Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account
Photo

You have a party of only 3 which classes should you pick?


  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#21 Pheonix

Pheonix

    Olde Farte Gamer

  • Patrons
  • 322 posts

Posted 14 July 2009 - 02:34 PM

We are in the MMO world. The only classes you need you need are Tank, Healer and Damage. :D
  • 0

#22 James

James

    Ghoul

  • Members
  • 509 posts
  • LocationMagnolia, TX

Posted 14 July 2009 - 02:41 PM

Barbarian
Cleric
Rogue
  • 0

#23 Daniel

Daniel

    Gelatinous Cube

  • Members
  • 2,825 posts
  • LocationYork

Posted 14 July 2009 - 02:55 PM

Fighter (AC feats & Power Attack)
Cleric (High wisdom; with extra turning and Turn-Buff feats)
Rogue

Whilst Barbarians had the hit-points they lack the AC. When you have a small party every 5% chance to hit you can rob from your foe needs to be taken. In addition all party members should be human to maximise the feat and skill-point return.
  • 0

#24 Phneri

Phneri

    Goblin

  • Members
  • 100 posts

Posted 15 July 2009 - 10:55 AM

Fighter (AC feats & Power Attack)
Cleric (High wisdom; with extra turning and Turn-Buff feats)
Rogue

Whilst Barbarians had the hit-points they lack the AC. When you have a small party every 5% chance to hit you can rob from your foe needs to be taken. In addition all party members should be human to maximise the feat and skill-point return.


True regarding the AC, but a fighter using a 2-handed weapon (To maximize damage output) is going to be both slower (meaning he can't maneuver as well to protect the squishy or flank) and and have far fewer skill points while retaining a roughly equal damage output.

Cleric and Rogue builds are also both focused entirely on dealing with traps and undead, when there are a variety of solutions to both available to other classes.

Additionally, the Barbarian/Cleric multi/Druid combo gets the benefit of having a number of characters who can potentially make spot/listen/etc. checks to notice ambushes and perform well during watches, which could prove a problem when all three members need to be able to do this. Animal companions and summoning can also overcome AC issues.
  • 0

#25 Ieqo

Ieqo

    Lantern Archon

  • Members
  • 1,090 posts
  • LocationIts pronounced CHATT-uh-NOO-gah.

Posted 15 July 2009 - 11:21 AM

Alright, this one's sucked me back in.

Assuming we're talking about level one characters, I'd go with a cleric, a rogue, and a wizard. Am I advocating that the cleric should serve as the party's battle-turtle? Well, he/she could in a pinch, but I'd point out that a first-level wizard has nothing upon which to spend his starting gold. All the armo(u)r he'll ever wear comes free (ie clothes), his best choice for a melee weapon can be picked up in any convenient forest (a stick), and likewise all the tools of his trade (his spellbook and component pouch) are assumed at character creation. If he wants a crossbow, he can wait for loots (statistically there's a good chance of encountering a suitably-equipped bandit, goblin, or kobold within the first few encounters). In a properly-staffed party I generally spend the wizard's cash on scrolls at the beginning and half the time I end up not using them.

This means he can easily hire up to three or even four slices of henchmeat for short-term employment up there in front. An NPC-class "warrior", while not as skilled as a proper fighter, serves almost as well as a speedbump, and a plurality of them is better than a single player character who will likely be borrowing cash off of everyone else to get kitted out anyway.

I'd avoid the temptation to replace the cleric with a pally. If any of my suggestions are expendable, it'd be to replace the wizard with a fighter, but doing so would cut out a bunch of skills and bring the crowd-control potential down to zero.

In my example, the party's Spot capability is invested in the rogue and the cleric (cleric probably hasn't invested skill points here, but if he/she doesn't have enough Wis to carry it at low levels, smack him for me, will you?).
  • 0

#26 Daniel

Daniel

    Gelatinous Cube

  • Members
  • 2,825 posts
  • LocationYork

Posted 15 July 2009 - 02:46 PM

True regarding the AC, but a fighter using a 2-handed weapon (To maximize damage output) is going to be both slower (meaning he can't maneuver as well to protect the squishy or flank) and and have far fewer skill points while retaining a roughly equal damage output.

I don't think thats an issue in 3.5; I've never seen weapons imposing a speed restriction.

Cleric and Rogue builds are also both focused entirely on dealing with traps and undead, when there are a variety of solutions to both available to other classes.

While rogues generally focus entirely on dealing with traps a level, or so, of fighter can develop a very nice support-fighter whilst still retaining trap removal ability.

The Cleric on the other hand with proper feat selection can be found to be very versatile on the battlefield. There are many feats that allow a cleric to use his many Turns-per-day as AC and Damage boosters. In addition he is very good at being a mobile buffer. While Druid-Barbarian-Shifters are an interesting combination they are very one-sided and lack the healing capacity of the Cleric. When you only have three party members each character needs to be as versatile as possible; a Druid just simply doesn't have that going for him due to his inability to swap spells for heals.

Animal companions and summoning can also overcome AC issues.

Animal companions are useful in a pinch, but I wouldn't take a class purely for the companion that comes with it.
  • 0

#27 Phneri

Phneri

    Goblin

  • Members
  • 100 posts

Posted 15 July 2009 - 06:41 PM

[quote name="Illiani"][quote name="Phneri"]True regarding the AC, but a fighter using a 2-handed weapon (To maximize damage output) is going to be both slower (meaning he can't maneuver as well to protect the squishy or flank) and and have far fewer skill points while retaining a roughly equal damage output. [/quote]
I don't think thats an issue in 3.5; I've never seen weapons imposing a speed restriction.

[/quote]

weapons do not. Armor does. To benefit from a higher AC the fighter is going to cut himself down to 20ft movement, where the barbarian will be at 40 or 30.


[quote name="Illiani"]
While rogues generally focus entirely on dealing with traps a level, or so, of fighter can develop a very nice support-fighter whilst still retaining trap removal ability.

The Cleric on the other hand with proper feat selection can be found to be very versatile on the battlefield. There are many feats that allow a cleric to use his many Turns-per-day as AC and Damage boosters. In addition he is very good at being a mobile buffer. While Druid-Barbarian-Shifters are an interesting combination they are very one-sided and lack the healing capacity of the Cleric. When you only have three party members each character needs to be as versatile as possible; a Druid just simply doesn't have that going for him due to his inability to swap spells for heals.

[/quote] The cleric can be devastating, indeed, but can also multiclass as a rogue for the trapfinding, and use divine magic to bypass a variety of traps


[quote name="Illiani"]
[quote name="Phneri"]Animal companions and summoning can also overcome AC issues.[/quote]
Animal companions are useful in a pinch, but I wouldn't take a class purely for the companion that comes with it.[/quote][/quote]

No, but the companion plus a couple summoned creatures will spread out a large number of enemies while the raging barbarian murders each of them and the cleric uses spells to disable others.
  • 0

#28 popper

popper

    RPGMP3 Patron

  • Patrons
  • 136 posts

Posted 17 August 2009 - 06:47 PM

I like the Binder, Druid, Fighter combo.

The Fighter provides the group with a bit of combat stability which as we all know is very, very necessary. The Druid provides the party with a magic user that is fully capable of standing toe to nose with most magical villains or axe to spear in combat. With the properly picked animal companion the Druid also provides the Fighter with much needed combat support when she dips out of melee and moves into a magical support role healing the other party members or chucking spells overhead against their opponents. The Binder, by contrast, allows for a creative player to build into whatever niche is unfulfilled by his fellow party members by selecting his vestiges according to his perceived needs.

In Fourth Edition I would choose a Fighter, Warlord, Rogue combo.

The Fighter and Warlord will be fully capable of taking on anything that is foolish enough to cross your party's path and the rogue is there for filler. You don't need a healer as you have healing surges and the Warlord can buff that ability.

Fourth Edition is a human centric world where your best options are to be from the land of Men and sling your sword with prejudice against the lesser - and they are indeed lesser - races of the world.
  • 0

#29 Balgin

Balgin

    The Dwarf

  • Patrons
  • 2,109 posts
  • LocationRingwood, Hampshire, England

Posted 18 August 2009 - 11:26 AM

True regarding the AC, but a fighter using a 2-handed weapon (To maximize damage output) is going to be both slower (meaning he can't maneuver as well to protect the squishy or flank) and and have far fewer skill points while retaining a roughly equal damage output.

I don't think thats an issue in 3.5; I've never seen weapons imposing a speed restriction.


weapons do not. Armor does. To benefit from a higher AC the fighter is going to cut himself down to 20ft movement, where the barbarian will be at 40 or 30.


Dwarfs take no movement penalties for armour or encumbrance. (Yeah, they blatantly copied that from Warhammer an edition too late for it to be that recognisible).

Dwarfs in d20 have two speeds. Stop & Go. Overencumbered to the point of being incapable of moving is stop. Standing still or lying down or sitting down is stop., everything else is go.

The only exceptions to this would be a dwarven monk or adwarven barbarian. But they make very good fighters so many party fighters won't be losing any speed for the increased protection.

Additionaly a good group of players will work around a slower character's speed. Rather than constantly leaving them behind they'll adapt to it (take breaks, move shorter distances in encounters and stuff like that).
  • 0

#30 sigfile

sigfile

    Toad

  • Members
  • 3 posts
  • LocationGreat Northern Wastes

Posted 18 August 2009 - 03:19 PM

In Fourth Edition I would choose a Fighter, Warlord, Rogue combo.


Oy, that's asking for frustration. Small parties and rogues always end up with sad rogues.

Recommendations:

Defender: Take your pick. I'm partial to Swordmages or Paladins for small parties, but there really isn't a bad choice.
Striker: Sorcerer or Ranger (Bow).
Leader: Cleric. Melee and ranged attack options, plus slightly better healing (out of the box) than the Warlord.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Gravityscan Badge