Purposely NOT filling the four roles

[Seeten]

I played a campaign where there was no Gods, and no Clerics. No real healers of any sort. It was weird...

So I played a Specialist Wizard(Necromancy) went Pale Master, and took Tomb-Tainted Soul. I could heal myself, raise the dead, and none could stop me! Muahahahaha!!!

 

[der_kluge]

You could easily cover most of the 4 traditional roles with a party of 3:

Ranger (tank/healer/scout)
Druid (healer/tank)
Bard (arcane/rogue/healer/tank)

It wouldn't be terribly easy, and the lack of strong arcane spells might make it tough going, but it would be very feasible.

 

[I'm A Banana]

If the DM tailors his adventures to the party, it can be entirely glossed over. He can pick out stuff that doesn't hit their weak spot, except in the minority. If the DM presents the adventure and the party must overcome it, it can be more challenging, because few punches will be pulled.

 

[Seeten]

I trump Der_Kluge's bad non powergamer party with my own.

Cleric(Tank/Healer)
Cleric(Tank/Healer)
Wizard(Arcanist/Blaster)

Have the cleric memorize detect traps and the wizard knock. Done.

 

[Aus_Snow]

Druid
Fighter/Druid --> PrC (more Fighter)
Barbarian
Monk/Sorcerer --> PrC (half/half, roughly)

No (completely) full arcane caster. No skill monkey.


Um, and that's actually the closest thing (atm) to a standard party I'm involved in.

 

[Zzyzx]

As home-brew DM, I never had problems.

Worst case was a barbarian-ranger-ranged fighter group that did all right, just bought lots of potions and sent the highest HP in front if there was a fear of traps (I don't use too many traps).

Agreed, if I had to follow a set module they would have had more problems.

 

[Remathilis]

Back in the day of 2e, we had some unique party dynamics. Examples.

Fighter, Fighter/Mage, Mage, Mage, Mage, Thief (No cleric)
Ranger, Monk, Necromancer, Fighter/mage/thief, Fighter (no cleric)
Crusader, Bard, Fighter, Psionicist (No Mage, No Thief)
Cleric, Ranger, Fighter, Fighter/Thief, Fighter (No Mage)

Since 3e though, we've been adopting the "four roles" method. Our current game: dwarf fighter, elf wizard, human cleric, halfling rogue, half-elven bard. We're already calling ourselves the iconics! (and as extra fun: we're all the correct genders; we could USE the dang DDM minis for our characters!)

 

[der_kluge]

I trump Der_Kluge's bad non powergamer party with my own.

Cleric(Tank/Healer)
Cleric(Tank/Healer)
Wizard(Arcanist/Blaster)

Have the cleric memorize detect traps and the wizard knock. Done.

I was just trying to avoid the traditional classes with my make-up.

 

[Turhan]

In my homebrew we never have anyone who plays a cleric. Years ago we had one and he did well and everyone liked his PC, but no one plays clerics any more.

Not one problem. As DM I just let them buy, find or trade for healing potions and "retoratives" to cover the various healing spells.

The group is usually only 3 players too, and if we have no arcane type, then I expand the rules to allow anyone to take Use Magic device and read scrolls and use wands. It hurts nothing with a small group to bend the rules on scrolls and wands.

 

[VirgilCaine]

My campaign has some attendance problems at the moment...

I've got for sure:

Wizard (Scare and Web are his favorite spells...)
Cleric of Pelor
Bard

Who knows what happened to them last session: (the party could have really used the Rogue's Slippers of Spider Climbing or the Barbarians strength to open the castle portcullises)
Rogue
Barbarian/Fighter

I've also got two players who will be back in a few months when school lets in:
a Ranger (archery type)
a Fighter (weird Dex-heavy, longspear user...)

So, I have no idea how things will go in the future. Perhaps it will let me use a Dragon Shaman NPC as a fighter-type...