D&D 5E Ideal Party Composition

[Gecko85]

I actually meant what I said for Gecko85, but this is what I was thinking about. They seem to have made a decision for 5e to make no classes required, even partially.

I agree with what SirAntoine said...A bard has healing spells, any class can add the healer feat (when they get feats later, or if they choose variant human right off the bat), and other classes can become proficient in thieves tools, perception, etc. So, I think it was definitely a design decision to make you less reliant on a particular party makeup.

 

[Zardnaar]

It's interesting that you put the bard over the rogue. That's because in 5e it's actually easy for other characters to disarm traps, am I correct? The two extra clerics would really make healing plentiful. The bard gets healing spells, too.

I'd probably try the following right now:

Four Players

1 fighter
1 ranger
1 cleric
1 wizard

Six Players

1 fighter
1 ranger
1 cleric
1 wizard
1 bard
1 monk

8 Players

1 fighter, champion or battle master
1 ranger
1 cleric
1 wizard
1 bard
1 monk
1 fighter, eldritch knight
1 barbarian

I start with the fighter who will lead the party into battle. Then you have the ranger who can back him up at the front line, but who also is a ranged specialist who can weaken the enemy before they get into melee. The cleric is the party's defender and life-line. He will come to the aid of anyone caught off-guard, and back-up the other characters. The wizard is the party's tactician, who sizes up the battle and decides when to use a spell to influence the outcome.

The next character I'd add is the bard, who can be a diplomat and help the party's morale and also back-up the cleric and wizard in healing, reinforcement, and tactics.

The monk is who you have to go it alone for a time, when the situation calls for it. They have a good balance of offensive and defensive abilities, and the intuition to know when it's time to return. When among the rest of the party, this character would most actively stand with the fighter.

The next character I'd pick is the eldritch knight, with a nod to the elf fighter/ mage. The character can supply extra offensive magic, and do well in melee if an enemy gets into the party's midst, defending the wizard if needs be.

Then I'd say the barbarian, because heavy extra damage in melee is very often just what the party needs. The barbarian's resilience and primal knowledge are also great additions to the standard party.

The bard is almost as good as the rogue at traps if you take some back ground. If your bard maxes dex is can replace the rogue. The Rogue also lacks a bit of damage as well.

 

[Gecko85]

The bard is almost as good as the rogue at traps if you take some back ground. If your bard maxes dex is can replace the rogue. The Rogue also lacks a bit of damage as well.

I agree. And if you go valor bard at 3rd level, you get medium armor, shields, and martial weapons. At 6th level they get multi-attack, and at 10th level can add 5th level or lower spells from any class. So, you could add, say, Fireball...but even better, add Swift Quiver. For one minute you'll be getting a total of 4 ranged attacks per round. Deadly! Then at 14th level you'll be able to cast your spells as a bonus action, so fire off some arrows, then cast a spell. Sweet!

 

[Gecko85]

I agree with what SirAntoine said...A bard has healing spells, any class can add the healer feat (when they get feats later, or if they choose variant human right off the bat), and other classes can become proficient in thieves tools, perception, etc. So, I think it was definitely a design decision to make you less reliant on a particular party makeup.

And evidently when I updated my profile (adding zip code and such), Chrome decided to auto-complete "Chase Freedom MC" into my username field. Didn't notice, and now I'm not allowed to change it back. Worst. Username. Ever.

 

[DaveDash]

The advantage a Rogue(Thief) has over a Bard is their ability to never roll less than 10 on ability checks, and they're better at climbing and such, which makes them better at bypassing dungeon hazards.

I'd still rather a Bard though for overall usefulness.

 

[Gecko85]

The advantage a Rogue(Thief) has over a Bard is their ability to never roll less than 10 on ability checks, and they're better at climbing and such, which makes them better at bypassing dungeon hazards.

I'd still rather a Bard though for overall usefulness.

True, but starting at 2nd level, Bard gets Jack of All Trades, which adds half their proficiency bonus (rounded down) to all ability checks. Not as nice as never rolling less than 10, but still nice.

 

[Fralex]

Healing, tanking, spellcasting, and possibly even skill monkeying for everyone!

Well, definitely ordinary monkeying for everyone!

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

What classes would make the best ideal party composition? Assuming for four, six, and eight players. Traditionally, the core four would make the most ideal for a four member party. Is this still true in 5th Edition? (I.e. the core four of fighter, rogue, cleric, and wizard.) For six players, what are the next two best choices? And for eight?

Ideal? My favorite test party comprises one Necromancer, one Warlock 2/Lore Bard x, and one Shadow Monk. Lots of fun, but the biggest hole in the party is the lack of an Archer. So my "ideal" party probably adds an Eldritch Knight. The whole party is designed to be very mobile, stealthy, and tactical but also capable at close range for house-clearing operations--I mean, for dungeon crawling.

Necromancer is the anvil with skeletons and eventually elementals, Shadow Monk is the stealthy hammer, Lore Bard and Eldritch Knight supply ranged attacks and protection.

At level 6 they beat a Vampire (10,000 XP/CR 13), to my surprise.

 

[SirAntoine]

My "ideal" party...that is fairly specific/on table to table, play style, type of adventure/feel of the game, personal preferences and a whole lot of other arbitrary variables. I suppose mine would go something like this...

For 4:
As written, I guess Fighter, Cleric, Rogue, Wizard. Though I would hate to run a game with such a small party.

For 6:
Fighter (Champion), Dwarf
Fighter (Battlemaster), Human
Fighter (Eldritch knight), Elf
Wizard (homebrew a generalist), Human
Cleric (Life or Light), Human
Rogue (Thief), Halfling

For 8:
Fighter (Battlemaster), Dwarf
Barbarian (Berserker), Human
Fighter (Eldritch Knight), Elf
Wizard (homebrew generalist), Human
Cleric (Light or Life), Human
Rogue (Thief), Halfling
Ranger (Hunter) or Cleric (Tempest), Half-Elf or Human
Rogue (Arcane Trickster) or Druid (Land), Gnome or Human

I also like to have more than four players. Have you ever run the game for more than eight?

 

[SirAntoine]

"Ideal" certainly does depend on different factors, including player preference and the adventure or campaign, but it seems an accurate enough term.

"If you could convince everyone what character class to play, what party would you build?"