Purposely NOT filling the four roles

[Hussar]

LOL!

My current bunch is lacking in the arcane department. Actually, right now they are seriously lacking in spells period. 5 characters, 1 Favoured Soul. Not exactly oozing with magical might. However, the two brute fighter types are certainly capable of laying down the smack. Their biggest problem is with large numbers of smaller creatures. Lack of boom to make the bad mens fall down hurts.

 

[Valdur]

In my current campaign I'm running only mainstream published adventures and the party doesn't have a rogue. They're only second level but so far it means they miss a lot of hidden areas and treasure, and of course they fall in a few traps.

I was thinking that it hurt the game not having that stealthy guy with the high search modifier in the party. I planned to add an NPC rogue to help them out but now I'm inspired to leave them on their own to see what happens.

 

[Whimsical]

The Player's Handbook II describes the consequenses of an unbalanced party, and provides several recommendations for dealing with this situation. It starts on pg. 154, but it's best to start reading at the beginning of chapter six.

 

[Andre]

Anyone play a "standard" adventure with one of the four roles (tank, healer, blaster, sneaker(?)) not present? How did it go? What did you think?

IME, this is not a issue with a GM designing his own adventures, but when running a module as is, it can be a serious problem.

We went through RttToEE and about half-way through the barbarian was captured, the paladin/cleric was disintegrated, and the wizard was killed (yet again). We tried continuing with secondary characters, but we were terribly unbalanced, especially lacking in melee damage and healing. After several frustrating sessions, the GM ran us through a couple encounters of his own design to allow us to raise our dead and rescue the barbarian. Things got back on track quickly at that point.

As others have said, a group can be successful without covering all the bases, but (IME) only if a GM is willing to adjust the adventure to fit the party. That doesn't mean catering to the players' every whim, but neither should they be put in the position where winning is almost impossible just because they're playing the "wrong" classes for the adventure.

 

[the Jester]

I've had many parties over the years that didn't fill all four "core roles"- it's never been a problem. In fact, sometimes (in certain circumstances) the best party is all fighters, or all clerics, or all wizards, or all rogues.... the key is for the party to seek out appropriate adventures.

 

[Silver Moon]

Another good example was from a different convention game many years back - this one written by Piratecat and KidCthulhu. All six playing characters were clerics - of different gods and alignments - who had to unite together for a mission. The character sheets were excellent and there was a ton of role playing potential. Unfortunatley my table had a 'task-oriented DM' who kept stopping us from role playing in order to "get back on track and complete the module". Still, we had fun despite the DM. That module would be a great one to update for 3E!

 

[Gnome]

Another good example was from a different convention game many years back - this one written by Piratecat and KidCthulhu. All six playing characters were clerics - of different gods and alignments - who had to unite together for a mission. The character sheets were excellent and there was a ton of role playing potential. Unfortunatley my table had a 'task-oriented DM' who kept stopping us from role playing in order to "get back on track and complete the module". Still, we had fun despite the DM. That module would be a great one to update for 3E!

Sounds interesting. What was the basic premise that explained why such a diverse group of clerics had to band together like that?

 

[painandgreed]

Although my last group was mostly monsters using Savage Species and we had some spell like abilities, we had no spell casters at all. We noticed it pretty quick and picked up some Use Magic Device so we coudl use the wands of magic missle and CLW that we had picked up off dead people and did quite well.

Editted to add: We also didn't really have a tank. My pixie had fighter levels, a DR of 12, and was naturally invisible, but I don't know if I would call him a tank. Or perhaps he was a tank since he could take damage but couldn't deal it. With no str bonus and a pitiful magic weapon he did 1d4+1 damage but often would take none even from a good hit. In one battle where our party was attacked versus another NPC party, I squared off against their fighter. She would hit and do no damage. I would hit and do 1d4+1. She would hit and do no damage. I would hit and do 1d4+1. She would hit and do 2 points past my DR. I would hit and do 1d4+1. By time the DM realized where this battle was going, everybody else had finished with their fights and were literaly sitting around the room acting as my cheering section. A few rounds later, the fighter gave up and surrendered even though we both had over half our hit points still.

 

[Aust Diamondew]

Nearly every party I've ever DMed for or played in didn't have all 4 rolls covered. Usually no cleric or druid often nobody who can find or disable traps (even if we have a rogue or some other skil monkey).

There are a lot of ways to work it out without one of the basic roles.

 

[Drowbane]

Anyone play a "standard" adventure with one of the four roles (tank, healer, blaster, sneaker(?)) not present? How did it go? What did you think?

I'm in a game right now where we have no real rogue and actually no real arcane caster. Battles last longer; we fall for every trap; but we seem to be OK on offense and on healing. It is funny how simple situations can flummox us when we don't have handy access to utility spells or a sneaky guy.

Yep! Sure have!

Of the Classic Four, the only role that is really required is the Healer. You can "fake" everything else. IME, the Classic Four just make things run more smoothly.