I'm thinking of running a D&D campaign where the only restriction is that the characters all have to pick the same class. It's up to them what class it is, but they all have to pick the same class. My question is, would this be better in Pathfinder or 5e? Pathfinder has more classes and I'd love to see them play some broken stuff like an all summoner party. But at the same time, 5e has more balance, and also feats that let you get a sampling of arcane or divine spellcasting, to shore up lack of healing or magic. But you don't need magic healing as much in 5e. And I'm Pathfinder someone could just get a cure wounds wand early on and live in that.
What would you do? Inb4 kms for playing DND.
If you’re married to 5e, Warlock easily. You could make a party based on the different options offered by warlock alone. That and Bard are super versatile.
I have been wanting to run something like this in Sigil where the Lady of Pain becomes a Zordon figure for a team of planars with attitude.
A warlock union, which travels together to increase bargaining power against their patron
lel
Always found that idea amusing
I'd say go Fighter only
>What would you do?
I'd play 13th age instead which is the better 5e.
Honestly I've only had experience running 5e so it seems doable but incredibly boring. All bard party might be neat I guess but I'd burn on that fairly quickly.
If I have to run it I'm going to throw in magic items pretty often to keep the game Hispanicy.
>I'd say go Fighter only
Boooooooooooooooooooooorrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrriiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnngggggggggg
Might as well put the players on a bus to snoozeville
I haven't played 5e but fighter sounds the opposite of boring because people wouldn't be able to use utility spells and whatnot, and would be forced to come up with real solutions for problems.
>would be forced to come up with real solutions for problems
At the cost of every combat being a boring samey slog
That’s more an issue with 5e than with the idea of a single class
>real solutions for problems
Translation, "play mother may I with the GM because there's less than ten whole pages in the book dedicated to skills, tools and equipment".
D&D is shit for low fantasy, find something else. I hear good things about Pendragon but haven't played it myself.
>Translation, "play mother may I with the GM because there's less than ten whole pages in the book dedicated to skills, tools and equipment".
This is such a shitty take. I swear, the only people who repeat this must have terrible DMs or just completely lack any creativity.
If I wanted to freeform I'd freeform.
>Translation, "play mother may I with the GM because
There is no clearer sign of a 3aboo redditor than this. Saying "mother may I" in regards to actions in a roleplaying game is the most retarded and obnoxious shit. It frames the GM as some kind of inconvenience where his judgment is also an inconvenience that stands in the way of you, the player, getting what you want. And what you want, is to roll a natural 20 to convince the guard captain to suck your dick, so that the entire table collapses into autistic, table-pounding laughter, your yellowed teeth showing through your patchy nu-male beards, the brays of your wife's son only barely piercing the low- test cacophony of scratchy basedcuck laughter that woke him up. It's even better on RPG podcasts where the laughter flares out the mic and creates this weird ceiling-feedback effect that makes the laughter even more grating. Anyway, the GM is the one running the game and the one who actually makes up a world and a series of potential plotlines that might interest your retarded tabaxi paladin whose backstory you got the idea for from some Reddit post. He is the one who applies the common sense and judgment to make the RPG system actually function for a game. Whining because the system doesnt let you use the rules as a weapon against him to get what you want, and (1) treat the GM as your adversary as well as (2) in so doing, create an impetus for the GM to treat you likewise in an effort to keep up with balance, is utterly infantile. have a nice day.
That's what I'd like to see but I'm letting them pick since I figure that's a fair trade. Plus I like the idea of adapting my campaign to whatever they pick, and I've already started thinking out different scenarios for each class group.
>I'd play 13th age instead which is the better 5e.
I thought it was the better 4e?
Might genuinely be the only time I recommend someone play fagfinder. Way better than 5e, especially for this purpose.
13th age would trump both of these though, but I still struggle in thinking they might all feel quite samey.
Outside of this thought experiment though I’d never fucking do this. What’s the point of this gimmicky shit?
>the only restriction is that the characters all have to pick the same class
sounds kind of dumb. If they thought about it for 2 seconds, they'd pick the most versatile so one guy is tanky, one guy heals, one guy buffs, etc. So then you basically end up with people picking "classes" or specializations anyway. What's the point?
To show people that those specializations exists. There wouldn't be a need for figuring out how to heal as a rogue if your party were allowed to have a cleric. And maybe some of wired builds created during this campaign will turn out to be compelling choices
>sounds kind of dumb. If they thought about it for 2 seconds, they'd pick the most versatile so one guy is tanky, one guy heals, one guy buffs, etc. So then you basically end up with people picking "classes" or specializations anyway. What's the point?
It makes them pick archetypes they wouldn't otherwise. I like the idea of an all rogue party for 5e, cause with how easy stealth is they could probably sneak attack a lot of encounters to death in a single surprise round. It'd be a totally different style of play.
No subclasses
Human Fighter only
Final Destination
I've had a plan to run an all Bard campaign set in ancient Greece if I can get a party on board.
The premise? They're a band trying to get into one of Dionysus's raging parties, but they need a new song, so they go on an odyssey to get inspiration to write one that will get them into the party.
I think it sounds like just the amount of silly fun that would be enjoyable without devolving into a complete mess.
>The premise? They're a band trying to get into one of Dionysus's raging parties, but they need a new song, so they go on an odyssey to get inspiration to write one that will get them into the party.
That sounds great anon, I hope it goes well.
Pathfinder is a less bad game overall but I kind of like the idea of a 5e game where every PC is a paladin with a different oath.
>paladin
COPS
>cleric
Pilgrimage kino
>thief
Do I even?
>fighter
Gruesome brawler with some custom combat features
>monk
At this point stop playing 5e and pick up a system that actually makes kung fu opera fun
>bard
Did this once as a scooby door mystery. Fun
>druid
Meh
>ranger
Monster hunter/ survival with big exploration and environmental hazard focus
>At this point stop playing 5e and pick up a system that actually makes kung fu opera fun
Yeah, I think this is the biggest problem with OP entire premise, there are a lot of systems where everyone is kinda the same and even in d20 it wouldn't be a "challenge" doing it....just kinda lame
> COPS
So an all Paladin Party is basically that one scene from Shrek 2?
>What would you do?
I would work on my own system, because I dislike D&D, and D&D adjacent games, especially 5e.
Fighter.
At the start of our current campaign I made the proposal for a group of evil gnome monks with red hats and a temper for brawling.
Sadly wasn't accepted by all.
Have you tried not playing D&D?