Worried about group balance - Class suggestion?

[Stryfe]

I'm about to start a 5e campaign with a few friends (4 of us not counting the DM) and I'm a bit worried about our current group balance.

So far, we have:
2 x Ranger
1 x Druid

We haven't customized much past that, but I'm worried about the lack of both a primary healer and defender. I'll be comfortable filling any role, but I'm curious as to what people think would help round out the party.

Right now I'm leaning towards a Cleric of some type, likely War if it means I could soak up a bit of damage while providing support. Any suggestions?

Thanks!

[ProphetSword]

I actually wouldn't worry about it too much. Just go with what you feel you want to do. The party I'm currently DMing for is made up of a Wizard, a Cleric, a Warlock and a Bard. In past versions of D&D, this might not have worked out well for them, being as there is no front-line fighter...but I have to tell you, they are kicking serious tail.

I think 5e is pretty well balanced enough to accept any party setup. That is partly due to bounded accuracy and the fact that most everyone has a near equal chance to hit in whatever method they choose (be it spell, ranged weapon or melee weapon).

[GWJ_DanyBoy]

Having a "primary healer" isn't always needed in 5e. A lot can be done with rests and a healthy dose of caution.

But in your case, I would note that every single person in the party has the ability to heal through magic, so the lack of a cleric really shouldn't be an issue.

My recommendation would be one of Bard, Barbarian or Paladin. Both Bard and Paladin suppliment healing and support further, while the former fills in some ultility and the latter provides a front-liner.

The Barbarian provides a front-liner as well, and the damage resistance makes the party healing very efficient.

[Stryfe]

Thanks guys, I really appreciate the quick responses. I feel silly worrying about it as much as I have been. Haven't played any D&D since high school (far, far too many years ago) and my experience with WoW had me assuming that an unbalanced party would be doomed from the start.

Nice to know that we can find a good balance with any combination of classes, and I appreciate the suggestions! Looking forward to ripping through the PHB tonight.

[DireSickFish]

Your Druids and rangers will have plenty of healing between them not to mention everyone has hit die that can be spent on short rest. Are your rangers going melee or archery?

If Melee I'd go wolf totem barbarian to give them all advantage on all of there melee attacks. You can wade though a lot of stuff like that and it will increase there damage significantly as they will hit more and crit more.

If that group is "missing" anything it would be arcane casting. Bladelock would let you sit on the front-lines for your party while still having the arcane oomph when needed. Plus you can eldrich blast while the ranges plink away with arrows and the druid can entangle making it difficult for anything to approach you. It owuld make for a very potent ranged kity kind of comp.

5th edition can be run with any kind of party, so I wouldn't fret to much about the party not being balanced.

[Daishain]

So far in this edition, group balance is to some degree a non issue. with enough determination and a little cleverness, any grouping can muddle through a standard adventure. Hell, even the skill monkeys aren't as essential anymore.

If going through something designed to be very difficult, some party design is definitely going to be needed, but that's always been true.

[ZenBear]

I say stick with the nature theme. Nature Cleric, Ancients Paladin, Feylock, Barbarian of any stripe. Maybe Sorc, since their power comes naturally.

[Alejandro]

I'm curious to hear how it goes, considering many here have the opinion that the Ranger is the weakest class, and the Druid the most powerful. :)

[Stryfe]

Your Druids and rangers will have plenty of healing between them not to mention everyone has hit die that can be spent on short rest. Are your rangers going melee or archery?

If Melee I'd go wolf totem barbarian to give them all advantage on all of there melee attacks. You can wade though a lot of stuff like that and it will increase there damage significantly as they will hit more and crit more.

If that group is "missing" anything it would be arcane casting. Bladelock would let you sit on the front-lines for your party while still having the arcane oomph when needed. Plus you can eldrich blast while the ranges plink away with arrows and the druid can entangle making it difficult for anything to approach you. It owuld make for a very potent ranged kity kind of comp.

5th edition can be run with any kind of party, so I wouldn't fret to much about the party not being balanced.
I have to admit, I skimmed your name as I was reading the replies and mistook it for "SirDickFish."

"My, what a regal fellow, this one!"

Thanks for the advice!

[Stryfe]

I'm curious to hear how it goes, considering many here have the opinion that the Ranger is the weakest class, and the Druid the most powerful. :)
I'll keep you posted! The Druid is actually the one participant with no D&D/WoW/RPG experience, I wonder if that'll end up balancing things out...

[Garimeth]

I say stick with the nature theme. Nature Cleric, Ancients Paladin, Feylock, Barbarian of any stripe.

Seconded, especially if the DM has planned the campaign at all around having so many nature based characters.

[Myzz]

yeah I second Nature Cleric with at least a 2 level dip to Ancient Fey warlock... tho I'd go full armor blasty lock!

Or a Ancient Fey Blast Lock with a 2 level Nature cleric dip for the heavy armor...

Or just a straight up Ancient Fey Blast Lock, if the armor is no biggie for ya.

Hill Dwarf if you dont want to put str to min for heavy armor... Although WoodElf would give ya +5 move speed, then -10 for not meeting heavy armor str requirement, for a net of 25 speed... of course the woodelf hide feature would be useless in heavy armor...

I like BreastPlate personally... its medium (all clerics get medium btw) AC 14, and allows +2 Dex for AC total of 16 AND no disadvantage to stealth (biggie for me). Get a shield (all clerics get them) AC is boosetd to 18... and you save 1100gp.

I prefer the medium armor with shield prof on my Warlock... which means going Barbarian, Cleric, Fighter, Paladin, or Ranger... I think Cleric gives a Blast Lock the best other stuff... Paladin on a BladeLock is decent too...

Knowledge Cleric can give you 10 min prof with any tools... At the cost of a channel divinity, if no one else gets theives tools...

Life gets you better heals for when you have to cast em...

Trickster could be neat coupled with a warlock!

[unwise]

Your group has a pretty strong theme going there, I would be more concerned with fitting in with the theme rather than worrying about group balance. My suggestions are:

A) Oath of Ancients Paladin - tank and healing rolled in to one. You have plenty of healing with the druid already, but having a second option like this will allow her/him to use other spells as needed.

B) Nature Cleric - getting a little close to the druid, but far less so if they are a moon druid. Keeps the theme well and can be a warm body in the front lines if needed.

My preference would be the Paladin, as it is more different to the other characters. I can picture this group being part of the Emerald Enclave or something similar, though they would work well as just being members of a rural clan too. I think the nature theme could be quiet interesting.

[Vogonjeltz]

I'm about to start a 5e campaign with a few friends (4 of us not counting the DM) and I'm a bit worried about our current group balance.

So far, we have:
2 x Ranger
1 x Druid

We haven't customized much past that, but I'm worried about the lack of both a primary healer and defender. I'll be comfortable filling any role, but I'm curious as to what people think would help round out the party.

Right now I'm leaning towards a Cleric of some type, likely War if it means I could soak up a bit of damage while providing support. Any suggestions?

Thanks!

Healers aren't really needed in 5th, most healing is easily taken care of from using Hit Dice.

If the rangers are doing ranged and neither is going beast master, you might consider a Fighter or Barbarian, both are fairly tough.

[Ralanr]

I'd recommend barbarians, fits with the nature theme (Double so for totem warriors), really survivable, plus you get to show the wrath of nature by punching people in the face.

Though in all honesty I wouldn't worry too much about the theme (Which wasn't the question). In my experience as a barbarian with a druid, the druid makes half of my skills worthless (Which to be fair, I could have chosen better, but Animal Handling was stuck with the background). So whatever you chose, I'd recommend getting some skills or focusing on things that the others aren't as good as. That'll help a lot with balance.

And get perception. But everyone loves perception.

[Felvion]

Go wizard.

I see most people suggest nature themed and mostly front-line classes.
I think that if you want to find what your party lacks neither should do.
First off, the druid path. If he's a moon druid he is actually a "front-liner" or, at least, he's very capable of being one. In that case he has the in-game versatility of choosing between a full, wis-based, nature themed divine caster and a beast with potential buffs precast on it.
As for the rangers, in case they don't build the exact same character at least on of them would be dualwielding or be a Beastmaster (assumed that at least one has picked the typical bow-sniper hunter path).
In overall, your party has a divine full caster (that can potentially serve as a frontliner) and two serious damage dealers who should better be one melee and one ranged for their own good. One of them could also have a pet that helps in melee too. All three of them have great out of combat versatility being experts in wilderness survival but possibly facing difficulties when it comes to socialising.

I don't see a reason to play one more martial class such as paladin for example. What i think your party lacks is an arcane caster. A warlock is a nice idea and the high cha helps to serve as a "face" but he's not that versatile in terms of casting. My personal suggestion would be a wizard.
I don't know why it feels so weird telling something that no one else did but it seems too obvious a choice.
The wizard gets lots of spells and his "spells-known" list is potentially unlimited. Battlefield control, buffs or de-buffs, aoe damage and attitude affecting spells (not necessarily for combat use) are things that only your druid can offer but not equally effective as a wizard does.

If you are tied to a nature theme as a party there is not much to do to make a wizard fit in other than picking a race or a background that has related features. Such a race could be the gnomes, which are also ideal as wizards because of the int boost, with their speak to animals racial ability or any kind of elf (better be high) that are always subconciously related to forests.

[Garimeth]

Go wizard.

I see most people suggest nature themed and mostly front-line classes.
I think that if you want to find what your party lacks neither should do.
First off, the druid path. If he's a moon druid he is actually a "front-liner" or, at least, he's very capable of being one. In that case he has the in-game versatility of choosing between a full, wis-based, nature themed divine caster and a beast with potential buffs precast on it.
As for the rangers, in case they don't build the exact same character at least on of them would be dualwielding or be a Beastmaster (assumed that at least one has picked the typical bow-sniper hunter path).
In overall, your party has a divine full caster (that can potentially serve as a frontliner) and two serious damage dealers who should better be one melee and one ranged for their own good. One of them could also have a pet that helps in melee too. All three of them have great out of combat versatility being experts in wilderness survival but possibly facing difficulties when it comes to socialising.

I don't see a reason to play one more martial class such as paladin for example. What i think your party lacks is an arcane caster. A warlock is a nice idea and the high cha helps to serve as a "face" but he's not that versatile in terms of casting. My personal suggestion would be a wizard.
I don't know why it feels so weird telling something that no one else did but it seems too obvious a choice.
The wizard gets lots of spells and his "spells-known" list is potentially unlimited. Battlefield control, buffs or de-buffs, aoe damage and attitude affecting spells (not necessarily for combat use) are things that only your druid can offer but not equally effective as a wizard does.

If you are tied to a nature theme as a party there is not much to do to make a wizard fit in other than picking a race or a background that has related features. Such a race could be the gnomes, which are also ideal as wizards because of the int boost, with their speak to animals racial ability or any kind of elf (better be high) that are always subconciously related to forests.

Feylock tome pact would accomplish the same thing though.

[FightStyles]

Eh, pick Druid. Eventually, some conflict should break out and now you have yourself a good old-fashioned 2v2 Druid-Ranger battle.

[Tenmujiin]

I'd go fey-lock if you want to fit the theme or bard if you don't. Assuming the druid is a moon druid they will actually be a passable front liner and one of your rangers could easily provide a 2nd one. All three characters can heal and with 5e having HD to heal you as well, rolling a primary healer is basically just asking to be bored. What your group is missing IMO is arcane magic and non-nature skills which both bard and warlock would fill nicely.

[SangoProduction]

I'm currently playing in a group of 5 wizards...or 3 perhaps. Depends on how many actually plan to show up regularly. Had a couple of combats, and their "low hit dice" really isn't much of an issue if you take it into account when making the encounter. (I actually have a forum on this...forum. That doesn't sound right. Anyway, I have one that is about some of the more interesting challenges I've come up with for the group.)

As well, any group can be used in most any situation that their levels allow, especially if your group thinks more carefully than "rawh! i is barbarian! hear me charge." Having -no- source of magical healing tends to be a problem...unless you don't want it to be, and gift the PCs with magical Elven Sleepwraps which restore you health to full when you rest for an hour in it.

[Shining Wrath]

Depending on your druid, you may need a front-line fighter, in which case I'd go with Barbarian - fits the nature theme.

Out of combat I think there could be some serious holes in your skill proficiency. Probably at least one of the Rangers will have high Dexterity, but I see no one with Charisma - who will talk to NPCs for the party? That leads to Bard (the skill monkey), Sorcerer (sort-of fits the nature theme if you take Dragon archetype), or Warlock.

So depending on the choices made by the rest of the party, I'd have a Barbarian ready to go if the party most needs a meat shield, and a Draconic Sorcerer ready to go if the party most needs a face.

[HoarsHalberd]

So depending on the choices made by the rest of the party, I'd have a Barbarian ready to go if the party most needs a meat shield, and a Draconic Sorcerer ready to go if the party most needs a face.

Did you forget that paladin is a charisma caster who can perform well in a me at shield role. Paladin stats should be: Attack stat, cha, con. Perfect for a face and likely to be respected by NPCs. Half elf OoA paladin, gives you all three social skills easily and leaves enough room for valuable skills like athletics, perception and maybe investigation depending on the DM.

[Mandragola]

The problem of doubling up classes tends to be that you don't have some other role fulfilled. Right now in this group you've got plenty of dexterous and wise people, so sneaking around and spotting the baddies is sorted. You don't have strong, clever or charismatic people though (the druid could be strong if it becomes a bear), and it's a big ask for one character to cover all of that.

I guess you could make a skillmonkey lore bard. Failing that a paladin could be a tank and the party's face.

But then of course you're missing anyone in the "controller" position. A wizard with a reasonable charisma score, or vice versa with a sorceror, could be an option.

But also, you could not worry about it too much. The others obviously haven't given too much thought to balance either!

[Shining Wrath]

Did you forget that paladin is a charisma caster who can perform well in a me at shield role. Paladin stats should be: Attack stat, cha, con. Perfect for a face and likely to be respected by NPCs. Half elf OoA paladin, gives you all three social skills easily and leaves enough room for valuable skills like athletics, perception and maybe investigation depending on the DM.

Not a bad thought, but Cha is second stat not first and the party has 3 "divine" casters but no "arcane". I will admit to a soft spot for OoA Paladins, though.

[Rowan Wolf]

If i were in your situation I would review a few things not necessarily in the order given:

What kind of campaign is this going to be?

What is the DM's playstyle?

What will be the most fun to play?

[Knaight]

The problem of doubling up classes tends to be that you don't have some other role fulfilled. Right now in this group you've got plenty of dexterous and wise people, so sneaking around and spotting the baddies is sorted. You don't have strong, clever or charismatic people though (the druid could be strong if it becomes a bear), and it's a big ask for one character to cover all of that.

You don't necessarily need them either. Every party doesn't need to be able to handle every scenario. As is there's a strong nature theme and probably a lack of social skills (though we don't know how attributes and skills got assigned). That would be an issue in an urban focused campaign, but with this party the obvious solution is to just not have an urban focused campaign. Plus, everyone being sneaky creates a lot of opportunities that just one person being sneaky doesn't do, and can compensate for the lack of a "tank".