the worst party ever

[amysrevenge]

I'll say 5 warlords: A warlord depends solely on moving his allies around. Every ally would moving each other; it'd be a hectic mess as people shift, pull, and slide around the battlemat like a bizzaro-dance number.

Of course, all they need is one barbarian or melee ranger added to the mix to go from worst party ever to best party ever.

(I played one LFR adventure with my barbarian, a cleric, and three warlords of different types. Best adventure ever.)

 

[Oryan77]

5 DMPCs of any sort.

 

[lotuseater]

Besides, the optimal number of samurai is seven.

well said!

 

[Tiberius]

Besides, the optimal number of samurai is seven.

Unless they serve no master, in which case the optimal number is fourty-seven.

 

[MrMyth]

Hmm, hard to say, since even within a class you can often have many different builds. I'd suspect it would be an all striker or controller party - I've been in such groups in LFR, and it is doable, but very intense. It is easier, in my mind, to build an all-leader party for offense than an all striker party for durability.

All warlock might be the worst - they need to take a feat just to be able to stack curses, don't have stellar defenses, and are not as spike damage as other strikers.

Monk, also, would be in a bad place - also low damage for a striker, they have a lot of awesome mobility and forced movement that works great when you can leave enemies stuck by defenders, but not so much when the enemy can simply chase you down after you run away.

Controllers could be bad, though massed area effects and stacking debuffs could be powerful in the right circumstances. On the other hand, the wrong group that gets cornered could be done for.

 

[Stuntman]

5 bards and call em the Patridge family.

If they're all male, call them the Backstreet Boys. If they're all female, call them the Spice Girls.

I would be very curious to how 5 wizards would fare.

So would I. I think they would do OK depending on the type of wizards and the powers they pick. If they all took the same powers and build, then it could go very bad.

 

[karlindel]

I think the answer to the question changes depending on whether or not the PCs are all the same build of the class. A party of all shielding clerics would be terrible, but a party with a mix of Str, Laser, and Shielding would be great.

A party of all one type of Warlord would probably not do well, as their init bonus and action point bonuses would not stack, but a party with one of each type would buff each other amazingly and have absurd action points. Also, the Warlord benefits from having other melee fighters, and so having everyone in the party be a melee fighter helps them out, although the lack of ranged attacks will be a problem.

I think an all wizard party could do very well, actually, particularly if they are all Staff (for good defenses) or Orb (as a good Wisdom, Thunderwave, and Cloud of Daggers adds up to a lot of damage as they ping pong enemies through the Cloud(s) over and over again). With good bursts and blasts, they have solid melee and ranged capabilities, and the lower single target damage should be made up for by constantly hitting multiple enemies (if the enemies don't cooperate, then one PC will just have to set them up for the others).

I think the all Warlock party can be great if they have a hexhammer or two and a mix of the other types, but an all Feylock party would be a contender for worst party.

I think an all Bard party would be fine, with plenty of buffs and debuffs, healing, and the ability to grab melee powers. In fact, if you assume that the party all starts out as the same build, they are one of the better options, as they can pick up both melee and ranged attacks regardless of build. They will also totally rock skill challenges.

 

[Obryn]

Even though I love the class a lot - in fact, it's probably my favorite - 5 4e Swordmages in a party would IMO suck.

Marking becomes much less useful when all the targets are basically the same, and there's nobody squishy to protect. Additionally, the swordmages' very low damage output would make for some pretty awful fights.

-O

 

[Fifth Element]

Five controllers of any stripe. I have no idea how it was decided that controllers should have the least hitpoints AND the least damage of any class. They always seem to be a liability when I'm playing.

In the campaign I'm currently DMing, my wife's character is a high-Con druid with the Toughness feat. They're 4th level and it's become something of a running joke that the druid (still) has the most hit points in the party. The party's defender, a dragonborn paladin, is catching up with each level, but slowly.

 

[Andor]

The all leader party might be slow to kill it's enemies but will be nigh-unkillable in return. The all striker party will be a turbo-charged killing machine until they hit a run of bad luck. Then they'll go down like a soufle at a Mega-Deth concert. The all Controller party can clean-up... if they are all tactically minded players who coordinate well. Otherwise it will be like balloon soldiers fighting porcupines. The all defender party will have balanced offense and defense but with no healing, and since they have no one to defend their main reason for being is negated. They'd probably commit seppuku from the ennui of it.