PDA

View Full Version : Thought Exercise: Optimal Party



Human Paragon 3
2008-02-01, 10:59 AM
Hi guys. I'm bored and I suddenly got a brain storm. If you were to build the optimal party, how would you go about it? To be clear, for the purpose of this exercise, I define the optimal party as such: Able to succesfully meet the widest variety of challanges successfully, adaquately fill all party roles, with as little redundancy as is reasonable. Challenges include various combats, social interactions, and general adventuring and display of skills. Optimally, each character will play some role in all group encounters.

To limit the peramaters a bit more, we'll assume that the party will adventure from level 1 to level 12.

The party must be four members with the option of a fifth "auxilliary" character.

Draw from every class in every 3.5 legal book for your party. Multiclassing and PrCs are OK, but no character can have more than 2 base classes or 1 prestiege class.

Difficulty: No LOL 4 wizards FTW!

Chronicled
2008-02-01, 11:01 AM
Wizard, Cleric or Archivist, Druid or Artificer, Beguiler or Factotum. Go with the former when in doubt, although the latter options will be better choices depending on the campaign.

Edit: As for which of them to add as the fifth person, if going Wizard/Cleric/Druid/Beguiler, then the Artificer is the best choice, with the Factotum also very strong.

Worira
2008-02-01, 11:02 AM
A wizard, a druid, a cleric, and a beguiler.

Edit: accursed ninjas.

Chronicled
2008-02-01, 11:06 AM
accursed ninjas.

The ninja class is most certainly not in the optimal 4-person party! :smallwink:

(It is a strong choice for an individual campaign, though, when you don't have a bunch of people with no concept of stealth following you.)

Snadgeros
2008-02-01, 11:06 AM
Wizard, cleric, fighter, rogue.

No, seriously, what's wrong with that? The game was built around these four roles, and none of them overlap, provided the cleric doesn't go CoDzilla. They've got all of the bases covered here. For a fifth man, throw in a bard for some "Plan B" casting, healing, fighting, and skills, not to mention some sweet buffs.:smallbiggrin:

Arbitrarity
2008-02-01, 11:08 AM
An Artificer, a Wizard/Incantatrix, an Archivist, and a Druid. 5'th member is a Factotum/Chameleon.

The Artificer does rogue, and magic stuff, along with metamagic cheese, as does the Chameleon. The Chameleon gets every spell in-game for the wizard and archivist, by getting extra spell with his floating feat. The chameleon and artificer team up for item crafting as well.

The wizard does metamagic cheese for everyone, while being batman. The Archivist does all list divine casting cheese, better than the chameleon, as well as being a secondary melee prescence, along with the artificer and the chameleon. The Druid goes melee, and kills everything with it, while covering the divine caster role a bit.

Redundancy? Moderate. The chameleon isn't horribly useful, but he can be anything, which makes him useful if someone falls. Also, his boosting the wizard and archivist is incredibly powerful.

Whoops. I forgot. The Archivist takes Magical Training, and goes into Dwenomerkeeper for metamagic cheese, spontaneous casting, and free wishes/miracles with supernatural spell.

Dragonmuncher
2008-02-01, 11:09 AM
Wizard, cleric, fighter, rogue.

No, seriously, what's wrong with that? The game was built around these four roles, and none of them overlap, provided the cleric doesn't go CoDzilla. They've got all of the bases covered here. For a fifth man, throw in a bard for some "Plan B" casting, healing, fighting, and skills, not to mention some sweet buffs.:smallbiggrin:

Well, there's nothing WRONG with it, but the goal is "optimal." And just to pick the easiest argument, a Cleric or Druid can out-fighter the fighter without much difficulty.

Chronicled
2008-02-01, 11:09 AM
Wizard, cleric, fighter, rogue.

No, seriously, what's wrong with that? The game was built around these four roles, and none of them overlap, provided the cleric doesn't go CoDzilla. They've got all of the bases covered here. For a fifth man, throw in a bard for some "Plan B" casting, healing, fighting, and skills, not to mention some sweet buffs.:smallbiggrin:

What's wrong with that is that the OP asked for the optimal 4-person party, not the iconic 4-person party.

Human Paragon 3
2008-02-01, 11:21 AM
How about Psychic Warrior, Wizard, Beguiler, Druid/Master of Many Forms? I think this team would be incredably versatile. I'm having difficulty concieving a challenge that they couldn't overcome. Not only do they have the necessary abillities to overcome any challenge, but each can contribute to all types of challenges. The only weak point would be Beguiler in a non-charmable combat situation, but that's what advanced learning is for.

Duke of URL
2008-02-01, 11:22 AM
Wizard, Druid, Cleric, Beguiler.

The last can be the "skill monkey" and the party "face", and you don't have to worry about any accursed "non-casters" in your group.

MandibleBones
2008-02-01, 11:25 AM
Wizard, Archvist, Swordsage, Warblade.

We've all agreed on Wizard, right?

Archivist for all your divine needs (whether druid or cleric).

Swordsage is your stealth-monkey, and archivist picks up the slack as far as skills go.

Warblade is your "I hit things" class, since it does it better than the fighter in much the same fashion - even so far as having fighter bonus feats.

Chronicled
2008-02-01, 11:28 AM
How about Psychic Warrior, Wizard, Beguiler, Druid/Master of Many Forms? I think this team would be incredably versatile. I'm having difficulty concieving a challenge that they couldn't overcome. Not only do they have the necessary abillities to overcome any challenge, but each can contribute to all types of challenges. The only weak point would be Beguiler in a non-charmable combat situation, but that's what advanced learning is for.

Cleric > Psychic Warrior

Druid > Druid/MoMF (usually)

Your selection would be quite versatile, it's true. However, the second weak point is the Psychic Warrior -- much as I love them, the Cleric beats them hands down for out of combat utility (even for skills), and is better in melee.

Edit: The Psychic Warrior also has problems with running out of power points, more so than the Cleric does with spells.

Snadgeros
2008-02-01, 11:29 AM
Well, there's nothing WRONG with it, but the goal is "optimal." And just to pick the easiest argument, a Cleric or Druid can out-fighter the fighter without much difficulty.

Ah! But his definition of "optimal" was not "most overpowered classes!" He said to make a party that could fulfill a wide variety of tasks, check, filled all party roles, check, and with as little redundancy as possible. Under these stipulations, my iconic party is best, as it has little to no overlap, fills the 4 roles, and should be able to overcome any level-appropriate assignment.

Your parties, on the other hand, have ridiculous amounts of redundancy when compared to mine, with multiple casters and healers. So while your party is more powerful, it does not meet the OP's definition of "optimized.":smalltongue:

Jack Zander
2008-02-01, 11:33 AM
Gonna have to say Beguiler, Cleric, Druid, and Wizard here. Covers everything prefectly with no one steping on each others toes.

MandibleBones
2008-02-01, 11:34 AM
Your parties, on the other hand, have ridiculous amounts of redundancy

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.



re·dun·dant
adj.
Exceeding what is necessary or natural; superfluous.


Yes, there is some overlap - in mine especially. But the ability for a party to defend itself is always necessary.

Chronicled
2008-02-01, 11:37 AM
Ah! But his definition of "optimal" was not "most overpowered classes!" He said to make a party that could fulfill a wide variety of tasks, check, filled all party roles, check, and with as little redundancy as possible. Under these stipulations, my iconic party is best, as it has little to no overlap, fills the 4 roles, and should be able to overcome any level-appropriate assignment.

Your parties, on the other hand, have ridiculous amounts of redundancy when compared to mine, with multiple casters and healers. So while your party is more powerful, it does not meet the OP's definition of "optimized.":smalltongue:

Your party falls short in two areas: "Able to succesfully meet the widest variety of challanges successfully," and "Optimally, each character will play some role in all group encounters." (Admittedly, the latter quoted section demands some redundancy in the party makeup.)

The Wizard/Cleric/Druid/Beguiler party can meet a wider variety of challenges successfully, and each member can contribute to nearly all group encounters -- for example, the Cleric, Druid, and Beguiler all have Diplomacy as a class skill, while the Wizard has access to Charm Person, Suggestion, etc. Your iconic party has the Fighter twiddling his thumbs in such a situation (unless he's built like a GiaMonk).

Chronos
2008-02-01, 11:41 AM
I was also going to say Wizard, Beguiler, Cleric, Druid.

Everyone knows why Wizard is on the list, so I won't waste time there.

Beguiler is there primarily as skill-monkey. Rogue can fill this role slightly better, but the Beguiler does well enough, and also contributes magic.

Cleric and druid are front-line meatshields, and also happen to be full casters. I'm taking one of each because their areas of expertise are different, so this gives more versatility.

Some other comments:
Spellthieves are just as good at the skillmonkey role as beguilers, and with three full casters in the party, they have plenty of options for spells to borrow (even if up against non-magical enemies). So that would probably be a viable substitution. On the other hand, the beguiler's presence makes it a lot easier for the wizard to specialize.

Archivists can be very nice, but between the cleric, druid, and wizard, we already have access to darn near every spell in the game, anyway. And the archivist doesn't have the combat prowess of the cleric. So he's out.

Artficiers are also powerful, but with so many casters, item creation is going to be very easy, anyway (each feat need only be taken by one of the characters), which removes one of the major advantages of the artificier.

Arbitrarity
2008-02-01, 11:41 AM
Hm. My party needs better social skills. Chameleon is pretty good, wizard has magic, I suppose druid and archivist have the potential. Chameleon is still better, but he's a 5'th wheel. Prehaps replace the druid with a beguiler, but that leaves melee rather weak. Wait, though, the wizard can just use some cheese from Incantatrix to give the archivist free metamagic, so persist stuff anyways. Ah, there we go.

Snadgeros
2008-02-01, 11:53 AM
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.



Yes, there is some overlap - in mine especially. But the ability for a party to defend itself is always necessary.

First off, massive kudos to you for quoting my favorite movie ever.:smallbiggrin:

Secondly, I'm not looking to get deeply involved in this debate here; I'm just tossing in my two cents and passing along. Okay, yes, your parties meet wider varieties of tasks and your tank doesn't twiddle his thumbs during diplomacy rolls, but I'm just pointing out something most of you didn't take into account. Wizard, beguiler, cleric, and druid might be a kickass party and meet all of the other requirements, but I'm sure there's a way SOMEONE can reduce the overlap here.:smalltongue: Right now you've got two arcane casters, two divine casters, two tanks, two blasters, and three diplomacers. Pretty much the only area there that's covered by ONE person is the skillmonkey, although batman there could cover that if he devoted his spell selection as such.:smalltongue:

Cyclone231
2008-02-01, 11:58 AM
The game was built around these four roles, and none of them overlap, provided the cleric doesn't go CoDzilla.

I don't think you understand CoDzilla. CoDzilla is not a wanked out munchkinny cleric or druid. CoDzilla is any cleric or druid.

They are THAT powerful.

Draz74
2008-02-01, 11:58 AM
Too many good options. But if simplicity is considered a good thing, here's a very decent and fun party with no multiclassing or PrCs or Vancian casting or setting-specific material.

Raptoran Warblade 12
Human Dragonfire Adept 12
Elan Ardent 12
Whisper Gnome Factotum 12

It's not optimized for power (like everyone else's so far), but it's optimized for flexibility, simplicity, and fun. And can still handle combat pretty well.

Telonius
2008-02-01, 11:59 AM
I was also going to say Wizard, Beguiler, Cleric, Druid.

Everyone knows why Wizard is on the list, so I won't waste time there.

Beguiler is there primarily as skill-monkey. Rogue can fill this role slightly better, but the Beguiler does well enough, and also contributes magic.

Cleric and druid are front-line meatshields, and also happen to be full casters. I'm taking one of each because their areas of expertise are different, so this gives more versatility.

Some other comments:
Spellthieves are just as good at the skillmonkey role as beguilers, and with three full casters in the party, they have plenty of options for spells to borrow (even if up against non-magical enemies). So that would probably be a viable substitution. On the other hand, the beguiler's presence makes it a lot easier for the wizard to specialize.

Archivists can be very nice, but between the cleric, druid, and wizard, we already have access to darn near every spell in the game, anyway. And the archivist doesn't have the combat prowess of the cleric. So he's out.

Artficiers are also powerful, but with so many casters, item creation is going to be very easy, anyway (each feat need only be taken by one of the characters), which removes one of the major advantages of the artificier.

Artificer to fill in the fifth wheel, maybe? Each Item Creation feat the Artificer takes is a Metamagic feat the Wizard can take.

Or you could go with something completely different, and have a Bard built for item creation.

Illiterate Scribe
2008-02-01, 12:12 PM
Artificer - ultra batman. Give him time, he can probably come up with a solution to a problem. Also, tons of metamagic.
Archivistidweomerwizardkeeper - I disagree with Fax, here - rereading alternative source spell does seem to allow you to prepare your wizard spells in cleric spots. Anyway, this character is batman, having literally all the spells, and also that oh-so-sweet alternative source spell.
Crusader/Wizard/Jade Phoenix Mage - Tank, during the early game. Mid range support at later levels.
Beguiler - face.

FlyMolo
2008-02-01, 12:23 PM
Lesee. You need a good melee guy, a good magic guy, a good skills guy, and a healing guy. The 5th guy is just icing on the cake.

I'd say a thri-keen fighter/warmind with a pair of spiked chains and great cleave.(by 12th level, he can hit 8 squares around him, plus more if he gets a cleave. Sweeping Strike ftw.) Spring Attack, Mobility, etc etc. Superior cleave if you can get it, and just hack through the ranks of weak enemies almost instantly. Alternatives to a pair of spiked chains: one spiked chain and a pair of long swords, or a light reach weapon if you can find one.

Wizard for the magic guy. Maybe an archivist, but I don't know how they work. *shrug*

Spellthief. Skills that are important only. Disable Device, Search, Hide, MS, etc. Stuff that other people aren't advancing. With 3 casters and a manifester in the party, go nuts. Take the enemy's magic away. Bow and point blank shot.

Cleric. Need I say more? Get a big hammer. Hit things.

The 5th guy can by a druid, throwing in more meatshielding and magic. Alternatives are the Warlock, for spiderclimb, darkness, etc. A good build for the warlock might be an overpowered combination of classes that get good stuff in the darkness, and the warlocks at will darkness SLA. It's on these forums somewhere.

valadil
2008-02-01, 12:32 PM
Cleric, Wizard, and Beguiler. Those are necessary. Past that I'd go with a gish of the wiz, human paragon, spellsword 3, eldritch knight X variety with a spiked chain. Other than that a bard, druid, or even another tank would be pretty happy.

AKA_Bait
2008-02-01, 12:32 PM
Going to go with:

Wizard
Archivist
Druid
Beguiler/Factotem

5th man:
Artificer or Beguiler/Factotem

This post brought to you by the 'Yes Spells Really Are That Powerful" foundation.

Indon
2008-02-01, 12:36 PM
I don't think you understand CoDzilla. CoDzilla is not a wanked out munchkinny cleric or druid. CoDzilla is any cleric or druid.

They are THAT powerful.

That's not how it generally works out in practice - at least, for the Cleric. For the Cleric to match the Fighter in combat effectiveness, he needs to either use divine metamagic (which is generally agreed to be very, very cheesy) to precast his buffs, or to spend rounds of combat casting (which, considering combats are usually very short, is a big problem).

All the Druid needs to do, on the other hand, is spend all his time Wildshaped with Natural Spell, and use his OOC telepathy whenever he wants to communicate anything to the party.

As for the optimal party, I'll go with a Wizard for encounter resolution, a Druid for stealth, divine casting and melee combat, a Warlock for UMD and endurance scenarios, and a Factotum for everything else (including arcane spells the Wizard can not or does not take).

Outside of blasting and Turn Undead, there's actually not much redundancy provided everyone coordinates a bit on spell and ability choices.

Edit: And they can have a Samurai as a 5'th man.

Duke of URL
2008-02-01, 12:50 PM
Edit: And they can have a Samurai as a 5'th man.

What, there's a shortage of horses to carry the luggage?

Indon
2008-02-01, 01:37 PM
What, there's a shortage of horses to carry the luggage?

I wanted to pick a 5'th member that would minimize the increase in my party's redundancy.

Telonius
2008-02-01, 01:44 PM
Well, Samurai has the market on Uselessness nearly cornered, so I don't see any redundancy there. Horses can occasionally be useful.

Tempest Fennac
2008-02-01, 01:52 PM
I'd say a Knight as a meat shield (they have acess to heavy armour and a d12 HD), a Cleric (for healing and helping on the frontlines), a Wizard specialist (preferably a Conjurer or Transmuter) barring Illusion and Enchantment and a Beguiller (for trapfinding, Illusion and Enchantment magic and for handlin social situations). If the 5th member (who would be a Druid as a back-up healer/battlefield controller/tank) was allowed, a Rogue could be used instead of the Beguiller for Sneak Attacks (in this case, the Wizard would be better off being a Diviner while barring Evocation).

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-02-01, 02:03 PM
Cleric, Druid, Wizard, Beguiler. With a Warforged Artificer as the 5th man so that you never need to actually buy anything. You stick him in a BoH and let him pretend to be Q. Beguiler can be replaced by a rogue, but you have enough power in melee already that his combat is less useful than a spellcaster with enchantment. A sorcerer may be better replacement for the wizard(who's spec'd for Necromancy, with I&E banned), depending on how much everybody works together on choosing spells. The Druid can be traded for a cleric, or the cleric for a druid with the healing variant, but both of those lose a bit of versatility from the standard optimal party. If this is solely at low levels, a warblade is good to trade for the Cleric if the Druid will go "Spontaneous Healing". That loses power at level 5, but until then it's a bit more powerful.

The_Werebear
2008-02-01, 02:14 PM
Warblade, Wizard, Cleric or Druid, Beguiler or Rogue/Wizard/Appropriate PRCs. For a fifth wheel, either an Artificer or one of either or options.

Trouvere
2008-02-01, 04:33 PM
For an "optimal party", as opposed to a party of optimal characters, ideally you'd like each character to provide a bucketload of bonuses to every other member. Your divine caster could be an Archivist, granting everyone dark knowledge bonuses; a character with 1 Marshal and 5 Dread Commando levels would be adding 5+Cha bonus to everyone's initiative, for a good chance for the entire party to act first; Nightsong Enforcer and/or Infiltrator levels would grant other party members a bit of (extra) sneak attack damage and various other teamwork boosts. The arcanist could be an Incantatrix to metamagic-up the other casters' spell effects, or a War Weaver to buff everyone at once; one level of Mindbender to act as the party's silent information relay would be nice. And of course tricked-out Bards can provide obscene bonuses to allies.
There must be lots more along this line. And then there's Tome of Battle, which seems to be the boringly predictable answer to nearly every optimisation question these days, specifically White Raven stuff, but I don't know anything about this.

Chronos
2008-02-01, 04:54 PM
For the Cleric to match the Fighter in combat effectiveness, he needs to either use divine metamagic (which is generally agreed to be very, very cheesy) to precast his buffs, or to spend rounds of combat casting (which, considering combats are usually very short, is a big problem).Or the Core-only cleric can use a metamagic quicken rod to cast his buffs in the same rounds that he spends fighting. First round, quicken Righteous Might and then attack, and second round, if necessary, quicken Divine Power and attack again. It's not like swift actions have any other use in melee.

And the reason that the four-casters party has redundancy is because redundancy is good. If you have a party with no overlap, then should one of the characters become incapacitated (asleep at the time a night ambush occurs, or under some nasty spell effect, or dead, or the player just didn't show up for the session today, or whatever), then the party is screwed. With a party of wizard-beguiler-cleric-druid, though, you can lose any one member of the team, and still probably be able to do very well. By the standards of this thread, an optimized party should be able to handle any situation, and that includes the situation of being short-handed.

Frosty
2008-02-01, 05:15 PM
Beguiler and Factotum are very popular it seems. Poor rogue...

mostlyharmful
2008-02-01, 05:16 PM
Or the Core-only cleric can use a metamagic quicken rod to cast his buffs in the same rounds that he spends fighting. First round, quicken Righteous Might and then attack, and second round, if necessary, quicken Divine Power and attack again. It's not like swift actions have any other use in melee.

And the reason that the four-casters party has redundancy is because redundancy is good. If you have a party with no overlap, then should one of the characters become incapacitated (asleep at the time a night ambush occurs, or under some nasty spell effect, or dead, or the player just didn't show up for the session today, or whatever), then the party is screwed. With a party of wizard-beguiler-cleric-druid, though, you can lose any one member of the team, and still probably be able to do very well. By the standards of this thread, an optimized party should be able to handle any situation, and that includes the situation of being short-handed.

What??? BACK-UP MEASURES??!!?? Yes, a decent party should be able to lose people, even up to half its members, and still be diverse. Otherwise you're just begging for a TPK


Morgh "RAAARGHHH!!!"
Fighter "Oh no, sorry the cleric's been feebled, could you come back in a few sessions old chap?"
Morgh "Ah, dreadfully sorry to hear that, do send my best to his wife won't you. Would next tuesday be good for you?"
Rogue "Er.. We'll be taking on constructs then and the Wizard can't make it so yes that'd be good for us."
Morgh "Capital. Well see you when your not short a vital role then... toodles":smallconfused:

As Chronos points out contingency planning is a strengh not a weakness just so long as nothing major is left out of the basic roles the game was designed around. The Iconic party runs ok, not great but ok. When any one of them gets status conditioned or can't make the session they're boned

Indon
2008-02-01, 06:24 PM
As Chronos points out contingency planning is a strengh not a weakness just so long as nothing major is left out of the basic roles the game was designed around. The Iconic party runs ok, not great but ok. When any one of them gets status conditioned or can't make the session they're boned

Feel free to start a "Make a three wizards and one divine caster party!" thread about it. I'll be over in the interesting thread doing interesting things, in which redundancy is avoided.

Rutee
2008-02-01, 06:34 PM
Feel free to start a "Make a three wizards and one divine caster party!" thread about it. I'll be over in the interesting thread doing interesting things, in which redundancy is avoided.

To be perfectly fair, the OP explicitly stated that he wanted an optimal party.

mostlyharmful
2008-02-01, 06:42 PM
Feel free to start a "Make a three wizards and one divine caster party!" thread about it. I'll be over in the interesting thread doing interesting things, in which redundancy is avoided.

OK. well nothing more to say here. If the fallback position to "casters can cover all roles in 3.X so lets face up to it and talk about how we can use the game engine AND eek a little flexability out of the Skillmonkey/Tank classes" is "La La La... I'm not listening!!!" then yeah. I'll be over in the thread on dumbass PC names thanks.

For the record my point was just redundancy is a good thing in role filling to make sure a badly rolled save or an unreliable player doesn't hamstring the party and blow the encounter

Swiftblu
2008-02-01, 07:33 PM
Well, trying to break the mold here...

Transmuter Wizard
Kineticist Psion
Spiked-Chain Warblade
Factotum

The Wizard's first priority is to pacify enemies for the Kineticist, his second to buff everyone that needs buffing, and his third to be Batman.

The Kineticist is a straight blaster the way only a Psion could be. After enemies are taken out of the battle by the Wizard, he blows them into oblivion.

The Warblade has optimized reach and a spiked chain. His job is to trip anything that comes near him so it won't hurt the other, squishier party members, effectively locking down the battlefield within double his reach. He does not deal any significant damage.

The Factotum is the support character. He skill-monkeys, uses UMD to heal-bot, uses Track and maxxed Spot/Listen to be the party ranger, and uses a bunch of ranks in social skills to be the party face.

Everything here is covered, as far as I can see. If the Wizard can't save-or-suck it, the Psion can't blow it up, and the Warblade can't knock it on its ass, then the Factotum is bound to have something up his sleeve to take care of it.

Gardakan
2008-02-01, 07:43 PM
A druid, a rogue, a wizard, a fighter, a ranger.

The rogue is sneaky, he need to be a melee assistance to the warrior who deals a lot of damage. The warrior need to have a high AC(around 18 at the beginning..) to stop the melee attacks. The druid is here to be the third in the melee. He use spells like buffs to make the warrior more dangerous. He use wildshaping to add some punch in that party. The ranger choose ranged style and he shoot arrows. For the healing... the druid do the best of that and the ranger help it. Carry a wand of cure light wounds. The wizard is also a DPS(Damage per second). He needs to choose the best spells. Fireball, Lightning Bolt is on the top ot the post. THis party is just polyvalent...

Orzel
2008-02-01, 07:47 PM
No matter the party the 6th man is the ranger. After you divine up the BBEG's type, the ranger maxes it as favored enemy, tracks him down, waits for the teleport then "lots of unbalanced attacks".

Fenix_of_Doom
2008-02-01, 08:09 PM
A druid, a rogue, a wizard, a fighter, a ranger.

The rogue is sneaky, he need to be a melee assistance to the warrior who deals a lot of damage. The warrior need to have a high AC(around 18 at the beginning..) to stop the melee attacks. The druid is here to be the third in the melee. He use spells like buffs to make the warrior more dangerous. He use wildshaping to add some punch in that party. The ranger choose ranged style and he shoot arrows. For the healing... the druid do the best of that and the ranger help it. Carry a wand of cure light wounds. The wizard is also a DPS(Damage per second). He needs to choose the best spells. Fireball, Lightning Bolt is on the top ot the post. THis party is just polyvalent...


Brilliant sarcastic post:smallwink:.

Gardakan
2008-02-01, 08:27 PM
Brilliant sarcastic post:smallwink:.

That was not sarcastic. I really play the druid in that kind of group. Never we lost a member... we were level 17 each and we have defeat the Tarasque(the ranger track it... the wizard hide whit the rogue and the fighter to prepare the spell.) Me i change into a Large Elephant and the ranger was on me. He shoot arrows to keep the attention of the monster for 15 minutes(TIME that wizard need to prepare that spell slot...). We defeat it...

I don't tell you the entire things that the part can do... track, hide...

Collin152
2008-02-01, 08:35 PM
That was not sarcastic. I really play the druid in that kind of group. Never we lost a member... we were level 17 each and we have defeat the Tarasque(the ranger track it... the wizard hide whit the rogue and the fighter to prepare the spell.) Me i change into a Large Elephant and the ranger was on me. He shoot arrows to keep the attention of the monster for 15 minutes(TIME that wizard need to prepare that spell slot...). We defeat it...

I don't tell you the entire things that the part can do... track, hide...

But... wizards... Fireball and Lightning bolt...?
...
Urge to kill... running wild...
Wheres my vent?
The DM isn't responding!
I'm having flashbacks to 'Nam!
Aaaaaaaaa-
*static*

Fenix_of_Doom
2008-02-01, 08:41 PM
That was not sarcastic. I really play the druid in that kind of group. Never we lost a member... we were level 17 each and we have defeat the Tarasque(the ranger track it... the wizard hide whit the rogue and the fighter to prepare the spell.) Me i change into a Large Elephant and the ranger was on me. He shoot arrows to keep the attention of the monster for 15 minutes(TIME that wizard need to prepare that spell slot...). We defeat it...

I don't tell you the entire things that the part can do... track, hide...

You kept a combat going for over 15 minutes(friggin' looooong) so that your wizard could prepare one spell to win the encounter? How on earth did you do that?

Never dieing proves nothing because we don't know how you play, maybe your DM wouldn't kill you if you played four commoners.

As for not being sarcastic, why did you mention fireball if you weren't sarcastic?

Chronicled
2008-02-01, 08:43 PM
You kept a combat going for over 15 minutes(friggin' looooong) so that your wizard could prepare one spell to win the encounter? How on earth did you do that?

For that matter, you tracked down the Tarrasque when your wizard didn't have the proper spell(s) prepared? Why on earth did you do that?

Gardakan
2008-02-01, 08:52 PM
We were tracking a giant monster(wh tough that was a green dragon..) We knew that in this mountain(we were in a mountain) they were a few dragons. So we track down this ''dragon'' but we discover the Tarasque. I was running at the end i morph me into a giant eagle so we begin to fly and to shoot it with arrows and spells. We just keep it far of the wizard. The rogue and the fighter shoot it with arrows and keep is attention. The wizard cast Finger of Death on the monster... the monster failed it 3rd save and he cast Miracle. We loot the Tarask(yeah he add a treasure...).

Quellian-dyrae
2008-02-01, 09:35 PM
Interestingly, I'm playing a group of four psions (with different disciplines) in a game my friend's DMing (just the two of us playing), and I'm finding them pretty efficient. Good defenses, ability to spam high-damage or save-or-lose effects, respectable skill selections. They wouldn't quite meet the standards of this thread (pretty much their first move was to contact the ruler of their city asking her to send out a tracker), but they're pretty solid.

For this exercise...Psion, Beguiler, Favored Soul, Swordsage as the main set, with a Wizard/Cleric/Mystic Theurge as the auxilliary character.

Myself, in general use, I favor spontaneous casting. Although I do recognize and respect the ability of prepared casters to conceivably have a spell ready for any given situation, I tend to be leery of their limitation when dealing with multiple similar situations in succession, which is not uncommon in my games.

The psion has the blasting, dominate, and respectable utility. Probably make it a telepath, using Expanded Knowledge to get some of the better powers from other disciplines (like Energy Missile to qualify for Privileged Energy). Psion also has some utility in social encounters with skills, and can use Mindlink as a cheap way to keep the party organized when necessary. Finally, its ready access to excellent defensive powers lets it both protect the party from enemy blasters (Damp Power, Intellect Fortress) and even serve as a solid defender (Vigor, Inertial Armor, Defensive Precognition, Biofeedback...) I do seem to recall a spell that can convert spell power to PP, which the Mystic Theurge and Favored Soul can eventually learn if doing so seems viable.

The beguiler handles locks, traps, scouting, has good utility, can save-or-lose or battlefield control to be useful in combat, and illusions for when most applicable. Also has social capability and other general skill functionality.

Favored Soul can grab the key clerical healing (panacea, restorations, the mighty revivify, heal), can tank respectably (equal to non-DMM-persist clericzilla, and less vulnerable than a straight cleric to dispels), has social function, and provides good divine utility spells and a bit of save-or-lose (Nauseating Breath) and eventual save-or-die. Naturally, it comes equipped with wands for out of combat healing. Favored Soul might grab a reach weapon, because they're good. FS is default tank.

Swordsage will go TWF, giving the beguiler melee backup on scouting missions, and laying waste with various stealth/movement maneuvers, flame blade boosts, etc. Primary disciplines are Shadow Hand, Desert Wind, Tiger Claw, and Diamond Mind. Will probably grab Craven if DM accepts Assassin's Stance as a prerequisite (I can't see why not, it's essentially sneak attack with the additional prerequisite of "can only be used while in this stance", but that's discretion-based). Even if not, might take a rogue level to qualify, which would probably be even better since that way it can use Blood in the Water and high-threat weapons. Swordsage is the massive single-target damage dealer, and the beguiler (or more accurately, the beguiler's Greater Invisibility spell) is its best friend.

The mystic theurge is there so that the group can pull whatever obscure (albeit lower-level) spell it may need out of its hat, and to dispense some of the better low-level wizard spells such as web, glitterdust, fly, and the like. Also a backup healer. At the high levels, it has divine power and thus can fight.

EDIT: Ironically, if I were using this party in my current game, their first move ALSO would have had to be to ask for a tracker...

Drglenn
2008-02-01, 09:50 PM
I personally would go with Paladin, Rogue, Druid and Wizard
Reasoning:
Paladin: High BAB, Mount, Smite, Some Healing (always a good idea to have a backup healer)
Rogue: Skills, Sneak Attack, Trapfinding
Druid: Animal Companion, Healing, Some attack spells
Wizard: Spells

Best 5th character: Bard: acts as a backup to all roles above (except animal companion + mount)

Worira
2008-02-01, 10:10 PM
We were tracking a giant monster(wh tough that was a green dragon..) We knew that in this mountain(we were in a mountain) they were a few dragons. So we track down this ''dragon'' but we discover the Tarasque. I was running at the end i morph me into a giant eagle so we begin to fly and to shoot it with arrows and spells. We just keep it far of the wizard. The rogue and the fighter shoot it with arrows and keep is attention. The wizard cast Finger of Death on the monster... the monster failed it 3rd save and he cast Miracle. We loot the Tarask(yeah he add a treasure...).


Casting Finger of Death at a monster with a fortitude save of +38 and SR 32 isn't really all that optimal. Not to mention that he then had to cast Wish (not Miracle, wizards don't get that) on the same round, which is rather hard to do, especially in core. Also, Druids can't transform into Giant Eagles, and for a Giant Eagle to carry a party, they would have to weigh under 100 pounds including gear, 173 with Bull's Strength.

Collin152
2008-02-01, 10:24 PM
Casting Finger of Death at a monster with a fortitude save of +38 and SR 32 isn't really all that optimal. Not to mention that he then had to cast Wish (not Miracle, wizards don't get that) on the same round, which is rather hard to do, especially in core. Also, Druids can't transform into Giant Eagles, and for a Giant Eagle to carry a party, they would have to weigh under 100 pounds including gear, 173 with Bull's Strength.

Perhaps he meant a Roc?

Worira
2008-02-01, 10:38 PM
It wouldn't really matter, since Rocs are Gargantuan.

Indon
2008-02-01, 10:49 PM
To be perfectly fair, the OP explicitly stated that he wanted an optimal party.

And then said, "No 'LOL 4 Wizards', and minimize redundancy" right after it, specifically so this wouldn't turn into another thread about how much more awesomer casters are than everything else. We already know.

mikeejimbo
2008-02-01, 11:24 PM
Feel free to start a "Make a three wizards and one divine caster party!" thread about it. I'll be over in the interesting thread doing interesting things, in which redundancy is avoided.

I was wondering when someone would say this. Or Wizard / Wizard / Wizard / Wizard.

Collin152
2008-02-01, 11:28 PM
The answer is simple: Pun-Pun's left arm, left leg, right arm, right leg. The head is the 5th, Anxillary party member. Then you shout "Obliterate!" and you win instantly.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-02-01, 11:40 PM
And then said, "No 'LOL 4 Wizards', and minimize redundancy" right after it, specifically so this wouldn't turn into another thread about how much more awesomer casters are than everything else. We already know.The current primary build (wiz, caster skillmonkey, 2xdevine) can cover every primary role, most secondary roles, and most roles are covered twice. How is reducing redundancy a good thing?

Kilroy
2008-02-01, 11:49 PM
Optimum parties can function in anti-magic feild somewhat effectively

Crow
2008-02-01, 11:50 PM
In Core;

Barbarian, Wizard, Rogue, Druid. With a Bard to front for the party.

Unfortunately, my party will experience a good deal of body-swapping over the course of 20 levels...

MeklorIlavator
2008-02-01, 11:57 PM
Optimum parties can function in anti-magic feild somewhat effectively


Antimagic Field

Abjuration
Level: Clr 8, Magic 6, Protection 6, Sor/Wiz 6 Components: V, S, M/DF Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: 10 ft.
Area: 10-ft.-radius emanation, centered on you
Duration: 10 min./level (D) Saving Throw: None Spell Resistance: See text
....
(The effects of instantaneous conjurations are not affected by an antimagic field because the conjuration itself is no longer in effect, only its result.)
Note those two sections. Anti-Magic fields are a small area centered on a caster, and instantaneous conjurations can enter the field after being cast. This means that a well built wizard will have some options as long as he is not inside the field, and that well built clerics/druids will likely be at least on par with the enemy caster. Plus, Druids have animal companions, which mean that the caster is likely very screwed.


Plus, being somewhat suboptimal in one instance doesn't mean that they are not overall the most optimal party.

sonofzeal
2008-02-02, 12:32 AM
Let's see what we can do with no spellcasters......



Factotum, Swordsage, Warlock, Crusader.


Crusader tanks, does massive Battlefield Control, and has unlimited out-of-combat healing as well as some in-combat healing.

Warlock has great ranged blasting, flight, and with Beguiling influence and Charm he can make an awesome face. (edit: oh yeah, and UMD/crafting awesomeness, how could I forget?)

Factotum is your skillmonkey, secondary healer, and can play mini-batman when needed, with Arcane Dilettante.

Swordsage handles stealth and secondary skillmonkeydom, and can dish out the damage





All four are reasonably durable (especially the Crusader obviously), all can handle themselves admirably in a fight using a diverse array of special abilities that can be tailored to the situation, all but Warlock have reasonably good skillpoints and should be able to cover anything you need between them, and all have solid (and different) out-of-combat purposes. You'll be heavy on melee and light on ranged, but not critically so as the Factotum can handle ranged combat just fine, and the Warlock is positively in his element. You'll have all the healing you should need, and reasonable batman abilites. Oh, and all four characters have unlimited endurance in that they can use almost all of their key abilities without ever having to worry about running out over a long series of encounters.

thorgrim29
2008-02-02, 03:57 AM
Lessee, wizard, for battlefeild control. Then, warblade, for hitting things, hard, fast and effectively. Cleric, healing through objects, buffing, tanking. Beguiler, party face, takes care of traps and those pesky alive monsters (quite useless against undead and constructs though). Fifth spot? Either a bard, a marshall or an artificer, alternatifely you could have a conjurer wizard with enchantment spells fill that niche, buffing, crafting, and summuning nastys. I,d say an artificer would be more usefull, even without the cheese, particularely if the dm allows the transferrance rules, and you have an home base (or a portable hole to put the automated lab in).

Saph
2008-02-02, 06:16 AM
I don't think I'd pick both a cleric and a druid. At levels 11-20, sure. At levels 1-12, no. Too much overlap. Instead I'd replace one of them with a dedicated melee/tank class, probably either a Crusader or a Warblade.

Beguiler definitely takes the rogue slot.

Wizard takes the last slot, because despite their suckiness at level 1, they're an excellent team class.

- Saph

Kurald Galain
2008-02-02, 07:03 AM
I think a party of four clerics is going to be surprisingly near optimum...

thorgrim29
2008-02-02, 10:53 AM
Yeah cleric team!

Gardakan
2008-02-02, 11:00 AM
Casting Finger of Death at a monster with a fortitude save of +38 and SR 32 isn't really all that optimal. Not to mention that he then had to cast Wish (not Miracle, wizards don't get that) on the same round, which is rather hard to do, especially in core. Also, Druids can't transform into Giant Eagles, and for a Giant Eagle to carry a party, they would have to weigh under 100 pounds including gear, 173 with Bull's Strength.

I'm not remember... but the Strenght of my Eagle was of 25... so i can carry the ranger. The DC of the spell of Finger Death was 40. He use a metamagic feat, he add is + 14 inteligence, he choose that school of predilection, two feats that give + 1 each to your spell DC... so we have defeated it. It was too cool...

Chronos
2008-02-02, 02:22 PM
Instead I'd replace one of them with a dedicated melee/tank class, probably either a Crusader or a Warblade.A druid is a dedicated tank class. He just happens to have other things he can do, too.


The DC of the spell of Finger Death was 40. He use a metamagic feat, he add is + 14 inteligence, he choose that school of predilection, two feats that give + 1 each to your spell DC... so we have defeated it. It was too cool...And do you know what all of that effort to increase the DC gained you? Absolutely nothing. It would have worked exactly as well to have a DC of 1. The Tarrasque has a +38 to his Fortitude saves, which means that if he rolls a 2 or higher on his d20 for the saving throw, he hits that DC of 40. He only fails on a roll of 1, and as it happens, a roll of 1 on the d20 is always a failed save, no matter what the bonus or DC.

Now, throwing spells at something repeatedly until it eventually rolls a 1 on its save is one possible tactic for taking things down, but if that's your plan, you should make sure to have plenty of spells available. I rather doubt that your wizard had a couple dozen Finger of Death spells prepared.

Hectonkhyres
2008-02-02, 04:40 PM
The answer is simple: Pun-Pun's left arm, left leg, right arm, right leg. The head is the 5th, Anxillary party member. Then you shout "Obliterate!" and you win instantly.
I have just lost all respect for you.

Doomsy
2008-02-02, 05:02 PM
Samurai, ninja, spirit shaman, and soulknife.

Wait, I misread something.

Collin152
2008-02-02, 05:03 PM
I have just lost all respect for you.

Did you have any to begin with?

Darkantra
2008-02-02, 05:47 PM
I'd personally go Scout, Archivist, Wizard, Paladin, with a Dragon Shaman as the fifth wheel (with meta-breath feats of course!).

I just really prefer the mechanics for Scouts to Rogues.

Fenix_of_Doom
2008-02-02, 05:54 PM
I'd personally go Scout, Archivist, Wizard, Paladin, with a Dragon Shaman as the fifth wheel (with meta-breath feats of course!).

I just really prefer the mechanics for Scouts to Rogues.

The question was "what would be optimal" not what would you like most to play with, in that light I don't think a paladin can match a druid/cleric/crusader and a scout isn't really the pinnacle of power either. The dragon shaman is supposedly fairly suboptimal and I don't think your meta-breath can save him.

I'm afraid I'll have to be boring and say Wizard/Druid/Beguiler/Artificer myself.

Gardakan
2008-02-02, 10:11 PM
A druid is a dedicated tank class. He just happens to have other things he can do, too.

And do you know what all of that effort to increase the DC gained you? Absolutely nothing. It would have worked exactly as well to have a DC of 1. The Tarrasque has a +38 to his Fortitude saves, which means that if he rolls a 2 or higher on his d20 for the saving throw, he hits that DC of 40. He only fails on a roll of 1, and as it happens, a roll of 1 on the d20 is always a failed save, no matter what the bonus or DC.

Now, throwing spells at something repeatedly until it eventually rolls a 1 on its save is one possible tactic for taking things down, but if that's your plan, you should make sure to have plenty of spells available. I rather doubt that your wizard had a couple dozen Finger of Death spells prepared.
Yes i prepared 5 spells...

Voyager_I
2008-02-02, 10:41 PM
Five is not nearly enough when you need your opponent to roll a one, even assuming you always overcome its Spell Resistance. The Tarraque isn't really as tough as it's cracked up to be, anyhow. There are many, many ways of killing it much more easily at lower levels.

Fenix_of_Doom
2008-02-03, 05:20 AM
Five is not nearly enough when you need your opponent to roll a one, even assuming you always overcome its Spell Resistance.

It is with the ultimate power of DM fiat, which is, I'm guessing, probably used quite often in Gardakan's group.

shaggz076
2008-02-03, 06:16 AM
Optimal class working from the books I have or have read:

Beguiler/Spec wiz(evocation): Covers the magic element of the party combined with the trap disarming and lock picking of the rogue. Also makes for a great party face due to the sheer number of enchantments s/he is able to cast. Is also the blaster of the party when it comes to combat.

Cleric: There is something to be said about a good old heal bot in any party. Combined with the right feats and spell selection the rest of the party could be all commoners and still overcome many obsticles.

Duskblade/Warblade: The combination of these two classes grants some pretty amazing abilities in combat including the ability to cast spells through your weapon. Combine both with spiked chain proficiency and combat reflexes and you have a reall big obstacle for the enemies to overcome on their way to the casters of the party.

Druid (varient with shapeshifting instead of Wildshape): The reason for this selection is you now have a character that can be useful in combat without a limit on how many times they can change shape. The same member can transform into a bird to fly across chasms, etc. to secure a rope for the rest of the party. Finally you have a secondary healer in case the first were to fall in combat.

For the fifth optional character I would go with a Varient Sorcerer (+2 hp/level and martial wpn prof and focus with one weapon)/Fighter/Abjurant Champion. This is a great combo as it grants you spell casting and combat prowess as well as the benifit of not needing armor like normal fighters. Combine with the right spells (Decastave or Thunderlance) and you have a character that can't truely be disarmed.

sonofzeal
2008-02-03, 01:23 PM
Optimal class working from the books I have or have read:

(stuff)
....you have a Gish fetish, don't you? Gishes are "cool", but usually a waste of resources. Duskblade is a solid class, don't get me wrong, but Battle Sorcerer isn't, and the Cleric and Druid provide all the melee pwnage you're likely to need.

Wait..... Evocation Specialist? Are you kidding? Please tell me this post was a joke. Evokers are widely considered the #1 worst wizard specialist. Personally I like Diviners and Abjurers, but Enchanters, Conjurers, and Transmuters are always good choices too. Basically, anything but Evokers. Wizards have far, far better things to do than deal hitpoint damage.




So does anyone else have a nomination for best no-caster party? Rule is nothing with Power Points or Spellslots (including infusions and similar mechanics). Binding would be fine, as would Incarnum.

shaggz076
2008-02-03, 01:56 PM
Wait..... Evocation Specialist? Are you kidding? Please tell me this post was a joke. Evokers are widely considered the #1 worst wizard specialist. Personally I like Diviners and Abjurers, but Enchanters, Conjurers, and Transmuters are always good choices too. Basically, anything but Evokers. Wizards have far, far better things to do than deal hitpoint damage.




Actually, for the Beguiler/Wizard combo, an evoker is a great choice, you are there to soften up the enemy with your big damage spells and then you follow it up with your beguilers enchantment and illusion spells. worked properly you can do a lot with this combo. I wouldn't normally choose an Evoker Specialist but you did ask for what I thought would be a party to cover as much as possible with little overlap. It would be redudnant to be an enchanter or illusionist as you get that from your Beguiler class. It would also be silly to be a transmuter since you already have enough in the party for melee combat and most of them wouldn't need to be boosted.

It is also a combo that with the right feats wouldn't be gimped if seperated from the party. Anyway, a specialist only gets an extra spell per level/ per day in their specialist school and a +2 bonus on spellcraft checks for their school. That being said I don't know what the problem would be. I think the problem is that too many people play Evokers without though of the party members. They cast area effect spels that hit ally and enemy alike, due to the thoughtlessness of these players using evokers people think as you do.

Arbitrarity
2008-02-03, 02:17 PM
I. Thou shalt not give up caster levels.
II. Wieldest thou thy two-handed weapon with alacrity; but two weapons shalt thou not wield, excepting that thou hast a source of bonus damage such as Sneak Attack.

III. Doubt not the power of the Druid, for he is mighty.

IV. Avoid ye the temptation of Gauntlets of True Strike, for they shall lead thee astray down the Path of Non-Rule Cheese.

V. Thou shalt not give up caster levels. Verily, this Commandment is like unto the first; but of such magnitude that it bore mentioning twice.
VI. Makest thou no build with an odd number of fighter levels, for such things are not pleasing to the Spirits of Optimization.

VII. The Rules of 3.5 are paramount; invoke not the rules of 3.0 if a newer version be available.

VIII. When beseeching the Bretheren of Optimization, come thou not empty handed, lest they smite thee; rather, bringest thou thine own build, that they may offer suggestions and guidance.

IX. Invoke not "common sense," for it is not common.

X. Thou shalt call no build "The Ultimate X" unless his name be Pun-Pun, or thou shalt see thine "Ultimate" build topped by the Bretheren within five minutes of posting.

Yea, verily.

Beguiler/wizard is a terrible idea. Making the wizard an evoker makes it worse. "Softening up" enemies with blastiness, the following with enchantment is fail, as blasting doesn't weaken your enemies for your enchantements, illusions, etc.

shaggz076
2008-02-03, 02:23 PM
I never said it was softening them up for the Enchantments... I just said soften them up... I you read what we were asked to do in this forum, you would see where I was coming from with the Evoker idea. Obviously you fail due to your lack of foresight when it comes to “Able to successfully meet the widest variety of challenges successfully, adequately fill all party roles, with as little redundancy as is reasonable.”

If you look at it this way then I have done what was asked…

The_Werebear
2008-02-03, 02:30 PM
He has a point in the idea. A better choice might be Conjuration or Transmutation specialist, as they can pack all the punch and bring even more to the table. But, that's refining the idea more than changing it.

So
-Cleric, Druid, Transmutation/Conjuration Specialist Wizard/Beguiler

Because, there are times when a wizard does need to simply blast. They aren't frequent, but they are there. Those two specializations give the wizard what they need in terms of batmanning it up, but don't preclude the possibility of unleashing direct damage if the situation calls for it.

Arbitrarity
2008-02-03, 02:31 PM
I never said it was softening them up for the Enchantments... I just said soften them up... I you read what we were asked to do in this forum, you would see where I was coming from with the Evoker idea. Obviously you fail due to your lack of foresight when it comes to “Able to successfully meet the widest variety of challenges successfully, adequately fill all party roles, with as little redundancy as is reasonable.”

If you look at it this way then I have done what was asked…

Except evokers are redundant to a great extent. Everyone in a party does damage: Wizards do disable. Doing damage is the same as the rest of the party, and isn't necessary for "meeting a wide variety of challenges", not is it in keeping with the idea of "as little redundancy as possible". Indeed, multiclassing makes it even weaker, and less able to meet any challenges, nor aid the party in meeting those challenges.

Splitting focus in casting is always a bad idea, especially due to finite rounds, which is why the multiclassed aspect is weak. Getting 6'th level wizard or beguiler spells is a much more powerful option than 3'rd level in each. Fireball at CL 6 is 6d6; Acid fog is 2d6/round, and stops enemies from moving at any reasonable speed, simultaneously destroying their items.

Evocation is generally considered the weakest school, because damage is what everyone else does. Warmage is widely considered a weak class compared to other casters, because all it can do is damage, with very little flexibility. Compare Scorching Ray to Glitterdust.

Also, a beguiler/wizard might do well going into Ultimate Magus.

shaggz076
2008-02-03, 03:05 PM
Yes the UM is a great class for that. Either way I stick to what I posted. Yeas you can interchange the specialist school and it would work out just as well. The major thing is that your two prohibited schools would have been Enchantment and Illusion which the Beguiler calss would have picked up for you.

In the end I also didn't say it would be doing massive amounts of damage but if your a lvl 12 character you'd still be able to deal a 6d6 fireball or even bump that up to an 10d6 fireball if you took Practised Spellcaster. the difference between the two spell you mentioned would be moot because you still gain access to said spells and still can use them effectively.

Chronos
2008-02-03, 04:07 PM
In the end I also didn't say it would be doing massive amounts of damage but if your a lvl 12 character you'd still be able to deal a 6d6 fireball or even bump that up to an 10d6 fireball if you took Practised Spellcaster. the difference between the two spell you mentioned would be moot because you still gain access to said spells and still can use them effectively.6d6 points of damage is an average of 21 points. Any class at all can do 21 points of damage in a round at level 12, and most of them can do it an unlimited number of times. If your goal is to do damage, and you pick a wizard to do it with, you're just making things hard on yourself.

As for the spell access, sure, at level 12, your multiclassed wizard will have access to pretty much any level 2 spell he wants. But what level 6 spells does he have access to? Some of them are, surprisingly enough, actually more useful than level 2 spells.

shaggz076
2008-02-03, 04:12 PM
Your right! any character can do an average of 21 points of damage in a round but they can't do that in a 20 foot radius now can they? And yes there are 6th level spells that are, as you put it oddly better than 3rd level but then I never said he would be pulverizing his opponents with bedazzeling, awe inspiring 6th level spells O doom did I? I made a party that would work well to overcome most obstacles.

Chronos
2008-02-03, 04:37 PM
Your right! any character can do an average of 21 points of damage in a round but they can't do that in a 20 foot radius now can they?Actually, several of them can. A large fighter with a spiked chain, for instance.

Yes, your party can accomplish things, but it can't do them as well or as easily as other parties. The challenge here isn't "Create a party"; it was "Create an optimized party". Your party is not only not optimized; it goes to some length to become less optimized, when the simpler option would actually be better.

shaggz076
2008-02-03, 04:45 PM
True a large character CAN hit in a 20 radius but without someone to enlage a medium sized character you are relying on an ECL to acheive the effect thus dropping the class levels said character has and in dropping the class levels you also drop the damage deal/feats available etc.

Cuddly
2008-02-03, 05:00 PM
I don't think you understand CoDzilla. CoDzilla is not a wanked out munchkinny cleric or druid. CoDzilla is any cleric or druid.

They are THAT powerful.

Clerics are a little more difficult to make teh real ultimate power onez without DMM cheese or until you can quicken divine power(rod or feat). Given the parameters of this challenge, I don't think the cleric would be able to persist his buffs without cheesing out.

Draz74
2008-02-03, 05:57 PM
So does anyone else have a nomination for best no-caster party? Rule is nothing with Power Points or Spellslots (including infusions and similar mechanics). Binding would be fine, as would Incarnum.

Way back on the first page, I almost did this. I did include one Psionic character, though. Because I don't think there is any really good healer that's not a spellcaster or psionicist. (Crusader might be closest, as you use in your party, but that's not enough healing for my comfort.)

I don't know much about Incarnum. Can it make a good healer build?

Maybe Crusader combined with another semi-healer would be enough. In that case, I could change my ideal party to meet your non-caster requirement:

Crusader (used to be Warblade)
Dragonfire Adept
Binder (used to be Ardent)
Factotum

Voyager_I
2008-02-03, 06:33 PM
True a large character CAN hit in a 20 radius but without someone to enlage a medium sized character you are relying on an ECL to acheive the effect thus dropping the class levels said character has and in dropping the class levels you also drop the damage deal/feats available etc.

If you're throwing 6d6 Fireballs at 12th level, many, many things have gone wrong with your character. First and foremost would be the fact that he apparently prepares Fireball on a daily basis. Also, what 12th level character doesn't have a way of getting enlarged? It's a 1st level spell available, at worst, in the form of a cheap potion. Furthermore, that 12th level character can hit for much harder than 21 damage, and doesn't worry about hitting his allies. Yes, Fireball is iconic, but that doesn't make it good.

Illiterate Scribe
2008-02-03, 07:21 PM
So does anyone else have a nomination for best no-caster party? Rule is nothing with Power Points or Spellslots (including infusions and similar mechanics). Binding would be fine, as would Incarnum.

Even if infusions were completely removed from the artificer, a 4 artificer group would still be nasty. They would just need to replaced wands faster in their 'scorching ray-o-rama'.

wumpus
2008-02-03, 08:04 PM
Fighter, Fighter, Fighter, Rogue/(ranger).

Or with ToB Warblade, Warblade, Warblade or Crusader, Rogue/Ranger.

Wimpy you say? Sub-optimal? Sure, for playing. On the other hand, let this crew *grind*, and they will be epic in no-time (game time that is, not real life). The catch here is that none of them are vancian casters, so nobody has to rest much past first level (which is cake this crew of melee types). They rush out, obtain the obvious CLW wand (thus the ranger levels) and launch to glory. While they may have to slum a bit (and then a lot) with lower level encounters due to their suboptimal ECL, they will still be doing a heck of a lot better than 4 encounters per day, and racking up the xp.

ps. overlapping specialist wizards aren't worth 2 positions in a party? I suppose druid+cleric is a great combo, but from 5 level out that extra caster level+specialization feats combine for at least a level of wizard, and the other wizard removes the downsides. By you get the point that one caster level isn't that big a deal (does it ever happen?), wizards completely own D&D

sonofzeal
2008-02-03, 09:22 PM
Way back on the first page, I almost did this. I did include one Psionic character, though. Because I don't think there is any really good healer that's not a spellcaster or psionicist. (Crusader might be closest, as you use in your party, but that's not enough healing for my comfort.)

I don't know much about Incarnum. Can it make a good healer build?

Maybe Crusader combined with another semi-healer would be enough. In that case, I could change my ideal party to meet your non-caster requirement:

Crusader (used to be Warblade)
Dragonfire Adept
Binder (used to be Ardent)
Factotum
There's one Crusader stance that gives 2 hp to any one ally within a certain radius, every time you make a successful melee attack. This is a stance, mind you, so there's no limit on duration. Assuming you can either punch inanimate objects, pull your punches, find someone with DR, or otherwise get your punch damage down to 1 per hit, you can get unlimited out-of-combat healing. In combat, your healing is roughly on par with a Druid's, is activated by hitting enemies so you're not wasting turns, and endlessly renews. At higher levels, you even get Heal and something resembling Mass CMW. Your only weakness is no (Lesser) Restoration, for which my party would depend on the Warlock and UMD.

Is Dragonfire Adept a stronger class than Warlock? I've only really glanced at them and never seen one played. The non-invocation class features looked sub-par, and I'm not much a fan of the 1/2 BAB.

13_CBS
2008-02-03, 09:45 PM
Is Dragonfire Adept a stronger class than Warlock? I've only really glanced at them and never seen one played. The non-invocation class features looked sub-par, and I'm not much a fan of the 1/2 BAB.

Depends. DAs make awesome battlefield controllers (Slow Breath, use that resistance to elements invocation to make allies immune, plus entangling breath, plus a few other metabreath effects such as lingering breath...), and if you're neutral/evil and don't mind taking damage, you can do somewhere around 315 damage in one shot around level 20. Also, DAs can easily get around energy resistant monsters (just take Sonic Breath Effect, or if you really want to hit incorporeal stuff, Force Breath). And, of course, free automatic Identify. Don't forget free Geas!

Warlocks can craft, Detect Magic, and do some neat damage with PrCs (or pick up some divine/arcane spells with the Eldritch Disciple/Theurge classes). They can also be good battlefield controllers. Other neat invocations include the Warlock version of teleportation (Shadow Walk) and Eldritch Glaive, allowing the Warlock to become a passable reach-fighter.

Indon
2008-02-03, 10:26 PM
Fighter, Fighter, Fighter, Rogue/(ranger).

Or with ToB Warblade, Warblade, Warblade or Crusader, Rogue/Ranger.

I see your cheese and raise you:

Monk/Monk/Warlock/Scout(/ranger)

They focus on raising their mobility and can do more encounters faster and cheaper than the Fighter or Warblade team, because escaping an encounter counts as overcoming it for the purposes of gaining XP.

Furthermore, in accordance with RAW, the DM is going to have to start putting piles of easily-harvested treasure all around the place so this team can keep up with WBL. Failing that, they can use Vow of Poverty.

Draz74
2008-02-03, 11:52 PM
There's one Crusader stance that gives 2 hp to any one ally within a certain radius, every time you make a successful melee attack. This is a stance, mind you, so there's no limit on duration. Assuming you can either punch inanimate objects, pull your punches, find someone with DR, or otherwise get your punch damage down to 1 per hit, you can get unlimited out-of-combat healing.

RAW, I suppose you're right. But I forget about that stance since I assume no DM will allow its pure cheese. It was obviously (IMHO) supposed to have a clause in it like all the other Devoted Spirit healing maneuvers, stating that its healing only works in a "real" combat with some kind of danger involved. Even if your DM goes by pure RAW, I'd be ashamed to use this as my main healing method. :smallredface: Although I suppose out-of-combat healing can largely be covered by items anyway; I'm mainly concerned about in-combat healing.


In combat, your healing is roughly on par with a Druid's, is activated by hitting enemies so you're not wasting turns, and endlessly renews. At higher levels, you even get Heal and something resembling Mass CMW. Your only weakness is no (Lesser) Restoration, for which my party would depend on the Warlock and UMD.

Really? I haven't seen enough Crusader action to know if the healing really ends up as fast-paced as a Druid's. I wouldn't have thought it was quite that good. However, the not-wasting-turns part of it probably makes up for that.


Is Dragonfire Adept a stronger class than Warlock? I've only really glanced at them and never seen one played. The non-invocation class features looked sub-par, and I'm not much a fan of the 1/2 BAB.

1/2 BAB isn't too bad when your main attack is an area effect. Hmmm, I haven't actually played a DA, but they're supposed to be more powerful than an "out-of-the-box," not-especially-optimized Warlock. An optimized Warlock, like one that uses UMD extensively and takes Hellfire Warlock (and the Incarnum feats that let him heal CON damage fast) will be more powerful than a DA.

I still picked DA because it seems a more fun class to me. And I was trying to show how a party could do well without even multiclassing or PrCing. :smallsmile:

sonofzeal
2008-02-04, 12:20 AM
RAW, I suppose you're right. But I forget about that stance since I assume no DM will allow its pure cheese. It was obviously (IMHO) supposed to have a clause in it like all the other Devoted Spirit healing maneuvers, stating that its healing only works in a "real" combat with some kind of danger involved. Even if your DM goes by pure RAW, I'd be ashamed to use this as my main healing method. :smallredface: Although I suppose out-of-combat healing can largely be covered by items anyway; I'm mainly concerned about in-combat healing.
Well, mine has allowed it. Even with pulling your punches and only doing 1 damage each time, that still cuts your total healing to 1 per hit, and takes a lot of effort on the Crusader's part (which is only a "fluff/RP" thing, but still helps). So it ends up like the Dread Necromancer Tomb Tainted Soul trick, but only half as good and requiring more "fluff" effort. Not totally ridiculous.


Really? I haven't seen enough Crusader action to know if the healing really ends up as fast-paced as a Druid's. I wouldn't have thought it was quite that good. However, the not-wasting-turns part of it probably makes up for that.
Well, looking through again, it's not quite as good as I though at higher levels (one of my current characters is a lvl6 Crusader). At lvl 1 Crusaders get Crusader's Strike for 1d6+IL; Druids get CLW for 1d8+CL. At lvl5 Crusaders get Revitalizing Strike for 3d6+IL; Druids get CMW for 2d8+CL. After that though, Druids get CSW and CCW while Crusaders don't get anything else until lvl 11, where they gain Rallying Strike (3d6+IL in a 30 foot burst), which is the same time Druids learn Mass CLW (1d8+CL in a 30 foot area, with a limit on total targets). Druids do eventually gain Mass CMW and CSW. At lvl17, Crusaders get Heal and Druids get Mass CCW.

So yeah, depends on the level. Druids come out ahead most (but not all) of the time on a "per-use" measure, but since Crusaders constantly refresh their maneuvers throughout a fight, they're liable to get a lot more uses out of their powers in an average four-combat day, unless the Druid takes Spontaneous Healing. Still, the ability to do it from the front lines with no Concentration Checks and still be pounding down the enemy at the same time seems worthwhile to me. I'd still rank them equal as healbots, even without Martial Spirit Cheese.



I still picked DA because it seems a more fun class to me. And I was trying to show how a party could do well without even multiclassing or PrCing. :smallsmile:
Oh, definitely! Yeah, both our parties are solid without multiclassing, and do it without any actual casting ability (although both have some simulated casting). The only major difference is I went with a Swordsage and you went with a Binder, which I suppose is a fair choice for bonus utility and flexibility. Totemist would probably have worked too - I haven't used either of them, but I'm under the impression that Totemist and Binder play similarly, despite opposing flavours. And Warlock vs DA is up for grabs; I've used Warlocks and I haven't used DA's, but I'll probably give them a try at some point.



Anyone else have a suggestion to a caster-less group?

Draz74
2008-02-04, 12:35 AM
I still like my original party better, though. I like Warblades better than Crusaders, style-wise. And I like Ardents, too, even if they can be considered a full-caster class. (They're slightly weaker than Sorcerer/Psion-level full casters; and the way they choose powers known means they're always built around "themes" to their casting, which I think is cool; and psionics is so much cleaner a system than Vancian spell slots.) So, I still want to play in a Warblade, Factotum, Dragonfire Adept, Ardent party.