D&D General Name your favorite 4 person party composition.

[ccs]

As a DM, I always tell people to not worry about what everyone else is playing and just make what makes them happy. If I end up with a party of three wizards, a sorcerer, and a rogue, I'll make it work.

Agree, as a DM I have no preferences concerning party comp beyond happy players, must fit the game/campaign, & {generally} non-drow/monster races*.
* Because I'm not running campaigns where most of those would generally fit. If you make a monster you won't have much fun.... So just save that concept for when someone else DMs.

As a player my preference for non-Drow/monster races is suspended because I'm not the DM.
Sure, I still prefer the classic races. And I'll readily accept (and even occasionally play) the new ones - Tieflings, Dragonborn, etc. But if someone else rolls up a Drow or a monster? 99% of the time I'll just roll my eyes a bit, make sure I don't make my own characters PoV incompatible with the whatevers presence, & leave it to the DM.
Though I do draw the line with adventuring with vampires & such and will let the others know this.

Otherwise, it has to be:

Bard
Bard
Bard
Bard

I'd honestly love to have an all-bard campaign where they're all part of a band. Sadly, it hasn't happened yet.

In games I run there's a 4 member band of NPC Bard/Assassins known as KISS. In black leather & full make-up.

 

[zarionofarabel]

A Tortle with a Katana
A Tortle with a Bo Staff
A Tortle with twin Nunchaku
A Tortle with twin Sai

 

[Enrico Poli1]

Human Paladin of Devotion
Human Rogue Thief
Human Cleric of Life
Human Wizard Diviner

 

[auburn2]

1. Single class high elf Bladesinger
2. Multiclass half-elf Scout/hexblade-pact of chain
3. Multiclass V. human Arcane Archer/Gloomstalker (this character takes both GWM and sharpshooter)
4. V. Human war-magic wizard with a 2 level dip in trickery domain cleric.

With that party you also have 3 familiars walking/flying/swimming around giving you a ton of actions you can take in a round.

That was my favorite party I have played with. I was the bladesinger. To be honest it may have been even better if it had a diviner/knowledge wizard/cleric instead of war-magic/trickery.

I really like that party because it has so much out of combat, there are about 30 skill proficiencies distributed throughout that party once they are all in their classes along with a lot of utility cantrips. It also has a ton of versatility in combat. In terms of melee damage it is not as good as some others with a melee-optimized martial character, but three familiars makes up a lot of that ground because you usually have advantage and hit more often in melee. In general against most enemies, everyone except the bladesinger would try to use ranged attacks and avoid melee while they could, but when they got close or got around the bladesinger, the F/R would switch to melee and have one of the familiars "help" him to get advantage with GWM attacks. The Scout/Warlock and F/Ranger both were proficient in athletics too (scout had expertise in it), so we would use shove a lot as well to move enemies around the battlefield, often with the enemy hexed on dexterity or strength.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

And in 5e, there's enough variety with the different subclasses that you won't necessarily feel that someone is...horning (sorry, not sorry) in on your schtick.

All bard has the advantage in 5e of being a really nice class to stack. There's obvious deficiencies in upfront AC and at-will damage, but a ton of skill and spell versatility.

I don't mind monster characters, but I find that most of my players are still sticking to the usual suspects. Since Volo's came out, I've only seen one kobold and a bugbear in play.

Agree, as a DM I have no preferences concerning party comp beyond happy players, must fit the game/campaign, & {generally} non-drow/monster races*.
* Because I'm not running campaigns where most of those would generally fit. If you make a monster you won't have much fun.... So just save that concept for when someone else DMs.

As a player my preference for non-Drow/monster races is suspended because I'm not the DM.
Sure, I still prefer the classic races. And I'll readily accept (and even occasionally play) the new ones - Tieflings, Dragonborn, etc. But if someone else rolls up a Drow or a monster? 99% of the time I'll just roll my eyes a bit, make sure I don't make my own characters PoV incompatible with the whatevers presence, & leave it to the DM.
Though I do draw the line with adventuring with vampires & such and will let the others know this.

Yes!

In games I run there's a 4 member band of NPC Bard/Assassins known as KISS. In black leather & full make-up.

 

[clearstream]

My personal feeling is that less well-rounded parties (like the one above), with synergistic strengths but obvious weaknesses, are actually the most fun. Barring that, that they should have some hook that makes their play different from a normal group. The classic "Fighter, Thief, Cleric, Magic-User", to my mind, is less fun precisely because it lacks that sort of novelty.

I mean, any game with good players will be fun, but I don't see a classic composition adding to that.

I really enjoy parties that are asymmetrical. Four bards, for instance, or three rogues and a sorcerer.

 

[jmartkdr2]

Highly lopsided parties seem to be the only ones where party comp adds to the fun - I've run all dwarves (which gets you some interesting class choices, a plus) and I'm currently in an all-bard game. Hard to say yet how well it works in serious situations, since we've avoided any hint of seriousness thus far.

(Well, all bards including multiclass, but the restriction is 'mostly bard', largely because we just finished a 1-18 campaign where I played a bard and asked to not have to do that again.)

 

[Greenstone.Walker]

4 halfling bards. Scary, Sporty, Baby and Ginger.

 

[Catulle]

Battlemind/Ardent/Psion/Monk

 

[Redwizard007]

Human Hexblade/Paladin
Human Battlemaster Fighter
Half Elf Eloquence Bard
Githyanki Divination Wizard