D&D (or Pathfinder) for two (With Published Adventures!)?

[AMFV]

Howdy folks!

I've been recently looking into duet or 2-Person gaming. Since the groups of people I play with rarely have schedules conducive to weekly games anymore. Despite this I have a large backlog of published adventures ranging from Pathfinder APs, to a wide-variety of other material. I'm currently considering creating a series of modified character classes to allow one character to solo published adventures. As such I'm trying to think out what exactly would be necessary.

So far I have the following:

More HP - Especially at the early stages of the game, where a lucky critical can kill you. (My current working solution is to give Con Mod x 10 + hit dice hit points at the start). I may also give a boost to hit dice in general.

Abilities need to stretch over more time - Casters typically have other people to fall back on, so they can use their spells more effectively if they are running on their own this would make that exceedingly difficult (I'll probably make it spells per encounter, or give them a recovery mechanism, I may also give Sorcerers and Wizards more potent familiars)

SoD and SoL effects are absolutely screwing - My current solution for this is to give each of the updated classes ways to reroll or otherwise ignore saves a few times per round/encounter, still working on the nitty-gritty of that.

Skills - Increasing skill points, and trying to think this one out.

I'd appreciate any assistance with this, obviously it'll change the tone of the game quite a bit, since now PCs and NPCs are vastly different, rather than fairly similar. Anyways, thought, input, ideas?

[ComaVision]

My suggestion:

Have the players make gestalt characters, except they get to roll the HD from both classes and add them together (or just take the max of both if you want).
Let the characters roll two initiatives for combat (so they both act twice per round).

Two characters, with the approximate ability of four. As far as SoD/SoL, if you're concerned about them shutting down the game then don't use them.

[AMFV]

My suggestion:

Have the players make gestalt characters, except they get to roll the HD from both classes and add them together (or just take the max of both if you want).
Let the characters roll two initiatives for combat (so they both act twice per round).

Two characters, with the approximate ability of four. As far as SoD/SoL, if you're concerned about them shutting down the game then don't use them.

I'm less fond of Gestalt, since it kind of pushes the characters towards sameness, rather than different, which is kind of the most significant merit in 3.5. I mean I could be persuaded to go that route, I'm just trying to avoid it if possible. I'd also rather avoid the "don't use them" solution, because that's a limiting solution, as far as my planning goes, I would rather figure out ways for the player to cope with that, than simply completely remove an entire element from the game. One basically requires tons of rewriting adventures and removes a bunch, the other adds something. I'd rather add something.

Also, as one other note, I mean two as in 1 player and 1 GM, so one total player.

[Psyren]

I'd actually second the gestalt advice myself. I mean, despite being able to perform both melee and skillmonkey roles, a Magus//Slayer is going to play a lot differently than an Oracle//Ninja or a uRogue//Alchemist, so I don't think the sameness argument holds merit.

[Bohandas]

IIRC 2 creatures of a given CR are equivalent to 1 creature of the next CR higher. From this we can geeralize that, theoretically, a single character 2 or 3 levels higher that the recommended level for an advanture can theoretically take the place of a normal 5 person party. I've never actually tried this myself however.

[critfumbles]

My advice is Pathfinder-specific.

In a one-player party, the biggest issues are action economy and the risk of failure, since one death ends the game. You want options that give the player more narrative control. Playing a higher-level character is not ideal since it trivializes some written content, and I am assuming gestalt is out of the question.

1. Give your player hero points or Mythic Adventures. Both variant rules give players more control over their characters. Mythic Adventures is complicated, but grants players unique abilities, bonus hit points, ability score increases, and improvements to their feat and spell selections. Playing a mythic character in a non-mythic Adventure Path might be an appropriate adjustment for one character. Hero points are simpler.

Consider increasing the rate at which your player gains hero points. He or she needs more.

2. Give your player bonus actions in a round. The dual initiative mythic monster special ability is a good method to implement this. Hero points and the base mythic system also allow players to act out of turn.

3. Give your player a cohort at the same level. One additional character improves your player's action economy, and can add another aspect to roleplaying; delving dungeons is lonely work. And even if he or she doesn't want to create or run it, you as a GM can. (Remember to never treat it as a GMPC.) Your player might need different NPC allies through their adventures. If you need inspiration or a pool of NPCs to draw from, consult the NPC Codex. This should have the added benefit of populating your world.

[BWR]

The way I've handled it is give the PCs a powerful henchman or DMPC (yes, they can work just fine) and made sure the PC is somewhat overleveled for the adventure in question. No need to go gestalt or mythic, or anything else like that. I haven't run anything that expects a group of lvl 20 folks yet, so some APs may not work with this approach.

[the_david]

Pathfinder does have plenty of options to boost the power level, you might want to check out Pathfinder Unchained for more options. You could try toning the encounters and loot down to 1/4 of what they were.

You can also find some 1 on 1 adventures. I recommend the One on One Adventure Compendium. It has a bunch of adventures for a rogue that can be linked together.

[AMFV]

I'd actually second the gestalt advice myself. I mean, despite being able to perform both melee and skillmonkey roles, a Magus//Slayer is going to play a lot differently than an Oracle//Ninja or a uRogue//Alchemist, so I don't think the sameness argument holds merit.

Well if it were your game then it would be your opinion regarding the merit of my complaints that would matter. Not being rude, bud, but frankly dismissing one of my core requests because you don't agree with the premise, isn't really productive, or useful, or valuable to the discussion. There a lot of other things that I dislike about the Gestalt system, it's kind of clunky, it's inelegant, if I wanted a clunky inelegant solution I'm sure that I could develop one.


IIRC 2 creatures of a given CR are equivalent to 1 creature of the next CR higher. From this we can geeralize that, theoretically, a single character 2 or 3 levels higher that the recommended level for an advanture can theoretically take the place of a normal 5 person party. I've never actually tried this myself however.

My experience has been that this is not necessarily the case, since the concerns of a single player aren't necessarily the same as those of an entire party. There's a strong risk of trivializing some encounters, while others retain their problematic nature. I think the goal would be to give your player certain abilities to mitigate certain things.


My advice is Pathfinder-specific.

In a one-player party, the biggest issues are action economy and the risk of failure, since one death ends the game. You want options that give the player more narrative control. Playing a higher-level character is not ideal since it trivializes some written content, and I am assuming gestalt is out of the question.

1. Give your player hero points or Mythic Adventures. Both variant rules give players more control over their characters. Mythic Adventures is complicated, but grants players unique abilities, bonus hit points, ability score increases, and improvements to their feat and spell selections. Playing a mythic character in a non-mythic Adventure Path might be an appropriate adjustment for one character. Hero points are simpler.


Mythic might be worth looking into, although that seems to be fairly fiddly and complex to me, my concern would be that it would be more work to incorporate that, then it would be to simply houserule or homebrew my own solutions. I will look into it though, since it fits conceptually with what I'm looking into.



Consider increasing the rate at which your player gains hero points. He or she needs more.

2. Give your player bonus actions in a round. The dual initiative mythic monster special ability is a good method to implement this. Hero points and the base mythic system also allow players to act out of turn.


Definitely a good suggestion, my only concern would be that the increase in the amount of actions would result in action paralysis and would make the rounds start to drag. Maybe if I incorporate some ways to give people different actions in combat.



3. Give your player a cohort at the same level. One additional character improves your player's action economy, and can add another aspect to roleplaying; delving dungeons is lonely work. And even if he or she doesn't want to create or run it, you as a GM can. (Remember to never treat it as a GMPC.) Your player might need different NPC allies through their adventures. If you need inspiration or a pool of NPCs to draw from, consult the NPC Codex. This should have the added benefit of populating your world.


The way I've handled it is give the PCs a powerful henchman or DMPC (yes, they can work just fine) and made sure the PC is somewhat overleveled for the adventure in question. No need to go gestalt or mythic, or anything else like that. I haven't run anything that expects a group of lvl 20 folks yet, so some APs may not work with this approach.

I'd rather not need Henchmen, although I'm not necessarily opposed to it, since having only one player results in increased load on the DM anyways, and trying to run a DMPC while also balancing encounters seems unduly complex.


Pathfinder does have plenty of options to boost the power level, you might want to check out Pathfinder Unchained for more options. You could try toning the encounters and loot down to 1/4 of what they were.

You can also find some 1 on 1 adventures. I recommend the One on One Adventure Compendium. It has a bunch of adventures for a rogue that can be linked together.

I've read the One on One Adventure Compendium, it tends to flow towards series of encounters without a lot of plot or fleshing out, which is somewhat problematic for me.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Definitely a good suggestion, my only concern would be that the increase in the amount of actions would result in action paralysis and would make the rounds start to drag. Maybe if I incorporate some ways to give people different actions in combat.
Getting an extra turn leads to action paralysis? My experience has been that the problem stems from too many options and not enough time, rather than vice versa. However you do it, dealing with action economy is the single most important adjustment to make for a one-person party. There's a reason that being outnumbered is a Bad Thing.

[AMFV]

Getting an extra turn leads to action paralysis? My experience has been that the problem stems from too many options and not enough time, rather than vice versa. However you do it, dealing with action economy is the single most important adjustment to make for a one-person party. There's a reason that being outnumbered is a Bad Thing.

I agree, my concern is that it would lead to the player feeling that they're repeating the same action twice (particularly in the case of martials), or burning through all of their resources (in the case of Casters), or else winding up stumped as to exactly what to do, if they're doing something that needs to be sustained. I'm not disputing that this is probably the most significant issue, I'm just concerned that fixing it would generate worse issues, unless one plans for that.

[Grod_The_Giant]

I agree, my concern is that it would lead to the player feeling that they're repeating the same action twice (particularly in the case of martials), or burning through all of their resources (in the case of Casters), or else winding up stumped as to exactly what to do, if they're doing something that needs to be sustained. I'm not disputing that this is probably the most significant issue, I'm just concerned that fixing it would generate worse issues, unless one plans for that.
Hmm.
The first doesn't seem like an issue with action economy so much as it does with certain classes-- a Fighter will repeat the same action pretty much every turn, regardless of whether he gets one turn a round or five. But that's a known thing-- I assume if a (non-new) player makes a class without access to some sort of special combat ability, that's what he meant to do. You could try adding in things like gestalt ("sameness" isn't so much of an issue if you only have one PC), Pathfinder's Stamina system (maybe? I'm not very familiar), welding maneuvers and/or invocations onto characters in a class-independent manner, or something similar if you're concerned.

The second could be an issue, though. Especially HP-- you might want to back-port something like 4e's Healing Surges to deal with all the damage that'll start to pile up on your poor solo adventurer. For spells and daily abilities... it depends on how much you want endurance to be a factor, but perhaps you could have options for a partial recharge after a short rest?

[Psyren]

Well if it were your game then it would be your opinion regarding the merit of my complaints that would matter. Not being rude, bud, but frankly dismissing one of my core requests because you don't agree with the premise, isn't really productive, or useful, or valuable to the discussion. There a lot of other things that I dislike about the Gestalt system, it's kind of clunky, it's inelegant, if I wanted a clunky inelegant solution I'm sure that I could develop one.

If you're truly ruling out gestalt, that may be a good provision to add to the opening post then to stop people who are trying to help you from wasting their time. Especially when you're literally asking for "thoughts, input and ideas."

And Protip: saying "not to be rude" doesn't stop your post from being rude. :smallannoyed:

So yeah, good luck and all that, I'll be taking my leave.