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

[Lanefan]

I don't think there is any need to have a general theory, and party construction shouldn't have anything to do with how the DM presents challenges. It changes how the party approaches those challenges.

Disagree, and then agree; and it all depends on what side of the screen you're on.

From the player side, having or developing a general theory makes sense - even in-character - once a party has gone through a few adventures and become familiar with what's out there. I'm fine with this.

From the DM side, though, you're absolutely right: the challenges should be presented neutrally without regard for what composition of PCs the players happened to bring along this time.

 

[Lanefan]

A fun Five-Guy Band is:

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

There's a big hole in that band's lineup.

Pally's your drummer, Fighter's got bass, Warlock's your rhythm guitar, Wizard's your lead, and Bard does the vocals. But who on the keyboards?

In game terms, where's the Skill Guy - the Thief or Rogue type - that can get you into places you'd otherwise not easily (or quietly!) be able to get?

 

[nevin]

This is a perennial question, but I was wondering if anyone ever tried to concisely say what bases needed to be covered in a D&D party. 4th edition had the system of striker, controller, leader (support really), and defender, but since then it seems somewhat unclear. We have the sense a party of 3 sorcerers and 2 wizards would be unbalanced, but apart from that...? Seems like it would make it easier for, say, a player joining an existing group of 4 to know what the party needed, for instance.

Generally the only theory of party construction that works is what the players want to play. Anything else your probably dooming your game.

 

[Yaarel]

There's a big hole in that band's lineup.

Pally's your drummer, Fighter's got bass, Warlock's your rhythm guitar, Wizard's your lead, and Bard does the vocals. But who on the keyboards?

In game terms, where's the Skill Guy - the Thief or Rogue type - that can get you into places you'd otherwise not easily (or quietly!) be able to get?

In this band:

Yeah:
Paladin is drummer.
Warlock is rhythm guitar.
Bard is vocalist.

But:
Fighter is lead guitar.
Wizard is synthesizer keyboard.



Regarding Rogue, it can easily be the Rogue is the Rebel Guy (and I often misspeak "Rogue Guy" when meaning Rebel Guy).

But meanwhile, the standard flavor and features of Rogue or Warlock can be the sixth "Double-Agent Guy".

 

[dave2008]

The only somewhat general requirement for a party, IMO, is for at least on character to have some ability to cast healing magic. Even without that, though, a party can achieve success if they play tactically enough.

In 5e you don't even need the that. The group I DM for is all martials + a wizard. Not really any healing magic to be found and they have a blast. Lvl 15 now and no deaths yet!

 

[dave2008]

I like the 4e roles, but I agree there are ideas in the middle.

at least you need more then 1 melee characters (caster or weapon) a healer and at least 1 ranged (Caster or weapon) and you do best if you have more casters.... casters just have more options.

However, you can a have great time with an area martial class. That is what my group generally prefers and it works really well (at least in 1e, 4e, and 5e).

 

[Gammadoodler]

I mean, if you're gonna bring a band, you could just bring 5 bards.

Jack of all trades+
expertise+
magical secrets and full spellcasting progression+
bardic inspiration in all its various flavors

Maybe there's no true specialized tank or damage dealer but pretty much everyone should be competent enough at basically the full gamut of D&D challenges by lvls 3-6.

 

[Scott Christian]

The only time I have ever seen a 5e table unbalanced was when there was no healer. No healer, and limited access to potions, can cause the combat to be a bit swingy, regardless of damage output.

That aside, party creation, at least in my experience, has always been based around the players that know exactly the type of character they want to play. Then, the others come along and base their characters off what they "think" the party needs. This generally boils down to searching for the classic: fighter, rogue, wizard, cleric model. With massive allowances like druids standing in for clerics or wizards, bards standing in for wizards, etc.

 

[ECMO3]

Two Fighters (or fighter types like Barbarian or Paladin), a wizard, a cleric, and a rogue. Done.

I like two wizards a Rogue and then anyone else.

 

[ECMO3]

I mean, if you're gonna bring a band, you could just bring 5 bards.

Jack of all trades+
expertise+
magical secrets and full spellcasting progression+
bardic inspiration in all its various flavors

Maybe there's no true specialized tank or damage dealer but pretty much everyone should be competent enough at basically the full gamut of D&D challenges by lvls 3-6.

You could and it would absolutely work ... but for me it would suck role playing.