Question on Party Class Choices. - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Question on Party Class Choices.

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
maleioch
May 15, 2009 13:57:10 Tomorrow is the big day. The day my old friends and I get back into D&D after 15-20 years. I'm ready. Got snacks, H1 Module, intro and background written, minis, books, dungeon tiles etc. One of my friends who I was sure was going to play a Fighter, Warlord or Cleric just called to inform me that he has chosen a Human Ranger. I'm concerned about the party makeup. This is what it is.

Human Ranger
Half-Elf Ranger
Tielfling Warlock
Elf Druid
and possible Human Wizard joing as well

The lack of a Paladin, Cleric, Fighter or Warlord concerns me. Should I be concerned?
#2
person34
May 15, 2009 14:12:14 I wouldnt be too worried, the group will probably get roughed up pretty good, but there is so much damage and controlling going on there you will have a hard time getting anything to live long enough to do any damge, or even get to the PCs.

Just change out some of the money from the rewards to healing potions, and youll be alright
#3
tiornys
May 15, 2009 14:17:37
Human Ranger
Half-Elf Ranger
Tielfling Warlock
Elf Druid
and possible Human Wizard joing as well

The lack of a Paladin, Cleric, Fighter or Warlord concerns me. Should I be concerned?

If this party uses good tactics and coordination, and can use scouting to help dictate the terms of battle, they'll slaughter things. If this party doesn't use good tactics, and especially if they get ambushed, they may be in trouble. They are a glass cannon of a party (no defender) with minimal ability to recover if things start going poorly (no leader), so they need to make sure things don't go poorly.

t~
#4
Marquand
May 15, 2009 14:35:03 Well, the short answer is "no". Don't be concerned. Be aware of what your party can and cannot do and shape encounters accordingly. Im my opinion it is more important for players to play what they want as opposed to playing what the party supposedly needs.

However, don't be surprised if your players address the archetype disparity all on their own. After a few encounters your players may very well begin to pick up on the fact that some fights are harder or longer than they need to be and that the solution is to either expand the party's capabilities with some different archetypes or to change their power choices and tactics to cover the gaps.

In the game that I run the players decided on a Cleric (Leader), a Fighter (Defender), a Ranger (Striker), and a Warlock (Striker) as their classes, foregoing a Controller. By the time they had hit 3rd level the Warlock was choosing more "controllery" powers to cover the gap and the rest of the group learned how to funnel enemies into the meatgrinder. I won't elaborate about the halfling rogue's attempt to create "Master Blaster" by riding on the dragonborn cleric's shoulders...

In the other game I'm involved with as a player, we ended up with a Fighter (Defender), two Rangers (Strikers), a Rogue (Striker), and a Sorcerer (Striker). After a few sessions, both Rangers had been replaced with a Druid (Controller) and a Shaman (Leader), all at the player's request.
#5
herald108
May 15, 2009 14:46:58 I'd say this depends on the fighting-styles of the two rangers. If both are two-weapon rangers, then they should have no trouble.

But someone needs to engage the monsters. You can't have a warlock going toe-to-toe with the badguys. If two PCs can stay in melee, while the rest stay mobile, then this party will work.

It looks like that party is going to do a lot of damage. But the question is, can they sustain the fight?

I'd run a few practice encounters so that the party can work out its tactics.
#6
onemanhorde
May 15, 2009 15:04:22 Don't worry to much.

In my current campaign we only have three players. And they still are facing difficult encoutner and coming out strong, considering we have a swordmage, a wizard and a sorcerer, i'm impressed with them.
If the wizard joins maybe you can get the druid to roll up a shaman. Or ask the wizard player to roll up a bard?

With some very little changes a shamans spirit thing can be an animal like 3.5 druids and bard can easily be Enchanting/Abjuring/Diving wizards.

It all depends how much your players want to stick to the mold.
#7
Novacat
May 15, 2009 15:34:54 If, after a few hard fights, they decide they need some more diversity, there's always the multiclass option. Multiple characters multiclassing into Cleric or Warlord is a great way to improve overall party-healing, without designating any one character as "the healer". Multiclassing into a defending role is a little harder, but I'm sure they can come up with something if they really put their minds to it.
#8
jailbreaker
May 15, 2009 15:51:32 One tactic is to make your campaign a cakewalk. It worked for my last DM.
#9
Stuntman
May 15, 2009 17:56:39
The lack of a Paladin, Cleric, Fighter or Warlord concerns me. Should I be concerned?

I would not be too concerned. Let the players work out how to play such a party. I think it would be fun for them to learn how such a group handles combat. If they can identify the most serious threat early in combat, they may be able to take it out before it can do any serious damage to the party. Expect fights to be quicker as this group will be able to deal a large amount of damage. This balances the fact that they may not be able to take as much damage.

Just don't get too frustrated if the bigger artillery monsters you have cannot get their big effect powers off before going down. My group of 5 has 4 strikers (or partial strikers). If they have on occasion taken down the most powerful monster in the first round and then mop up the rest of the group rather easily.
#10
vaelan
May 15, 2009 18:06:48
One tactic is to make your campaign a cakewalk. It worked for my last DM.

H1 is not a cakewalk. It has lots of encounters with guys that just love to swarm and flank, making the lack of a Defender hurt and hampering what I would consider the party's optimal strategy of abusing the hell out of their ranged superiority.

Hopefully the Rangers will both be somewhat capable of tearing it up at range and the Druid will be focused on casting to throw some of the harder control effects out (fights with 10 minions are pretty common, bump that down to 8 for four people). They'll definitely want to soften up the enemies before they start taking serious damage.
#11
undrave
May 15, 2009 22:33:26 Just as long as they are aware of their weak spots they can cover them better.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 maleioch May 15, 2009 13:57:10	Tomorrow is the big day. The day my old friends and I get back into D&D after 15-20 years. I'm ready. Got snacks, H1 Module, intro and background written, minis, books, dungeon tiles etc. One of my friends who I was sure was going to play a Fighter, Warlord or Cleric just called to inform me that he has chosen a Human Ranger. I'm concerned about the party makeup. This is what it is. Human Ranger Half-Elf Ranger Tielfling Warlock Elf Druid and possible Human Wizard joing as well The lack of a Paladin, Cleric, Fighter or Warlord concerns me. Should I be concerned?
#2 person34 May 15, 2009 14:12:14	I wouldnt be too worried, the group will probably get roughed up pretty good, but there is so much damage and controlling going on there you will have a hard time getting anything to live long enough to do any damge, or even get to the PCs. Just change out some of the money from the rewards to healing potions, and youll be alright
#3 tiornys May 15, 2009 14:17:37	Human Ranger Half-Elf Ranger Tielfling Warlock Elf Druid and possible Human Wizard joing as well The lack of a Paladin, Cleric, Fighter or Warlord concerns me. Should I be concerned? If this party uses good tactics and coordination, and can use scouting to help dictate the terms of battle, they'll slaughter things. If this party doesn't use good tactics, and especially if they get ambushed, they may be in trouble. They are a glass cannon of a party (no defender) with minimal ability to recover if things start going poorly (no leader), so they need to make sure things don't go poorly. t~
#4 Marquand May 15, 2009 14:35:03	Well, the short answer is "no". Don't be concerned. Be aware of what your party can and cannot do and shape encounters accordingly. Im my opinion it is more important for players to play what they want as opposed to playing what the party supposedly needs. However, don't be surprised if your players address the archetype disparity all on their own. After a few encounters your players may very well begin to pick up on the fact that some fights are harder or longer than they need to be and that the solution is to either expand the party's capabilities with some different archetypes or to change their power choices and tactics to cover the gaps. In the game that I run the players decided on a Cleric (Leader), a Fighter (Defender), a Ranger (Striker), and a Warlock (Striker) as their classes, foregoing a Controller. By the time they had hit 3rd level the Warlock was choosing more "controllery" powers to cover the gap and the rest of the group learned how to funnel enemies into the meatgrinder. I won't elaborate about the halfling rogue's attempt to create "Master Blaster" by riding on the dragonborn cleric's shoulders... In the other game I'm involved with as a player, we ended up with a Fighter (Defender), two Rangers (Strikers), a Rogue (Striker), and a Sorcerer (Striker). After a few sessions, both Rangers had been replaced with a Druid (Controller) and a Shaman (Leader), all at the player's request.
#5 herald108 May 15, 2009 14:46:58	I'd say this depends on the fighting-styles of the two rangers. If both are two-weapon rangers, then they should have no trouble. But someone needs to engage the monsters. You can't have a warlock going toe-to-toe with the badguys. If two PCs can stay in melee, while the rest stay mobile, then this party will work. It looks like that party is going to do a lot of damage. But the question is, can they sustain the fight? I'd run a few practice encounters so that the party can work out its tactics.
#6 onemanhorde May 15, 2009 15:04:22	Don't worry to much. In my current campaign we only have three players. And they still are facing difficult encoutner and coming out strong, considering we have a swordmage, a wizard and a sorcerer, i'm impressed with them. If the wizard joins maybe you can get the druid to roll up a shaman. Or ask the wizard player to roll up a bard? With some very little changes a shamans spirit thing can be an animal like 3.5 druids and bard can easily be Enchanting/Abjuring/Diving wizards. It all depends how much your players want to stick to the mold.
#7 Novacat May 15, 2009 15:34:54	If, after a few hard fights, they decide they need some more diversity, there's always the multiclass option. Multiple characters multiclassing into Cleric or Warlord is a great way to improve overall party-healing, without designating any one character as "the healer". Multiclassing into a defending role is a little harder, but I'm sure they can come up with something if they really put their minds to it.
#8 jailbreaker May 15, 2009 15:51:32	One tactic is to make your campaign a cakewalk. It worked for my last DM.
#9 Stuntman May 15, 2009 17:56:39	The lack of a Paladin, Cleric, Fighter or Warlord concerns me. Should I be concerned? I would not be too concerned. Let the players work out how to play such a party. I think it would be fun for them to learn how such a group handles combat. If they can identify the most serious threat early in combat, they may be able to take it out before it can do any serious damage to the party. Expect fights to be quicker as this group will be able to deal a large amount of damage. This balances the fact that they may not be able to take as much damage. Just don't get too frustrated if the bigger artillery monsters you have cannot get their big effect powers off before going down. My group of 5 has 4 strikers (or partial strikers). If they have on occasion taken down the most powerful monster in the first round and then mop up the rest of the group rather easily.
#10 vaelan May 15, 2009 18:06:48	One tactic is to make your campaign a cakewalk. It worked for my last DM. H1 is not a cakewalk. It has lots of encounters with guys that just love to swarm and flank, making the lack of a Defender hurt and hampering what I would consider the party's optimal strategy of abusing the hell out of their ranged superiority. Hopefully the Rangers will both be somewhat capable of tearing it up at range and the Druid will be focused on casting to throw some of the harder control effects out (fights with 10 minions are pretty common, bump that down to 8 for four people). They'll definitely want to soften up the enemies before they start taking serious damage.
#11 undrave May 15, 2009 22:33:26	Just as long as they are aware of their weak spots they can cover them better.