Decent 3-person party?

[Keithicus]

After reading these forums for a while, I decided that it looks like this would be a good place for me to get some help DMing my campaign. I'm a relatively new DM and my 3 players are also somewhat new (we've done one adventure to learn the rules). I'm getting my world put together and my players have decided to play as the following: Elf Bard, Elf Dragon Shaman, Raptoran Duskblade.

Is this a 3-person party that would be (reasonably) able to handle themselves? None of the players are going full optimization but that aren't going to intentionally weaken themselves significantly.

Also a small side question about Raptorans. From what I read a Raptoran can fly (once they get the hit dice to do i obviously) as long as they are wearing a light load. Does armor affect this any? Would a Raptoran with enough strength to make full plate and weapon into a light load be able to fly in that armor?

Edit: we are playing 3.5e and I have access to a fairly large amount of books

[Eldariel]

After reading these forums for a while, I decided that it looks like this would be a good place for me to get some help DMing my campaign. I'm a relatively new DM and my 3 players are also somewhat new (we've done one adventure to learn the rules). I'm getting my world put together and my players have decided to play as the following: Elf Bard, Elf Dragon Shaman, Raptoran Duskblade.

Is this a 3-person party that would be (reasonably) able to handle themselves? None of the players are going full optimization but that aren't going to intentionally weaken themselves significantly.

Also a small side question about Raptorans. From what I read a Raptoran can fly (once they get the hit dice to do i obviously) as long as they are wearing a light load. Does armor affect this any? Would a Raptoran with enough strength to make full plate and weapon into a light load be able to fly in that armor?

Edit: we are playing 3.5e and I have access to a fairly large amount of books

The Dragon Shaman seems under the par of the other two; would he consider a Dragonfire Adept [Dragon Magic] instead? Similar idea but Dragonfire Adept is much stronger, especially in a small party (Dragon Shaman is a force multiplier, much like Bard, except not quite as impressive one, whereas Dragonfire Adept effectively acts as a damaging controller).

But yeah, you have a jack of all trades and a versatile combatant with decent damage output. You don't have anyone with Trapfinding but if you either give it to the Bard or handwave the requirement, that shouldn't be crippling (or if the Bard dips Factotum/Rogue/Such or takes Planar Touchstone: Catalogues of Enlightenment (Kobold)).

[Alaris]

After reading these forums for a while, I decided that it looks like this would be a good place for me to get some help DMing my campaign. I'm a relatively new DM and my 3 players are also somewhat new (we've done one adventure to learn the rules). I'm getting my world put together and my players have decided to play as the following: Elf Bard, Elf Dragon Shaman, Raptoran Duskblade.

Is this a 3-person party that would be (reasonably) able to handle themselves? None of the players are going full optimization but that aren't going to intentionally weaken themselves significantly.

Also a small side question about Raptorans. From what I read a Raptoran can fly (once they get the hit dice to do i obviously) as long as they are wearing a light load. Does armor affect this any? Would a Raptoran with enough strength to make full plate and weapon into a light load be able to fly in that armor?

Edit: we are playing 3.5e and I have access to a fairly large amount of books

Well, I find it entertaining. Some things you should know, at least in MY experience:

-Duskblades... are cheese. Like, stinky cheese. You put them up against a single opponent, and they will hands down, crush his skull in.

-Dragon Shaman has an Aura that can heal 1 hit point per round, up to half. This will help in the healing department, since you guys don't have a Cleric. Combine this with the Bard's limited healing, and your party MIGHT stand a chance.

-I honestly recommend throwing them a bone. Give them a single NPC, to fill in the gap they're party does not (And oh lord, does that party have gaps. No Wizard, Cleric, Rogue? ACK).

-If the Raptoran entry does not say "You can't fly in heavy armor," then he can probably fly in heavy armor, assuming he can make it count as a light load somehow. I wish him luck on that.

All in all, I wish you luck as a new DM. I was one a year or so ago... and I am simply spreading my wisdom... newly gained wisdom. About cheese.

That is all.

[Keithicus]

Wow fast feedback, nice.

The duskblade is played by the player that is the least game-oriented (and therefore optimization). If the duskblade starts becoming a problem then I'll tailor my encounters to have more enemies. From what I read duskblades aren't as capable with multiple enemies (probably throwing mooks at them to wear down some spells per day then letting them fight the big evils).

I'll have the dragon shaman look into the dragonfire adept but I'm not going to tell him he has to change. I'm pretty sure I'll be able to scale the encounters down since the classes aren't tier 1 or 2 and if it becomes a problem I can give them an NPC to help then even though I don't want a GMPC running around. I might show all of them the leadership feat and have them get cohorts that can fill in their weaknesses.

[Andreaz]

Duskblade isn't stinky cheese, just a capable melee combatant :p Cheese starts at shocktrooper ubercharging and unloading 10 spell slots within a single arcane strike.

A dragonfire adept covers much more than the dragon shaman, so it's a good trade, as said.


On heavy armor... Medium encumbrance offers the same penalties as a medium load, it's your call how to interpret that.

[Alaris]

Wow fast feedback, nice.

The duskblade is played by the player that is the least game-oriented (and therefore optimization). If the duskblade starts becoming a problem then I'll tailor my encounters to have more enemies. From what I read duskblades aren't as capable with multiple enemies (probably throwing mooks at them to wear down some spells per day then letting them fight the big evils).

I'll have the dragon shaman look into the dragonfire adept but I'm not going to tell him he has to change. I'm pretty sure I'll be able to scale the encounters down since the classes aren't tier 1 or 2 and if it becomes a problem I can give them an NPC to help then even though I don't want a GMPC running around. I might show all of them the leadership feat and have them get cohorts that can fill in their weaknesses.

'Tis nothing wrong with playing a Dragon Shaman. Don't know why people got into their heads that they had to play the more optimized thing. I've never played one, but I've had players PLAY Dragon Shamans, and have had fun with it. Dragonfire Adept is nice... but not necessary at all.

And yeah, you've got the right idea. Duskblades are cheese, but throwing enough minions at them will prevent them from beating every encounter you have without batting an eyelash. Ironiaclly, it's the game I'm currently running where a Duskblade is effectively slamming all my encounters... I plan on having the next one have a lot of mooks.

That... or I'll send a Duskblade after the Duskblade. That sounds...evil...

[Flickerdart]

If you think duskblades are cheese, you're doing it wrong. They're a T3 class, same as the Bard, but they have far, far less support.

The party will probably do reasonably well - the Dragon Shaman can keep them healed up somewhat and pick up the slack at the end of a long adventuring day when the others are low on spells, the Duskblade stands between the monsters and his buddies, and the Bard can do an admirable job of buffing, spellcasting or fighting depending on which way the player wants to take the character. This party has some roles left uncovered (trapfinding, battlefield control mostly) but they are not especially crucial.

[Morph Bark]

Why are there both a Bard and a Dragon Shaman in the party? Alternatively: why is there a Duskblade in the party instead of a Marshal?


More seriously though, with a smaller group or one that doesn't have all the roles covered, tailor your encounters a bit differently. As you said for instance, to not make the duskblade stand out too much from the rest you could have a few more enemies thrown in. However, this does not have to mean more encounters. You could simply scale down the CR of the big bad monster you had planned by 2 or so and throw in two more monsters that are of a CR 2 below the new CR of the bad bad monster.

I myself played with two players for two years and therefore kept my encounters small and varied CR to see how things went from time to time and it worked well for me. If it becomes a problem that they don't have the right roles covered or are not with enough people, allow them to get some hirelings or convince NPCs to join them through use of Diplomacy. After all, the more people, the more the Bard's and Dragon Shaman's buffs will prove their worth.


EDIT: Take note not to overvalue Duskblades though, or the player will end up feeling overshadowed if you go too far into equalizing the characters' input. Heck, they can't even cast a spell while using a maneuver! (The big dent in my plans of playing a Warblade/Duskblade.)

[Metahuman1]

If Duskblade is cheese what would CoDzilla, Natural Spell Druid and Batman Wizard be?

[Keithicus]

My largest concern is balance within the party, if the dragon shaman (who is being played by the player that is most likely the best skilled player at the table... not by a huge margin) is too strong or too weak compared to the bard and duskblade to the point where the dragon shaman starts feeling useless. My dragon shaman say's that he is probably going to stay with the dragon shaman and (if needed) take the leadership feat to get a minion that can fill our needs

[Flickerdart]

See if you can get him to take Dragonfire Adept instead. The flavour is mostly the same, but the class is quite a bit more useful.

[SowZ]

The strongest and most balanced three person party would look like this-

Druid
Druid
Druid

Alternatively, it could be-

Druid
Cleric
Wizard

That's if you are going for pure power. If you aren't looking for 'best as in strongest' but best as in playability I would recommend-

Bard
Fighter or Barbarian (Make sure they optimize well)
Ranger or Rogue

[Fouredged Sword]

That party can function fine. Give them a wand of cure light wounds or two for healing (the bard can use them without a check), or three belts of healing.

A duskblade can kill things quickly, but the best thing to do is force him decide if it is worth the spell to kill something.

The dragon shama makes a good pair to him.

Good fairly balanced party. With good tactics they will be on CR more or less. With bad tacktics nothing can save them. Go for it.

[Keithicus]

Next time I am able to show him the class in person I'll have him look at the dragonfire adept but I'm not going to tell him he has to switch class. Thank you all for the surprising amount of feedback. I'm going to make an NPC that can quickly come in and help the party in case things don't quite go right with my encounters... Just to be safe.

Edit: by the time I post a reply there are 3 more posts above mine to read >.<

[ericgrau]

It seems like they have the essentials covered at least. The bard should have a cure light wound wand and any essential skills, plus battlefield control spells I think. The mixed martial is good to cover that. The party might be a bit weak on the damage/killing area but I don't know the classes well enough to say. Seems like the main person there is the duskblade.

[SowZ]

Next time I am able to show him the class in person I'll have him look at the dragonfire adept but I'm not going to tell him he has to switch class. Thank you all for the surprising amount of feedback. I'm going to make an NPC that can quickly come in and help the party in case things don't quite go right with my encounters... Just to be safe.

I would recommend making the NPC a level under the party and no more than a level above, use him rarely, (even when the party is in real trouble,) and come up with some plausible explanation other then coincidence why he is there. (The first time they meet the NPC it could be coincidence and as a travelling adventurer may have seen the group in trouble. After that, there should be an explanation.)

The danger is in the group feeling like they have a friend who is a safety net. If he helps them repeatedly, it would also be sensible to ask the party to help out said adventurer from time to time.

[Keithicus]

I would recommend making the NPC a level under the party and no more than a level above, use him rarely, (even when the party is in real trouble,) and come up with some plausible explanation other then coincidence why he is there. (The first time they meet the NPC it could be coincidence and as a travelling adventurer may have seen the group in trouble. After that, there should be an explanation.)

The danger is in the group feeling like they have a friend who is a safety net. If he helps them repeatedly, it would also be sensible to ask the party to help out said adventurer from time to time.

That's exactly what I'm worried about, both the NPC out-shining them and the players feeling like the NPC only exists to save the party when something goes wrong.

I already have a good way of introducing him in my head, seeing as the campaign starts with an elvish nation being attacked he could be an individual from a rescue party.

[Flickerdart]

A Cloistered Cleric with the Kobold domain should be a decent NPC cohort - he can heal, he can find traps, he has good skill points, but he can't fight worth a damn unless you build him to.

[Grendus]

Party should be fine. I think there's a bard ACF that gives them trapfinding, though I could be mistaken, but some clever antics with a bag of tricks or an 8 foot pole will suffice if they're clever, or just ignore Disable Device based traps all together. All three of those classes are useful without being broken. Biggest issue is is going to be lack of healing, bards aren't necessarily bad healers but they're only really built for support, they don't have the spell longevity of the cleric/druid (no wands of lesser vigor, no spontaneous healing, fewer spell slots).

I'd recommend a Healer DMPC (yes, that healer), maybe houserule that they get the Vigor line as well. Otherwise you should be golden. The duskblade and dragon shaman are both capable tanks/melee, the bard (contrary to Elan's bumbling antics) is a fairly capable arcanist and support class. Just be sure to recognize that a three person party will have fewer actions/round and less resources, so plan your encounters accordingly.

[Alaris]

If Duskblade is cheese what would CoDzilla, Natural Spell Druid and Batman Wizard be?

Yeah... but this is clearly not an optimized group. In un-optimized games, Duskblade shines as cheesy, because you can build him badly, and he'll still crush single opponents fairly quickly.

Throw Batman Wizard or Natural Spell Druid into a game like that, and you'll get a similar result, though less "instant crush," and more "Pwn Encounter."

[Morph Bark]

The strongest and most balanced three person party would look like this-

Druid
Druid
Druid

Alternatively, it could be-

Druid
Cleric
Wizard

That's if you are going for pure power. If you aren't looking for 'best as in strongest' but best as in playability I would recommend-

Bard
Fighter or Barbarian (Make sure they optimize well)
Ranger or Rogue

Or just go three Bards. :smallwink:

Bard/Crusader or Bard/Warblade
Bard/Sublime Chord and other spellcasting PrCs
Bard/bardic music PrCs

I long for the day where I can gaze upon a large all-bard party with various kinds of inspire courage and Words of Creation and despair...

[Eldariel]

'Tis nothing wrong with playing a Dragon Shaman. Don't know why people got into their heads that they had to play the more optimized thing. I've never played one, but I've had players PLAY Dragon Shamans, and have had fun with it. Dragonfire Adept is nice... but not necessary at all.

Dragonfire Adept is approximately as strong as Duskblade and Bard. Dragon Shaman is distinctly weaker. In this kind of a party, where Dragon Shaman's powers are further understated due to the lack of buffees, Dragonfire Adept would be far more appropriate class-power wise, while being perfectly appropriate fluff-wise.

And regardless of their pre-optimization, I fail to see anything cheesy in Duskblade. Care to enlighten me? Because it can use touch spells at melee range combined with weapon damage as a standard action, and with full attacks on level 13? Only advantage I see to a blaster Wizard is that they have easier low level access to HP and AC, and they get weapon damage per round in addition to spell damage, but in exchange for making actual attack rolls instead of touch attack rolls.

[Greenish]

I'd keep an eye on the bard. Duskblade and Dragon Shaman (or Dragonfire Adept) are pretty simple and intuitive, but bards are a tad more complex to build and play up to their potential.

[Ardantis]

I love that party.

As for the lack of trapfinding, it depends on their quest. Forests and cities aren't known for being trap-strewn.

I love urban quests, but your party's class layout and PC races screams overland adventure to me. Lots of animals and stuff, with the occasional village or elven stronghold to test their social mettle. For combat, the Raptoran's flying, with Bardic buffs and Dragon Shaman-ness, should work very well in the wide open spaces.

I hope you have a great time.

[Divide by Zero]

I long for the day where I can gaze upon a large all-bard party with various kinds of inspire courage and Words of Creation and despair...

But it will rock so hard.

[Fouredged Sword]

I second a trapfinding cloistered cleric, or a wizard / rouge / unseen seer with the frail flaw.

Just make the character completely useless in combat. Give them vow of poverty / vow of non violence, just to keep them out of the loot / combat situations.

[Cerlis]

dungeonscape is the book with a trapfinding oriented Bard (Historian bard)

also you could just have your focus on strange monsters (ethereal filtchers, harpoon spiders. anything weird) which the bard would be able to use his knowledge on to tell them how to defeat it.

If you can modify your campaign to the big bad evil orginization uses Undead for shock troops, i'd remind you that Zombies have alot of HP but can only do one thing a turn. your classic encounter would be something big and bad (who uses a high HP and grapple and otherwise non-high damage forms of combat) to go mono-e-mono with the duskblade while the bard and dragon shaman cover him with spell and fire (or lighting, or acid)

at the beginning you can cature to your players. If your bard has alot of illusions, put stupid monsters in. If he has enchantments, put extra mooks in to take control over. If the dragon shaman can fly, put chokepoint bridges in for the other two to fight on while the dragon shaman blasts the mooks waiting to get into the fight.

once they learn how to use their abilities well, step it up a notch. Spell casters might entangle the shaman if he flies. there might be magical versions of the mooks who have a higher will save.


but one thing to remember is that most encounters are geared to a 4 man party with everything covered. So add 1 to the CR of everything (2 if its a powerful monster, there is a difference between "tough cus it has high HP and lots of attacks" and "tough cus its immune to most damage and can cast spells") and if you are ever worried about the players when it comes to a certian monster, remember not every enemies kills them. Spiders coccoon their prey. Zombies dont attack a seemingly dead body (unless you absolutely MUST have corpse eating zombies) . mooks bring prisoners to masters. Some animals defend themselves violently....unless the party is unconcious and it can run away.

you dont have to go this overboard but...for example.

I'm running the Temple of the Yuan Ti module. I'm worried about a mind flayer (since even if you succeed on mind blast save, you are still stunned one round). If i get a TPK he will actually capture the party and use them in his mind game (literally). this will be represented in their heads. i'm going to have each of my players bring a Magic the Gathering Commander deck. in the game each character is turned into this random warrior with access to strange spells and must defeat him or their minds will be crushed and they will die (Arch enemy format, where its one Boss like player vs multiple). Since most of em are pretty good and i'm only half decent at making a deck, they will probably win, being he first group to best the mind flayer at his own game.

[FMArthur]

You might want to just do away with traps altogether instead of forcing Trapfinding into the game in one form or another. If you really need them in a dungeon, there's nothing wrong with making traps that use the players' problem-solving skills instead of a Rogue player's d20.

Also, while it isn't very nice to pressure someone not to play the class they want, you should at least prepare to find something for the Dragon Shaman to actually do in battle. Make sure he knows about Entangling Exhalation, and perhaps give him some action-consuming gear if whacking people with his medium BAB and Simple weapons is unappealing to him. If he picked DS because he wants to be a healer, you can give the party healing items and he'll get them. Be sure to keep in mind that a 3-man party with a dedicated healer is only capable of handling threats as if it were a 2-man party, but a few more of them per day.

With decent Bard support he can approach competence in melee; longspears are ideal simple weapons and need little investment. Power Attack should be sufficient with it, and Combat Reflexes could take advantage of reach and his elven Dexterity. Crossbows are another option and with a DS aura + the bard's songs he can get better damage out of it than normal crossbowing, but they are mostly inferior weapons and take much more build investment. If the Bard doesn't try to optimize his Inspire Courage in some way and doesn't take Snowflake Wardance, even buffing each other they are only about as good in melee as a blank full BAB class with martial weaponry. In that case a Bard can fall back on spells or, at worst, will only shine in social encounters, but the DS would be pretty much boned.

[Draz74]

Yeah, I worry a little about the Dragon Shaman's ability to not get outshined in this party, but not too much assuming the monsters aren't particularly optimized either. And otherwise I think the party should be fine, even without fanangling Trapfinding in somehow.

On the excellent suggestions above regarding Dragon Shaman, I had a couple points to add: DS's aren't particularly feat-intensive, so you should easily be able to spare a feat on Exotic Weapon Proficiency with an excellent weapon such as the Spiked Chain or Harpoon or something.

In addition, Imperious Command is another easy way for a DS to add a new combat option to his repertoire (at Level 6+), especially if he's wielding a reach weapon. Just max out your Intimidate ranks; you should already have good Charisma. Of course grab Never Outnumbered (skill trick) too.

[Keithicus]

I don't know completely why he wants a dragon shaman over a dragonfire adept (or anything else that has the "I want to be a dragon" flair) But he decided to play a Dragon Shaman, I'll let him know this feedback that everyone is giving on how he can stand out.

I'll probably go light on the trapfinding (if I have it at all) because of the party comp.

In other news the duskblade decided to change to a half-orc (and looks like the player is going to focus more on the martial aspect over the spellcasting, though without neglecting the spellcasting). The duskblade wants to take Toughness for the first level feat, should I encourage the player to consider something else (I'm thinking power attack)?

The party is going to start at level 1 but I'll still take all this into account as I plan things in the future. I don't think the dragon shaman is going to have too many issues being outshined as the player is creative, a good roleplayer, and has a quick grasp of game mechanics (above the other 2 players)

Edit: I also don't know which books some of these things you all are listing are from, if someone could point me at a good long list of everything or at least tell me where Entangling Exhalation, Harpoon, Imperious Command, and Never Outnumbered are it would be much appreciated.

[gkathellar]

If he's really committed to Dragon Shaman, there are a couple of good revisions floating around on the homebrew board (by Admiral Squash and PiD6, I think). If he doesn't like the DFA and you're amenable to homebrew, see if he's interested in either of those.

Your duskblade should be fine. It's a relatively optimization-lite class, because there's not a whole lot you can do to screw it up.

Again, watch the bard to make sure he doesn't make any terrible choices.

Otherwise, should be fine. I second just skipping traps altogether — no need for them if nobody is building to deal with them.

[Alabenson]

I don't know completely why he wants a dragon shaman over a dragonfire adept (or anything else that has the "I want to be a dragon" flair) But he decided to play a Dragon Shaman, I'll let him know this feedback that everyone is giving on how he can stand out.

I'll probably go light on the trapfinding (if I have it at all) because of the party comp.

In other news the duskblade decided to change to a half-orc (and looks like the player is going to focus more on the martial aspect over the spellcasting, though without neglecting the spellcasting). The duskblade wants to take Toughness for the first level feat, should I encourage the player to consider something else (I'm thinking power attack)?

The party is going to start at level 1 but I'll still take all this into account as I plan things in the future. I don't think the dragon shaman is going to have too many issues being outshined as the player is creative, a good roleplayer, and has a quick grasp of game mechanics (above the other 2 players)

Edit: I also don't know which books some of these things you all are listing are from, if someone could point me at a good long list of everything or at least tell me where Entangling Exhalation, Harpoon, Imperious Command, and Never Outnumbered are it would be much appreciated.

Given that it's the single most useless feat in the game, I would strongly discourage the duskblade from taking the Toughness feat as opposed to just about anything else.

[Draz74]

Edit: I also don't know which books some of these things you all are listing are from, if someone could point me at a good long list of everything or at least tell me where Entangling Exhalation,
Races of the Dragon

Harpoon,
Stormwrack

Imperious Command,
Drow of the Underdark

and Never Outnumbered are it would be much appreciated.
Complete Scoundrel -- the only book that has skill tricks. :smallwink: Also a summary available online. (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20070105a&page=5)

[Keithicus]

Thank you Draz, and everyone (yet again) for all the feedback.

Just because I have all these sourcebooks doesn't mean I've looked at them in detail so I don't know what all is in which book.

So yeah, I talked to the duskblade about changing feats and explained that Toughness becomes very weak very fast (I think it's a decent feat at first level personally... but not after). I think this campaign is going to go well especially now that I know some strengths and weaknesses of the party.

Edit: but by no means does this mean you all have to stop talking about this 3-party setup, it's a good way for me to get more informed

[gooddragon1]

Draconic Aura from the Dragon Magic book allows the player a draconic aura similar to the thing from the dragon shaman which also scales with level. Have the guy look at that on a dragonfire adept with a healing aura and you've got healing part from the dragon shaman covered at level 3.

[Cerlis]

Thank you Draz, and everyone (yet again) for all the feedback.

Just because I have all these sourcebooks doesn't mean I've looked at them in detail so I don't know what all is in which book.

So yeah, I talked to the duskblade about changing feats and explained that Toughness becomes very weak very fast (I think it's a decent feat at first level personally... but not after). I think this campaign is going to go well especially now that I know some strengths and weaknesses of the party.

Edit: but by no means does this mean you all have to stop talking about this 3-party setup, it's a good way for me to get more informed

If you allow retraining, maybe he could take toughness at 1st lvl and then swap it for Imp toughness later

[TwylyghT]

I figure its not for everyone, but our group has house ruled toughness to the 1hp/level version by default. a feat is worth A LOT more than 3hp and that goes a thousand times over for anyone not a fighter.

The bard can swing things way in to the parties favor with just a little work, built right. This only compounds if anyone in the party picks up leadership. That army of underlings gets scary fast when the bard can hit +3 inspire courage with little effort (song of the heart feat and inspirational boost spell) by level 3, and +4 at 7 by adding a masterwork lute. They can go even higher with more effort and magic items.

the dragon shaman I have no real hands on time with, no one in our group has played one. But skimming it over it looks a little light.

The duskblade can be beast just playing it straight, backed by a good bard it could be a monster.

[gkathellar]

This only compounds if anyone in the party picks up leadership.

Don't let anyone take Leadership. It is the most powerful feat in the game — and not in a good way.

Kill it. Kill it with fire.

[Niceman]

Ok, I'm probably stepping into a hornet's nest here, but here's my take. You're new to DMing and your players are new to the game in general. I'm old school and I've found that with new people, simple is always best.

Forget everything that's been said up to this point.

When you're new to things, start with the basics. Everyone is first level and you're just using the three core books. Leave all the supplements and special characters and races out of it. Stick to the core classes and races. It'll be hard enough for new players to get a grip on mechanics and whatnot in the beginning with just the three books, not counting all the other sourcebooks and variants. Get the basic mechanics down with these characters... play them to like 5th level or so. Once there you can evaluate if you want to restart the campaign with new, more advanced character types or continue on, introducing prestige classes and extras as you go.

As for a three person group, I'd say don't worry about getting some sort of balanced character types. What class does each player want to play, and let them. The underlying point of the game is overcoming challenges. If the players choose character classes that don't cover all the bases, that's fine. They'll learn how to do the most with what they've got, whether they're all playing fighters or two rogues and a cleric or a wizard, sorcerer, and a monk, or whatever. They'll learn to capitalize on their strengths and compensate for their weaknesses. If they don't have access to healing, for example, then they will learn not to blindly charge in... to use tactics rather than brute force in certain situations... and to become skilled in first aid and/or procuring cure potions.

Anyway, that's my suggestion. Start off with the basics, with basic classes and races until people find their feet, then if you want to go to the supplements and all you'll be be ready for them. Regardless of what you do, I hope you all have fun and best of luck to you :)

[Morph Bark]

When you're new to things, start with the basics. Everyone is first level and you're just using the three core books.

Not really necessary. The core books have the basic rules for combat and skills and character building you need, but you can easily add in other books for classes. I'd say leaving the harder mechanics and big fluff books out would be a good idea though (Race books, incarnum, Tomes, the environmental/themed monster books, etc.). Heck, adding in psionics might make things easier considering it is more intuitive and many might already be familiar due to the mana system many video games use.

Duskblade and Dragon Shaman are some of the easiest classes to use. Bard is a bit harder, but mostly because it has so much support outside of core and it is outside of core that it really gets its shine from.

[HailDiscordia]

Ok, I'm probably stepping into a hornet's nest here, but here's my take. You're new to DMing and your players are new to the game in general. I'm old school and I've found that with new people, simple is always best.

Forget everything that's been said up to this point.

I agree, the best advice so far. Why the hurry to rush into advanced stuff? The core books have so much material to digest and you will appreciate the additional books so much more when you really grasp the game basics. Especially if the party is not looking to be optimized, there is no need to offer so much to them.

And as a (relatively) new DM you are just making it harder on yourself. Especially if you add an NPC to tag along with them. Honestly, it doesn't matter if they can find traps or heal or do a lot of stuff. They will figure it out, they might die along the way. And then they can try new characters.

A Raptoran duskblade? You are going to hate DMing with that guy in the party because you won't know how to plan for him. Start at first level with core books and run a simple adventure. It will be a ton of fun.

[Draz74]

I don't think there's anything magical about Core classes that makes them simpler to DM for. On the contrary ... high-Tier full casters tend to be the hardest characters to plan for.

Duskblade is going to be waaaaay easier to DM than, say, Druid.

Factotum or Binder or a Tome of Battle class might be complicated enough that the DM should get some experience before wading into them. But in the Dragon Shaman / Duskblade / Bard party, Bard (the Core class!) is going to be the most complicated character of the three.

[Coidzor]

Ok, I'm probably stepping into a hornet's nest here, but here's my take. You're new to DMing and your players are new to the game in general. I'm old school and I've found that with new people, simple is always best.

Forget everything that's been said up to this point.

Why would you want him to forget the introductory paragraph to your post? :smallconfused:

[Keithicus]

A Raptoran duskblade?

Fortunately for me the duskblade decided to switch to half-orc. I'll talk to the players and see what they think about going back to core (we already did about 4 sessions with core). They might not be too happy about me changing my mind this close to the session starting but we'll see.

We might do something along the lines of using only core (and PHB II if the Duskblade and Dragon Shaman are upset about changing) until 4th level then slowly add other books as we see fit.

Edit: (why do I end up editing every single post I make?) The fact that the duskblade and dragon shaman seem relatively simple is one of the reasons I don't think it'll be a big step up. And my players already know that anything outside of core needs my approval so if they pick a class that I really don't want to see then I can say 'no'. Also the character currently playing the duskblade was a wizard in our first session and absolutely hated the spell preperation.

[Coidzor]

Fortunately for me the duskblade decided to switch to half-orc. I'll talk to the players and see what they think about going back to core (we already did about 4 sessions with core). They might not be too happy about me changing my mind this close to the session starting but we'll see.

Generally people don't like to be jerked around, no.


We might do something along the lines of using only core (and PHB II if the Duskblade and Dragon Shaman are upset about changing) until 4th level then slowly add other books as we see fit.

Do you guys have that little free time to play and familiarize yourself with the books you have access to? :smallconfused:

[Keithicus]

Do you guys have that little free time to play and familiarize yourself with the books you have access to? :smallconfused:

No the problem is mainly that I have sudden access to a lot of books at once (thanks to a non D&D-playing friend...)

[FMArthur]

Yeah, a core-only game would be far more complicated than what you've got. As far as DM challenges go, the list of Duskblade 'tricks' that allow them to come up with unexpected solutions to problems is as follows:
Swift Fly
Swift Invisibility
Dimension Door

Nearly everything else is "I swing my sword and deal extra damage" or "I blast those guys with X element" from a distance. Easy stuff to handle.


Here is a list of Dragon Shaman 'tricks' capable of catching you by surprise:
Water Breathing


As for core classes, I would probably hit the text limit on Bard trickery. Other casters only gets worse from there.

[TwylyghT]

Don't let anyone take Leadership. It is the most powerful feat in the game — and not in a good way.

Kill it. Kill it with fire.

I wouldn't remove it all together, but yes you really do have to keep it in check. In the light of a heroic campaign, a lot of concepts can build toward leadership as a legitimate character goal, and I think it should be attainable by those who seek *and* earn it, as such, our group has two rules always in place for leadership.

First, you need DM go ahead to take, as should be normal, but in this context your in game play has to justify the feat. The distant gloomy maverick doesnt tend to suddenly sprout an army, but the fighter who has spent resources and time moving up the guild command chain could end up with quite a following. The one time I have had it in play myself, was after my cleric managed to free a town from a demonic influence, and in sticking around to help pick up the pieces, gained converts to Pelor. This eventually ended up with the greater part of the population looking to him, and the DM at next level up said I could now take the feat if I wanted.

Second, and this is an important one, except in situations like an actual war event, or defense of the leaders home base, only the cohort gets to travel with the character. Followers while loyal don't have the same level of commitment. We do still allow followers to contribute to business ventures and to tend to various things while the hero is away, so still quite useful, just keeps Leadership from being a build an army for one feat feature.

That said, even still, it is a very potent feat. More than any other feat in the game, it needs the player and DM to respect the role play aspect of the game. You could, and it's probably a good idea, pretend its not in the book until you think you and your players are ready to handle it in a way that works for you and your play style. Then even when you think you are there, access should be a privilege and not a right... so to speak.

One last note in support of holding off for awhile at least. Even with experienced players, adding more rolls to a game can cause combats to drag on longer and longer. The more familiar everyone gets with the rules, the less time it adds, but it will almost always be noticeable.

[Keithicus]

I am going to make the characters reasonably roleplay gaining followers before they can take leadership (or at least before they get the benefit of it). I was never planning on letting take their followers into battle (both because of the level difference and because that would be way too many people)

I also might make the houserule suggested above that makes toughness 1 hp/level but even with that it doesn't seem too great of a feat.

Edit: However, because it's a small party and they have to reach level 6 just to get it I wouldn't see a problem with having the feat, I'm just not 100% sure as to how much control I'm going to give them over their cohort.

[Bard for Kicks]

Here is a simple solution to not having trapfinding...

Summon Monster X

A bard can summon a meat shield to go bust some traps in a corridor

Also, armband of maximized healing anyone?
It would probably be useful since rolling a one is the bane of a healing attempt...

[Eldariel]

Here is a simple solution to not having trapfinding...

Summon Monster X

A bard can summon a meat shield to go bust some traps in a corridor

Also, armband of maximized healing anyone?
It would probably be useful since rolling a one is the bane of a healing attempt...

So, that trap that closes doors and starts filling a room with water? Or the one that collapses a part of the dungeon? Or the one that summons monsters? Or the alarm? Why anyone would willingly set off traps specifically designed to keep people away is beyond me.

[Bard for Kicks]

So, that trap that closes doors and starts filling a room with water? Or the one that collapses a part of the dungeon? Or the one that summons monsters? Or the alarm? Why anyone would willingly set off traps specifically designed to keep people away is beyond me.

Good point...
I was only thinking about pitfalls and walls that shoot arrows, etc...

Hmm...:smallconfused:

[gkathellar]

Don't clam up and play a core only game because you're worried about "simplicity," especially if the characters already like the characters they have. Core is terribly unbalanced, not particularly "simpler" or "easier" than the material that followed it, and frankly a lot of it is also really uninteresting.


only the cohort gets to travel with the character.

The cohort is the problem! You get a character for a feat! WHAT.

[SowZ]

Given that it's the single most useless feat in the game, I would strongly discourage the duskblade from taking the Toughness feat as opposed to just about anything else.

I can think of a few feats a little more useless.

[SowZ]

I wouldn't remove it all together, but yes you really do have to keep it in check. In the light of a heroic campaign, a lot of concepts can build toward leadership as a legitimate character goal, and I think it should be attainable by those who seek *and* earn it, as such, our group has two rules always in place for leadership.

First, you need DM go ahead to take, as should be normal, but in this context your in game play has to justify the feat. The distant gloomy maverick doesnt tend to suddenly sprout an army, but the fighter who has spent resources and time moving up the guild command chain could end up with quite a following. The one time I have had it in play myself, was after my cleric managed to free a town from a demonic influence, and in sticking around to help pick up the pieces, gained converts to Pelor. This eventually ended up with the greater part of the population looking to him, and the DM at next level up said I could now take the feat if I wanted.

Second, and this is an important one, except in situations like an actual war event, or defense of the leaders home base, only the cohort gets to travel with the character. Followers while loyal don't have the same level of commitment. We do still allow followers to contribute to business ventures and to tend to various things while the hero is away, so still quite useful, just keeps Leadership from being a build an army for one feat feature.

That said, even still, it is a very potent feat. More than any other feat in the game, it needs the player and DM to respect the role play aspect of the game. You could, and it's probably a good idea, pretend its not in the book until you think you and your players are ready to handle it in a way that works for you and your play style. Then even when you think you are there, access should be a privilege and not a right... so to speak.

One last note in support of holding off for awhile at least. Even with experienced players, adding more rolls to a game can cause combats to drag on longer and longer. The more familiar everyone gets with the rules, the less time it adds, but it will almost always be noticeable.

I did this with a Thrallherd, once. The Cohort travelled with me and the rest lived on a flying ship that carried the party around and occasionally helped us out if it was possible.

The other thing was that all followers had only NPC levels and non-elite array.

[Coidzor]

Well, depending upon what you're wanting, if you just want some melee muscle, Wild Cohort (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/re/20031118a) strips away most of the issues of Leadership.

[Keithicus]

I think the people that are arguing for core only are simply arguing for us to not get overwhelmed by books while looking at choices and that they are not saying that core is somehow better than the other books (at least that's what it seems like).

I don't see any problems with leadership itself, after all I can simply scale the encounters up as appropriate for having a cohort. However I am going to make it clear to my players that only the cohort travels with them in most circumstances.

My players know that the leadership feat, along with anything outside of the Player's Handbook requires my approval, just so that if they pick something that really confuses me that I can look into it further and give a definitive yes or no.

Edit: apologies for poor word choice and grammar

[Divide by Zero]

I think the people that are arguing for core only are simply arguing for us to not get overwhelmed by books while looking at choices and that they are not saying that core is somehow better than the other books (at least that's what it seems like).

Perhaps, but if the players already have characters they like, then the number of choices isn't much of an issue.