Most powerful, flexible party

[two]

This is my claim. The most versatile, most powerful 5 PC party must include the following two classes:

Tactical Warlord
Inspirational Warlord.

With these two as a base, you can then stir in 3 more classes as you see fit.

The 3.5 parallel is the cleric. While not many parties had more than one cleric, if they did, they could be scary powerful. In 3.5 you might start out with:

Buff cleric (buffs self to combat, buffs others)
Heal cleric (massive healing and ranged spells)

And stir in 3 more classes. (ignore more than 2 clerics, which is however even more optimal in 3.5).

In 4, the TacWarlord + InspWarlord gives you staying power, healing, best buffs in the game, defense, damage... and synergies like crazy almost everywhere.

That's my claim.

The question is, am I really stupid?

 

[Sadrik]

2 warlords
3 rogues

This will maximize your damage capabilities and your ability to flank to get the bonus damage. This will end combats quickly, minimize damage to oneself, provides healing, tactical control and plenty of teamwork potential.

 

[two]

I was thinking:

2 warlords + 1 striker + 1 defender + 1 controller

Just to be insanely boring.

But there is a lot of room for variation.

2 warlords + 2 strikers + controller

or

2 warlords + 2 strikers + defender

I guess it's pretty hard to go wrong.

or

2 warlords + 2 defenders + controller

 

[Kazinsky]

I was thinking:

2 warlords + 1 striker + 1 defender + 1 controller

Just to be insanely boring.

But there is a lot of room for variation.

2 warlords + 2 strikers + controller

or

2 warlords + 2 strikers + defender

I guess it's pretty hard to go wrong.

or

2 warlords + 2 defenders + controller

While I understand that both variations of the warlord will grant the party very useful tactical buffs, I don't believe that they need to form the core of the "most powerful, flexible party". I see adding 1 warlord into a 5-man team to grant their abilities, but having 2 with their low damage output and weak defenses doesn't seem to be a strong solution.

I'll admit that I have not played in too many games yet, but that's the impression that I'm getting from the books and from what I've seen so far.

@Two -- I'd be interested to hear, in more detail, as to how a TacWarlord and and InsWarlord form the core of your proposed "most powerful, flexible party". Thanks!

 

[Goumindong]

2 Warlords or Warlord/Cleric, 1 rogue, 1 great weapon fighter(or Paladin), 1 archery ranger/warlock.

 

[Mengu]

My dream team 5-man party does not include any warlords. I think 2 leaders are overkill. 2 Defenders, 1 Leader, 1 Striker, 1 Controller is my favorite 5-man composition.

Here is my dream team:

Dragonborn Greatweapon Fighter
Half-elf Protecting Paladin
Dwarf Devoted Cleric
Elf Archer Ranger
Tiefling War Wizard

Between the Cleric and Paladin, there is plenty of healing and temporary hitpoints to go around.

 

[Tony Vargas]

The question is, am I really stupid?

I don't know if I agree, but no, it's not a stupid assertion.

You certainly get a lot of in-combat tactical versatility and staying power from a party build around both warlord builds. A tactical warlord can have a pretty competative AC in light armor, and an inspiring warlord who doesn't bother with INT at all can manage a very high STR and enough DEX or CON for some good weapon feats, so they're hardly a low-damage/low-AC drag on party effectiveness - certainly not enough of one to cancel the overwhelming extent to which they'll enhance thier party.

To really take full advantage, especially at low level, you want a melee oriented party (which will cut into the versatility claim, of course). Fighters, Avenging Paladin, Brutal Rogue, TWF Ranger, those sorts. At higher Heroic levels the Warlord starts being able to really help out ranged combatants so other builds would get better synergies.


As an alternate 'dream party,' I'd suggest a Warlord, Fighter, War Cleric, TWF Ranger, & Brutal Rogue. Very melee oriented, reasonably tough, hits /very/ hard.

 

[Mad Hamish]

My dream team 5-man party does not include any warlords. I think 2 leaders are overkill. 2 Defenders, 1 Leader, 1 Striker, 1 Controller is my favorite 5-man composition.

Here is my dream team:

Dragonborn Greatweapon Fighter
Half-elf Protecting Paladin
Dwarf Devoted Cleric
Elf Archer Ranger
Tiefling War Wizard

Between the Cleric and Paladin, there is plenty of healing and temporary hitpoints to go around.

It's not so much the healing that the Warlords boost party strength with, it's the buffs.
I haven't had an indepth look at the Warlord yet but I suspect that they do more for groups with melee strikers than ranged strikers so you might not get great synergy for your party.

I tend to think that if you've got 1 leader a cleric is probably better than a warlord but a warlord makes a great 5th member of the team and, given a 2 weapon ranger or a rogue and an otherwise balanced party, may provide more to the party than any other 5th member.

 

[SadisticFishing]

I'd rather a cleric and a warlord, so as not to waste the +initiative bonus, and other foot stepping that'll surely go on. Plus, too many melee'ers in one group causes bad-ness.

 

[ac_noj]

There's no way I'd go for 2 Warlords, but one is very nice. A lot of the combos people come up with depend on +hit bonuses from Tactical Warlords.