Party Optimization

[BootStrapTommy]

You know, there are a lot of threads on how to play such and such class better or on build optimizations for classes and archetypes.

But if you had to built a four player party, what classes, with what background and what builds/archetypes, would you choose? What's your ideal tank? Ideal healer? Ideal primary caster? Ideal skill monkey? Is that even your ideal party roles? How would you build your ultimate party? How would you optimize a whole party?

[JNAProductions]

Optimize for what?

[JellyPooga]

I think my ideal party is any one that isn't just the mish-mash collection of free agents that make up the average adventuring group, but rather one that has been collectively designed to fill a purpose and the roles within it. One guy might be the leader, another the muscle, one the party face and you always get a screw-ball, but at least the group has a good reason to be working together and they share some common skills as well as in-character knowledge and connections so that the GM can actually work with that background without feeling like he's singling out one character or ignoring others.

If all the characters are members of a certain church or thieves guild, for example, then the GM can involve NPCs from those organisations much more easily than when each character has his own individual backstory that has no connection to anyone elses.

I also like to see synergistic builds. As a very simple example;
- A Rogue on his own is an excellent Scout
- A Rogue with a Druid friend to cast Enhance Ability (Dex) is nigh undetectable.
- A Rogue with both a Druid and a Ranger buddy, one to cast Enhance Ability the other to cast Pass Without Trace is little more than a shadow.
- A Rogue with a Druid, a Ranger and a Bard*, one for Enhance Ability, one for Pass Without Trace and the other for Nondetection is the reason that their enemies are afraid of the dark.

And more importantly, whilst they all might have their own specialties, they can all do well at stealth/exploration-based missions. Sure, a heavy-plate wearing Fighter might be a better front-liner than the Druid or the Ranger, but he would also likely stick out like a sore thumb when it comes to subtlety or subterfuge.

*incidentally, a party I would very much like to see in play; something Harper-ish in their background perhaps, or maybe a military scout or special forces style infiltration team.

[Naanomi]

I agree that a party build to function together is great. I have a team in my current game (on hold until summer) of a Paladin, Warlock, Bard, and Sorcerer... The charisma and social skills are so high they talk their way past a huge number of struggles; no one 'blundering barbarian to get through the king's ball'... All cohesion and most of the 'basic roles' covered at least to some degree

[BootStrapTommy]

Optimize for what?Being synergistic as a party. There is not much else you would optimize a party for.

[Specter]

Assuming a campaign made of 50% combat, 25% exploration and 25% social, at level 10:

- Tank/melee brute: Eldritch Knight OR Bearbarian 7/Champion 3
- Explorer/ranged damager: Hunter 5/Assassin 5
- Social God/healer/debuffer: Lore Bard 10
- Utility caster/Battlefield planner/Blaster: Diviner Wizard

That's all of the top of my head. Maybe because I've already played with 3 of these? Haha

[danpit2991]

4 Half Orc Barbarians

[Gtdead]

There are three approaches for me.

The "video game" approach:

You stack bonus on top of bonus making a party member extremely strong. A typical party would look something like Fighter/Wizard/Bard/Cleric. Fighter is here to kill stuff, the casters build defensive and use all their slots to keep the fighter going. This is the most cooperative approach because the builds are extremely specialized. It's not necessarily something that players would enjoy in a pnp game.

At lvl 5 it looks like this:
VHuman Fighter:
Battlemaster, Grab precision strike
STR>CON>WIS>Others
Feats/ASI:GWM, Polearm Master

Vhuman Cleric:
Any Domain, Keep Bless up
WIS>CON>STR>Others
Feats/ASI: Observant, Resilient CON

Vhuman Bard:
Lore, Make sure to grab EW at lvl 6
CHA>DEX>CON>Others
Feats/ASI: Alert, +CHA
Expertise on a social skill and stealth.

Vhuman Wizard
Abjurer is good but Anyone can work, Keep haste on Fighter at all times.
INT>DEX>CON>Others
Feats/ASI: Alert, +INT

These are the types of parties I would create in a game like NWN2, or Dragon Age Origins.
Taking full advantage of melee scaling and creating a caster heavy party with an extremely simple playstyle.
Survive and wait for the Fighter to kill everything.

I would consider this approach in dungeon crawls.

------------

Individual Focused:

This is the powerbuild approach. Roles aren't really taken into consideration, they are more of an after thought. The only question is "can this guy solo a deadly encounter? yes? good, you're hired".
A typical party will have a lot of sorc/lock/fighters dips, 8 INT and will look something like Paladorc, Sorlock, Tempest Sorc, Moon Druid

No need to list builds for this. It's your typical powerbuilds with Warcasters and Twinned BBs with haste, 21 AC Paladorcs abusing blur, Quickened EBs with hex, Bears annoying the hell out of the DM, Clerics drooling over their maximized call lightnings and pray that the DM hasn't read the sage advice on Contagion.

Personally I favor strong individual characters over the more traditional "synergistic" way. The reason is that this way there can be more party drama. Everyone is strong, everyone is dangerous. Great setting for a neutral/evil campaign but it can be really messy too.

------------

Traditional Approach

This is the "hey guys what are you going to play?" approach, or alternatively the "damn I don't want to play a cleric again" ^^
This isn't about optimization, more like reinforcing weak points.

Guy wanted to play the stupid barbarian and his girlfriend wanted to play the beautiful elf sorceress enchantress that bends minds through her sheer willpower.
You are stuck with cleric.

Your little cousin wanted to play a rogue and his friend from school a CE Fiend Bladelock.
Yea, probably cleric.

Your old friend from school decided to give 5e a try and be a DM. You can't find anyone to play from your old gank, so you bring two newbies. One wants to play a Warlock from World of Warcraft, you point him to wizard. The other wants to play a land druid (you just realize you can't help her cause you don't know **** about land druid).
At least you won't have to play a cleric. Probably Paladin? Good luck preparing your backstory now and explain the new "falling" rules to a DM that considers 3.5e the beginning and the end of PnP gaming, but won't homebrew your old DMM:Persist Divine Power so you can play the damn cleric ^^

But well, it's not all bad. At least you try new domains ^^

[MaxWilson]

Easiest optimization to describe: a whole party composed entirely of Mobile PCs. If one of them is also a Sharpshooter fighter, the game is extremely easy.

[Specter]

Easiest optimization to describe: a whole party composed entirely of Mobile PCs. If one of them is also a Sharpshooter fighter, the game is extremely easy.

These guys don't get past a locked door or an uncooperative NPC or a castle wall. There's more to "the game" than that.

[JakOfAllTirades]

I don't find find four player parties optimal. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FiveManBand)

[JellyPooga]

I don't find find four player parties optimal. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FiveManBand)

Thinking of Bands, a party of Bards is remarkably optimized.

Everyone's a full-caster, everyone's a skill-monkey, everyone's relatively combat-efficient and there's a lot of cross-character synergy. If one member drops or is otherwise incapacitated, the group as a whole doesn't suffer, because they're all capable of covering each others roles.

In your "typical" Fighter/Rogue/Cleric/Wizard party, if the Cleric falls, then the group is out of luck if they need a heal or buff, if the Fighter drops, then there's no-one to tank and so forth, but with a party of Bards? That's not a problem.

[p_johnston]

Play four variant human life clerics with heavy armor master. Then wait for the monsters to fall over from exhaustion as they try to kill you.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

These guys don't get past a locked door or an uncooperative NPC or a castle wall. There's more to "the game" than that.I imagine these Mobile PCs have plenty of build resources to invest in non-combat stuff, since apparently kiting is all you need to win combat. It's not like enemies ever have long-ranged attacks/abilities or ways to force engagement in close quarters.

[BootStrapTommy]

Thinking of Bands, a party of Bards is remarkably optimized.

Everyone's a full-caster, everyone's a skill-monkey, everyone's relatively combat-efficient and there's a lot of cross-character synergy. If one member drops or is otherwise incapacitated, the group as a whole doesn't suffer, because they're all capable of covering each others roles.This is like the "Party of Red Mages" thing from FFI. Everyone is pretty good at basically everything. A nice mix of optimized Valor and specialized Lore, and it might work pretty well.

My party optimization is as follows:

Control Wizard: Conjurer (since many area controls are conjuration and summons), Illusionist (illusions, plus Illusionary Reality can mimic some of the best area controls, without concentration), or Divinationist (because they are awesome), depending on the player. Area control, buffing, utility. Int skills.

Fighter: BM, Polearm Master, Sentinel, using maneuvers (tripping, lunging, pushing, menacing, disarming) to aid in area control. Tank. Physical skills.

Lore Bard: Buffing, debuffing, utility casting, healing, and skill monkey. The face.

Fiend Booklock: Sustained glass cannon. There are few better at filling that role than a Warlock.

Thematically, it makes a nice mercenary party, with only as much conflict as they player purposefully create.

[MaxWilson]

I imagine these Mobile PCs have plenty of build resources to invest in non-combat stuff, since apparently kiting is all you need to win combat. It's not like enemies ever have long-ranged attacks/abilities or ways to force engagement in close quarters.

How many of the last five combats you have participated in have featured grappling/restraining monsters and/or medium- or long-ranged attacks (over 100') in an environment devoid of partial cover? More or less than 50%? If the percentage for you is over about 60%, then an all-Mobile + one Sharpshooter party wouldn't be much use at your table. (BTW, Sharpshooter probably wins long-ranged archery duel in terrain with partial cover.)

In case you didn't notice, I was optimizing for brevity of description, not maximal effectiveness. All-Mobile + one Sharpshooter is easy to describe and works quite well.

================================================== ====

Just for fun, to make this more concrete (and less brief than "all Mobile"): here's a set of four stats I rolled up on BrockJones.com. What would you do with these stats?

13 16 9 12 13 16
13 14 11 12 18 16
12 14 9 8 6 17
12 14 17 8 15 13

To me, that looks like:

#1 [Tank/Healer/Secondary Scout/Summoner]: Reclusive and taciturn human (Mobile) Moon Druid 20, Str 12 Dex 14 Con 17 Int 13 Wis 16 Cha 9 [Resilient (Con), Sentinel, Lucky, +4 Wis]
#2 [Arcanist/Scout/Summoner/Secondary Tank]: Arrogant forest gnome Rogue 2/Bladesinger 18, Str 12 Dex 17 Con 14 Int 20 Wis 13 Cha 11 [Mobile, +1 Dex/+1 Con, Resilient (Con), Lucky; Stealth/Perception Expertise]
#3 [Ultra-healer/Summoner/Ranged Combat Specialist/Secondary Scout]: Ditzy but optimistic human (Spell Sniper) Wild Sorcerer 3/Life Cleric 1/Lore Bard 11/Chain Feylock 5, Str 6 Dex 8 Con 14 Int 9 Wis 13 Cha 18 [Extended Spell/Careful Spell; Agonizing Repelling Eldritch Spear; Mobile, +2 Cha, Alert; Stealth/Perception/Athletics/Investigation Expertise]
#4 [Tank/Ranged Combat Specialist/Secondary Healer/Tertiary Scout]: Humble and friendly human (Inspiring Leader) Paladin of Devotion 9/Cthulock 2/Wild Sorcerer 9 Str 16 Dex 8 Con 14 Int 12 Wis 13 Cha 18 [+2 Cha, Spell Sniper, Lucky, Warcaster; Agonizing Repelling Blast; Quicken Spell/Extended Spell]

I'd be confident taking that party up against 6+ Kobold.com Deadly encounters per day, especially after 6th level when they've hit their strides. I'd also be comfortable taking that party against anything my own players have faced at my table at similar levels. (Well, except for the time they rammed and boarded the neogi deathspider... I wouldn't be comfortable doing that at 9th level, but that one wasn't my fault.)

[Stygofthedump]

1 Gotta have a paladin in there for the auras!

2 Cant go past Lore Bard for any and all gaps in party

3 Diviner Wizard cause they perform

4 Moon Druid to round out, spells and tanking

[djreynolds]

Controller: this means a caster, usually, who can buff /debuff and possibly heal/mitigate damage. IMO this is a wizard, cleric or bard. You are the party focus, IMO. You are setting the table.

Tank: people will kill me for this, but it is a character with high HP and AC who draws agro. Barbarians are great, paladins, fighters, moon druid. You need decent DPR. Must hold the lines and have multiple attacks.

Striker: This is a big DPS guy like a paladin or rogue or caster. Or someone dropping AoEs or nasty spells like disintegrate.

Utility: anyone can fulfill this and it can be spread out, spells, skills, etc. A bard, wizard, or rogue can do this

Scout: mundane or magically done, or a combination. Wizard, bard, rogue, or ranger

DPR: ranged or melee, just a consistent source of damage. Archers, warlocks, melee fighters, paladins, barbarians, monks

Skirmishers: flankers such as rogues, rangers, and monk and casters with spells

Crowd control: can be a tank, or caster, or even ranger or monk.

You must have someone in your party who has one or two of these as main jobs and then they have extra tasks. A paladin can do lots of these jobs, but not all at once. If your paladin is tanking and striking, smiting, he cannot be expected to also be the main healer. Your moon druid can have one concentration spell up, maybe its barkskin, or moonbeam or spike growth. But if he's in animal form, he probably has barkskin running.

Ranger are great at DPR, scouting, utility, skirmishing, crowd control.

Bards are just fantastic. Clerics can tank, but may have a tough time maintaining a concentration spell if they are holding the lines. They may forgo casting bless for shield of faith or protection from evil.

Rogues can ruin someone's day with a well placed sneak attack, have one in the party

Multiclassing is a good way to help flesh out a party.

[JellyPooga]

I'm not convinced that diversity of roles is necessary; the whole Tank/Controller/Healer/Striker thing makes for great versatility, but can also feel...a little forced, I guess? There's also less room, I think, for synergistic abilities.

Take the example of stealth; In your typical party, the Rogue is good at stealth and maybe the Wizard can help by casting Invisibility on himself or someone else, but the Fighter and the Cleric need to stay at home for all stealth-related activities. Poor synergy.

Stealth is an obvious one, but it also applies elsewhere; social competence, martial prowess, even magical synergy. How important synergy is over versatility depends on the campaign, but a more synergistic party can open doors to campaign styles you might otherwise forgo.

[djreynolds]

I'm not convinced that diversity of roles is necessary; the whole Tank/Controller/Healer/Striker thing makes for great versatility, but can also feel...a little forced, I guess? There's also less room, I think, for synergistic abilities.

Take the example of stealth; In your typical party, the Rogue is good at stealth and maybe the Wizard can help by casting Invisibility on himself or someone else, but the Fighter and the Cleric need to stay at home for all stealth-related activities. Poor synergy.

Stealth is an obvious one, but it also applies elsewhere; social competence, martial prowess, even magical synergy. How important synergy is over versatility depends on the campaign, but a more synergistic party can open doors to campaign styles you might otherwise forgo.

Very true on all points. No one wants to stay home, while the party is going on.

DnD is a strange land where people where plate armor all day, its where something like the medium armor master becomes a cool feat in a realistic world, where people actually cannot wear heavy armor all day long.

Myself, obviously, I get stuck in that former world where it makes perfect sense to force march from town to town in full plate, and we always assume when I wake up the first thing I do at the inn is strap my armor back on.... and then pee.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

How many of the last five combats you have participated in have featured grappling/restraining monsters and/or medium- or long-ranged attacks (over 100') in an environment devoid of partial cover? More or less than 50%? If the percentage for you is over about 60%, then an all-Mobile + one Sharpshooter party wouldn't be much use at your table. (BTW, Sharpshooter probably wins long-ranged archery duel in terrain with partial cover.)

In case you didn't notice, I was optimizing for brevity of description, not maximal effectiveness. All-Mobile + one Sharpshooter is easy to describe and works quite well.The tactic works well, no doubt, but it seems to me it would work better in covered-but-open terrain to take advantage of the PCs' movement and range. A sparse, temperate forest would be ideal, I'd imagine. In a dungeon with wandering monsters, or worse, a cramped labyrinthine cave network with hostile locals, it's far harder to kite, even with really good movement. Then again, speaking from recent experience, maybe PCs should just avoid cramped labyrinthine cave networks with hostile locals. Getting surrounded/trapped/jumped repeatedly isn't exactly peaches for a non-Mobile party either.

[dev6500]

With the introduction of concentration to 5e, I find that for an optimal party, every character needs to get enough spell slots so that they can use some buff or other spell that requires concentration every encounter.

For example,
if a party of 4 wishes to optimize for group combat buffs, then even the tank/melee dps needs to have 2 or 3 1st level spell slots so they can cast bless, bane, longstrider or faerie fire for a few encounters per day. If a group can get up Bless, haste and crusader's mantle, then their combat potential goes way up and also leaves a 4th slot open for a primary offensive caster to use their concentration for control spells that require concentration.

[JellyPooga]

With the introduction of concentration to 5e, I find that for an optimal party, every character needs to get enough spell slots so that they can use some buff or other spell that requires concentration every encounter.

This is especially true with the advent of easy access to magic for all characters. Almost every Class can get access to some kind of magic, even if not using Feats. Magic Initiate and Ritual Caster obviously open the door to all characters.

Whilst it may not be strictly optimal for the personal power of a character to aim at picking up a little bit of magic, it can (as you say) improve the overall utility and/or combat prowess of the party a great deal.

Having said that, magic is not the be-all it was it previous editions (i.e. 3ed); whilst magic still pips the top-spot, I think, an all-martial group can still very much compete at higher levels.

[djreynolds]

My party of four, cheesy.

Tank/striker/ back up---- healer Paladin, and I prefer devotion, sacred weapon is awesome.

Buffer/ Tank---- Hill dwarf Valor bard with cleric dip, 1 level of life cleric is just perfect for heavy armor, he will man the lines, uses
shillelagh and shield

Wizard---- I prefer evocation, but diviner or abjuration is fine

scout/striker/skirmisher----- trickster rogue/ranger or trickster rogue/fighter dex based melee warrior and archer

And this of course has never, ever, happened. People choose what they like, not what the party needs.

[Arkhios]

I'll cease this thread as an opportunity to ramble about our party: It's not perhaps as optimized as most would prefer in this thread, but to be frank, I find that our party composition has everything anyone could ask for.

Oath of the Ancients Paladin---Tank/Off-healer
Bear Totem Barbarian----------DPR/Off-tank
Storm Sorcerer-----------------Control/DPR
Underdark Druid----------------Control/Utility/Off-healer
Beast Master Ranger-----------DPR/Utility/Off-healer

So, in total we have:
Front-line meat shield x 2 (Barbarian, Paladin)
Capable healer x 3 (Druid, Paladin, Ranger)
Adept scout x 2 to 3 (Druid in wild shape, Ranger+Panther Companion)
Crowd control x 3 (Druid, Ranger, Sorcerer)
Killing Machine x 4 (Barbarian, Paladin, Ranger, Sorcerer)

All in all very competent party, and basically all important "party roles" occupied.
As it's been often said, a good party has a "Cleric", a "Fighter", a "Rogue", and a "Wizard". Anything more than that is just a bonus.

In fact, one could say that our "Party Optimization" is more in the Theme; Although we certainly didn't plan to do it, somehow everyone in our group chose to make their characters have something to do with Nature.

[dev6500]

Similar to my opinion about concentration. I think party optimization is about picking the things that the party would benefit from if everyone had it. Thats why everyone should have stealth and perception proficiency. Perception because the more people rolling with a bonus the higher chance that the party doesn't miss it and stealth because I have seen a number of ambushes ruined because the wizard or fighter failed a stealth check even while 200 feet back and the rogue was getting into position.


Also this floats more toward character optimization but I think action optimization should take place front and center. Characters should line up a number of abilities that they can use during their bonus actions and reactions. My current party hasn't done any optimization in this regard. My character has sentinel for OAs and PAM or hunter's mark for bonus actions but other than the wizard periodically casting shield, no one else consistently uses their reaction or bonus action. That is a lot of lost action economy.

[MaxWilson]

I'm not convinced that diversity of roles is necessary; the whole Tank/Controller/Healer/Striker thing makes for great versatility, but can also feel...a little forced, I guess? There's also less room, I think, for synergistic abilities.

Take the example of stealth; In your typical party, the Rogue is good at stealth and maybe the Wizard can help by casting Invisibility on himself or someone else, but the Fighter and the Cleric need to stay at home for all stealth-related activities. Poor synergy.

Stealth is an obvious one, but it also applies elsewhere; social competence, martial prowess, even magical synergy. How important synergy is over versatility depends on the campaign, but a more synergistic party can open doors to campaign styles you might otherwise forgo.

I think it can be valuable to have an awareness of roles over classes, but I agree that you don't have to slot one PC into one role. Instead, be aware of what roles they can fill. A measure of party versatility is the number of total roles in the party. If your party looks like (1 Tank, 1 Striker, 1 Controller, 1 Healer) you will be relatively inflexible and weak-ish; but a party like the one in #16 is strong all-around. Even #4 (the Paladorc) is a Tertiary Scout, which means that by 20th level he will be able to use Enhanced Ability (Dexterity) to cancel out the Stealth penalty on his armor, giving him a +5 to Stealth on his own and a +15 to Stealth when the druid is holding Pass Without Trace. +5 under bounded accuracy is respectable, and overall this Paladin will be able to sneak about as well as Conan, or an action hero in a movie: he can't steal the Mona Lisa in broad daylight, but he can sneak up on mooks (Perception 11ish) pretty reliably, even in armor. Since everyone else in the party way way better at Stealth than he is, that means that the whole party has the option to ghost past encounters if they want to save resources. Maybe instead of fighting every random bad guy encounter the DM has placed between you and the objective, you'd like to save your strength and avoid giving the enemy any chance for warning, hey? Hit them while their armor is doffed and their spells are down.

As you say, stealth is just one example, but I do think mentally checking the total number of roles covered is still useful. E.g. since there are three healers in party #16, there's no single point of failure if someone goes down (although the Ultrahealer doesn't get Greater Restoration until quite late, so the druid is kind of a single point of failure against stoning attacks until then).

=================================


The tactic works well, no doubt, but it seems to me it would work better in covered-but-open terrain to take advantage of the PCs' movement and range. A sparse, temperate forest would be ideal, I'd imagine. In a dungeon with wandering monsters, or worse, a cramped labyrinthine cave network with hostile locals, it's far harder to kite, even with really good movement. Then again, speaking from recent experience, maybe PCs should just avoid cramped labyrinthine cave networks with hostile locals. Getting surrounded/trapped/jumped repeatedly isn't exactly peaches for a non-Mobile party either.

A dungeon with wandering (melee) monsters is ideal for an all-Mobile party. Even if the monsters get the jump on you and get in the first attack, each PC now has 40' movement to hit them and then back away. Now they have to choose between letting you escape the ambush, Dashing towards you (loser strategy because you'll just hit them again and repeat), or switching strategies (e.g. going full stealth and trying to sneak up on you/surround you again). As you say, the non-Mobile party will be in much worse shape here.

Also, remember that the Mobile party is also better at Dashing over difficult terrain. In my last play session that mattered a lot because the PC could Dash a full 80' through the flooded cavern, and the Mummies could only Dash 20'.

=================================


I'll cease this thread as an opportunity to ramble about our party: It's not perhaps as optimized as most would prefer in this thread, but to be frank, I find that our party composition has everything anyone could ask for.

Oath of the Ancients Paladin---Tank/Off-healer
Bear Totem Barbarian----------DPR/Off-tank
Storm Sorcerer-----------------Control/DPR
Underdark Druid----------------Control/Utility/Off-healer
Beast Master Ranger-----------DPR/Utility/Off-healer

So, in total we have:
Front-line meat shield x 2 (Barbarian, Paladin)
Capable healer x 3 (Druid, Paladin, Ranger)
Adept scout x 2 to 3 (Druid in wild shape, Ranger+Panther Companion)
Crowd control x 3 (Druid, Ranger, Sorcerer)
Killing Machine x 4 (Barbarian, Paladin, Ranger, Sorcerer)

All in all very competent party, and basically all important "party roles" occupied.
As it's been often said, a good party has a "Cleric", a "Fighter", a "Rogue", and a "Wizard". Anything more than that is just a bonus.

In fact, one could say that our "Party Optimization" is more in the Theme; Although we certainly didn't plan to do it, somehow everyone in our group chose to make their characters have something to do with Nature.

Case in point. Arkhios, that's a good way to think about parties. Worth noting that the Druid can turn almost everyone into a reasonably passable scout when necessary via Pass Without Trace.

The main weakness that I see in that party is a relative lack of ranged capability, which makes it somewhat harder to e.g. fight flying dragons or mounted hobgoblin archers. The party is also pretty long-rest dependent, without too many short-rest or at-will capabilities, so will have potential issues with endurance when facing large numbers of foes or foes using hit-and-run tactics. But yes, a very competent party and one that obviously fits the style of campaign it's in. Besides, in some ways it's good for parties to have weaknesses so you have problems to solve during play, like "how do we arrange to fight the dragon on the ground instead of in the air? sneak into its cave?"

================================


Similar to my opinion about concentration. I think party optimization is about picking the things that the party would benefit from if everyone had it. Thats why everyone should have stealth and perception proficiency. Perception because the more people rolling with a bonus the higher chance that the party doesn't miss it and stealth because I have seen a number of ambushes ruined because the wizard or fighter failed a stealth check even while 200 feet back and the rogue was getting into position.

Yes, every professional adventurer should have both of these.

I can imagine making a deliberately unprofessional character (unwilling accountant-turned-warlock?) who has civilian-oriented skills like Animal Handling/History/Persuasion/Insight/Medicine. But I'd be making him with the expectation of being deliberately bad at combat compared to the professionals--the joy would come from when he manages to triumph anyway. (E.g. '"Accountant in your face!" screamed Randall, suddenly materializing from the shadows and hurling an enormous ball of fire at the grimlocks.')


Also this floats more toward character optimization but I think action optimization should take place front and center. Characters should line up a number of abilities that they can use during their bonus actions and reactions. My current party hasn't done any optimization in this regard. My character has sentinel for OAs and PAM or hunter's mark for bonus actions but other than the wizard periodically casting shield, no one else consistently uses their reaction or bonus action. That is a lot of lost action economy.

Yep. It's important to have ways to exploit your concentration economy too, but action economy (especially bonus action economy) comes first.

[Stygofthedump]

Does anyone get Sick of the f&$@n wow terms "tank, healer etc etc" this is not a pc game! Forget those titles and look at mechanics of this specific game. Obviously RP takes precedence but if we are talking mechanics then talk D&D mechanics.

[MaxWilson]

Does anyone get Sick of the ----- wow terms "tank, healer etc etc" this is not a pc game! Forget those titles and look at mechanics of this specific game. Obviously RP takes precedence but if we are talking mechanics then talk D&D mechanics.

Not sure who you're criticizing dude but "Arcanist/Scout/Summoner/Secondary Tank" seems like a reasonably D&D-ish description to me. Only one of those terms ("Tank") is associated with WoW in the slightest, as far as I know, which I don't really because I've never played WoW.

What I meant to convey by "Arcanist" is that there are certain things that only wizards do well in 5E, e.g. casting Rope Trick or Phantom Steed, and other things that they are particularly good at, e.g. True Polymorph. (Bards and Warlocks can True Polymorph too but the opportunity cost is much higher due to pressure on spells known.)

Scout is pretty self-explanatory--he makes sure you don't walk into situations blind.

Summoner is likewise self-explanatory--provide the party with extra troops as needed.

"Tank" is intended to convey "someone who can stand up directly against enemies/hold chokepoints/etc. as necessary."

[Arkhios]

Does anyone get Sick of the f&$@n wow terms "tank, healer etc etc" this is not a pc game! Forget those titles and look at mechanics of this specific game. Obviously RP takes precedence but if we are talking mechanics then talk D&D mechanics.

wow is technically based on D&D (and other RPGs) anyway, and the whole mmo-party role classifications stem from tabletop RPGs that have classes. For example, throughout D&D's history, a typical party composition has always been a fighter (=someone who can take in a lot of beating and still carry on; a.k.a. "tank"). a rogue (=someone who can quite reliably deal a heck lot of damage; a.k.a. "damage dealer"), a cleric (=someone who is especially great at healing; a.k.a. "healer"), and a wizard (=someone who can wreak havoc on a large area by destroying everything with a few words or by controlling the battlefield with another few words; a.k.a. "ranged damage dealer/controller").

It's not that far from a MMO in the end. Terms like Tank, Healer etc. are just words to classify someone's role in the party. Be it WoW or D&D. Hatred against those terms is a bit ridiculous. Someone is always going to be better at "tanking", "healing", or "dealing damage" than another, and that's most of the time a matter of class.

[MaxWilson]

wow is technically based on D&D (and other RPGs) anyway, and the whole mmo-party role classifications stem from tabletop RPGs that have classes. For example, throughout D&D's history, a typical party composition has always been a fighter (=someone who can take in a lot of beating and still carry on; a.k.a. "tank"). a rogue (=someone who can quite reliably deal a heck lot of damage; a.k.a. "damage dealer"), a cleric (=someone who is especially great at healing; a.k.a. "healer"), and a wizard (=someone who can wreak havoc on a large area by destroying everything with a few words or by controlling the battlefield with another few words; a.k.a. "ranged damage dealer/controller").

Rogues were not traditionally "damage dealers." That was the fighter's niche. Ditto "ranged damage dealer."

[Arkhios]

Rogues were not traditionally "damage dealers." That was the fighter's niche. Ditto "ranged damage dealer."

That could well be true, I didn't play when the "tradition" was laid out; My understanding is based on later iterations of rogue. :)

[BootStrapTommy]

Does anyone get Sick of the f&$@n wow terms "tank, healer etc etc" this is not a pc game! Forget those titles and look at mechanics of this specific game. Obviously RP takes precedence but if we are talking mechanics then talk D&D mechanics.Those terminologies way pre-date WoW. "Tank" as a gaming terminology to describe a character built to draw the attention of enemies and absorb their attacks predates WoW by more than a decade. And the idea of a class with a leg up on healing? Has been written into the cleric class from the beginning.

[Slipperychicken]

My current party is pretty close to what I'd consider ideal. Note: Races are all V-human because of the setting.

-Barbarian, GWM, berserker
-Fighter, battlemaster, crossbow master, sharpshooter
-Cleric, life domain, healer feat, magic initiate(identify)
-Bard, lore college

Only things I'd change: Move barbarian to bear totem, give fighter or bard thieves' tools proficiency, have bard pick haste, have bard take expertise in skills we actually use, have bard put more in con.

[Socratov]

well, for an optimised party I wouldn't optimise for all roles, rather create a set of characters that are loosley affiliated and from them select a team that has the capabilities you need for a mission.

For example: for an infiltration mission, get bard, rogue and wizard. for combat on an open plane, get sorcerers barbarians, druids, fighters and the like. Tactical missions in tight spaces (in dungeons, dities, etc.), take sentinel fighter, rogue, bard, warlock, druid, etc. Depending on what they specialise in.

However, for play that would be annoying in terms of XP and the like. (though you can circumvent this by giving the players the XP and that they will pick one of their characters to join the mission.

that said, you could go for a party that covers all bases, though this will come at a cost.

frist you will need a half-elf Lore Bard with a suitable background to get all the skills. then you need a couple of frontliners (2 ought to do the trick), they can be your walls and your 'regular'dmg cannons. then you will need to get your lore bard to go heal and support onwards. last but nog least you want some ranged damage support, preferably with the option to go nova: I'd recommend Sorcerer.

Possible nice additions ouwld be a scouting druid or somesuch. (also great BFC and ranged dmg support, pissibly as one of the walls)

[Logosloki]

One Paladin, One Diviner Wizard (with a focus on control and out of combat utility) and Two Bards/Druids would probably be one of the better all-comers parties. Portent is one of the most potent sub-class features in the game, Paladin gives you a mix of defence and burst/sustained damage and I consider Bard and Druid to be the more flexible classes.

I would actually say all half-elves would probably be better than variant human as half-elf gives you a better spread of abilities. At the cost of a feat a half-elf gains +2 cha, one more skill, one more language, dark vision and fey ancestry.

Of the suggested backgrounds I would say criminal, guild artisan, entertainer and outlander give you the best mix. Maybe drop the entertainer for a sailor/pirate. Entertainer under some DMs would put you in the middle of the people, where you can pick up the rumour mill, as well as allowing you to spread propaganda via performances. Sailor though gives you a better spread of skills if adventuring takes you closer to the sea.

[Naanomi]

How is this as a 'general all-purpose adventuring group'
------
V. Human Noble Battlemaster: pole-arm mastery/Sentinel/great weapon mastery; lock-down style tank, big melee damage

Half-Elf Sage Knowledge Cleric/Lore Bard: Party Face, Healer, 'know stuff' guy, general skill monkey (take survival to cover that hole in the party skill set), magic secrets to cover holes

1/2 Orc Folk Hero Fighter/Assassin: sharpshooter/cross-bow expert; scout, big ranged damage, enough 'alpha strike' to solo lone monsters while scouting

Svirfneblin Criminal Diviner: most of the important rituals covered, portent just that good
--------
Backgrounds cover contacts in areas most likely to come up regardless of setting (underworld, nobility, the people)

Everybody takes perception, stealth, and acrobatics or athletics if possible

[Rhynear]

4 Assassin Rogue 4/Shadow Monk 6

All take stealth proficiency and expertise.

Sneak up on your enemy, all sneak attack with a guaranteed critical hit, and if it survives you can all teleport up to 60 feet away, and then move another 45 feet.

Can sneak past pretty much anything.

[MaxWilson]

1/2 Orc Folk Hero Fighter/Assassin: sharpshooter/cross-bow expert; scout, big ranged damage, enough 'alpha strike' to solo lone monsters while scouting

Swashbuckler might be a better choice for an archer. It simplifies sneak attack, especially for a Crossbow Expert who has better things to do with his bonus action than Hide each round. Besides, Assassinate and Sharpshooter don't synergize well, since Assassinate doesn't multiply the Sharpshooter bonus.

The major thing I see with that adventuring party as a whole: not enough ranged damage. There's a huge difference in effectiveness between a party with one ranged damage-dealer and one with two or more. It opens up all kinds of tanking options. Instead of a knowledge cleric, make the half-elf a Bardlock. Alternately, have the Diviner raise a bunch of skeleton archers (6+ should do it).

[JNAProductions]

Erm... 5E, not 3E.

[djreynolds]

Something we also forget, or at least I do. Is classes evolve. You know, classes get stronger.

I find creating a party from 1st level on up has a lot of variables.

I know these terms tank, striker, etc... drive people crazy. But it is a way to share some common ground.

So for the question of party optimization, I would have to ask what level is this party of 4 starting out as?

I'm playing a life cleric now, but aside from the few extra HP I can heal, YAWN.

[Slipperychicken]

I'm playing a life cleric now, but aside from the few extra HP I can heal, YAWN.

Really? I've been playing a healbot life cleric and having a lot of fun. Between things like spirit guardians, spiritual weapon, banishment, and other things, it feels like playing any other cleric. Also, the preserve life CD is great. Maybe I'm just glossing over a mechanical blandness because I've had a blast RPing him, but I've always felt like I contribute meaningfully during fights.

[BootStrapTommy]

Personally, I agree with dj. Life cleric just really doesn't make you that much better of a healer to warrant giving up what the other domains provide access to.

[krugaan]

a good party has, IMO:

- a good mix ranged and melee
- high HP
- everyone has at least one useful concentration spell
- a good mix of spells from all classes (CC/heal/utility/aoe/single target)
- divination of some kind
- a good mix of armor, weapon, and item types
- at least one party face
- one high dex class for sneaking with expertise

so, one valor bard, a wizard, a paladin, and moon druid.

Or 4 bards.