Imagine a clan of barbarians setting out to try and reclaim their ancestral lands. Or a troupe of clerics, devout to one God, trying to spread its word to less than receptive peoples
Woah! You are from the future! (My clock says 6/6/22 right now. Obviously, it's a timezone thing but I think it's funny.) The problem with doing games where everyone is the same class (that I have found) is the lack of longevity. Obviously, if you are doing a one-off it probably won't be a big deal but my group did an all cleric game once and it got really old by the end of that session. Of course, we also had 6 players...
All PCs of the same class is possibly already a tough sell. There is nothing wrong functionally, but you can't also throw in worshipping the same god or having the same sub-class. People like variety and with the major choice already removed, you can't realistically ask that they give the decision on sub-class.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"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?"
I've seen an Oops, All Monks party go very well, though there was some Cleric and Druid multiclassing involved
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Leaving OGL 1.0(a) untouched and making SRD 5.1 CC-BY-4.0 is a great first step. The next is a promise to do the same for future editions. Here's a discussion thread on that.
It's doable, particularly if you have different subclasses to cover different roles and "blind spots" in skill sets. Classes that are more versatile to begin with and/or offer a wider range of subclass based abilities work best. Bards and Clerics top that list imho, with Druids coming in third and the oft-maligned Ranger behind that. I'd advise making a point to coordinate who's handling what to make sure you don't end up with five utility/support PCs and nobody focused on damage, tanking, or stealth.
It's not really my thing. It can work potentially if you go for different subclasses, different spell niches etc, to fill different roles. But I prefer playing in and dming for parties of diverse classes instead. Gimmick parties like all wizards or all goblins don't tend to appeal to me personally. Though an all one race party would work better than one class for me if they don't also all pick the same class.
Also the beauty of 5e is how many of the classes can be reflavored. Your barbarian example is perfect. You could have 5 party members all from the same barbarian tribe but only one is barbarian class while the others are, maybe a Druid, and a warlock reflavored as a witch doctor who gets his power from the tribe’s god, another is a ranger beast master with the tribe’s totem animal, etc.
I admit the idea is pretty cool but even the pirate ship or barbarian village or all from the same temple. It is pretty hard to explain that everyone is of the same class.
The only way that I can see that can insure that everyone is of the same class, it would be that everyone is from some sort of accademy teaching that class. Even from a temple, there could easily be some Paladin with the Clerc. Some clerc that where never bless by there deity could end up warrior or something else.
Anyway good luck with that. It sure sound interesting and could be a cool chalenge.
Friends did a 'this one time at bard camp' oneshot, which was apparently pretty fun. I think you could make it work, but it'd work best with people who are interested in a lot of roleplay and not just mechanics.
It can absolutely be done and it can absolutely work for whole campaigns. Of course, certain classes are more suitable (Artificers, Paladins, Bards and Rangers) than others (Fighters and to a degree Rogues) whereas some fall in between. As long as you have a class and the subclasses that can cover most bases (skills, healing, fighting and so on) then you should be fine.
I think the main problem will be to get the players to agree with what class they should play. :P
I think the main problem will be to get the players to agree with what class they should play. :P
Yeah, if you're looking for a party unifying gimmick, a common point of origin is probably going to be much easier to get your whole group on board with. Turjan's example of a "barbarian" tribe is a good one. Or Vertdure's pirate ship with a Fighter/Battlemaster captain, a Rogue/Swashbuckler first mate, a Barbarian that leads boarding parties, a ship's Wizard or Sorcerer, and a Tempest Cleric that worships a storm god. Other classes could also be worked in with a modicum of thought to flavor. Low level parties can easily work as all being from the same rural village or even neighborhood of a large city, having gained their limited skills through either a basic apprenticeship or even dabbling on one's own. The party could all be part of a kingdom's royal guard and given a mission requiring all of their talents. There's always the old standby of a mercenary company or adventurer's guild (I'm joining a new-to-me game this weekend with the latter premise, which makes it simpler to add my character to the existing party). You could go with everybody being associated with the same temple; Clerics and Paladins are obvious but other classes could be on staff as guards, seers, or even just members of the common faith answering a call for aid by an ecclesiastic authority figure.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I’ve always wanted to make a party of all barbarians, or all wizards..
No one seems interested, but I think it would really fun https://19216811.cam/ https://1921681001.id/.
Imagine a clan of barbarians setting out to try and reclaim their ancestral lands. Or a troupe of clerics, devout to one God, trying to spread its word to less than receptive peoples
Woah! You are from the future! (My clock says 6/6/22 right now. Obviously, it's a timezone thing but I think it's funny.)
The problem with doing games where everyone is the same class (that I have found) is the lack of longevity. Obviously, if you are doing a one-off it probably won't be a big deal but my group did an all cleric game once and it got really old by the end of that session. Of course, we also had 6 players...
Buyers Guide for D&D Beyond - Hardcover Books, D&D Beyond and You - How/What is Toggled Content?
Everything you need to know about Homebrew - Homebrew FAQ - Digital Book on D&D Beyond Vs Physical Books
Can't find the content you are supposed to have access to? Read this FAQ.
"Play the game however you want to play the game. After all, your fun doesn't threaten my fun."
All PCs of the same class is possibly already a tough sell. There is nothing wrong functionally, but you can't also throw in worshipping the same god or having the same sub-class. People like variety and with the major choice already removed, you can't realistically ask that they give the decision on sub-class.
"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
I've seen an Oops, All Monks party go very well, though there was some Cleric and Druid multiclassing involved
Leaving OGL 1.0(a) untouched and making SRD 5.1 CC-BY-4.0 is a great first step. The next is a promise to do the same for future editions. Here's a discussion thread on that.
#OpenDnD
DDB is great, but it could be better. Here are some things I think could improve DDB
The DM for my IRL game group had an idea for a pirate-themed campaign where-in we'd all have to start with Rogue as our class, at least to start with.
It's doable, particularly if you have different subclasses to cover different roles and "blind spots" in skill sets. Classes that are more versatile to begin with and/or offer a wider range of subclass based abilities work best. Bards and Clerics top that list imho, with Druids coming in third and the oft-maligned Ranger behind that. I'd advise making a point to coordinate who's handling what to make sure you don't end up with five utility/support PCs and nobody focused on damage, tanking, or stealth.
It's not really my thing. It can work potentially if you go for different subclasses, different spell niches etc, to fill different roles. But I prefer playing in and dming for parties of diverse classes instead. Gimmick parties like all wizards or all goblins don't tend to appeal to me personally. Though an all one race party would work better than one class for me if they don't also all pick the same class.
Also the beauty of 5e is how many of the classes can be reflavored. Your barbarian example is perfect. You could have 5 party members all from the same barbarian tribe but only one is barbarian class while the others are, maybe a Druid, and a warlock reflavored as a witch doctor who gets his power from the tribe’s god, another is a ranger beast master with the tribe’s totem animal, etc.
I admit the idea is pretty cool but even the pirate ship or barbarian village or all from the same temple. It is pretty hard to explain that everyone is of the same class.
The only way that I can see that can insure that everyone is of the same class, it would be that everyone is from some sort of accademy teaching that class.
Even from a temple, there could easily be some Paladin with the Clerc. Some clerc that where never bless by there deity could end up warrior or something else.
Anyway good luck with that. It sure sound interesting and could be a cool chalenge.
Friends did a 'this one time at bard camp' oneshot, which was apparently pretty fun. I think you could make it work, but it'd work best with people who are interested in a lot of roleplay and not just mechanics.
Birgit | Shifter | Sorcerer | Dragonlords
Shayone | Hobgoblin | Sorcerer | Netherdeep
It can absolutely be done and it can absolutely work for whole campaigns. Of course, certain classes are more suitable (Artificers, Paladins, Bards and Rangers) than others (Fighters and to a degree Rogues) whereas some fall in between. As long as you have a class and the subclasses that can cover most bases (skills, healing, fighting and so on) then you should be fine.
I think the main problem will be to get the players to agree with what class they should play. :P
Yeah, if you're looking for a party unifying gimmick, a common point of origin is probably going to be much easier to get your whole group on board with. Turjan's example of a "barbarian" tribe is a good one. Or Vertdure's pirate ship with a Fighter/Battlemaster captain, a Rogue/Swashbuckler first mate, a Barbarian that leads boarding parties, a ship's Wizard or Sorcerer, and a Tempest Cleric that worships a storm god. Other classes could also be worked in with a modicum of thought to flavor. Low level parties can easily work as all being from the same rural village or even neighborhood of a large city, having gained their limited skills through either a basic apprenticeship or even dabbling on one's own. The party could all be part of a kingdom's royal guard and given a mission requiring all of their talents. There's always the old standby of a mercenary company or adventurer's guild (I'm joining a new-to-me game this weekend with the latter premise, which makes it simpler to add my character to the existing party). You could go with everybody being associated with the same temple; Clerics and Paladins are obvious but other classes could be on staff as guards, seers, or even just members of the common faith answering a call for aid by an ecclesiastic authority figure.