While I've been playing RPGs on and off since the early '90s, my last campaign that got past the lowest levels was also in the early '90s using 2e. Now I'm GM-ing for my sister, brother-in-law, and pre-teen nephews. Their only experience is the Beginner Box campaign I just ran them through.
We're getting ready to start a Jade Regent campaign, and due to their inexperience, I'm somewhat micro-managing the character creation process. I've told each of them to come up with the race, class, alignment, and campaign trait they'd like to play (limited to CRB races & classes). Then we'll discuss their choices as a group, and I'll go over any gaps or conflicts that I see in their party and potential methods of dealing with them. Finally, they'll decide if or how to cover those gaps or avoid those conflicts.
They seem to have decided to throw me a curveball, however, and my youngest nephew (who I was sure would play a sorcerer, wizard, or bard) decided he wanted an animal companion and is planning on playing a druid. That leaves the party as a dwarf druid, an elf ranger, a half-elf paladin, and whatever my sister decides on (which will almost certainly be a martial character of some sort).
There are a lot of other gaps that I know how to describe to them, but I'm not sure exactly what the lack of an arcane caster would mean for the party. What issues is a party lacking an arcane caster likely to run into? I'm thinking they won't be able to do much blasting, and they'll miss out on some utility spells (like See Inivisibility, but what else?). Is that it? I'm also assuming that the way to cover those kinds of gaps is with magic items (and UMD where necessary).
Any help would be appreciated. Thanks!
-Joe
They are missing out a lot on buffs. Blasting isn't really that important. They are set for combat, but they likely also need a face. A bard here could go a long way (Maybe for your sister?) And can also Fight. Martials are pretty bland without the buffs. Wands can heal and druid is good battlefield control. Good luck.
Treantmonk in his wizard guide breaks down a lot of good party roles. Other guides too.
|
Actually, that sounds like a decent group. It could be more potent, but it's perfectly workable.
Pathfinder is much more forgiving than 2e is when it comes to party composition. A druid (depending upon how they're built) can be a pretty decent pure caster, and they can do a lot of the things that an arcane caster can.
The only really important thing is to make sure that someone can use a wand of Cure Light Wounds for out of combat healing.
And you're right, a lot of those gaps can be covered with wands and UMD. Or other random gear. (Ex: Smog pellets help deal with invisible things rather well.) Or specific build choices. (Ex: Blind-fight is pretty handy. Also useful vs. Mirror Image and gaze attacks since you can just close your eyes and keep fighting pretty effectively.)
Hey, jbusnengo:
Having been DM-ing at the gaming table for awhile now, I agree that an arcane caster can feel imperative. The buffs, the battlefield control, the debuffs, the summoning. Honestly, though, I think their party composition is fine as-is (especially for a group of new players - a wizard can feel overwhelming at first given the sheer amount of choices when it comes to effectively preparing spells each and every day).
I've run Jade Regent before - it's a very fun campaign. The boon here is that the AP comes loaded with a good deal of NPCs. If you ever feel that your beginning party is missing out on a certain dynamic (such as arcane casting or some more divine casting) you can always have one of their friendly NPCs help them out (Koya Mvashti as the cleric, Ameiko as the bard... and I'm drawing a blank now on some of the other NPCs in the caravan).
It might end up being more fun without the "usual" party dynamic that seems to cover each of the normal bases. Also, Charon's Little Helper is absolutely right that Pathfinder is much more forgiving when it comes to party composition, so however the players want to have fun is a much more viable approach.
I hope you and your family have a great time at the table :)
Cheers!
(EDIT: Some misspellings - it would have had me waking up in the middle of the night in a cold sweat.)
It seems like a decent line-up to me. If you don't have an arcane caster, you can either use an NPC as suggested above or tailor the encounters to whether or not they're actually needed badly.
|
|
Maybe have an NPC tag along....just in case.
I typically say "no....oh hell no" to DMPCs, but in this case it might be like training wheels. Just be sure to stay out of the spotlight and let the PCs win. Another option, if you feel comfortable enough, is to let the PCs also run Koya or whatever NPC is with them. This might give the PCs even more chance to make the story their own.
There are basically three jobs to do in combat. Buffing/Supporting the party, Hindering the enemy/Controlling the battlefield and dealing damage to the bad guys. Parties that have all three of these covered tend to have an easier time than those that are missing one or more, but even without full coverage of these roles a party can still be quite successful.
There are some out of combat roles too, trap disabler, party face, stuff like that, a well balanced party will have these covered as well, but typically they are less absolutely necessary.
In Pathfinder, many classes seem focused toward one specific role, while some can equally handle any. Even the most focused class can, if desired usually be built toward a different role.
Basically, all that means that having any specific class is not necessary, and just knowing what classes are being played doesn't tell you what roles are covered.
There is no reason that the party you have described can't be built to handle all of those roles, and it is equally possible that a Figher, Wizard, Cleric and Rogue can leave a role uncovered.
If I were you I would certainly point out anything you think the party might be missing, but I would leave it entirely up to them as to if they want to change any builds or find other ways to cover gaps. I also don't think you should change your adventure to cover for missing elements, doing that invalidates their choices.
Thanks for the feedback, everyone.
In Pathfinder, many classes seem focused toward one specific role, while some can equally handle any. Even the most focused class can, if desired usually be built toward a different role.
Basically, all that means that having any specific class is not necessary, and just knowing what classes are being played doesn't tell you what roles are covered.
There is no reason that the party you have described can't be built to handle all of those roles, and it is equally possible that a Figher, Wizard, Cleric and Rogue can leave a role uncovered.
That's very true, but we're not dealing with experienced players here who know all of the options and how to make a class fill a role it's not focused on. Honestly, I'm not enough more experienced than them that I could do it very well, either. They're making a lot of use of the Strategy Guide, and I think it's fairly safe to say that they'll be playing characters fairly close to those archetypes (animal friend, archer, and crusader, for those familiar with the book). I'll certainly make suggestions and encourage them to look beyond the Strategy Guide for options, but that seems to be where they're finding their inspiration.
If I were you I would certainly point out anything you think the party might be missing, but I would leave it entirely up to them as to if they want to change any builds or find other ways to cover gaps.
This is exactly my plan. My main purpose in posting was to make sure I could give accurate information about what not having an arcane caster means in practice. I'm still not really sure what to tell them. Folks have mentioned buffing, debuffing, battlefield control, and summoning, but all those are things that other classes seem to be able to do fairly easily. Am I missing something? What is it that's unique to arcane casters? All that being said, I will certainly pass along that several presumably more experienced players thought that it sounded like a good group.
While I'll certainly keep the possibility of having one of the NPCs join them to round out the party, that wouldn't be my first choice. In addition to the risk of overshadowing the players, I'm a new enough GM that the last thing I need is one more NPC to manage.
I also don't think you should change your adventure to cover for missing elements, doing that invalidates their choices.
To a certain extent, I agree, but the primary goal is for them to have fun. If they're repeatedly banging their heads against a wall, I'm going to make changes. I'm most inclined to either suggest alternate strategies or provide magical items that could be useful and let them puzzle out how to get the best use out of them.
|
|
Folks have mentioned buffing, debuffing, battlefield control, and summoning, but all those are things that other classes seem to be able to do fairly easily. Am I missing something? What is it that's unique to arcane casters?
Druids can do battlefield control and summoning pretty well, though not quite as well as an arcane caster. However, several of the best buffs and debuffs are not available to them. (Druids are relatively limited at buffing relative to other 9 level casters, either arcane or divine.)
They also don't have as many utility spells as arcane casters do.
As I said above though, it's a perfectly serviceable group. They should be able to handle standard CR encounters perfectly well.
|
|
One thing you can do on your end is adjust the adventure. This might make a lot of work on your end but might help carry the players through. If an encounter looks too difficult try and scale it back. You could also run the enemies sub-optimally to give the players an upper hand. Obviously, as they gain experience and learn their abilities you will be able to adjust the encounters better for them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My main purpose in posting was to make sure I could give accurate information about what not having an arcane caster means in practice.
Basically nothing. Arcane caster by itself doesn't really tell you anything at all. The question is, what spells are on what spell list. Wizard/Sorcer and Cleric are the biggest lists in the game, so if you have both of those you pretty much have everything. See Invisible, for example, is both an arcane and divine spell, but the only divine list it is on is the inquisitor.
Even if you don't have an a specific spell, there are often other ways around the problem. For example, a druid who has scent (either from a spell or wild shape) can detect (and even pinpoint at close range) an invisible creature, and faerie fire can then let everyone see it. There are many other ways to achieve similar results, and of course many magic items that duplicate spell effects. Usually the biggest problem of magic access isn't from the Wizard list (which while it has some great spells, doesn't have all that many effects that can't be lived without, haste and teleport are awesome, for example, but not make or break usually) rather it is the Cleric list, and particularly condition removal, that you want to make sure you are covered on. Druids have a few of those spells, and Paladin's have many on their list, so even if the Paladin can't cast the spell, a few scrolls can ease that problem.
To a certain extent, I agree, but the primary goal is for them to have fun. If they're repeatedly banging their heads against a wall, I'm going to make changes. I'm most inclined to either suggest alternate strategies or provide magical items that could be useful and let them puzzle out how to get the best use out of them.
That sounds reasonable. To elaborate on why I say don't change much because of party build is because it can have some negative aspects as well. For example, I have seen people advocate not putting in traps if the party doesn't have any trapfinding. The problem with that is, that if ever a player wants to play a character with trapfinding, doing so will make the party less safe, because now there will be traps in the world. Similarly, if you decide that, well, no one has see invisible so I won't use any invisible monsters, if anyone ever wants to play a class with that on their list they will essentially be screwing the party over.
Druids can do battlefield control and summoning pretty well, though not quite as well as an arcane caster. However, several of the best buffs and debuffs are not available to them. (Druids are relatively limited at buffing relative to other 9 level casters, either arcane or divine.)
They also don't have as many utility spells as arcane casters do.
My main purpose in posting was to make sure I could give accurate information about what not having an arcane caster means in practice.Basically nothing. Arcane caster by itself doesn't really tell you anything at all. The question is, what spells are on what spell list. Wizard/Sorcer and Cleric are the biggest lists in the game, so if you have both of those you pretty much have everything. See Invisible, for example, is both an arcane and divine spell, but the only divine list it is on is the inquisitor.
Even if you don't have an a specific spell, there are often other ways around the problem. For example, a druid who has scent (either from a spell or wild shape) can detect (and even pinpoint at close range) an invisible creature, and faerie fire can then let everyone see it. There are many other ways to achieve similar results, and of course many magic items that duplicate spell effects. Usually the biggest problem of magic access isn't from the Wizard list (which while it has some great spells, doesn't have all that many effects that can't be lived without, haste and teleport are awesome, for example, but not make or break usually) rather it is the Cleric list, and particularly condition removal, that you want to make sure you are covered on. Druids have a few of those spells, and Paladin's have many on their list, so even if the Paladin can't cast the spell, a few scrolls can ease that problem.
So it sounds like what I need to tell them is that (1) they'll have less of a selection of buff/debuff spells, but that there are ways to duplicate some of them if they get creative, and (2) they won't be able to cast a lot of the utility spells, but they're more a convenience than a necessity, anyways.
I'm not too worried about the cleric spells, as this AP has an NPC cleric who travels with the party and could cast such spells when they get back to the caravan if the paladin or druid hasn't already taken care of it.
Thanks again!
It wouldn't hurt at all to try and convince your last player to play an archer bard though. While not strictly martial, after a round of buffing (at first just inspire courage most of the time, later inspire courage and a spell) they would still be able to deliver quite a bit of regular damage (archery is a powerful style) and have some extra utility spells for weird situations. With a ranger, a paladin, possibly a druid animal companion and possibly a druid in combat and/or summoned creatures inspire courage would be quite the force multiplier.
Oh yeah, definitely try to guide your sister towards bard for the force multiplication.
Druids are extremely versatile. They can do a lot, and what they can't do, their animal companion and/or summoned creatures can do.
Also, it looks like all 4 of your PCs will be able to use a wand of CLW, which is pretty sweet.
Druids can be very complex. I strongly recommend you pre-stat out all summoned nature allies (including any buffs from spells and feats like Augment Summoning), wild shape forms, and variant buffed versions of the animal companion.
Status removal is probably going to be the job of the paladin, so select its Mercies wisely.
Are you using only the core rule book? The reason I am asking is that all three of your characters so far are prepared divine casters so have access to their entire spell list. While this may be a little much to throw at a beginner, especially a pre-teen, maybe you can cherry pick some spells that will be useful from the other books. The druid spell list is actually one of the most versatile in the game. It has a little bit of everything and as previously mentioned do very well at battle field control and summoning. They also have a decent amount of blast spells even if they are mostly fire spells.
If you expanded the books available your sister would have more options to play a pseudo martial character. A Magus or Skald would actually work well for her.
This group looks almost exactly like one I'm running for;
Dwarf Druid
Human Paladin
Elf Ranger
Human Witch
They do very well (they also have a npc URouge / Shadow Dancer) they have run into some problems (missing conditional removal and ways to deal with a Will'o'Wisp) but they found ways to overcome and that can be more fun than having the right tool for everything.
It wouldn't hurt at all to try and convince your last player to play an archer bard though. While not strictly martial, after a round of buffing (at first just inspire courage most of the time, later inspire courage and a spell) they would still be able to deliver quite a bit of regular damage (archery is a powerful style) and have some extra utility spells for weird situations. With a ranger, a paladin, possibly a druid animal companion and possibly a druid in combat and/or summoned creatures inspire courage would be quite the force multiplier.
Oh yeah, definitely try to guide your sister towards bard for the force multiplication.
I'd love to be able to convince my sister to play a bard or something like that, but I doubt it'd fly. In the MMO we play, she always plays tanks, and in the Beginner Box campaign, she played Merisiel and was always getting herself knocked out by running into melee too quickly. Once she decided that wasn't the best strategy, it killed her to hang back and use ranged weapons.
Are you using only the core rule book? The reason I am asking is that all three of your characters so far are prepared divine casters so have access to their entire spell list. While this may be a little much to throw at a beginner, especially a pre-teen, maybe you can cherry pick some spells that will be useful from the other books. The druid spell list is actually one of the most versatile in the game. It has a little bit of everything and as previously mentioned do very well at battle field control and summoning. They also have a decent amount of blast spells even if they are mostly fire spells.
If you expanded the books available your sister would have more options to play a pseudo martial character. A Magus or Skald would actually work well for her.
I've limited them to the CRB only for race and class (though we're using Unchained Barbarians and Rogues if anyone decides to play one) so as not to overwhelm anyone right at the beginning during character creation. (That anyone includes me, btw, since the only classes I know reasonably well are those in the CRB.) I've told them that they can use feats, spells, and equipment from APG, ISWG, UE, and a few player's companions we have access to, and gave them lists of what from those sources is not allowed. I'm also allowing a few class-specific rules from the APG and UM (e.g. cleric subdomains, ranger combat styles, and sorcerer bloodlines). Other sources I'll allow on a case-by-case basis. All that said, I figure they'll stick with the CRB to start out and branch out as they get more comfortable.
I'll have to take a look at the Magus and Skald and decide if I want to broaden their options.
Druids can be very complex. I strongly recommend you pre-stat out all summoned nature allies (including any buffs from spells and feats like Augment Summoning), wild shape forms, and variant buffed versions of the animal companion.
Absolutely. It's especially key since we're using Roll20. (I'm in Chicago. They're in Florida.) That particular nephew has a talent for making character choices that complicate my life. Fortunately, I shouldn't have to worry too much about buffs, as Roll20 makes that comparatively simple.
Status removal is probably going to be the job of the paladin, so select its Mercies wisely.
I'll be sure to keep that in mind.
This group looks almost exactly like one I'm running for;
Dwarf Druid
Human Paladin
Elf Ranger
Human WitchThey do very well (they also have a npc URouge / Shadow Dancer) they have run into some problems (missing conditional removal and ways to deal with a Will'o'Wisp) but they found ways to overcome and that can be more fun than having the right tool for everything.
Good to know, although I'm not very familiar with the Witch spell list. I'll have to check it out.
Thanks, everyone!
|
If she wants to play a front liner, you might suggest Magus. That would mitigate the party's lack of arcane spellpower while enabling her to play a tank of sorts.
Another alternative would be to play a tanky bard. Give a bard a level of fighter, barbarian, cavalier, or (2 levels of) paladin and go to town. You get all the stuff a bard is good at and with a good strength and some feat focus, they can go to town smacking monsters around too. You typically sacrifice some charisma and end up with a 14 or so so you won't be casting enchantment spells on the monsters but you get a lot of the key arcane abilities like fly and haste.
There are some things specific to Jade Regent to consider
You have several npc's travelling with the party who can fill in gaps, you have a Bard, a Ranger, a Cleric and a Rogue plus the party can pickup at least a barbarian as an extra. If you think the party are really going to need an Arcane caster and no one wants to play one it would be easy to change Koya the Cleric to a Witch , Wizard or a Cleric/Wizard/Mystic theurge like her mother.
As a party we found taking along the bard fairly common given her centrality to the plot and that our Paladin was her younger sister.
You could without any real problems to the back story change the Ranger to a Magus which would give you another arcane option
Bloodrager or Skald might be fun for her too.
Or just don't worry too much about not having an arcane spellcaster. Druids really are quite versatile, and with 3 martials up front, plus an animal companion and some summoned beasties, you really won't need AoE stuff much.
|
I'm currently a 12th lvl PC running through Jade Regent, and I take turns in our group as DM.
I will say that Jade Regent, as you might expect, has a ninja or two once you get to Minkai, and they have a spell trick that allows them to Vanish as a supernatural ability, which many of them take. So somebody mentioned "See Invisibility" above, that's a more handy than average spell to be able to have access to.
I play as an Aasimar Sorceror with the Stormborn Archetype, and that spell has already saved our bacon a couple of times, and it promises to just be the beginning.
Beyond that, I will say that the guidance provided by most of the other posts on here has been solid.
No experience with Jade Regent, but in my campaign, the party had no arcane caster for the first four levels or so, and is back to having no arcane caster now after a player conflict. With a Warpriest, a Cleric, a Rogue, and a Medium, nothing's gone too badly besides identifying magic items. (Which is a pretty easy thing to have a friendly NPC do offscreen, if you want.) All the players are experienced, but I've also not been pulling punches in terms of tailoring encounters to them.