How can i maintain a group without a leader?

[Mengu]

Fight 1 we were all so bad that we needed an extended rest. Fight 2 was a TPK. One character survived because of GM intervention. This was at level 1.

This is a little surprising. Was the DM pitting the group against level 3 or level 4 encounters? There are definitely risks involved then. But a level 1 or level 2 encounter should not result in TPK even for a party without a leader.

I've run some test games where we tried out a group of all strikers, and a group of all defenders. Both groups went through 3-4 encounters in the same day, of levels 1 and 2, without any big problems. The strikers were running low on surges at the end, and had a few close calls, but it was a breeze for the defenders. Obviously neither party had a leader, the closest thing was the paladin in the defender party.

A leader makes mistakes and bad luck more forgiving. And bigger groups are also more forgiving of mistakes and bad luck, than smaller groups. The DM does have to pay a little extra attention to encounter design for a small group without a leader. But it is far from a lost cause. As a matter of fact well coordinated efforts in such a group are very rewarding.

 

[ricardo440]

why a TPK?

Ongoing 5 Acid damage.

But surges are not an issue. we had many many surges left, we just couldn't use any of them.

 

[keterys]

I've done plenty of games without a leader in LFR. For example, we did one with a paladin and four warlocks (one of each type), three controllers and two strikers, and a week or two ago I ran my invoker as the party leader with his 1/enc healing spirit (shaman multiclass) and 1/enc shielding light as the only form of defenses.

Remember, not having a leader means you have something else that's good. You have a little less leeway in terms of throwing extremely threatening encounters, but potions are actually plenty effective enough in a lot of cases. I'd also suggest giving the party a healer's sash or two.

Consider any of the following houserules:
* Second Wind may be done as a minor action, but gives no defense bonus if you do. Dwarves still get it as a minor, but get a +4 defense bonus when they do it.
* Whenever you drink a healing potion, you may also expend your second wind to heal a surge.
* Second Wind also grants you a save against any effects a save can make (optionally, at a +2 bonus)
* Everyone gains a bonus feat-equivalent, either the tribal feat for increased healing surge value (effectively +5 or 6 to surge value) or one healing/inspiring/majestic word.

 

[Mengu]

why a TPK?

Ongoing 5 Acid damage.

On every single PC? And everyone constantly failed their saves? Was it a bunch of creatures that did this at-will? Were you facing a Young Black Dragon? That can TPK a level 1 party even with a leader.

 

[Stuntman]

I'll also say that you don't need a leader. My group of level 1 characters did pretty well without a leader. There are ways to minimise the need for the healing ability of a leader. Extra defenders are tougher and are better at taking the head off soft targets. Extra controllers can manipulate the battlefield preventing enemies from getting into better positions. Extra strikers will take enemies down more quickly. The faster they go down, the less opportunities they have to damage your party members.

In encounter, the controller was able to prevent a total of 32 points of damage to two party members because she kept them out of the auras of enemy creatures by pushing the creatures away. In another heavy striker group, they were able to take down the most dangerous enemy so quickly that the party incurred less damage as a result in that battle.

 

[Destil]

Focus fire on defenders.

I'm going to argue that you shouldn't focus fire. Leaders are good when one person takes a hell of a beating. When the group on a whole is scuffed up a bit but no one's in danger, things will be a lot easier for them. If you focus fire you'll just end up with a dead defender with no one to heal them.

Also triggering the defender's attacks for ignoring mark will speed up combat, making things faster. As said above, a long battle of attrition is where party without a leader will have issues.

 

[Mengu]

I'm going to argue that you shouldn't focus fire. Leaders are good when one person takes a hell of a beating. When the group on a whole is scuffed up a bit but no one's in danger, things will be a lot easier for them. If you focus fire you'll just end up with a dead defender with no one to heal them.

Also triggering the defender's attacks for ignoring mark will speed up combat, making things faster. As said above, a long battle of attrition is where party without a leader will have issues.

My argument for focusing fire on the defender is because they have the best means of mitigating damage (more HP, high AC, temp HP, resistances, etc), and typically have the most healing surges. If you have a bunch of controllers that are blasting the whole party, you are doing equal damage to the defender and the striker. But at the end of the fight, the striker will probably have to spend 3 surges to heal back up, which could be half his surges, while the defender will probably have to spend 2, and have 9 or 10 left over.

It also makes a defender happy usually, when he is the one soaking up the damage, and they will look for more ways do handle it, such as better defenses, toughness, durable, etc.

I'm not saying, only attack the defender. But paying more attention to the defender and letting him do his job spreads the healing resources more evenly among the party, than ignoring the defender and doing something that would be tactically good for the monsters by taking down those strikers first. I think that's the way to a lot of pain for the party.

I do agree with you on the point about faster combat though. The more combat drags on, the worse things get for the leaderless party.

 

[holywhitetrash]

i don't know how you guys are going without a leader the previous game i played in was a tpk because the laser cleric doesn't give out enough healing so i couldn't even imagine a party with no leader
also the potion idea is expensive especially since 4 ed players already poor

 

[Herschel]

Leaders and controllers are, IME, essential for the most fun because of the versatility they allow. Without them encounters can become pretty limited in scope. I agree with Nifft, either they live and it's okay or one of them dies and makes a leader.

 

[keterys]

Controllers are considered the most skippable of the roles amongst most I know.

And potions are wicked cheap.