D&D General D&D is a Team Sport. What are the positions?

Tony Vargas

Legend
So, if we use the analogy of D&D combat as a team sport, what do you think are the key positions? How important is it that team members stay in their lane? Is the position distribution rigid, or is there lots of wiggle room? Does it change from edition to edition, or between tiers of play?
Just, traditionally, the Big 4. Fighter, Cleric, Magic-user, Thief.
Fighter - stand in front, blocking a doorway or shoulder-to-shoulder, in a 10' corridor and trade damage.
Cleric - turn undead and heal those fighters so they stay ahead in the damage trading
Thief - scout ahead and die in ambushes you don't detect, listen at doors and get your brain eaten by an Ear Seeker, get killed by traps (or to break things up a bit, mimics) when you fail to find or disarm them.
Magic-User - cast Sleep at first level if you're lucky enough to have it, try not to get killed by a house cat at 1st level. After that, increasingly solve every problem the party encounters, as you get a greater variety of spells and more of them per day.

Sub-classes generally plug into their main class, an Assassin (or even Monk) can nominally do some Thief functions. A Paladin or Ranger fights about as well as a fighter in addition to their other perks. A Druid has animal friends and can help out in the woods instead of turn undead and starts healing at 2nd level. An Illusionist can get creative to do most of what a magic-user could if the DM goes with it.

Out of combat, a Cleric might appeal to authority as a religious leader or cast a helpful spells, the magic-user might have a spell for any situation on the list, but does he know and did he memorize it, the Thief had his specific 'special' abilities (picking pockets having an obvious, if annoying out of dungeon application) & could become a 'guildmaster' at name level, the Fighter could bend bars/lift gates & could become a 'Lord' at name level. Mostly, back in the day, out of combat you spoke in character or declared actions in detail and tried to do both in ways that'd get favorable results from your DM. 5e successfully evokes the classic game with that last bit, too. ;)

Over time (not a lot of time, the second half of the 70s), the Big 4 Classes became expected roles and DMs could run their games to lean into that or not. Over more time, computer and eventually on-line games, from Zork to WoW, took up the idea and implemented them more systematically - since, y'know, a chip can't muddle it's way through vague ideas the way a meat brain can.

3e changed things up. Made the Rogue to be a peak damage dealer, while making it's abilities no longer 'special,' but skills (just more of 'em). Doubled-down on the fighter being the front-line, vaguely added anchoring the party, and being the natural 'leader' - all sans mechanical support. Gave the Cleric spontaneous casting to heal, and WoCLW for out of combat healing, and, just generally, created CoDzilla. And making it possible to work around the various restrictions that had traditionally slowed the wizard's domination of the game.

4e formalized roles for combat, and added structure for non-combat challenges, which could have been big steps forward, if it hadn't also introduced intolerable anti-D&Disms like class balance.

5e re-established class imbalance, and really went overboard slashing, burning, and salting the earth around roles. Arguably, non-casters were simply strikers (they certainly weren't anything else), the defender role was back to being woefully undersupported, and even the Clerics traditional bandaid healing burden had been undercut by HD, overnight healing, and in-combat healing being, well, bad. So, while there's still differentiation - martials can't do much but DPR, which everyone can do one way or others, casters can spontaneously cast their best spell for the situation, and while wizards have the most/best/greatest-variety of spells they still can't heal (tho, healing is bad) differentiating them in a traditional manner. Roles are nominally dead in 5e, but classes still fall into broad strokes by contribution, Casters can do anything (including heal, but keep that to a bare minimum), Half-casters can do DPR and whatever else their spell lists & restricted spell levels allow, Rogues do DPR (to the extent the DM cooperates) and (like Bards) get Expertise to be better at some skills, and other martials just do DPR. It's less roles than it is a hierarchy.
 

log in or register to remove this ad



GuyBoy

Hero
As a tribute to the Rugby World Cup (even though England just lost the semi-final; sob!), here’s a D&D rugby team:
2x Props: Dwarf fighters
Hooker: Dwarf rogue
2x Locks: Half-orc barbarians
2x Flankers: human fighters
Number 8: Human warlock
2x wings: Elf rogues
Scrum half: half elf wizard
Fly half; elf sorcerer
2x Centres: Human rangers
Full back; Human cleric

There you go, ready to take on the All Blacks or the Springboks in an exhibition match after the final.
 


Lanefan

Victoria Rules
Combat as sport, not PvP.
Whether sport, war, or PvP, the roles remain the same; and map (in a big enough party) surprisingly well to a gridiron football team.

Front four: heavy Fighters, Knights, Barbarians, etc.
Halfback and tailback: Clerics, who can either fight or defend. (if using a three-back formation, the third would be a Druid)
Quarterback: Wizard.
Tight end: heavy Ranger.
Wide Receivers: Thieves and-or Monks and-or Bards.

You'd think a smaller party would map well to a hockey team but despite years of trying, it just doesn't work: the positions on the ice are reversed from where they'd line up in a party, meaning you'd need to lead your attack with your goalie. Good in D&D, not so good in hockey. :)

Goalie: Fighter or Knight
Defense 1: Cleric
Defense 2: another Fighter, Barbarian, heavy Ranger, Paladin - pick one
Wingers: Thief, Monk, Bard, Assassin, Druid, light Ranger - pick two.
Centre: Wizard.
 

Tony Vargas

Legend
Whether sport, war, or PvP, the roles remain the same; and map (in a big enough party) surprisingly well to a gridiron football team.
Do they? A free-for-all PvP or duel, for instance, roles and teamwork go out the window. Similarly, CaW the players, for sure, and the DM if he's not just humoring them, will try to break up enemy synergies while maximizing their own.
 

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
Do they? A free-for-all PvP or duel, for instance, roles and teamwork go out the window.
If I'm a Fighter facing down the party Wizard I'm stil going to use my "role" as a Fighter to best advantage. And teamwork still applies once people start choosing sides - see Captain America: Civil War for an example. :)
 

Fighter (Offense)
Tanker (Defense)
Sneaker (Cherry Picker)
Schmoozer (Cheer Leader and Marketer)
Investigator (The one who watches post game videos and organizes strategy and finds the other team's weakness)
Trouble-shooter (usually a spellcaster. Strategist.)
Edge Lord(er)
 
Last edited:

overgeeked

B/X Known World
You'd think a smaller party would map well to a hockey team but despite years of trying, it just doesn't work: the positions on the ice are reversed from where they'd line up in a party, meaning you'd need to lead your attack with your goalie. Good in D&D, not so good in hockey.
Sure they do. Just flip the narrative. The goalie is trying to prevent goals and their team’s loss. The rest of the team is trying to make goals and secure the win. The defender/tank is trying to prevent their teammates from dying and the team from losing. The rest of the team is trying to kill monsters and secure the win. The goalie and the tank have the same goal they just stand in different spots. To me it works better with hockey than American football.
 

Remove ads

Top