Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Dan'L" data-source="post: 4320629" data-attributes="member: 68954">Well, discussion about what single-race parties would work the best got me thinking... What about single class parties?I know that this was certainly achievable in 3.5, but with the more role-focused nature of 4e, is it still possible?&nbsp; I think so, but let's look.My thoughts:CLERIC - good balance of ranged and melee powers; access to lots of healing and saves; good range of targeting different defenses; different deities for different Channel Divinity feats and good gateway for establishing different flavors for the different members.&nbsp; Light on area effects, poor on control.FIGHTER - In melee they're good, but if they have to close distance under fire of archers, they can get pretty hosed.&nbsp; Poor control, minimal healing, and relative lack of to-hits on other than AC.PALADIN - See fighter, but add in a little more healing.&nbsp; And like the Cleric, the different deities add a ready way to provide different character flavor.&nbsp; A Divine Challenge nightmare for the DM (&quot;okay, so this ogre's challenged by WHO?), so that's maybe a plus <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":P" title="Stick out tongue&nbsp; &nbsp; :P"&nbsp; data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":P" />RANGER - These guys are solid in melee and ranged.&nbsp;&nbsp; Good mobility, some multiple target hits, but relatively weak on control, and weak on non-AC attacks.ROGUE - a whole team of flankers and snipers?&nbsp; Oh, yeah.&nbsp; Crap on healing though, and light on control.&nbsp; So-so on non-AC attack options.&nbsp; Best basic skill coverage.WARLOCK - This is the striker that has most versatility, and the most control options.&nbsp; Not great in melee, though.WARLORD - With the bumps to healing and the battlefield aid and control, this could be a tough group.&nbsp; Like the other &quot;Martial&quot; classes, though, weak on non-AC attacks.WIZARD - Awesome control, good attack and damage options.&nbsp; Terrible on melee.&nbsp; Healing is poor at best.Summary:&nbsp; I'd say the Leaders and Strikers are where it's at for overall versatility.&nbsp; Others could be done, but battlefield conditions could quickly become a death-trap.-Dan'L</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Dan'L, post: 4320629, member: 68954"] Well, discussion about what single-race parties would work the best got me thinking... What about single class parties? I know that this was certainly achievable in 3.5, but with the more role-focused nature of 4e, is it still possible? I think so, but let's look. My thoughts: CLERIC - good balance of ranged and melee powers; access to lots of healing and saves; good range of targeting different defenses; different deities for different Channel Divinity feats and good gateway for establishing different flavors for the different members. Light on area effects, poor on control. FIGHTER - In melee they're good, but if they have to close distance under fire of archers, they can get pretty hosed. Poor control, minimal healing, and relative lack of to-hits on other than AC. PALADIN - See fighter, but add in a little more healing. And like the Cleric, the different deities add a ready way to provide different character flavor. A Divine Challenge nightmare for the DM ("okay, so this ogre's challenged by WHO?), so that's maybe a plus :P RANGER - These guys are solid in melee and ranged. Good mobility, some multiple target hits, but relatively weak on control, and weak on non-AC attacks. ROGUE - a whole team of flankers and snipers? Oh, yeah. Crap on healing though, and light on control. So-so on non-AC attack options. Best basic skill coverage. WARLOCK - This is the striker that has most versatility, and the most control options. Not great in melee, though. WARLORD - With the bumps to healing and the battlefield aid and control, this could be a tough group. Like the other "Martial" classes, though, weak on non-AC attacks. WIZARD - Awesome control, good attack and damage options. Terrible on melee. Healing is poor at best. Summary: I'd say the Leaders and Strikers are where it's at for overall versatility. Others could be done, but battlefield conditions could quickly become a death-trap. -Dan'L [/QUOTE]

Verification