What niches do you think a good adventuring party needs? Ie a smart guy, a strong guy, a sneaky guy, etc.
>>93265938Oh look, a thread about nothing in particular that's going to have 3d10 semi-genuine replies, then die off and be kept around by retarded bumpfag for next 7 days. What a great time to live in!
Lets skip to the end. You need at least one person who can talk and at least one person who can kill. They dont nesessarily have to be different people. Anything else offers more options, but not mandatory options. Oh and a pack animal obviously
Rolled 1, 1, 9 = 11 (3d10)>>93266427
>>93265938A Healslut.
Warrior, mage, thief, optional side slot cleric. All bases covered with a layer of redundancy. Brawn, wits, skills, languages, utility and if needed healing.
>>93265938Just a bunch of violent guys can usually deal with whatever the DM throws at them. Not every party needs to be made up of a collection of unique rainbow coloured capeshit snowflakes.
>>93265938Only combat power matters.
>>93267464>>93267496I mean, if you're playing a campaign like that, yes.
>>93267496You need a talking guy to do the relation and faction building so you can field larger armies and manage bigger organizations. Smart guys are usually good utility, unless it’s a sci fi game then they are also crucial. Once you have one of each then you can fill out all on combat characters for an optimal composition, though with enough players there are more niche utilities that can be explored, and a Jack of all trades is always helpful.
>>93267590No you don't. In an RPG, everything important involves violence, and it always has to be done by the party personally.
>>93267464You didn't bring a healer, so you are forced to flee every fight before finishing the job or you start dropping like flies. You swiftly gain a reputation as the ones that 'lived to fight another day', which is said in derision. You attain no glory, even as you gain more levels you are forced to never fight anything that requires a magical defense or solution, meaning that even at the peak of your character's power you are always only fighting common threats weaker than you are. You met the heroes that saved the world once. They didn't know who you were and assumed you were town guards.
>>93267654>a healerWhat do you think this is, World of Warcraft? Dumb nogames.
which traditional game are you discussing?
>>93268070That's up to you, of course a party in cyberpunk 2020 will have different requirements to a L5R or a GURPS fantasy one. So, what do you think? Do you think your parry has all niches covered?
>>93267583No. It's true for all campaigns. Don't argue.
>>93267654Nope, we kill everyone without taking damage.
>>93268093Wrong answer. Tell me which traditional game you're asking about. Final warning.
>>93268167How can I know what game you're playing?
>>93265938In order of importance:1. Prevention/control. Either someone hardy and capable of directing most of the ire to themselves, or someone with sharp reflexes to interrupt enemy action where possible.2. Damage output. This can be a form of prevention in and of itself, with someone who can either hit hard, hit rapidly, or possibly both.3. Sabotage. Being able to cause problems for the enemy, be it slowing them down, weakening their offensive or defensive strength, or the classic damage-over-time.4. Proactive friendly support. This is a form of prevention that bolsters party performance; increasing their offense/defense or making them more mobile/accute. Very important niche, but it doesn't have any direct effect on the hostile forces themselves.5. Reactive friendly support. Healing, restoration, resuscitation; very important, but can be a severe waste of resources in the middle of combat, turning a situation that would be better of retreating from and regrouping for into a head-against-the-wall war of attrition.
>>93268312I struggle to imagine in what situation and system someone hitting fast but not hard is going to be useful, apart from shit like "I'm the first to act and attack the ceiling to make it collapse on top of the enemy" or something.
>>93268355>individual hits have their own chance to cause ailments>individual hits have a chance to "detonate" existing status ailments the target has>individual hits have a chance to either stagger where they strike or stun the entire target>individual hits have a chance to reduce target hit location to 0 HP>individual hits have a chance to either affect the target's entire body or to splash to other targets>each hit drains power resource for an amount non dependent on damage>individual hits build up a charging resource for the user>individual hits trigger conditions for allies to perform follow up strikes...to name a few.
>>93268448Right. That's what I get for playing systems that don't have that lately. At least, it didn't come up. Thanks anon.
>>93268526If it makes you feel better, the fact that I've been making things how I want for so long means I've forgotten what it's like to not have the things I want.
>>93268549So it's a custom built system? Sounds cool. I can get behind the status buildup thing like in some souls game or monster hunter, but wouldn't a stun be too powerful of an effect? That paralyzing style in jade empire comes to mind. Sorry for all these video games analogies but that's usually where I see stuff like this.
>>93265938"Need" is always a problem word in these things. The most basic party is a group of melee warriors. The standard party size in trpgs in four, so four warriors.The question you need to ask is; when is it better to have something besides a melee warrior? Is it worth it to trade one of those guys for a ranged warrior? A ranged warrior will have problems if they get stuck in melee or otherwise can't get shots off from a distance, and they must trade either some str or con for more dex. But a ranged warrior can damage or weaken enemies before they even get into melee range, which makes the fight easier, and they can target enemies that are troublesome for melee fighters, like ranged-combat enemies (archers, mages, etc) or fliers. Hell, four ranged warriors might end fights before they even get to melee range. But there's the problem, as soon as your four ranged warriors get ambushed in melee by a serious melee threat, their story ends. Likewise, if your four melee warriors go up against some mounted archers or a powerful evoker on a featureless plain, they're probably dead. Thus you want better variety in your party to handle the things that a narrow and rigid party can't handle, even if it makes them less capable of handling a particular task (like, a fighter/cleric/rogue/wizard party is gonna have a harder time taking on four orc warriors than a party of four fighters would, unless they successfully prepared for that exact fight)A well-balanced party used well, can handle things that a focused party simply can't (but if they don't prepare well then they're probably worse).
>>93268160>N-N-NOOOOO DON'T TALK BACK I'M RIGHT I'M ALWAYS RIGHT MOOOOOM THEY'RE TALKING BACK AT MEEEE
>>93265938Five pikewomen, and a wizard.
>>93266427>a thread about nothing in particularWhere do you think we are?
>>93268166How'd you kill that group of expert longbowmen with 200lb bows? That mind-bending enchanter who made you guys fight each other? The ghost that steals your life-force right through your armor?The 12ft tall giant with a 10ft club who's as strong as an elephant?Nigga I don't even see a shield. This isn't battle-brothers; you aren't fighting nothing but CR 1-4 enemies.
>>93269302We ran up to them and killed them all in one hit before they got to act.
>>93269316no no, anon, don't get triggered and pretend to be the guy you're arguing withwe want real discussion
>>93265938The core all parties should revolve around is >fighty>sneaky>spellcastyThis is where you start. If you have that base, you're going in the right direction, and whatever you add can't really worsen things. Personally, I prefer games where casters really can't be expected to live long without people between them and most dangers, so for me it's usually when the next addition is some over flavour of fighty. IMO western fantasy RPGs are often too incestuous to reach the peak dynamic, which is generally found in novels in JRPGs. It's something like this:>Swordsman FighterThe hero archetype melee fighter. They're not usually huge types and they don't tend to wear much if any armour. They have a sword, usually a longsword, and fight using their skill, courage, agility, and creativity. Examples would be Aragorn, Taran, Early Conan, Rand al'Thor before he becomes a supermage, Jon Snow, nearly every 'hero' guy in JRPGs like Fire Emblem.>Tank FighterThe big guy. Strong, tough, either wears heavy armour or is a gigatuff barbarian type. Could be sword & board, could just have giant fucking axe. They can take hits, throw people around like ragdolls, and split motherfuckers in half with their weapon. Can sometimes be 'spiritually' big rather than physically big. Examples: Later Conan, Gimli, Wulfgar, Fafhrd.>Precise FighterYour rogue. They can fight, but they're also sneaky and cunning with a bunch of worldly skills, and they probably prefer light weapons. Most likely the best of the 'fighters' with a bow & arrow, succeed through precision and planning. Examples: the Gray Mouser, Legolas, Robin Hood, Ezio.>WizardThe spellcaster that is more academic and cold. Generally has more bad guy type magic, tilts toward offensive spells and magic that fucks with people, like mind control or illusion. The caster that got into magic for knowledge and power.>MysticThe spellcaster that tilts toward support and healing. Into magic for spiritual or ascetic reasons.
>>93265938The rapist. Or better yet, the entire party rapes everything.
>>93270418Finally, a worthy opponent.
>>932659381 tank + 3 or more ranged attack characters
The chosen one, the investigator, the haggler and the mascot.There. No need to fight.
>>93265938The only niches that needs to be filled are about the type of characters your players wanna play.If they all want to be illiterate barbarians, so be it.If they all want to be wise wizards, so be it.If they all want to be greedy and weak bureaucrats, so be it.As long as they don't bitch and moan of they're unable to do something if they're not balanced, I don't give a damn
>>93269302>How'd you kill that group of expert longbowmen with 200lb bows?Don't get noticed, follow them and slit their throats while they sleep.>That mind-bending enchanter who made you guys fight each other?Don't get noticed, follow him and slit his throat while he sleep.>The ghost that steals your life-force right through your armor?Don't get noticed, follow him and slit his throat while he do some ghost rest shit or smth.>The 12ft tall giant with a 10ft club who's as strong as an elephant?Don't get noticed, follow him and slit his throat while he sleep.
>>93268355To give a specifically DND related example, using many weaker spells/attacks to drain Shields, Counterspells and Legendary Resistances
>>93269094You talk back exactly because the person you're talking back to is not capable of limitless violence, if he were you would not have the chance.
>>93270842That's the same for everyone. That's also the basis of civilization.
>>93267654Good, all according to plan. Not being recognised as 'snowflake heros' means we can surprise our enemies - while they a looking for some blue haired twat to monologue at, we sidle up and just kill them. No messing, just ulta violence. Also because we ALL fight, we can usually flatten any mixed party that has one tank, a twat with a bow, a no combat healer and a 2hp unarmoured wizard who usually fireballs his own party trying to get us. Try it in your next game, have everyone pick a violent thug, it's good fun.
>>93274209kekyou're the orcs who get flattened because they think they're hot shit with their basic bitch lvl3 violence and 15 str
>>93265938>le a smart guy>le a Fine, I'll post in yet-another bot thread. Ride the tiger.A party needs to be based around the kind of challenges they are going to face. An adventuring party is out to acquire loot and win fights. What stands in their way? >where is the loot?>how do we get there?>we're there; how do we get in?>how do we survive the traps?>how do we solve the puzzles?>how do we survive the guardians?>how do we find the loot?>how do we identify the loot?>how do we get back to safety with the loot?>where/how do we sell the loot?>how do we spend our new wealth?>repeatBard, cleric, fighter, ranger, rogue, wizard. Social/city, wilderness/tracking/navigating, bypassing obstacles, killing/defending, healing/buffing, traps/locks, identifying/knowing what to do.
It all boils down to the type of campaign and the style of the GM/DM. If the campaign and the GM are heavily combat focus, then you can just focus on the trinity of tank, healer, and DPS. If the campaign and the DM are more focus on narrative, character, and puzzles, then you should make sure you at least have a face, and skill and utility monkeys.
>>93281656I slit the puzzles' throat while it sleeps
>>93266788spbpHonestly depending on system or even just the campaign, you could end up only needing one of these.For example, VTM is all about social games, combat is usually more a consequence of fucking up than an expectation. You could theoretically play an entire VTM campaign of just constant drama and mindgames, and your character weaseling his way out of combat either entirely, or running away like a bitch.
>>93267611hytnpdnd?Or maybe even just get a better DM if every situation is just "FUCK YOU KILL PEOPLE AND DO IT YOURSELF"Unless you're just refusing to try anything else
>>93283186It's the case for every game, be it D&D or Call of Cthulhu. You have to kill the bad guys, no ifs or buts.
Boxer for tanking, hitting shitCutman for healingCoach for buffs and debuffsManager for the face of the groupThe optimal four man party for any campaign. You may ask where the skill-based character is and I will have you know that each member of this group is street smart and that's basically the same thing as having 20 ranks in 20 different skills.
>>93283306CoC is entirely playable without combat, especially depending on how you define combat.Blowing up a Cult's headquarters with them inside it isn't really much of a combat, for example. Calling the police down on false pretenses(they wouldn't likely believe in a cult doing human sacrifice, but they might believe a gang is doing a murder-based initiation) and let them do the dirty work, also allows you to avoid combat.And most if not all supernatural threats are either unkillable, or so difficult and obtuse to kill that it's not worth attempting. Lovecraftian stories aren't often about sprinting into the tombs constructed with sacred geometry to a god you don't know and blasting him with a six-shooter(even if this can happen).If you assume combat is such an inevitability, its no wonder you end up solving all your problems with it.
>>93265938Let's see, reluctant leader guy, crochity old guy, stupid timid young guy who never does anything useful, special snowflake freakshit character who gets himself killed early on doing something really stupid and attention-seeking, guy who is actually useful, and then girl who causes group to break apart in anger and tears.
>>93283457>CoC is entirely playable without combatNot at all. You're not just a delusional nogame, you don't even read modules. You probably thought Old Man Henderson was real.>Calling the policeThey're either in on it or won't make it in time before something terrible happens. You always have to do it yourself.
>>932659381d6 Paladins
