Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ancalagon" data-source="post: 8600266" data-attributes="member: 23">wellFirst, talk to the DM.&nbsp; If that doesn't work, find another table.Second, as I said above, even though a party has &quot;roles&quot; as you say, important roles (like healing) should be &quot;shared&quot; by more than one PC.&nbsp; So if you look at the example above (where the tank was a paladin, and the mage took the healer feat), this allowed the cleric to take a &quot;not healing&quot; subclass and use their clerical magic to help the party and to blast, not just heal.&nbsp; The player could probably have instead played a druid, or even a bard, and it would still have been a viable party composition.&nbsp; One could make similar examples with other &quot;roles&quot;, such as ranged combat or stealth.&nbsp; You don't need more than one &quot;specialist&quot; in those roles, but a: it's really useful if some (or all!) of the other party can attack at range (... every PC should have at least javelins or darts or a short bow or something!)&nbsp; orbe sneaky.&nbsp; And b: (and more importantly) there are several ways to build a ranged combat specialist, or a scout.&nbsp;&nbsp; And it's not hard to build a PC that is very good at both.&nbsp;&nbsp; The party face could be ... a hexblade, a paladin, a sorcerer, a rogue even... A party tank has several permutations, so does the&nbsp; &quot;gish&quot; concept.&nbsp; etc etc etc.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ancalagon, post: 8600266, member: 23"] well First, talk to the DM. If that doesn't work, find another table. Second, as I said above, even though a party has "roles" as you say, important roles (like healing) should be "shared" by more than one PC. So if you look at the example above (where the tank was a paladin, and the mage took the healer feat), this allowed the cleric to take a "not healing" subclass and use their clerical magic to help the party and to blast, not just heal. The player could probably have instead played a druid, or even a bard, and it would still have been a viable party composition. One could make similar examples with other "roles", such as ranged combat or stealth. You don't need more than one "specialist" in those roles, but a: it's really useful if some (or all!) of the other party can attack at range (... every PC should have at least javelins or darts or a short bow or something!) orbe sneaky. And b: (and more importantly) there are several ways to build a ranged combat specialist, or a scout. And it's not hard to build a PC that is very good at both. The party face could be ... a hexblade, a paladin, a sorcerer, a rogue even... A party tank has several permutations, so does the "gish" concept. etc etc etc. [/QUOTE]

Verification