...what are you missing exactly?
You have paladins, who fill in fine with some of the key divine magic (such as restoration), and their mercies cna cover some other needed healing. Also, hunters, who have 6 levels of divine spells.
Not entirely familiar with the shaman list, but I presume it is kind of a divine/arcane mix like witch- and they have 9 levels. Also, they have hexes which can lay on mean debuffs.
Alchemist has arcane spells for 6 levels....and while those tend to be more buff stuff, he probably has bombs which can be just as good when he puts discoveries into making them AoE debuff mechanics. So he isn't lacking on that department either.
Ask your GM again- what does he specifically feel you are missing? Sure, adding a wizard might add some more versatility...but 2/3 of the current characters are casters, and 1/2 have at least 6 spell levels available.
So honestly- play what you want. Your GM has his own ideas, but by all rights this party is already REALLY magical. And also filled with characters that can (probably) melee. So no need to feel like you need to fill either role.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Don't play a necromancer. Especially since there is a paladin in the party.
The shaman should have some of the divine caster stuff covered. Go arcane. The other players will love the buffs you can lay on them.
The trouble with the mystic theurgist is that you are still juggling 2nd level spells when a pure caster would have 5th level ones. While it's neat to have loads of spells, missing out on the higher caster-level stuff just hurts too bad, IMHO. No caster should multiclass, especially if the party is relying on him for added power.
This said, it's your game, and you can play whatever you want - even if it is objectively sub-optimal - and still have fun.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can only see myself suggesting bard, because you have a BIG party (7 total when 'normal' is 4), which means their performances carry further.
Also, it covers the enchantment/illusion stuff that isn't covered by other casters.
Really, when 2/3 of the party is made of casters of all sorts, the question stops being 'do we need more arcane, or do we need divine?' The question is 'what schools of magic are under represented?'
EDIT: oh, they think they NEED a wizard or cleric? They have three different characters that can fill in the 'cleric' role, one of which is a 9 level caster. Alchemists do fine for a lot of the roles of a wizard with buffs, debuffs, AoE, etc.
Again- they are just doing one big lump of 'arcane' and 'divine', and imagining each as wizard and cleric. They need to honestly think about the roles being filled here. Again, based off of the classes listed, I think bard (for buffs, and basic illusion/enchantment) or mesmerist (for more intense illusion/enchantment since they can debuff a target's will save) would do fine. Having a party filled with a ton of 6 level casters means you don't necessarily 'need' to have one big 9 level caster.
paladin and shaman should be able to cover the "divine caster" needs.
Hi there, I am about to join a group for a game set at 5th level and currently I am conflicted. I have asked our DM what he feels the party is most lacking and says that they are lacking both Divine and Arcane casters.
Now I thought that the MT PrC would be a great fit although reading many opinions as well as mechanics posts I don't think it is a viable option any more. I have considered playing the Cleric more and more since they are almost always great to play. I also enjoy Arcane casters since the spells can be more versatile.
This also comes with a huge confliction to want to play a necromancer, although fluff wise not sure if this would be more fun or just a desire that isn't necessarily needed.
The group I am joining contains a paladin, fighter, rogue, hunter, alchemist, and a shaman.
In all truthfullness they sound like a pretty well rounded party.
But who will take care of locked doors? or int checks?
I suggest a good Int based class, or even bard. get some really nifty utility spells, and you'll be the go to guy for obstacles and problem solving scenarios!
I was going to say something similar to what the others are saying. But I would add that if you DON'T need a skill monkey (for instance if the Alchemist actually has this covered) AND the Shaman went for a build that snags arcane spells (with the Lore Spirit), you could do not too shabby by going with Evangelist Cleric, which gets you a decent subset of Bardic Performance and 9/9 divine spellcasting. But if both of these conditions are not met, I would say go with the Bard like the others are saying (or with the Skald if the skills are covered but the quasi-arcane casting isn't -- Skalds eventually get Spell Kenning, which is a nice option). I would feel better about the Evangelist Cleric recommendation if the Shaman was actually a Witch (another arcane-divine hybrid spellcaster, but more on the Arcane side).
Lots of Bard choices out there too.
Shaman is a divine fullcaster. Paladin a level 4 divine.
Go Arcane. With this many players Bard sounds best, but you are never wrong with the classic Wizard.
Wizards for the win. You have no real arcane caster, and while Shaman spells can do battlefield control, wizards do it better. Go wizard. Your alchemist will love you as well if you let him crib off your spellbook.
Wizard, Bard or Evangelist Cleric. The passive bonuses to your party would be awesome with Bard or Evangelist. But I'll tell you what, go wizard. A ton of knowledge. You don't have a ton of controllers. That might be the most useful thing for your party and a lot of fun for you.
{. . .}
Too bad Wizard doesn't have a hybrid archetype that gives Bardic Performance. Although maybe you could go Wizard VMC Bard, although this will make you more MAD and more feat-starved than a normal Wizard.
If in doubt... Herald Caller
If in doubt... Herald Caller
Not a bad idea, but you need a Rogue or Ninja sidekick that habitually goes mounted on a rough-terrain velocipede.
Lots of Bard choices out there too.Which would you recommend mate I have far to many choices.
Well, that's the problem with Bard -- too man 7@^!#%& archetypes. Same problem with Fighter, except that the ones that DON'T trade out Weapon Training are usually the ones you want, and are not very numerous . . . Which actually leads to a possible method for winnowing Bard archetypes: You want to be a skill monkey, so don't trade out Bardic Knowledge, Versatile Performance, Lore Master, or Jack of All Trades; and you want to buff and/or undebuff that nice big party, so don't trade out Countersong, Inspire Courage, or Soothing Performance (unless you get something in exchange that also buffs or undebuffs all of the party members at the same time -- for instance, the Archivist's Naturalist Bardic Performance is a pretty good trade for Inspire Courage, but some of its other trades are undesirable). Nothing wrong with going vanilla Bard (no archetype). For another example, Flame Dancer actually trades up overall, because while the replacement for Countersong is more situational, Song of the Fiery Gaze and Fire Break actually replace single-target abilities with party buffing abilities, and as a bonus, at 8th level you get Burning Hands, Flaming Sphere, and Fireball added to your spells known -- and that means BURNINATE!! (Try to get or even make a Rod or at least Lesser Rod of Dazing Spell Metamagic.) Arbiter does trade out Versatile Performance (and Inspire Competence), but on the other hand, you get Teamwork Feats and the ability to use your Bardic Performance to hand them out to your party (be sure to get Lingering Performance). Thunder Caller gives you some Electric blasting, but it consists of Supernatural abilities, so you can't put Dazing Spell on them; on the other hand, you also get a second-rate version of Skald's Inspired Rage (you have to start it on one ally at a time, and it doesn't scale unless the targets have their own Rage/Bloodrage ability, but you can progressively add it to more allies -- on thte other hand, you don't have many Barbarian or Bloodrager friends, so you can't get the best use of this).
