|
3 years ago ::
Apr 13, 2010 - 9:26AM
#21
|
Date Joined:
Aug 21, 2009
|
"If you're playing against yourself, I'd think you might as well roll up a full party, no?" --Andrelai
I'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 monsters, I'm apt to start forgetting marks and saves and power options. Running a solo character through encounters is a bit more relaxed. (Summoner wizard is my favorite for that, by the way. Oodles of tactical fun.)
Although . . . using the companion rules in the DMG2, I might find a full party with most of the characters in "8-bit mode" feasible.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Apr 20, 2010 - 10:37PM
#22
|
|
|
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 many options out of combat as well.
More sex and gender equality and racial equality shouldn't even be an argument--it should simply be an assumption for any RPG that wants to stay relevant in the 21st century.
I could say anything in D&D is silly though, because it's a silly game and we are silly people.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 26, 2012 - 5:39PM
#23
|
Date Joined:
Jan 22, 2012
|
*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't used him much yet...
In our other game, I run a player party of 1 Kender Rogue (main character) and 1 Dwarf Fighter/Warlord. The problem with solo campaigns is that all the monsters are made for an approximate group of five. So, say, Orcus, poses a fair threat to a party of five characters, but a solo character would need to have either a few levels on the party of five, or a dragon's hoard of magic items.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Oct 01, 2012 - 12:04AM
#24
|
|
|
why bump a two and a half year old thread?
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Oct 01, 2012 - 10:35AM
#25
|
Date Joined:
Jan 22, 2012
|
...I dunno. I guess it looked lonely...
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Oct 20, 2012 - 3:16PM
#26
|
Date Joined:
Apr 24, 2010
|
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 feats makes a great high defense barrier in time) may feel a little weak to start but rapidly gains power as you go up in tier.
Also many of the abilites and skills are useful for out of combat siutations. Very fun in my opinion
Ps: Also It did look lonely and its a neat discussion. Why not bump it some more? Right Tristantak?
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Oct 23, 2012 - 10:03PM
#27
|
Date Joined:
Oct 23, 2012
|
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 and I run. Overall, I would be a Seeker for sure. They're a very fun class.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Oct 25, 2012 - 7:33AM
#28
|
Date Joined:
Apr 16, 2009
|
Leaders in general are a good idea, as you can grant yourself two of your healing surges per encounter (three at higher levels) with barely any action cost. You do want to be careful with your leader selection, though; some of them 'waste' a lot of features and powers if you have no allies around. (SC warlords are an example of this; your 'presence' feature goes by the wayside.)
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.
"The world does not work the way you have been taught it does. We are not real as such; we exist within The Story. Unfortunately for you, you have inherited a condition from your mother known as Primary Protagonist Syndrome, which means The Story is interested in you. It will find you, and if you are not ready for the narrative strands it will throw at you..." - from Footloose
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Nov 08, 2012 - 7:31PM
#29
|
Date Joined:
Jan 22, 2012
|
... It did look lonely and its a neat discussion. Why not bump it some more? Right Tristantak?
Quite so.
And Bards don't really make very good solo PCs, that is true... what with 95% of their abilities helpful to your allies, not you...
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Nov 11, 2012 - 7:10PM
#30
|
|
|
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 Assassin or a Thief)--e.g., climbing the ladder of the local Guild-of-Choice--to be quite fun. I've done this more than once over the years, and if you focus more on role-playing and stealth and less on the hack-and-slash, these can be truly one of a kind adventures.
|
|
|
