Soon I'm going to join a group of player who already choose their characters (a paladin, a ranger and a barabrian). I'm hesitating between bard, rogue (probably arcane trickster) and warlock (tome). Which one is the best to fit this party? Or all these 3 classes are good options?
You seem to be looking for the character class that will "balance" the party. If that's the case, go bard. That will help you cover both the arcane spellcasting and roguey aspects that your party seems to be missing. It will also relieve the paladin of being the primary healer. Really though, balanced parties are somewhat overrated and you should play whatever sounds like the most fun to you.
Agreed with the above. If you're leaning towards a class - go with that one. What you want to play always triumphs over the 'best' class to play. That's the beauty of D&D - there's always an alternative solution. I once played a one-shot with a group of 3 other rogues, and we had an absolute blast, and had to really think outside the box a few times.
To answer your question; yes, all three are good. In regards to the balance of your party, there's a lot of heavy hitting martial ability, so physical damage is covered. I'd agree that a bard is probably the best class to level this out, covering the arcane spells, while ensuring a wide range of skills are covered too.
From a "balance" perspective, I'd recommend a wizard, sorcerer or warlock, where "balance" is having a warrior, scout, support and blaster in your party. Ranger can work the scout angle, both paladin and barbarian can work the warrior angle, but the paladin can also double as support. That leaves having a blaster type in your group for those times you need control opions, AoEs, counter magic, or something like Fly.
That said, I agree that the best option is the one that's the most fun to play. The game doesn't break down if you're not filled with a fighter-, rogue-, cleric-, wizard- variant party.
Is this a role-play heavy group? If so discuss with the GM on how your character would be introduced.
If the party is going to be "picking" a new member through a sort of mercenary group, then it would make sense to build a party-optimized character that fits "perfectly".
If the GM plans to introduce you as a sort of "encounter" that the party doesn't hand pick (IE you are in the bar and overhear the group talking about a quest you are also on), then I'd encourage you to pick what you want.
I think too many people try to "fill a need" in the party instead of playing what they want. This isn't an MMO where a party needs 1 tank, 1 healer, and X DPS. This is a roleplaying game and not every party has the perfect ratio of Healers to Martial to Spellcasters.
One thing that I considered suggesting initially (from a party balance POV) is a celestial warlock. That would definitely let you help with the healing load and still give you awesome blasting ability. Healing plus arcane casting. The only reason I think celestial warlock is inferior to the bard in this situation is the relative lack of skills/roguishness.
To be fair to the people trying to fill a need, its actually something that is kinda important for many. Humans tend to find that overlapping with others causes conflict and/or distress, while specializing in a niche leads to overall satisfaction, both on the individual level, and on the group level. As a species, we're generally wired to find individual niches and work as a pack. And how many times have we seen people complain that they're feeling redundant, or feel like they're not really standing out in a game?
So, for the most part, filling a need is generally going to be more fun for all involved than playing a concept that overlaps with another.
Hey guys!
Soon I'm going to join a group of player who already choose their characters (a paladin, a ranger and a barabrian). I'm hesitating between bard, rogue (probably arcane trickster) and warlock (tome). Which one is the best to fit this party? Or all these 3 classes are good options?
You seem to be looking for the character class that will "balance" the party. If that's the case, go bard. That will help you cover both the arcane spellcasting and roguey aspects that your party seems to be missing. It will also relieve the paladin of being the primary healer. Really though, balanced parties are somewhat overrated and you should play whatever sounds like the most fun to you.
Agreed with the above. If you're leaning towards a class - go with that one. What you want to play always triumphs over the 'best' class to play. That's the beauty of D&D - there's always an alternative solution. I once played a one-shot with a group of 3 other rogues, and we had an absolute blast, and had to really think outside the box a few times.
To answer your question; yes, all three are good. In regards to the balance of your party, there's a lot of heavy hitting martial ability, so physical damage is covered. I'd agree that a bard is probably the best class to level this out, covering the arcane spells, while ensuring a wide range of skills are covered too.
Thanks for the answers!
Each of these sound fun to me but I just have a hard time to decide. This is why I ask. Maybe I'll go for bard and play a charismatic roguish dude.
Go Fighter. It's the only "fighter" class missing =)
In the end, pick whatever you want to play Chequers is right, what you want for your character trumps balance.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
From a "balance" perspective, I'd recommend a wizard, sorcerer or warlock, where "balance" is having a warrior, scout, support and blaster in your party. Ranger can work the scout angle, both paladin and barbarian can work the warrior angle, but the paladin can also double as support. That leaves having a blaster type in your group for those times you need control opions, AoEs, counter magic, or something like Fly.
That said, I agree that the best option is the one that's the most fun to play. The game doesn't break down if you're not filled with a fighter-, rogue-, cleric-, wizard- variant party.
Is this a role-play heavy group? If so discuss with the GM on how your character would be introduced.
If the party is going to be "picking" a new member through a sort of mercenary group, then it would make sense to build a party-optimized character that fits "perfectly".
If the GM plans to introduce you as a sort of "encounter" that the party doesn't hand pick (IE you are in the bar and overhear the group talking about a quest you are also on), then I'd encourage you to pick what you want.
I think too many people try to "fill a need" in the party instead of playing what they want. This isn't an MMO where a party needs 1 tank, 1 healer, and X DPS. This is a roleplaying game and not every party has the perfect ratio of Healers to Martial to Spellcasters.
One thing that I considered suggesting initially (from a party balance POV) is a celestial warlock. That would definitely let you help with the healing load and still give you awesome blasting ability. Healing plus arcane casting. The only reason I think celestial warlock is inferior to the bard in this situation is the relative lack of skills/roguishness.
To be fair to the people trying to fill a need, its actually something that is kinda important for many. Humans tend to find that overlapping with others causes conflict and/or distress, while specializing in a niche leads to overall satisfaction, both on the individual level, and on the group level. As a species, we're generally wired to find individual niches and work as a pack. And how many times have we seen people complain that they're feeling redundant, or feel like they're not really standing out in a game?
So, for the most part, filling a need is generally going to be more fun for all involved than playing a concept that overlaps with another.