Best class mix for party of five or more?

[Eridanis]

I was reading the Halmae SH on the train this morning, and started thinking about the optimal class mix for a party of more than four characters.

We all know that D&D 3E was optimized for four characters per party, but in the five or so 3E campaigns I've been in, I can't say there've ever been less than six characters.

For instance, in the game I currently play in, we have a paladin and a fighter (played by the same player), a sorcerer, a samurai, a rogue, and a wizard and cleric (both played by me). Seven characters for five players, and while we're challenged quite a bit (we're playing through Bloodstone right now), it makes for a very effective mix.

Just for the sake of argument, if we assume fighter, cleric, rogue and wizard for the first four characters, what else would you add? I'd say a paladin would be fifth (another front-line fighter with healing capabilties); a sorcerer or warmage sixth (for extra whammy, allowing the wizard to take more utility and crowd control spells); and perhaps a druid seventh (more healing and nature-based mojo).

It goes without saying that there are many happy and effective parties that don't go with the basic four to build on, but for the sake of discussion, what would you add to the basic four to enlarge a party?

 

[smootrk]

The best mix IMO would be

Fighter
Wizard (alternatively another Full Progression Arcane Caster)
Cleric (alternatively another Full Progression Divine Caster with healing options)
Rogue (alternatively wilderness rogue, possibly scout)

then the 5th wheel can be flexible. My thoughts are for a secondary warrior type such as Ranger, Paladin, Hexblade, Duskblade, Knight, Swashbuckler, etc. A Bard (or variant) would be a good. Otherwise a secondary spellcaster (divine or arcane) might be decent as long as the focus of the character is significantly different from the other caster of the same type (warlocks, archivists, warmage, true necromancer, etc would be in this category).

Ultimately my choice would be the core 4, and then throw in an Archivist (from Heroes of Horror). Interesting divine caster with a twist and can help the party with its special buffs.

 

[el-remmen]

I go by the philosophy that the ideal mix is whatever the players want to play (within the confines of the campaign/setting guidelines). It is the DM's job to present challenges aimed towards the skills/abilities available in the group - and sometimes ones that don't

After an early PC death - my 'Out of the Frying Pan' campaigns core group for the longest time (six players) was made up of:

• Dwarven Fighter
• Human Fighter
• Human Witch (sorcerer variant)
• Human Paladin
• Half-Orc Ranger/Cleric
• Human Illusionist

 

[The_Gneech]

Once you've got 5+ characters, it's worth bringing along a bard. Even though the average bard is nothing special in a fight by himself, "Inspire Courage" a very powerful, almost-free, full-party buff than can easily turn the tide of battle.

-The Gneech

 

[Vrecknidj]

If you're playing in a campaign that kinda needs a fighter/cleric/wizard/rogue combo (or any of their variants: paladin/cleric/sorcerer/bard, barbarian/druid/sorcerer/rogue, etc.), then I've generally felt that the best fifth character is something that can help the front-line fighter. So, barbarian, fighter, ranger, paladin and monk all come to mind--probably something different from what's already up there.

What you probably don't need is another spellcaster.

I think that a bard is best for a 6th member, but I can see the argument for having him as the 5th.

Dave

 

[Kafkonia]

Personally, I'd take a second cleric. It spreads the onus of healing a bit, they can serve as a secondary combatant, and depending on domain and feat selection they can be quite varied in their approaches. (One with War and Strength, one with Magic and Knowledge, say.)

I may just be biased because my first 3.5 campaign had two clerics and no arcane caster for the first while.

 

[Lorgrom]

I have to agree with Kafkonia. The 5th party member should be a more combat related cleric or druid. Not quite as good in combat as a Pally but the additional healing early on is a huge bonus.

 

[FolcoTook]

I'd say it really depends on what type of campaign is being run.

Hack n' Slash/action oriented, then definitely a backup fighter with more healing (cleric or pally) is a good choice.
Intrigue/political oriented, then a bard could really come in handy.
High magic quotient, then another arcane caster or a cleric with the magic domain could be very handy.
Etc.

-FT

 

[Mort]

It certainly depends on the type of campaign - but in general I agree that a 2nd cleric is a huge boon.

One of the problems with the cleric is that no matter how powerful the are "in theory", many of their best spells and much of their time in combat is wasted healing the rest of the party. With a 2nd cleric, the burden is lifted and the cleric can become usefull in many other areas.

 

[drothgery]

1. Warrior (fighter, paladin, barbarian, or other stand-up melee type; a self-buffing focused cleric takes this spot, too)
2. Skill guy (rogue, scout, maybe bard or ranger depending on the campaign, definitely a high skill-point class, and probably one with trapfinding)
3. Battle caster (usually wizard, but anyone that uses magic/psionics primarily to attack the enemy)
4. Healer/support caster (usually cleric)
5. Wild-card; can be anything, should cover weaknesses of a non-standard choice for the first four if necessary (an artificer gives trapfinding and covers for that lack if a bard is the skill guy; a more melee-inclined character is nice if the support caster is a cloistered cleric or an archivist rather than a cleric or druid)