I had this question posed to me the other day by someone during some downtime in a game and it made me think. If your adventuring party of five, starting at level 1 [say staying together until level 5] could only be the same class, which class would you want your party to be? Pretty much WOTC published rules, no home brew stuff or multiclassing.
I ended up saying cleric as you can have different builds that are at least competent in a lot of different areas. Might be a bit weird with 5 holy men/women praying to different deities for divine assistance. I think some of the other classes like Druid and bard could make it work, while others like barbarians and monks would struggle. I am not confident iwith playing all the different classes, so enlighten me with your reasons :)
What class would you want your party to be?
*And yes I know everyone should pick what they want to play to get the most enjoyment out of D&D, this is more of a theoretical question
I think Barbarian or Paladin would be the most interesting ones, RP-wise. The paladins could RP as an actual holy military unit which is taking orders from the upper echelons of the Church of XXXX, and it's a reason for an entire PC party to work together as a cohesive unit for once.
Barbarians is... Well, putting 5 musclebrains with an average int score of 7 together has never been a bad idea if you want to laugh. Even better if all of them are named 'Muscles'.
I think Barbarian or Paladin would be the most interesting ones, RP-wise. The paladins could RP as an actual holy military unit which is taking orders from the upper echelons of the Church of XXXX, and it's a reason for an entire PC party to work together as a cohesive unit for once
Bard would probably be the strongest because you can specialize bards in a ton of different ways, especially with the Xanathar's colleges. Druid would be fun and shenanigans; if they all went Circle of the Moon you could have a wolf pack (hmmmm, that sounds like a one shot idea). Rogue might be fun to roleplay, assuming that they probably won't trust each other at all. That said, here are the classes I think are viable and the ones I think aren't:
Viable: Bard, Cleric? (domain diversity required), Druid, Paladin (picking different oaths), and maybe Warlock (you'd need one or two Hexblades to front line)
Not Viable: Barbarian and Fighter (no magic, poor range), Sorcerer and Wizard (no HP, might work for Wizard with some Spellblades but that's a pick after level 1), Monk (actually could probably work but no diversity at level 1), Ranger and Rogue (rely on higher levels to diversify and use important class features), and probably Warlock.
Most of this is based on level 1 survival chances. Clerics and Warlocks are at an advantage because they get some nice class features at level 1, though Warlocks aren't tanky enough to make a really defensive party (Xanathar's fixes this with Hexblade, making a solid melee combatant assuming people can get their hands on gear) Generally, I assume that casters with other benefits do well (Paladins squeak by because Lay on Hands is a life saver at level 1) whereas pure martial or pure caster classes do poorly (Druids probably shouldn't pass, but if they make it to level 2 getting a bunch of Circle of the Moon druids would be pretty strong at level). Fighters can probably hold on with Eldritch Knights (second wind give them good durability and they get both Counterspell and Dispell Magic, so they can at least counter casters) whereas Barbarians have terrible mental saves, so outside of rage they can simply be controlled and dominated (and psychic damage spells that do stuns or compel movement like Tasha's Hideous Laughter are going to chew through them). Wizards can definitely manage once they get spell schools, and Sorcerer might once they have health pools (again, your mileage may vary, there are some scarily tanky draconic sorcerers), but I have seen Wizards get one hit KO'ed at level 1 by a single shot, so level 1 would be the problem, especially since they have so few spell slots at level 1. Monks are decent, but I don't think they can pull off level 1 without some diversity that they just don't have. Rangers are just very unlikely to do much damage at level 1, and without spells they're locked into either melee combat, where they are not quite durable enough to excel, or ranged combat with very little damage per turn. Rogues might actually be pretty viable with sneak attack, but that assumes ideal conditions (swarming enemies together so everyone gets sneak attack) and having enough melee rogues survive to provide sneak attack to the others. Of course, these are all assuming that these characters start at level 1 and the DM isn't handholding, so depending on how cruel or generous your DM is and how levels are earned, most of these classes can perform alright if the party uses diverse backgrounds to handle skill versatility and avoids massive threats before level 2/3.
I feel with classes like Barbarian and Paladin you would need the right party of players. Many players would be put off by the restriction to a point that it would negatively affect the campaign. Running with a group that was in for it I think Druid would be the most interested, but you are less likely to find a group on board for that.
With classes where you'll get a group on board easily Monk or Rogue would suit players in my experience, but a lack of versatility in the party would limit the campaign to suit the party.
The best bet would be Bards. People would be on board and they enjoy a versatility that would allow people to specialize in areas to make the party more effective.
I voted Wizard. I see them as more versatile than the general view. They are popular and I think the players would have a light hearted "well we're all going to die anyway" view then as they grow in versatility and do really well, I see the players gaining an affection for a surprisingly effective party.
Any class would work if your group plays them intelligently. Every class has strengths and weaknesses, the key is for the group to work together to maximize the class’s strengths and minimize the class’s weaknesses in order to survive until 3rd level. Once the party hits 3rd level they get enough class abilities to overcome the class’s weaknesses much easier.
I would love to play a campaign, either as the DM or as a player, where the entire party knew each other for at least 5-10 years prior to the start of the campaign. Everyone could be members of a thieves guild, the city watch, or a mercenary band. Or everyone could have grown up together inthe same village, town, or neighborhood in a big city. Or everyone could be crew members on a ship. Or anything else that’s creative. That would tend to result in most of the group being the same class, but not the entire group.
I would say 5 Fighters will do very well in level range 1-5. They can have a ranged or melee builds. Some self healing due to second wind. Some tactical and face capabilities once they gain their archetype at 3rd level. Good health, good damage, good armor class, etc.
I would actually go with Fighter myself, for a very simple reason. I think that would be the easiest for the GM on creating a story where this group is working together - maybe a group of soldiers or mercs handling a goblin encampment, perhaps a part of a convoy, perhaps stuck in a Colosseum. Its the most intuitive for me to reason why my fighter would be hanging out with three or four other fighters of different training styles. After Fighter, I'd have to go with a group of all Rogues (all part of the same criminal organization, with different specialized roles), Bards (traveling troupe with different performance styles as Colleges) or Wizards (wizard school!)
Most every other class will have some difficulty working together, I think - paladins and monks, with their varied Oaths and Paths, would hail from different organizations / monasteries, often with clashing styles and beliefs. Barbarians come across differently depending on the Path - dwarven gutbusters are not naturally inclined to being alongside other Paths such as zealots or Storm Heralds, and most tribal groups tend to be very ethnic / background homogeneous; even if its all one class, I'd like to have a variety of subclasses, races and backgrounds. Rangers might join up with druids or other ranger orders, but most of the time Rangers tend to be working alone than within a group. Clerics and druid shave the same issue as paladins and monks; they have different religions or Circles that would more likely clash than work well together in a group. Warlocks and Sorcerers tend to be individuals, and don't intuitively lend themselves to organizations; I suppose all warlocks could spread themselves out if they had a really versatile Patron, but that's tricky to me.
I'll be the "that guy" to throw out the wild-card class: MYSTICS!
A party of mystics could potentially be very squishy early on as they are basically warlocks with potential of shielding with Psi Points and the right Disciplines. A few levels in, though, and they get very potent.
-Immortals become very formidable tanks able to soak up and regenerate hp. Shifting focus, they can greatly enhance their damage output.
-Avatars make great battlefield controllers. They have a number of aura-like abilities that can enrage or inhibit enemies, bolster allies, and manipulate the playing field a bit.
-Soul Knives get limited Discipline access, but can make great melee strikers. Paired with hindering and movement abilities (Celerity, Nomadic Step, Mastery of Light and Dark), they becomes incredible assassins/ambushers
-Nomads are very flexible and highly-mobile (Nomadic Step). They have great scouting and out-of-combat utility as well (Nomadic Mind)
-Awakened use a lot of Psychic damage and doubles as crowd-controllers by melting brains or throwing others into frenzies
-Wu Jen gains access to almost all elemental damage and can prepare extra resistances during rests. They also gain access to spells and can convert Psi points to spel slots up to lvl 5. Their elemental Disciplines eventually can summon full Elementals. Paired with a later feature that allows them to effectively focus on multiple Concentration Disciplines, this significantly boosts their power.
Mystics also gain access to telepathy at lvl 2, so they can always be in secret contact. They gain a self-healing ability when they spend Psi Points (short rest). Finally, thry can change their WIS save proficiency to another stat after a rest. It's a very versatile class that dabbles in a little of everything without becoming a powerhouse in anything. Make a team of them, and each can account for the shortfalls of another.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Characters:
Grishkar Darkmoor, Necromancer of Nerull the Despiser Kelvin Rabbitfoot, Diviner, con artist, always hunting for a good sale Bründir Halfshield, Valor Bard, three-time Sheercleft Drinking Competition Champion, Hometown hero
Warlock, rogues or clerics would do well. With both warlocks and clerics, you can have healing, melee and range all covered. As for rogues, well 5 rogues pulling off some Ocean's 11 style heists just sounds like fun.
I would think just about any class could work as the sub-class system actually leaves a lot of room for diversity even within a single class (though I'd personally want to use more than just the players guide options for more of that diversity). I would expect it would require a more heavily stylized campaign tailored to the group's class than your typical campaign with diverse classes would be, though could still be quite fun to do so.
I think Barbarian or Paladin would be the most interesting ones, RP-wise. The paladins could RP as an actual holy military unit which is taking orders from the upper echelons of the Church of XXXX, and it's a reason for an entire PC party to work together as a cohesive unit for once.
Barbarians is... Well, putting 5 musclebrains with an average int score of 7 together has never been a bad idea if you want to laugh. Even better if all of them are named 'Muscles'.
I love this idea, and for the paladins it would be much easier to deal with five lawful good narcissists than one and the rest chaotic etc.
Warlock, rogues or clerics would do well. With both warlocks and clerics, you can have healing, melee and range all covered. As for rogues, well 5 rogues pulling off some Ocean's 11 style heists just sounds like fun.
This is what I was thinking! A group of rogues make for a tiny thieves guild all on their own. That can make for some incredibly cool heist plots!
Others have mentioned bard. A 5-person party of bards can be a band! I can't see a downside to the classic touring band dynamic. Really can't. That's wild and the campaign would be wild.
Functionally, I would go for cleric or paladin. I made a Dragonborn battle cleric who had a STR of 19 after bonuses, and could put all their spell slots into healing. I have a Drow paladin who works much the same way, but with survival/dexterity that made him a lowkey skill money plus helpful healing spells. Let me tell you, healing can come in handy in social situations, too. There are a lot of people with small injuries or sicknesses out in the world who are mighty endeared to upstanding, charismatic healers. Aforementioned Dragonborn healed a broken leg someone got fighting the bandits he was sending us out to fight, and it earned us a much better reward after. The religion aspects are also interesting, obviously, raw abilities and functionality aside. Interfaith retreat, anyone? :P Various orders sending a representative to a meeting/study/conference/event could be a good hook.
I remember back during Vanilla World of Warcraft me and 4 other paladins would always group up and we were untouchable. So I would definitely vote for five paladins. A band of Holy knights is an unstoppable force of Good. :D
I may just have to plan a one shot campaign around this now. Thanks for posting this topic! :)
I feel like Bards would be the best, not because I play a bard a lot, but because of how versatile they are. A group of bards with the spell, thunderwave can take on large hordes of monsters, and with melee or spellcasting focusing, bards are perfect for single-class parties. If you had all barbarians....... you can guess where that would go........
A few years back my group and I played all bards(3.5 edition) Pretty much a rock band touring Toril with many misadventures. Good times for sure. 5E bards are probably best iteration of the class.
Paladins would be nearly unstoppable with all the smites available to the party.
I feel like Fighter or Rogue would provide the most variety. With Fighter, you could have an archer, a commander, a caster, a courtier and a knight. That feels more diversified than the various Wizards or Clerics at the conceptual level. Mechanically, you'll suffer without healing, horde and skill coverage. For skills, I'd say go with Rogue rather than Bard. You have a trickster, a mastermind/inquisitive, a scout, a swashbuckler and an assassin/thief for that conceptual variety that Bards don't have as much of (Swords/Valor, Glamour/Lore and Whispers). For myself, I'd rather have conceptual diversity over mechanical.
That said, I went with Monk for that Final Fantasy I nostalgia trip. Not that bad with conceptual diversity either, it'd fit a four-man team. Which would actually be best for that nostalgia trip! Drunken Master/Open Hand, Kensei, Long Death, Four Elements/Sun Soul.
Edit: An honest answer though is that everybody could take any one Class/Subclass combo and make a full team of it, and as long as they take different backgrounds they could all be very different characters at the conceptual stage.
I had this question posed to me the other day by someone during some downtime in a game and it made me think. If your adventuring party of five, starting at level 1 [say staying together until level 5] could only be the same class, which class would you want your party to be? Pretty much WOTC published rules, no home brew stuff or multiclassing.
I ended up saying cleric as you can have different builds that are at least competent in a lot of different areas. Might be a bit weird with 5 holy men/women praying to different deities for divine assistance. I think some of the other classes like Druid and bard could make it work, while others like barbarians and monks would struggle. I am not confident iwith playing all the different classes, so enlighten me with your reasons :)
What class would you want your party to be?
*And yes I know everyone should pick what they want to play to get the most enjoyment out of D&D, this is more of a theoretical question
I went with Bard, they can be good at melee, ranged, healing, support and social. A party of bards would be really dangerous.
She/Her College Student Player and Dungeon Master
I think Barbarian or Paladin would be the most interesting ones, RP-wise. The paladins could RP as an actual holy military unit which is taking orders from the upper echelons of the Church of XXXX, and it's a reason for an entire PC party to work together as a cohesive unit for once.
Barbarians is... Well, putting 5 musclebrains with an average int score of 7 together has never been a bad idea if you want to laugh. Even better if all of them are named 'Muscles'.
Bard would probably be the strongest because you can specialize bards in a ton of different ways, especially with the Xanathar's colleges. Druid would be fun and shenanigans; if they all went Circle of the Moon you could have a wolf pack (hmmmm, that sounds like a one shot idea). Rogue might be fun to roleplay, assuming that they probably won't trust each other at all. That said, here are the classes I think are viable and the ones I think aren't:
Viable: Bard, Cleric? (domain diversity required), Druid, Paladin (picking different oaths), and maybe Warlock (you'd need one or two Hexblades to front line)
Not Viable: Barbarian and Fighter (no magic, poor range), Sorcerer and Wizard (no HP, might work for Wizard with some Spellblades but that's a pick after level 1), Monk (actually could probably work but no diversity at level 1), Ranger and Rogue (rely on higher levels to diversify and use important class features), and probably Warlock.
Most of this is based on level 1 survival chances. Clerics and Warlocks are at an advantage because they get some nice class features at level 1, though Warlocks aren't tanky enough to make a really defensive party (Xanathar's fixes this with Hexblade, making a solid melee combatant assuming people can get their hands on gear) Generally, I assume that casters with other benefits do well (Paladins squeak by because Lay on Hands is a life saver at level 1) whereas pure martial or pure caster classes do poorly (Druids probably shouldn't pass, but if they make it to level 2 getting a bunch of Circle of the Moon druids would be pretty strong at level). Fighters can probably hold on with Eldritch Knights (second wind give them good durability and they get both Counterspell and Dispell Magic, so they can at least counter casters) whereas Barbarians have terrible mental saves, so outside of rage they can simply be controlled and dominated (and psychic damage spells that do stuns or compel movement like Tasha's Hideous Laughter are going to chew through them). Wizards can definitely manage once they get spell schools, and Sorcerer might once they have health pools (again, your mileage may vary, there are some scarily tanky draconic sorcerers), but I have seen Wizards get one hit KO'ed at level 1 by a single shot, so level 1 would be the problem, especially since they have so few spell slots at level 1. Monks are decent, but I don't think they can pull off level 1 without some diversity that they just don't have. Rangers are just very unlikely to do much damage at level 1, and without spells they're locked into either melee combat, where they are not quite durable enough to excel, or ranged combat with very little damage per turn. Rogues might actually be pretty viable with sneak attack, but that assumes ideal conditions (swarming enemies together so everyone gets sneak attack) and having enough melee rogues survive to provide sneak attack to the others. Of course, these are all assuming that these characters start at level 1 and the DM isn't handholding, so depending on how cruel or generous your DM is and how levels are earned, most of these classes can perform alright if the party uses diverse backgrounds to handle skill versatility and avoids massive threats before level 2/3.
I feel with classes like Barbarian and Paladin you would need the right party of players. Many players would be put off by the restriction to a point that it would negatively affect the campaign. Running with a group that was in for it I think Druid would be the most interested, but you are less likely to find a group on board for that.
With classes where you'll get a group on board easily Monk or Rogue would suit players in my experience, but a lack of versatility in the party would limit the campaign to suit the party.
The best bet would be Bards. People would be on board and they enjoy a versatility that would allow people to specialize in areas to make the party more effective.
I voted Wizard. I see them as more versatile than the general view. They are popular and I think the players would have a light hearted "well we're all going to die anyway" view then as they grow in versatility and do really well, I see the players gaining an affection for a surprisingly effective party.
Extended Signature
Any class would work if your group plays them intelligently. Every class has strengths and weaknesses, the key is for the group to work together to maximize the class’s strengths and minimize the class’s weaknesses in order to survive until 3rd level. Once the party hits 3rd level they get enough class abilities to overcome the class’s weaknesses much easier.
I would love to play a campaign, either as the DM or as a player, where the entire party knew each other for at least 5-10 years prior to the start of the campaign. Everyone could be members of a thieves guild, the city watch, or a mercenary band. Or everyone could have grown up together inthe same village, town, or neighborhood in a big city. Or everyone could be crew members on a ship. Or anything else that’s creative. That would tend to result in most of the group being the same class, but not the entire group.
Professional computer geek
I would say 5 Fighters will do very well in level range 1-5. They can have a ranged or melee builds. Some self healing due to second wind. Some tactical and face capabilities once they gain their archetype at 3rd level. Good health, good damage, good armor class, etc.
I would actually go with Fighter myself, for a very simple reason. I think that would be the easiest for the GM on creating a story where this group is working together - maybe a group of soldiers or mercs handling a goblin encampment, perhaps a part of a convoy, perhaps stuck in a Colosseum. Its the most intuitive for me to reason why my fighter would be hanging out with three or four other fighters of different training styles. After Fighter, I'd have to go with a group of all Rogues (all part of the same criminal organization, with different specialized roles), Bards (traveling troupe with different performance styles as Colleges) or Wizards (wizard school!)
Most every other class will have some difficulty working together, I think - paladins and monks, with their varied Oaths and Paths, would hail from different organizations / monasteries, often with clashing styles and beliefs. Barbarians come across differently depending on the Path - dwarven gutbusters are not naturally inclined to being alongside other Paths such as zealots or Storm Heralds, and most tribal groups tend to be very ethnic / background homogeneous; even if its all one class, I'd like to have a variety of subclasses, races and backgrounds. Rangers might join up with druids or other ranger orders, but most of the time Rangers tend to be working alone than within a group. Clerics and druid shave the same issue as paladins and monks; they have different religions or Circles that would more likely clash than work well together in a group. Warlocks and Sorcerers tend to be individuals, and don't intuitively lend themselves to organizations; I suppose all warlocks could spread themselves out if they had a really versatile Patron, but that's tricky to me.
I'll be the "that guy" to throw out the wild-card class: MYSTICS!
A party of mystics could potentially be very squishy early on as they are basically warlocks with potential of shielding with Psi Points and the right Disciplines. A few levels in, though, and they get very potent.
-Immortals become very formidable tanks able to soak up and regenerate hp. Shifting focus, they can greatly enhance their damage output.
-Avatars make great battlefield controllers. They have a number of aura-like abilities that can enrage or inhibit enemies, bolster allies, and manipulate the playing field a bit.
-Soul Knives get limited Discipline access, but can make great melee strikers. Paired with hindering and movement abilities (Celerity, Nomadic Step, Mastery of Light and Dark), they becomes incredible assassins/ambushers
-Nomads are very flexible and highly-mobile (Nomadic Step). They have great scouting and out-of-combat utility as well (Nomadic Mind)
-Awakened use a lot of Psychic damage and doubles as crowd-controllers by melting brains or throwing others into frenzies
-Wu Jen gains access to almost all elemental damage and can prepare extra resistances during rests. They also gain access to spells and can convert Psi points to spel slots up to lvl 5. Their elemental Disciplines eventually can summon full Elementals. Paired with a later feature that allows them to effectively focus on multiple Concentration Disciplines, this significantly boosts their power.
Mystics also gain access to telepathy at lvl 2, so they can always be in secret contact. They gain a self-healing ability when they spend Psi Points (short rest). Finally, thry can change their WIS save proficiency to another stat after a rest. It's a very versatile class that dabbles in a little of everything without becoming a powerhouse in anything. Make a team of them, and each can account for the shortfalls of another.
Characters:
Grishkar Darkmoor, Necromancer of Nerull the Despiser
Kelvin Rabbitfoot, Diviner, con artist, always hunting for a good sale
Bründir Halfshield, Valor Bard, three-time Sheercleft Drinking Competition Champion, Hometown hero
Warlock, rogues or clerics would do well. With both warlocks and clerics, you can have healing, melee and range all covered. As for rogues, well 5 rogues pulling off some Ocean's 11 style heists just sounds like fun.
I would think just about any class could work as the sub-class system actually leaves a lot of room for diversity even within a single class (though I'd personally want to use more than just the players guide options for more of that diversity).
I would expect it would require a more heavily stylized campaign tailored to the group's class than your typical campaign with diverse classes would be, though could still be quite fun to do so.
- Loswaith
*avatar by @ZomgDae on Twitter*
I remember back during Vanilla World of Warcraft me and 4 other paladins would always group up and we were untouchable. So I would definitely vote for five paladins. A band of Holy knights is an unstoppable force of Good. :D
I may just have to plan a one shot campaign around this now. Thanks for posting this topic! :)
"Lawful Good does not always mean Lawful Nice."
I feel like Bards would be the best, not because I play a bard a lot, but because of how versatile they are. A group of bards with the spell, thunderwave can take on large hordes of monsters, and with melee or spellcasting focusing, bards are perfect for single-class parties. If you had all barbarians....... you can guess where that would go........
it's been a long time...
A few years back my group and I played all bards(3.5 edition) Pretty much a rock band touring Toril with many misadventures. Good times for sure. 5E bards are probably best iteration of the class.
Paladins would be nearly unstoppable with all the smites available to the party.
I feel like Fighter or Rogue would provide the most variety. With Fighter, you could have an archer, a commander, a caster, a courtier and a knight. That feels more diversified than the various Wizards or Clerics at the conceptual level. Mechanically, you'll suffer without healing, horde and skill coverage. For skills, I'd say go with Rogue rather than Bard. You have a trickster, a mastermind/inquisitive, a scout, a swashbuckler and an assassin/thief for that conceptual variety that Bards don't have as much of (Swords/Valor, Glamour/Lore and Whispers). For myself, I'd rather have conceptual diversity over mechanical.
That said, I went with Monk for that Final Fantasy I nostalgia trip. Not that bad with conceptual diversity either, it'd fit a four-man team. Which would actually be best for that nostalgia trip! Drunken Master/Open Hand, Kensei, Long Death, Four Elements/Sun Soul.
Edit: An honest answer though is that everybody could take any one Class/Subclass combo and make a full team of it, and as long as they take different backgrounds they could all be very different characters at the conceptual stage.
Almost everybody wants to be a traveling band. Love it
I know what you're thinking: "In that flurry of blows, did he use all his ki points, or save one?" Well, are ya feeling lucky, punk?
An all paladin/cleric holy crusade campaign would be insanely fun, the Out of the Abyss campaign could get pretty crazy!