So we finally get back to gaming after having two players drop out and one of our old ones that hadn't been there in a while come back. (YAY for Snickle My Finckle!) This also meant I could now play BOTH my characters without the DM looking at me cross eyed. (We needed a Tank. Hasini, my paladin IS a tank. At least at close quarters.)

So out of the Darklands/Underdark pop out our characters (including the now non-existent Necromancer and Gunslinger) with elf bows pointed at us. We manage to not get filleted by arrows and meet the queen. This is where the DM with the aid of Snickle and some elf magics teleport Hasini out of the Worldwound. (Yeah even I was skeptical about how that works but eh. DM magic.) Hasini did get a demon fight in, (Omox/Slime demon. I really don't like those but they're less annoying than Vrocks at least) before having the second in command elf kind of look down on Hasini's story. Hasini took exception to being called a liar. The DM then was like "YOu want to summon demons in there? That's not a paladin thing to do!"

I really was just trying to get Hasini to show the Elf NPC that 'yes she was fighting demons AND there were drow." Apparently no one in the Elf kingdom believes drow exist. Weird huh? Anyway...

So I'm also getting closer to running Carrion Crown and this is what I have so far: One melee type fighter (with a backup bow), one alchemist and one inquisitor. I really would like more PCs (obviously) but I'm wondering...

In case I DON'T get more than three people should I encourage the remaining PCs to make another character to help round out the party?

Your thoughts.

No, extra people aren't needed. If they want to hire NPCs from time to time, you could let them. If healing is an issue, you could let them get a magic item or change the rules on how you get health back.

A fewer number of PCs lets you focus in on the characters. I like it better if I have players I like.

So you honestly think that having JUST a party of three people works? Even when one isn't that readily available?

I just don't see it myself.

Quote from: Nightfall;461547So you honestly think that having JUST a party of three people works? Even when one isn't that readily available?

I just don't see it myself.

Most of my D&D groups over the years were around three people, sometimes with niche relevant tag-along NPCs for a quest or two and sometimes not.

Quote from: Nightfall;461547So you honestly think that having JUST a party of three people works? Even when one isn't that readily available?

I just don't see it myself.

Sure it works. I ran a 1-11 game of Dragon Lance back in the day for two people.

You just have to be clear about the fact that the CR system was designed for 4 people, so you have to tone down the encounters a little. On the other hand, it makes it easier to run mysteries and puzzles because you don't have too many extra people sitting around doing nothing.

Yeah but the fact is Carrion crown does have CRs/encounters that are designed for more than just two/three people. I can do mysteries a little better. I am, however,  VERY uncertain about the fact certain things (like Haunts for example) might end up killing everyone because there's not enough people to go around.

Quote from: Nightfall;461652Yeah but the fact is Carrion crown does have CRs/encounters that are designed for more than just two/three people. I can do mysteries a little better. I am, however,  VERY uncertain about the fact certain things (like Haunts for example) might end up killing everyone because there's not enough people to go around.

So let them hire some henchmen, or change the encounter.

I'm a bit wary about nameless Henchmen, even if it's a Horror themed Adventure Path.

And changing the encounters really makes it less...horrific, especially if I remove Haunts which is an integral part of Chapter 1/Harrowstone.

It would be like removing the Mists from Ravenloft.

You could have someone run an extra character. Or you could create an NPC to go with the party - one that the PCs make all of the decisions for, subject to your veto power of course. That way the PCs would still have to solve the mysteries and they would have some extra firepower during combat.

I've run games for three people quite often. It just takes a little bit of an adjustment on the power level of the encounter. Error on the side of being too easy rather than too hard. You can always make things a little tougher on the fly if it is looking like a cakewalk but it is pretty hard to pull the punch should it prove to be too much for them to handle.

Quote from: PaladinCA;461749You could have someone run an extra character. Or you could create an NPC to go with the party - one that the PCs make all of the decisions for, subject to your veto power of course. That way the PCs would still have to solve the mysteries and they would have some extra firepower during combat.

I've run games for three people quite often. It just takes a little bit of an adjustment on the power level of the encounter. Error on the side of being too easy rather than two hard. You can always make things a little tougher on the fly if it is looking like a cakewalk but it is pretty hard to pull the punch should it prove to be too much for them to handle.

Well see this isn't JUST about the fact I have three people. It's more the fact I might have two IF the group ends up finishing Second Darkness AP before August. (Or at least before the end of it...) The reason I say that is because with our current make up and the fact this is a college/university town; there's not many players left atm.

That being said I am heavily considering letting the PCs make two characters and that should help with the balance aspect. That being said I honestly don't know if that would hinder play or not.

Just a lot of variables to consider with Carrion Crown, the lack of a strong group atm, (in terms of numbers/players not the people themselves), and how much longer we have on Second Darkness.

I've always been happy (and even encouraged) players to have a primary and a secondary character in the party. I don't generally have the luxury of more than three players, and besides in most situations the player will "lead" with one character while their back up is guarding something, horseholding etc. Having players manage 2 characters in a fight is usually not a problem, and I rarely see a player inappropriately using one character to bail out their other in a tight spot.

Besides, casualties are resonably common, whether character death or just incpacitation through disease, possession or serious wounds, it's great that a player can carry on being active with their back-up.

Well as I feared, no one else showed up to sign on for tomorrow/Sunday's adventure. :mad:

Course only have me and the DM probably didn't help much, even if his GF could have made it. So...

Anyway Iron, I DO encourage players to make a backup. Mostly because characters can and DO happen in my game. But not sure I want the backups and the 'starters' together.

I mean I COULD hold off until August (the end of it). Maybe by then some gamers will return.

Wait, so less than 4 people is badwrongfun now?

Man, that makes me feel good.  I love badwrong fun, and I hate large groups.  Yay!

Uhm no...

It's just less fun if you're doing like 3 characters and there's only two other people.

Anyway you're always wrong.