PDA

View Full Version : 3 PC Campaign



ArmorArmadillo
2007-03-01, 10:45 PM
So, I'm starting a campaign and, unfortunately, one of my four players had to withdraw. I don't want to scrap the whole thing, but I'm not really experienced at DMing and I'm not sure how to balance a campaign for 3 players rather than 4. (How do I determine EL? Party Strength? Balanced Encounters?)

Thanks for any help.

Nerd-o-rama
2007-03-01, 11:33 PM
I had the same problem when I started DMing my group. The route I went was to play a regular DMNPC that filled in the party's missing role (a Fighter, in this case.) It worked, since they're all basically mercenaries, Karl the Fighter is just another mercenary who works with them most of the time.

The key here, of course, is not to succumb to the temptation of putting "your" character in the spotlight all the time, or giving them uberkewl powers. Remember, your players are there to have fun and do cool stuff. Don't let the NPC do everything for them, like trivialize combat or boss them around/railroad them with their Superior DM Knowledge.

Black Swan
2007-03-01, 11:43 PM
Depends on what's missing. If it's a cleric, make healing from NPC's readily available, for a price. If it's an arcane caster...I dunno. Maybe focus on enemies which can be dealt with without magic. If it's a rogue, maybe send traps at them which can be worked around with a little thought. If it's a fighter, hey, no big deal. Casters can summon tanks easily enough, and the cleric is a tank with a little work.

As for the enemies, maybe reduce the difficulty a bit. CR is balanced against four characters, so maybe treat them as a party at 3/4 the level they're at with regards to calculating CR and work towards facing them with enemies they can reasonably deal with, depending on what's missing from the party.

I've never had a good experience with DMPC's as a player, so I don't use them when I DM and can't really give you any advice on that. Obviously I don't recommend it as I've never had a good experience with them as a player, but maybe it was just the DMs I played with. It's a possibility, but I'd suggest thinking of it as a last resort.

brian c
2007-03-02, 12:52 AM
Gestalt could be an option. 3 gestalt characters would face opponents probably a little higher than the CR for a 4 PC party, but at least then you don't have to worry about using an NPC in the party.

Behold_the_Void
2007-03-02, 01:17 AM
Depends on your class break-down but try using the Encounter Calculator (http://www.d20srd.org/encounterCalculator.htm), as well as being careful to pick monsters that don't exploit the party's weakness or to only do so with an allowance for an increased CR equivalent.

Quietus
2007-03-02, 01:22 AM
Ignore the lack of the fourth character, and send appropriate challenges anyway. They're PC's, if they are creative at all they'll find a win.

ArmorArmadillo
2007-03-02, 01:28 AM
Well, I don't want to be facing a TPK and then say they weren't "creative" enough.

Thanks all for the advice, the encounter calculator is a godsend, thanks a lot BtV.

Thomas
2007-03-02, 01:35 AM
I have three players at most. I've never had to change a thing. The game's already balanced just fine for three PCs.

Quietus
2007-03-02, 01:56 AM
I wouldn't worry about a TPK. I've run games for one, or two people and haven't had to significantly alter anything. Like I said, PC's are creative, and as Thomas said, it's balanced well enough for three PC's anyway.

The_Snark
2007-03-02, 02:07 AM
The encounter calculator's useful, but most things shouldn't require much of a change. Just make sure you take into account what they're missing.

-If they're missing a fighter-type, they have less endurance, because now the cleric has to spend spells on buffing up more frequently. Not really a problem at high levels. They also lack somebody who can chip away at the health of a magic-resistant opponent, so leaving things like Golems out is probably a good idea.

-If they're missing a rogue or similar, keep in mind that they have less skills available to them; they might not have anybody to sneak, they probably won't have a trapfinder, they may lack interaction skills if you're big on those. Not too much of a problem, especially since other classes can cover some of the skills; monks and rangers can sneak, wizards can substitute a Charm spell for social skills, et cetera.

-If they're missing an arcane caster, be careful. They've lost a lot of firepower, meaning they'll take down encounters more slowly. At low levels they won't notice the lack much; as they level up, the lack of somebody there to cast Glitterdust, Fireball, and Fly may start to hurt. And stay away from swarms.

-If they're missing a cleric or healer, they'll manage in a fight, but their endurance just went way, way down. Give them wands (if they can use them) and healing potions pretty frequently, and make sure you know that they'll probably be resting pretty often.

Roderick_BR
2007-03-02, 07:03 AM
3 PCs out of 4 are not too bad. If things gets too bad, you can put in a npc working for them. He'll just do whatever is asked, like healing, helping to flank an enemy, etc.
It's like a 4th PC that the group controls. Except he is still a npc. He needs to receive orders and instructions in-game, and can disagree with some ideas. A handy tool the DM can use sometimes (only sometimes)

Player 1: Let's invade the dragon's lair.
Player 2: We'll get his treasure and all his magic weapons.
NPC: A dragon? You ever faced a dragon before?
Player 3: Camon, are you afraid?
NPC: Well, I'm pretty interested in my well-being. You know what this dragon is like? Where he is, what he does? The color, at least?
Player 1: Umm...
NPC: You go ahead. I'll wait here.
Player 2: We should do some research first, I guess.

This is good to hold on groups that jump into fights without think.
And don't let him be a "deux-ex-machina", nor get information the group wouldn't normally have access to.

Krill
2007-03-02, 07:05 AM
The only thing I'd suggest is preparing further ahead in your campaign... 3 PCs will accomplish more in a session than 4 will. I'm sure there's some sort of mathematical relationship there.

Saph
2007-03-02, 07:38 AM
How do I determine EL? Party Strength? Balanced Encounters?

Quick-and-dirty rule: For a party with 3 PCs, reduce Encounter Level by 1. So, if they're level 4, send them against monsters of CR 3 or equivalent. You can use the Encounter Calculator if you want a more precise result, but it won't necessarily be any use (Encounter Levels are a bit vague anyway).

That's it, really. I wouldn't worry about being a player down. Games with 2-3 players can be much more fun than games with 4-5. The PCs move faster, less time's spent on arguing, the characters get roleplayed more, and every character is really important.

- Saph

Meat Shield
2007-03-02, 09:21 AM
I would also encourage you to remind your PCs that foreknowledge and caution are more important to small parties. Also, remind them that running away is always an option. And allow them to run away if they are clearly outmatched.

If you use a DMPC, I would let them make the tactical decisions for you with that character. That way you don't risk overshadowing the real PCs.

Galathir
2007-03-02, 11:28 AM
I don't think it will be that much of an issue. It will really help to have a balanced party, not a group of three rogues or three tanks. I once ran a strange campaign where players kept dropping out and new ones coming in. I had anywhere from two to five PC's at a time. I don't think you need to scrap your campaign idea. You can always nerf a few abilities on the monsters if you need to. Sometimes I would drop a few hit points for lower DC's for special attacks and such.

Encouraging the PC's to play tactically is important. When you have a small party, blindly rushing into every cave is sure to lead to disaster pretty quickly.

As some people mentioned before, a smaller party can be a lot of fun. Combat goes quicker, there is more party interaction and each character gets more of a chance to shine.

Fax Celestis
2007-03-02, 11:34 AM
3 PCs out of 4 are not too bad. If things gets too bad, you can put in a npc working for them. He'll just do whatever is asked, like healing, helping to flank an enemy, etc.
It's like a 4th PC that the group controls. Except he is still a npc. He needs to receive orders and instructions in-game, and can disagree with some ideas. A handy tool the DM can use sometimes (only sometimes)

Player 1: Let's invade the dragon's lair.
Player 2: We'll get his treasure and all his magic weapons.
NPC: A dragon? You ever faced a dragon before?
Player 3: Camon, are you afraid?
NPC: Well, I'm pretty interested in my well-being. You know what this dragon is like? Where he is, what he does? The color, at least?
Player 1: Umm...
NPC: You go ahead. I'll wait here.
Player 2: We should do some research first, I guess.

This is good to hold on groups that jump into fights without think.
And don't let him be a "deux-ex-machina", nor get information the group wouldn't normally have access to.

My DMPCs usually do the same style thing. I purposefully make them about two or three levels lower than the rest of the party, leveling them up at the same rate. This way, the players already have anything nifty that the DMPC is getting. The only thing that the DMPC gets that the party doesn't is "divine inspiration" when the party gets stuck.

I've even run DMPCs who simply ran and hid during combat. Gave the PCs a feeling of "We're protecting our friend that gives us helpful advice!"

Neek
2007-03-02, 12:02 PM
For a campaign I had, the group's only 3 PCs large. I did include with them a few NPC options to be teamed with; they chose Gaudí, the Paladin/loose-cannon (who in middle of combat once almost killed one of the players... oh, the fun it is to have a Tiefling in a party... but I digress on this aside and close these parentheses.)

A DMPC is good when you need deus ex machina solutions; there are times you need them: When you have a party so disjointed that never get anywhere, or they do nothing but talk about how they're going to get the objective without ever coming to a consensus. Great way to prod the plot along if they're not doing it themselves.

There are, however, a couple problems with DMPC. The deus ex machina solution can easily be abused and remove any plot-control from the characters. It can also lead to Mary Sue conditions, where the DMPC becomes a greater antagonist.

The smaller the party, the better you can analyze their strengths and weaknesses; this allows you to create more challenging situations that aren't team party killers. Encounters don't have to be mass slaughters, either; making things more challenging then doesn't revolve around "more orcs." Someone suggested looking for ECL - 1 CRs. This is a good place to start. Another is to simply look at their characters, see what they can and can't do. And go from there.

Olethros
2007-03-02, 12:58 PM
Ask the players if there worried about it. If they are, especially if they feel exposed, offer them a 4th character. I suggest making a character that you make to fit what they're missing. If the party is new to the game, it can be a way for them to see how other classes work, pass the character sheet around for each person to get a go at trying to use it in combat (they basically get to play 2 characters for the fight). Just make sure if the NPC is going to advance with the party, and be played with full pc creativity, that it gets a cut of the xp and treasure.

slapdash
2007-03-02, 01:08 PM
I was going to post about how the best campaign I was ever in only had three players, and how it allowed a lot of focus on story and character relationships and development...

Then I thought, 'oh, right, this is D&D'. :smallwink: If you go the route of the DMPC, make sure they aren't obnoxious. I've been in a couple games where the DM basically paraded his awesome NPCs around...and we watched.

rob
2007-03-02, 02:03 PM
You're gonna have to try a few encounters to get the feel of ANY party... No different from a party of 3 to a party of 2.
Throw them encounters with enough of a way out that they can do something about it if they're getting killed. Give 'em enough plot flexibility that they can avoid situations their party isn't ready for.

IF you've got some more experienced players, I like to give them a group of subordinates from whomever they're working for. Or, if they're high enough level, give 'em all leadership for free. Make it their responsibility to work with the added NPCs.

PnP Fan
2007-03-02, 02:40 PM
Lot's of good ideas here already.
For the severely inexperienced GM I would suggest just toning down your encounters a bit, and don't take advantage of their weakness. You might also offer encounters that have alternate ways out, something that plays to their strengths. That way you don't have to worry about a TPK accidentally ruining everyone's good time. Also, if you judged poorly when assembling an encounter, fudge the dice, for cryin' out loud. No sense in making the Players pay if you make a mistake.
I would avoid the DMNPC, just because its one more thing you've got to keep track of during combat.
If your group has been together for awhile, and relatively low level, the gestalt option from UA can work well, for awhile at least. But if you aren't familiar with the core game, it can make a paperwork nightmare. Especially if you've got a mathematically unskilled person in your group.

AaronH
2007-03-02, 07:00 PM
You know, I used to play with a group that started off with 3 players. Our first campaign we just played it like normal, and things worked out fine. I mean sure, we ran away a bit more, and of course, we were a little bit higher level then we were supposed to be (more challanging encounters for fewer players = more XP per player) and everything worked out fine.

Our second campaign was the Against the Giants adventure path. This time aronud we each had 2 characters (for a totall of six characers) which wound up being tons of fun. If you run it right it can be tons of fun with lots to keep the players constantly invovled. Oh and if a character dies (in a non rezzable way....) it isn't a huge loss....

ArmorArmadillo
2007-03-03, 01:29 AM
Hmm...thanks a lot for the advice. I'll have plenty of stuff to go with.
I'm starting the players at level 2 (as opposed to one) and starting with the same set of encounters as before. I'm throwing in some intentionally overpowering ones (like EL 5 or so) to remind them that it's okay to run.

I think this should work.

Thoughtbot360
2007-03-04, 09:04 PM
set it at the apporiate CR, and give the monsters crappy gear. Work your way up (perhaps in mid-session, if your worried that players are getting too bored. You should practice thinking on your feet whenever you get the chance anyway.) If your really nervous, give the players a few adventures that involve a clan of hunter-gather monsters who are skilled at boneworking at have most their weapon made of bone or poorly furnished wood (-2 to attack and damage rolls vs. armored opponents) unless one of them loots a player's body for a better weapon. You can also have a few iron-age weapons pillaged from humans in a raid that occured before the adventure, so the tribe's best warriors are better armed and more of a challenge.

Heck, an idea for a low-level adventure could revolve around a group of impoverished goblins that have been robbed the local blacksmith of his wares because they prize human weapons and tools. The blacksmith hires a the PCs to steal his wares back from the goblins. He is a skilled blacksmith around these parts and offers to forge each of the members a masterwork tool or weapon in exchange for either getting the stolen goods back. He might pay a bonus if the party gets ALL the iron tools and weapons back, but!-if they break/leave behind/keep too many to themselves, he will have lost so much business that he refuses to even give them the masterwork items.

Another thing to do as you try to guess what the party can handle is have enemies ambush the players. In my very first game (3rd level chars) the DM had goblins jumping from trees. It left my 14-con Sorcerer running for cover. The only problem is when a goblin botches, he tends to turn his dramatic attack from the air into a hilariously ironic suicide. GM: After laughing hysterically, its the sorcerer's turn. (What? its funny. If you doubt my claims, watch this movie (http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/333756)