D&D 5E Is there a general theory of party construction?

[EzekielRaiden]

Honestly 5e and contemporary adventures are robust and forgiving enough that an unbalanced party that doesn't cover every role well can be fun to play through the handicaps of rather than just impossible to succeed with.

Were people actually saying the bolded? It sounds to me like you have blown the criticism out of proportion. It has never been "impossible to succeed" without magical healing, in the sense that it has always been possible to still wrest victory from the jaws of defeat without it, even in the far more meatgrinder-y days, purely because of random luck. What is almost always being described is that if you don't have a real healer on hand, you have a dramatically greater chance of individual character death and TPK. That remains true in 5e.

Support Expert -- In many ways this is increasingly a historic role. It's a character that is capable of curing and healing to keep the party alive, or capable of enhancing other characters. Healing turns out to be so unappealing to such a broad range of tables that it has been rolled into the base game as much as was feasible. Today it amounts to the ability to cast lesser restoration, revivify, greater restoration, and raise dead. General support still exists, but the best effects are generally very low cost. This role suffers from diminishing returns particularly badly, since these characters are often not as good at any other role, may not be able to help themselves, and even though they can help each other the result isn't as effective.

So, originally I was going to make a sarcastic remark here, but I realize that is unproductive. Trying for a more friendly approach: Are you familiar at all with 4e? Part of the reason so many 4e fans truly loved the Warlord class was that it was a support-focused class...that could still stand on its own decently well, didn't have to sacrifice its own contributions in order to support others, and directly enhanced a more high-risk/high-reward playstyle as opposed to the reliable but often dull and purely reactive playstyle usually associated with playing a "support" character. Many, many people over the years have expressly said how refreshing and exciting it was to feel like they could play a support character that felt awesome right alongside the people they were supporting.

 

[Bacon Bits]

So, originally I was going to make a sarcastic remark here, but I realize that is unproductive. Trying for a more friendly approach: Are you familiar at all with 4e? Part of the reason so many 4e fans truly loved the Warlord class was that it was a support-focused class...that could still stand on its own decently well, didn't have to sacrifice its own contributions in order to support others, and directly enhanced a more high-risk/high-reward playstyle as opposed to the reliable but often dull and purely reactive playstyle usually associated with playing a "support" character. Many, many people over the years have expressly said how refreshing and exciting it was to feel like they could play a support character that felt awesome right alongside the people they were supporting.

My comment was specifically in reference to healing, which is why I said healing was unappealing, and not support. Even so, you seem to acknowledge and agree with what I'm stating when you say, "the reliable but often dull and purely reactive playstyle usually associated with playing a 'support' character," so I'm not really sure what point you're really driving at or why you had to restrain yourself from making a sarcastic comment. The warlord is an notable exception to the general trend of support characters, but exceptions do not prove the rule.

Warlords were popular, but 4e came along 40 years after clerics did. Long enough for 1e and 2e to establish "being forced to be the cleric" or "forcing your little brother to be the healer" tropes to be pretty well established in the community. Indeed, one of the reasons 3e clerics were so powerful was specifically because they were trying to give the class something meaningful to do outside of being a healing battery. CoDzilla happened when people stopped playing clerics like healing batteries.

No other leader class from 4e has such a following. Has there even been a thread lamenting the 4e mechanics from the Ardent, the Runepriest, or the Shaman? (Yes, I did have to look up those names, and no, I have no idea what their unique mechanics were.) Furthermore, at-will Commander's Strike won't work in a 5e style game. I understand people enjoyed that mechanic, but it's simply not coming back without significant redesign or limitations because it would break the game. It triggers Rogue Sneak Attack, Paladin Smite, Ranger damage bonuses, and so on. It didn't do any of that in 4e. In 5e it's literally just Action Surge for martial classes; everything that combos with Sentinel combos with Commander's Strike. 5e isn't built to support it like 4e was. Battlemaster's Commander's Strike, costing an attack, a bonus action, a reaction, and a superiority die, really is the best you're going to get because the game has a half dozen classes whose primary source of damage is 5e's equivalent of the basic attack or something that triggers from that.

 

[ECMO3]

Hit dice provide at most one full heal-up without the aid of magic, short rests don't restore any HP on their own, and sources of THP that aren't magical in nature are pretty heavily limited. The only sources I'm aware of that can be given to other characters are Battle Master's Rally (usable at most 6 times per short rest, for at most 1d12+5 THP, at dramatic cost to fighting prowess) and the feats Inspiring Leader (which provides level+Cha mod THP once per short rest) and Chef (which provides proficieny bonus THP via a few "treats" after an hour's work).

One full heal up is usually all you need (or less).

There are temp hit points all over the game, a lot of them are spells but a lot of them are abilities too. The only classes that don't have a way to gain temp hps are maybe Paladins and Druids. I'm not actually sure they don't, I just can't think of any way they can off the top of my head. Off the top of my head, Warlock Form of Dread gives 1d10+level temp hit points every time you activate it, other warlocks gain temp hit points whenever they kill something and they have an invocation where you can cast false life an unlimited number of times meaning you always have 8 temp hps at the start of a fight. Twilight clerics can give out temp hit points to everyone within 30 feet every round. Wizards can not only cast false life they can upcast it and nearly double their hit points.

Now I am not suggesting these will be as much as you would get by bringing an actual healer or convincing a cleric to prepare healing spells, but strictly speaking it is relatively easy to play the game and succeed at it with no healer ..... just like you can suceed at pretty easy with no tank in the party.

 

[Mind of tempest]

A fun Five-Guy Band is:

Paladin (Big Guy)
Fighter (Jock Guy)
Warlock (Rebel Guy)
Bard (Heart Guy)
Wizard (Smart Guy)

if I remember correctly the 2nd world of darkness tried something similar?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

5e works with any combination of characters.
In the worst case, if you notice that you are lacking in some departement, a clever subclass choice, feat or multiclass can patch all holes.

Healing through healing surges and magic items usually gets you through. Although magic helps, every character can contribute and in the worst case, you can hire help.
Don't ever feel restrained by party composition when creating characters.
Even if all characters start the same, usually everyon finds their own niche.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Snip

Oh, and don't forget: you only regain HALF your HD every long rest, not all of them. So if you're reliant on HD to keep going, better be okay with full-day breaks in between each adventuring day!

I appreciate that parties have to take a day off once in a while.
Also a fighter RAW can actually heal 16(d10+level) hp on top of hd if they really need it.
Healing in 5e is plenty.

 

[Shadowdweller00]

My theory usually goes along the lines of:
1) Find a bunch of gullible idiots willing to convince themselves that heinous acts are necessary for "the greater good"; keeping in mind that the "greater good" might include such things as personal wealth or power, depending on the subject in question.

2) Convince them that your personal goals will advance the "greater good".

3) Pressure test to see whether they are willing to put aside any sort of ethics to work with each other.

4) If not, replace one or more members then return to pressure testing.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I appreciate that parties have to take a day off once in a while.

I don't. And it's more than a little frustrating that that's so baked into the rules.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I don't. And it's more than a little frustrating that that's so baked into the rules.

If we are going by the guidelines without days off, we have 1 to 20 in a mont or so.

6 to 8 encounters per adventuring day.
About 12 encounters per level.
So that makes 2 levels per 3 days... Or 20 levels in 30 days...

 

[Cruentus]

If we are going by the guidelines without days off, we have 1 to 20 in a mont or so.

6 to 8 encounters per adventuring day.
About 12 encounters per level.
So that makes 2 levels per 3 days... Or 20 levels in 30 days...

As someone who likes campaigns where other things happen, where there are events going on and BBEG plots unfolding, the idea of a 20 levels in 30 days kind of thing, or there always being a world ending cataclysm to prevent, makes me sad. There needs to be more downtime, and things to do in downtime, in the game. Now, a DM can always add it in, but its all half baked in support of the "let's play the next major adventure book from level 1-15 over a couple of sessions and save the world (again)".

As have been mentioned, I'll second that Feats, Backgrounds, Classes and Subclasses can all cover for "holes" in a party. But there is plenty of healing without clerics, heck, just the "long rest recovers all HP" is all you really ever need, unless that entire adventure (and multiple level gains) all happen in one day? Ugh.

But, that "jack of all trades" ability is a design choice in 5e, and a feature for some, not a bug. Particularly when you can just grab whatever class, race, background, and feat (if being used), or heck, multiclass (if being used) to be able to do everything reasonably well. And with how CR works in the core rules (i.e. a joke), most new players and DMs won't find it particularly difficult to play whatever type of game with whatever someone wants to show up with (optimizing and sub-optimizing aside). Again, many find that a feature, not a bug.