HYPERBOREA » Perfect Party?

Iron Ranger · 5/02/2018 10:44 am

Hey gang. What's your current party makeup? And what's the class you think that's missing from its mix?

Brock Savage · 5/02/2018 2:46 pm

I like my players' characters alot

Crixus, a Barbarian and popular pitfighter

Kay, a Half-blood Pict Ranger and de facto leader of the group.

Ceril the Hyperborean Warlock, a brooding anti-hero and exile from House Vheez.

Ember the Thief, an agent of the Courtesans' Guild.

I am quite pleased that the party composition wasn't gamed for maximum optimization (I get enough of that playing Overwatch). I'd gently suggest cleric to a new player but they could play anything they want and the group's still solid.

As far as optimization goes, you can't go wrong with one from each of the four basic food groups of Fighter, Magician, Thief, and Cleric.

Jimm.Iblis · 5/02/2018 5:24 pm

I'm looking for new players for my game but we recently had a barbarian, a barbarian/thief, a legerdemainist, and a shaman. It worked out okay. One of the things I'm loving about the old-school renaissance is that these games don't require one to master the character and party optimization mini-game that's been the norm in every iteration of D&D from Third Edition on. Players play what they want and succeed by their own skill. So I guess the answer is, I don't think anything is missing. The players can all be fighters, for example, if everyone is having fun, nothing else is needed.

Iron Ranger · 5/02/2018 6:26 pm

Brock Savage wrote:
Crixus, a Barbarian and popular pitfighter

Kay, a Half-blood Pict Ranger and de facto leader of the group.

Ceril the Hyperborean Warlock, a brooding anti-hero and exile from House Vheez.

Ember the Thief, an agent of the Courtesans' Guild.

I like this mix too. Love to hear how is works out...or doesn't ;)

Iron Ranger · 5/02/2018 6:27 pm

Jimm.Iblis wrote:
The players can all be fighters, for example, if everyone is having fun, nothing else is needed.

I've had this kind of thing a couple of times...tons of fun but can be so-o-o-o brutal.

Ghul · 5/03/2018 9:40 am

In recent years my players had a party comprised entirely of thieves, and it was quite a bit of fun. Of course, not all were pure thieves; we had purloiners and legerdemainists, too.

Last edited by Ghul (5/03/2018 9:41 am)

Blackadder23 · 5/03/2018 9:42 am

Jimm.Iblis wrote:
I'm looking for new players for my game but we recently had a barbarian, a barbarian/thief, a legerdemainist, and a shaman. It worked out okay. One of the things I'm loving about the old-school renaissance is that these games don't require one to master the character and party optimization mini-game that's been the norm in every iteration of D&D from Third Edition on. Players play what they want and succeed by their own skill. So I guess the answer is, I don't think anything is missing. The players can all be fighters, for example, if everyone is having fun, nothing else is needed.

To enlarge on this: despite its reputation as a "hack and slash" endeavor, in reality Old School play generally revolves around exploration, solving puzzles, avoiding traps, interacting with NPC's, etc. Class is basically irrelevant to these activities. Since there does tend to be a certain amount of combat, I would say a fighter type or two is desirable - but these could be hired NPC's if, for example, the entire party wants to play thieves or magic-users.

If a soi-disant "Old School" referee designs adventures that require some careful balance of classes for success... that's a red flag in my opinion. I would carefully consider whether I wanted to play in such a campaign.

mabon5127 · 5/03/2018 10:39 am

Two Purloiners, an Ice Lord, a Cryomancer, a Druid-Warlock, a Bard, a Cataphract, a Cleric of Azathoth, and soon a Berserker.

I agree with BA concerning class balance. The adventure / campaign should not be tailored to the nth degree to suit or showcase character class abilities so that everyone feels equally useful. It tests the mettle of characters to succeed in situations for which their class is not well suited. As was pointed out much of the interaction is not rule based but player skill based.

gizmomathboy · 5/03/2018 11:11 am

Ghul wrote:
In recent years my players had a party comprised entirely of thieves, and it was quite a bit of fun. Of course, not all were pure thieves; we had purloiners and legerdemainists, too.

My current group tried that, all thief subclasses except for a lone ranger. They were TPK'd in their last session by fire beetles. I suspect it was a combination of bad rolls, being in "high level pc mode", and bad tactics.

We aren't quite done re-rolling pc's, but so far the 2 that have are a warlock and a ranger :-)

Iron Ranger · 5/03/2018 3:39 pm

Right now we've got a necromancer, cleric, and 2 fighters, all common stock. The 2 fighters are always close to death...

gizmomathboy · 5/03/2018 6:42 pm

Iron Ranger wrote:
Right now we've got a necromancer, cleric, and 2 fighters, all common stock. The 2 fighters are always close to death...

How else does one describe melee?

lige · 5/03/2018 7:08 pm

In chainsaw's game we had a party of all fighter subclasses (Barbarian, Berserker, Warlock) - it was great! It felt like we were in an 80's barbarian movie though I guess I wouldn't call it perfect as the campaign ended in a TPK. However that was after we had let a non-fighter into the party!

Iron Ranger · 5/03/2018 7:37 pm

gizmomathboy wrote:
Iron Ranger wrote:
Right now we've got a necromancer, cleric, and 2 fighters, all common stock. The 2 fighters are always close to death...
How else does one describe melee?

Most often "Run for your lives...."

rhialto · 5/04/2018 4:08 am

My main party is illusionist, legerdemainist, cleric, monk and fighter. I don't think they're missing anything, since their success is dependent on player skill, as others have pointed out.

Ynas Midgard · 5/04/2018 5:47 am

My players prefer thieves and magic-users, because they bring the greatest amount of sheer utility (an above average chance for sneaking past things, alternate entrances opened through magic or being able to climb up/down with ease, various spell effects, etc.). However, the player who almost always goes for Legerdemainist now plays a Berserker, and he enjoys it very much!

gizmomathboy · 5/04/2018 9:18 am

Ynas Midgard wrote:
My players prefer thieves and magic-users, because they bring the greatest amount of sheer utility (an above average chance for sneaking past things, alternate entrances opened through magic or being able to climb up/down with ease, various spell effects, etc.). However, the player who almost always goes for Legerdemainist now plays a Berserker, and he enjoys it very much!

Berzerkers are a lot of fun, so long as the party steps away just before things get really messy.

Iron Ranger · 5/04/2018 2:14 pm

rhialto wrote:
My main party is illusionist, legerdemainist, cleric, monk and fighter. I don't think they're missing anything, since their success is dependent on player skill, as others have pointed out.

That's a pretty mixed party, so you've got it covered. And I get it that the group relies on player skill, but do you find that your players most often rely on the characters with special skills to attempt the special tasks?

Spider of Leng · 5/05/2018 12:35 am

Having just bought the game, we are just putting our first party together and it looks like this:

Canwulf, a Viking berserker from Vinland
Gwynwog, a Half-Pictish Scout from the Savage Boreal Coast
Hawkwind, a Keltic Huntsman from the Gal City region
Drago, a Hyperborean Pyromancer (Twin brother of Dragyana)--From Khromarium
Dragyana, a Hyperborean Cryomancer (Twin sister of Drago)--From Khromarium
Tinniktet, Esquimaux Shamaness from the Plain of Leng, Follower of Ythaqqa

I'm thinking this will be a very well-balanced party, especially if they survive the first couple levels.

This being said, one of the best parties I played with in first edition consisted of the following;

Human Barbarian
Human Paladin
Gnome Illusionist/Thief
Half-elven Druid

All of us were very experienced, creative players. So even without a traditional magic-user or cleric, we did alright. I played the gnome and he saved the party on more than one occasion with stuff like mirror image and paralysis spells.

Brock Savage · 5/05/2018 3:08 am

Spider of Leng wrote:
Having just bought the game, we are just putting our first party together and it looks like this:

Canwulf, a Viking berserker from Vinland
Gwynwog, a Half-Pictish Scout from the Savage Boreal Coast
Hawkwind, a Keltic Huntsman from the Gal City region
Drago, a Hyperborean Pyromancer (Twin brother of Dragyana)--From Khromarium
Dragyana, a Hyperborean Cryomancer (Twin sister of Drago)--From Khromarium
Tinniktet, Esquimaux Shamaness from the Plain of Leng, Follower of Ythaqqa

I am digging that party makeup. Let us know how it works out and welcome to Hyperborea!

rhialto · 5/05/2018 5:55 am

Iron Ranger wrote:
rhialto wrote:
My main party is illusionist, legerdemainist, cleric, monk and fighter. I don't think they're missing anything, since their success is dependent on player skill, as others have pointed out.
That's a pretty mixed party, so you've got it covered. And I get it that the group relies on player skill, but do you find that your players most often rely on the characters with special skills to attempt the special tasks?

Yes, they do rely on the best class/background to do that. For example, whenever it comes to quick/sorcerous healing, it's the cleric; mundane healing, the cleric again, since she venerates Apollo.

I also use my own set of background tables (what AS&SH calls "Secondary Skills"), and those play heavily into "Who's best to talk to the Prince's servants? The Illusionist, he's an escaped slave." I lean heavily on the Non-Standard Task Resolution (d6 throw) for things like this, if they don't want to role-play out all the dialog (which happens sometimes).

But I'm fine with this niche-leveraging: IMO that's what differentiates a class-based game from a skill-based game (like Classic Traveller, which I also run).