PDA

View Full Version : PF/3.5 - Two Person Party (Gestalt?)



TheMinxTail
2010-10-15, 05:20 PM
So my third player character ran off on paying rent or whatever and could be anywhere in Britain by now, which means that I'm back to two PCs until I can scrounge up a few guys from University (not hard - someone actually wears a series of DnD-themed shirts to my Physics lecture, but he's always half a theatre away). Anyway, point is, I've got our first DnD/Pathfinder session in months tomorrow, and no one has a character prepared. I'm probably starting from level 1, if only to make it simplistic for me since I already have my work cut out as DM. It could be seafaring, or this other campaign idea that I've had shelved for a while - probably one of my improvised sessions just to get into the flow of things, since I've been too swamped and/or sleep-deprived recently to prepare much in advance. Point is, I need ideas for a two person party. I might just withhold the experience system in favour of 'level up when I think you're ready and it's appropriate', so they can expect to spend a while as level 1, at least a few sessions until they're ready to make the characters themselves. It has to be something I can explain to them pretty simply and that can function as something approaching teh effectiveness of a general party. I know that without serious munchkining, which I'd rather avoid, making two people as effective as your standrd four-five person group is a tad over the top for expectations, but i might as well try. Since the odds are against them, they're getting some extra ability points and if no great ideas come to mind, I MAY just use the Gestalt system. I'd use NPCs to fill up the party, but that REALLY didn't work in my favour last time.

Any races, classes, builds you guys can suggest would be great. Surely someone out there has had a pretty number-strained party to DM for before, right?

Abaddon87
2010-10-15, 05:48 PM
I am playing in a two person party currently and we are playing Gestalt. We also have a DM run Gestalt NPC and 3 additional normal NPCs that are mercs we hired from day one. So far we have had some pretty large scale fights against many foes so having the hired guns helps a lot (one is a sword/board dwarf and the other two are archers). I really enjoy playing a gestalt character as it allows for some really fun combos in abilities! One word of caution though, if you go gestalt expect your two players to pack the punch of a whole 6 person party. My lvl 6 Wizard/Swiftblade//Warblade/Iaijutsu Master walks around with a 24 AC with no armor and thats before I throw on Mage Armor and/or Shield... and on several occasions the other player (a Half Giant Rogue//Psychic Warrior that focuses on using a large spear and enlarges himself as well) has cleared many a rooms full of foes with a single Greater Cleave. If you dont give the players the option to hire helpers or they dont want to, you may want to adjust the fights accordingly. They may have the strengths of two classes and few/none of the weaknesses, but they still only get so many Hit Points :smalltongue:

TheMinxTail
2010-10-15, 06:01 PM
I am playing in a two person party currently and we are playing Gestalt. We also have a DM run Gestalt NPC and 3 additional normal NPCs that are mercs we hired from day one. So far we have had some pretty large scale fights against many foes so having the hired guns helps a lot (one is a sword/board dwarf and the other two are archers). I really enjoy playing a gestalt character as it allows for some really fun combos in abilities! One word of caution though, if you go gestalt expect your two players to pack the punch of a whole 6 person party. My lvl 6 Wizard/Swiftblade//Warblade/Iaijutsu Master walks around with a 24 AC with no armor and thats before I throw on Mage Armor and/or Shield... and on several occasions the other player (a Half Giant Rogue//Psychic Warrior that focuses on using a large spear and enlarges himself as well) has cleared many a rooms full of foes with a single Greater Cleave. If you dont give the players the option to hire helpers or they dont want to, you may want to adjust the fights accordingly. They may have the strengths of two classes and few/none of the weaknesses, but they still only get so many Hit Points :smalltongue:

The reason i was considering seafaring was because, well, I'm not much of an anime fan, but I was watching old episodes of One Piece and got inspired to do some pirate stuff. In which case, it would make sense to hire a crew, so I guess I can work in the henchmen until we get more players, at which point, assuming I'm still running this game, I guess they'll toss them all overboard? Maybe I'll make each of the henchmen like the three stooges in personality and work as basic melee fighters for a caster character to buff up.

The overpowered gestalt thing was kind of a concern of mine I suppose, though generally speaking the action economy means that in any given round an evoker/barbarian will either be a barbarian or an evoker with a lot of hit points, effectively. But as for buff spells, particularly your combos, I thought of a particularly abusable one; the Pathfinder Alchemist. The class' main function is entirely based around buffing itself - combine with a full BAB and some damage upgrades from Favoured Enemy or Smite Evil or whatever, and you have apretty good fighter, assuming he has a couple round sbefore combat to load up on mutagens and helpful buffing extracts. Since I'm making the characters for now, I guess I could find for myself a decent balance of power of the PCs v NPCs. That or I could make a fair chunk of teh fights revolve around a crap tonne of weaker enemies (like, twenty at mid-level) and others with majorly powerful bosses.

Assuming i do go the gestalt route, any suggested class mixups?

Kylarra
2010-10-15, 06:19 PM
Well what you want to do is link a passive side to an active side with stat synergy, so for example your barbarian//evoker would probably be marginally better statted out as a warblade//evoker for the int synergy or a beguiler//warblade for both combat and out of combat abilities as well as skillmonkeying.

Other thoughts, Factotum make great passive sides bringing decent HD/BAB, skills and, of course, cunning inspiration to their active sides.

Stuff like Warlock,DFA, Binder and Incarnum classes make decent passive sides too with their always-on abilities. Cloistered Cleric is generally better than normal cleric due to the gestalt and the fact that you'll probably tag on crusader or something.

GoodbyeSoberDay
2010-10-15, 06:23 PM
If you don't want to go gestalt, a Druid and Beguiler team covers most roles, and in level 1 Pathfinder neither of them are a hassle to set up. Just tone back the encounters since there's only two adventurers.

Crossblade
2010-10-15, 06:28 PM
You said your players aren't ready to make characters themselves... So they're new to the game? I would avoid throwing them a curve ball of gausalting. You can still have a normal game of any theme, just scale back the difficulty some. Likely CR-2 or so.

TheMinxTail
2010-10-15, 06:32 PM
Well what you want to do is link a passive side to an active side with stat synergy, so for example your barbarian//evoker would probably be marginally better statted out as a warblade//evoker for the int synergy or a beguiler//warblade for both combat and out of combat abilities as well as skillmonkeying.

Other thoughts, Factotum make great passive sides bringing decent HD/BAB, skills and, of course, cunning inspiration to their active sides.

Stuff like Warlock,DFA, Binder and Incarnum classes make decent passive sides too with their always-on abilities. Cloistered Cleric is generally better than normal cleric due to the gestalt and the fact that you'll probably tag on crusader or something.

i wasn't really going to go evoker/barbarian, though considering how little a barbarian requires stat wise (mostly just get con and strength as high as you can, maybe dex for good luck), it wouldn't be taht hard to pull off. I don't plan on using Tome of Battle stuff - not because I think it's a bad system, but because I no longer have a physical copy of the book. I scanned a few key pages as I do with basically everything I can get my hands on, but I never end up using anything i don't have a quick reference to. Maybe if my local gameshop stocks it at some point, but they've mostly just got obscure supplments and 4th edition. I've been considering going back to 4th edition jsut because I have fond memories of my warlock builds, but a lot of it was jsut so metaphysical.

I never quite got the feel for a Binder. i dunno, I may have to gleam over that if it warrants study, but are tehy any good at level one? What's DF A stand for...? I probably know, but for teh lfie of me I can't remember. Frankly (at least teh impression i got the last time I read Ircanum), my players are too stupid to juggle that many numbers to make Ircanum anything but slow and clunky. I have trouble with that occasionally, and I'm setting a third of my course on pure mathematics! Though maybe they can try when they're good and properly familiar with regular combat spells.

I was thinking of this system I was going to use in my custom setting - present in each of my campaign ideas - the gestalt amulets, extensively. The players wear them and tehy can't be removed except through death. Over time, the dormant magical energy and soul guiding it within teh amulet comes to life and melds with the user, granting them further power - effectively, they gain one of teh artefacts, they get Gestaltism. I'd totally make it like that bit from order of teh Stick where Vaarsuvius... there's a small chance someone reading hasn't read all of OotS, so i'll shut up now.

Godskook
2010-10-15, 06:33 PM
1.I personally think you'd be less stressed if you let your players build their characters.

2.Gestalt does less for maximum power and more for versatility, especially since casters already have encounter-clearing spells at their disposal as it is. And some of the action-economy abusing abilities are actually just making up for the lack of party members.

3.Figure out what your personal rulings for gestalt are, as it is, RAW, really restrictive on prestige class options, allowing overpowered options like incantrix but refusing access to dual-progression classes like JPM and Arcane Trickster. Personally, I rule that it only concerns Theurge classes, and even then, if you can qualify on a single track, you can still take it(read: Druid 3/Wizard 3/MT 4/AH 10//Warblade 20 is ok, but Druid 10/Psion 10//wizard 10/AH 10 is not).

TheMinxTail
2010-10-15, 06:35 PM
You said your players aren't ready to make characters themselves... So they're new to the game? I would avoid throwing them a curve ball of gausalting. You can still have a normal game of any theme, just scale back the difficulty some. Likely CR-2 or so.

yeah, tahat was my major conern to, which is why I'm still really split on gestaltism. Mostly, i just want a class which is easy to use but if used in proper synergy with teh other player could be effective, gestaltism was just me backup.

I do plan on lowering teh number of enemies, though they might get sick of fighting off teh same group of three goblins if I don't find a way to mix it up. I'll think of something though, probably.

TheMinxTail
2010-10-15, 06:38 PM
If you don't want to go gestalt, a Druid and Beguiler team covers most roles, and in level 1 Pathfinder neither of them are a hassle to set up. Just tone back the encounters since there's only two adventurers.

A beguiler, now there's an idea... good skills, arcane casting - very good arcane casting in fact. No blasting between them, though that's never been my biggest concern inlife.

I kind of have a really cool LV1 build of Oracle i've been working on, maybe that would work instead of a Druid...? Beguiler suits the player though, so I'll assume taht and work from there.

TheMinxTail
2010-10-15, 06:42 PM
1.I personally think you'd be less stressed if you let your players build their characters.

2.Gestalt does less for maximum power and more for versatility, especially since casters already have encounter-clearing spells at their disposal as it is. And some of the action-economy abusing abilities are actually just making up for the lack of party members.

3.Figure out what your personal rulings for gestalt are, as it is, RAW, really restrictive on prestige class options, allowing overpowered options like incantrix but refusing access to dual-progression classes like JPM and Arcane Trickster. Personally, I rule that it only concerns Theurge classes, and even then, if you can qualify on a single track, you can still take it(read: Druid 3/Wizard 3/MT 4/AH 10//Warblade 20 is ok, but Druid 10/Psion 10//wizard 10/AH 10 is not).

With the way things are shaping up, the least experienced player would end up making a caster character, so not a preferable situation - at the very least, I'd act as overseer. Ranger seemed pretty ideal for gestalt doesn't it? Good skill, BAB and hit dice - covers up a caster well. I don't think dual casters is a great idea with gestalt - I haven't tried it myself, but it sounds a bit messy.

Crossblade
2010-10-15, 07:09 PM
The beauty of Pathfinder versitility (well one of, in my opinion) is the 1:1 cost for class skills and non-class skills. If you want a lock picking barbarian, it's possible. So you can in theory throw just as many skill challenges at them as combat challenges.
Another thing to help you would be to ask them what kind of class they want to play, that can help you decide on challenge types.
As for 'the same 3 goblins, having just gotten the beastiary 2 weeks ago, it seems to me there's more low level monsters in the book than high level ones. I'm away from book now, else I would list a pile.

TheMinxTail
2010-10-15, 07:15 PM
The beauty of Pathfinder versitility (well one of, in my opinion) is the 1:1 cost for class skills and non-class skills. If you want a lock picking barbarian, it's possible. So you can in theory throw just as many skill challenges at them as combat challenges.
Another thing to help you would be to ask them what kind of class they want to play, that can help you decide on challenge types.
As for 'the same 3 goblins, having just gotten the beastiary 2 weeks ago, it seems to me there's more low level monsters in the book than high level ones. I'm away from book now, else I would list a pile.

When I went out hunting a beastiary, they weren't in stock - all I got was an old 3.5 Monster Manual. But it was about a quarter of the price, so it all worked out. I'll go look it.

As a side, how powerful is the Factotum really? Every time I've asked about classes and builds in these forums, someone mentions that class.

So far I've been thinking Beguilder and something else - it was suggested earlier I get a Druid and Beguiler. Thoughts? A sorceress might be easier to run if only due to the smaller spell list, but they would be aided greatly by an overpowered class I suppose.

Crossblade
2010-10-15, 07:23 PM
Not having the beastiary isn't the end all. Pathfinder states that npcs are level-1 for cr. And if you really ever want to throw a higher lever monster at your pc's, remember, the HP listed in the monster manuals are AVERAGES. 5d10hp can be anywhere between 5hp and 50hp, for example. The PCs don't need to know the dragon they slayed only had a third hp it's listed having in the book.:smallwink:

Edit: and I still think you should let your pc's pick thier own class, not you pick it for them.

TheMinxTail
2010-10-15, 07:32 PM
Not having the beastiary isn't the end all. Pathfinder states that npcs are level-1 for cr. And if you really ever want to throw a higher lever monster at your pc's, remember, the HP listed in the monster manuals are AVERAGES. 5d10hp can be anywhere between 5hp and 50hp, for example. The PCs don't need to know the dragon they slayed only had a third hp it's listed having in the book.:smallwink:

Edit: and I still think you should let your pc's pick thier own class, not you pick it for them.

Letting them pick their only class would involve me sitting down with them for like an hour, explaining each of teh classes in turn and letting them deliberate and ask stupid questions. I already tried that. Actually, one of my players prefers paladin, if only because he's use dthem in every game so far taht he's familiar with the context. My general idea is to run them through a few games, jog their memories and teach them a little something then afte rtaht they can build their own character - or decide where to go from, say, level 2 onwards in their development.