Will my players party work?

[Pheonix0114]

In the coming month or two, my gaming group will finish our current d20 future game, and I am beginning the crafting process of what will be the first sandbox style game my group has done. In this pre-planning phase, I went over the core classes (I only have the core rulebook atm, but might buy the apg soon) with the group and asked what they were interested in. The static group consists of three players other than myself, and they seemed most drawn to a Fighter, Barbarian, and Rogue. We also MIGHT have a new player that seems interested in playing a paladin, but I am not convinced. My players also like me running a nearly constant dmpc, and I was thinking of doing a bard for many reasons, but I am now unsure as a bard isn't an ideal healer or arcane caster; however, I'm loathe to have a character that will overshadow the group.

So my question is, could this group be successful as is? If so, what kind of tweaks will I have to make to the standard formula to help out? If not, what do you suggest I do to try to fix the situation.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

When my campaign forked years ago, the in-trouble-with-the-law group ran off with a bard, two wizards, a fighter, sometimes a rogue and later picked up a ranger. Giant pain in the butt as a DM, since I either had to keep them supplied with wands of cure X wounds or have them trip over healing potion dispensaries, neither of which is really satisfactory.

A non-traditional set-up like you've got works best, IMO, if you have an urban scenario where they're unlikely to be away from bedrest, hospitals and temples for long periods of time. That way, you can beat them up and really challenge them, but after an encounter or two, they can limp off to lick their wounds.

But more traditional stuff, like long overland treks or dungeon crawls? You're either going to have to fudge a lot of stuff or it might end up being a very short campaign.

I'm a fan of people playing what they like, but D&D and its derivatives (maybe not 4E -- I haven't played it and don't know) is really built around the idea that someone can heal the party up. Optimally, there's a healer and a back-up healer with one of those wands as well.

 

[Pheonix0114]

Well I was planning on starting in a large town/small city with quests there and in the surrounding towns less than a week a way, and after they've exhausted there I should be able to guide them to a large city. Thanks for the advice of trying to stay urban, it'll help alot. I would give you exp, but apparently I've already done so recently.

 

[Steel_Wind]

If you are an experienced GM (and you sound like you are) I would recommend you take a look at the Ennie Award winning Kingmaker Adventure Path. It will save you time on prep and will present a great and engaging sandbox for your players to play in and "hexplore".

We have several episodes of the podcast devoted to reviewing portions of the Kingmaker Adventure Path. See the link below. Episodes 8, 12 and the forthcoming Episode #015 cover the first three volumes of that AP, in detail.

Highly recommended.

 

[Pheonix0114]

Thanks for the suggestion, I'll look into it. I keep hearing about Kingmaker but haven't checked it out yet. Also, I'm glad I sound like I'm an experienced GM, I'll have been playing tabletop games for 2 years this fall and have only been gm-ing for about a year...mostly I feel like I'm flailing about, esp when I read about some of the other gm's on this site. But my players keep showing so I guess I'm doing something right.

 

[TarionzCousin]

I hope playing a bard in Kingmaker doesn't suck, because that's what I'm doing right now.

Of course, the group also has an Oracle and an Alchemist. So we have some healing capability.

Wayyyyyyyyyyyyy back in 1E days, we almost always had a Cleric DMPC. I don't think it would overshadow a group if kept mostly in the background.

 

[Herobizkit]

Fighter, Paladin, Barbarian, Rogue.

Low Magic. Urban-centric. Short dungeons (Five Rooms or less, but multiple and even linked video-game style). Few creatures that have special resistances except as plot points/bosses/"elite" creatures for bonus treasure (undead, aberrations, magical beasts to name a few.) Lack of mages/arcane casters means most issues will be solved by muscle, skill rolls, and actual adventuring gear.

Bard would fit right in, but Bards are generally the social/chatty class and you'd be running him. Suggest running Inquisitor instead, or if you really want healing juice, Oracle... but I'd try and minimize healing. Make them rest for days to get back precious HP like the good ol' days. Force them to pay for faster healing if they want it.

There was also a really good blog about running sandbox adventures regarding a journey from a pioneer town and exploring random hexes floating about called West Marches. Great read.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

The Paladin gets lay on hands and can use wands. The rogue can also use CLW wands by level 10, probably, though that is a long way away. They need a toubleshooting arcanist the most, IMO. Make a transmuter, abjuror, or diviner wizard and limit him to buffing the party, being the party taxi (teleporting), and utility spells. As long as they do the socializing and the fighting, I don't think you'll have to worry about even a wizard overshadowing them, or them feeling like he is.

Bard is actually overall a bad choice, I think. Does some buffng and healing, yes, but still not a good healer. And he lacks all those "in the background" spells a wizard has, instead packing a whole bunch of mindrape (enchantment).

 

[Herobizkit]

Ah, my mock arch-nemesis @StreamOfTheSky strikes again.

I'm from the camp of "tailor the adventure to the players" as opposed to other way around. If the players "need" a mage or a healer, then they'll find a way to get one. Don't hand them the free help.

It's not the DM's job to cover the party's shortcomings, it's to work around them (and on occasion, exploit them).

Of course, if you REALLY want to push the Everyman, you could always go Bard/Chameleon and then be whatever the party needs at any time.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Ah, my mock arch-nemesis StreamOfTheSky strikes again.

Who are you again? Wait... it's Blue Pommel, right?

I'm from the camp of "tailor the adventure to the players" as opposed to other way around. If the players "need" a mage or a healer, then they'll find a way to get one. Don't hand them the free help.

It's not the DM's job to cover the party's shortcomings, it's to work around them (and on occasion, exploit them).

The OP specifically said the players like having a DMPC to help out and was asking what to use. I wasn't teling him what he needs to do; it's what him and his group actually want to do already. In that case, what would you do? Look over their roster and say, "screw 'em, their fault for not covering the bases, not my job to make the DMPC useful or fill in their holes, they''re getting another fighter!"

Of course, if you REALLY want to push the Everyman, you could always go Bard/Chameleon and then be whatever the party needs at any time.

And...THAT would be a great example of a spotlight hog the OP needs to avoid...