PDA

View Full Version : If you had to fill one more slot in your group......



Counterpower
2007-02-25, 11:00 PM
..... which class would you fill it with?

Assume that you already have a wizard and a cleric for healing. It'd be nice if you could also explain why, in a polite and civil manner. I know there are plenty of strong opinions on this matter, but I am an eternal optimist, and believe that we can have this discussion civilly.

The final "other" on the poll is supposed to represent either a class or play style I did not mention. If I misplaced a class (for example, if you think that "cleric" should be in a different category) then vote for the category that the class is in, and explain why it shouldn't be there.

Counterpower
2007-02-25, 11:05 PM
Apologies for the double post.

I believe that a fighter, even if only for cleanup after the wizard has done his job, is a better choice than the others. After all, even two wizards will run out of spell slots eventually.

PaladinBoy
2007-02-25, 11:12 PM
Fighter. (or other tank)

What he does isn't as dependent on preparation or targeting the right weakness to be effective.

I also agree with you......... casters can't keep casting spells all day. While fighters can't fight all day without dying, they can fight all day if they are careful and have healing potions.

Rabiesbunny
2007-02-25, 11:13 PM
Boy, would I EVER choose a cleric.

Let me explain our party dynamic at the moment; this is an FR campaign set in the Moonsea, a Zhent campaign. We have...


Level 8 LE Knight/Vengeance Knight, Banite (The DM tweaked the class for fun's sake, to let him be LE)

Level 8 LE Swashbuckler, Loviatan

Level 7 LE Monk, Banite

Level 8 LE Wizard/Skymage, Banite

Level 8 LE Duskblade/Dragon Disciple, Banite

Edit: Level 8 LE Rogue, Banite

Level 9 N Expert/Cleric/Techsmith, Gondian

Level 7 NE Gnoll Barbarian/Ranger, Malarite

Level 8 NE Druid, Talonar

We're a motley crew. The reason I'd end up picking up a cleric is that though we have two divine casters in our party, the follower of Gond is obsessed with, DUH, machines, and as such almost never really jumps into battle -- he sucks as a healer. That leaves my Talontar druid as the primary healer. Problem IS, she's a Talontar, and likes death, poison, and rotting! So she has maybe two moderate wounds, and minor maxed out -- all of her spells are offensive, or buff her animal companion.

...what I wouldn't give for a dedicated healer...

Rigeld2
2007-02-25, 11:24 PM
Cleric or Druid in a heartbeat, if I was trying to optimize the party. If I'm just sitting down to a game, I'll play a Fighter or Warlock.

crazedloon
2007-02-25, 11:25 PM
I personaly would go with a skill monkey. Every group could use one if not need one. Also playing the skill monkey is very fun :smallbiggrin:

LotharBot
2007-02-25, 11:32 PM
I assume this is "above and beyond your normal party", in which case, I'd like a utility character -- a bard, mystic theurge, or rogue specializing in something other than stealth and lockpicking.

I'd go with bard with my current party -- ftr8/brb3 , brb11, rgr7/rog3/brb1, clr11, wiz7/loremaster4, rog11. Nobody has a CHA over 12, and nobody has invested in anything diplomatic, despite the fact that it's actually useful in this campaign. We've got a fair bit of heavy melee and light melee, and plenty of sneak attacks/flanking/etc, but it'd be nice to have a bit of bonus casting on top of the diplomacy and such.

Bears With Lasers
2007-02-25, 11:34 PM
Another wizard or cleric or druid should do quite nicely.

cupkeyk
2007-02-25, 11:47 PM
BARD. A face, secondary caster, secondary healer, and skill monkey.

Stevenson
2007-02-25, 11:48 PM
Hrm. Cleric.

More heals are always good.

More other uniquely cleric spells are also good.

Besides casting spells, clerics can fight. Not quite as good as a fighter, but it gets kinda close.

Plus, the versatility of domains.

Add it all up, and cleric seems to be the best bet.

I normally would say tank...but the group already has a person with 30 AC, so I think we're good.

Bears With Lasers
2007-02-25, 11:53 PM
Besides casting spells, clerics can fight. Not quite as good as a fighter, but it gets kinda close.

Uh, better than the fighter, you mean.

Suzaku
2007-02-25, 11:56 PM
Druid, I now have a class feature that's better then the other class.

Stevenson
2007-02-25, 11:57 PM
Well, not fighting by itself with nothing else. Fighting along with the cleric's spellcasting makes it far superior, yes. I tend to find that fighters' bonus feats make it more suited for flat combat than a cleric.

Bears With Lasers
2007-02-25, 11:58 PM
Eh, the cleric's higher AB/damage from buffs and self-healing mean that he fights as well. He can fit in whatever the fighter's best feat chain is, too (i.e. Shock Trooper), without a problem.

PnP Fan
2007-02-26, 12:04 AM
I'll put in "other caster" because my groups tend to need a utility mage to cast all of those highly useful utility spells. Our caster tends play sorcerers, focused on damage dealing, and sometimes we are left high and dry because the sorcerer has none of the utility spells. Of course, all this means is that we have to be a little more creative in dealing with some situations that the utility spells could handle quickly.

Orzel
2007-02-26, 04:30 AM
Other. Stealthy guy.

I rather not see the casters waste the first 3 turns buffing and getting arrowed.

ZekeArgo
2007-02-26, 04:48 AM
Other. Stealthy guy.

I rather not see the casters waste the first 3 turns buffing and getting arrowed.

The Cleric takes 1 round (Quickened Divine Favor + Divine Power), the Wizard lays down Solid Fog + Quickened Whatever, and the druid just Wildshapes into an "OMFG monster of pouncing crazy power" and Quickens whatever spell he wants to cast before charging in.

Yeah, another wizard/druid/cleric in a heartbeat.

greenknight
2007-02-26, 04:48 AM
What is the general party level? And who are the other party members?

If the party doesn't have a Rogue, then a Rogue (maybe with a few Ranger levels) would probably be the best choice. Maybe some other stealth/scout from a splatbook, if they're allowed.

Of the options you've presented, each could be the best choice, depending on party level. If it's 1st - 4th, then a powerful melee type like Fighter or Barbarian (or even Figher/Barbarian multiclass) would be the best choice. From 5th - 8th Druid's the best choice, with a powerful Animal Companion. From 9th onwards, the choice would be between Cleric, Druid and Wizard (but not a specialist Evoker).

Yuki Akuma
2007-02-26, 04:50 AM
Bard. Always, always pick the bard to be the fifth wheel.

Always.

Bears With Lasers
2007-02-26, 04:52 AM
Bard. Always, always pick the bard to be the fifth wheel.

Always.

Except... not? Another cleric (for example) is a much better fifth wheel. Bards don't bring that much to the table, fifth party member or not.

Orzel
2007-02-26, 04:58 AM
The Cleric takes 1 round (Quickened Divine Favor + Divine Power), the Wizard lays down Solid Fog + Quickened Whatever, and the druid just Wildshapes into an "OMFG monster of pouncing crazy power" and Quickens whatever spell he wants to cast before charging in.

Yeah, another wizard/druid/cleric in a heartbeat.

I ready a Manyshot/sneakattack "if she starts casting a spell."
What spell?

OR

DM: Your wizard/cleric takes 50 damage, Roll for Init.

Saph
2007-02-26, 05:06 AM
Our party is currently:

Tank (fighter)
Hybrid (cleric)
Blaster (evoker)
Controller (enchanter)
Other (bard)
Other (fighter/rogue)

So we don't really need any more players, but if we had to pick one more, a tank/healer type, like a paladin or fighter or cleric, would be nice. We're a bit short on front-liners. Definitely don't want a fourth arcane caster.

- Saph

Leon
2007-02-26, 05:10 AM
Cleric/Druid - we had a Disticnt lack of Healing power last time, to the point of the Wiz casting Limited wishes to gain healing capability

Currently it looks like i'll be a Druid or a Cleric for our upcoming Dark Sun run, the intro games have everyone as a Psioinc class of some sort with a Cleric NPC cos the DM thought we needed it

As it stands: 2 Soulknives, 2 Psions, 2 Psi Warriors, 1 Wilder

greenknight
2007-02-26, 05:11 AM
I ready a Manyshot/sneakattack "if she starts casting a spell."
What spell?

Unless the Cleric / Druid takes total cover behind a Tower Shield while casting the spell. What readied action?

Orzel
2007-02-26, 05:21 AM
Unless the Cleric / Druid takes total cover behind a Tower Shield while casting the spell. What readied action?

Why are you taking cover? You don't see nor hear me?

greenknight
2007-02-26, 05:24 AM
Why are you taking cover? You don't see nor hear me?

You mean battle is happening and a Cleric / Druid wouldn't take total cover if they could while casting spells? And for that matter, how exactly are you hiding from the Druid's insanely high Spot / Listen check?

Yuki Akuma
2007-02-26, 05:30 AM
Except... not? Another cleric (for example) is a much better fifth wheel. Bards don't bring that much to the table, fifth party member or not.

Because I like bards. :smalltongue:

Armads
2007-02-26, 05:31 AM
i would get a cleric or a druid. extra healing is always nice, especially if the druid/cleric dies in the first round of combat (happened to me. got ambushed by 2 greater shadows and ran out of strength in the first round before i could wildshape).

Orzel
2007-02-26, 05:32 AM
how exactly are you hiding from the Druid's insanely high Spot / Listen check?

The Ranger/rogue's insanely high H&MS

If there's a dude who can cast and has a tower shield, I shoot the wizard.

Jack Mann
2007-02-26, 05:39 AM
Orzel, Green, the question isn't who could beat whom. It's who can beat most enemies better. From an optimization standpoint, that's the important question.

greenknight
2007-02-26, 05:45 AM
Orzel, Green, the question isn't who could beat whom. It's who can beat most enemies better. From an optimization standpoint, that's the important question.

You're right, I did allow myself to get dragged into that one. But right now the question can't really be answered because as I pointed out earlier, we don't know what level the character will be, nor do we know what other character types are in the group (aside from one Cleric and one Wizard). The only thing I can say for sure is that for level 5 and beyond, the Fighter / Barbarian type wouldn't be the best choice.

Orzel
2007-02-26, 05:47 AM
Orzel, Green, the question isn't who could beat whom. It's who can beat most enemies better. From an optimization standpoint, that's the important question.

That's my point. A stealth archer can kill/seriously injure enemies before the battle and lock down casters during. If you have a CoDzilla you don't gain much from another one. Plus enemies rarely carry tower shields.

ZekeArgo
2007-02-26, 05:48 AM
I ready a Manyshot/sneakattack "if she starts casting a spell."
What spell?

OR

DM: Your wizard/cleric takes 50 damage, Roll for Init.

Ah, so he would have to make 3-4 concentration checks (if all of the strikes even hit, dealing 1d8+1or2d6 elemental damage+2-3? So a DC 20-ish Concentration check that activates say... the Windwall on arrow attack contingency that a decent wizard would prepare? Nevermind others to cast mirror image/invisibility/dimension door/whatever.

axraelshelm
2007-02-26, 05:53 AM
Cleric nothing like healing for myself and a host of gods to worship and Divination is great!
BUT next time I'm taking a break and going psyic warrior back with the sword!

Bender
2007-02-26, 05:54 AM
Where is the love and music, without a bard...

Yami
2007-02-26, 07:53 AM
I choose a damage caster, because your idea of a tank and mine most likely differ. It's not like I play my sorceror or warlock any different than my fighter/barbarian... well, unless I get too splat book happy, but I just craft those, I never actually use them.

Sure more healing is nice an all, but I've had people say some choice words about my clerics. I umm, tend to play them like my barbarians... so still a damage caster.

"More healing? I'va given ya all I got. Whaddya expect, God of Bloody Vengance 'member? I can cause ya all sortsa problems with the buffs and downers I've left, but ya canna just go takin' everythin' and expect a bloody revification like that. I can only do ya fit as a fiddle once. Ya gota warn me your a bleeder, these thing need ta be prepared for."

Edit:

Where is the love and music, without a bard...
Its at the nearest tavern once the dungeon crawls over. That is the reason I risk life and limb for a few measley thousand gold you know.

Khantalas
2007-02-26, 08:31 AM
Druid.

Anything another character can do, it is likely that druid can do it better.

Fighting? Wild shape. Check. Stealth? Wild Shape. Check. Blasting? Magic. Check. Buffing? Magic. Check. Miscellaneous support? Magic. Check.

If you can't have a druid, get a cleric. You may slightly lack at the stealth department, but you'll also breathe out radioactive substances and smash tanks with your toe.

Closet_Skeleton
2007-02-26, 08:40 AM
Bards. They're everyone's friend even if nobody likes them. The great thing about Bards as a fifth party member is that they don't compete with anyone. If you get a second Wizard than the one with lower initiative will feel useless. They just generally help everyone without getting in the way.

Roderick_BR
2007-02-26, 08:46 AM
For a group with a wizard and a cleric? Fighter, of course. Or other melee character. I like classic groups: 1 Warrior type, 1 arcane spell user, 1 healer, and 1 rogue (notice I didn't say just any skill monkey, because every group NEEDS a rogue).
After the main group is complete, I like to use complement types, like extra meleers, or bard, to boost the party.

Miles Invictus
2007-02-26, 09:24 AM
I'd go with a cleric, so the primary cleric doesn't need to be quite so stingy with his spells. And there's nothing like a theological debate between the adherents of two wholly and admittedly fictional religions.

Doc_Outlands
2007-02-26, 11:41 AM
Warlock and/or Scout. Just because.
:smallbiggrin:

Leush
2007-02-26, 12:19 PM
You have two full casters- so don't go for a third. I would recommend bard, but for once I'm not going to. Whilst the two of them rest, (even a magnificent mansion can, in theory, be detected), you need something to stand guard, with a high listen check preferably. You could use a familiar, but I'd be happier with a rogue or ranger, in fact rogue more than anything. Mainly because he has more skillpoints, so the casters don't have to waste spell slots on social/trap disarming/searching/guarding spells. He's not going to be the star of combat, but he won't be useless as his specialisation is so vastly different from the other two.

Telonius
2007-02-26, 12:43 PM
If I knew more about them, I have a feeling I'd put down some sort of Psionic character.

But going off of what I know now, you've got your Wizardly and Cleric-y (clerical?) stuff taken care of. I'd go with Bard. You already have your combat needs taken care of with a Tank/caster Cleric and a Batman Wizard. Those two will be optimized for dealing with all combat situations. What about the social situations? Everybody in town likes a Bard. High Bluff and Diplomacy will open doors for you.

Speaking of opening doors, not having trapfinding (with a Rogue) will hurt you, but only situationally. If your DM has attended the Tucker School of Kobold Trapsmiths, you'll want a Rogue instead. However, if he's like most other DMs, traps will come up only very occasionally, and you can get your skillmonkey on as a Bard.

Altair_the_Vexed
2007-02-26, 12:47 PM
I'd want a skillmonkey of some sort, preferably one with rogue levels.

pestilenceawaits
2007-02-26, 01:26 PM
I would go with Cleric more heals, buffs, etc. It has all been said before but I would make sure it had a different flavor than any other divine casters in the party.

ravenkith
2007-02-26, 01:33 PM
It all depends on what level you're talking about. At lower levels(1-5), a warlock or a fighter can make a very good choice for some 'go all day' capabilities. At mid levels 5-12ish)a druid would probably be the best choice, while at higher levels (12+) an extra cleric or wizard often maakes for a useful party member, where others wouldn't contribute much.

It also depends on your current party composition.

My post assumes that you have not only hte cleric and the wizard roles covered, but also have a tank type and a thief type as well (although at the later levels a wizard, druid or a cleric can perform either function acceptably if need be.

FYI:
Mount = 'detect traps' in hallway
Knock = open lock
invisibility = hide
silence = move silently

etc., etc..

Strengfellow
2007-02-26, 01:58 PM
There is the question of player competence to take into account.
The more experienced gamers can safely be trusted to boost the party with a Bard/dedicated caster type.
If on the other hand your new player is a rank tyro then I would suggest operation meat shield.

Leush
2007-02-26, 02:10 PM
FYI:
Mount = 'detect traps' in hallway
Knock = open lock
invisibility = hide
silence = move silently

etc., etc..

Detect Magic = Priceless

4+ Spell Slots Wasted Every Time You Need To Sneak = Very Bad

Sorry, I felt snarky. It won't happen again. I hope. There is more evidence for why this doesn't [quite] substitute for a rogue, however, I'm sure some other kindly individual can explain that.

PaladinBoy
2007-02-26, 05:12 PM
I have an explanation for you , Leush.

A rouge can sneak around all day, without wasting resources (unless he's spotted) and without having to worry about dispel magic or particularly a wall of dispel magic.

With a cleric/druid/wizard, you do have to worry about durations and dispel magic. Druid less so, because wild shape lasts for a while, but if any of the buffs wear down at the wrong time, then you have to worry about being spotted. Or, if some enemy has detect magic or arcane sight, the buffs which are keeping you hidden will either reveal you or be worthless.

It will work, possibly even better than a rogue can do it, but it opens up weaknesses that a rogue doesn't have.

Bears With Lasers
2007-02-26, 05:14 PM
The solution: an Arcane Trickster build.

Noneoyabizzness
2007-02-26, 05:22 PM
ok to break down on campaign...

really good campaign, a rogue. the scout we had had a fallign out with the dm, but the rest of the party is the battle bard, a warmage, a cleric, and a kobold swordsage. trapmonkey is needed badly

evil campaign-cleric. we have a badly played annoying bard, a kyton, My dread necro, and an evil pixie.

gestalt-clerc/sorc, or archivist/wizard. the druid/rogue and the monk/totemist died. and the new characters are ninja/something noncaster and someone wholly useless that might infact be partly those classes, but shown no virtue in those roles. then the paladin/monk or the soulknife fighter have to be the primary problem solvers in the party, yes, one must worry.

ravenkith
2007-02-26, 05:28 PM
Detect Magic = Priceless

4+ Spell Slots Wasted Every Time You Need To Sneak = Very Bad

Sorry, I felt snarky. It won't happen again. I hope. There is more evidence for why this doesn't [quite] substitute for a rogue, however, I'm sure some other kindly individual can explain that.

I wasn't trying to substitute for a rogue...

if you actually read the whole post, you'd see I very specifically pointed out that my post posited that you already had 1 each of the fighter, healer, arcane caster and rogue types.

In such a situation, a dedicated caster (read druid/cleric/wizard) is clearly the better choice, because, in a pinch, they can step in for any of the initial members if they are temporarily incapacitated. The druid is especially good at this, being able to tank like a fighter with wildshape, cast offensive spells like a wizrd with his call lightning, etc., buff and heal like a cleric, or stealth like a rogue thanks to rat forms, etc.

Solaris
2007-02-26, 05:38 PM
'Other caster' - Grimrore Sagescient des Sylva Conjeirtei is almost always the NPC I bring into the party to round out the roster and give us a spellslinger who does something other than fireball or scorching ray. Grim, naturally, is a wizard. He either has a couple levels of rogue or dread necromancer, I forget which - it's been a while.

Leush
2007-02-26, 05:39 PM
Ooops. There I go again. Sorry. I seem to have spent too long in the Gaming section of the forum today. In that case you're right- two non casters is enough, usually.

(Although personally I would choose a Bard rather than a Druid because cheese effect kills, so don't eat druids after casting remove poison.)

Matthew
2007-02-26, 06:11 PM
So, has CounterPower provided any further parameters? I have to throw in with the 'it depends' people at this stage.
If you have a Fighter, Rogue, Cleric, Wizard combination already, all the bases are covered for pretty much all levels of play. After that, you're probably best served by a Non Spell Caster at levels 1-5 and a Spell Caster at levels 6+. However, a Cleric is always handy.

deadseashoals
2007-02-26, 06:44 PM
For a party with a wizard and a cleric? Swordsage with a 2-level dip in a trapfinding class (either scout or rogue, since beguiler, artificer, ninja, and spellthief have fewer skill points and less synergy). Be human, take Adaptive Learner (if necessary). You now have a skillmonkey with an initiator level of 1 less than his ECL. He can tank, provide extra firepower, take care of all of the trapfinding and scouting needs, and cover the casters when they're out of spells.

Alternately, if the cleric is going to be the tank with persistent metacheese, you can just skip the tome of battle stuff and make an arcane trickster or beguiler or somesuch...

Counterpower
2007-02-26, 07:02 PM
I already stated that the assumption was that there was a cleric and a wizard already in the party. Not that I mind hearing what everyone else would do in their own situations, mind. Just that I did define that in the first post.

As for level: Well, I hadn't really thought about it. Honestly. We'll go with mid-level, as in 7-10. I do have one question for those who said that a tank would be better lower but fails compared to the casters higher: How does that higher level change the fact that any caster will run out of spell slots eventually? I'm honestly curious how that works. I do realize that casters get more spell slots and better spells at higher levels, but then again, the challenges increase in difficulty. When it comes to druids: would what you are saying about their combat prowess change if the rule modifications that the Giant suggested to polymorphing were used? Here are the links:

Part 1: basic rule changes: http://www.giantitp.com/articles/dC21fDHZ4tK8n5OjUm9.html

Part 2: specific rewordings of spells and the druid's wild shape: http://www.giantitp.com/articles/PbpHATjPkec7E82kEmo.html

Also, it is true that when a caster's spells are all expended and their buffs are gone, a fighter becomes much more important. Right?

Matthew
2007-02-26, 07:11 PM
Yeah, but is that the extent of the party [i.e. A Cleric and a Wizard]?

There is no need to get into a debate about how it works, but basically Non Spell Casters are more useful at low levels than high levels compared to Spell Casters. Everyone runs out of resources, whether Spell Slots or Hit Points.

Roderick_BR
2007-02-26, 07:29 PM
FYI:
Mount = 'detect traps' in hallway
Knock = open lock
invisibility = hide
silence = move silently

etc., etc..
Mount = Not aways easy to fit into narrow corridors
Knock = Works great, as long there are not traps that'll fill the room with traps
Invisibility = Can't argue here...
Silence = Good chance a enemy can sneak on you, as well

Magic casting = limited use. Even with staffs/wands/scrolls/etc
Skill = unlimited

Toliudar
2007-02-26, 07:31 PM
If you're talking level 7-10 and a desire to back up a cleric and a wizard with a third party member, then this is NOT a blockbuster force. As a group, they're not going to want to go for long periods without stopping/retreating anyway, and with a mid-level wizard, rope trick is a great way to do so.

So, if the cleric is focused on tanking, I'd take a non-caster like a ranger/rogue to do the skillmonkey stuff. If the cleric is a buffer/healer focused build, I'd go with fighter or druid for melee goodness.

greenknight
2007-02-26, 07:33 PM
I already stated that the assumption was that there was a cleric and a wizard already in the party. Not that I mind hearing what everyone else would do in their own situations, mind. Just that I did define that in the first post.

The other part of that question was whether the Cleric and Wizard were the only members of the party, which wasn't defined.


As for level: Well, I hadn't really thought about it. Honestly. We'll go with mid-level, as in 7-10.

If you've only got a Cleric and Wizard, I'd add a Rogue, maybe with a couple of Ranger levels. But if you already have a scout, my preference here would be Druid.


I do have one question for those who said that a tank would be better lower but fails compared to the casters higher

Ok. I never said a tank wouldn't be needed, but I have stated that Barbarians and Fighters start losing out (if you stick with the PHB / SRD rules) at around level 4. The reason is simple - Druids get Wild Shape at level 5, and at that point they can do pretty much everything the Fighter and Barbarian can and a bit more besides. And for when they can't use Wild Shape (which is only 1 time per day at 5th level, I admit), they can fall back on the power of their Animal Companion to do something similar.


How does that higher level change the fact that any caster will run out of spell slots eventually?

A caster will run out of spell slots in the same way a Fighter or Barbarian can run out of hitpoints. But with only one good Save, Fighters and Barbarians are more likely to fail their saving throws, and since some spells are effectively save-or-die type spells, it's not too difficult to sidestep hitpoints and AC.


When it comes to druids: would what you are saying about their combat prowess change if the rule modifications that the Giant suggested to polymorphing were used?

I'm not sure I'd agree to some of the Giant's changes, for example, not changing current HP when Constitution changes. I realize that's the current version from WotC, but it's inconsistant with other rules (like when Bear's Endurance is cast on a character, or when a Barbarian rages), and I hate inconsistant rules.

That said, it might solve some of the problem, but the real issue is that the Druid has an Animal Companion which can replace a Fighter or Barbarian as a staller, at least for a short time, and can still replace poor physical stats through a Wild Shape. If the loss of a Druid's Animal Companion also resulted in a loss of XP for the Druid, that would be in line with the loss of a Familiar, and might help balance that aspect of the Druid class. And if Wild Shape simply added to the Druid's existing stats (as with the Barbarian's rage, or a template), that might fix the Wild Shape issue while staying compatible with the existing rule structure.

Counterpower
2007-02-26, 10:22 PM
The other part of that question was whether the Cleric and Wizard were the only members of the party, which wasn't defined.

Indeed, you are correct, and my apologies for not realizing that. I think for now I'd prefer to stick with just the cleric and the wizard. Maybe I can try this kind of poll again later, with this as something of a test run.


Ok. I never said a tank wouldn't be needed, but I have stated that Barbarians and Fighters start losing out (if you stick with the PHB / SRD rules) at around level 4. The reason is simple - Druids get Wild Shape at level 5, and at that point they can do pretty much everything the Fighter and Barbarian can and a bit more besides. And for when they can't use Wild Shape (which is only 1 time per day at 5th level, I admit), they can fall back on the power of their Animal Companion to do something similar.

Well, neither did I say that I was specifically referring to you. I think the fact that druids can replace barbarians and fighters after 5th is a very good reason to reduce their power in some way.


A caster will run out of spell slots in the same way a Fighter or Barbarian can run out of hitpoints. But with only one good Save, Fighters and Barbarians are more likely to fail their saving throws, and since some spells are effectively save-or-die type spells, it's not too difficult to sidestep hitpoints and AC.

The way some people seem to talk about what they do with their wizards, it seems to me that they'd run out of spell slots long before a tank would run out of HP. Besides, it's a lot easier to restore HP than spell slots. Save-or-die spells are a problem, but they'd be a problem regardless. Since I haven't looked too carefully: what save-or-die spells are there available to a 10th level caster? I found phantasmal killer, which does allow a Fort save.


I'm not sure I'd agree to some of the Giant's changes, for example, not changing current HP when Constitution changes. I realize that's the current version from WotC, but it's inconsistant with other rules (like when Bear's Endurance is cast on a character, or when a Barbarian rages), and I hate inconsistant rules.

That said, it might solve some of the problem, but the real issue is that the Druid has an Animal Companion which can replace a Fighter or Barbarian as a staller, at least for a short time, and can still replace poor physical stats through a Wild Shape. If the loss of a Druid's Animal Companion also resulted in a loss of XP for the Druid, that would be in line with the loss of a Familiar, and might help balance that aspect of the Druid class. And if Wild Shape simply added to the Druid's existing stats (as with the Barbarian's rage, or a template), that might fix the Wild Shape issue while staying compatible with the existing rule structure.

Making it increase your HP, just like any other Con-increasing effect, may be a good idea. If only for consistency. It does only increase your physical ablility scores by a modifier based on your new form. And I like the idea of making the animal companion more like the familiar, and adding the XP loss. And as a final note: thanks for answering those questions.

Sorry for my low level of communication. I've been checking this every once in a while, in between my other activities.......... and now I have to go to bed.

Iudex Fatarum
2007-02-27, 12:25 AM
I've played as a soulknife recently and am convinced as long as there is a cleric to turn the undead they rock. They are very simmilar to monks in that they don't rely on carrying a weapon arround and I have loved monks I have played in the past for that too. a nude crazed man tries to warn king of impending attack, taken in to see king, king dies by fist of man.
I also think monks work well. with both of these classes they are low to no armour and they are decent at sneaking arround. granted they are not the best they are still good. the monk gets all good saves so he can just walk through any traps on the floor.

greenknight
2007-02-27, 03:15 AM
I think for now I'd prefer to stick with just the cleric and the wizard.

In that case, forget about the spellcasters since you've got that base covered and go with someone to scout like a Rogue.


I think the fact that druids can replace barbarians and fighters after 5th is a very good reason to reduce their power in some way.

There is a need for some kind rebalance, and it probably would involve reducing the Druid's power. At the same time, the Fighter and Barbarian need some way to be more effective at higher levels.


Since I haven't looked too carefully: what save-or-die spells are there available to a 10th level caster? I found phantasmal killer, which does allow a Fort save.

I call a spell a save-or-die type if the subject is rendered effectively harmless, and usually easy to kill even if the spell doesn't do it directly. I also group save-or-suck (which effectively cripple the target) spells in this category, since it generally leads to the same result. On that basis, here's a few spells which qualify:

Charm Person (doesn't usually end in death, but pretty much ends the battle in the caster's favor)
Sleep (again, not instant death, but sleeping creatures die easily)
Ray of Enfeeblement (doesn't even allow a save, just a ranged touch attack. Often just one casting will be enough, although two or three might be necessary)
Ray of Exhaustion (ranged touch attack, two castings may be necessary, but even saving won't help much)
Hideous Laughter (the subject can be much more easily and safely killed while under the influence of this spell)
Deep Slumber (See Sleep)
Hold Person (renders target helpless)
Suggestion (can be used to defeat foe, although death isn't always a result)
Charm Monster (see Charm Person)
Enervation (usually takes a few castings to get to the death stage, but often only one or two to reduce a threat to insignificance)
Dominate Person (why kill when you can turn the subject into a loyal slave?)
Feeblemind (THE anti-sorcerer / wizard spell)

Bears With Lasers
2007-02-27, 03:21 AM
Ray of Enfeeblement doesn't stack with itself.

greenknight
2007-02-27, 03:26 AM
Ray of Enfeeblement doesn't stack with itself.

You sure? I don't see that it doesn't in the spell description.

Bears With Lasers
2007-02-27, 03:45 AM
Uh, yeah. It's the same spell. You can only apply the bonus/penalty from the same spell once. Similarily, casting Girallon's Arms multiple times doesn't get you multiple extra pairs of arms, casting Haste multiple times doesn't get you extra attacks, etc.

Swordguy
2007-02-27, 03:54 AM
The OP didn't ask for optimization, he asked what we'd like to fill the last slot with.

For me, it's whatever I'm in the mood to roleplay as. It's a damn roleplaying game, Mega-man-like mechanics aside.

It's up the the DM to provide party-appropriate challenges, not the responsibility of the party to blindly conform to the rules of optimization.

Kantolin
2007-02-27, 04:02 AM
For me, it depends.

It's almost certainly better to fill the void with a Cleric, Druid, or Wizard.

The catch is, it's frequently less fun for everyone involved when too much doubling up happens, as stepping on toes can be bothersome. So I'd probably go for the (noticably less effective) option of something else. I like bards, and they can fill skills fairly well, and will do less toe-stepping, especially with some discussion between the bard and the assumably-existant wizard.

If I had to pick a 'I want this for pure effectiveness', I think I'd go Druid for levels 1-2 (primarily for the animal companion), Clerics for the remainder of low levels, or Wizard for higher levels.

As a note... about Feeblemind. At level 10, a good-will bad-fort type has a +7 to will, and a +3 to fort. Admittedly, they're more likely to have a good constitution than a good wisdom, so that difference is a bit off, but the -4 you take for feeblemind makes it essentially a fort save... so doesn't that make baleful polymorph, which is much more incapacitating than feeblemind's effects (Albeit easier to heal, but most of the time that's irrelevant for a PC) more useful insofar as incapacitating a spellcaster?

greenknight
2007-02-27, 04:19 AM
Uh, yeah. It's the same spell. You can only apply the bonus/penalty from the same spell once.

It's not a named bonus or penalty, nor does it specifically state in the spell description that the effect doesn't stack. Here's a couple of sections from the SRD:


SPECIAL SPELL EFFECTS

....

Bonus Types: Usually, a bonus has a type that indicates how the spell grants the bonus. The important aspect of bonus types is that two bonuses of the same type don’t generally stack. With the exception of dodge bonuses, most circumstance bonuses, and racial bonuses, only the better bonus works (see Combining Magical Effects, below). The same principle applies to penalties—a character taking two or more penalties of the same type applies only the worst one.

and


COMBINING MAGICAL EFFECTS
Spells or magical effects usually work as described, no matter how many other spells or magical effects happen to be operating in the same area or on the same recipient. Except in special cases, a spell does not affect the way another spell operates. Whenever a spell has a specific effect on other spells, the spell description explains that effect. Several other general rules apply when spells or magical effects operate in the same place:

Stacking Effects: Spells that provide bonuses or penalties on attack rolls, damage rolls, saving throws, and other attributes usually do not stack with themselves.

More generally, two bonuses of the same type don’t stack even if they come from different spells (or from effects other than spells; see Bonus Types, above).

Different Bonus Names: The bonuses or penalties from two different spells stack if the modifiers are of different types.

A bonus that isn’t named stacks with any bonus.

That last sentence is what I'm considering here. The effect of Ray of Enfeeblement certainly doesn't qualify as a bonus, but it is an unnamed modifier.


so doesn't that make baleful polymorph, which is much more incapacitating than feeblemind's effects

I meant to include Baleful Polymorph on my list, but somehow skipped it. The list isn't meant to be comprehensive anyway.

Bears With Lasers
2007-02-27, 04:24 AM
"Stacking Effects: Spells that provide bonuses or penalties on attack rolls, damage rolls, saving throws, and other attributes usually do not stack with themselves."

Also, from the Magic Overview section:

Same Effect More than Once in Different Strengths

In cases when two or more identical spells are operating in the same area or on the same target, but at different strengths, only the best one applies.
Same Effect with Differing Results

The same spell can sometimes produce varying effects if applied to the same recipient more than once. Usually the last spell in the series trumps the others. None of the previous spells are actually removed or dispelled, but their effects become irrelevant while the final spell in the series lasts.

ravenkith
2007-02-27, 11:16 AM
After level 12, casters outstrip tanks primarily because of their versatility.

A tank can run up and hit things, or he can shoot them, but a wizard at 12 has spells for every occasion, from out-of-combat to blowing stuff up at range to insta-kills and dominates, the ability to manufacture magical quipment for his allies, etc. etc.

Meanwhile, a tank can...

Yeah, I think I covered it with 'hit stuff'.

Now Gish can blur that line a lot, but in core only, it's casters FTW as you get higher in level.

In point of fact, depending at what level you play, every class is going to shine.

(Except Paladin and Bard. You can't polish a turd.)

Wolf53226
2007-02-27, 11:34 AM
Really depends on the make up of the rest of the group. What is the other Arcane Caster, is he a blaster or battlefield control? I might play the opposite of what they are there. The Cleric/Druid, is he a heal bot with offense as secondary, or is he a front liner? I could always be a cloistered Cleric is he is a front liner, or a druid/cleric of war if he is a heal bot. Bard fits a number of roles for a 5th in a party. Is there enough ranged damage dealers, or too few people to wade into the fray? Even in a good 4 or 5 person party, there are other roles which would help, just no glaring issues. I would find what roles others were intending to play and play something so as not to be stepping on their toes. But if I had to choose without knowing all this, probably a arcane caster.

Illiterate Scribe
2007-02-27, 11:36 AM
How about the good ol' artificer? You might as well do away with the rest of the party, then.

alchemy.freak
2007-02-27, 01:06 PM
My Party is in bad need of a Cleric, I as the paladin am the back up healer. but our Cleric had to leave our party. so now i end up using all of my lay upon hands and every spell i have needs to be a cure spall. damn we need a healer

LotharBot
2007-02-27, 03:58 PM
My Party is in bad need of a Cleric, I as the paladin am the back up healer. but our Cleric had to leave our party. so now i end up using all of my lay upon hands and every spell i have needs to be a cure spall. damn we need a healer

You can use a wand for any spell on your spell list, even if the spell is higher level than you can currently cast. This means paladins and rangers can use wands of cure light, moderate, or serious wounds even before they can cast those spells.

Find a temple or something that sells wands of cure *, and pick one up.

Umbral_Arcanist
2007-02-27, 09:18 PM
Other, skill monkeys are my favorite