Help for team design.

[infinite_ant]

My party has this problem of always choosing melee characters (current campaign has no arcane casters, Im the divine caster/cleric/healbot that talks to npc's too much).

I have asked for our upcoming campaign that we try to be more diverse, they feel they would be left out if choosing a slightlyless combat role, so I was wondering are there any good party designs for low level combat oriented players that still have good(i.e normal) diversity?

Books we have are: Core, PHB2, DMG2, CAdv, CArc, CSco, CWar, City/Dungeonscape, Libris, ToB
I'm sorry if this is the wrong place to ask.

[Bears With Lasers]

The feel they'd be left out of what?
Do they just not realize that, for example, divine casters are at least as good as combat as the pure-melee classes? And that a good wizard can contribute a lot more to combat as well as to anything else?

[Zincorium]

Well, I've seen this before, and not always with melee. When people get stuck in a rut and always play the same character, not just usually, the tendency is to judge everything by how well they perform in the player's usual role.

For example, someone who plays rogues and then switches to a barbarian will probably whine about how they never have anything useful to do outside combat, since while they might actually see the stuff to do, it simply doesn't stack up.

I don't know what you could do other than shout 'carpe diem!' and get them to break out of the box they've made for themselves.

On a side note, I literally by accident discovered how good clerics can be in combat even if they aren't specifically focused on that. The fact that you can temporarily enchant your own gear comes especially in handy.

[infinite_ant]

The current group consists of a Barbarian, Cleric (Me), Samurai, Swordsage & Ranger. They don't misunderstand the other classes but don't appreciate (for lack of a better word[not being mean]) the appeal in them.

...I suppose I shouldn't really worry, we manage to get through most things thrown at us. (except those damnable knowledge(arcane) checks and all that comes with-out someone who casts spells other than Cure Wounds...)

And the skipping of nearly all diplomacy scenes doesn't thrill me either...

The guy who would play a wiz/sorc is DM and the Ranger hasn't had his share of dam. in the previous games so...
I might just be to hard on them. Thanks for responding.

[kamikasei]

Perhaps the Samurai player could try a Duskblade instead? I'm not sure how generally decent they are as arcane casters. Or alternatively, point out the melee effectiveness of a Cleric or Druid, and then play a Wizard or other arcanist yourself when you manage to have one of them take the divine role off your hands.

[greenknight]

The current group consists of a Barbarian, Cleric (Me), Samurai, Swordsage & Ranger. They don't misunderstand the other classes but don't appreciate (for lack of a better word[not being mean]) the appeal in them.

A DM will often tailor the challenge to the adventuring group, so if your DM is doing that, it won't matter too much that your group isn't all that diverse. In fact, many DMs prefer groups like this because it's easier to set challenges for them. And from a player's perspective, it's usually better to play the character type the character wants to rather than try to force the player into playing a different character type.

That said, it's easy to see that the group does have a few glaring holes when it comes to abilities. I'm not sure why the party doesn't have someone who can find traps (a Beguiler is the best choice, but a Rogue also works well), for example, since that's a very necessary skill.

In terms of straight power, it would help to know what the starting level of the next campaign will be, as well as the expected ending level. If you want the optimum party, I haven't really tried this, but Beguiler, Cleric, Druid, Wizard and Knight should make a very powerful group for just about any level. If the Cleric has the Magic and Trickery Domains, then you should have all bases covered with at least one party member able to give backup in each area (except for skills which only 1 party member really needs, like appraise and diplomacy).

[Matthew]

Wait, what's the problem here? These guys aren't playing the same Base Classes, they just aren't playing many Spell Casters. Making these Characters more interesting isn't a matter of changing Base Classes, it's about creating more interesting Characters. If you want to see more Arcane Spell Casters, just play one and see how it pans out.