Discussion on what makes a well balanced party.


Advice

1 to 50 of 53 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I am preparing for a Rise of the Runelords campaign, and one of the players pointed out to me that since we had and alchemist, wizard, and druid in the party who could cast healing spells, perhaps we didn't need a healing character like a cleric. I always had based a well balanced party off of the classic fighter-rogue-cleric-wizard combo. I'm still not certain that a cleric is needed in the party, but I want to know, based on your experiences, what you think makes a well balanced party. This is my method:

- 1 part defence. This part absorbs damage and leads enemies away from the other members of the party.

- 1 part attack. This part does the real damage.

- 1 part healing/support. This part heals and supports the other parts of the party.

- 1 part utility. This part does skill checks, makes magic items, and helps the party when not in battle.

Notice I said 'part' not 'PC'. Each part of the party can be split up among many players, but the overall ratio should remain balanced. This is my strategy, please tell me what you think about this topic. Can a party of one class be balanced well? Can one player alone fill in all these rolls? What parts of the ratio can be changed? What do you think?


The PC's in my own game have NO dedicated healer, or a dedicated skill monkey, 2 players craft together making everything (easily with their spells). COmbat is usually over quickly as I have 4 full casters and 2 1/2 casters, plus 2 (druid) animal companions. Damage and action economy are simply not issues for them at all. When they are hurt, it is easy for them to swap places (feat) and get out of danger/be covered by each other while healing/potions/retrieving wands. 2 times have I had players on the brink of death (1con left), within the round they were alive and fighting again.

Healing really depends on the game, if AC, blur, shield, mage armor, deflections, mirror image, evasion, fly, etc, are preventing the party from getting hurt much then it really doesn't matter until the dust has settled anyways.

At high levels, it becomes hit or die rocket tag, so depending on level of the game health stops mattering, either IT dies or you die. At lower levels, I have seen sorcerers tank hard with natural AC stacked with shield and light armor. A dedicated, "Intelligent" Tank is nice as a buff-bunny (everyone spends a round buffing that one PC).

There are only a few "Utility" skills really needed by a party, sure it is nice to have high SWIM when you need to jump in the river, but there are potions, spells, and taking 10 for STR characters for that. Technically only one player needs to pass perception to alert the party, etc. If a balanced party has each member focus on 2-3 specific skills that no one else worries about, the load can be spread out and all bases covered, when they are in a group. With a large party of casters, everyone can assist with requirements for crafting.

With an Alchemist, Druid, and Wizard your party is likely above standard APL already, magic makes a difference (plus wizard and alchemist can share spells with SOME shenanigans, at low cost).

Summons keep the enemy at bay, debuff rays and bombs keep the enemy from going anywhere or laying out damage, and your damage spells combined should kill most things before they are an issue. Plus druid and alchemist can both be pretty decent melee fighters with spell likes/mutagens. If not, a druid has a FULL Fighter in their animal companion potentially, all for the cost of a swift action to use, with 3 people buffing it, it can turn into a powerhouse.

The classic wizard - cleric - fighter - thief just isn't as strictly necessary in pathfinder. Heck, 4 rangers can survive just fine on their own, as long as they work together and cover each others shortcomings.

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.

You are looking for Tark's essay The Forge of Combat. You are unlikely to find a more thorough and considered answer to your original question.

Grand Lodge

+1 to Magda

The forge of Combat is one of the best guides written. The whole old fashioned Fighter, Rogue, Cleric, Wizard is not the way to think about it.

It is typically:
2 Hammers- Damage Dealers (guys who end fights through damage)
1 Arm- the Guy who makes sure the hammers stay swinging. (buffer, healer)
1 Anvil- the guy who lays down the battlefield Example: Black tentacles, Fogs, Pits, summoned monsters

I learned a lot from the guide and my home group learned a ton. Our party use to run unblanced and all the scenarios Tark mentions about a group missing certain parts is 100% true. We had a group without an anvil. Our Paladin died...several times because no control of the field. We had to recover and outlast and it really puts a hurting on resources for the group paying to raise up the same guy over and over.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I take exception to calling Clerics a 'healing class'. False stereotype! A negative-channeling battle cleric has minimal healing ability and can deal ridiculous amounts of damage while also controlling the battlefield several different ways at the same time.


1 Part Mental stability

2 parts tactical smarts

1 part drive

1 part strategic smarts

3 parts mental instability

Everything else is negotiable.


I think the most important part of a balanced party is that everybody feels useful and like they're contributing, that no one player hogs the spotlight to the exclusion of the others, and that these two things being true ensures that everybody is having fun.

The problem with expecting a "dedicated healer" is that a lot of people will find that role much less entertaining than anything else they could be doing. The problem with having a designated "party face" is that it cuts down on RPing opportunities in social situations for other players. Et cetera.

I'm not actually sure if a "defense" character is really possible in Pathfinder. There are certain specialized monk builds for intercepting enemy attacks, but that involves "getting in the way" not "attracting enemy attention." Generally the way you attract the attention of intelligent monsters in this game is by being a priority target by virtue of being dangerous.

But everybody should have something to do in combat that they enjoy, and everybody should have something to do out of combat that they also enjoy. Likewise nobody should feel like they're holding back the party.

Sovereign Court

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Its 1 part class selection and 99 parts teamwork.


4 Rangers, 4 Paladins, 4 Druids or 4 Alchemists could cover pretty much every role.

4 Wizards can probably handle it, and 4 Barbarians is just funny enough that your DM would have to be soulless to TPK you.

Grand Lodge

6 people marked this as a favorite.

When all party members take max ranks in acrobatics, the party can balance well.


Never really seen the appeal of the whole skill monkey thing. Even in the Pathfinder adventure paths I've played its not that useful. Unless everyone at your table is dumping int, then most basic skills should be covered. Plus it keeps someone from having to play something crappy like a rogue or blowing too many points on an Int score if you arent a wizard.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Skill Monkey is not an actual role. Face, Sage and Scout are jobs that need doing.


The Forge of Combat is a great article and a good link Magda. As long as you've got the general Arm/Hammer/Anvil roles (hopefully with a secondary role for some characters) then you've got combat covered. Even just things like melee having a spare reach weapon, Dazzling Display or similar can turn them from a pure Hammer into an Hammer/Anvil when necessary.

Most PCs can manage to do something out of combat with their skillpoints, as long as they consider it and synch it with the rest of the party. It's quite fun to have some things split up. Your Paladin might be the diplomat, but when you need intimidation then the Cornugon Smashing Barbarian will have something to say.

Covering the big four knowledges (Arcana, Planes, Religion, Nature) will get you a long way, and tends to be split betwen party members. I find that face skills depend on your GM quite a lot. Some prefer you to just roleplay out interactions anyway, so having maxed social skills matters less (naturally some are the opposite).


What pan said

Liberty's Edge

A party that works as a team, regardless of individual classes, is a balanced party. At the end of the discussion, this is the core concept.


1 arm
1 hammer
1 anvil
1 anything (probably another hammer, but a second anvil can work well)

4 max perception characters
2 textbooks
2 faces

at least 2 9 level casters

Liberty's Edge

D&D 4th edition has a system like this. Basically, it puts the classes into 4 Roles: Controller, Tank, Leader, and Striker (I think those are the names)
The Controller is a blaster, the tank is a front liner, a striker is either a rogue, gunslinger or ranger, who can do dps from afar, or weave between enemies taking them out. The leader is pretty cool, as they are the buffer and healer.
A quick reference:
Controllers: Wizard, Sorcerer, Maybe a Witch, etc.
Tank: Fighter, Inquisitor, Paladin, Cavalier, etc.
Leader: Paladin, Cleric, Bard, etc.
Striker: Rogue, Gunslinger, Ranger, etc.


Gregory Connolly wrote:

1 arm

1 hammer
1 anvil
1 anything (probably another hammer, but a second anvil can work well)

4 max perception characters
2 textbooks
2 faces

at least 2 9 level casters

Honestly It's probably a waste for all four characters to max perception. If you are in a group there is now reason that more than two have it maxed. Maxing it on four people is a wate especially considering some classes may only get 2 skill points a level or less.


EsperMagic wrote:
Gregory Connolly wrote:

1 arm

1 hammer
1 anvil
1 anything (probably another hammer, but a second anvil can work well)

4 max perception characters
2 textbooks
2 faces

at least 2 9 level casters

Honestly It's probably a waste for all four characters to max perception. If you are in a group there is now reason that more than two have it maxed. Maxing it on four people is a wate especially considering some classes may only get 2 skill points a level or less.

I can say this honestly.

You can never have enough points in perception

I never recommend dumping perception, and I don't care if you get only 1 skill point per level. If you only get 1 my number one recommendation is going to be perception.


This varies so much by table than any general guide is almost useless.

How long are your combats? Most tables have 6 round combats or so, but if your guys are all about super optimization and rocket-tag,so you have 2 round combats? Then in combat healing is not valuable. For many other groups it's a necessity. It depends.

Trap-finder? Well, few PF AP's are as full of the devious and deadly Gygaxian traps that used to plague dungeon delvers. You might be able to get along without one. Thus the "skill-monkey" role can be covered with one PC with a maxed out Perc, one or two with a decent Perc- a party Face, and someone with Sense Motive. Of course the Wizard or Witch can handle Knowledge skills.

This saddens me, as I have a soft spot of the Thief class, of course.

So, it's hard to give any generalizations.


meh not wasting points on perception when other people are already consistently rolling high 30 to low 40s in it. ITs a waste of my skill points. The group clearly doesnt need it.


EsperMagic wrote:
meh not wasting points on perception when other people are already consistently rolling high 30 to low 40s in it. ITs a waste of my skill points. The group clearly doesnt need it.

Dexterity tends to be a more common high stat than wisdom, there are available size bonuses to stealth, not to mention bonuses to stealth are much more easily available and larger.

By the time you reach 30's to 40's in perception its not hard to have 50+ stealth.

Basically, because its often an opposed roll anything that will be CR appropriate is going to have stealth capabilities at least on par with your perception, so you want as many chances as possible to beat them.


eh...im by far the tankiest person in the party and solo'ed a female black wyrm dragon cr 17. The rest of the party? Shoveling all the dragons loot into portable holes.

Im not too concerned about a piddly stealth bad guy. Besides my points were sent on Know:Rel, Diplomacy, Intimidate, UMD, and Spellcraft


1 person marked this as a favorite.
EsperMagic wrote:
meh not wasting points on perception when other people are already consistently rolling high 30 to low 40s in it. ITs a waste of my skill points. The group clearly doesnt need it.

If they are the only ones who can see it then they are the only ones who can deal with it. Most GM's are willing to let you see somethign if it's pointed out to you but, reality and RAW dictate that that's not always the case.

Plus, redundancy in this case absolutely matters. It's the difference from one guy acting in the surprise round to the whole group.


A well balanced party should be one that gives all the players a chance to contribute. The game has a social function.

That said, as a DM I will present varied challenges that require a breadth of approaches to overcome (to give all the characters a chance to shine) and I will actively target predictable weaknesses (and EVERY character type has a weakness) - Why? Because then the characters must diversify and cannot be over-specialised.

So the best party? To just look at 4-6 'maximised' characters in isolation is not the answer (as said they tend to be over-specialised), 4-6 effective pcs working as a team tends to get the job done better.

With regards to the statement of the guide that Initiative is Everything, at low levels I disagree, there is an art in reacting effectively as well, you can be fast but ineffective, slower but deadly. Avoid absolutes!


strayshift wrote:


With regards to the statement of the guide that Initiative is Everything, at low levels I disagree, there is an art in reacting effectively as well, you can be fast but ineffective, slower but deadly. Avoid absolutes!

There is no art in dying first.

It's better to go first and ready an action than to do nothing and expect the best.


TarkXT wrote:
strayshift wrote:
Avoid Absolutes!
There is no art in dying first.

I think you missed his point.

Not going first doesn't mean you lose or else being ambushed is always death which it isn't. That's an absolute thought which isn't always true.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Flawed wrote:
TarkXT wrote:
strayshift wrote:
Avoid Absolutes!
There is no art in dying first.

I think you missed his point.

Not going first doesn't mean you lose or else being ambushed is always death which it isn't. That's an absolute thought which isn't always true.

No I got the point. It's just wrong. It's also a misrepresentation of the actual statement. Initiative is "almost" everything. We'll get to that "Almost" part in a moment.

Let me elaborate.

It's not about ambush (because you can lose without it) nor dying in the first round. It's about actions and status effects.

Being flat footed isn't just reduced ac, it's having no threat (thus no control over the area around you), being open to combat maneuvers (because no threat = no AoO's), and allowing any sort of effect that gets you specifically because you are flat footed (sneak attack) to work.

This is in Round 1 when few if any defensive buffs have been cast to protect you. A savvy GM will happily punish you not with damage, but with disarm checks you can't defend against, enemies that rush past the bewildered frontline to body check the wizard.

Will you lose? Not always. In fact I never stated in that piece that was a possibility. It does however put you at a tactical disadvantage. Even in defensive strategies it's better to go first and get your defenses set up prior to the enemy than wait for them to come storming up the beach first.

Now, as to the "Almost" part. There are times when initiative is a moot point. GEnerally in situations where the first couple of rounds are spent just trying to get to a fight. Combat started at too long a distance for the opposing groups to do much in the early rounds? Doesn't help much.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

And again still missing the point. He said having a high initiative isn't necessary at low levels and there's an art to reacting where you responded with the absolute statement that there is no art in dying first implying that not going first means death.

How is initiative everything in circumstances where combat closes quickly? Readying an action may waste your turn if the triggering action never happens. Status effects may not even occur. A spell can be shrugged off with a saving throw and even failing it doesn't always affect more than one person. Arguing worst case scenarios will definitely make initiative seem like the best option, but not everything is a worst case scenario.

Multiple classes and archetypes get uncanny dodge and others can easily take combat reflexes entirely mitigating flat footed in a surprise round and beyond for uncanny dodge. Just as circumstantial as your listed examples.

Many defensive buffs are long duration and cast on entering a dungeon. In a 4 man party there may be 2 broad AoE buffs in the first round like haste, BoF, bless, prayer or the like. Many have very little impact on your defenses and others have none.

The comment on losing was based on you saying "no art in dying first". It implies losing.

I've honestly never played a character with a trait or feat boosting initiative and have never struggled. I fail to see value in a huge initiative bonus. Sometimes I'm the last to go in the initiative order and suffer no drastic ill effects nor to the rest of my party. Everything becomes dependent on strategy, positioning, and tactical deployment more than who goes first much like playing chess.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Flawed wrote:


How is initiative everything in circumstances where combat closes quickly? Readying an action may waste your turn if the triggering action never happens. Status effects may not even occur. A spell can be shrugged off with a saving throw and even failing it doesn't always affect more than one person. Arguing worst case scenarios will definitely make initiative seem like the best option, but not everything is a worst case scenario.

Nor is everything a best case scenario. However given the consequences of failure it's better to prepare for the worst. This is why you take high perception scores, it's why you endeavor for a good if not great initiative, why you worry about saves, why you check for traps even when you're not entirely sure there aren't.

Hope for the best, prepare for the worst. This is how adventurers, soldiers, SWAT teams, and sports teams survive.

As to Combat Reflexes and Uncanny Dodge. Combat Reflexes is actually one of the best feats in the game imo purely for that purpose. Unfortunately it's also not that big of a priority for many characters.
And, unfortunately, unless you're built for melee combat in the first place it won't save you from combat maneuvers nor do anything against things like sneak attack.

Uncanny dodge also doesn't show up on a lot of characters. Barbarians, rogues, and archaeologists have it but the latter two often trade it out. So that doesn't help.

You are also wrong about the wide spells you listed not having defensive qualities.

Haste: Bonus to AC and move speed.
Prayer: saves
BoF:Bonus to saves,ac can also grant increased momvement speed or trip negation.
Bless (lowest level): bonus to saves against fear.

Those are the ones listed. A good number of offensive buffs follow a pattern of major offense + a bit of defense. Even enlarge person a spell that lowers your overall AC is arguably defensive in that it increase your reach thereby possibly negating the reach of an enemy and providing AoO potential against aggressive enemies. Though I do admit these spells are favored for their offensive boosts as well.

A final point about readied actions getting wasted is that readied actions is this; So?

The point about readied actions is making it so that it doesn't make a difference if the triggered action happens or not. For one, you should be wording it so it's not vague or rare ("I attack the first enemy who comes within reach (or specify)", "I cast X Spell when X condition occurs" etc.). For two, if you think the action might be potentially wasted you must ensure that the wasted action in and of itself affects the field. That's the hard part.

And a topic I'll cover another time.

Flawed wrote:
I've honestly never played a character with a trait or feat boosting initiative and have never struggled. I fail to see value in a huge initiative bonus. Sometimes I'm the last to go in the initiative order and suffer no drastic ill effects nor to the rest of my party. Everything becomes dependent on strategy, positioning, and tactical deployment more than who goes first much like playing chess.

Then you have not played a game where low initiative has been punished or you simply did not see the disadvantages of having done so. Or you are just very lucky.

Because in the many, many games I have looked over this is just not the case. You are arguing chess when I'm talking about gunfights.

And in the end going first isn't even the whole story. I've written extensively and at length about the effect the initiative order has on the group. The ones going first are the ones that set the pace of the fighter. They're the wizards, the witches, the druids, the summoners, the guys who plop down battlefield control and go "This is how the fight will go now".

After that you get your support guys your clerics, your bards, your skalds, and what not who multiply the threat of the group and go "this is how hard we can swing".

AFter that you get the guys who look at the flatfooted, battlefield controlled enemy, envision the outcome and go, "This is how it will End."

And in the end you may feel you or your group has not struggled because you don't care. But I'll bet honest money that you certainly got the benefit of someone else's high initiative.

[rant off]

Yes this is a salty subject for me. Initiative has been hailed as great by optimizers long before Pathfinder existed. Low level, high level, the absolute truth is that it's almost always better to be faster on the draw then the bad guy.


Our current party is handling things quite well with a melle focused tank/dps paladin, a bomb-throwing mummy alchemist, a battlefield control wizard, and a dirge bard. Our GM is even maxing hit points on the enemies for encounters and we still are like ho-hum


6 people marked this as a favorite.

Well you need one bard on vocals, one on drums, one on the lute, and one on the bass lute. Perfectly balanced adventuring party, there.


TarkXT wrote:
Flawed wrote:


How is initiative everything in circumstances where combat closes quickly? Readying an action may waste your turn if the triggering action never happens. Status effects may not even occur. A spell can be shrugged off with a saving throw and even failing it doesn't always affect more than one person. Arguing worst case scenarios will definitely make initiative seem like the best option, but not everything is a worst case scenario.

Nor is everything a best case scenario. However given the consequences of failure it's better to prepare for the worst. This is why you take high perception scores, it's why you endeavor for a good if not great initiative, why you worry about saves, why you check for traps even when you're not entirely sure there aren't.

Hope for the best, prepare for the worst. This is how adventurers, soldiers, SWAT teams, and sports teams survive.

As to Combat Reflexes and Uncanny Dodge. Combat Reflexes is actually one of the best feats in the game imo purely for that purpose. Unfortunately it's also not that big of a priority for many characters.
And, unfortunately, unless you're built for melee combat in the first place it won't save you from combat maneuvers nor do anything against things like sneak attack.

Uncanny dodge also doesn't show up on a lot of characters. Barbarians, rogues, and archaeologists have it but the latter two often trade it out. So that doesn't help.

You are also wrong about the wide spells you listed not having defensive qualities.

Haste: Bonus to AC and move speed.
Prayer: saves
BoF:Bonus to saves,ac can also grant increased momvement speed or trip negation.
Bless (lowest level): bonus to saves against fear.

Those are the ones listed. A good number of offensive buffs follow a pattern of major offense + a bit of defense. Even enlarge person a spell that lowers your overall AC is arguably defensive in that it increase your reach thereby possibly negating the reach of an enemy and providing AoO potential against...

Give me a low level character that is slower but more resilient and deadly over a faster but less deadly and resilient one any day. High levels I accept 'rocket tag' exists, but most of our play is lower level and you can get by just fine by responding to events and being lower down the initiative chain. And as you gain levels? Well you can always take a feat or possibly extra traits.

Scarab Sages

I think that really depends on the GM and/or the opponents you face. When I GM, my intelligent or even savvy opponents try to pin the charaters, limit their movement, lock down sections of the party, etc if they get to go first. Basically they take the fight to the party on their terms, not the PCs, if they get to go first.

If every monster the party fought won initiative, there would be a huge difference in how much healing and how many defensive spells would be needed to achieve the same victory. If nearly every encounter the party won initiative, the same would be conserved.


But it doesn't happen like that - usually initiative is a mixed bag and things like the opportunity to fireball/web, etc. to effectively determine the fight become few and fleeting. Selective Spell as a metamagic is awesome for that reason - but that is higher level play and my point was specifically about low level play.


Going a little off thread here i also think that the cr system needs a little work
We've all had encounters that are to easy or to hard for there supposed cr, and I've lost count of the number of threads that say how well optimized party's can blow through encounters with little or no effort .
So that to me says that the cr system needs an overhaul or characters need to be toned down
I read one thread that said that a group of 4 lvl 15 characters should have no problems taking oout a tarrasque (think that's spelt right) which is a cr 23+ or something to me that's not right

Anyway back to the thread at hand sorry for this side step


Albatoonoe wrote:
Well you need one bard on vocals, one on drums, one on the lute, and one on the bass lute. Perfectly balanced adventuring party, there.

The Vocalist needs to have at least a few points in Perform (Dance). The truly great Frontmen can throw shapes during the lute solo.

@tony gent - There is a very big difference between optimized and unoptimized PCs. Adventure paths are balanced toward a group of four 15 point buy characters with a relatively low level of systems mastery. Most groups should be able to complete them, and CRs are generally based around the same principles.

Not all PCs are created equal, and a group who create characters tailored to a very specific set of roles will be able to do them exceptionally well. An APL +8 encounter doesn't sound like a cakewalk by any means, but given the right builds and setup it's probably feasible.


strayshift wrote:
But it doesn't happen like that - usually initiative is a mixed bag and things like the opportunity to fireball/web, etc. to effectively determine the fight become few and fleeting.

I'm not seeing that, but I'm usually playing a God Wizard or Master Summoner or similar. The faster I make the other side dance to my tune, the better. To back that up, I've almost always got high perception, have at least a +6 initiative (preferably higher), and try to recon the area and prep effectively so I maximize my chances of landing the first shot and making it hurt. Minor or Silent Image, Stone Call, Grease, and Create Pit are pretty common first round spells. Our druids and rangers like to start the party with Entangle.

The faster the bard hands out buffs, the debuffers hand out conditions, and the controllers get into position and control, the better. We've got some fighter types who are always excited to roll a high initiative, but it rarely does them as much good - they're not able to capitalize on the free buffs and hampered enemies and charge right into full attacks.

We're all playing at 5th level and below in my groups, too.


Experiment 626 wrote:
strayshift wrote:
But it doesn't happen like that - usually initiative is a mixed bag and things like the opportunity to fireball/web, etc. to effectively determine the fight become few and fleeting.

I'm not seeing that, but I'm usually playing a God Wizard or Master Summoner or similar. The faster I make the other side dance to my tune, the better. To back that up, I've almost always got high perception, have at least a +6 initiative (preferably higher), and try to recon the area and prep effectively so I maximize my chances of landing the first shot and making it hurt. Minor or Silent Image, Stone Call, Grease, and Create Pit are pretty common first round spells. Our druids and rangers like to start the party with Entangle.

The faster the bard hands out buffs, the debuffers hand out conditions, and the controllers get into position and control, the better. We've got some fighter types who are always excited to roll a high initiative, but it rarely does them as much good - they're not able to capitalize on the free buffs and hampered enemies and charge right into full attacks.

We're all playing at 5th level and below in my groups, too.

That's a lot of spells to burn for a 5th level caster. Give a low level group 3 or more encounters and let's see you contribute.


strayshift wrote:
That's a lot of spells to burn for a 5th level caster. Give a low level group 3 or more encounters and let's see you contribute.

We average 3-4 encounters on game nights. The only times I've run out is when someone does something stupid or the dice are completely against us. Then I have to burn spells or other consumables to try to retake the momentum. Big boss fights also eat a lot of spells, but hey, that's what they're designed to do.

Its usually one good "game changer" in the first round and maybe a follow up to help tie up some loose ends or buff someone on round 2, then help with mop up and see if any other spell support is necessary.


"and consumables..."


1 person marked this as a favorite.
strayshift wrote:

"and consumables..."

You do realize that there is a portion of WBL dedicated solely to consumables correct? I mean they give you extra gold just so you can have them. Not to mention casters need less equipment to stay dependable anyways.


Pan nailed it. Teamwork is the key. Literally any class combination can be effective, with an effective team strategy. How many player groups ever take the time to actually develop a general strategy together?

I've seen all kinds of oddball combinations work amazingly well, using uncommon strategies. And of course, plenty of Total (Well-Rounded) Party Kills.

I'm pretty sure that if a party doesn't work together to plan an effective strategy, I could easily mop them up with a uniclass party of the same level and number. Any uniclass -- even Rogues -- simply because my party members will be working in concert.

Guides are great for understanding the basics, and I would certainly use them to start. Once those are mastered though, I suggest going beyond the Build-Centric attitude, and focus on strategic teamwork instead.


I find that teamwork and everyone having their own area to shine makes for the best party. Other then that it really depends on the GM and campaign he/she is running.


If the GM has done their job, there is always a way for the party to succeed, regardless of what class/race/spells/feats/etc. they have. (Although it might be run away and come back after you've done some research and discovered how to beat whatever it is.)

As a GM, I'd much rather have players think first about dramatic roles rather than mechanics. That is, does somebody want to play an intimidating big guy (who secretly has a heart of gold)? Or a wise, compassionate type who keeps everybody on track morally? Or a strategic character who carefully plans out every move? Or a highly skilled but impetuous hothead? Or a brilliant but socially awkward professor type? (These are obviously just examples. The players can make up whatever dramatic roles they want.) Once they have picked a dramatic role, deciding on race, class, etc. is the easy part.

This works MUCH better if the group can create their characters together, so that the players can come up with roles that let each of them stand out in some way from all the others.

The other kind of balance is no problem. As long as the players can work together, I can easily come up with encounters that will challenge them without being overwhelming.


Two items I'm not seeing mentioned is -

What do you have anyone for melee?
Alchemist and wizard is usually range type characters
The Druid is a 'who knows' they can be anything.

Do you have anyone good at Social skills?
From the classes you have listed as showing up, I doubt you have anyone in the party with good Social type skills.


Teamwork feats can be cool... when the entire party is Inquisitors.

I kid, but really, the only issue with Tmwrk feats is that a large part of the party gives up their unique build to fuel someone else's feats. Even if it's a interconnecting web of synergy, you sacrifice a lot.

Sovereign Court

DominusMegadeus wrote:

Teamwork feats can be cool... when the entire party is Inquisitors.

I kid, but really, the only issue with Tmwrk feats is that a large part of the party gives up their unique build to fuel someone else's feats. Even if it's a interconnecting web of synergy, you sacrifice a lot.

I think an excellent bolt on set of rules for PF would be to find a way to include teamwork feats on top of the normal distribution. Maybe in PF unchained they can do something with this cool yet often overlooked feature of PF.


Matt2VK wrote:

Two items I'm not seeing mentioned is -

What do you have anyone for melee?
Alchemist and wizard is usually range type characters
The Druid is a 'who knows' they can be anything.

Do you have anyone good at Social skills?
From the classes you have listed as showing up, I doubt you have anyone in the party with good Social type skills.

I don't know who you're replying to here, but the Vivisectionist Alchemist makes an excellent frontline melee combatant and uses sneak attack with more efficiency than anyone else who has it. Alchemist and Wizard can both serve as a face if you take Student of Philosophy as a trait.


Thomas Long 175 wrote:
strayshift wrote:

"and consumables..."

You do realize that there is a portion of WBL dedicated solely to consumables correct? I mean they give you extra gold just so you can have them. Not to mention casters need less equipment to stay dependable anyways.

I've only been playing versions of D&D 35ish years. However low magic, low level, character driven campaigns with no such concept as wealth by level are our norm, and I can assure you that does limit the 'legs' of a party.

1 to 50 of 53 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Discussion on what makes a well balanced party. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.