Well if your trying to think up a solo adventure to run through with a friend, any class could work so long as the encounters are built properly. So I'd go with which ever class fits the adventures theme.If however your talking about starting a game
You'll have to define 'solo game' a little better. If you mean one DM/one player, that's one thing. If you mean 'just me, myself, and my books" then thats something else altogether.1-on-1 adventuring, I'd have to say a paladin, a rogue, or a battle c
You could also go for a Valorous Bard -- similar in concept to the battle cleric, but with the added advantage that you can poach a variety of other classes for features you might want.Leaders in general are a good idea, as you can grant yourself two
I like the Panther Shaman. It's one of the few leader builds that aren't primarily focused on giving bonuses to allies (of which you'll have none). Plus, if your DM is merciful he might take some swings at your spirit companion instead of you.I k
I'd like to echo the Paladin statement that Corman makes. In addition to his points (High durability, defenses, face skills, and radiant vulnerability builds) the apaldin also has some ranged options. In addition, with the release of Divine Power
Paladin with warlock multi - for the thievery skill. You have all the benefits of a durable defender, multiple forms of healing through lay hands and powers, radiant sources of damage which will you can put the smack down on most undead, and you have
It takes a lot of work to set up, but yes. You end up with a lot of randomization (either in monster responses or in your own actions) but if you are the kind of person who never cheats at Solitaire, its doable.
With one DM and one PC, the best options probably are:1. Leaders (who are not too stuck on helping allies) since they can heal during the combats2. Dwarves since they can second wind as a minor action and keep going during combat3. Rangers beca
Picking up on the Shaman idea (which I think is great because it gets you that extra token), it might be interesting to look at other 'buddy' classes and builds. Beast Ranger could be interesting. Even if you just do the 'standard archer + animal f
A well built melee bard can actually dish out fine damage, while being really hard to put down. They are a little better for a duo campaign(or solo with a dmpc or somesuch), where the second person is a striker, but they can definately be done solo.
Action-denial will present a disproportionately huge problem to a solo PC. He needs to be durable, have high NADS, have respectable damage output, have the skills for social interactions and for traps, and be able to cope with debilitating effects. T
I'm with those who say "any class." The rules are, as the WotC folks have said on their podcasts, a "baseline." I experimented DM'ing a solo adventure with a wizard, and it worked out fine. Doing something as simple as ensuring a second wind a minor
Would probably be useful for testing monsters or builds out.If you're playing against yourself, I'd think you might as well roll up a full party, no?Actually, that's not a bad idea for the one player + one DM scenario, either, except that the rolepl
I would recommend the most broken class i have come across so far,the Rune priest.Make him a Goliath witha Craghammer and you can heal amazingly well and hit for around 20 points of damage with just MBA's
I second Dwarves.I personally would suggest a Dwarf Hexhammer though. It was my first character in solo pvp play(yes its not pve but a lot of the same rules apply) and it was flexible, optimal, and durable. It takes a few levels to get into its own,
"If you're playing against yourself, I'd think you might as well roll up a full party, no?" --AndrelaiI've tried it, but found the bookkeeping tedious. If I'm trying to keep track of decisions for a five-person party AND an appropriate number of mon
really defensive monk. Maybe a halfling monk/fighter with small warriors defense and/or hafted defense, unarmored agillity, etc?Your secondary stat won't be great, but you'll be versatile in what you can do in combat, and you can build it to have man
*Performs Raise Dead (Thread) Ritual*Well, in the game my dad runs, I'm the only player, but we have a couple of different rules- we multiclass more like in 3.5, so I have a Rogue/Shaman/Monk character who seems to work pretty well, although I haven'
My vote (as usual) is a monk or monk Hybrid. Mostly cause the monk comes with plenty of powers and some neat abilities. Its pretty easy to flavor it however you'd like. Defense are rather good if you build correctly (lower stats and Superior defense
Barbarian/Sorcerer Hybrid aka the ultimate striker. I agree that you could be anything. Another fun hybrid is the Druid/Shaman for out of combat. As mentioned earlier, the Runepriest is so broken that it's not allowed in any campaign that my friends
Definitely, with a one-character party you do NOT want ANY warlord. And a Cunning Bard isn't great either. These builds and a few others really work by what they do to/for allies, and there are no allies.
If it's just you and a DM, then I assume that the DM is going to have to tailor the adventures to you, regardless. Concept-wise, I'd go with a stealth based character (for reasons put forth above), and I've found City-based adventures (either as an