What can solo APs?

[Tanuki Tales]

Just out of curiousity, what class set ups could solo an average Adventure Path?

I personally feel like you'd at least need to gestalt and even that wouldn't be enough because of the lost action economy.

[zlefin]

while i've never tested myself; higher op gestalts should generally be able to pull that off, even well before the ultracheesy points. even without gestalt it should be possible for a fair number of builds, depending on level of cheese allowed and other rules.

I assume you also mean doing them at the standard level for the AP; and not letting the person use the extra XP from doing it solo to level faster, or to accumulate the treasure that was meant for a full party, as either of those make things alot simpler.

[MeimuHakurei]

Druids and Sorcerers have very little need in terms of gear to function and have a wide assortment of spells to solve a majority of problems. Similarly, a Summoner's minionmancy (take Master Summoner) allows them to make up the lost action economy. Wizards and Clerics likewise have a massively versatile spell list, but you need more thought in what spells you need - Wizards in particular must be careful about their spellbook(-s). Similar to the other fullcasters, Witches, Oracles, Shamans and Arcanists can also get it done if you manage their spell lists properly.

[Acanous]

Summoners have a pretty easy time, especially with a whole party worth of treasure and XP.

Standard reply of any T1 caster being able to do it theoretically, and Clerics doing it in practice.

Are NPCs recruitable? If so you could do it with most of the melee classes that have spells, like bloodrager, Paladin, Ranger. For ranger actually if the player knows the monsters/terrain types in the AP he’d have a much more fair time of it.

[Elkad]

If they get all the xp and loot? Anything tier3 should be able to manage it. Hardest part will be getting through the first couple encounters. After that you'll be overleveled and likely overequipped.

Of course you need to build for it. Besides regular optimization, you'll specifically want lots of rerolls for your inevitable failure on a SoD. And probably a minion of some sort to help watch your back (including while you sleep).

Tier4s would eventually meet a problem they couldn't solve. But with lots of cash they can probably buy a solution. So be prepared to run away.

Tier5/6? They'll either wash out at mid-level, or do something to jump a couple tiers (heavy UMD use probably).


I look at it like playing CRPGs that expect you to have party with a single character. Something I do all the time. You just have to be slow and cautious and never take chances. Run away a lot. Do all the side quests for more XP. Exploit the 15-minute adventuring day. Mash the "reroll stats" button until you get something near straight-18s. Etc.

[Rynjin]

Clerics, Druids, and some of the 6 casters.

[Gnaeus]

I think it will be harder than suggested. I’ve seen some fights in the harder paths that were difficult for a mid op party. I’m not saying it’s impossible with sufficient cheese. I feel like my RotRL Sorcerer could probably have soloed the runeforge part. Maybe others. But I think I’d have died at low levels. And Iron Gods is worse.

Even a high op gestalt I think would need a little luck. Rerolls would help. But even at a 1in400 chance I think it would be hard to avoid making saves altogether.

[Mike Miller]

I hope magicalmagicman chimes in with his artificer run

[Jack_Simth]

Just out of curiousity, what class set ups could solo an average Adventure Path?

I personally feel like you'd at least need to gestalt and even that wouldn't be enough because of the lost action economy.

Depends.

Are you starting at level 1?
What variants are permitted / in use (e.g., gestalt, variant multiclassing)?
Are the Monsters As PCs (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/bestiary/monstersAsPCs.html) rules in play?
There's a lot of things where interactions between A and B are poorly defined (e.g., a Spirit Guide (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/oracle/archetypes/paizo-oracle-archetypes/spirit-guide/) Oracle (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/oracle/) taking the Arcane Enlightenment hex from the Lore Spirit (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/hybrid-classes/shaman/spirits/lore/) has three basic interaction options: 'doesn't work', 'can prepare Sor/Wiz spells in Oracle slots', and 'they're treated as spirit spells' with a side question of 'replaceable at spell preparation or at level up only?'). Do we assume these mostly go the way the player wants them?
What do you consider an "average" adventure path?
How "smart" does the DM play the opponents?
... and so on.

I mean, a Gestalt Oracle//Summoner using the feat chain to get a Druid's Animal Companion and a Figment familiar, taking Spirit Guide and Dual-Cursed (not 100% compatible - one trades out the mystery skills, the other loses them) and snagging choice arcane spells, and going Leadership (at 7th) could flood the battlefield for most of an adventure path with disposable minions while sitting at the back and hiding. As noted, XP would quickly build up (it's normally split four ways...) and while the first few sections would be hard, it would get easy quickly - because in D&D and Pathfinder, 8+8=10 when it comes to Encounter Levels and it works similarly with party composition, too.

[vasilidor]

arcanist with the quick study discovery, they become the quantum spell caster with one round of study. in a test run I took an arcanist trained in stealth (found a way to make it a class skill, along with perception) and solo'd everything until I ran into something that was 3CR higher than my level, could have run, should have run, did not.

[Calthropstu]

If it's pathfinder, you could advance the player into mythic while running the nonmythic ap. That would go a LONG way towards fixing the power gap.
Apart from that, minionmancy builds should do it just fine, whether from undead creation, domination of enemy minions or summoning.

[Alcore]

Most early APs were built on the assumption of low point heroes and i find a high point build paladin capable of handling most fights even when outnumbered by 'stronger' encounters. As with all solo games; combat tends to drag on.


It's not even just the paladin. When you reach the 40-60 point build mark some wizards can wade into melee with proper precautions. Many newer APs have a higher difficulty stemming from developers noting how OP some gamers ran.

[MeimuHakurei]

Maybe we should assume the soloing characters would be PFS legal - that is, no evil alignments, 20 PB, no crafting feats with replacements as shown in the document. Pretty sure most caster classes will still do fine.

[Eldariel]

Maybe we should assume the soloing characters would be PFS legal - that is, no evil alignments, 20 PB, no crafting feats with replacements as shown in the document. Pretty sure most caster classes will still do fine.

Aye, casters generally don't care about much beyond their casting stat and Dex. You can even afford good Con with 20pb. I don't see evil alignments as a particularly relevant restriction; it's a fluff limitation in PFS more than anything. Removing Craft-feats feels a bit excessive though; they don't work in PFS since PFS isn't a real game but a bunch of modules with no structured downtime or such in-between. But yes, PFS point buy and bans/restrictions are probably fine though you could use the cheese grinder limitations too to remove the supereasy options.

Either way, Stealth is good and anyone can and should do it while soloing (class skill is just +3, equivalent of skill focus, so it doesn't really matter that much), minionmancy is great and casters get a rather early start to it (Druid and Summoner on level 1, Wizard on level 3 with Undead-heavy modules, Clerics on level 5, Wizards on level 7 otherwise) so that's probably the big thing. The less characters you control the more minions you want. Lower levels are challenging and the best option is probably a level 1 minion class like the Druid, but you can make any full caster work with sufficient effort in all likelihood. Frankly, all the APs are pretty low key power-wise; not one of them can handle T1 as written. You have to really jumpstart NPC builds, efficiency and choices to accomplish that.

[Krazzman]

We did a fun game through Hells Vengeance with a Dhampir (with some more Race Points) Cleric of Zon-Kuthon//Investigator//Tyrant(Antipaladin). Do you know how many fights/situations are invalidated by access to flight at level 1? It's lots.

That said the combats are not the problem, at least not for the first few levels. But the political stuff and some other things lead to an enjoyable adventure. Tristalt might be overkill though. I assume a Cleric//Summoner Gestalt would be enough.

[MeimuHakurei]

Aye, casters generally don't care about much beyond their casting stat and Dex. You can even afford good Con with 20pb. I don't see evil alignments as a particularly relevant restriction; it's a fluff limitation in PFS more than anything. Removing Craft-feats feels a bit excessive though; they don't work in PFS since PFS isn't a real game but a bunch of modules with no structured downtime or such in-between. But yes, PFS point buy and bans/restrictions are probably fine though you could use the cheese grinder limitations too to remove the supereasy options.

Either way, Stealth is good and anyone can and should do it while soloing (class skill is just +3, equivalent of skill focus, so it doesn't really matter that much), minionmancy is great and casters get a rather early start to it (Druid and Summoner on level 1, Wizard on level 3 with Undead-heavy modules, Clerics on level 5, Wizards on level 7 otherwise) so that's probably the big thing. The less characters you control the more minions you want. Lower levels are challenging and the best option is probably a level 1 minion class like the Druid, but you can make any full caster work with sufficient effort in all likelihood. Frankly, all the APs are pretty low key power-wise; not one of them can handle T1 as written. You have to really jumpstart NPC builds, efficiency and choices to accomplish that.

The evil restriction does matter for casters quite a bit - it basically prevents them from using Evil descriptor spells, particularly Animate Dead and Infernal Healing.

[Florian]

My money's on either Warpriest or Paladin.

[Mystral]

Just out of curiousity, what class set ups could solo an average Adventure Path?

I personally feel like you'd at least need to gestalt and even that wouldn't be enough because of the lost action economy.

Bards could propably solo adventure paths best on the basis of their pure versatility. Other than that, it depends on the AP. Certainly wizards and sorcerers have a chance, but they'd struggle in the low levels, while at high levels, fighters become useless. And if the goal of the adventure is to recover an artifact from an evil wizard or something like that, a solo rogue might actually have an easier time than a complete party. The same rogue would be useless if the adventure required him to cleanse a crypt from the undead.

That said, any class could propably solo an adventure. They'd just have to be a few levels higher than reccomended and be given some sort of magical tool to overcome challenges that require a certain ability.

[Kurald Galain]

The evil restriction does matter for casters quite a bit - it basically prevents them from using Evil descriptor spells, particularly Animate Dead and Infernal Healing.

It doesn't, actually. Casting the occasional evil spell doesn't make your character evil aligned. IH is probably the most common healing option in PFS.

[Jack_Simth]

The evil restriction does matter for casters quite a bit - it basically prevents them from using Evil descriptor spells, particularly Animate Dead and Infernal Healing.
Arcane casters and Oracles can cast spells regardless of alignment; Neutral Divine casters can still use Evil spells, provided the deity is also nongood. You may need to worry about later alignment shift for using such things, but you can still cast them.

[Psyren]

Pre-nerf Summoner would be my first guess. Otherwise a really well-built Inquisitor, Medium, Druid or Witch.

[Efrate]

A harbinger might be alright as well past the first few levels. Any initiator prolly but harbinger is the one I have the most experience with. Classed npcs are pretty awful in aps. Get flight, senses, and cover your big weaknesses and as long as you and/Or your minions have good dpr and you get some rerolls or such for SoD, you should be fine.

[RoboEmperor]

Early Levels: Summoners.
Early Mid to High Levels: Out of combat minionmancers. Be it necromancers, planar binders, construct masters, charm masters, etc.

I actually solo'd adventure modules with characters. Here are some on the top of my head.
Cleric with Creation Domain. Conjure Ice Beast that lasts 3 rounds doing 1d6 cold damage a round in a 10ft AoE destroys all encounters. After getting solo XP your high level shenanigans like DMM:Persist come online and you just steamroll from there.
Sorcerer with Mount and Power Word Pain. Take 20 to hit DC 25 Handle Animal to make your 2hrs/level mount act as meatshields while you Power Word Pain everyone to death. Often I jump on a horse and withdraw out of there and come back once the Power Word Pain wears off. Once she hit level 6 her out of combat minionmancy came online and she steamrolled from there.
Any Spellcaster with access to Hirelings - Use your starting wealth to hire 20 warrirors and clear the dungeon by yourself, receiving solo XP and then proceed to steamroll every encounter with your overleveled spells.

Just a FYI, you are 4 levels higher than a normal party if you solo before your xp gain slows down to 13 encounters to level up.

These were just joke adventures though, didn't actually go through the entire 20 levels because once you hit that steamroll number there's no challenge.

[Gnaeus]

Aside from the fact that those require 3.5 content, those last 2 especially seem massively dubious to me. I can’t imagine most DMs letting a 4 man party hire 20 retainers for a level 1 adventure and suck exp off them. As far as I am concerned, these responses are as relevant as “I don’t worry about the saves because I just tell the DM I roll all 20s.” Yes, you can win almost any game if you cheat massively. If you aren’t actually going to be engaging the encounters and defeating them like a party would, you aren’t defeating the AP

[RoboEmperor]

Aside from the fact that those require 3.5 content, those last 2 especially seem massively dubious to me. I can’t imagine most DMs letting a 4 man party hire 20 retainers for a level 1 adventure and suck exp off them. As far as I am concerned, these responses are as relevant as “I don’t worry about the saves because I just tell the DM I roll all 20s.” Yes, you can win almost any game if you cheat massively. If you aren’t actually going to be engaging the encounters and defeating them like a party would, you aren’t defeating the AP

Pathfinder tag is always invisible to me @_@.

My bad carry on.

And yes the hireling thing is a blatant abuse of rules.

[Gnaeus]

Aren’t the APs Pathfinder products?

I’m not even sure how they would work in game with a lenient GM. So goblins attack the town and you run to market and hire 20 soldiers? I assume they weren’t hired BEFORE anyone knew goblins would attack.

So you have mount, you convinced the DM that you can make it attack. We fought like 30 goblins that day. You could PWP what, 3 or 4? While casting multiple mounts? You going to rest while the town is under attack? That seems like a hard fail. Can’t they just attack you with ranged weapons when you close to 30 to cast?

Other than being 3.5, whenever combat begins you start casting a full round spell and hope no goblins throw fire at you? It seems like if you get hit and fail a concentration check you will be mobbed and killed.

[RoboEmperor]

Aren’t the APs Pathfinder products?

I’m not even sure how they would work in game with a lenient GM. So goblins attack the town and you run to market and hire 20 soldiers? I assume they weren’t hired BEFORE anyone knew goblins would attack.

So you have mount, you convinced the DM that you can make it attack. We fought like 30 goblins that day. You could PWP what, 3 or 4? While casting multiple mounts? You going to rest while the town is under attack? That seems like a hard fail. Can’t they just attack you with ranged weapons when you close to 30 to cast?

Other than being 3.5, whenever combat begins you start casting a full round spell and hope no goblins throw fire at you? It seems like if you get hit and fail a concentration check you will be mobbed and killed.

The cleric and sorcerer were in the module Age of Wyrms where the adventure took place in a non-time-constrained dungeon that I could adventure at my leisure so i did in fact Nova. Cleric only lasted 1 encounter a day, the sorcerer 2. Because nothing outruns the horse the sorcerer could just adventure until she couldn't and just bail out of there, but the cleric actually failed on his first time through because of a surprise Save-or-Die encounter.

I did the hireling thing on the gates of slaughtergarde where my character just hired 20 warriors to help her clear out the dungeon. She did nothing. Didn't even cast a single spell. The entire adventure was me just flanking, tripping, and aid another-ing all the hobgoblins with my warriors and then resting up to heal all of them.

When the title said AP I thought it meant a level 1-20 adventure path like age of wyrms, savage tide, shackled city, etc.

These were joke solo adventures me and my DM did just for the lulz because all of our other members were busy for a month.

My horse sorcerer is actually in a real game right now and she is super helpful, flanking all of the mundanes, aid another-ing all the mundanes, and being meat shields to prevent the zombies from reaching our spellcasters.

[Calthropstu]

Aren’t the APs Pathfinder products?

I’m not even sure how they would work in game with a lenient GM. So goblins attack the town and you run to market and hire 20 soldiers? I assume they weren’t hired BEFORE anyone knew goblins would attack.

So you have mount, you convinced the DM that you can make it attack. We fought like 30 goblins that day. You could PWP what, 3 or 4? While casting multiple mounts? You going to rest while the town is under attack? That seems like a hard fail. Can’t they just attack you with ranged weapons when you close to 30 to cast?

Other than being 3.5, whenever combat begins you start casting a full round spell and hope no goblins throw fire at you? It seems like if you get hit and fail a concentration check you will be mobbed and killed.

I agree. Not only is it gross rules abuse, it's also highly suspect for most APs, especially the pf ones. Even 3.5 it gets pretty suspect.

[Psyren]

Handle Animal is a move action for sorcerers isn't it? So taking 20 would take 10 rounds

[Troacctid]

Aren’t the APs Pathfinder products?
There are 3.5 adventure paths too. Greyhawk, Eberron, and Forgotten Realms each had one (they weren't branded as "Adventure Paths" but still). Shackled City, Age of Worms, and Savage Tide appeared in Dungeon magazine. And the first couple Pathfinder APs were written for 3.5 rules.

[RoboEmperor]

Handle Animal is a move action for sorcerers isn't it? So taking 20 would take 10 rounds

I don't know about PF but in 3.5 pushing an animal is a full-round action so it will take 2minutes. You can push it to do any trick, and the trick I'm pushing it to do is Defend except it aids another rather than attacking. DC is 25. 2 ranks + 16 charisma and you can hit it at level 1. This trick doesn't require constant handle animal checks so the horse will forever defend the mundane I assigned it to until its duration is up.

If I want to make it do anything else though you're right, it will take 10 rounds, and will need to be re-pushed into defending afterwards which takes 20 rounds.

[Gnaeus]

Or look at skull and shackles. As I remember, any familiar or companion gets murdered when you are press ganged, then the pirates start putting you through waves of skill challenges and shoot at you if you try to cast. Nothing a horse would help with, nothing Ice beasts would help with, and all your NPC hiring money is taken.

[RoboEmperor]

Or look at skull and shackles. As I remember, any familiar or companion gets murdered when you are press ganged, then the pirates start putting you through waves of skill challenges and shoot at you if you try to cast. Nothing a horse would help with, nothing Ice beasts would help with, and all your NPC hiring money is taken.

I find your incredibly defensive stance puzzling. D&D is not meant for solo adventurers which is why a character that can solo APs is are going to be out of whack in one way or another. I even openly said what I did was rule abuse and was used in a non-real game.

Mount is a spell so I can have as many horses as I have spell slots for, and at a -2 to hit they can kill CR1 stuff. Eventually. Even without PWP.

[Alcore]

Aren’t the APs Pathfinder products?

I’m not even sure how they would work in game with a lenient GM. So goblins attack the town and you run to market and hire 20 soldiers? I assume they weren’t hired BEFORE anyone knew goblins would attack.
Oh it gets worse.

The AP kingmaker suggests at least a one year time skip. Add in Ultimate Campaign which contains downtime rules and you'll have a PC spending 7 days out of a month ruling for a year. If i recall correctly a month in Golarion is three weeks of ten days which leaves fourteen days.

168 days of earning money and hiring teams. So you can start book 2 with a wagon or two. A team of retainers for anything basic and teams of elite soldiers (each of which is 5 men and 3rd level) to handle things a 4th level party must deal with. Did i forget to mention the 'teams' of wizards and clerics?

[Gnaeus]

I find your incredibly defensive stance puzzling. D&D is not meant for solo adventurers which is why a character that can solo APs is are going to be out of whack in one way or another. I even openly said what I did was rule abuse and was used in a non-real game.

Mount is a spell so I can have as many horses as I have spell slots for, and at a -2 to hit they can kill CR1 stuff. Eventually. Even without PWP.

Sure they can. But you didn’t command them to attack. They are ordered to defend you. They aren’t going to roam around killing enemies. Even under a very generous interpretation of horse intelligence they will only start engaging ranged attackers after the crossbow bolts start flying. Assuming that the DM doesn’t require additional checks for the horses to willingly approach fire, or undead, or predators.

I am defensive because I think you are cheating at the challenge, and honestly I think that most of the claims in this thread are bogus. Something like a summoner or an aegis might be able to solo an AP. But I think they would need a ton of luck, not least of which is picking the right AP, because I think some they will just fail outright. Most of the tier 1 casters I would expect to die at level 1 or 2. I think the best chance for a non elevated character would be something from ToB/PoW, because they get more daily counters than casters do. But even then, you are limited to 1 counter per round and subject to most normal attacks.

I’m not 100% sure that the gestalt of all DSP classes would win S&S or RotRL. I mean he probably would, but even that monster isn’t immune to saves or crits at level 1. Sure, at 5 he’s dominant and at 10 unbeatable but there are a lot of encounters before you get there, and I don’t think hiring 20 warriors is a fair attempt at the challenge.

[Dr_Dinosaur]

Paladin 3/Untouchable Destined Bloodrager could be fun for this. Going to struggle due to not being a god/caster but very flavorful as a “Protagonist” build. If it’s an AP where we can wait until 8th level before getting SR, an Oracle dip for Sidestep Secret or Nature’s Whispers lets us dump Dex entirely. Dual-cursed even gets us more of that vital rerolling we’ll need.

A Paladin/Bloodrager gestalt with said Oracle dip and an archetype for each that trades casting would be even better. If we’re talking 3pp, Knight Disciple (PoW) and Dirt-Spattered/Blind Faith (Spheres) are both attractive Paladin-side

[RoboEmperor]

Sure they can. But you didn’t command them to attack. They are ordered to defend you. They aren’t going to roam around killing enemies. Even under a very generous interpretation of horse intelligence they will only start engaging ranged attackers after the crossbow bolts start flying. Assuming that the DM doesn’t require additional checks for the horses to willingly approach fire, or undead, or predators.

I never said they went roaming around killing enemies.

They're summoned creatures, and they know it, so they don't care about death.


I am defensive because I think you are cheating at the challenge, and honestly I think that most of the claims in this thread are bogus. Something like a summoner or an aegis might be able to solo an AP. But I think they would need a ton of luck, not least of which is picking the right AP, because I think some they will just fail outright. Most of the tier 1 casters I would expect to die at level 1 or 2. I think the best chance for a non elevated character would be something from ToB/PoW, because they get more daily counters than casters do. But even then, you are limited to 1 counter per round and subject to most normal attacks.

I'm not cheating. It's not my fault warriors cost 3 SILVER pieces a day.

I was gonna say "In any case there are a metric **** ton of level 1 shenanigans casters can pull on the TO level so I would disagree with your claim that most tier 1 casters would die at level 1 or 2." but... I remembered this is Pathfinder so I'm probably wrong XD. Pretty sure all early entry/access shenanigans fail in pathfinder.

[Jack_Simth]

Regarding overleveling... Pathfinder doesn't do XP scaling by CR, so this is easier...

If you're soloing...

When the AP expects a 4-person party to hit level 2 (1300 xp on Fast), you're most the way through 3rd (5,200 xp on Fast), 1 level ahead.
When the AP expects a 4-person party to hit level 3 (3,300 xp on Fast), you're most the way through 5th (13,200 xp on Fast), 2 levels ahead.
When the AP expects a 4-person party to hit level 4 (6,000 xp on Fast), you've been 7th for a little while (24,000 xp), 3 levels ahead.
When the AP expects a 4-person party to hit level 5 (10,000 xp on Fast), you've deep into 8th (40,000 xp on Fast), still 3 levels ahead.
When the AP expects a 4-person party to hit level 6 (15,000), you're halfway through 9th (60,000), still 3 levels ahead.
When the AP expects a 4-person party to hit level 7 (23k), you're at 92k (halfway through 10th), still at +3 levels.
Later...
8th (34k) -> 11th (136k), +3
9th (50k) -> 12th (200k), +3
10th (71k) -> 13th (284k), +3
Skipping...
15th (425k) -> 19th (1,700k), +4 (finally! This is the first level where this happens at the expected level point)
16th (600k) -> 20th (2,400k), +4


So yeah. You hit +3 levels where the AP expects you to be 4th level, then you stay there for quite some time. On the plus side, this may mean you get to actually use a capstone feature in an adventure path (most of them end at 15th-17th).

[Krazzman]

I am defensive because I think you are cheating at the challenge, and honestly I think that most of the claims in this thread are bogus.

Running both a personal Solo Campaign (P6, Gestalt Barb//Inquisitor) and having DMed Hells Vengeance (Book 1-3, Tristalt Tyrant//Investigator//Cleric) I know that it can be done. It might be a bit "cheating" to use Gestalt rules and give the player more than assumed Point Buy... since I believe a well built Anti-Paladin(Tyrant) could Solo book 1 of Hells Vengeance. For the first 2 books my player just passive-ly was cleric/Investigator


Regarding overleveling... Pathfinder doesn't do XP scaling by CR, so this is easier...

If you're soloing...

When the AP expects a 4-person party to hit level 2 (1300 xp on Fast), you're most the way through 3rd (5,200 xp on Fast), 1 level ahead.
When the AP expects a 4-person party to hit level 3 (3,300 xp on Fast), you're most the way through 5th (13,200 xp on Fast), 2 levels ahead.
When the AP expects a 4-person party to hit level 4 (6,000 xp on Fast), you've been 7th for a little while (24,000 xp), 3 levels ahead.
When the AP expects a 4-person party to hit level 5 (10,000 xp on Fast), you've deep into 8th (40,000 xp on Fast), still 3 levels ahead.
When the AP expects a 4-person party to hit level 6 (15,000), you're halfway through 9th (60,000), still 3 levels ahead.
When the AP expects a 4-person party to hit level 7 (23k), you're at 92k (halfway through 10th), still at +3 levels.
Later...
8th (34k) -> 11th (136k), +3
9th (50k) -> 12th (200k), +3
10th (71k) -> 13th (284k), +3
Skipping...
15th (425k) -> 19th (1,700k), +4 (finally! This is the first level where this happens at the expected level point)
16th (600k) -> 20th (2,400k), +4


So yeah. You hit +3 levels where the AP expects you to be 4th level, then you stay there for quite some time. On the plus side, this may mean you get to actually use a capstone feature in an adventure path (most of them end at 15th-17th).

Nice to know. Thanks for taking the time to calculate this. We ran with "You get an extra level up after book 1, 2 and 3" to not overlevel but also get a bit of an edge.

[Gnaeus]

Running both a personal Solo Campaign (P6, Gestalt Barb//Inquisitor) and having DMed Hells Vengeance (Book 1-3, Tristalt Tyrant//Investigator//Cleric) I know that it can be done. It might be a bit "cheating" to use Gestalt rules and give the player more than assumed Point Buy... since I believe a well built Anti-Paladin(Tyrant) could Solo book 1 of Hells Vengeance. For the first 2 books my player just passive-ly was cleric/Investigator.

Now, see, I believe that. A high Pb high op tristalt? With a skillmonkey, a martial and a T1 caster who can heal? Yeah. It’s more the “just take a (T1 class)” that I don’t believe so much, at least under conditions that resemble what a normal Party would be expected to deal with. I also believe that many well built martials could solo the first acts of some paths (with luck, it would also be plausible for the same tyrant to fail a save or eat an unlucky crit at 1 and die. Level 1 combat is swingy and there’s no team to save you from hostile dice) just as I believe that most T1s could solo the last halves.


I never said they went roaming around killing enemies.

They're summoned creatures, and they know it, so they don't care about death.

😂. A horse doesn’t even know what a summoned creature is. It has an Int of 2. It serves you as a mount, willingly and well. It can do anything a non combat trained horse can do. It sees a snake? Make a handle animal check. Entering a combat full of blood and loud noise? That’s a check. Approaching scary stuff is an entirely different trick (you have to have the attack trick twice).

[RoboEmperor]

😂. A horse doesn’t even know what a summoned creature is. It has an Int of 2. It serves you as a mount, willingly and well. It can do anything a non combat trained horse can do. It sees a snake? Make a handle animal check. Entering a combat full of blood and loud noise? That’s a check. Approaching scary stuff is an entirely different trick (you have to have the attack trick twice).



Summoned Creature
Dire rat
Eagle (animal)
Monkey (animal)
Octopus1 (animal)
Owl (animal)
Porpoise1 (animal)
Snake, Small viper (animal)
Wolf (animal)


Size/Type: Small Animal
Hit Dice: 1d8+1 (5 hp)
Initiative: +2
Speed: 10 ft. (2 squares), fly 80 ft. (average)
Armor Class: 14 (+1 size, +2 Dex, +1 natural), touch 13, flat-footed 12
Base Attack/Grapple: +0/-4
Attack: Talons +3 melee (1d4)
Full Attack: 2 talons +3 melee (1d4) and bite -2 melee (1d4)
Space/Reach: 5 ft./5 ft.
Special Attacks: —
Special Qualities: Low-light vision
Saves: Fort +3, Ref +4, Will +2
Abilities: Str 10, Dex 15, Con 12, Int 2, Wis 14, Cha 6
Skills: Listen +4, Spot +16
Feats: Alertness, Weapon FinesseB
Environment: Temperate mountains
Organization: Solitary or pair
Challenge Rating: ½
Advancement: 2-3 HD (Medium)
Level Adjustment: —


A nonhazardous task requires only half the indicated payment, while an especially hazardous task might require a greater gift. Few if any creatures will accept a task that seems suicidal (remember, a called creature actually dies when it is killed, unlike a summoned creature). However, if the task is strongly aligned with the creature’s ethos, it may halve or even waive the payment.

So yes even animals know they are summoned and do suicidal things because they know they are summoned. In any case you seem like the type of person who is overly hostile, dismissive, condescending, and hates something for a random arbitrary reason and tries to rule lawyer and pervert RAW into banning the thing you arbitrarily hate without actually saying you're banning it even though your knowledge of the game is limited so I will be ending our conversation here. I do not converse with people who use condescending emojis when they clearly have no idea what they are talking about.

Good day.

[Psyren]

I don't have a dog in this fight one way or the other, but the Lesser Planar Ally quote shows that Called creatures know what they're getting into - not summoned animals, and certainly not the subject of the Mount spell.

On a tangentially related note, Handle Animal is really vaguely written. That Defend command could be used to justify anything from Aid Another to attacking someone who looks at you funny (including aberrations and undead) to bodily carrying you away from danger.

[RoboEmperor]

I don't have a dog in this fight one way or the other, but the Lesser Planar Ally quote shows that Called creatures know what they're getting into - not summoned animals, and certainly not the subject of the Mount spell.

The logic is if Called creatures don't do suicidal things because they're not summoned, then Summoned creatures do suicidal things because they are summoned. Summon nature's ally (or any summoning spell for that matter) completely falls apart if the summoned creature does not know it cannot die.


On a tangentially related note, Handle Animal is really vaguely written. That Defend command could be used to justify anything from Aid Another to attacking someone who looks at you funny (including aberrations and undead) to bodily carrying you away from danger.

It is vaguely written on purpose, so the trainer can make the animal do what he wants. "Possible tricks (and their associated DCs) include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following." so you train the animal to defend the way you want it to, be it aid another, flanking, actually attacking, etc. but if you're pushing the animal you can't make them do anything else until they are re-pushed.

[Psyren]

The logic is if Called creatures don't do suicidal things because they're not summoned, then Summoned creatures do suicidal things because they are summoned. Summon nature's ally (or any summoning spell for that matter) completely falls apart if the summoned creature does not know it cannot die.

They follow your instructions, yes - if they can understand them. That's the bigger issue with a summoned animal I think, not a fear of death. The creature's intelligence (and your method of communicating with it + what you say) matter at that point.



It is vaguely written on purpose, so the trainer can make the animal do what he wants. "Possible tricks (and their associated DCs) include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following." so you train the animal to defend the way you want it to, be it aid another, flanking, actually attacking, etc. but if you're pushing the animal you can't make them do anything else until they are re-pushed.

The problem is that there is no RAW definition of "defend you" - so your GM needs to decide what that phrase means, because per RAW they decide how NPCs in the world act. You can direct them to use a specific trick, but carrying it out depends on the text. It can happen exactly the way you envision, or not.

[RoboEmperor]

They follow your instructions, yes - if they can understand them. That's the bigger issue with a summoned animal I think, not a fear of death. The creature's intelligence (and your method of communicating with it + what you say) matter at that point.

That's what handle animal does. Make animals do what you want even if there is no common language.


The problem is that there is no RAW definition of "defend you" - so your GM needs to decide what that phrase means, because per RAW they decide how NPCs in the world act. You can direct them to use a specific trick, but carrying it out depends on the text. It can happen exactly the way you envision, or not.

You're missing my point.


Possible tricks (and their associated DCs) include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following.

Make a new trick that is identical to defend in every way except it aids another/flanks/attacks/etc, whatever you want it to be.

[Troacctid]

That's what handle animal does. Make animals do what you want even if there is no common language.



You're missing my point.



Make a new trick that is identical to defend in every way except it aids another/flanks/attacks/etc, whatever you want it to be.
That's pretty much what the Assist Attack and Assist Defend tricks (from CAd) are.

[Psyren]

That's what handle animal does. Make animals do what you want even if there is no common language.

Right, and when that thing is not defined in the rules, the GM must do so.


Make a new trick that is identical to defend in every way except it aids another/flanks/attacks/etc, whatever you want it to be.

I'm not disagreeing that you can do that, if your GM approves whatever you come up with.

[upho]

If we're talking non-gestalt, and treasure and XP as if a member of a full party (levels gained as outlined in the AP), very few classes could solo most APs starting at 1st. In general I definitely agree with other posters saying the Summoner, and especially the Master Summoner archetype, has the greatest chance of succeeding at the greatest number of APs. No other class comes with such a great action economy advantage on top of enough versatility, item independence and practical durability from scratch, and few classes are better equipped to deal with the higher level challenges.

When it comes to certain specific APs, I suspect other classes could also succeed, at least during a large majority of the levels. Perhaps most notably highly optimized combat oriented divine (half-)casters or certain paladins in WotR and, as mentioned, likely also in Hells Vengeance (though naturally serving different gods and changing the paladin for an antipaladin Tyrant). They'd likely need more luck than the summoner though.


The logic is if Called creatures don't do suicidal things because they're not summoned, then Summoned creatures do suicidal things because they are summoned. Summon nature's ally (or any summoning spell for that matter) completely falls apart if the summoned creature does not know it cannot die.Eh...? All this is nitpicks on an OT discussion, really, but I fail to see how the rules quote you provided gives the logical conclusion "Summoned creatures do suicidal things because they are summoned". AFAICT, the quote only says Called creatures don't do suicidal things because they actually die (unlike summoned ones). But regardless of whether summoned creatures die or not, this doesn't say anything about whether they do suicidal things, nor whether an animal with Int 2 is even aware of being summoned or capable of drastically changing its behavior accordingly. So I'd call your conclusion false causality, not logic.

Likewise, the mount spell description doesn't say anything beyond "The steed serves willingly and well." Which I'd presume means "as willingly and well as any other non combat trained light horse or a pony can be expected to". Probably mostly GM fiat whether that means you'd only need to make a successful Handle Animal check to instruct it to "defend" in combat, or a whole bunch of additional checks once the proverbial excrement hits the propeller and things like loud screams, the scent of blood and the mount taking damage gets thrown into the mix. Personally, I find it extremely unlikely a non combat trained animal with strong flight instincts would keep to you first instruction in such circumstances. But of course, that's just RL verisimilitude, not necessarily high fantasy RPG fictional verisimilitude...

[magicalmagicman]

Likewise, the mount spell description doesn't say anything beyond "The steed serves willingly and well." Which I'd presume means "as willingly and well as any other non combat trained light horse or a pony can be expected to". Probably mostly GM fiat whether that means you'd only need to make a successful Handle Animal check to instruct it to "defend" in combat, or a whole bunch of additional checks once the proverbial excrement hits the propeller and things like loud screams, the scent of blood and the mount taking damage gets thrown into the mix. Personally, I find it extremely unlikely a non combat trained animal with strong flight instincts would keep to you first instruction in such circumstances. But of course, that's just RL verisimilitude, not necessarily high fantasy RPG fictional verisimilitude...

There is nothing in the horse entry that says horses flee from combat. Also it's not an instruction, it's training. Handle animal teaches animals to engage in combat. A horse trained for combat will never run because it is trained not to run.

Now whether a person who is so good with animals he can temporarily train an animal to defend him in 2minutes is realistic or not, the answer is definitely unrealistic. In fact I'd say it is downright impossible, but this is d&d, d&d characters can do things real people can never do.

Whether a summoned creature knows it is summoned or not is largely irrelevant. Combat trained animals dive into combat simple as that. I do however believe that summoned animals do know they are summoned. D&D doesn't explain how spells work, how summoning spells work, where the creatures grabbed come from, why they are connected to this spell, why they fight for the caster, etc., but if a summoned eagle with an intelligence of 2 attacks the caster's enemies to the death then it must know it is immune from death otherwise it would run away as soon as it is summoned.

[Eldonauran]

I stopped in here to give my two cents on the topic.

I am pretty confident a well built Druid could probably solo some (if not all) adventure paths. Surviving the first level would (probably) be the hardest thing to do, but after that, they could probably hold their own. Being the best at every little niche role is not necessary to succeed. A jack-of-all-trades type of Druid as ample ability to fortify whatever skill he needs to succeed at a particular role, any given day.

Some possible builds revolve around the Elemental Ally archetype, specifically building each of your Elementals to excel at a given role (scout, tank, FLIGHT, etc), aside from the role you've built for yourself. Pick up a familiar (via the numerous different ways) to get yourself a Protector archetype familiar to effectively DOUBLE your HP (at 11th level) and invest in ways to give shield other to your familiar and yourself to absorb damage from your summons.

Using the variant multiclass options (which I know not every uses, but why not? Unchained Rogue/Barbarian is very popular), it opens a plethora of additional options for you to pad your abilities while not deviating from your Druid class levels. I am a fan of the Magus VMC to combine with Druid, but Barbarian and Rogue are great options too.

[upho]

There is nothing in the horse entry that says horses flee from combat.Well, there's not much at all in the horse entry. Just imagine how perplexed you'd be if you didn't know what a horse is and read that entry... :smalltongue:

But it seems to me at least the animals in the bestiary sharing names with RL extant animals are also supposed to mimic those RL animals. If that is correct, here's a little Wikipedia tidbit (quoted from "Equine Extension Specialists") which may shed some light on the topic of horses fleeing from combat:

"Horses evolved from small mammals whose survival depended on their ability to flee from predators. This survival mechanism still exists in the modern domestic horse. Humans have removed many predators from the life of the domestic horse; however, its first instinct when frightened is to escape."


Also it's not an instruction, it's training. Handle animal teaches animals to engage in combat. A horse trained for combat will never run because it is trained not to run.First, I used the term "instruction" due to previous posts discussing the similarities and differences in communicating with and instructing other summoned creatures (such as through the summon monster spells). And because I believe it's better suited than "trick" to illustrate the goal-oriented behavior someonenoone11 expects his poor horsie to continuously display - in combat, no less - after his very brief (man)handling of it... :smallfrown:

Second, this is neither about actual training, much less about the many tricks typically included in the "Combat Trained" package, nor is it about a horse trained for combat. The only thing trained about this horse, aside from whatever comes from being domesticated, is its willingness and ability to serve as a mount. So summoned or not, it's still about a bog-standard light riding horse, not a friggin' destrier.

Third, Handle Animal isn't used for the "Train for general purpose" task here, but for the "Push" task, making the horse perform a specific trick it hasn't been trained to do, in this case to "Defend" through the Aid Another action.


Now whether a person who is so good with animals he can temporarily train an animal to defend him in 2minutes is realistic or not, the answer is definitely unrealistic.I think most people would find it not just unrealistic, but outright silly if a 1st level PC could actually train a peaceful riding horse to repeatedly perform Aid Another actions to aid them in combat within a couple of minutes, even in D&D (might work just fine in higher levels though). Thankfully, according to the actual rules for Handle Animal, that doesn't seem to be the case here, and I'm confused why someonenoone11 appears to believe otherwise:
You can push it to do any trick, and the trick I'm pushing it to do is Defend except it aids another rather than attacking. DC is 25. 2 ranks + 16 charisma and you can hit it at level 1. This trick doesn't require constant handle animal checks so the horse will forever defend the mundane I assigned it to until its duration is up.Thing is, the "Defend" trick says absolutely nothing about "attacking". In fact, it doesn't say anything at all about how the animal actually defends, just that does when you're threatened and that it's ready to do so when you're not. Which also seems deliberate, allowing the actual "how" of the defense to be whatever other trick the trainer finds the most fitting.

But most importantly, having the animal perform the Aid Another action is a separate trick called "Aid". And I have no idea how someonenoone11 intends to Push both Defend and Aid simultaneously somehow, because the general Handle Animal rules surely don't allow for this.

I don't remember whether these details exist also in the 3.5 version of Handle Animal, so it may of course simply be that they don't and that this is the reason for someonenoone11's mistake and my confusion.


In fact I'd say it is downright impossible, but this is d&d, d&d characters can do things real people can never do.On that, I fully agree. At least if the rules says a character can.


Whether a summoned creature knows it is summoned or not is largely irrelevant. Combat trained animals dive into combat simple as that. I do however believe that summoned animals do know they are summoned. D&D doesn't explain how spells work, how summoning spells work, where the creatures grabbed come from, why they are connected to this spell, why they fight for the caster, etc., but if a summoned eagle with an intelligence of 2 attacks the caster's enemies to the death then it must know it is immune from death otherwise it would run away as soon as it is summoned.Maybe. But all of this is largely irrelevant, since this isn't a summon monster spell, and neither is the horse any more combat trained than your regular D&D/PF chicken.

Although come to think of it, I also remember that particular animal doesn't really need any such training to become a deadly ally in 3.5, as proven by a certain famous chicken farmer commoner... :smalleek:


I stopped in here to give my two cents on the topic.

I am pretty confident a well built Druid could probably solo some (if not all) adventure paths.Yeah, druid would most likely be my second choice after summoner. Then maybe hunter for largely the same reasons, or possibly melee cleric just for it's lack of any true weaknesses during any level.


Surviving the first level would (probably) be the hardest thing to do, but after that, they could probably hold their own. Being the best at every little niche role is not necessary to succeed. A jack-of-all-trades type of Druid as ample ability to fortify whatever skill he needs to succeed at a particular role, any given day.Level 1 would definitely be the most challenging, although I guess a druid may also struggle to cover the necessary skills.


Using the variant multiclass options (which I know not every uses, but why not? Unchained Rogue/Barbarian is very popular),Why not? Because a large majority of the VMC options flat out suck from an optimization perspective, and, arguably much worse, because VMC only offers one pre-selected and boxed set of features and flavors per class and not for every class, which means VMC tends to be boring and something to be avoided (unless perhaps if you play in a game which doesn't allow normal MC for some weird reason).

And UnRogue VMC Barb is very popular? How come? I mean, the barb is one of the strongest and most universally useful VMC options (which doesn't say much, mind), but what would be the appeal for an UnRogue?


it opens a plethora of additional options for you to pad your abilities while not deviating from your Druid class levels. I am a fan of the Magus VMC to combine with Druid, but Barbarian and Rogue are great options too.Really? But what needed padding is actually gained through VMC magus? And do you really consider dealing melee damage enough of a druid weak spot to make VMC barb, not to mention VMC rogue, great options? Despite the fact that you can gain a crap-ton of more damage and versatility through the lost feats (at least before you can access rage powers at 11th)?

What did I miss here?

[Arutema]

Oh it gets worse.

The AP kingmaker suggests at least a one year time skip. Add in Ultimate Campaign which contains downtime rules and you'll have a PC spending 7 days out of a month ruling for a year. If i recall correctly a month in Golarion is three weeks of ten days which leaves fourteen days.

You're thinking Faerun. Golarion uses the Gregorian (AKA, modern Earth) calendar with the months and days renamed.

[Eldonauran]

Why not? Because a large majority of the VMC options flat out suck from an optimization perspective, and, arguably much worse, because VMC only offers one pre-selected and boxed set of features and flavors per class and not for every class, which means VMC tends to be boring and something to be avoided (unless perhaps if you play in a game which doesn't allow normal MC for some weird reason). From a high ceiling optimization perspective, sure. Outside of those (fairly rare) almost theory crafting games, VMC can be a very useful option, but it does come down to player preference. I haven't had any particular issues with the VMC options that I have used, and knowing that not all of them will fit every niche, I only find perhaps three of them to be not worth the feats they consume (namely the Ranger, Gunslinger, and Summoner).


And UnRogue VMC Barb is very popular? How come? I mean, the barb is one of the strongest and most universally useful VMC options (which doesn't say much, mind), but what would be the appeal for an UnRogue?You misunderstood me. I meant that Unchained Rogues and Unchained Barbarians are popular.


Really? But what needed padding is actually gained through VMC magus? And do you really consider dealing melee damage enough of a druid weak spot to make VMC barb, not to mention VMC rogue, great options? Despite the fact that you can gain a crap-ton of more damage and versatility through the lost feats (at least before you can access rage powers at 11th)?Need padding? I never said it was NEEDED. Depending on your character concept, you might not HAVE an archetype that lets you use wildshape and the extra damage output from Magus would be HIGHLY useful, as well as the accuracy bonus from Arcane pool. Enhancing your flameblade with arcane pool is useful in a number of different ways. Not to mention getting Flamboyant Arcana and parrying/riposting.


What did I miss here?Mostly that I was speaking in general terms and not specific. VMC is not for general use. You need specific design goals in order to make proper use of them.

I really didn't come here to argue about my suggestions. Just offer them and offer some clarification on what I had in mind. I don't need to defend my suggestions if you don't think they are powerful enough. I stated that being the most powerful was not necessary to 'win' or complete an adventure path solo. I was not offering that.

[RoboEmperor]

But most importantly, having the animal perform the Aid Another action is a separate trick called "Aid". And I have no idea how someonenoone11 intends to Push both Defend and Aid simultaneously somehow, because the general Handle Animal rules surely don't allow for this.

Before Troacctid mentioned it in this thread, I did not know CAr had a separate trick called Aid that required an animal to already know Defend. So yes I am wrong. If you read Aid Another, the guy is attacking his opponent but instead of landing a deadly blow he's just distracting the guy for an effective -2 to his ac against the next attack, so I figured Defending by Aiding was a valid option.

But seeing how specifically CAr handled aid another... I dunno. I still think it's valid, but I guess it's not as rock-solid-raw as I thought it was.

In any case this was my attempt to be less selfish and help the party, but I guess I can't be less selfish anymore with my mount spell.

[magicalmagicman]

Before Troacctid mentioned it in this thread, I did not know CAr had a separate trick called Aid that required an animal to already know Defend. So yes I am wrong. If you read Aid Another, the guy is attacking his opponent but instead of landing a deadly blow he's just distracting the guy for an effective -2 to his ac against the next attack, so I figured Defending by Aiding was a valid option.

But seeing how specifically CAr handled aid another... I dunno. I still think it's valid, but I guess it's not as rock-solid-raw as I thought it was.

In any case this was my attempt to be less selfish and help the party, but I guess I can't be less selfish anymore with my mount spell.

This is incorrect.

Pushing an animal can make it do a trick it doesn't know.

To teach Assist Defend the animal must know the Defend trick, but you are not teaching the assist defend trick. You are making it perform the assist defend trick. Prerequisites to learn the trick are irrelevant because Pushing an animal is not teaching.

Finally Assist Defend is like the Attack command not Defend since you constantly have to tell it to assist.

The trick you are making your horses do to be less selfish is completely within the rules of handle animal. Defend by using aid another instead of fleeing, attack, flanking, or some other thing. Unlike Assist Defend the horse can only assist one character.

Put these naysayers out of your head. What you're doing is perfectly legal and awesome.

[upho]

From a high ceiling optimization perspective, sure. Outside of those (fairly rare) almost theory crafting games, VMC can be a very useful option, but it does come down to player preference. I haven't had any particular issues with the VMC options that I have used, and knowing that not all of them will fit every niche, I only find perhaps three of them to be not worth the feats they consume (namely the Ranger, Gunslinger, and Summoner).Well, I was talking mostly from a "solo AP"-POV. Otherwise, sure, it's not like I think the option shouldn't exist. I just find them kinda boring.


You misunderstood me. I meant that Unchained Rogues and Unchained Barbarians are popular.Ah, of course. That makes a lot more sense!


Need padding? I never said it was NEEDED. Depending on your character concept, you might not HAVE an archetype that lets you use wildshape and the extra damage output from Magus would be HIGHLY useful, as well as the accuracy bonus from Arcane pool. Enhancing your flameblade with arcane pool is useful in a number of different ways. Not to mention getting Flamboyant Arcana and parrying/riposting.

Mostly that I was speaking in general terms and not specific. VMC is not for general use. You need specific design goals in order to make proper use of them.I was simply misunderstanding the context here, again assuming what you said were intended as suggestions for making a druid capable of solo APs.


I really didn't come here to argue about my suggestions. Just offer them and offer some clarification on what I had in mind. I don't need to defend my suggestions if you don't think they are powerful enough. I stated that being the most powerful was not necessary to 'win' or complete an adventure path solo. I was not offering that.Oh, I'm sorry if I came off sounding more critical than I intended. I was mostly surprised, is all.

[Eldonauran]

Well, I was talking mostly from a "solo AP"-POV. Otherwise, sure, it's not like I think the option shouldn't exist. I just find them kinda boring.Sheer Power(TM) is not always necessary to complete an AP solo, in my experience. Yes, it is nice (in some ways) to know you have the ability to crush all resistance with ease, but ... that kind of gameplay becomes boring, at least to me. It certainly comes down to gameplay styles. I prefer versatility and adaptability, able to do something in almost every circumstance.

And, you think VMC is ... boring? I was delighted with the concept, if not exactly the implementation. Sure, it’s not full of immediate benefits like normal multiclassing, but the long term payoffs are potent. Yes, a level 1 dip in Barbarian gives you immediate results, but VMC Barbarian gives you increasingly higher level abilities without detracting from your original class. Yes, it costs feats, and some people (a lot, really) plan out every feat they take like a formula. VMC may not be for those people. I think gaining class abilities are usually more powerful than feats (aside from those pesky cantrips at will for a few of the VMC classes, really... what we’re they thinking?)

But, don’t misunderstand me. I love to theory craft with the best of them. My Herolab is filled to bursting with character builds I may never have a chance to play. However, when it actually comes down to playing a character, they evolve organically after the first few levels, sometimes diverging heavily from the chassis I originally designed. My playstyle has evolved as well, favoring cool or unique abilities over “infinite cosmic power” (a little because of the itty-bitty living space, in Herolab, not seeing play).


Ah, of course. That makes a lot more sense!

I was simply misunderstanding the context here, again assuming what you said were intended as suggestions for making a druid capable of solo APs.

Oh, I'm sorry if I came off sounding more critical than I intended. I was mostly surprised, is all.No worries. Misunderstandings happen.

[upho]

Sheer Power(TM) is not always necessary to complete an AP solo, in my experience.Just for the Record 1: I consider versatility to be power. Maybe not Sheer PowerTM (whatever that is - pure combat effectiveness?), but in practice versatility is often at least as relevant a measure of a PC's ability to overcome adventuring challenges IME. Or rather, if you have "enough" combat effectiveness, boosting it further tends to give much less in return than increasing your versatility. Hence why JaronK's classic "Tier System" is almost exclusively concerned with versatility (a fact which comes with it's own slew of issues).


Yes, it is nice (in some ways) to know you have the ability to crush all resistance with ease, but ... that kind of gameplay becomes boring, at least to me. It certainly comes down to gameplay styles. I prefer versatility and adaptability, able to do something in almost every circumstance.Just for the Record 2: I agree. I've never been interested in "power-gaming", even though I certainly enjoy playing games with different expected mechanical power levels, including ones where pretty highly optimized PCs are required for survival in combat as well as for having enough versatility to overcome other challenges. Though I'd also note that "versatility and adaptability" is very much a focus of mechanical optimization, at least outside pure TO corner cases focusing on some highly specific odd thing or another (such as getting the highest speed possible). And speaking of, not having to care much about Sheer PowerTM, and arguably even being able to meaningfully focus on versatility at all, is often a luxury only the most powerful classes (like the druid) can afford.

That said, I'm a bit surprised your experiences of soloing APs is that you don't also require Sheer PowerTM. I mean, you have to equal a party of 4 also in that regard, as for example avoiding combat is rarely an option in order to get through an adventure. Are you really saying you have the option to "crush all resistance with ease" to the degree it becomes boring when soloing an AP? :smalleek:

If so, I believe your view of what is "optimized" is on a completely different level than mine. In my world, a PC who can solo AP's run as written with ease is per definition highly optimized, in terms of Sheer PowerTM as well as versatility and adaptability. Regardless of gameplay styles.


And, you think VMC is ... boring? I was delighted with the concept, if not exactly the implementation.To clarify, I find the concept great. It's the implementation that turns me off, and not so much because of the often lackluster mechanical benefits per se, but rather because of how delayed and/or diluted the granted features typically are. To illustrate, say I'm playing a character who's story so far, personality and combat "style" would be ideally represented by adding some distinct magus qualities to those provided by her other options (class, feats, items etc). As a VMC magus, she'd have to sacrifice 3 feats and wait until 11th level before gaining any actually distinct magus quality. Until that happens, the VMC magus choice has no unique impact on anything she does in-game and is therefore largely invisible and meaningless, mechanically as well as flavor-wise. This is regardless of whether the benefits granted at 3rd and 7th are actually enough mechanically useful for her to be a fair trade for her feat slots from an optimization perspective.

Hence why I find most VMC options boring, and why I think VMC barb is the most notable exception as it actually grants the signature barb feature right away.

I hope this makes it easier to understand my opinion.

[Eldonauran]

That said, I'm a bit surprised your experiences of soloing APs is that you don't also require Sheer PowerTM. I mean, you have to equal a party of 4 also in that regard, as for example avoiding combat is rarely an option in order to get through an adventure. Are you really saying you have the option to "crush all resistance with ease" to the degree it becomes boring when soloing an AP? :smalleek:Sheer Power(TM), to me, simply means that you can end encounters with almost nothing more than a simple hand wave and the expenditure of (much) less than the the normal amount of resources that should be set aside per encounter. Sheer Power(TM), again to me, is HIGH OP gameplay that offers little challenge.


If so, I believe your view of what is "optimized" is on a completely different level than mine. In my world, a PC who can solo AP's run as written with ease is per definition highly optimized, in terms of Sheer PowerTM as well as versatility and adaptability. Regardless of gameplay styles.There is indeed a difference in what you view as 'optimized' and what I view as 'optimized', and then how the larger community treats optimization (or at least tends to communicate it in a certain way). Like many things, the definition of the word gets ignored and replaced by whatever the person wants it to mean. In my experience, optimization is a very wide gradient that is often reduced to black or white choices (and requires a great deal of explanation in order to actually clarify what you mean). You've either taken the best ability or you have 'ruined' the build. I don't try to 'optimize' in the black and white scale and that is what I mean when I say my builds are not highly optimized.

I should try more often to clarify what I mean when I say that the builds I offer are not 'optimized' as it is normally treated in the community, but then it gets overly word, people take issue with the assumptions, or overall tend to disagree and these sort of conversations happen.


To clarify, I find the concept great. It's the implementation that turns me off, and not so much because of the often lackluster mechanical benefits per se, but rather because of how delayed and/or diluted the granted features typically are. To illustrate, say I'm playing a character who's story so far, personality and combat "style" would be ideally represented by adding some distinct magus qualities to those provided by her other options (class, feats, items etc). As a VMC magus, she'd have to sacrifice 3 feats and wait until 11th level before gaining any actually distinct magus quality. Until that happens, the VMC magus choice has no unique impact on anything she does in-game and is therefore largely invisible and meaningless, mechanically as well as flavor-wise. This is regardless of whether the benefits granted at 3rd and 7th are actually enough mechanically useful for her to be a fair trade for her feat slots from an optimization perspective.In that situation, using the VMC option is not conducive to your character build. In fact, Magus requires 6 class levels before you can even start using spells outside the magus list with spellstrike, and the expenditure of a magus arcana. So, you are left with either a HUGE deviation from your main class or you have to wait until 11th level (mid-game for me and my players) before you can use it.


I hope this makes it easier to understand my opinion.Oh, I believe I fully understand your opinion on the VMC options, and I can understand why you hold them. I don't happen to share them. I just approach them from a different perspective (ie, more of a long term commitment/delayed gratification). I actually LIKE the Mystic Theurge class, if that tells you anything.

[Psyren]

Note that you can retrain into a VMC if leveling as one would feel diluted.