Group Division of Party Responsibilities [Archive] - Wizards Community

Group Division of Party Responsibilities [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
draco1119
01-25-07, 02:18 AM Since this is a topic that, unfortunately, hasn't been adequately explored (IMHO) due to thread closures, I figured I would use WizO Cat's blanket permission to reopen this topic. As long as it stays on topic and doesn't have a misleading thread title. :D

What I wanted to focus on was a question about divvying up party responsibilities. In terms of accepting a role you either aren't accustomed to, or don't like (cleric, bard, fighter typically), how compromising are you? Is there a line to be drawn when you sacrifice enjoying your place in the group with fulfilling your duties?

Discuss.
Dragonsblood
01-25-07, 02:54 AM In the groups I've been in we don't really "divide up" the party roles. We make our characters with everyone else, and everyone knows the ideal party make up so it's always worked out. This is usually about how it goes:

Me: "Frank, what do you want to make?"
Frank: "Probably either a caster or a rogue, what about you guys?"
Me: "Doesn't matter to me."
Miles: "Hmm, I dunno, I'll make whatever the group needs"
Nick: "Well I don't want to make a plain melee character like a fighter, but something with casting ability would be good."
Me: "How about a cleric, Nick?"
Nick: "Yeah that's fine."
Frank: "OK I'll make a rogue then."
Miles: "I think I'm going to try a ranger this time."
Me: "Looks like we still need an arcanist and more of a melee presence, but I think I'd prefer making a wizard."
Nick: "That's fine, I'll make my cleric more melee focused and take the strength or war domain."

If I joined a group that didn't compromise as well in class selection, I wouldn't have a problem being stuck with a different class than I first wanted. I tend to get attached to multiple character concepts.
Mister_Sinister
01-25-07, 02:56 AM I'm fairly able to fill empty slots, largely because only two members of our group are even able to book-keep or properly work a caster at all. As a result of this, cleric and wizard-type classes tend to be our focus.
At the same time, there are classes I simply won't touch. Anything roguish-skill monkey type is well out for me. I'm really not sure why.
Kas
01-25-07, 03:26 AM A problem I see many groups having is this: NO ONE wants to play the healer.

I won't say cleric, because the cleric can fill multiple roles and can, if played effectively, be just as formidable as a fighter or barbarian in most situations. But no one wants to play the person with the Heal skill or the person who spends their time/XP/gold on healing wands. The predicament is that the party tends to drop very very fast, so recently I've taken the helm to that role.

Yes, you take a backseat to the fighting and action, but you're nearly the most essential group member and everyone loves you for it. You also tend to make the most decisions, since it's not just your butt on the line, but the butts of those you're trying to keep standing.
Dragonsblood
01-25-07, 03:33 AM A problem I see many groups having is this: NO ONE wants to play the healer.

I won't say cleric, because the cleric can fill multiple roles and can, if played effectively, be just as formidable as a fighter or barbarian in most situations. But no one wants to play the person with the Heal skill or the person who spends their time/XP/gold on healing wands. The predicament is that the party tends to drop very very fast, so recently I've taken the helm to that role.

Yeesh - I wouldn't want to play the healer if I had to buy all of the cure wands either. Maybe it would help if everyone pitched in for the healing items and not just the cleric. In groups I've been a part of, a wand of CLW is the first thing we buy, which is really easy when everyone's only paying around 200 gold.
DM Denubis
01-25-07, 03:52 AM I think I'm the only person alive who doesn't mind playing the healer, and actually enjoys playing the Healer class (Miniature's Handbook).

Anyhow, it's usually me who winds up filling the gap in the party, which, in my group, almost always means playing a divine caster of some sort. Not that I mind, because I do so love clerics and healers.

So, I guess you could say that I'm pretty flexible for my group, because I'll go there with all intentions of playing a Whisper Gnome rogue, and wind up playing a human cloistered cleric, because that's that the party needs.
draco1119
01-25-07, 04:09 AM In my group, we tend to make our characters individually, and then the DM has an NPC for any obvious holes. As an example: in one of our games, I am BOTH skill-monkey and healer, which means I'm not as effective as either one individually. I did it because I've had a concept knocking around in my head for a few years, and finally got to play him. Sort of. Anyway, we have an NPC rogue and another player has a cohort that fills the gaps for me until I go Epic. Right now I'm at 9th caster level Favored Soul and 5th level Scout, so I've got LOTS of room to improve... :P
User5127
01-25-07, 08:34 AM I tend to make what the party needs. alot of times its us talking about "i'll fill what the party needs" and no one can settle on something till every one else has picked! haha.

So when that happens I pick wizard and let the chips fall after that. then I pick my spells to fit what every one else has chosen.

but I'm comfortable in pretty much any role. I've done some savage barbarian types to the sophisticated scholorly wizard. so yea ^_^
kelvinaw273
01-25-07, 06:13 PM It depends on the players and the DM, really.

Some DMs will amend adventures and supply NPC allies to your needs, and encourage players to play whatever they want to.

Others will insist on all of the four 'main' roles being filled - tank, healer, blaster and trapspringer.

When I join a group I generally ask what they need and adapt a character concept I already have to it. If they don't need anything like that I will still look for something that compliments the party as chosen. If nobody has chosen yet, I make up what I want.

DMing I prefer to play the 'adaptable' game: I adapt to the party, once I have explained the campaign concept to the party. Of course if players ignore the campaign concept and make something really incompatible, then that becomes their problem ...
danielinthewolvesden
01-26-07, 02:17 AM Generally, in my groups everyone wants to play the Arcanist or the Warrior, so the skill-monkey and heal-bot roles are often the ones "someone has to do".

Currently, for example, I am playing a Healer.Yes, a MH Healer. 20th level. Voted "most valuable party member". Really. Not the most fun PC I have ever run, but I am still enjoying myself.

For "the next game" we decided to discuss in advance party roles.

Note that it is important to pin folks down. "I'll play a rogue" could mean a PC with little in the way of Search/Disable/Open Lock.

The party needs one each of the 4 main roles. A cleric or druid can sub for the warrior, but that's about it. So, you could have a cleric AND a druid, with a Sorc and a Scout for example.
User5127
01-26-07, 04:56 AM I cant really remember the book atm... but iirc its phb2. Anyways it detailed some info for gorups who were short a player and what classes every one could pick to fill out groupd roles. like picking bard and pally... etc..
FntsyWlkr
01-30-07, 11:36 AM The arguement I will speak to is the final question, "where do you draw the line?"

There isn't necessarily a need to balance the party. (whao!) Sometimes a good imbalance opens up new theory, and/or tactics.

I may be in the minority here, but I find that really interesting effects come into play with the risk of doing something new, and unplanned.

"When you have an original idea you don't have to worry about people stealing it, you practically have to cram it down their throats ..."
Alex_
01-30-07, 11:58 AM Cleric is not the only healer. There's Druids, Bards, Spirit Shamans, Favored Souls, Paladins, and the Healing class just to name a few. I think that if people were encouraged to choose these options as opposed to being told, "We need a cleric", there would be fewer people adverse to the role.

I personally dislike spellcasting, especially flashy spellcasting with lots of bookwork, so I prefer playing the skill and combat focused classes. If I do play any kind of spellcaster, I like them to have limited spell selection of basic/utilitarian nature to keep down on book keeping and focus more on the character than all the cool spells they can cast.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
draco1119 01-25-07, 02:18 AM	Since this is a topic that, unfortunately, hasn't been adequately explored (IMHO) due to thread closures, I figured I would use WizO Cat's blanket permission to reopen this topic. As long as it stays on topic and doesn't have a misleading thread title. :D What I wanted to focus on was a question about divvying up party responsibilities. In terms of accepting a role you either aren't accustomed to, or don't like (cleric, bard, fighter typically), how compromising are you? Is there a line to be drawn when you sacrifice enjoying your place in the group with fulfilling your duties? Discuss.
Dragonsblood 01-25-07, 02:54 AM	In the groups I've been in we don't really "divide up" the party roles. We make our characters with everyone else, and everyone knows the ideal party make up so it's always worked out. This is usually about how it goes: Me: "Frank, what do you want to make?" Frank: "Probably either a caster or a rogue, what about you guys?" Me: "Doesn't matter to me." Miles: "Hmm, I dunno, I'll make whatever the group needs" Nick: "Well I don't want to make a plain melee character like a fighter, but something with casting ability would be good." Me: "How about a cleric, Nick?" Nick: "Yeah that's fine." Frank: "OK I'll make a rogue then." Miles: "I think I'm going to try a ranger this time." Me: "Looks like we still need an arcanist and more of a melee presence, but I think I'd prefer making a wizard." Nick: "That's fine, I'll make my cleric more melee focused and take the strength or war domain." If I joined a group that didn't compromise as well in class selection, I wouldn't have a problem being stuck with a different class than I first wanted. I tend to get attached to multiple character concepts.
Mister_Sinister 01-25-07, 02:56 AM	I'm fairly able to fill empty slots, largely because only two members of our group are even able to book-keep or properly work a caster at all. As a result of this, cleric and wizard-type classes tend to be our focus. At the same time, there are classes I simply won't touch. Anything roguish-skill monkey type is well out for me. I'm really not sure why.
Kas 01-25-07, 03:26 AM	A problem I see many groups having is this: NO ONE wants to play the healer. I won't say cleric, because the cleric can fill multiple roles and can, if played effectively, be just as formidable as a fighter or barbarian in most situations. But no one wants to play the person with the Heal skill or the person who spends their time/XP/gold on healing wands. The predicament is that the party tends to drop very very fast, so recently I've taken the helm to that role. Yes, you take a backseat to the fighting and action, but you're nearly the most essential group member and everyone loves you for it. You also tend to make the most decisions, since it's not just your butt on the line, but the butts of those you're trying to keep standing.
Dragonsblood 01-25-07, 03:33 AM	A problem I see many groups having is this: NO ONE wants to play the healer. I won't say cleric, because the cleric can fill multiple roles and can, if played effectively, be just as formidable as a fighter or barbarian in most situations. But no one wants to play the person with the Heal skill or the person who spends their time/XP/gold on healing wands. The predicament is that the party tends to drop very very fast, so recently I've taken the helm to that role. Yeesh - I wouldn't want to play the healer if I had to buy all of the cure wands either. Maybe it would help if everyone pitched in for the healing items and not just the cleric. In groups I've been a part of, a wand of CLW is the first thing we buy, which is really easy when everyone's only paying around 200 gold.
DM Denubis 01-25-07, 03:52 AM	I think I'm the only person alive who doesn't mind playing the healer, and actually enjoys playing the Healer class (Miniature's Handbook). Anyhow, it's usually me who winds up filling the gap in the party, which, in my group, almost always means playing a divine caster of some sort. Not that I mind, because I do so love clerics and healers. So, I guess you could say that I'm pretty flexible for my group, because I'll go there with all intentions of playing a Whisper Gnome rogue, and wind up playing a human cloistered cleric, because that's that the party needs.
draco1119 01-25-07, 04:09 AM	In my group, we tend to make our characters individually, and then the DM has an NPC for any obvious holes. As an example: in one of our games, I am BOTH skill-monkey and healer, which means I'm not as effective as either one individually. I did it because I've had a concept knocking around in my head for a few years, and finally got to play him. Sort of. Anyway, we have an NPC rogue and another player has a cohort that fills the gaps for me until I go Epic. Right now I'm at 9th caster level Favored Soul and 5th level Scout, so I've got LOTS of room to improve... :P
User5127 01-25-07, 08:34 AM	I tend to make what the party needs. alot of times its us talking about "i'll fill what the party needs" and no one can settle on something till every one else has picked! haha. So when that happens I pick wizard and let the chips fall after that. then I pick my spells to fit what every one else has chosen. but I'm comfortable in pretty much any role. I've done some savage barbarian types to the sophisticated scholorly wizard. so yea ^_^
kelvinaw273 01-25-07, 06:13 PM	It depends on the players and the DM, really. Some DMs will amend adventures and supply NPC allies to your needs, and encourage players to play whatever they want to. Others will insist on all of the four 'main' roles being filled - tank, healer, blaster and trapspringer. When I join a group I generally ask what they need and adapt a character concept I already have to it. If they don't need anything like that I will still look for something that compliments the party as chosen. If nobody has chosen yet, I make up what I want. DMing I prefer to play the 'adaptable' game: I adapt to the party, once I have explained the campaign concept to the party. Of course if players ignore the campaign concept and make something really incompatible, then that becomes their problem ...
danielinthewolvesden 01-26-07, 02:17 AM	Generally, in my groups everyone wants to play the Arcanist or the Warrior, so the skill-monkey and heal-bot roles are often the ones "someone has to do". Currently, for example, I am playing a Healer.Yes, a MH Healer. 20th level. Voted "most valuable party member". Really. Not the most fun PC I have ever run, but I am still enjoying myself. For "the next game" we decided to discuss in advance party roles. Note that it is important to pin folks down. "I'll play a rogue" could mean a PC with little in the way of Search/Disable/Open Lock. The party needs one each of the 4 main roles. A cleric or druid can sub for the warrior, but that's about it. So, you could have a cleric AND a druid, with a Sorc and a Scout for example.
User5127 01-26-07, 04:56 AM	I cant really remember the book atm... but iirc its phb2. Anyways it detailed some info for gorups who were short a player and what classes every one could pick to fill out groupd roles. like picking bard and pally... etc..
FntsyWlkr 01-30-07, 11:36 AM	The arguement I will speak to is the final question, "where do you draw the line?" There isn't necessarily a need to balance the party. (whao!) Sometimes a good imbalance opens up new theory, and/or tactics. I may be in the minority here, but I find that really interesting effects come into play with the risk of doing something new, and unplanned. "When you have an original idea you don't have to worry about people stealing it, you practically have to cram it down their throats ..."
Alex_ 01-30-07, 11:58 AM	Cleric is not the only healer. There's Druids, Bards, Spirit Shamans, Favored Souls, Paladins, and the Healing class just to name a few. I think that if people were encouraged to choose these options as opposed to being told, "We need a cleric", there would be fewer people adverse to the role. I personally dislike spellcasting, especially flashy spellcasting with lots of bookwork, so I prefer playing the skill and combat focused classes. If I do play any kind of spellcaster, I like them to have limited spell selection of basic/utilitarian nature to keep down on book keeping and focus more on the character than all the cool spells they can cast.