Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Passivearmada 06-17-07, 09:43 PM	Alright, i am a generally new DM and our group has only three members (:weep:), with two people that are joining once we get together. with me DMing, thatd be 4 PCs, and one is always the human fighter/ paladin :rolleyes: , one is always unpredictable, and the other two- i dunno, cause i havent played with em yet. i was just wondering what you think the perfect party is. My idea (for 4 members) is 1 tank + 1 rogue with wits and sneaky stuff + 1 super cool spellcaster that can support other group members + ranger/ druid that can track and fight decently. clerics are nice, but not needed (to me), along with monks, which are amazing, but a little hard to roleplay. your thoughts and advice would be greatly appreciated. thank you. ;)
Tevin Kevlak 06-17-07, 10:14 PM	The traditional party is made up of 1 warrior (barbarian, fighter, paladin, ranger etc.) 1 healer (cleric, druid) 1 stealthy/trapfinder (rogue for core only for trapfinding but rangers and bards can easily fill the stealth/scout role) and 1 arcane caster (wizard, sorcerer). That being said it really depends on what the campaign entails. If it takes place mostly outdoors with little dungeon delving or features a lot of undead the Rogue character wouldn't be necessary and might be fairly useless for example. Or if you're going to be fighting lots of undead as suggested above a party made up of nothing but clerics would really excell.
MerrikCale 06-17-07, 10:57 PM	basically its one each of the 4 main groups. With the plethora of alternate base classes you can go crazy. Any fighter (or ranger, barbarian, swordsage, etc), Any mage (wizard, warlock, sorcerer, etc) and on and on.
Lady_Mhaor 06-17-07, 11:15 PM	All rogues, cuz everything bows down before the all mighty sneak attack except things that cant be sneak attacked, but then thats why traps were invented
Passivearmada 06-17-07, 11:16 PM	agreed, lady mhaor the best solution is multiclassing- and i love to place encounters anywhere. i knew the traditional party, but that kind of bores me (just a little). I mean, it's all the PC's decision, but I'm just hoping that we dont end up with 2 fighters, a barbarian, and a ranger. :twitch: i love arcane and anything CN. a party of mages might be intersting, but ridiculously vulnerable. nevermind that. any evenly balanced party is good for me, but i love a good roleplayer :thumbsup:. roleplaying is half the game. (to me at least) groups of all tanks tend to have the same personalities, and call for a conversation as fun as one with your ex-girlfriend, your mother, and your deaf neighbor.
Lady_Mhaor 06-17-07, 11:24 PM	A cabal of wizards arent that vulnerable. unless said wizards wear red, are of the zhentarim variety and or dont trust each other enough to cast high magic, banned though it may be
captaincarot 06-19-07, 04:56 AM	3 rogues at level1 one with high strength, one with high int and one with high dex so they can all sneak and hide, plus a cleric of tempus. then multicalss 2 of em at lvl2 one to mage or sorceror, 1 to fighter, the perfect CG party. especially if 2 of em are elves ond one is a dwarf. thus you get dwarf rogue fighter, elf rogue 20dex, elf rogue wizzard 18int, with the right rolls for stats. or just start a dwarf ranger instead of the dwarf rogue. but more skills with the rogue.
The_Wrath_of_Talos 06-19-07, 04:42 PM	A cabal of wizards arent that vulnerable. unless said wizards wear red, are of the zhentarim variety and or dont trust each other enough to cast high magic, banned though it may be Are you saying that Red wizards are weak? With their circle magic and extremely specialized magic whose saves are generally very hard to pass. And the Black Network? Whos hands tend to be in almost everything in northern Faerun. With their flying mounts and multiple wands at disposile. I would consider either organization easy targets.
Lady_Mhaor 06-19-07, 07:24 PM	Are you saying that Red wizards are weak? With their circle magic and extremely specialized magic whose saves are generally very hard to pass. And the Black Network? Whos hands tend to be in almost everything in northern Faerun. With their flying mounts and multiple wands at disposile. I would consider either organization easy targets. especially when your a harper ANYWAY the black network? I dont mean the black network I mean the zhentarim not the zhentilars my understanding is that there two different sections of the same group, could be wrong. As for red wizards? pffgh they cant even beat a few barbarians and their scarcely clad women
Mr. Master 06-20-07, 07:49 AM	In a generic fantasy campaign,the best group is made up of fighter+wizard+cleric + thief. In a "wildlands" fantasy campaign,the best group is made up of ranger+druid+sorceror+barbarian. In a urban fantasy campaign,the best group is made up of paladin OR fighter + cleric + wizard + bard. However,all those groups whose members can fullfill the 4 roles required for a good party (fighting type,roguish type,arcane spellcaster,divine spellcaster)are good ones.I'm DMing a Cormyrean campaign and the party has the following members:Darvin the half-dragon ranger (flying tank with very good scouting skills),Enialis the sun elf wizard (arcane spellcaster particularly fond of Invocation and Transmutation spells),Arthur the cavalier (uber horse-based tank and good swordman when not on his legendary horse) and Evendur the cleric (my NPC,Lathander rulez!).Up to now,even in urban based adventures or in traps filled dungeons,we've never missed classes like thieves, bards or monks.:)
Passivearmada 06-20-07, 10:12 AM	yeah, my campaign takes place everywhere, and its not in the realms, so i can put cities wherever i want! right now, since some ppl got killed, there is a fighter lvl 7 or 8 and a ranger lvl 6 or 7/fighter 1. im hoping to get a quickwit rogue and a nice spellcaster when the othre two roll up characters. ive never DMd a good spellcaster and i really want to.
Karsus the Mad 06-20-07, 10:59 AM	Wizard, wizard, wizard, and archivist.:P
Alediran 06-20-07, 04:14 PM	Agreed with KtM, a Wizard can be a powerfull melee character if done correctly. *Casts Tenser's Transformation*
Nitan 06-24-07, 12:08 AM	^ That's not the answer. Anyways, the best party would be some combination of Clerics, Druids, and Wizards. You can throw in a Rogue for fun.
warforgedMonkey 06-24-07, 12:27 PM	if you are in eberron a perfect party would be a wizard, a cleric, a artificer and a warforged tank.. the artificer can be a great skill monkey and can make lots of humonculi to do the sneaky backstabbing stuff, the warforged cant be stopped when a artificer is backing him up.. in a campaign other than eberron... the fighter, wizard, cleric, rogue is a classic but.. you can have a druid do alot of roles by wild shaping and magic (tanking, sneaking around, scouting) ans the animal companion is a fine backup in melee.. so that the other players can experiment with other classes that are not the normal core stuff... but you can never, ever forget the wizard
MerrikCale 06-24-07, 12:35 PM	in a campaign other than eberron... the fighter, wizard, cleric, rogue is a classic but.. you can have a druid do alot of roles by wild shaping and magic (tanking, sneaking around, scouting) ans the animal companion is a fine backup in melee.. so that the other players can experiment with other classes that are not the normal core stuff... but you can never, ever forget the wizard druid is powerful in any party, but is especially effective at taking on various roles when there is less than 4 members.
Lunar190 06-24-07, 12:45 PM	Every party is perfect. :) Everything belongs to DM and PCs. Even lonely wizard can take his way through the Faerun. ;)
Passivearmada 06-26-07, 10:29 AM	nice reply Lunar 190, and u are right, but you just kinda killed the thread.
ghostcolt 06-26-07, 07:13 PM	I have been a Dm for about 25 years. I have ran parties of 2-15 from level 1-10, and I think the perfect party is well rounded to suit the quest. I find having a little of everything is often not the best, but raw "fire power" fighter and magic along with a little healing ability is a great combination. There have been times where to much was not enough, like to many fighters and not enouogh magic users.
MerrikCale 06-26-07, 09:30 PM	Every party is perfect. :) Everything belongs to DM and PCs. Even lonely wizard can take his way through the Faerun. ;) See I was thinking no party is perfect. None can truly cover ever contigency
Passivearmada 07-01-07, 09:02 PM	i think MerrikCale is more correct. I as a DM, when i see a PC lacking strength in one area, throw stuff at that area at the party, to further promote teamwork, and for the big stupid fighter to appreciate the weak, witty rogue and vice versa. Also, when they're easily cutting through Infernal ranks and bragging how awesome they are, i like to see how the like the Abyss and its Abyssal residents. I want the players to feel challenged, but not overchallenged (except sometimes). Of course, if the group has no rogue, im not going to present problems only a rogue could handle. the same with every class. i'll settle for "every party is perfect as long as the players know what theyre doing and can work well together." though it should be "if there's a nuker and a sneak, it's perfect!" just kidding
Ivellios95 07-02-07, 04:48 PM	Ithink the perfect party is....well, a Barbarian, Fighter, Rogue, and Sorceror or wizard. This just happens to be the party I,m playing with now.
Ivellios95 07-02-07, 04:52 PM	The traditional party is made up of 1 warrior (barbarian, fighter, paladin, ranger etc.) 1 healer (cleric, druid) 1 stealthy/trapfinder (rogue for core only for trapfinding but rangers and bards can easily fill the stealth/scout role) and 1 arcane caster (wizard, sorcerer). That being said it really depends on what the campaign entails. If it takes place mostly outdoors with little dungeon delving or features a lot of undead the Rogue character wouldn't be necessary and might be fairly useless for example. Or if you're going to be fighting lots of undead as suggested above a party made up of nothing but clerics would really excell. I agree totally........The healer could also turn
peteyrock 07-03-07, 10:39 AM	If someone takes levels in Druid, then they can be a really decent healer. I've actually had better results making a Druid healer rather than a Cleric one. Besides, there usually is a tree-hugger present in nearly all campaigns.
MerrikCale 07-03-07, 11:28 PM	i was just wondering what you think the perfect party is. Me, Angelina Jolie, Jessica Alba, Lindsey Lohan, and lots and lots of alcohol
Passivearmada 07-08-07, 06:55 PM	^. . .that wasn't funny to me. anyhoo, i have a problem (help!) 2 of the guys in my group are new, and one decided to be a monk. (Gods bless him!) Theyre still learning the rules, but theyre pretty solid with the basics. The other is a halfling rogue, so he's pretty set. The group adds up to a human fighter, an elf ranger, a human monk, and a halfling rogue. But there's no spellcasters. Should I create a DMPC? I really have some great material invoving a wizard, and id like to put it to use, but not on my character. what should i do? The fighter and monk dish out lotsa damage, but the ranger guy cant really do well. he'll probably have some good moments tracking, but thats about it. :confused:
Zandilar 07-08-07, 08:07 PM	Heya, But there's no spellcasters. Should I create a DMPC? I really have some great material invoving a wizard, and id like to put it to use, but not on my character. what should i do? The fighter and monk dish out lotsa damage, but the ranger guy cant really do well. he'll probably have some good moments tracking, but thats about it. :confused: If you're new to DMing, a DMPC is a very bad idea. It puts more on your plate than you should be dealing with, and can be distracting. It might also cause some resentment among the players if you put them in situations where a spellcaster will shine brighter than melee types. (Remember the PCs are the stars, and a DMPC makes the DM a star too, when he/she shouldn't be. :rolleyes: ) A better idea is to offer the players a chance to make new PCs at the end of the first adventure with the same XP level and wealth total as their current characters. And build into your current adventure things they can solve, but would be more easily solved with a spell caster (and encounters where spell damage would make them easier/flow faster - with three fighter types and a rogue, most melee based combat is going to be way easier for them). Don't completely inhibit them from completing these encounters, but make sure they get an idea of how attractive having a spell caster might be. They might surprise you by switching, or perhaps at least looking into hiring a wizard/sorcerer for the next adventure. (Yes, I know this solution is predicated on metagaming, but if you're sneaky, you could make the class switch seem like their idea to begin with... So rather than saying "hey guys, you can change classes after the first adventure", let them go "hey, having a mage might be nice - some of those encounters were pretty tough and would have been better with one, I want to reroll!" then say "Yep, okay... and here have a bargain deal - same xp and wealth level...")
Passivearmada 07-08-07, 09:02 PM	would they have to get rid of their original characters? cause if thats so, i think thats ridiculous. "remember when your paladin snuck past the guard and unleashed all the prisoners, knowing theyd be recaptured, just to see the shock on his face? hahaha, good times, good times." that would not work. a rogue guy changing to paladin. or worse- a barbarian changing to a wizard. ......shudder......
Zandilar 07-09-07, 06:10 PM	Heya, would they have to get rid of their original characters? cause if thats so, i think thats ridiculous. Of course, yes. It would have to be a completely new character... Unless they decide to multiclass instead - which is also an option. But players can be stubborn, so my suggestion is not a 100% fool proof solution. They may all still decide to stay with their current characters.
Passivearmada 07-09-07, 06:50 PM	but would this new character have been with the group all along? or would they meet up with him/her and the players original character leaves the group?
Lord_Zeb 07-09-07, 07:35 PM	DMPC is generally a bad idea, but if you really want one, make a Cleric. Reasons? 1. The team do not have a Healer. Healing will be EXTREMELY expensive if they do not, and free healing will get your team up and running soon again so that the fun will have few breaks. (Needing to head back to town to heal for a couple of weeks after clearing a few rooms in a dungeon is a downer.) Give him Healing Domain to fulfil this role properly, and all your spells can be used for Healing as well as be efficient at it. 2. Clerics are good "support roles" that can be slightly forgotten when you are busy, or just bash away at the enemy protected by heavy armor and shield, until you can start thinking of what good he should do. It's the PCs that are to be the Heroes, and as a DMG you cannot do much creative stuff anyway due to you already knowing the "proper" solutions. Wizard is bad, since you cannot strategize your spells due to DM knowledge and cannot play smart since you cannot come up with solutions, Rogue is bad since you then know when to look for traps, leader types (like marshalls, paladins, warblades/crusaders with White Raven path maneuvers) are also bad since then it is not the PCs that make the decisions. 3. As a Cleric you have your own Agenda as a Servant of a God/Goddess, and hence can blame on that when you do silly stuff with the DMPC. Good to have a reason to use it as a NPC and steer the adventure along a bit, and call it Roleplaying. ;)
Zandilar 07-10-07, 04:25 AM	Heya, but would this new character have been with the group all along? or would they meet up with him/her and the players original character leaves the group? That's how I'd run it. :)
Passivearmada 07-10-07, 04:57 PM	okay, zandilar- in my campaign, there are some "chosen" people, and i find that bad roleplaying when you switch off a character, cause- can't you just wait 'til the next campaign? or when your current character dies? im afraid that everyone'll do that and it'll end up being a completely new group! but thanks for the idea. and for Lord Zeb, i have been strangely drawn towards the divine arts lately. i find a cleric not only a good healer, but a good defender, due to its divine abilities. ive been considering a DMPC, but i figure that it will change from time to time. like say the party visits a city. there have been problems involving criminals tipping off guards to ignore open crimes, right? the king has forbidden his agents to look into it because he believes his men are too trustworthy and would never do such a lawless thing. but one grizzled old veteran "don't give a orcses bruised up arse, if i say so meself!" says in his own words, against the king's decision. he joins the group to investigate. after a few enconters or one really long one, the party and their ally solve the problem. then they leave the city, and the man behind. then they stumble across, say... a scouting patrol from a nearby elf village, pinned down by a mob of kobolds. the PCs clear that up, and have this curious elf ranger join the group as their cleric tends to the wounded. you investigate near the cave they were presumably from, and there are some drow waiting inside. after you clear that up, you help the wounded back to the town, and you leave your ranger buddy behind. maybe later in the campaign (this is what i'm doing), you'll need to gather allies for some battle, and the elf village and human city would be grateful, and you would feel familiar with these allies. just an idea.
Zandilar 07-10-07, 06:22 PM	Heya, okay, zandilar- in my campaign, there are some "chosen" people, and i find that bad roleplaying when you switch off a character, cause- can't you just wait 'til the next campaign? or when your current character dies? im afraid that everyone'll do that and it'll end up being a completely new group! but thanks for the idea. You can always just make multiclassing an attractive option. And if you're really really stuck, you could even offer to "tweak" the character's stats. Right now, you're in a position where you either need to use only melee oriented bad guys without easy access to clerics (because easy access to clerics will give the bad guys too strong an advantage), or make bad guys who act out of character in order not to take too much of an advantage over the non-magical group's obvious weakness. You could, of course, ignore the fact they don't have spell casters at all and just run the game as you always would - the attrition rate might just cause your players to reconsider their character creation options next time. (No, I'm not saying you need to implement a TPK, as that would really kill the fun of the game. The object of DnD is to have fun, and if tweaking/modifying the encounters so the PCs aren't at too much of a disadvantage is necessary, then it's necessary even if it kind of breaks the realism of the world.) For me, I'm personally torn on this issue. This kind of came up in one session in a game I'm running - my PCs are a sorcerer/druid and a warblade, and they travel with a henchwoman-***-DMPC* bard... They had to deal with an incursion by kobolds into a mine - now as we all know, kobolds are consummate trap builders and neither PC nor henchwoman had the skills to handle traps... I debated with myself, and decided in the end that the kobolds hadn't got around to building more elaborate traps than pits yet, which the PCs could spot and avoid with a high enough spot check. But it really doesn't sit well with me to do those kinds of things. For a game world to be real, creatures need to act in character. Restricting the normally clever and deceptive kobolds to pit traps still doesn't really sit right with me - and when the PCs next encounter kobolds (unlikely, they've just entered drow territory), the traps will be more elaborate. The world doesn't stop just because the party is lacking a class. I'm not going to actively set out to kill the PCs, because that's not my style. However, I am no longer going to cater exclusively to their class choices - because the "reality" of the game world doesn't work that way. Life ain't fair, as they say. At least they have access to arcane and divine magic in the form of the sorcerer/druid and the bard. * Yes, I know what I said about DMPCs, but I've had some experience as a DM in the past. My intention with the DMPC is that she's largely going to stay in the background and provide inspiration to the group, supporting the warblade in combat, and occasionally supplementing the sorcerer/druid's spells with her own. In this manner I'm keeping down the things I need to keep track of for her, and the PCs remain the stars of the game.
Passivearmada 07-10-07, 09:03 PM	nice ideas, zandilar, but we have some new members in my group. originally it was 1 elf ranger + 1 human fighter and then 1 human monk + 1 halfling rogue and now 2 more ppl are interested an im having them over to see if they like the idea. so we add (cause i talked with them and they wanna be these) 1 dwarf fighter + 1 elf wizard. the party is pretty elaborate- 3 melee, 1 spell girl, a sly tongued sneak w/ like 16 Int, and a ranged specialist (though he did what i recommend if you look at Salkyre's bows article).
Passivearmada 07-10-07, 09:17 PM	we'll have a nice big group, and a versatile one at that, so i'll be able to throw many challenges at them. the only problem is that its hard to get our group together. it was generally easy at first, because the group was my brother, a friend, and i. then we added 2 more friends. and the new recruits live right on my block, so it'll be easy to get together with them. so...how can a party be perfect (hence the name of this thread, not saying this is a perfect party) be perfect, if we cant even get together to roleplay. one guy is always open, another 2 are really wrapped up with baseball, my brother will usually be around, especially if i plan a date. the guy that lives on my block is usually open, and the girl on my block is into soccer and the mall. so i think i'd be able to get an average of... maybe 3 ppl missing from our group of 7. (this also makes me think of the many varieties of people that roleplay. and those online junkies call us nerds when we're the ones socializing. psshhh- addicts- what do they know?) i'm afraid that we'll hardly ever be able to get together, because d&d is a game you really have to devote some time to, so you can get together, but not all your time. its a hobby, not a lifestyle. most of you guys are a lot older than i am and have probably experienced these obstacles. any advice for a fellow roleplayer?
Zandilar 07-11-07, 08:25 AM	Heya, i'm afraid that we'll hardly ever be able to get together, because d&d is a game you really have to devote some time to, so you can get together, but not all your time. its a hobby, not a lifestyle. most of you guys are a lot older than i am and have probably experienced these obstacles. any advice for a fellow roleplayer? Well, what my groups have usually done has been to set aside a day (or days - one group I play with plays only on the third Saturday, the other group I play with plays on the second and fourth Saturdays, and occasionally when we all have a free day for public holidays or just the odd quiet "off" weekend). We make it a commitment to be there that day, unless something comes up. So essentially, the day(s are) set aside we try not to plan anything else for (so no double booking, not unless it's for something really really important). It's really all about commitment. Even hobbies need that, otherwise are they truly hobbies at all? :) But what would I know? I'm one of those addicts. :P :D ;)
Passivearmada 07-11-07, 10:47 AM	im talking about addicts to online games, like you know, the people that died playing WoW ;) but you're a tabletop roleplayer, zandilar. go zandilar. youve given me some good advice- ill try to get the word out that there needs to be some commitment, and we need to form a schedule. thank you. now that we have some perfect parties, anyone feel free to add in any crappy parties. :)
Zandilar 07-11-07, 07:44 PM	im talking about addicts to online games, like you know, the people that died playing WoW ;) but you're a tabletop roleplayer, zandilar. go zandilar. youve given me some good advice- ill try to get the word out that there needs to be some commitment, and we need to form a schedule. thank you. now that we have some perfect parties, anyone feel free to add in any crappy parties. :) I play WoW too. :) You'll find that most of the stories of deaths involving WoW (or any other MMORPG) usually have other mitigating factors. For example - aparently there was this guy who played WoW for 50 hours straight, before collapsing and being carted off to hospital. He died of heart failure due to dehydration... Now I have to ask - who in their right mind goes 50 hours without drinking anything? Usually there are other factors involved in these stories, especially mental illness (for which the addiction is a symptom, not the cause). To put this into perspective, I've known people to go on entire weekend binges of tabletop RPing, and when I was younger, my friends and I gathered for a series of Babylon 5 Weekends, where we'd watch as much of the Babylon 5 series as we could from Friday night through Sunday evening. So I guess what I'm trying to say is - don't believe the hype. ;)
Passivearmada 07-11-07, 10:03 PM	yeah, zandilar, i was joking, becuase i always get on my friend for playing WoW, cause he says im a nerd for d&d. i just dont like online rpgs a whole lot, because theyve stripped my generation of their imagination and repaced it with pixels on all the new gadgets and gear. luckily, im a survivor, and my imagination is in full contact. usually everything you hear about people dying due to games is because of health problems or a lack of a good life. has anyone found a good psionic book?