them that they can "recruit" certain NPCs to join their group. I roleplay the NPCs when needed (though they generally stay in the background so that they don't steal the PC's thunder). These NPCs are mostly composed of the NPCs provided in the text, who have been buffed up with levels so that they are the same level as the PCs in the party. Possible party members that my PCs have had access to are:
Ameiko Kaijitsu, Shalelu Andosana, Orik Vancaskerkin, All 3 Black Arrows, Razmus (HP nerfed slightly), Conna the Wise (altered to be younger and HP nerfed slightly), that Thassilonian warrior dude who was imprisoned in the Iron Cages of Lust whose name I can't remember, Svevenka (on the condition that someone stays behind to watch the Ice Mists for her, with nerfed HP).
Looking through this list you'll note a lack of casters. So I supplemented the book NPCs with some of the pathfinder iconics - namely Kyra, Seoni, and Seelah. Kyra was in Sandpoint assisting with the festival, Seoni was found in a bar in Magnimar, and Seelah was found captured by the Scribbler. Each of these iconics was explicitly chosen to help with party composition.
The rules:
The players cannot roleplay the NPCs. The NPCs do not join the party unless the PCs roleplay with the NPCs and befriend them enough. The NPCs do not stay with the party unless the party's goals and actions align with the NPC's. For example, Kyra left the group when they refused to fight Black Magga out of fear, even though innocents were getting hurt. Another example is that Conna only joined on the condition that no stone giants save Mokmurian die. The NPCs also do not stay around if they are ignored. The PCs are expected to talk to the NPCs and include them in their planning, even though the NPCs generally defer to the PCs. The players do not level up the NPCs, though they do control prepared spell lists. I level up the NPCs intentionally to make them slightly worse than the PCs in terms of optimization so that the PCs always shine brightest. Each player controls one NPC in combat. The NPC always obeys combat orders unless they strictly go against their alignment or goals. For example, Orik Vancaskerkin will not heroically sacrifice himself for the greater good.
This method was well received by my players. They only identify with their own PCs and roleplay exclusively as them, but the group's composition does not suffer due to having only 2 players. The only thing that has not been well received is me leveling up the NPCs. They want to control what the NPCs do as they level up, especially feat and spell selection. I think I will concede this to them next campaign, on the condition that I have to approve their decisions.
Hope my experiences help you come up with your own solution!
One NPC can be a cleric of Irori -- he's out to help the PCs become heroes, gain enlightenment, and generally get better and better. But he figures they have to learn how to do stuff, so he never takes the initiative and only responds to suggestions. (He has a pretty generic set of buff and healing spells in case the PCs don't have any particular requests.)