So when levelling up, is it good for players to try to co-ordinate what skills/spells they each take with each other in order to avoid overlapping?

It depends on how meta they want to be.  In my experience, most players have a specific build in mind for their characters, so they go with that, with any coordination that might have happened being in Session Zero when they picked their characters in the first place.

In my experience I've never coordinated with my fellow players at level up... my group tends to go out of our way to avoid having multiple characters of the same class, and it usually ends up with us tending to avoid redundancies in features, since everyone is inherently going for a different build. If we do end up with something where two characters, for example, have the same spell prepared, it's usually a pretty universally helpful spell like Cure Wounds or Fireball or something, where you're not really wasting any time by having two different characters who can do the same thing. We never really plan for comboes that could potentially be pulled off in the future... anything like that is usually figured out in-the-moment instead of planned for ahead of time.

I feel it is more important to talk to you table about spells or features that will impact their play and strategy.  Overlapping spells are not really the worst thing. Having two party members with Dimension Door can allow for clever tactics and strategy.  Or if two players have Bane, then the one with the higher initiative casts it and the other play lays a complimentary spell. 

But I do think it is important to check with you players before taking a spell that will have a direct impact on how they play. Its better to have these discussions during level up rather than learning during the game play and now you have a known spell that you will never use. 

If a certain new ability you can choose opens up tactical options for the other party members it makes sense to discuss it beforehand. Especially if the new tactical options require them to make specific choices of their own at the same time or later

We do a bit. My group has a couple sorcerers and a warlock, so we talk a little to make sure we don’t have too much overlap in spell selection. Come to think of it, though, we really only did that at low levels, now we’re at a point where it doesn’t matter much. 

Depending on how the group chooses to do it, really, during zero session.

In my last campaign, they opted for an experience point basis, and they moved at different levels based on the activity they did.  Campaign before that, it was mostly a milestone based system.

Looks like the next campaign will be a milestone based system again, so odds are good they will all move at roughly the same (although I do let them decide when to level up since that always involves some role play).

I think you're most likely to see it when you have multiple wizards, so they can copy each other's notes spell selection.

In all groups i've been either DM or player never did i saw coordinated leveling, it's always solo decisions not influenced or dictated by anyone but the player itself.

Some cases of overlap are great, for example two casters with dimension door in a party of 4 means everyone can teleport 500ft. Great for getting out of a sticky situation.

Others particularly out of combat more than one person is nearly always a waste. For example it is very rare for a second caster of teleportation circle to be useful so if on hitting level 9 if me and another pc have access to teleportation circle I would ask the other player if they plan on taking it. 

While a party can be optimised by taking completing features I have not been in a group where this is discussed formally, and things will generally come at different levels anyway. If the druid tends to concentrate on spells like moonbeam or spike growth the warlock may choose to take repelling blast or vice versa, but in my experience this tends to be after seeing what another character can do doing something that combi es with it.

I think at character creation it is good for the players to at least give an outline of their builds, this is particularly the case if one of the characters will be one that can make other features useless. It is bad enough to put expertise in thieves tools to find someone else has done the same so you have to share the lock picking, it is another to decide to take inspiring leader as a starting feat only to find a twilight cleric in the group.

So, i am going to expand on my previous answer, because there seems to be a different kind of thought kicking in.

First, I am not a Player -- strictly DM. I often play NPCs for other DMs, but that's not quite the same thig.

I took the original question to be "do they advance at the same rate". Others seem to be taking it as "do players collaborate to improve party utility".

My response to the second version is "lordy, I hope they do, but also, does it matter?"

As a DM, I don't particularly worry about it if they do or do not. As i will adjust later encounters and such to take advantage of changes and all that, for me it isn't a big deal if they do. It is one of the reasons that I shift "genre" when i shift adventures within a larger campaign -- it means changing up their builds because no build is going to be great for all situations. And I admit that since all builds have deep and abiding weaknesses, I like to use those weaknesses -- be it as individuals or as collectives (parties).

My group tends to be different in outlook, though -- they will definitely coordinate spells taken, specialties used, even class assortments, but doing so always comes secondary to their individual desires for role playing a given character. The folks who are not as big on roleplay will tend to be more willing to adjust, while those who are tend to be a little more resistant, but it is always grounded in that story they have for their own character -- not the larger campaign.

I will take those personal stories and weave them into the campaign following a zero session (or series of zero sessions, lol), but the rest is just a matter of them doing what they want -- i have known many friend groups where folks who are in close contact frequently adopt complementary capabilities, so it isn't a stretch that they would do so in a game.

One limit that I do tend to place on that as they move forward is that we role play advancement because it is a segment of the world itself -- at certain levels there are ceremonies that are done, and renown has an effect, and during the in between stuff until they reach a higher level they also need to train with or under a Master. This is one of the ways that I can give them new spells, rewards, side quests, and we always have a "montage" session. These I will often set up as 1 on 1 or related sessions, outside normal play sessions, so that there is a sense of individual development and a story they can tell to each other.

These only happen when it is 5th, 9th, 13th, or 17th level in question, so it isn't absolute for every level, and these are all key moments because they involve gaining important new skill and ability sets in my game. This also makes it more difficult to plan that way, because circumstance can often change a plan, and I admit most of my players have learned I sneak foreshadowing and hints into those sessions for the game to come, lol.

I have asked about spell selection in games with newer players just so I don't steal any of their thunder by casting their brand new spell. But in my party of veterans we generally already have ideas about what we want to take. We adjust accordingly as we figure out general tactics for our party, but we don't have specific conversations about "you take X and I'll take Y." Our wizard will sometimes give the party two or three spells they want on level up and get our input on which to take though.

Welcome to the difference between regular troops and elite units - regular troops mostly do their own thing with a bit of coordination and a fairly simple SOP. Elite units are the opposite, they not only plan out what they will do for as many different situations as they can, they practice and adjust those plans till they work smoothly with everyone knowing what the others are doing and what to do if someone goes down. Regular units (most d&d parties from the sound of it) react to changes as individuals and that can really cause problems. Elite units ( the ones that actually do coordinate both at level up and in game can be a DM’s nightmare as that coordination generally means they are functioning at at least 1 level highe and frequently 2 or 3 levels. I’ve layer in both and DMed for both and they can be worlds apart in how they play. 

Quote from Wi1dBi11 >>

Welcome to the difference between regular troops and elite units - regular troops mostly do their own thing with a bit of coordination and a fairly simple SOP. Elite units are the opposite, they not only plan out what they will do for as many different situations as they can, they practice and adjust those plans till they work smoothly with everyone knowing what the others are doing and what to do if someone goes down. Regular units (most d&d parties from the sound of it) react to changes as individuals and that can really cause problems. Elite units ( the ones that actually do coordinate both at level up and in game can be a DM’s nightmare as that coordination generally means they are functioning at at least 1 level highe and frequently 2 or 3 levels. I’ve layer in both and DMed for both and they can be worlds apart in how they play. 

LOL -- you seriously gave me flashbacks just reading that to the non stop training we did.

Absolutely correct on all points, imo.

In my group, not exactly, we all get the level up system done by ourselves until the next session.

Quote from AEDorsay >>

Quote from Wi1dBi11 >>

Welcome to the difference between regular troops and elite units - regular troops mostly do their own thing with a bit of coordination and a fairly simple SOP. Elite units are the opposite, they not only plan out what they will do for as many different situations as they can, they practice and adjust those plans till they work smoothly with everyone knowing what the others are doing and what to do if someone goes down. Regular units (most d&d parties from the sound of it) react to changes as individuals and that can really cause problems. Elite units ( the ones that actually do coordinate both at level up and in game can be a DM’s nightmare as that coordination generally means they are functioning at at least 1 level highe and frequently 2 or 3 levels. I’ve layer in both and DMed for both and they can be worlds apart in how they play. 

 

LOL -- you seriously gave me flashbacks just reading that to the non stop training we did.

Absolutely correct on all points, imo.

 First thank you - it’s always nice to be corroborated. Experienced groups that have played together for a while fall somewhere in between - their knowledge of the game and each other let them coordinate pretty well without the training even if they are mostly working on their own.