D&D 5E Too much arcane in the party?

[Shiroiken]

That actually sounds like a lot of fun. Is this something you saw personally, or is there a video/blog somewhere of it?

It was at my FLGS, but I wasn't actually part of it. We had 3 Encounters tables during the playtest, and I was DMing a different table. I knew about it because the DMs discussed things after each session to figure out what worked and what didn't.

 

[eayres33]

I’ll just echo what a few others have said that almost any grouping works in 5E. I’ve run a group with 3 fighters and a Ranger and its worked well. Of course I had to change a few things as a DM because the best Dex bonus in the group was + 1. So if your DM is flexible there should be no worries and even if they are more ridged as long as you make sure one of your magic users can handle a more roguish role the group should be fine

Currently I’m in a game with a champion fighter, a War Cleric a Wizard and a Dragon Sorcerer. As the Dragon Sorcerer I'm high Dex, and focus my spells on stealth, damage, and some buffing, while the Wizard focus on battlefield control, debuffing and some buffing. Buffing is the only real overlap and that’s only so the I as the sorcerer can twin haste.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Having too many casters causes all sorts of problems. You have too many spell slots to get you through the day, too much flexibility to deal with unexpected problems that come up, and too much versatility to adapt yourself for new challenges when you see them coming. It'll be a disaster, I'm sure.

;P

 

[Ashrym]

There's too little arcane in the party. ;-)

Get the barbarian druid to go bard, get the cleric to go eldritch knight, add an arcane trickster. The group can play 6 different arcane casting classes and still work out not stepping on toes. As mentioned, they don't necessarily need to be different classes.

 

[The Grassy Gnoll]

What's the magical equivalent of a sausage fest? Wand party? Staff room?

 

[ChelseaNH]

I have a new campaign starting with 7 players and this is the first time most of them have rolled up characters in 5e. There was some discussion but not real coordination. We wound up with 1 human barbarian, 1 elf barbarian, 1 elf ranger, 1 dragonborn warlock, 1 elf wizard, 1 gnome wild magic sorcerer and 1 tiefling favored soul sorcerer. Seeing the obvious gap, I created a half-elf lore bard with Urchin background for proficiency with thieves tools and some extra healing. Also, bards are wicked useful for dropping information on a party.

 

[Rhenny]

Like others have said, it is not necessary to have party balance in 5e so this should work out fine. Sometimes, lacking something actually makes the game more interesting (especially for players who have experience and tend to steamroll encounters when they have a well-balanced party). Sometimes, I enjoy playing or DMing an all stealth party. Sometimes, I enjoy the challenge of few or no healers. I think a lack of warrior/melee meat shield will be equally interesting.

This also raises another point. Sometimes, it is actually pretty fun to play a party of PCs that share a common link. Having a bunch of arcanes might give all the PCs more to talk about and heighten camaraderie or competition depending on how they play it. I love that stuff. Just recently, I ran a few sessions with an an all Dwarf party. It actually made interaction between characters really natural, cohesive and rich. I can see an arcane heavy group playing a similar way.

Let us know how it goes.

Cheers.

 

[Tony Vargas]

There's too little arcane in the party. ;-)

Get the barbarian druid to go bard, get the cleric to go eldritch knight, add an arcane trickster. The group can play 6 different arcane casting classes and still work out not stepping on toes. As mentioned, they don't necessarily need to be different classes.

Wizard: 8 schools Traditions
Warlock: 3 Patrons
Sorcerer: 2 bloodlines
Bard: 2 Colleges
Fighter: 1 Archetype (EK)
Rogue: 1 Archetype (AT)

6 classes that can cast Arcane spells, half the classes in the PH, and 17 Arcane sub-classes, nearly half the sub-classes in the PH. A plurality of PC options are arcane.
Hardly surprising, really, to have an arcane-heavy party. Lacking an arcanist would be stranger.

 

[Ancalagon]

Wizard: 8 schools Traditions
Warlock: 3 Patrons
Sorcerer: 2 bloodlines
Bard: 2 Colleges
Fighter: 1 Archetype (EK)
Rogue: 1 Archetype (AT)

6 classes that can cast Arcane spells, half the classes in the PH, and 17 Arcane sub-classes, nearly half the sub-classes in the PH. A plurality of PC options are arcane.
Hardly surprising, really, to have an arcane-heavy party. Lacking an arcanist would be stranger.

Very true - and you forgot some of the monks sub-classes have some arcane magic too...

Having a party with no magic at all (given the high number of divine magic users) would be astonishing. You would have the barbarian, 2/3 of the fighter archetypes, 1/3 monks, 2/3 rogues and... that's it.

Could make an interesting party - 1 barbarian, 1 fighter, 1 monk, 1 rogue. Lots of butt-kicking

 

[Ashrym]

I wouldn't include the barbarian's totem abilities as representative of a divine subclass. They still have less magic than the open hand monks acquire. I wouldn't call the monk sub-classes arcane either -- they are specifically called out as ki powers to manifest or duplicate spells and are left out of the arcane / divine classification later in the magic section. They use magic (ki powers) but appear to be distinct as neither arcane nor divine.

It's the casting class and not the spell / ability which dictates divine vs arcane. It doesn't really matter, however. The group can run bard (arcane) as a cleric or a druid (divine) as an offensive / utility spell caster just fine. The current system classifying arcane vs divine spell casters is pretty much just generalization and flavor.

It is true that there are a lot of options with magic but players will still tend towards what they like as opposed to taking options simply because they exist. It's hard to make a non-magical wizard as an archetype and it's easy to make a magic using fighter so I think that illustrates why there would be more magical options than non-magical, at least at a basic level.