First and foremost, good luck with your first campaign!
Just basing on classes and subclasses is not the easiest way of judging a party as a lot of the internal choices (such as what skills you all have trained) and playstyles can make a pretty big difference. Still, overall, you have a fair mix of characters adaptable to a wide range of situations--some heavy hitters, some folks who can do some control magic, a couple healers, and a bard to talk you out of tight spots. The one archetype that seems to be missing is a sneaky type, like a rogue or ranger, but some of those other classes can be relatively sneaky if they need to be, so that might not make or break your campaign.
The one concern I might have--the party size. Seven player characters can lead to a number of problems. The biggest problem is going to be giving everyone the opportunity to shine both in combat and out of combat. In combat, there is going to be a lot of downtime between your turns, which can grow rather dull and lead to players getting bored. Out of combat (especially if you have someone with Main Character Syndrome--a personality trait that does not really manifest until players start actually playing), it might be difficult to get folks to all feel like they are contributing, rather than being part of a crowd where a small number of players are usually in the spotlight.
You also are just going to have a problem with combat, unless your DM does something to make fights harder. 5e monsters are relatively weak, balanced against parties of four characters--and not really balanced well to begin with. With seven characters and low monster starting health, you all are likely going to tear through some monsters. Your DM needs to be able to compensate for that by drastically increasing monster difficulty--by adding hitpoints, giving them unique abilities to control the battlefield, increasing number of monsters (though this should be done with caution, since combat rounds will already be extra long, as aforestated), etc. It is going to take a while to get into the swing of things and for your DM to get a feel for how difficult combat should be, so be prepared for a bit of a learning curve.
None of that, of course, is to dissuade you from playing with a party that size--but it is something you and your friends (and especially your DM) should know before you start so you all can be prepared for some hiccups and some slower play than might otherwise be expected.
At a glance and from a purely mechanical standpoint I'd say it looks fine. You don't have a rogue so you might be weak on stealth related tasks but if the casters take a few utility spells spread out amongst them that should compensate for that (assuming your DM is wise enough to take that into account; a balanced game comes from both balanced PCs/parties and balanced encounter/challenge design from the DM). I would strongly recommend the players/characters with magic at least establish what their preferred strengths and styles are. There's a lot of potential versatility in those classes that can potentially cover a lot of bases as long as you don't have everybody assuming that somebody else is going to take care of everything. For physical combat I'm guessing the Paladin and Barbarian will be front liners, quite possibly backed up by the Warlock and Cleric, while the Bard, Druid, and Wizard mainly support from behind with magic. I would also recommend that everybody that can do so should work into their build at least one way to heal at least as an emergency measure if the other healer(s) go down ; Pally has Lay On Hands but I'd recommend the Cleric, Bard, and Druid all have at least cure wounds or healing word in their repertoire even if they intend to focus on non-healing related roles. Nothing sucks more than half the party making death saves while the three casters capable of healing magic are all one hit away from joining them as they scream "I'm not a healbot!" Because they sure ain't going to be "proactively preventing damage with offensive magic" with everybody including themselves already dead.
Firstly thank-you for the recommendation about increasing the difficulty I didn't realise that such a big size would be a problem so I'll bring that up with my dm and thr party and we should relatively be able to handle that, we're all good friends so hopefully the downtime between turns is filled with us joking a lot but thank you.
I also did think it would be hard to give certain characters a spotlight but hopefully our dm should let us each have our times to shine and most of us are massive introverts and have a hard time taking action ourselves so I doubt a main character player will come alone but I'll be sure to look out for it
And finally yeah I was discussing with the party about a lack of stealth generally but as a dhampir I can spider crawl and if I choose a variant human I can choose the shadow touched feat to turn invisible, then in later levels I might take mask of many faces to aid in thst stealth and another warlock ability to blend into shadows at will
Another part that flushmater said, while our druid is being our dedicated healer I have recommended our bard to have some added support spells, our cleric however is adamant on being a front line fighter in heavy armour as a Tempest cleric so thst may pose a problem
I think you might be a bit confused how damphir works. The lineage only allows the following:
If you replace a race with this lineage, you can keep the following elements of that race: any skill proficiencies you gained from it and any climbing, flying, or swimming speed you gained from it.
It does not allow you to retain any feats from the underlying race, so you cannot retain the "shadow touched" feat from variant human while also being a Damphir. That said, Warlocks can be built to be rather sneaky (though Dex isn't their strongest skill), so you still could fill a sneaky role if needed.
I don’t see any dexterity-based characters, so the party could be weak with those sorts of skills governed by it and could get blown out by dex save AoE damage.
If you don’t mind switching to a rogue, ranger, monk or dex based fighter you could fill out those skills to the party’s benefit. Also, it would remove the conflict with the eloquent bard for the party’s primary charisma character/negotiator. Especially as a monk, you could use evasion to dodge the dex save threat, then run up with extra movement and knock the crap out of the enemy doing it and even stun them. Very helpful.
I could play a dec focused eldritch knight ad that would still allow me to use my characters Current backstory and do what you just mentioned perfectly i think so that is a choice I can do
Take into account that Eldritch Knight is a worse spellcasting class overall than Hexblade before you make that decision. While you can maximise dex, providing both weapon and AC bonuses, your spellcasting modifier is intelligence, which will be your secondary stat. You also will not get Eldritch Blast, the absurdly versatile and high-damage cantrip Warlocks gain access to.
Hexblades, on the other hand, use charisma for both their melee attacks and their magic modifiers, so they can more freely move between magic and swordplay.
Consider also that a lot of the “you can get blown out by a fireball or other dex save spell” is a bit of an exaggeration. Positioning can mitigate these problems some, keeping your Wizard and Bard (and Warlock when against someone with large dex save spells) at range, so they cannot all be hit simultaneously.
And, perhaps most importantly, they are massively different in terms of backstory and playstyle. An Eldritch Knight is a fighter who studied and learned magic; a Warlock entered into a pact with some kind of magical superpower to gain their magics - which is something a DM can utilise as a roleplaying and storytelling device (mileage may vary on this, it can be a blast or a disaster, depending on how your DM handles). Since you mentioned backstory is important to you, that is a big consideration to take into account.
All of which is not to dissuade you from switching over to Eldritch Knight either, just to make sure you do not make a snap judgment based on advice you see online. Ultimately, it is much more important for you to play what you want to play rather than try to “optimise the party” or follow internet advice. It’s your DM’s job to balance the game to your party, so, provided they are doing their job well (or can learn on the fly since they are new), either option will work.
Also, don't be too focused on Dex. It's a good attribute to have (and I've recently had a rather long discussion pushing its strengths), but it's not the end-all, be-all attribute either.
I'm a little...perplexed why it was brought up, to be honest. It's a great attribute for the character, but it's not so good for the party. It's not like Wis that gets you perception and so helps spot traps etc, Cha that gets you persuasion and so helps with social stuff, nor is it even Int that gets you investigation and knowledge based stuff. Even Str has some party utility, being able to open doors etc. But Dex is more like Con - it helps the character be better, which then indirectly helps the party, but not the party directly. You're more looking at roles, which Dex can help with, for that - eg Sneak or Ranged. You don't normally look for a Dex quality when looking at party composition.
Still, do what's fun fr you. If you want to go Dex based, go for it. I'm just saying that's not what I'd be looking at when assessing a party composition.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Yeah I guess that is a good point I'm just new and worried about it being a bad experience for the rest of the party so im trying to make it seem as fun as possible but I guess I should just choose whatever feels best for me then :))
So thank you for the advice :)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So currently me and my friends are preparing for our first dnd campaign and I was simply wondering if this was a good team composition
Me: dhampir human, hexblade warlock
My bf: eladrin druid of dreams
Friend no1: elf(who's 3 foot) wizard of chronurgy
Friend no2: half orc paladin or redemption
Friend no3:aasaimar cleric of the Tempest
Friend no4: fairy bard of eloquence
Friend no5: half giant barbarian(undecided subclass)
The campaign is mainly fighting the undead and I was simply wondering if this was a good team comp for said campaign
First and foremost, good luck with your first campaign!
Just basing on classes and subclasses is not the easiest way of judging a party as a lot of the internal choices (such as what skills you all have trained) and playstyles can make a pretty big difference. Still, overall, you have a fair mix of characters adaptable to a wide range of situations--some heavy hitters, some folks who can do some control magic, a couple healers, and a bard to talk you out of tight spots. The one archetype that seems to be missing is a sneaky type, like a rogue or ranger, but some of those other classes can be relatively sneaky if they need to be, so that might not make or break your campaign.
The one concern I might have--the party size. Seven player characters can lead to a number of problems. The biggest problem is going to be giving everyone the opportunity to shine both in combat and out of combat. In combat, there is going to be a lot of downtime between your turns, which can grow rather dull and lead to players getting bored. Out of combat (especially if you have someone with Main Character Syndrome--a personality trait that does not really manifest until players start actually playing), it might be difficult to get folks to all feel like they are contributing, rather than being part of a crowd where a small number of players are usually in the spotlight.
You also are just going to have a problem with combat, unless your DM does something to make fights harder. 5e monsters are relatively weak, balanced against parties of four characters--and not really balanced well to begin with. With seven characters and low monster starting health, you all are likely going to tear through some monsters. Your DM needs to be able to compensate for that by drastically increasing monster difficulty--by adding hitpoints, giving them unique abilities to control the battlefield, increasing number of monsters (though this should be done with caution, since combat rounds will already be extra long, as aforestated), etc. It is going to take a while to get into the swing of things and for your DM to get a feel for how difficult combat should be, so be prepared for a bit of a learning curve.
None of that, of course, is to dissuade you from playing with a party that size--but it is something you and your friends (and especially your DM) should know before you start so you all can be prepared for some hiccups and some slower play than might otherwise be expected.
At a glance and from a purely mechanical standpoint I'd say it looks fine. You don't have a rogue so you might be weak on stealth related tasks but if the casters take a few utility spells spread out amongst them that should compensate for that (assuming your DM is wise enough to take that into account; a balanced game comes from both balanced PCs/parties and balanced encounter/challenge design from the DM). I would strongly recommend the players/characters with magic at least establish what their preferred strengths and styles are. There's a lot of potential versatility in those classes that can potentially cover a lot of bases as long as you don't have everybody assuming that somebody else is going to take care of everything. For physical combat I'm guessing the Paladin and Barbarian will be front liners, quite possibly backed up by the Warlock and Cleric, while the Bard, Druid, and Wizard mainly support from behind with magic. I would also recommend that everybody that can do so should work into their build at least one way to heal at least as an emergency measure if the other healer(s) go down ; Pally has Lay On Hands but I'd recommend the Cleric, Bard, and Druid all have at least cure wounds or healing word in their repertoire even if they intend to focus on non-healing related roles. Nothing sucks more than half the party making death saves while the three casters capable of healing magic are all one hit away from joining them as they scream "I'm not a healbot!" Because they sure ain't going to be "proactively preventing damage with offensive magic" with everybody including themselves already dead.
Firstly thank-you for the recommendation about increasing the difficulty I didn't realise that such a big size would be a problem so I'll bring that up with my dm and thr party and we should relatively be able to handle that, we're all good friends so hopefully the downtime between turns is filled with us joking a lot but thank you.
I also did think it would be hard to give certain characters a spotlight but hopefully our dm should let us each have our times to shine and most of us are massive introverts and have a hard time taking action ourselves so I doubt a main character player will come alone but I'll be sure to look out for it
And finally yeah I was discussing with the party about a lack of stealth generally but as a dhampir I can spider crawl and if I choose a variant human I can choose the shadow touched feat to turn invisible, then in later levels I might take mask of many faces to aid in thst stealth and another warlock ability to blend into shadows at will
Another part that flushmater said, while our druid is being our dedicated healer I have recommended our bard to have some added support spells, our cleric however is adamant on being a front line fighter in heavy armour as a Tempest cleric so thst may pose a problem
But still thank you for the advice :))
I think you might be a bit confused how damphir works. The lineage only allows the following:
If you replace a race with this lineage, you can keep the following elements of that race: any skill proficiencies you gained from it and any climbing, flying, or swimming speed you gained from it.
It does not allow you to retain any feats from the underlying race, so you cannot retain the "shadow touched" feat from variant human while also being a Damphir. That said, Warlocks can be built to be rather sneaky (though Dex isn't their strongest skill), so you still could fill a sneaky role if needed.
I don’t see any dexterity-based characters, so the party could be weak with those sorts of skills governed by it and could get blown out by dex save AoE damage.
If you don’t mind switching to a rogue, ranger, monk or dex based fighter you could fill out those skills to the party’s benefit. Also, it would remove the conflict with the eloquent bard for the party’s primary charisma character/negotiator. Especially as a monk, you could use evasion to dodge the dex save threat, then run up with extra movement and knock the crap out of the enemy doing it and even stun them. Very helpful.
That’s my tactical recommendation.
Oh thank you yes I was unsure about how dhampirs truly worked so apologies for that
But yes j could definitely build a dec focused warlock it's already my second highest stat so it wouldn't be hard to do that.
So thank you :)
I could play a dec focused eldritch knight ad that would still allow me to use my characters Current backstory and do what you just mentioned perfectly i think so that is a choice I can do
Take into account that Eldritch Knight is a worse spellcasting class overall than Hexblade before you make that decision. While you can maximise dex, providing both weapon and AC bonuses, your spellcasting modifier is intelligence, which will be your secondary stat. You also will not get Eldritch Blast, the absurdly versatile and high-damage cantrip Warlocks gain access to.
Hexblades, on the other hand, use charisma for both their melee attacks and their magic modifiers, so they can more freely move between magic and swordplay.
Consider also that a lot of the “you can get blown out by a fireball or other dex save spell” is a bit of an exaggeration. Positioning can mitigate these problems some, keeping your Wizard and Bard (and Warlock when against someone with large dex save spells) at range, so they cannot all be hit simultaneously.
And, perhaps most importantly, they are massively different in terms of backstory and playstyle. An Eldritch Knight is a fighter who studied and learned magic; a Warlock entered into a pact with some kind of magical superpower to gain their magics - which is something a DM can utilise as a roleplaying and storytelling device (mileage may vary on this, it can be a blast or a disaster, depending on how your DM handles). Since you mentioned backstory is important to you, that is a big consideration to take into account.
All of which is not to dissuade you from switching over to Eldritch Knight either, just to make sure you do not make a snap judgment based on advice you see online. Ultimately, it is much more important for you to play what you want to play rather than try to “optimise the party” or follow internet advice. It’s your DM’s job to balance the game to your party, so, provided they are doing their job well (or can learn on the fly since they are new), either option will work.
Also, don't be too focused on Dex. It's a good attribute to have (and I've recently had a rather long discussion pushing its strengths), but it's not the end-all, be-all attribute either.
I'm a little...perplexed why it was brought up, to be honest. It's a great attribute for the character, but it's not so good for the party. It's not like Wis that gets you perception and so helps spot traps etc, Cha that gets you persuasion and so helps with social stuff, nor is it even Int that gets you investigation and knowledge based stuff. Even Str has some party utility, being able to open doors etc. But Dex is more like Con - it helps the character be better, which then indirectly helps the party, but not the party directly. You're more looking at roles, which Dex can help with, for that - eg Sneak or Ranged. You don't normally look for a Dex quality when looking at party composition.
Still, do what's fun fr you. If you want to go Dex based, go for it. I'm just saying that's not what I'd be looking at when assessing a party composition.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Yeah I guess that is a good point I'm just new and worried about it being a bad experience for the rest of the party so im trying to make it seem as fun as possible but I guess I should just choose whatever feels best for me then :))
So thank you for the advice :)