I'm DMing the weakest party ever

[Aerris]

Well, the title pretty much says it.

I've never DM'ed before, but I'm by far the one with most experience around so the job falls on to me.
The party is composed of:
A Monk/Cleric who is going after Sacred Fist, I'll probably be able convince the player to only take a dip of monk so this character is going to be the most viable of the lot.
An Artificer who's player has never played DnD (He does know how the game works, he played lots of Neverwinter Nights and read a couple of books but still has no first hand experience.)
A rouge/psion/Elocater who by far has least knowledge of DnD.
And a Dragon Shaman.

There are 2 players left who haven't picked their characters, but i can't wait to see what craziness they want to play.

So, any tips or suggestions how should i handle this party? As far as i can tell the Artificer is going to be absolutely useless, Sacred Fist is going to do ok, Dragon shaman will rock the early levels but start to suck around level 8 and i have no idea what will happen with the Elocater.

[Yorrin]

First of all, it sounds from your post that you haven't actually seen them in action yet, so at least give them the benefit of the doubt until then. They might surprise you.

As for DMing new players in general, start with something simple and social to get them in the mindset of talking in character. Then get them to a simple combat against 1 or 2 creatures with less than 1 CR (goblins, kobolds, etc. If you're starting at higher levels you can go higher, but try to make sure they can kill each foe in 1-2 hits). This allows them to get a basic feel for combat mechanics so they realize how their character actually functions. Give them a chance to heal any wounds, then toss them into a level appropriate encounter against straightforward enemies. By the time that's over they'll have enough of a sense of the game to hopefully make better decisions, and you'll actually have had time to identify your problem players.

[Immabozo]

I would suggest a lot of story line encounters, intellect puzzles and gentle fights to really "test the waters" about their combat abilities.

Start with an epic battle between a rat and a house cat!

But I wouldn't try to coach them into too much optimization, let them have fun! Although I would help them into the level of optimization where they can about 80% of the time do what they are trying to do. Attack land, skill check made, save not devistatingly failed, etc.

A few levels in, have them meet a psion with Psychic Reformation, which will let the re-pick feats, skills and spells/powers, you can rule it to work on class levels too! Let them re-make their character to be more what they want after they see how it plays and get a better understanding of how the game works.

But it sounds like your group will mostly be in it for the story and the experience. If you deliver it, it will go famously.

[Phelix-Mu]

If they are new to the game you probably shouldn't let them pick from just any book. And artificer is really a class that benefits a lot from knowledge of how various classes interact and what elements can best be enhanced through crafting.

Anyway, regardless of what the party ends up playing, you should keep the first couple levels (and really, start at 1st) very simple. Small scale combats against stuff within a couple CR of the party's level, role playing in town, skill checks during non-combat type stuff, and so forth. Just until everyone is clear on the basic lingo, the basic mechanics, and so forth.

Also, make sure they all turn in copies of their character sheets for you to review. Look them over and give feedback on stuff, look for beginner errors (especially stuff with cross-class skills and the like).

Finally, I'd allow the characters to be pretty flexible. Around 3-4 or so, people start to get a feel for their character concept and whether or not the build they've selected is going to fit the concept. If someone wants a minor rebuild or something, let them have it, but make it clear that it's a one-time thing by tying it into the plot somehow (like everyone finishes the string of early-level missions and then there is a year of downtime when people can pursue their own lives or look into finding a mentor in another class they wish to take). This kind of character development, instead of just chucking everything and making something new, can often enhance the enjoyment of the character, as evolution of build and concept are pretty realistic and interesting from a dramatic standpoint.

Good luck. Be patient with them, and I think you'll see gradual improvement before long.

[avr]

An Artificer could be useless or could break your game by accident. It is not a weak class.

Rogue/Psion/Elocator might be hard to kill eventually but is unlikely to ever hit hard. If they successfully scout & find out what the opposition is the Artificer may be able to set up appropriate buffs out of combat; simple & satisfying synergy.

The Monk might be sneaky enough to back up the Rogue on stealth scenes.

[Bloodgruve]

My suggestion, as their DM just allow them to do what they want to do. Don't help them optimize. Let them learn the game with the choices they make. It will be a lot easier for you if they're not optimized and if one of their characters dies from a well balanced encounter they will naturally reroll a better character. I made the mistake of helping first timers with some optimization and I wish I wouldn't have. Just let them retrain or reroll when they feel like they need to.

Blood~

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

As long as they're all weak, weak characters is a pretty nice "problem." Just scale down encounters. Maybe they face dumb kobolds a little longer than the average group would.

[Vrock_Summoner]

As long as they're all weak, weak characters is a pretty nice "problem." Just scale down encounters. Maybe they face dumb kobolds a little longer than the average group would.

"Dumb" being the important word. You wouldn't want to make them think too much, might leave your players feeling a little... Tuckered out. :smallwink:

[Stoneback]

This is a problem? It sounds like your players are making up the characters they want to make up, crunch-wise. And since none of them have knocked it out of the park with optimization, they ought to play well together.

There's nothing wrong with this party at all so far.

[Slipperychicken]

"test the waters" about their combat abilities.


This. You don't need to kill them right away.

[Ermanti]

Could be worse, my party consists of a lvl 5 barbarian, 4 fighter/1 barbarian, and a 5 fighter...all have the endurance feat and weapon focus.... at level 3 I finally convinced 1 of them to get power attack. I'm a druid, so at least I can muscle us through a combat. I just shudder when I think of level 9+ play.

[Immabozo]

Could be worse, my party consists of a lvl 5 barbarian, 4 fighter/1 barbarian, and a 5 fighter...all have the endurance feat and weapon focus.... at level 3 I finally convinced 1 of them to get power attack. I'm a druid, so at least I can muscle us through a combat. I just shudder when I think of level 9+ play.

hey, 6 levels of fighter is used in some builds.

Although beyond 2 levels is probably not the greatest option outside dungeoncrasher

[Kane0]

...(He does know how the game works, he played lots of Neverwinter Nights and read a couple of books but still has no first hand experience.)...

That's how I started too, and it is far better than just flicking through the books or exposure at all. Would you think the same of someone that has played Baldur's Gate or Icewind Dale but not PnP?

[CIDE]

Was I the only one expecting a Truenamer (arcane caster), healbot cleric, monk, rogue, and fighter party going by the thread's title?

[Shining Wrath]

Well, the title pretty much says it.

I've never DM'ed before, but I'm by far the one with most experience around so the job falls on to me.
The party is composed of:
A Monk/Cleric who is going after Sacred Fist, I'll probably be able convince the player to only take a dip of monk so this character is going to be the most viable of the lot.
An Artificer who's player has never played DnD (He does know how the game works, he played lots of Neverwinter Nights and read a couple of books but still has no first hand experience.)
A rouge/psion/Elocater who by far has least knowledge of DnD.
And a Dragon Shaman.

There are 2 players left who haven't picked their characters, but i can't wait to see what craziness they want to play.

So, any tips or suggestions how should i handle this party? As far as i can tell the Artificer is going to be absolutely useless, Sacred Fist is going to do ok, Dragon shaman will rock the early levels but start to suck around level 8 and i have no idea what will happen with the Elocater.

As the Artificer comes up to speed he's going to achieve pwnage of many of your monsters and traps.
Do your best to talk the rogue / psion / Elocater to single-class until they have a grasp of the game. Having said that, a psion is not exactly weak.

That's far from the weakest party ever.

[Captnq]

So, any tips or suggestions how should i handle this party? As far as i can tell the Artificer is going to be absolutely useless, Sacred Fist is going to do ok, Dragon shaman will rock the early levels but start to suck around level 8 and i have no idea what will happen with the Elocater.

Sure. You should have no problem killing them all. They sound like it will take a minimal amount of effort and you can...

Oh, wait a sec. I just read your post again. You never actually said what you hoped to achieve. Maybe you should set some goals for yourself first, then I can help you.

[BWR]

Chiming in to throw my weight behind the "it's not a problem" crowd. Throw some easy encounters at them first and let them have fun. Don't push them into the trap of thinking that they have to be optimized to have fun. If someone asks for help to build a more powerful character, by all means. You can offer help unsolicted though I would be careful to word as "if you want help or suggestions" rather than "so you aren't so weak".

[Ermanti]

It wouldn't be so bad if the dm allowed dungeon crasher... or anything outside core... he says splat books are broken. Then he sets us up against cr 10 fights. For instance, last game we fought against a lvl 7 or 8 cleric and archer of some sort, with pc stats, pc gear, prebuffed with stoneskin on both of them, both have 23 ac (meaning the barbs need a 13 or better sans pa while raging and the fighter needs a 16 since he only has a 14 str) the archer (think it might be a ranger, I couldn't find them with a 30 spot check) started off by hitting me a silenced arrow and the cleric hit my dog with a pouch made of pepperspray (takes a MINUTE to remove... no matter what, and completely incapacitates it). The cleric also seems to cast spontaneously... the archer has a +3 bow.

All this wouldn't be so bad if we could go outside of core and they let me optimize their characters a bit. Or if one of them was a wizard or cleric. But this type of fight is the norm with my dm, and I'm sick of being the only one who can do anything and getting hosed because of it.

[Spore]

Especially with newer players: If they have an idea, cut them some slack. They'll improvise situations, weapons, cover and much more. If they hide behind an table from the ray attacks of an enemy wizard, give them full cover. If they don't know how to mundanely treat a poisoned character (but their character would), give them tips. Just don't start out with Trolls or anything with huge DR.

Ineffectual weapons and attacks for the first fight are the greatest buzzkills of all. Maybe let them fight against NPCs primarily. Just some odd expert/warrior combos, then rangers and then start to introduce enemies using magic.

[Arbane]

For instance, last game we fought against a lvl 7 or 8 cleric and archer of some sort, with pc stats, pc gear, prebuffed with stoneskin on both of them, both have 23 ac (meaning the barbs need a 13 or better sans pa while raging and the fighter needs a 16 since he only has a 14 str)

Try grappling?

(And that's when you 'find out' the cleric 'just happened' to have cast Freedom of Movement before the fight, or some similar BS. It sounds like your GM is just out to get you.)

[The Prince of Cats]

Some DMs approach the game as a chance to kill everyone as often as possible. This is why my first every character lasted about a fortnight. Other DMs like to play with rather than against the players and consider the game a collaborative storytelling adventure. This is why I had to retire my fatalistic ranger.

A party of newbies need a DM who gives them a chance to screw up. If I were the DM, I'd either let them switch their feats as they discover they are less than perfect or else tailor their adventure to their chosen characters. To be fair, where they start is not always as important as where they end up; half the great heroes of legend were farm-hands who had to learn which end of a sword to hold, so I'd let them find their own way and see where they go.

If anything, I think you are lucky to be playing with a party who will not min-max and argue every death. The trick is to have fun, not to create a perfect team of murdering plunderers...

[Vhaidara]

The artificer sounds like a bad idea, since most "fun" artificer builds I've seen/thought of involve breaking the game in one way or another.

The rest of them should be fine. They aren't optimized, but they can wok.

[BWR]

Some DMs approach the game as a chance to kill everyone as often as possible. This is why my first every character lasted about a fortnight. .

You're lucky. My first character lasted about 10 minutes, less time than it took to create him.

[Sylthia]

Are you starting at level 1? Having a so called "weak" party is not too much of an issue, as long as you scale appropriately. There's not as much chance for Munchkinery at low levels, and you should be able to guide newer players more easily as well. The real problem is if you have a player or two who vastly eclipses the rest of the party and makes it hard to plan encounters.

[Leviting]

send in a couple house cats http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0780.html
Tucker's Kobolds, Oh my...
Nah, Tucker's Kobolds with amphibious subtype...:smalleek:

[Spore]

send in a couple house cats http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0780.html
Tucker's Kobolds, Oh my...
Nah, Tucker's Kobolds with amphibious subtype...:smalleek:

Anyone writing this comic obviously has never seen an enraged house cat.

[Platymus Pus]

They don't sound all that weak to me.
Just tell them to pick their starting items carefully.

[Thrair]

First thing is to accept that low-op campaigns can exist. :) CR guidelines are just that: Guidelines. Feel free to adjust up or down as needed.

Secondly, if some of them are lagging behind, give them a boost. Perhaps a friendly Dryad grants them a boon. Perhaps a fairly powerful magic item attunes itself to them, etc. Plenty of options. This works especially well if they're big into roleplay/flavour over optimization (which, while by no means a given, is common among those who do not optimize. Disclaimer: Roleplay and Optimization are not mutually exclusive in principle).

Lastly? As has been said, give them a chance to surprise you. One of the better players I know tends to play low-op skill monkeys. He still makes it work. Because he plays dirty. He's a 1st edition veteran and is very good at both unorthodox tactics and using every little trick open to him. (IE, invisible opponent in a warehouse? "You gents block the gate, I'm going to rip open that bag of flour and dust the floor. Oh look! Footprints! Sic em, boys!")

[Taelas]

If they are playing their first characters, you should definitely cut them some slack. No one becomes an optimizer immediately, and contrary to many opinions you'll find around here, optimization does not automatically make the game "better." The point is to have fun -- if the rules become an obstacle to fun, throw them out the window!

When DMing any party, you should adjust encounters appropriately. (Note that this also includes them occasionally getting in over their heads; if they think they are invulnerable simply because they are PCs, feel free to disabuse them of that notion.) Save the difficult fights for the enemies you want to be memorable, and let the easy fights be easy. To do that you need a good idea of what your players can handle.

Whether or not your difficult fights are housecats or dragons, it doesn't matter much as long as you play it up accordingly. :smallwink:

Finally, you do not need to choose the most experienced member of your group to be the DM. Experience is valuable, generally moreso in a DM than in players, but more important is flexibility and improvisation. Players will come up with extremely unusual actions all the time; a good DM needs to be able to handle that.

[Aerris]

Wow, lots of wonderful advice here (and some well-deserved criticism)! Thank you all for contributing, it helps a lot :)

Now, back on topic, my biggest problem is the fact that I'm super afraid that players are gonna get bored two sessions in and quit so all hard work i put in this campaign is going to waste. You know how it goes, first time DM'ing, been working on the setting and the story for a long, long time and I'm extremely hyped but i kinda only got one shot at it. If the campaign ends early, there's no point trying to do it again.

Also, I'm afraid that most of the players aren't into their characters too much, they pretty much wanted to create their characters A.S.A.P and avoid any core (they said cliche) classes.

Well, the campaign is supposed to start in two weeks, I've got the world and a branching story ready, so wish me luck :)

On the side note, four more friends are interested in joining the campaign, all familiar with the game on the most basic level. I really have no idea should i DM a ten men party with no past experience. Thought of dividing them in two groups (players wont know that there's another group playing) and having different sessions in the same setting/time, so the choices one group makes affects the other and vica versa. Could be interesting but i probably wont manage to DM it well.

[The Prince of Cats]

I'm super afraid that players are gonna get bored two sessions in and quit so all hard work i put in this campaign is going to waste.
Generally, I find players are quite forgiving as long as you are not killing them all off, using DMNPCs which overshadow them or failing to give them a sense of progress.#

Also, if nothing else, remember why you are doing the DM duties; yours is the only game in town, so you'll earn some good feeling just from being willing to step up and run the game...

[3drinks]

Wow, lots of wonderful advice here (and some well-deserved criticism)! Thank you all for contributing, it helps a lot :)

Now, back on topic, my biggest problem is the fact that I'm super afraid that players are gonna get bored two sessions in and quit so all hard work i put in this campaign is going to waste. You know how it goes, first time DM'ing, been working on the setting and the story for a long, long time and I'm extremely hyped but i kinda only got one shot at it. If the campaign ends early, there's no point trying to do it again.

Also, I'm afraid that most of the players aren't into their characters too much, they pretty much wanted to create their characters A.S.A.P and avoid any core (they said cliche) classes.

Well, the campaign is supposed to start in two weeks, I've got the world and a branching story ready, so wish me luck :)

On the side note, four more friends are interested in joining the campaign, all familiar with the game on the most basic level. I really have no idea should i DM a ten men party with no past experience. Thought of dividing them in two groups (players wont know that there's another group playing) and having different sessions in the same setting/time, so the choices one group makes affects the other and vica versa. Could be interesting but i probably wont manage to DM it well.

I think, you should stick with a number of players you're comfortable with. For me, that number of three to five. This is something only you can answer as it's always a different number for different people.

Splitting up the campaign as you described sounds good in theory, though I think it might break story immersion for one group with these [unexplained] changes (to them). It's an interesting dynamic though, but I'd suspect it becomes more trouble to keep track of than it's worth.

[PsyBomb]

As a new DM, you do NOT want to be trying to get a 10-person party on track. Splitting them up into two 5-man groups is much more manageable, though if they're going to be in the same campaign world make sure to have them WELL separated (unless you plan on having a major get-together at some point). You can have the actions of one group affect the story of the other and vice-versa, but only remotely. Otherwise you get the sudden-shift problem mentioned above.

[Metahuman1]

It wouldn't be so bad if the dm allowed dungeon crasher... or anything outside core... he says splat books are broken. Then he sets us up against cr 10 fights. For instance, last game we fought against a lvl 7 or 8 cleric and archer of some sort, with pc stats, pc gear, prebuffed with stoneskin on both of them, both have 23 ac (meaning the barbs need a 13 or better sans pa while raging and the fighter needs a 16 since he only has a 14 str) the archer (think it might be a ranger, I couldn't find them with a 30 spot check) started off by hitting me a silenced arrow and the cleric hit my dog with a pouch made of pepperspray (takes a MINUTE to remove... no matter what, and completely incapacitates it). The cleric also seems to cast spontaneously... the archer has a +3 bow.

All this wouldn't be so bad if we could go outside of core and they let me optimize their characters a bit. Or if one of them was a wizard or cleric. But this type of fight is the norm with my dm, and I'm sick of being the only one who can do anything and getting hosed because of it.

Maybe I'm hyper sensitive after suffering under too many jerk DM's, but, well, this sounds like a bad DM.


Maybe see if you can have a chat with the DM and find out what his deal is?

[Bugworlds]

You could always buff them, give them some nice enchanted weapons, armors, and items. Giving them templaits to buff them up could help as well; a wizard lvl so-high-numbers-don't-matter casts something turning them gelatinous something usefull. It would be a pain to deal with and takes away free-will a little, but the option is there.

Alternatively you could just put weak encounters against them, but give them the pay out of higher level ones for a bit.
The first few sessions could be a tutorial, but don't let them know that. Just put them in situations where they have to learn various game features. A certain item needs to be made by the artificer, a certain style of combat needs to be done by the monk, a group effort needs to be put together to break the spell on something...

or kill them and tell them to be better.

[ericgrau]

First of all, it sounds from your post that you haven't actually seen them in action yet, so at least give them the benefit of the doubt until then. They might surprise you.
This plus as long as they're all equally bad it's not a problem at all. Lower CR encounters, job done. It's when you have a mix of strong and weak players that it becomes a headache because either end of the CR spectrum is either too easy or lethal to someone.