Five characters, one class, no problem

[AvatarVecna]

Hypothetical scenario: five players are about to play a game, which will play from level 1 to level 20, and the DM decides they think it would be fun if everybody had the same class (but not necessarily the same sub-class). Multiclassing is not allowed, but sub-class differences are allowed. How does this game vary from class to class? I don't just want to here which one you'd want your group to use, I would like to hear thoughts on various classes.

[AmayaElls]

I have done this with a group of Monks before and it was quite fun.

I think Bards might be the easiest to do this with though and have all the variety you'll need. A party of warlocks all with the invocation to see through magical darkness would be scary though. And finally it could be amusing to roleplay a crew of paladins, each worshiping a different "good" god working together to save the world from a great evil.

[AvatarVecna]

I have done this with a group of Monks before and it was quite fun.

I think Bards might be the easiest to do this with though and have all the variety you'll need. A party of warlocks all with the invocation to see through magical darkness would be scary though. And finally it could be amusing to roleplay a crew of paladins, each worshiping a different "good" god working together to save the world from a great evil.

I think a party with a single class would have a lot of focus; a group of paladins would have very paladin-ish solutions, while a group of barbarians would have very barbarian-ish solutions. The exceptions are the more versatile classes...which, in my mind, are the Bard, Cleric, Rogue, and Warlock, and Wizard, which have enough variety in build to allow them to cover more bases. Druid, Monk, Paladin, and Sorcerer would be next, with enough variety to not all be super-similar, but still have focused goals. Finally, Barbarians, Fighters, and Rangers are, in my mind, just too similar for the differences to matter a whole lot. The spellcasting possibilities means it won't be totally boring and identical, but it's a lot more limited a party than the others.

[ZX6Rob]

I always wanted to do this with rogues. Assassin for damage dealing, swashbuckler for front lines, arcane trickster for magical support, thief for skilled work, and mastermind for leadership and social manipulation. I think that'd work great.

[bid]

Clerics:
- light has fireball
- tempest/war can use bows
- nature can S&B with shillelagh and dampen elements

[Kane0]

My group has also entertained the idea of a party of 5 different rogues.
We have that concept tucked away for the next time a political/intrigue type game takes our fancy.

[Belac93]

I feel like bards and warlocks would be the most effective party.

I would say 2 bladelocks, an Undying and a Fiend, 2 tomelocks, a Great Old One and Archfey, and then a Chain of any type (either Undying for extra healing-type powers, or a Great Old One for more support).

A group of all different clerics would be hilarious. Lets say...Life, death, knowledge, tempest, war, light. Would be awesome.

[Sir cryosin]

A party of fighters would do fun. Champion with Pam sent, battlemaster with GWM, battlemaster with sharpshooter, eldritch knight with shieldmaster, Banneret with healer and inspiring leader. With all the ASI's you can take more skill feats to.

[Sir cryosin]

I think a all bard party would be a little annoying. With just the jack of all trades

[Rysto]

An all Cleric party would do really well until level 11 or so, but it would probably tail off from there. High-level Cleric spells really aren't all that great and the only other feature they get until their level 17 capstone is improvements to Destroy Undead and additional usages of their channel divinity.

[jas61292]

Rogues or Bards is definitely the way I'd go. Both would be very strong. However that strength is not so much from their ability in combat, but rather for their ability to forgo combat entirely. Your entire party can be super sneaky, and with at least one person skilled at almost everything of note. Plus you easily can have an expert for any social situation. I'd thoroughly enjoy that kind of campaign, especially as Rogues, since there are actually 5 subclasses so everyone can be unique in features still.

[AvatarVecna]

All rogue seems like it would be popular for obvious reasons.

[JumboWheat01]

All rogue seems like it would be popular for obvious reasons.

It's a thieves' guild outing! I gotta convince my group to do something like that eventually down the road.

[Biggstick]

An all Cleric party would do really well until level 11 or so, but it would probably tail off from there. High-level Cleric spells really aren't all that great and the only other feature they get until their level 17 capstone is improvements to Destroy Undead and additional usages of their channel divinity.

I definitely disagree with the tailing off part. The ability to scale up spells makes for some incredible combinations with the right choices (Tempest and Light in particular come to mind). The amount of counter measures that kind of party could be running around with is insane too (Deathward on everyone, Bless will always be up on the whole party, etc etc).

If actual level 6-9 spells are what you're considering Cleric's lack, the Arcana Cleric would like to have a word with you.

[Slipperychicken]

I'd run a variant human bard party, and I think it would look a bit like this:
-Lore bard, takes aura of vitality and probably remove curse. Healer feat. Maybe magic initiate(cleric) for bless, guidance, and resistance.
-Lore bard, takes conjure animals and counterspell. Magic Initiate(warlock) for EB and hex.
-Lore bard, takes haste and maybe animate dead. Ritual caster(wizard)? Magic Initiate(warlock) too maybe.
-Valor bard, high str, great weapon master, and maybe some other combat feat at level 8. Athletics expertise. Can grapple if desired.
-Valor bard, high dex, crossbow expert, sharpshooter, expertise in dex skills, get thieves tools proficiency from background.

They should have almost every bard spell covered, if not all of them. Ritual caster, magic initiate, and magical secrets would further expand their spell access. Skills are a complete non-issue since every party member has expertise on two skills (four at 10th level), bardic inspiration all over the place, and guidance too. Damage should be okay between the two valor bards, the two with EB, haste, bless, and the minions.

[indemnity]

Previous group had four bards and one paladin. Played level 1-8. Agreed, there was no problem.


Orc valor bard
Gnome lore bard
Halfling satire bard
Human swords bard

Mostly players leveled into familiar roles (tank, leader, dps, controller).

It made for good rp and we played adventures we wouldn't have with a more mixed party.

[TheTeaMustFlow]

Bards On Tour, all the way. Any other class is going to leave serious capability gaps.

[Naanomi]

Four Paladins constantly trying to juggle all their oaths...

Four moon Druids, one of each elemental type...

Four different patron Locks, watch the free-for-all after a TPK for who gets what...

I agree that bards are probably the most productive option

[Seruvius]

The all bard/rogue/cleric parties have been suggested already, but an all wizard could be quite fun. One could fluff it in many different ways for some interesting RP between the different subschools. An academic exploration committee and survivors of a major magic school's demise come to mind as interesting RP scenarios for an all wizard party.

[Naanomi]

Five Beastmaster Rangers with their own unique pets (spider! Wolf! Crab! Panther! Pterodactyl!)

[Jeebs]

I'd use Fighters.

1. An Intelligent Eldritch Knight.
2. A Wise Scout (if Unearthed Arcana is allowed ).
3. A Charismatic Battlemaster (Purple Dragon Knight looks underwhelming to me).
4. A Well-Constituted Champion.
5. And a "Lightning Bruiser" type with both max STR and DEX (BM for Maneuvers at longbow range and in melee or Champion for Archery and a second Fighting Style?).

You'd max all the stats, so you'd be suited for a variety of Skills and jobs, and all those ASIs mean you can use Feats for diverse combat styles (Sharpshooter, GWM, Polearm Master, Shield Master, Magic Initiate, Healer, etc.).

[BW022]

It was possible in previous editions and no reason it can't work in 5th.

The DM can always scale or adjust the campaign based on the party make-up -- giving more time to rest, putting in easier encounters, taking it easy on encounters they aren't built for, etc. It can also be fun for a party to face various challenges and have to overcome them with roleplaying and thought -- even if they require hiring an NPC for something they can't do. A DM might need to put in specific magical items or the party may have to find or buy certain items. This may be more difficult if you are using pre-made modules, but is fairly easy in home campaigns.

Obviously five PCs of the same class run into issues with skills, versatility, combat roles, etc.

5E has a lot of variation in backgrounds, feats, and races to permit filling in some gaps. You can get proficiency in thieves tools via backgrounds. You can get certain skills via backgrounds or races. Humans could start with specific feats to such as magic initiate or ritual caster (big one). These can allow getting past some of the issues for non-spellcasters. Certain races get weapon proficiencies, skills, or even medium armor (mountain dwarf) which might allow a non-martial/cleric to do some tanking. Likewise, you can take feats to increase armor proficiency. 5E also doesn't penalize non-martials with using weapons (i.e. no base attack bonuses) -- other than multiple attacks. An elf wizard is still effective with a bow.

For classes...

Easiest are likely bards, druids, and clerics. They have access to healing. Bard is the most versatile, and a valor bard gains multiple attacks, all weapons, and medium armor. At 4th take heavy armor. The lore bards would gain access to any key spells they are missing. They can take any skill and their spell casting covers most. Five characters with inspiration would also be extremely powerful. Clerics have good variation in their domains -- war and storm would be good tanks, light for healing, trickery for stealth, etc. Druids have some variation in moon vs. land, but tons of wildshapes help in stealth, scouting, etc. Moons can certainly tank. All have healing and reasonable spells.

Warlock, ranger, and paladin would be in the next category. Warlocks have an armor issue and someone would need to take feats or something to try to tank. However, the three sub-classes would eventually cover most roles -- bladelock could tank, chain for a scout, and tomes to cover ritual spells. Healing would be an issue, but five warlocks given short rests are pretty powerful even without everyone having devil's site and using darkness over and over. Rangers and paladin have some spells, good armor, good hit points, etc. Enough healing to stay alive. Rangers make good scouts. Paladins good tanks.

Rogue, monk. Players would likely need to rely on stealth, ambushes, and overwhelming opponents as neither are great tanks and neither have any healing. Skills are good. Five rogues would likely do damage so quickly as to drop most creatures. A rogue taking medium armour proficiency and medium armor mastery can likely tank for the few rounds necessary to drop others. Taking spell theft and using shield... probably enough. Monk would have more issues on both tanking and certain abilities.

Barbarian, Fighter. Brute force is fine. Barbarians could likely overwhelm most encounters with different PCs taking turns raging to limit damage for tanking. Fighters get some spell abilities. Both would have issues with healing. Each would likely be needing to rest a lot.

Wizard, sorcerer. Likely the hardest as they have no healing, low hit points, and tanking builds are extremely difficult. Mountain dwarf abjurist might be able to hold for a few rounds while the rest of the wizard blast. Wizards would certain dominate knowledge and out-of-combat magic -- having tons of rituals. Invisibility and silence might do for stealth. Sorcerers would have the same issues. Tanking builds are hard. Multiple wild magic casters would also statistically be a danger to the party.

Again... many would be fun to try. They could easily be concept parties. Backgrounds, feats, working together, and some ingenuity and roleplaying would be necessary to fill certain weaknesses. Each would also likely excel in certain encounters. There good parts would likely be amplified as would their weak points.

[Sir cryosin]

It was possible in previous editions and no reason it can't work in 5th.

The DM can always scale or adjust the campaign based on the party make-up -- giving more time to rest, putting in easier encounters, taking it easy on encounters they aren't built for, etc. It can also be fun for a party to face various challenges and have to overcome them with roleplaying and thought -- even if they require hiring an NPC for something they can't do. A DM might need to put in specific magical items or the party may have to find or buy certain items. This may be more difficult if you are using pre-made modules, but is fairly easy in home campaigns.

Obviously five PCs of the same class run into issues with skills, versatility, combat roles, etc.

5E has a lot of variation in backgrounds, feats, and races to permit filling in some gaps. You can get proficiency in thieves tools via backgrounds. You can get certain skills via backgrounds or races. Humans could start with specific feats to such as magic initiate or ritual caster (big one). These can allow getting past some of the issues for non-spellcasters. Certain races get weapon proficiencies, skills, or even medium armor (mountain dwarf) which might allow a non-martial/cleric to do some tanking. Likewise, you can take feats to increase armor proficiency. 5E also doesn't penalize non-martials with using weapons (i.e. no base attack bonuses) -- other than multiple attacks. An elf wizard is still effective with a bow.

For classes...

Easiest are likely bards, druids, and clerics. They have access to healing. Bard is the most versatile, and a valor bard gains multiple attacks, all weapons, and medium armor. At 4th take heavy armor. The lore bards would gain access to any key spells they are missing. They can take any skill and their spell casting covers most. Five characters with inspiration would also be extremely powerful. Clerics have good variation in their domains -- war and storm would be good tanks, light for healing, trickery for stealth, etc. Druids have some variation in moon vs. land, but tons of wildshapes help in stealth, scouting, etc. Moons can certainly tank. All have healing and reasonable spells.

Warlock, ranger, and paladin would be in the next category. Warlocks have an armor issue and someone would need to take feats or something to try to tank. However, the three sub-classes would eventually cover most roles -- bladelock could tank, chain for a scout, and tomes to cover ritual spells. Healing would be an issue, but five warlocks given short rests are pretty powerful even without everyone having devil's site and using darkness over and over. Rangers and paladin have some spells, good armor, good hit points, etc. Enough healing to stay alive. Rangers make good scouts. Paladins good tanks.

Rogue, monk. Players would likely need to rely on stealth, ambushes, and overwhelming opponents as neither are great tanks and neither have any healing. Skills are good. Five rogues would likely do damage so quickly as to drop most creatures. A rogue taking medium armour proficiency and medium armor mastery can likely tank for the few rounds necessary to drop others. Taking spell theft and using shield... probably enough. Monk would have more issues on both tanking and certain abilities.

Barbarian, Fighter. Brute force is fine. Barbarians could likely overwhelm most encounters with different PCs taking turns raging to limit damage for tanking. Fighters get some spell abilities. Both would have issues with healing. Each would likely be needing to rest a lot.

Wizard, sorcerer. Likely the hardest as they have no healing, low hit points, and tanking builds are extremely difficult. Mountain dwarf abjurist might be able to hold for a few rounds while the rest of the wizard blast. Wizards would certain dominate knowledge and out-of-combat magic -- having tons of rituals. Invisibility and silence might do for stealth. Sorcerers would have the same issues. Tanking builds are hard. Multiple wild magic casters would also statistically be a danger to the party.

Again... many would be fun to try. They could easily be concept parties. Backgrounds, feats, working together, and some ingenuity and roleplaying would be necessary to fill certain weaknesses. Each would also likely excel in certain encounters. There good parts would likely be amplified as would their weak points.

You and everyone else is severely under ratting fighters with a party of fighters you wouldn't need a lot of healing every fighter get second wind, then one person in party can pick up healer feat and with hit dice I don't see them going down easy not to mention they will all have indomitable. With the right feat selection which is why they have more ASI's. They can hold up just as well as any other party.and with race back ground and a feat if needed you can have all skills covered.

[MaxWilson]

Hypothetical scenario: five players are about to play a game, which will play from level 1 to level 20, and the DM decides they think it would be fun if everybody had the same class (but not necessarily the same sub-class). Multiclassing is not allowed, but sub-class differences are allowed. How does this game vary from class to class? I don't just want to here which one you'd want your group to use, I would like to hear thoughts on various classes.

Five Barbarians: I sure hope some of them choose to be Dexy Sharpshooter Barbarians or break character and take Ritual Magic (wizard), because otherwise this group is in for some pain against anything flying or mounted on horses. They'd make an awesome SWAT team, but will they have the moral courage to run away from threats they're ill-suited to handle (like dragons and mind flayers)? Stay tuned.

Five Bards: Pretty decent and versatile group. Will struggle a bit at level 1-2, but by level 3 there will be some mighty tanky skalds (Valor Bards) backed by cutting insults from the Lore Bards. Again, not a ton of ranged firepower, but bards will have the magical resources to deal with the problem (e.g. leverage conjured flying critters) if they work together. Having a ton of bardic inspiration plus spells like Greater Restoration on tap helps shield you from the worst parts of the monochrome party, which is that everyone has the same saving throw weaknesses.

Five Clerics: No opinion. I don't play clerics. Conjecture: with so many cleric domains available, this is probably going to be one of the more diverse (and perhaps more fun) groups.

Five Druids: Extremely strong party. Tons of wildshape, awesome spells all around; good endurance--when they need to rest, they can all just hole up in rocks via Meld Into Stone. Will get mechanically boring fast due to lack of differentiation (since all druids have the same spells, and the same wildshape options) unless some druids think outside the box with their feats or deliberately choose certain "styles" for their animals ("I only do felines").

Five Fighters: Powerful but fragile. Has HP healing via Second Wind, but the lack of status healing will leave them vulnerable to things that need a Greater Restoration to fix, like Medusas and Intellect Devourers. They will rely on seizing the initiative and a strong offense to put enemies down before enemies can hurt them, but all it takes is one nasty surprise to end several of the fighters permanently. The game will feel like a "Band of Brothers" war movie.

Five Monks: Strong party, excellent kiting ability, good ninja capabilities and even some AoE via Elemental Monks. Much like the fighters, will be powerful but brittle due to lack of Greater Restoration; but have more ability than the fighters to seek out advantageous positions before the fight starts. Less WWII, more special ops, but still a war movie.

Five Paladins: the Knights of the Round Table have a profile similar to Barbarians. Will do slightly better than the Barbarians against things like mind flayers due to paladin auras, and they will also be more mobile (Find Steed), but just like the Barbarians they will chew apart melee-oriented monsters while struggling against anything non-melee if all the paladins are built to type--so at least a couple of the paladins need to be Dexy Sharpshooter cataphracts. Like fighters, will be brittle due to lack of Greater Restoration, but since they are less likely to fail saves in the first place they are a little less brittle. At least they have Lesser Restoration.

Five Rangers: Powerful ranged component, relatively good melee capability thanks to Beastmaster tanks and conjured animals. Again, brittle without healers, but having disposable meatshields and high stealth mitigates some of that risk. Also, five guys with Camouflage is way better than one. Probably one of the more interesting groups to play--not as easy as the druid, but more varied than the fighters or paladins.

Five Rogues: weaker version of the all-monk group, but still pretty interesting, with a very strong ambush capability. Will rely on feats like Sentinel to add combat power in longer battles/close quarters. I predict that this group feels the most like a GURPS campaign out of any of these groups.

Five Sorcerers: Blasty but brittle. Dwarven sorcerers will be vital to achieving a necessary tankiness. Possibly the weakest of all of the mono-class configurations, but not so weak as to be unplayable.

Five Warlocks: About as brittle as the sorcerers, but with more options out of combat and a more varied spell list, plus good recon capabilities. Probably a fun group to play, especially if all warlocks share a patron.

Five Wizards: Powerful when prepared, but the most fragile of all when they don't do their homework. Good synergy between wizards--between them they will end up knowing most of the spells in the PHB, and between Diviner/Necromancer/Abjuror/Transmuter/Illusionist they can even cover most of the combat roles. Like all non-bard/cleric/druid groups, they will have trouble dealing with things that need Greater Restoration to heal, but divination capabilities and conjured elementals mitigate that risk. They even have access to Raise Dead via the Transmuter, eventually, and also things like Clone and Wish make them a strong group at high levels.

[RickAllison]

Rogues would be a blast, but provide very different challenges. Monks also have enough variety for no repeats.

For an odd one, I would say Land Druids. Five different lands could provide a power rangers-type feel. Maybe toss in an Underdark Druid as a Sixth Ranger...

[Belac93]

A long death monk could actually be a decent tank, and a sun soul can do ranged.

[Sir cryosin]

Five Barbarians: I sure hope some of them choose to be Dexy Sharpshooter Barbarians or break character and take Ritual Magic (wizard), because otherwise this group is in for some pain against anything flying or mounted on horses. They'd make an awesome SWAT team, but will they have the moral courage to run away from threats they're ill-suited to handle (like dragons and mind flayers)? Stay tuned.

Five Bards: Pretty decent and versatile group. Will struggle a bit at level 1-2, but by level 3 there will be some mighty tanky skalds (Valor Bards) backed by cutting insults from the Lore Bards. Again, not a ton of ranged firepower, but bards will have the magical resources to deal with the problem (e.g. leverage conjured flying critters) if they work together. Having a ton of bardic inspiration plus spells like Greater Restoration on tap helps shield you from the worst parts of the monochrome party, which is that everyone has the same saving throw weaknesses.

Five Clerics: No opinion. I don't play clerics. Conjecture: with so many cleric domains available, this is probably going to be one of the more diverse (and perhaps more fun) groups.

Five Druids: Extremely strong party. Tons of wildshape, awesome spells all around; good endurance--when they need to rest, they can all just hole up in rocks via Meld Into Stone. Will get mechanically boring fast due to lack of differentiation (since all druids have the same spells, and the same wildshape options) unless some druids think outside the box with their feats or deliberately choose certain "styles" for their animals ("I only do felines").

Five Fighters: Powerful but fragile. Has HP healing via Second Wind, but the lack of status healing will leave them vulnerable to things that need a Greater Restoration to fix, like Medusas and Intellect Devourers. They will rely on seizing the initiative and a strong offense to put enemies down before enemies can hurt them, but all it takes is one nasty surprise to end several of the fighters permanently. The game will feel like a "Band of Brothers" war movie.

Five Monks: Strong party, excellent kiting ability, good ninja capabilities and even some AoE via Elemental Monks. Much like the fighters, will be powerful but brittle due to lack of Greater Restoration; but have more ability than the fighters to seek out advantageous positions before the fight starts. Less WWII, more special ops, but still a war movie.

Five Paladins: the Knights of the Round Table have a profile similar to Barbarians. Will do slightly better than the Barbarians against things like mind flayers due to paladin auras, and they will also be more mobile (Find Steed), but just like the Barbarians they will chew apart melee-oriented monsters while struggling against anything non-melee if all the paladins are built to type--so at least a couple of the paladins need to be Dexy Sharpshooter cataphracts. Like fighters, will be brittle due to lack of Greater Restoration, but since they are less likely to fail saves in the first place they are a little less brittle. At least they have Lesser Restoration.

Five Rangers: Powerful ranged component, relatively good melee capability thanks to Beastmaster tanks and conjured animals. Again, brittle without healers, but having disposable meatshields and high stealth mitigates some of that risk. Also, five guys with Camouflage is way better than one. Probably one of the more interesting groups to play--not as easy as the druid, but more varied than the fighters or paladins.

Five Rogues: weaker version of the all-monk group, but still pretty interesting, with a very strong ambush capability. Will rely on feats like Sentinel to add combat power in longer battles/close quarters. I predict that this group feels the most like a GURPS campaign out of any of these groups.

Five Sorcerers: Blasty but brittle. Dwarven sorcerers will be vital to achieving a necessary tankiness. Possibly the weakest of all of the mono-class configurations, but not so weak as to be unplayable.

Five Warlocks: About as brittle as the sorcerers, but with more options out of combat and a more varied spell list, plus good recon capabilities. Probably a fun group to play, especially if all warlocks share a patron.

Five Wizards: Powerful when prepared, but the most fragile of all when they don't do their homework. Good synergy between wizards--between them they will end up knowing most of the spells in the PHB, and between Diviner/Necromancer/Abjuror/Transmuter/Illusionist they can even cover most of the combat roles. Like all non-bard/cleric/druid groups, they will have trouble dealing with things that need Greater Restoration to heal, but divination capabilities and conjured elementals mitigate that risk. They even have access to Raise Dead via the Transmuter, eventually, and also things like Clone and Wish make them a strong group at high levels.

Sorcerers a high dex can tank pretty well a 20 dex dragon sorcerer has a AC of 18 and with shield spell or mirror image or blink you got a nice Frontline tank plus they get extra hp. Now it only 1 hp per lv. And if you throw in a favored soul you have another frontliner or healer. You can have one of your buddy's cast haste on you and with sp your 2 GFB or BB and a 3rd attack for a frontliner that's will be close or out dpr a fighter. I now want to play a party of all sorcerers that going to be fun. I think a party of sorcerers, rouge, fighter, or Rangers, sound fun to me.

Oh in on a side note a monks 14th ability is pretty nice to have " beginning at 14th level your Mastery of ki grants you Proficiency in all saving throws additionally whenever you make a saving throw and fail you can spend 1 ki point to reroll it and take the second result."

[Xetheral]

5 Wizards with the same familiar.... not the same type of familiar, but actually the same creature. The campaign begins when the wizards each realize their familiar is five-timing them.

[MaxWilson]

Sorcerers a high dex can tank pretty well a 20 dex dragon sorcerer has a AC of 18 and with shield spell or mirror image or blink you got a nice Frontline tank plus they get extra hp. Now it only 1 hp per lv. And if you throw in a favored soul you have another frontliner or healer. You can have one of your buddy's cast haste on you and with sp your 2 GFB or BB and a 3rd attack for a frontliner that's will be close or out dpr a fighter. I now want to play a party of all sorcerers that going to be fun. I think a party of sorcerers, rouge, fighter, or Rangers, sound fun to me.

Oh in on a side note a monks 14th ability is pretty nice to have " beginning at 14th level your Mastery of ki grants you Proficiency in all saving throws additionally whenever you make a saving throw and fail you can spend 1 ki point to reroll it and take the second result."

Good points, but consider the counterpoints:

1.) If you Blink out to the ethereal plane, you're not tanking any more.
2.) How likely is it that you'll actually have Dex 20?

Favored Souls would change the equation considerably, if they existed. I haven't seen them in any reputable source though (UA is full of deliberately-overpowered stuff to get it more playtest time) so I exclude them from my analysis. If Favored Souls were in play exactly as they were in UA, then sorcerers become a pretty decent group, still hampered a bit by the sorcerer spell list but overall pretty strong, about the middle of the pack, i.e. plenty strong enough to succeed at the game.

[AvatarVecna]

You and everyone else is severely under ratting fighters with a party of fighters you wouldn't need a lot of healing every fighter get second wind, then one person in party can pick up healer feat and with hit dice I don't see them going down easy not to mention they will all have indomitable. With the right feat selection which is why they have more ASI's. They can hold up just as well as any other party.and with race back ground and a feat if needed you can have all skills covered.

I don't think Fighters would be terrible, far from it: the sheer firepower available would allow them to be quite capable in a fight, and when any fighter can have a longbow. When I ranked Fighter's low, it was on the class' overall versatility, not their capability. Different Fighters are much more similar to each other than, say, different Bards.

[JumboWheat01]

Five Barbarians: I sure hope some of them choose to be Dexy Sharpshooter Barbarians or break character and take Ritual Magic (wizard), because otherwise this group is in for some pain against anything flying or mounted on horses. They'd make an awesome SWAT team, but will they have the moral courage to run away from threats they're ill-suited to handle (like dragons and mind flayers)? Stay tuned.

Actually, the final Eagle Totem upgrade lets the Barbarian fly in bursts while raging. Perfect for catching those annoying gnats who think they're safe in the skies.

Plus, Barbarians die in two ways, in battle or in battle. Running away isn't the Barbarian way.

[Sir cryosin]

Good points, but consider the counterpoints:

1.) If you Blink out to the ethereal plane, you're not tanking any more.
2.) How likely is it that you'll actually have Dex 20?

Favored Souls would change the equation considerably, if they existed. I haven't seen them in any reputable source though (UA is full of deliberately-overpowered stuff to get it more playtest time) so I exclude them from my analysis. If Favored Souls were in play exactly as they were in UA, then sorcerers become a pretty decent group, still hampered a bit by the sorcerer spell list but overall pretty strong, about the middle of the pack, i.e. plenty strong enough to succeed at the game.

I see your point on favoured soul
A 20 dex and a decent con and Charisma isn't that hard to get. Going for that frontliner dragon sorcerer you will want to focus more on your dex then char you'll be using spells to augment your melee capabilities.
And blink wouldn't be the best spell for the tank. I slipped on that one.
My melee dragon sorcerer use a lot of his spell slots for shield counterspell and other things to help in melee I use GFB and quicken to get two weapon attack plush the spells damage. I play different them some people so I do cast haste on myself for that 3rd attack.

[mgshamster]

I've been working on an all monk campaign for after I'm done with Out of the Abyss.

I've seen this happen with all clerics (my old group did it when I was away in the army). The twist for clerics was no two characters could have the same deity or same alignment. There were seven players at the table, so it became an interesting mix of alignments and worshippers trying to work together for a common cause (all their gods demanded they worked together).

[Joe the Rat]

Rogues would be a blast, but provide very different challenges. Monks also have enough variety for no repeats.

For an odd one, I would say Land Druids. Five different lands could provide a power rangers-type feel. Maybe toss in an Underdark Druid as a Sixth Ranger...

I had a similar idea, except all Draconic Wizards - one from each of the chromatic lines. Fragile as all get out, but good for a dragon-themed quest. This is one that would rely more on problem solving and hitting from a distance than a traditional skirmish party. Good elemental coverage, though.
That or five Chromatic Dragonborn, but the topic here is class.

...Mordenkainen's Marvelous Modular Mecha?

[Naanomi]

Wizards would be fun... I'd do an Abjurer, and either a Necromancer or Conjurer to tag-team the 'tank' role (since it is where they are naturally weakest); a Diviner serving as 'scout' (an illusionist could do it as well in the more traditional way), and Evoker for damage burstiness. I'd wrap it up with Transmuter for a source of ressurection.

The party lacks a 'face' (a role that an enchanter really can't fill even if we had one) but hopefully someone can not completely dump charisma and take an appropriate background

[Yorrin]

This sounds like so much fun! Classes that lack healing can grab Magic Initiate: Cleric/Druid to help with that, which is nice. Obviously when you break down all the classes like this your view of each and how they should be built in general becomes pretty evident, which makes for a fun read even outside of this mental exercise.

Barbarians: This seems like the hardest one to me, as Barbarian feels like the most specialized class in the game. I'd definitely want at least one Fire Genasi for a Con based ranged option, Eagle Totem for bonus mobility and re-flavor it as a Phoenix thing. Then have a Bear (Goliath) for tanking and a Wolf (Half Orc) for support. Add in one Battlerager (Dwarf) for diversity and one Frenzied Berserker (Dragonborn) as the party face and you're good to go with racial diversity to boot!

Bard: In direct contrast to Barbarian is the most versatile class in game. Lots of great ways to build this. I think the 3 Lore 2 Valor split proposed above might be best, though you could probably get away with 4 Lore 1 Valor. Magic Initiate for offensive cantrips would be pretty common in this one. Half Elf is obviously amazing here, though Lightfoot Halflings and Humans would do fine too.

Cleric: This would definitely be one of the easiest ones. War + Tempest with Heavy Crossbow builds, Life as the tank, Nature as the buffer/debuffer, and Arcana (or Light) as a blaster. They've got nearly bardic versatility with their spells, and great proficiencies to boot. Plenty of racial options here too, depending on exact builds.

Druid: I'm thinking 2 Land 3 Moon, with one running buffs, one running crowd control, and the three brutes up front being unkillable. Have one of the Moon druids at any given time in caster form throwing down AoE damage and/or healing as necessary. As with Clerics there are a lot of solid racial options here.

Fighter: EK makes this really interesting. I'm thinking one spell-focused EK (Dex Variant Tiefling), one Greatsword/Maul Str Battlemaster (Half Orc), one Cha focused Purple Dragon Knight as party face(Dragonborn or Lightfoot Halfling), one Heavy Crossbow focused(Stout Halfling), and one Dex based Rapier+Shield build(also Stout Halfling). This would end up doing quite well.

Monk: This would be interesting. Ideally nobody would get stuck playing the elements monk, but each of the others could contribute well. Long Death for tanking, Sun Soul for range, Shadows for scout, and I'd say two Open Hands for general utility. There are a handful of good racial options here, though the Sun Soul might want to be an Aaracokra because range + flight pair well.

Paladin: One of the harder groups to kill. I'd have one Avenger with a Greatsword/Maul and the rest switch hitters doing Dex builds with a Heavy Crossbow, Rapier, and Shield. You'll want at least one Oath of Ancients for magic reduction, and having an Oathbreaker would provide some helpful variety, though party dynamics might get weird. Half Elves are always my default pick for Cha classes, though the Str guy will probably want to play a Dragonborn. Lightfoot Halflings and Humans are also decent picks.

Ranger: Much like Barbarians there aren't a lot of great options here. Most will want Heavy Crossbow builds, with two of them opting for Dual Wielding or Rapier + Shield. Spell selection is pretty limited, though everyone can pick up Cure Wounds at least, which is nice. Maybe make a Stout Halfing on a Pterodactyl for kicks, but otherwise avoid Beastmaster. Besides him Wood Elves and Aaracokra should be the norm.

Rogue: One Swashbuckler(Stout Halfling), one Arcane Trickster(Dex Tiefling), and three Assassins(Stout Halflings or Wood Elves) would be my party of choice here. The first round of combat will be tremendous every time. AT provides crucial magic support, the Swashbuckler should likely be your rapier + shield guy, and have two of the Assasins with crossbows and the other dual-wielding.

Sorcerer: Sorcerers are more versatile than many people give them credit for. One of the five could be wholly dedicated to a support role, casting various buffs/bebuffs. One could be a dedicated melee caster, with lots of self buffs and touch/cone spells, and the other three will of course be laying down mass destruction. Five Draconic would honestly probably work out best, with the Lightning guy as the melee unit, Fire and Ice for the blasters, and Acid for the support guy. Half Elves are once again a great pick, though Humans and Lightfoot Halflings could perform well.

Warlock: Obviously four of these guys will be heavily eldritch bast focused, with one of them going with a pact blade Rapier. The rapier guy should probably be your Fiend Pact. Make your Fey lock be the Chain pact and grab all the druid-y invocations like beast speech, while the other three should probably be Tome users of any patron who are focused on EB and their respective Pact spell lists. The final Cha class, I'll once again recommend Half Elves with honorable mention of Lightfoot Halflings and Humans.

Wizard: Last but certainly not least, there's a lot of variety here. A Dwarven Abjurers makes for a great tank and buffer, and toss in an Elven Bladedancer for a slightly different frontliner. An Illusionist and a Conjurer will lock down the battlefield in various ways and an Evoker will clean things up with raw damage. Those last three can be some combination of Gnomes, Fire Genasi, and Dex Tieflings.

In terms of ease of use I'd put Clerics and Bards as top tier, with Druids and Paladins right below that. Most of the rest kind of mill about in the mid-range with Barbarians probably being the toughest one due to a combination of range problems (alleviated by the Fire Genasi Eagle Totem build I proposed as well as Javelins) and being one of the many classes with lack of inherent healing.

[SaintRidley]

I kind of really like the idea of playing an all-fighter, -barbarian, or -paladin party. If done right, any of those could have a real gritty special ops kill team feel to them.


Five Beastmaster Rangers with their own unique pets (spider! Wolf! Crab! Panther! Pterodactyl!)

Just needs a taxidermist to assemble the MegaZord.

[Gwendol]

To me the all-bard and all-barbarian teams are the most challenging. Bards because they aren't very good at dealing damage (at least before they pick up swift quiver), the barbarian team because of their relatively low versatility (less ASI's/feats than fighters and rogues, for starters).
All-fighter team will be outright scary in damage potential, and the all-rogue team can be totally black ops (the enemies never see them coming, or leaving).
Wizards, druids and clerics can summon their way out of almost any situation. This is a major advantage over the other caster classes.
All-ranger I think has been underestimated so far. They will cover all terrain, and very many enemies. Their combined strength will be quite tremendous, and they will rarely be surprised. The use of poison will be prevalent, and they will be able to harvest it reliably.

[TheFlyingCleric]

Ranger's... they can fight at range, fight close up, fight groups of enemies, take hits, wear shields, cast spells, explore, evade detection, and heal each other.
Of course there are better classes for each of these things, but unlike those classes they are very well rounded; in keeping with their independent nature.

It gets better if you can consider the spell-less ranger a 'subclass'; one or two of them can make great use of combat manouevres to help their allies.


Or, you know, you could do the dreaded 5 Aarakocra rangers party. Incoming airstrike! Every goblin in a 10-foot radius is wiped out by a storm of arrows.

[Logosloki]

Five half elf druids with a good mix of backgrounds is going to cover a lot of situations.

[Socratov]

You bascially get this: https://www.reddit.com/r/DnDGreentext/comments/4ek7sx/the_sucker_punch_johnnys/

[Sir cryosin]

You want to know how a barbarian fights a dragon or other flying things just watch the Avengers movie. With the hulk is jumping around. That's a eagle barbarian moving. And they don't have that far of a ranged but a few javelins attached to some chains and that dragon is not flyin and if it does have fun with a horde of Barbarians climbing on to it back.

[Grubble]

5 Divination Wizards.

All halflings. All take Lucky at 4th level.

The DM might as well not bother rolling his own dice.

[MaxWilson]

To me the all-bard and all-barbarian teams are the most challenging. Bards because they aren't very good at dealing damage (at least before they pick up swift quiver), the barbarian team because of their relatively low versatility (less ASI's/feats than fighters and rogues, for starters).

Bards actually aren't bad at dealing damage in melee as long as one of the skalds (Valor Bards) is willing to do the Strongest Man in the World trick: grapple and prone an enemy with Athletics Expertise and your two attacks and/or Enhanced Ability (Strength), and beat him to death with a shield at advantage, while everyone does so with regular weapons at advantage. Giving advantage to yourself and disadvantage to your enemies is almost always enough to turn the tide of battle against a given enemy.

Also, Bards have crazy amounts of healing once they steal Aura of Vitality, so they can afford the action economy cost of taking a round to grapple/prone the enemy. If a given enemy gets in a couple of hits on the Valor Bard grappler while everyone else is busy dealing with some other threat, so what? One third-level spell probably patches up all the damage inflicted on the party in the whole fight.

Plus, Bards can steal Conjure Animals and/or Summon Elemental. In addition, they have native access to Planar Binding. Stereotypical Bards may struggle at level 1-2, but in a party of five bards, there is actually nothing wrong with building a couple of variant human high-Dex Sharpshooter bards (who could become Valor Bards later on) who will then tide you through the early levels. (Sharpshooter + Faerie Fire + Bardic Inspiration will be tons of fun.)

[Gwendol]

Yeah, don't get me wrong: bards are versatility personified. There is no question in my mind that a solution can be found to most situations given a band of bards. My point is only, as you have illustrated in your reply, that to achieve a respectable damage output the bards need to plan a little.

[Sir cryosin]

A party of 5 in any class if set nicely can work. The fun thing about it each party will it own way in over coming challenges. And for skills just remember anyone can make a roll a low dc 5, average dc is 15, we're a nearly impossible is only 30. And unless your DM is throwing deadly encounters at you a few heal pots or a healer feat with your hit dice will get you through the day. And for a melee group that don't have ranged come up with clever way to get that fly baddie to come to you.

[MaxWilson]

5 Divination Wizards.

All halflings. All take Lucky at 4th level.

The DM might as well not bother rolling his own dice.

I see people talk about Lucky + Portent a lot, but it's not really that good. I wonder if they are misunderstanding Portent or misunderstanding Lucky. Lucky doesn't stack well with Portent, because Portent has to be declared before the roll is made, whereas Lucky affects a roll as it is being made. You can't declare a Lucky re-roll and then impose Portent using it. They're additive, sure--you get to manipulate more rolls--but they don't synergize.

Even if the halflings blow all of their portents on manipulating enemy attack rolls (and they won't, because some of those Portent rolls are going to be high rolls), that's only eight dice. Depending on your DM's style, that might only let you manipulate 2/3 of the attack rolls (or Stealth rolls) in the first round of one fight against a dozen goblins. (4 5th level Diviners vs. 12 goblins is officially Easy.) Lucky is a bit better because you can save it for important rolls, but it will won't impact every roll the DM makes--not even close to it.

5 Halfling Diviner Wizards? Bring it on!

[EvilAnagram]

When I ranked Fighter's low, it was on the class' overall versatility, not their capability. Different Fighters are much more similar to each other than, say, different Bards.

I completely disagree with this sentiment. Bards will generally give people inspiration and cast control spells, occasionally attacking or healing. The real customization doesn't come in until you get magical secrets, and then you're augmenting one side ability on top of basic Barding. There's nothing wrong with this, as the Bard is quite useful and fun, but each Bard is similar to the next.

With Fighters, a Hawkeye Battle Master can exercise a ton of battlefield control from range, while a crit-fishing Champion wades in and cuts things to ribbons with Polearm Master. Meanwhile, an Eldritch Knight can cast and slash on an average turn, then action surge to cast a quality debuff with disadvantage to the target's save. These characters feel nothing alike. Even small differences like picking Shield Master while the other Fighter picks Polearm Master or Grappler can lead to very different tactics.



5 Halfling Diviner Wizards? Bring it on!

The strength of the build does not lie in being able to use Luck and Portent at the same time, but in being able to consistently use a power to modify the rolls on the table.

[Slipperychicken]

Bards actually aren't bad at dealing damage in melee as long as one of the skalds (Valor Bards) is willing to do the Strongest Man in the World trick: grapple and prone an enemy with Athletics Expertise and your two attacks and/or Enhanced Ability (Strength), and beat him to death with a shield at advantage, while everyone does so with regular weapons at advantage. Giving advantage to yourself and disadvantage to your enemies is almost always enough to turn the tide of battle against a given enemy.

If a valor bard pumps his attack stat (str or dex), and gets one of the good combat feats (i.e. GWM, crossbow expert), he can get 2-3 attacks per turn for pretty good damage. With a high attack stat and one or more combat feats, each one should be somewhat behind a fighter or ranger, but still able to do the job. In the party I posted before, I had one GMW strength-bard and one crossbow expert dex-bard.

Also, almost every meaningful attack against a bard party should be penalized by cutting words. And if you have a bard set up for counterspell duty, getting charisma mod plus half proficiency plus maybe a bardic inspiration die for counterspell/dispel checks, that can make life really hard for enemy casters.

[Coyote81]

The 5 Cleric party could be really powerful, taking the following domains: Knowledge (This basically covers just about all the skills you need) Arcane(Damage check!) Light (More damage!) War Cleric (Tank!) Nature (Backup tank and melee damage using shillelagh)

I feel this group is plenty power, and very tough still.

[MaxWilson]

I completely disagree with this sentiment. Bards will generally give people inspiration and cast control spells, occasionally attacking or healing. The real customization doesn't come in until you get magical secrets, and then you're augmenting one side ability on top of basic Barding. There's nothing wrong with this, as the Bard is quite useful and fun, but each Bard is similar to the next.

With Fighters, a Hawkeye Battle Master can exercise a ton of battlefield control from range, while a crit-fishing Champion wades in and cuts things to ribbons with Polearm Master. Meanwhile, an Eldritch Knight can cast and slash on an average turn, then action surge to cast a quality debuff with disadvantage to the target's save. These characters feel nothing alike. Even small differences like picking Shield Master while the other Fighter picks Polearm Master or Grappler can lead to very different tactics.

Erm, you do realize that Bards can also specialize in Shield Master/Polearm Master/etc. too? You could easily have:

Strongy McStrong, Shield Master Valor Bard w/ Athletics Expertise and high AC. Specializes in control, w/ Enhanced Ability (Str).
Tanky McTank, GWM Polearm Master Valor Bard w/ Athletics Expertise and stolen Armor of Agathys + Fire Shield spells. Specializes in melee damage with a side of you-really-don't-want-to-hit-me-back.
Shooty McShoot, Sharpshooter Valor Bard w/ Stealth Expertise and stolen Haste + Swift Quiver spells. Specializes in shooting things to death.
Healer McHeal, Lore Bard w/ stolen Bless and Aura of Vitality spells. Support caster.
Necro VonNec, Lore Bard w/ stolen Animate Dead and Fireball spells. The iron fist in the velvet glove.

All of these guys have control spells on top, sure, but I don't buy "each bard is similar to the next."

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


The strength of the build does not lie in being able to use Luck and Portent at the same time, but in being able to consistently use a power to modify the rolls on the table.

Remember that I'm responding to a statement about the DM not needing to even bother bringing his own dice. Sure, Luck and Portent will let you somewhat increase the odds of success in any risky endeavor, especially if you stick to non-combat activities where rolls are fairly sparse. You'll feel like you own Coinspinner. But there will still be plenty of opportunities for luck to blow up in your face if you push it too hard.

[Socratov]

Erm, you do realize that Bards can also specialize in Shield Master/Polearm Master/etc. too? You could easily have:

Strongy McStrong, Shield Master Valor Bard w/ Athletics Expertise and high AC. Specializes in control, w/ Enhanced Ability (Str).
Tanky McTank, GWM Polearm Master Valor Bard w/ Athletics Expertise and stolen Armor of Agathys + Fire Shield spells. Specializes in melee damage with a side of you-really-don't-want-to-hit-me-back.
Shooty McShoot, Sharpshooter Valor Bard w/ Stealth Expertise and stolen Haste + Swift Quiver spells. Specializes in shooting things to death.
Healer McHeal, Lore Bard w/ stolen Bless and Aura of Vitality spells. Support caster.
Necro VonNec, Lore Bard w/ stolen Animate Dead and Fireball spells. The iron fist in the velvet glove.

All of these guys have control spells on top, sure, but I don't buy "each bard is similar to the next."
Quoted for truth. The whole thing about Bard is that he can be whatever you want... And then some... And on top of it all, he is still a bard...

[JumboWheat01]

Quoted for truth. The whole thing about Bard is that he can be whatever you want... And then some... And on top of it all, he is still a bard...

Remember when the Bard class was a joke? Hard to think of those times with the way bards are in this edition.

[Socratov]

Remember when the Bard class was a joke? Hard to think of those times with the way bards are in this edition.

Bards haven't been jokes since Wizards found out that hey could get more money if they would sell more books and thus created bard friendly splats like races of destiny, complete arcane, complete divine, PHB2 and complete scoundrel.

[Slipperychicken]

Remember when the Bard class was a joke? Hard to think of those times with the way bards are in this edition.

I played 3.5 and they were good back then.. if you were willing to do a lot of book-diving. It seemed like almost every book had one or two things for bards.

[Waazraath]

I played 3.5 and they were good back then.. if you were willing to do a lot of book-diving. It seemed like almost every book had one or two things for bards.

Truth. Though without the splat support, it was a very mediocre class, and the bards who believed the flavour text about 'fulfilling any roll' and who walked into melee, had pretty short carreers. Even in 5e, while it's a very good class, it's squishy as hell at the lowest levels.

OT: what I really like about the concept of five of the same characters, is that you can easily make a party that is 'all stealth' (bards, rogues, monks). Usually, stealth is blown by having a diverse party with at least 1 person walking around in full plate, and 4 people rolling with one being unlucky. But 5 times expertise / stealth / dex character, or something like that, yes, could work.

btw, how does spirit guardians stack? I dunno if it does, but IF it does, with 5 clerics you have a party that is a walking blender.

[MaxWilson]

OT: what I really like about the concept of five of the same characters, is that you can easily make a party that is 'all stealth' (bards, rogues, monks). Usually, stealth is blown by having a diverse party with at least 1 person walking around in full plate, and 4 people rolling with one being unlucky. But 5 times expertise / stealth / dex character, or something like that, yes, could work.

I find that "all stealth" is pretty simple really: just have a Shadow Monk, druid, or ranger in the party. +10 to everybody's stealth makes even the full plate guy reasonably sneaky. Even better if he actually took Stealth proficiency. A Dex 10 paladin in full plate with stealth proficiency at 9th level (+4 proficiency) will average 11.18 on Stealth without Pass Without Trace, which is plenty good for sneaking past things in light obscurement like smoke or forest, since your average creature has a passive Perception of 5ish under those conditions. Add in Pass Without Trace and that paladin is rolling 21.18 on average. Have someone cast Enhance Ability (Dexterity) on him and you're at 24.5.

But that's overkill really. Stealth proficiency + Pass Without Trace is plenty. You're less likely to run into problems with failing the stealth check than with environments/creatures that bypass Stealth completely--e.g. at my table, oozes' blindsight represents their sense of smell, which means they completely ignore Dexterity (Stealth) rolls. They just automatically know where you are unless you've sealed off your scent somehow.

[Slipperychicken]

btw, how does spirit guardians stack? I dunno if it does, but IF it does, with 5 clerics you have a party that is a walking blender.

PHB 205, 'Combining Magical Effects'

"The effects of the same spell cast multiple times don't combine, however. Instead, the most potent effect -such as the highest bonus- from those castings applies while their durations overlap. For example, if two clerics cast bless on the same target, that character gains the spell's benefit only once; he or she doesn't get to roll two bonus dice."


I think that means the damage shouldn't stack. Only the highest level casting of spirit guardians would apply. Still, you could cover a huge area with multiple castings.

[AvatarVecna]

I played 3.5 and they were good back then.. if you were willing to do a lot of book-diving. It seemed like almost every book had one or two things for bards.

I imagine that's due to the nature of bards: the primary line of splatbooks (the Complete series) each focused on a particular role that could be filled in the party...and bards could fill just about any role, so it was determined that bards should get stuff. This resulted in basically every book having some bard options. Other kinds of splatbooks didn't focus nearly as much on role, but at that point giving bards goodies was basically a design philosophy.

[EvilAnagram]

snip


You make a lot if good points about Bard variability (though a lot of those builds don't arrive until tenth level), but with specific regards to feats the Fighter simply has more options. Any given Bard will have two feats max for the vast majority of play. Fighters simply have more ASIs to put towards feat customization.

[MaxWilson]

You make a lot if good points about Bard variability (though a lot of those builds don't arrive until tenth level), but with specific regards to feats the Fighter simply has more options. Any given Bard will have two feats max for the vast majority of play. Fighters simply have more ASIs to put towards feat customization.

I agree that the fighter will have more weapons-type customization (and less MADness) than the bards. Specifically, the fighters get an extra ASI at 6th level. But it's incorrect to say that the bards don't "come online" until 10th level. The feat-oriented bards come online at first level w/ Sharpshooter and Polearm Master; Expertise comes online at 3rd level; Shield Master and GWM come online at 4th level; and the spell-oriented bards come online w/ Bless/Aura of Vitality/Animate Dead/Fireball at 6th level, as does Extra Attack.

A bard can have three feats by level 8; a fighter can have four. That's not enough difference to make the bards seem homogenous compared to the fighters, as you originally claimed.

[Gwendol]

Yeah, but the difference in play between a champion, battlemaster, and EK is quite noticeable. Less so between different flavors of bard, at least early on.

[Lonesomechunk44]

Bards and Druids would be the most powerful I think. Bards have skills, spells and the ability to be a gish or a powerful support spellcaster. While Druids can wild shape and still have full spellcasting progression, and they can get MORE spells or STRONGER wildshapes depending on the druid circle you pick.

[DireSickFish]

Barbarians can use Javelins so there ranged options aren't nearly as limited as some people are implying. You can also go the Max AC route with a Stout Hafling that would have a good Dex ranged attack. A Human Berserker with Magic Secrets for Eldrich Blast and a 16 CHA could also fit the bill if you were really worried about it. You have more than enough melee damage that you can afford to slack off on one or two members.

Wolf totem is a must for the group though, giving advantage without having to reckless attack is brutal. They'd also have some of the best initiatives out of any group at lvl7+.

Fighter, Cleric, or Wizard would be the groups I'd want to try. They have the most versatility in subclass as has been shown at length in this thread.

[JumboWheat01]

Barbarians can use Javelins so there ranged options aren't nearly as limited as some people are implying.

The problem with thrown weapons is that a barbarian loses his Rage damage bonus the moment he throws them, and they don't have the same range as non-thrown weapons. What's the range again? 20/60? Most flying enemies would be outside that range, yes? And ground enemies, well, you can move or charge them at that range, unless they're on a cliff above you or something. (In that case, punch what's in front of you, break it, and watch 'em fall. You're a barbarian, gods blast it!)

[MaxWilson]

Barbarians can use Javelins so there ranged options aren't nearly as limited as some people are implying.

Maybe some of us don't find a 30'/120' range impressive. Maybe we don't like missing out on Extra Attack because of not being able to draw and throw two javelins in a round. (Easily houseruled away, but still.) Maybe some of us have also observed Barbarians running out of javelins (how many javelins can you realistically carry anyway? the Barbarian at my table carried 2; I'd be skeptical of anyone who tried to carry a dozen). Maybe we know exactly how Javelins work and still find them relatively weak.

Maybe some of us have observed sad Barbarians at our tables who sometimes feel irrelevant in combat, and don't want a whole party of sad barbarians. Caveat emptor.

[AvatarVecna]

As long as the Barbarians have a decent Dex bonus, they'll make okay archers; they won't be amazing, sure, but they'll be alright.

[Gtdead]

Warlocks! Crazy cultist squad.
They can fill multiple roles so I can see this working.

[Xetheral]

How about five warlocks with different patrons, each masquerading as some other class and each keeping their eldritch association secret?

[AvatarVecna]

So, one of my games here ITP has two bards in the party (me and someone else), and I started thinking about whether party members would benefit from both of us doing Song Of Rest; if multiple SoRs stack together (which the language of the ability doesn't seem to forbid), a five-man band has a lot more healing than I originally thought.

Does anybody know if there's a rule saying multiple Songs of Rest don't stack?

[JNAProductions]

I played with a guy who bought 670 javelins.

He also bought a cart to carry them.

[Grubble]

PHB 205, 'Combining Magical Effects'

"The effects of the same spell cast multiple times don't combine, however. Instead, the most potent effect -such as the highest bonus- from those castings applies while their durations overlap. For example, if two clerics cast bless on the same target, that character gains the spell's benefit only once; he or she doesn't get to roll two bonus dice."


I think that means the damage shouldn't stack. Only the highest level casting of spirit guardians would apply. Still, you could cover a huge area with multiple castings.

But Spirit Guardians is cast on yourself. Would you have an enemy only take damage from one spell if a Moonbeam, Insect Plague, and Cloudkill all occupied the same area and they wandered into it?

[bid]

Does anybody know if there's a rule saying multiple Songs of Rest don't stack?
DMG-errata says: "But when two or more game features have the same name, only the effects of one of them—the most potent one—apply while the durations of the effects overlap."

[AvatarVecna]

But Spirit Guardians is cast on yourself. Would you have an enemy only take damage from one spell if a Moonbeam, Insect Plague, and Cloudkill all occupied the same area and they wandered into it?

The quoted rules indicate that yes, you would only take damage once. However, it's worth mentioning that you'd roll damage for each, and the person would only take damage from whichever one dealt the most damage...meaning stacking a save-based non-instantaneous AoE like Cloudkill means they have to make the save for each one, making it more likely that the damage they take will result from a failed save.

...maybe. In any case, that's probably how I'd rule it if it came up in a game I was running.


DMG-errata says: "But when two or more game features have the same name, only the effects of one of them—the most potent one—apply while the durations of the effects overlap."

Darn...well, thanks for the heads up, I'll make sure to let my DM know about that.

[Slipperychicken]

But Spirit Guardians is cast on yourself. Would you have an enemy only take damage from one spell if a Moonbeam, Insect Plague, and Cloudkill all occupied the same area and they wandered into it?

Spirit guardians has an area of effect, it even says that in the range entry. In the case of multiple castings of the same spell overlapping over a creature, the clause applies, so only one affects the creature. Stacking multiple instances of spirit guardians is the kind of abuse the designers wanted to curb with that rule.

In the case of multiple different spells' areas all overlapping on a target, the clause does not apply, so all the spells work against the same creature. Also, moonbeam, insect plague, and cloudkill don't all follow you around with no action. You wouldn't get to slam people with 9d8 radiant per round just for getting within melee range the party; that's practically a death sentence for most small enemies.

[Specter]

What I think would work best are classes with many subclasses, like Rogue (4 different ones if I counted right), Monk (4) and Wizard (9). They would also benefit from a different personality and outlook on the world, to avoid a flock-of-birds behavior. Example:

- Enchanter (leader, good-looking guy)
- Bladesinger (noble arcane knight on a vendetta)
- Evoker (furious blaster)
- Necromancer (goth guy who's always brooding)
- Illusionist (trickster, skillful youngster)

[ad_hoc]

The most important thing to consider here is what kind of adventures they will get up to.

The party of wizards lends itself to a campaign centred around puzzle/problem solving and investigation.

A party of rogues could be centred around espionage adventures.

Those 2 seem strongest for the types of adventures.

Clerics and monks would be good for theme/reason to be on a quest.

[RickAllison]

What I think would work best are classes with many subclasses, like Rogue (4 different ones if I counted right), Monk (4) and Wizard (9). They would also benefit from a different personality and outlook on the world, to avoid a flock-of-birds behavior. Example:

- Enchanter (leader, good-looking guy)
- Bladesinger (noble arcane knight on a vendetta)
- Evoker (furious blaster)
- Necromancer (goth guy who's always brooding)
- Illusionist (trickster, skillful youngster)

Rogue: thief, assassin, arcane trickster, mastermind, swashbuckler (5 total).

Monk: open hand, shadow, 4 elements, sun soul, long death (5 total).

Wizard: abjurationist, bladesinger, conjurer, diviner, enchanter, evoker, illusionist, necromancer, transmuter (9 total).

Monk sounds like a blast. Long Death runs tank and crowd control, Sun Soul and Shadow pick off glass cannons, Open Hand locks down bigger targets, and 4 Elements... Does something useful? If nothing else, he can Stunning Strike!

For the rogues, I would feel sorry for anyone jumped by them. Can you just imagine getting pegged by five Sneak Attacks in one round? Anyone who can inflict disadvantage will do much better, but a surprise round from these guys is liable to do massive damage. At level 11, it is probable that these guys will be rolling a minimum of 23 on Stealth as a group, with the ability to alpha-strike for 5*(7d6+5). That's an average 147.5 damage.

[AvatarVecna]

What I think would work best are classes with many subclasses, like Rogue (4 different ones if I counted right), Monk (4) and Wizard (9). They would also benefit from a different personality and outlook on the world, to avoid a flock-of-birds behavior. Example:

- Enchanter (leader, good-looking guy)
- Bladesinger (noble arcane knight on a vendetta)
- Evoker (furious blaster)
- Necromancer (goth guy who's always brooding)
- Illusionist (trickster, skillful youngster)


The most important thing to consider here is what kind of adventures they will get up to.

The party of wizards lends itself to a campaign centred around puzzle/problem solving and investigation.

A party of rogues could be centred around espionage adventures.

Those 2 seem strongest for the types of adventures.

Clerics and monks would be good for theme/reason to be on a quest.

For what it's worth, my dad saw this thread and is actually running 5 wizards through a standard starting adventure; after we looked over the characters a bit, we came to the conclusion that the key to success with an all-wizard party is two-fold: firstly, make sure to coordinate both your spellbooks and prepared spells to deal with what you expect to face that day; secondly, don't ever take part in a combat you haven't heavily put thought into solving. The familiars are always scouting ahead, the fight never starts any closer than 120 ft (Firebolt/Chill Touch/etc max range), you always surprise the enemy and never get surprised yourself, and you always plan out the fight extensively based on what you know of the enemies and environment.

Bottom line: if you arrive at the fight not knowing specifically how you can win it, you've already lost; knowing how to win, and then going to the fight is key.

[Gwendol]

...which is why I would prefer playing an all-fighter party. No prep, just smash! :-)

Or barbarian: rage ftw!

Fighter (champion, battlemaster, eldritch knight, banneret (PDK), cavalier, scout): 6 total
Barbarian (FB, totem (bear, wolf, eagle, elk, tiger), battlerager): 7 total

[RickAllison]

...which is why I would prefer playing an all-fighter party. No prep, just smash! :-)

Or barbarian: rage ftw!

Fighter (champion, battlemaster, eldritch knight, banneret (PDK), cavalier, scout): 6 total
Barbarian (FB, totem (bear, wolf, eagle, elk, tiger), battlerager): 7 total

I really like the idea of a group of five bannerets, actually. Not for optimization, but the idea of five knights constantly boosting each other up seems too fun to pass up. "Brother Michael, attack (Action Surge)!" "Sir Evan and Lady Beatrice, don't give up (Second Wind)!" "Lady Erika, Sir Thedore, stand firm with me!"

[Belac93]

I really like the idea of a group of five bannerets, actually. Not for optimization, but the idea of five knights constantly boosting each other up seems too fun to pass up. "Brother Michael, attack (Action Surge)!" "Sir Evan and Lady Beatrice, don't give up (Second Wind)!" "Lady Erika, Sir Thedore, stand firm with me!"

Imagine 5 level 20 bannerets against the poor boss. They are each making 8 attacks on their turn, and 2 of their allies are making an attack. Adding up all 5, that's 50 attacks a round.

[RickAllison]

Imagine 5 level 20 bannerets against the poor boss. They are each making 8 attacks on their turn, and 2 of their allies are making an attack. Adding up all 5, that's 50 attacks a round.

1: AS1, 2 and 3 attack
2: AS1, 4 and 5 attack
3: AS1, 1 and 2 attack
4: only 3 currently has a reaction, doesn't spend AS
5: AS1, 3 and 4 attack

So for maximum efficiency, it would only be 44 attacks. That's... Still pretty painful. If they are willing to use their second Surge, rounds two and three would be:

1: only 5 has reaction
2: AS2, 1 and 5 attack
3: only 2 has reaction
4: AS1, 2 and 3 attack
5: only 4 has reaction

Still 32 attacks

1: AS2, 4 and 5
2: 1 has reaction
3: AS2, 1 and 2
4: 3 has reaction
5: AS2, 3 and 4

38 attacks

4 then gets his final AS is round 4 for 26 attacks.

Edit: Over the three rounds, the arrow output is roughly equivalent to half the rounds coming from an M1A1 Thompson submachine gun. It gets even crazier with Crossbow Expert and hand crossbows. The fire rate goes up to 61% of the Thompson.

With Sharpshooter/GWM, this could get absolutely ridiculous. 49 shots with hand crossbows, 20 Dex, and Sharpshooter has an average damage (if they hit) of 906.5.

[MaxWilson]

With Sharpshooter/GWM, this could get absolutely ridiculous. 49 shots with hand crossbows, 20 Dex, and Sharpshooter has an average damage (if they hit) of 906.5.

Make sure the first guy to go knocks the bad guy prone.

BTW, a single necromancer can match that same damage output with a mere hundred skeletons using heavy crossbows: 100 * (d10 + 8) is 1350 damage.

An AC 22 ancient red dragon using Darkness (+ blindsight) and the Shield spell would take only 4.75 damage per round from the skeletons (vs. 230 DPR if he uses nothing but his AC 22), and he would take only 9.49 damage per round from the 49 hand crossbow shots from the Bannerets (vs. 325.85 DPR if he relies on his AC 22).

Lesson for bad guys: don't get hit.

[N810]

5 barbarian... :thog: :thog: :thog: :thog: :thog:

Probably strong enough to drag around siege weapons,
... fliers, no longer a problem.

[Christian]

For what it's worth, my dad saw this thread and is actually running 5 wizards through a standard starting adventure ...

Specifically, using the Lost Mine of Phandelver from the old Basic Set (and, to be fair, straight PHB wizards). Just did the opening encounter, and it was certainly an experience. The brainstorming leading in, thinking how this should go, was illuminating: how do a group of five adventurers who have a collective average of twice as much Intelligence as hit points cope with the described situation?

"Looks like a couple dead horses up ahead. Should we check it out?"

"Seriously? Not before we trim back the surrounding vegetation at least 60' with fire bolts from back here, I'd say."

"We could just blanket the area with sleep spells."

"Or send our familiars to scout ahead for us!"

"Shouldn't they be doing that already? Shouldn't they always be doing that?"

The adventure says the goblin ambushers can't be surprised by the PCs. Well, the ambush site comes into view 50' away after the PCs reach the crest of a rise, and telepathic contact and spell delivery from familiars happens at a range of up to 100'. If the goblins can't be surprised by being electrocuted by a weasel, their surprise glands are truly broken.

[MaxWilson]

Specifically, using the Lost Mine of Phandelver from the old Basic Set (and, to be fair, straight PHB wizards). Just did the opening encounter, and it was certainly an experience. The brainstorming leading in, thinking how this should go, was illuminating: how do a group of five adventurers who have a collective average of twice as much Intelligence as hit points cope with the described situation?

"Looks like a couple dead horses up ahead. Should we check it out?"

"Seriously? Not before we trim back the surrounding vegetation at least 60' with fire bolts from back here, I'd say."

"We could just blanket the area with sleep spells."

"Or send our familiars to scout ahead for us!"

"Shouldn't they be doing that already? Shouldn't they always be doing that?"

The adventure says the goblin ambushers can't be surprised by the PCs. Well, the ambush site comes into view 50' away after the PCs reach the crest of a rise, and telepathic contact and spell delivery from familiars happens at a range of up to 100'. If the goblins can't be surprised by being electrocuted by a weasel, their surprise glands are truly broken.

This made me chuckle.

It sounds like a fun game. Good on you for ignoring the module where it made sense to do so; good on your players for creating the opening.

[gfishfunk]

I propose the following:

5 Desert Dwelling Princes (each wearing a distinctive color), all Fighter melee builds. They are all engaged to the same princess due to the shrewd business dealings of her father (the king). That same princess was kidnapped. Now, they have one camel to share on their quest to save their finance (whom they never met). The kicker is that the princess ran away with her one true love....

Also, they can all only talk in character through song.

[JNAProductions]

I propose the following:

5 Desert Dwelling Princes (each wearing a distinctive color), all Fighter melee builds. They are all engaged to the same princess due to the shrewd business dealings of her father (the king). That same princess was kidnapped. Now, they have one camel to share on their quest to save their finance (whom they never met). The kicker is that the princess ran away with her one true love....

Also, they can all only talk in character through song.

I feel like this is a reference... But it made me laugh out loud. Kudos to you, good sir!

[tieren]

I'd like to see 5 druids who all pretend to be one ranger. They could all dress alike and wear a mask or something, but generally travel with 4 of them wildshaped into mice or a steed or an animal companion.

The ranger hides and a bear comes out, the bear runs off stage right and the ranger appears stage left and summons beasts, then hides, one of the summoned wolves shifts into a bear in the face of the enemy, takes a lot of damage and shifts back into the ranger, who shifts into a sparrow and flies off stage left and reappears stage right controlling a flaming sphere, etc...

[MaxWilson]

I'd like to see 5 druids who all pretend to be one ranger. They could all dress alike and wear a mask or something, but generally travel with 4 of them wildshaped into mice or a steed or an animal companion.

The ranger hides and a bear comes out, the bear runs off stage right and the ranger appears stage left and summons beasts, then hides, one of the summoned wolves shifts into a bear in the face of the enemy, takes a lot of damage and shifts back into the ranger, who shifts into a sparrow and flies off stage left and reappears stage right controlling a flaming sphere, etc...

Genius. Finally, a use for the Moon Druid's at-will Alter Self ability!

[JackPhoenix]

For what it's worth, my dad saw this thread and is actually running 5 wizards through a standard starting adventure; after we looked over the characters a bit, we came to the conclusion that the key to success with an all-wizard party is two-fold: firstly, make sure to coordinate both your spellbooks and prepared spells to deal with what you expect to face that day; secondly, don't ever take part in a combat you haven't heavily put thought into solving. The familiars are always scouting ahead, the fight never starts any closer than 120 ft (Firebolt/Chill Touch/etc max range), you always surprise the enemy and never get surprised yourself, and you always plan out the fight extensively based on what you know of the enemies and environment.

Bottom line: if you arrive at the fight not knowing specifically how you can win it, you've already lost; knowing how to win, and then going to the fight is key.

“Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win”

― Sun Tzu, The Art of War

Really, that applies to any smart character when playing in Combat as War game. Combat as Sport, not so much. Propably why I'm often frustrated with my player's tactics and (lack of) strategies.

[Waffle_Iron]

This made me chuckle.

It sounds like a fun game. Good on you for ignoring the module where it made sense to do so; good on your players for creating the opening.

Heck, yeah. That's how you do it.

[Renvir]

5 wild mages using this (http://www.traykon.com/pdf/The_Net_Libram_of_Random_Magical_Effects.pdf) wild surge table. You won't make it to level 20 but it's about the journey, not the destination.

[Oramac]

5 Paladin's would be kinda stupid by 6th level. If they all manage a 20 Cha, that's a +25 to all saves, since Aura of Protection stacks.

[ClintACK]

5 Paladin's would be kinda stupid by 6th level. If they all manage a 20 Cha, that's a +25 to all saves, since Aura of Protection stacks.

Give them all the Protection fighting style and the Shield Master feat, and it gets even better. Plus five steeds, Bless always active...

But are you sure the Aura of Protection stacks? I thought effects of the same name don't stack.

[Oramac]

Give them all the Protection fighting style and the Shield Master feat, and it gets even better. Plus five steeds, Bless always active...

But are you sure the Aura of Protection stacks? I thought effects of the same name don't stack.

I'm at work so I can't link it, but there's been a few Dev tweets stating that they do stack. Maybe someone without dumb work filters can link it?