D&D classes question

[The Nomad]

I've got a D&D-related question for you expert gamers.

Basically, what is the best makeup for a group of 6 adventurers, both in terms of combat capabilities and general roleplaying (diplomacy, crafting, travel, intelligence gathering), assuming little or no multiclassing (just enough to get possible prestige classes), and no cohorts or followers.

1) using only the 11 base classes from the SRD

2) using all the base classes that are Faerun-compatible.

Assume that the group is supposed to eventually get into the low epic range.

[Rawtooth]

What level are you starting at?

[Brother-Captain Gaius]

It can really depend a lot on your DM. What skills he favors, the types of monsters you can expect to face, how NPCs are handled, and the style of game (dungeon hack vs. political intrigue).

That said, you probably want at least one wizard (sorcerer is all right, but if you get to epic levels you'll probably want the wizard for the versatility), a cleric, a rogue, two fighter-types (paladin, ranger, barbarian), and whatever suits your preferences for the last. Another wizard would be good, as would another fighter (perhaps specialized in ranged weapons depending on the type of encounters you'll run into and how picky you are with tiles and occupied space, etc.), or any jack-of-all-trades type like a bard or rogue. If you don't have any other divine magic users, another cleric wouldn't hurt either.

[Enforcer Talen]

The best fireteam I ever GMed was 2 monks, a wizard, and a cleric. They were level 21, and cleared pretty much everything.

[McNum]

In a six member party you might want to consider a Bard. Bards aren't that great solo, but their songs and magic work really nice with big groups. That and a Bard focusing on diplomacy can, by the rules, talk his way out of practically anything. Great for a party face. Also, Bardic Knowledge. "I heard a tale about [plot point] that [information]."

The usual suspects are never a bad choice, either.
- Melee combat: Figther/Barbarian/Ranger/Paladin/Monk (sort of.)
- Ranged combat: Fighter/Ranger/Evocation based Sorceror.
- Divine magic: Cleric/Druid.
- Arcane magic: "Batman style" Wizard/Sorceror.
- Sneakyness: Rogue/Monk (sort of).
- Social: Bard

The Batman style Wizard needs a quick explanation. The cliche goes that Batman wins, if he has time to plan. That's true for this Wizard style. Don't go for Evocation spells. Get spells that do ability drain or does other effects. So called "Save or suck" spells. Later, upgrade to "Save or die". Battlefield control is a strong suit, too. Necromancy (Eneverating Ray, Finger of Death) and Conjuration (Wall of Stone/Force, Cloudkill) are two good choices to use. As to what to plan, that's what Divinations are for. Also, there's a type of Elf in Faerun that gets a +2 Int bonus. Good choice for a Wizard, if a bit cliche.

Any 6 man party that has those roles covered should do fine in most settings. Be careful of alignment clashes if you add a Paladin, though. The Monk is an odd class. It runs fast, can do many tricks, and hits a lot. Just not very hard. Monks are better in smaller parties.

If I were to make a 6 SRD class party it'd be this one:
- Fighter (Greatsword and Longbow user)
- Rogue (Dual wielder with a bow in reserve)
- Wizard (Batman)
- Cleric (Can buff self and others)
- Bard (Diplomacy/Bluff focus)
- Druid (Get the feat that lets you cast spells in animal form)

You'll have good melee from the Fighter and Rogue, ranged attacks from everyone, crowd control from Batman (and the Druid), buffs and heals from the Cleric and Druid, and diplomacy good enough from the Bard to make anyone your friend. Anyone. The party is a bit cliche, you could replace some of the classes with their counterparts or go Prestige Class hunting in the later levels.

I hope that helps you, and remember, you can't win D&D, so don't try. Just have fun.

[Civil War Man]

Bards are amazing in small parties, because they are able to do a little bit of everything. And in small parties, you don't have enough people to fill in every spot. I think six is getting to the point where having a bard starts to become superfluous, because by that point you probably have every other spot filled in. If you are going with prestige classes, though, bards are excellent for fighter prestige classes that require spellcasting, like Dragon Disciple or Arcane Archer.

Having at least one divine spellcaster is vital, because it makes healing so much easier. Clerics are great healing sticks, particularly good clerics who can spontaneously convert their prepared spells to healing spells. However, depending on the feel of the campaign, you might want to go with a Paladin or Druid. Druids, on top of having healing spells, have the benefit of some good offensive spells, plus their shapeshifting can make them cool fighters if they run out. Paladins don't gain as much spells, but they can be pretty sick fighters, particularly if you give them Divine Might (spent a turning attempt to add their charisma bonus to their damage roll for one round) or Divine Vengeance (spend a turning attempt to do 2d6 extra damage to undead for one round).

Rogue is vital. Disable Device and Open Lock as class skills are just too useful to pass up.

So, assuming a 6 person Good-aligned party, I would give the following recommendation:

1 Rogue (vital), 1 Paladin (very highly recommended), 1 Cleric or Druid, 1 Wizard or Sorcerer, 1 of any Fighter class (if another Paladin, the primary divine caster should definitely be a Druid). The sixth spot is variable, but I would probably recommend a Ranger. Ranged Combat style only if the Fighter class spot isn't taken up by another ranged specialized character (like another Ranger or an Arcane Archer).

By the way, when I say Fighter class, I include a Bard that plans on taking a fighter-type prestige class.

That's my personal recommendation for a party, at least. IMHO, 6 is starting to get a little big for a good D&D game. The skill and experience of the DM will greatly influence how fun the game is with that many people, as an inexperienced one may have trouble dealing with that many people at once..

[Civil War Man]

In a six member party you might want to consider a Bard. Bards aren't that great solo, but their songs and magic work really nice with big groups. That and a Bard focusing on diplomacy can, by the rules, talk his way out of practically anything. Great for a party face. Also, Bardic Knowledge. "I heard a tale about [plot point] that [information]."

As much as I like Bard, they easily become superfluous in large parties. A Rogue with high intelligence and a decent charisma can match a Bard socially roll for roll, plus have the added bonuses of sneak attacks, lockpicking, and trap disabling.

Small parties are where Bards really shine, because they are the ultimate utility class. As a result, they can cover just about any aspect that is left out of the party. I once played a Bard in a 4-person party. He could tank a little when the Fighter wasn't available. He could heal or summon creatures if the Druid was out of spells. The only think I couldn't cover was the Rogue-specific skills. I think the biggest gift my character gave the Rogue was that she didn't have to focus on social stats because I was available.

[SirNitram]

Sorc has started to really shine as an opportunity, honestly. They're ideal for low encounters-per-day campaigns, where Arcane Fusion and Greater Arcane Fusion can blow large numbers of spells very quickly.

[Enforcer Talen]

Im not familiar with fusion -

and, Ive never, never seen bards used. Ever.

[SirNitram]

Im not familiar with fusion -

and, Ive never, never seen bards used. Ever.

It's relatively new; I think it's either Complete Mage or Dragon Magic. Basically, use a 5th level slot as a full round action. Cast a 1st level spell and a 4th level or lower spell. Greater Fusion just ups the levels of spells you can vomit out.

[McNum]

In a six member party you might want to consider a Bard. Bards aren't that great solo, but their songs and magic work really nice with big groups. That and a Bard focusing on diplomacy can, by the rules, talk his way out of practically anything. Great for a party face. Also, Bardic Knowledge. "I heard a tale about [plot point] that [information]."

As much as I like Bard, they easily become superfluous in large parties. A Rogue with high intelligence and a decent charisma can match a Bard socially roll for roll, plus have the added bonuses of sneak attacks, lockpicking, and trap disabling.

Small parties are where Bards really shine, because they are the ultimate utility class. As a result, they can cover just about any aspect that is left out of the party. I once played a Bard in a 4-person party. He could tank a little when the Fighter wasn't available. He could heal or summon creatures if the Druid was out of spells. The only think I couldn't cover was the Rogue-specific skills. I think the biggest gift my character gave the Rogue was that she didn't have to focus on social stats because I was available.

Rogues match Bards socially, until the Bard begins casting spells. "Glibness". Then you just casually make the mother of all bluffs and no one doubts your word. They can try, of course, but we're talking high 70s-80s Bluff checks here. A diplomat Bard can focus heavily on Charisma. Talking the bad guy into surrendering, in 18 seconds, also counts as winning the encounter. It may, however, annoy the DM if you're too good at it, so expect mindless foes if you keep that up.

[Civil War Man]

Im not familiar with fusion -

and, Ive never, never seen bards used. Ever.

Bards are put down a lot. One of the problems with the class is that they don't specialize, which reduces their effectiveness in large parties. At higher levels, they also have some trouble keeping up with fighters and wizards. However, unlike, say, Monk or Sorcerer, Bards are good for multiclassing. Their combination of decent BAB, high number of skill points, and arcane casting also makes them good at getting the prerequisites for a lot of prestige classes.

Frankly, I used to dis Bards myself, until I actually played one.

[LadyTevar]

One reason why the Bards are so disliked is how 1st Ed made you work up to them.

[Imperial Overlord]

Bards also get a bad wrap because it takes some skill to play well. It's easy to play a sucky bard.

[Erik von Nein]

Out of curiosity, Nomad, but why are you asking? Are you setting up a campaign where the DM chooses the classes for the players? I ask because I'm playing one right now like that (the whole thing is, in general, very different from the typical D&D game).

[The Nomad]

Out of curiosity, Nomad, but why are you asking? Are you setting up a campaign where the DM chooses the classes for the players? I ask because I'm playing one right now like that (the whole thing is, in general, very different from the typical D&D game).

I'm asking this because I precisely have no idea what the DM will do (it's more of a suggestion to fellow players) I'd be interested in a long-term campaign with characters taken from level 1 up to epic with maximal chances of survival (or not too frequent and costly resurrection). I'm not even sure of the number of players : between 4 (so we'll fall back on the regular quartet cleric-fighter-rogue-wizard) or 6 (I'm wondering what to advise or take in order to maximize efficiency).

[Enforcer Talen]

My campaign went from 1 to 21 until I ran out of monsters. Only two pcs remained the safe, the rest died. I cycled through about 15 players, too.

I like to kill party members.

[McNum]

Out of curiosity, Nomad, but why are you asking? Are you setting up a campaign where the DM chooses the classes for the players? I ask because I'm playing one right now like that (the whole thing is, in general, very different from the typical D&D game).

I'm asking this because I precisely have no idea what the DM will do (it's more of a suggestion to fellow players) I'd be interested in a long-term campaign with characters taken from level 1 up to epic with maximal chances of survival (or not too frequent and costly resurrection). I'm not even sure of the number of players : between 4 (so we'll fall back on the regular quartet cleric-fighter-rogue-wizard) or 6 (I'm wondering what to advise or take in order to maximize efficiency).

Maximum efficiency? That's easy.

ClericZilla. A Cleric in heavy armor using his substatial buffs on himself. He can outfight a Fighter and still cast spells like this.
DruidZilla. A Druid in the form of something big and using Natural Spell to cast spells in wildshape. Also outfights any Fighter.
Batman Wizard. Weak-ish at lower levels, gets sickly powerful later. Powerful as in "What kind of Dragon do I want to solo today... I'm thinking... Black."

But this can get a bit boring, and can cause the DM to send really powerful foes at you. Personally I'd go for synergy rather than pure power. It makes it easier for the DM to make decent encounters and makes battles a bit more fun.

[lance]

Rogue is vital. Disable Device and Open Lock as class skills are just too useful to pass up.

Open lock is actually a completely redundant skill, because you can disable a lock. Also only 1 level of rogue is actually needed for the trapfinding.

If I had a 6 person srd party it would be
1 cleric(melee focused)
1 druid, use a riding dog animal companion, take natural spell at 6th.
1 wizard
1 rogue
1 Sorceror
1 Cleric(spell casting focused)
If any source is allowed I might consider
1 crusader or warblade
1 Archivist(Divine wizard)
1 Wizard
1 beguilar(trapfinding)
1 Incarnate/binder/chameleon
Maybe scout4/ranger16 with the gestalt feat out of complete scoundrel, or a warlock maybe.
I could also try
6 clerics- 2 Divine metamagic melee and ranged focus.
1Kobold for the kobold domain(gets trapfinding and some class skills)
3 what ever.

[Civil War Man]

Point about open lock. Disable device is still a vital skill, though. One which should be covered even by people who play "I'm not actually a fighter *wink wink*" rogues.

I should also reiterate the importance of having at least one Paladin or Cleric in the party. Not necessarily for the healing, but for the undead. You can almost always count on the possibility of undead showing up. Even more so if the DM rejects your Paladin/Hunter of the Dead build.

[Academia Nut]

Nah, if you really want to piss off your DM, have your diplomat bard pick up this little ditty from the Eberron campaign setting book: Undead Empathy. Only prerequisite is Cha 13, which a diplomat should easily meet. No alignment restrictions. Gives +4 bonus to diplomacy vs. intelligent undead, and lets you use diplomacy against mindless undead. Expect to see large numbers of constructs and oozes once your DM discovers that your character has enough charm to convince things without functioning brains to be friends.

[Civil War Man]

Brilliant. Now if only there were some way to con a Ravenloft DM into allowing that feat. Who would need Leadership with that setup?

[The Dark]

Brilliant. Now if only there were some way to con a Ravenloft DM into allowing that feat. Who would need Leadership with that setup?

A truly brilliant Ravenloft DM would require a Dark Powers check (or whatever it's being called now) each time the feat was used, since it's a necromantic effect.