Disclaimer: We obviously aren't going to force any players to play something they don't want.
I'm just curious to see what sort of suggestions you all would have for this scenario: Starting this weekend we'll be playing some an ongoing game (not sure if DM plans on making it it mini campaign or a full campaign). Three of the five players are pretty experienced, two are either new or haven't played in a couple years. The three who are experienced have already chosen their characters, see below. My question is - how would you round out this group? Lvl 5
1. Light Domain Cleric - Variant Human (not sure what feat)
2. Totem Barbarian (Bear)- Variant Human (tough feat)
3. Symbiote Warlock Pact of the Blade (homebrew) - Variant Human (pole arm master feat)
Protection based Fighter is my first thought, the Barbarian will be pretty tanky, and the Light Domain cleric is going to be armored up and able to do some protection as well, but with new players I find Fighters are an easy way to get them in the door, and having a bit of extra protection to stand in front of the pole arm wielding Warlock might not be bad synergy.
My other thought though would be some sort of Rogue for Stealth, or a Circle of the Dreams Druid to add to healing. For some reason Newcomers to my sessions always want to play Druids, not sure why this is. But the Druid would add some extra healing, which if spent on the Bear Totem Barbarian basically counts as double healing due to all their resistances halving damage.
The party is pretty balanced with just those three. I'd guess that's why the experienced players chose them. So really anything the newer players want to play would be fine. I'd probably pay more attention to what proficiency everyone has to make sure you have a good range of skills to meet any challenges that require checks. Bards are always good at filling gaps in that arena.
Depending on how inexperienced the players are, a champion fighter can be a good choice. It doesn’t have a lot of things to remember so it can be a good one for new players. Thief rogue is also fairly simple (if I’m remembering it right) once they understand disengage, and that party can probably use someone to pick the locks. The other consideration is how interested are the older players and DM in teaching the game. If they are willing to be patient and helpful, the new people can really play anything.
Protection based Fighter is my first thought, the Barbarian will be pretty tanky, and the Light Domain cleric is going to be armored up and able to do some protection as well, but with new players I find Fighters are an easy way to get them in the door, and having a bit of extra protection to stand in front of the pole arm wielding Warlock might not be bad synergy.
My other thought though would be some sort of Rogue for Stealth, or a Circle of the Dreams Druid to add to healing. For some reason Newcomers to my sessions always want to play Druids, not sure why this is. But the Druid would add some extra healing, which if spent on the Bear Totem Barbarian basically counts as double healing due to all their resistances halving damage.
One of the new players played a Druid in a one shot we played last week - I don't want to sway anyone away from Druid, but I know they are a lot to deal with mechanically and that can be overwhelming. Even I haven't touched a Druid yet because of having to keep track of the beast shapes plus spells. Fighter and Rogue or Fighter Ranger is what one of the players was recommending.
The party is pretty balanced with just those three. I'd guess that's why the experienced players chose them. So really anything the newer players want to play would be fine. I'd probably pay more attention to what proficiency everyone has to make sure you have a good range of skills to meet any challenges that require checks. Bards are always good at filling gaps in that arena.
This is a good point and something I hadn't thought of yet. Since I'm playing the Barbarian I hadn't really thought of proficiency. I do believe our Warlock will likely play our Face, and I'd be surprised if the Cleric wasn't super proficient in Religion, History and Nature. I'll have to find out. Thanks for pointing that out.
Protection based Fighter is my first thought, the Barbarian will be pretty tanky, and the Light Domain cleric is going to be armored up and able to do some protection as well, but with new players I find Fighters are an easy way to get them in the door, and having a bit of extra protection to stand in front of the pole arm wielding Warlock might not be bad synergy.
My other thought though would be some sort of Rogue for Stealth, or a Circle of the Dreams Druid to add to healing. For some reason Newcomers to my sessions always want to play Druids, not sure why this is. But the Druid would add some extra healing, which if spent on the Bear Totem Barbarian basically counts as double healing due to all their resistances halving damage.
One of the new players played a Druid in a one shot we played last week - I don't want to sway anyone away from Druid, but I know they are a lot to deal with mechanically and that can be overwhelming. Even I haven't touched a Druid yet because of having to keep track of the beast shapes plus spells. Fighter and Rogue or Fighter Ranger is what one of the players was recommending.
The party is pretty balanced with just those three. I'd guess that's why the experienced players chose them. So really anything the newer players want to play would be fine. I'd probably pay more attention to what proficiency everyone has to make sure you have a good range of skills to meet any challenges that require checks. Bards are always good at filling gaps in that arena.
This is a good point and something I hadn't thought of yet. Since I'm playing the Barbarian I hadn't really thought of proficiency. I do believe our Warlock will likely play our Face, and I'd be surprised if the Cleric wasn't super proficient in Religion, History and Nature. I'll have to find out. Thanks for pointing that out.
I was initially thinking Bard or rogue for the skill checks. Rogue is a little simpler since there aren't spells if they don't go arcane trickster. Scout seems like a good bet for the ranged version and swashbuckler for the melee. Bard would be good for the skills if they want to figure out spell casting, but I don't have any suggestions for subclass on that one (not enough experience with them to recall the complication level).
The other player, I'll agree with Champion Fighter for lack of complexity, Cavalier for a sturdier "protection" style (don't think it's necessary, but couldn't hurt), or a Paladin if they want to figure magic out a little while boosting healing and potentially keeping it a little simpler since their spell slots go to smites more than spells limiting the impact of bad spell list for the day (plus prepared caster meaning that a bad list doesn't require the DM to intercede to change out half the spells if they are bad. It's built in.)
The party is pretty balanced with just those three. I'd guess that's why the experienced players chose them. So really anything the newer players want to play would be fine. I'd probably pay more attention to what proficiency everyone has to make sure you have a good range of skills to meet any challenges that require checks. Bards are always good at filling gaps in that arena.
It's not balanced. It's got three melee, no ranged. It's balanced in that you have a Charisma face character (Warlock), a Strength character (Barbarian), and a Wisdom Character (Cleric). But it's not balanced in the ranged vs melee composition, which is important.
I would suggest a ranged Rogue (a ranged Ranger would also work, but Ranger is probably the weakest class, so I wouldn't recommend a ranger). You could also do a Fighter archer, but for a stealthy scout, I think Rogue is better. It also doesn't have any high intelligence characters, so I would recommend a Wizard to give a second ranged character.
You already have the Warlock for Charisma, the Barbarian for Strength, the Cleric for Wisdom. I would add a Rogue for Dexterity and a Wizard for intelligence, and to give two ranged damage dealers to complement the three melee damage dealers that you already have.
Rogue and Wizard are a couple of very accessible classes for new characters, and are very popular styles of play.
The party is pretty balanced with just those three. I'd guess that's why the experienced players chose them. So really anything the newer players want to play would be fine. I'd probably pay more attention to what proficiency everyone has to make sure you have a good range of skills to meet any challenges that require checks. Bards are always good at filling gaps in that arena.
It's not balanced. It's got three melee, no ranged. It's balanced in that you have a Charisma face character (Warlock), a Strength character (Barbarian), and a Wisdom Character (Cleric). But it's not balanced in the ranged vs melee composition, which is important.
I would suggest a ranged Rogue (a ranged Ranger would also work, but Ranger is probably the weakest class, so I wouldn't recommend a ranger). You could also do a Fighter archer, but for a stealthy scout, I think Rogue is better. It also doesn't have any high intelligence characters, so I would recommend a Wizard to give a second ranged character.
You already have the Warlock for Charisma, the Barbarian for Strength, the Cleric for Wisdom. I would add a Rogue for Dexterity and a Wizard for intelligence, and to give two ranged damage dealers to complement the three melee damage dealers that you already have.
Rogue and Wizard are a couple of very accessible classes for new characters, and are very popular styles of play.
You do realize the cleric is a light cleric? That seems to be more of a blaster domain than several other clerics I've seen. Still, I won't fault you for suggesting rogue and wizard. My only concern with wizard would be the sheer number of spell choices that would have to be made for a new player.
The party is pretty balanced with just those three. I'd guess that's why the experienced players chose them. So really anything the newer players want to play would be fine. I'd probably pay more attention to what proficiency everyone has to make sure you have a good range of skills to meet any challenges that require checks. Bards are always good at filling gaps in that arena.
It's not balanced. It's got three melee, no ranged. It's balanced in that you have a Charisma face character (Warlock), a Strength character (Barbarian), and a Wisdom Character (Cleric). But it's not balanced in the ranged vs melee composition, which is important.
I would suggest a ranged Rogue (a ranged Ranger would also work, but Ranger is probably the weakest class, so I wouldn't recommend a ranger). You could also do a Fighter archer, but for a stealthy scout, I think Rogue is better. It also doesn't have any high intelligence characters, so I would recommend a Wizard to give a second ranged character.
You already have the Warlock for Charisma, the Barbarian for Strength, the Cleric for Wisdom. I would add a Rogue for Dexterity and a Wizard for intelligence, and to give two ranged damage dealers to complement the three melee damage dealers that you already have.
Rogue and Wizard are a couple of very accessible classes for new characters, and are very popular styles of play.
You do realize the cleric is a light cleric? That seems to be more of a blaster domain than several other clerics I've seen. Still, I won't fault you for suggesting rogue and wizard. My only concern with wizard would be the sheer number of spell choices that would have to be made for a new player.
Clerics don't get good attack cantrips and they get to use shields. And many of their abilities require them to be close to the enemy, such as Spirit Guardians, and the Light Domain's level 1 ability Warding Flare, and their channel divinity.
But you're right, they don't get any proficiencies with martial weapons and they get potent spellcasting at level 8.
So how does that work with Spirit Guardians? Does a Light Cleric just not use that spell?
The party is pretty balanced with just those three. I'd guess that's why the experienced players chose them. So really anything the newer players want to play would be fine. I'd probably pay more attention to what proficiency everyone has to make sure you have a good range of skills to meet any challenges that require checks. Bards are always good at filling gaps in that arena.
It's not balanced. It's got three melee, no ranged. It's balanced in that you have a Charisma face character (Warlock), a Strength character (Barbarian), and a Wisdom Character (Cleric). But it's not balanced in the ranged vs melee composition, which is important.
I would suggest a ranged Rogue (a ranged Ranger would also work, but Ranger is probably the weakest class, so I wouldn't recommend a ranger). You could also do a Fighter archer, but for a stealthy scout, I think Rogue is better. It also doesn't have any high intelligence characters, so I would recommend a Wizard to give a second ranged character.
You already have the Warlock for Charisma, the Barbarian for Strength, the Cleric for Wisdom. I would add a Rogue for Dexterity and a Wizard for intelligence, and to give two ranged damage dealers to complement the three melee damage dealers that you already have.
Rogue and Wizard are a couple of very accessible classes for new characters, and are very popular styles of play.
You do realize the cleric is a light cleric? That seems to be more of a blaster domain than several other clerics I've seen. Still, I won't fault you for suggesting rogue and wizard. My only concern with wizard would be the sheer number of spell choices that would have to be made for a new player.
Clerics don't get good attack cantrips and they get to use shields. And many of their abilities require them to be close to the enemy, such as Spirit Guardians, and the Light Domain's level 1 ability Warding Flare, and their channel divinity.
But you're right, they don't get any proficiencies with martial weapons and they get potent spellcasting at level 8.
So how does that work with Spirit Guardians? Does a Light Cleric just not use that spell?
Warding Flare and the Channel Divinity are both 30 ft. Spirit Guardians does goes out to 15 ft. While neither of those are candidates for a long range blaster, they do work well for someone who wants to interpose their presence on a choke point and still peg creatures that are a little more distant. Clerics get Sacred Flame (60 ft and no benefit from cover on the save) and Toll the Dead (also 60 ft and deals extra damage if the target is already missing HP) which aren't spectacular for range but will still serve for a class that doesn't mind being up close (shield, medium armor, d8 hit dice). The fact that both force saves instead of making spell attacks also means that they don't suffer disadvantage when cast within melee range of a hostile creature. Clearly, the intent was for a more ranged option than something like Life, War, or Tempest. I will grant you that Clerics aren't meant to be sitting at the back of the battle sniping people but the always prepared list does give a few more long range options to help (Scorching Ray 120 ft and Fireball 150 ft). Plus, the interaction of Light and the bolts from a crossbow, light (80 ft/320 ft with disadvantage) means that even an errant shot could provide significant value by lighting an area for all to see.
In that case, I stick by my suggestion of Rogue and Wizard, but it makes it more reasonable for the Rogue to be a melee Rogue (or a hybrid that uses both melee and ranged, since there's no real penalty for this), instead of wanting him to be ranged.
Having someone with expertise in stealth and expertise in thieves' tools is so useful to a party. And it's the type of thing that many newcomers love to do with their first character. My first character was in fact a Rogue.
Wizard is a bit of a challenge in that they don't have access to their entire spell list when choosing what spells to prepare, but I don't think it's too hard for a new player. Especially if they're given the encouragement to choose some ritual spells. I certainly do think it's an easier spellcaster to learn than Druid, Sorcerer, and Warlock. It's probably easier than Bard, too. Cleric is probably the easiest full spellcaster to learn, but I think Wizard is number two (and this party already has a Cleric).
The Dungeon Dudes did a video on YouTube not that long ago talking about the best class for a new player, it's worth watching their video (and it's an added bonus that Rogue and Wizard are two of the classes they choose along with Fighter, Barbarian, and Cleric).
A great thing about Rogue and Wizard is that these players become the automatic choices in this party to scout ahead or to lead an investigation. It's great to have a reason to shove a new player into the spotlight and say "here, this is your character's specialty, you lead this."
I would definitely second the opinion that the party is lacking in ranged engagement, and while both the Warlock and the Cleric do have spell power available to them, neither of them are dedicated to that (Warlocks are weird, and this one is Blade -- Light Domain cleric is more short range AoE focused with disruption, rather than true blasting). There are a few ways that either of those roles could be filled.
If you are wanting just a little more frontline capability, perhaps the Artificer deserves a look, specifically the UA Armorer subclass. The power armor features actually look really interesting, Guardian mode making it a melee roadblocker, while Infiltrator mode gives a special ranged attack, more mobility, and stealthiness. And all of this comes with access to a high INT (something your party currently lacks) and INT based spellcasting.
As for ranged attacking options, there's plenty of room to work with in that department. Rogue Scout, playing a DEX Fighter, even Bard has some interesting possibilities. A lot of people look down on Kensei Monks, but they get Longbows as their special version of a Monk Weapon, which means they benefit from your Martial Arts die at higher levels, and are eligible for most of your class features.
Disclaimer: We obviously aren't going to force any players to play something they don't want.
I'm just curious to see what sort of suggestions you all would have for this scenario: Starting this weekend we'll be playing some an ongoing game (not sure if DM plans on making it it mini campaign or a full campaign). Three of the five players are pretty experienced, two are either new or haven't played in a couple years. The three who are experienced have already chosen their characters, see below. My question is - how would you round out this group? Lvl 5
1. Light Domain Cleric - Variant Human (not sure what feat)
2. Totem Barbarian (Bear)- Variant Human (tough feat)
3. Symbiote Warlock Pact of the Blade (homebrew) - Variant Human (pole arm master feat)
Well.... first inspection. The 3 experienced people seem to be more or less powergame featuring for combat usage.
so to round it out. I’d make a skill monkey character, powergamey or not, and be the non-combat person.
2nd inspection add on: there is no balance outside of combat. And for combat, those 3, given their builds, designs, feats, etc. really the other 2 people, especially if they don’t know what they are doing as much, could do nothing, or do stuff and feel like they get in the way, but those can handle the combats pretty much by themselves.
so the other 2 people essentially could be for decoration, for non combat usage, or just be people that won’t get charmed/dominated/etc. and be the people that fix that if it happens to the others.
This is not the kind of group or campaign I personally would enjoy playing in.
aside from just skill monkeys...
a paladin would be a good choice as well, for their aura buffing to the other players as well as being a smite factory in there while the barbarian helps draw aggro. And gives a secondary healer for if something goes wrong with the cleric, or you get separated or whatever. And since it seems likely the warlock is going PAM/Sentinel. There won’t be a lot of movement and such by enemies in combat, keeping the paladin auras more effective.
Disclaimer: We obviously aren't going to force any players to play something they don't want.
I'm just curious to see what sort of suggestions you all would have for this scenario: Starting this weekend we'll be playing some an ongoing game (not sure if DM plans on making it it mini campaign or a full campaign). Three of the five players are pretty experienced, two are either new or haven't played in a couple years. The three who are experienced have already chosen their characters, see below. My question is - how would you round out this group? Lvl 5
Protection based Fighter is my first thought, the Barbarian will be pretty tanky, and the Light Domain cleric is going to be armored up and able to do some protection as well, but with new players I find Fighters are an easy way to get them in the door, and having a bit of extra protection to stand in front of the pole arm wielding Warlock might not be bad synergy.
My other thought though would be some sort of Rogue for Stealth, or a Circle of the Dreams Druid to add to healing. For some reason Newcomers to my sessions always want to play Druids, not sure why this is. But the Druid would add some extra healing, which if spent on the Bear Totem Barbarian basically counts as double healing due to all their resistances halving damage.
The party is pretty balanced with just those three. I'd guess that's why the experienced players chose them. So really anything the newer players want to play would be fine. I'd probably pay more attention to what proficiency everyone has to make sure you have a good range of skills to meet any challenges that require checks. Bards are always good at filling gaps in that arena.
That's what happens when you wear a helmet your whole life!
My house rules
Depending on how inexperienced the players are, a champion fighter can be a good choice. It doesn’t have a lot of things to remember so it can be a good one for new players. Thief rogue is also fairly simple (if I’m remembering it right) once they understand disengage, and that party can probably use someone to pick the locks.
The other consideration is how interested are the older players and DM in teaching the game. If they are willing to be patient and helpful, the new people can really play anything.
One of the new players played a Druid in a one shot we played last week - I don't want to sway anyone away from Druid, but I know they are a lot to deal with mechanically and that can be overwhelming. Even I haven't touched a Druid yet because of having to keep track of the beast shapes plus spells. Fighter and Rogue or Fighter Ranger is what one of the players was recommending.
This is a good point and something I hadn't thought of yet. Since I'm playing the Barbarian I hadn't really thought of proficiency. I do believe our Warlock will likely play our Face, and I'd be surprised if the Cleric wasn't super proficient in Religion, History and Nature. I'll have to find out. Thanks for pointing that out.
I was initially thinking Bard or rogue for the skill checks. Rogue is a little simpler since there aren't spells if they don't go arcane trickster. Scout seems like a good bet for the ranged version and swashbuckler for the melee. Bard would be good for the skills if they want to figure out spell casting, but I don't have any suggestions for subclass on that one (not enough experience with them to recall the complication level).
The other player, I'll agree with Champion Fighter for lack of complexity, Cavalier for a sturdier "protection" style (don't think it's necessary, but couldn't hurt), or a Paladin if they want to figure magic out a little while boosting healing and potentially keeping it a little simpler since their spell slots go to smites more than spells limiting the impact of bad spell list for the day (plus prepared caster meaning that a bad list doesn't require the DM to intercede to change out half the spells if they are bad. It's built in.)
Already a good team composition to be honest.
Maybe a rouge or bard for versatility/skill monkies. I hate them (just cause), but bards always surprise me at how useful they can be.
Definitely a Rogue or perhaps Bard, you need a sneak.
It's not balanced. It's got three melee, no ranged. It's balanced in that you have a Charisma face character (Warlock), a Strength character (Barbarian), and a Wisdom Character (Cleric). But it's not balanced in the ranged vs melee composition, which is important.
I would suggest a ranged Rogue (a ranged Ranger would also work, but Ranger is probably the weakest class, so I wouldn't recommend a ranger). You could also do a Fighter archer, but for a stealthy scout, I think Rogue is better. It also doesn't have any high intelligence characters, so I would recommend a Wizard to give a second ranged character.
You already have the Warlock for Charisma, the Barbarian for Strength, the Cleric for Wisdom. I would add a Rogue for Dexterity and a Wizard for intelligence, and to give two ranged damage dealers to complement the three melee damage dealers that you already have.
Rogue and Wizard are a couple of very accessible classes for new characters, and are very popular styles of play.
You do realize the cleric is a light cleric? That seems to be more of a blaster domain than several other clerics I've seen. Still, I won't fault you for suggesting rogue and wizard. My only concern with wizard would be the sheer number of spell choices that would have to be made for a new player.
Clerics don't get good attack cantrips and they get to use shields. And many of their abilities require them to be close to the enemy, such as Spirit Guardians, and the Light Domain's level 1 ability Warding Flare, and their channel divinity.
But you're right, they don't get any proficiencies with martial weapons and they get potent spellcasting at level 8.
So how does that work with Spirit Guardians? Does a Light Cleric just not use that spell?
Warding Flare and the Channel Divinity are both 30 ft. Spirit Guardians does goes out to 15 ft. While neither of those are candidates for a long range blaster, they do work well for someone who wants to interpose their presence on a choke point and still peg creatures that are a little more distant. Clerics get Sacred Flame (60 ft and no benefit from cover on the save) and Toll the Dead (also 60 ft and deals extra damage if the target is already missing HP) which aren't spectacular for range but will still serve for a class that doesn't mind being up close (shield, medium armor, d8 hit dice). The fact that both force saves instead of making spell attacks also means that they don't suffer disadvantage when cast within melee range of a hostile creature. Clearly, the intent was for a more ranged option than something like Life, War, or Tempest. I will grant you that Clerics aren't meant to be sitting at the back of the battle sniping people but the always prepared list does give a few more long range options to help (Scorching Ray 120 ft and Fireball 150 ft). Plus, the interaction of Light and the bolts from a crossbow, light (80 ft/320 ft with disadvantage) means that even an errant shot could provide significant value by lighting an area for all to see.
In that case, I stick by my suggestion of Rogue and Wizard, but it makes it more reasonable for the Rogue to be a melee Rogue (or a hybrid that uses both melee and ranged, since there's no real penalty for this), instead of wanting him to be ranged.
Having someone with expertise in stealth and expertise in thieves' tools is so useful to a party. And it's the type of thing that many newcomers love to do with their first character. My first character was in fact a Rogue.
Wizard is a bit of a challenge in that they don't have access to their entire spell list when choosing what spells to prepare, but I don't think it's too hard for a new player. Especially if they're given the encouragement to choose some ritual spells. I certainly do think it's an easier spellcaster to learn than Druid, Sorcerer, and Warlock. It's probably easier than Bard, too. Cleric is probably the easiest full spellcaster to learn, but I think Wizard is number two (and this party already has a Cleric).
The Dungeon Dudes did a video on YouTube not that long ago talking about the best class for a new player, it's worth watching their video (and it's an added bonus that Rogue and Wizard are two of the classes they choose along with Fighter, Barbarian, and Cleric).
A great thing about Rogue and Wizard is that these players become the automatic choices in this party to scout ahead or to lead an investigation. It's great to have a reason to shove a new player into the spotlight and say "here, this is your character's specialty, you lead this."
I would definitely second the opinion that the party is lacking in ranged engagement, and while both the Warlock and the Cleric do have spell power available to them, neither of them are dedicated to that (Warlocks are weird, and this one is Blade -- Light Domain cleric is more short range AoE focused with disruption, rather than true blasting). There are a few ways that either of those roles could be filled.
If you are wanting just a little more frontline capability, perhaps the Artificer deserves a look, specifically the UA Armorer subclass. The power armor features actually look really interesting, Guardian mode making it a melee roadblocker, while Infiltrator mode gives a special ranged attack, more mobility, and stealthiness. And all of this comes with access to a high INT (something your party currently lacks) and INT based spellcasting.
As for ranged attacking options, there's plenty of room to work with in that department. Rogue Scout, playing a DEX Fighter, even Bard has some interesting possibilities. A lot of people look down on Kensei Monks, but they get Longbows as their special version of a Monk Weapon, which means they benefit from your Martial Arts die at higher levels, and are eligible for most of your class features.
that seems like a pretty well balanced team if you ask me, but
-you can never go wrong with an bard, since they are useful as support, melee combat, utility casting, and good skill usage rivaling that of the rouge
-an wizard with their wider spell selection is also a good idea, even if you already have the arcana cleric
both of those classes can easily be molded to fit any gaps in most parties
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
Well.... first inspection. The 3 experienced people seem to be more or less powergame featuring for combat usage.
so to round it out. I’d make a skill monkey character, powergamey or not, and be the non-combat person.
2nd inspection add on: there is no balance outside of combat. And for combat, those 3, given their builds, designs, feats, etc. really the other 2 people, especially if they don’t know what they are doing as much, could do nothing, or do stuff and feel like they get in the way, but those can handle the combats pretty much by themselves.
so the other 2 people essentially could be for decoration, for non combat usage, or just be people that won’t get charmed/dominated/etc. and be the people that fix that if it happens to the others.
This is not the kind of group or campaign I personally would enjoy playing in.
aside from just skill monkeys...
a paladin would be a good choice as well, for their aura buffing to the other players as well as being a smite factory in there while the barbarian helps draw aggro. And gives a secondary healer for if something goes wrong with the cleric, or you get separated or whatever. And since it seems likely the warlock is going PAM/Sentinel. There won’t be a lot of movement and such by enemies in combat, keeping the paladin auras more effective.
Watch me on twitch
Thanks everyone for the feed back - lots of insight I really appreciate it!
Edit: From the group chat it appears our two last players have made their decisions:
Water Genasi Sorcerer (most likely Storm Sorcery)
Half Elf Bard (not sure what College)
Have fun!
Watch me on twitch
Sounds like you're going to have a very charismatic group. I'm glad to see that you'll have some more ranged damage dealers in the party.
seems like good choices, water genasi is perhaps not the best sorcerer race, but it certainly aint the worst
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes