[RPG] find a good collection of pre-generated characters for D&D 4th Edition?

"Balanced Party" is actually a really complex question.

I'd like to reword the question: How can we, in D&D 4th edition, create a party that can overcome challenging obstacles successfully?

In many ways, this is an exploration of the norming step of small group formation.

Group Goals

The first thing to note is that every player considers different things obstacles. I would like to direct the reader here in that there needs to be an explicit social contract outlining player motivations and what they want out of the world. (Doesn't have to be written down, but it should be fairly clear to everyone what people in the group desire.) Some people want butt-kicking, others want psychodrama. Without communication, an unsuccessful party can arise through lack of social cohesion.

Designing the Party

To create a coherent party, party creation must begin before character creation begins. What is the organizing force of the party? How does the in-world force cater to the players' desires for gameplay?

As part of this, and as part of the social contract, explore the alignment question: idealistic good is functionally incompatible with mercenary and chaotic unaligned. Someone won't be having fun. (Unless, of course, the player /wants/ player-versus-player conflict —usually with words — but this must be agreed upon in advance. Communication is key.)

Mechanics

Once you have the "group" created, the mechanical beast rears its head. Not all powers are created equal. Worse off, some powers "sound" awesome... and aren't. Players who don't memorize the DDI and CharOp boards will be worse off, mechanically, than those who do. The trick here is to have rough equality in power. The best way to battle choice paralysis is to present most players with "scaffolding." Go to the charOp boards and make a list of the blue and light blue powers that they can pick for their level. (Never ever start a party at high level. Learning a character is complex enough at 1-3.) Obviously, make recommendations, not requirements.

Another way to do this is to ignore the books entirely. Have people describe their optimal "heroes" down to their signature moves. (Everyone should have a good reason for adventuring with the group. I've been bitten by that problem myself a few times.) Allow the people who like mechanical bits to then flesh out the powers so defined, but for the rest, reflavour and retag good powers so they match the idiom described. The huge abstraction gap between mechanics and flavour is your friend, if embraced.

Everyone should, at 1st level, have +4 or +5 in their primary stat. D&D is, ultimately, a game about combat. Sucking at combat while everyone else doesn't is not much fun. As a GM, make sure the numbers work. Let the players make flavour, then instantiate the mechanics based on their requirements. Looking through the books should be encouraged for them to find awesome stuff that looks like fun, ignoring the mechanics.

Group Play

This was the easy part. The hard part is getting the party to cooperate. Uncooperative parties in 4e are deadly to themselves and to fun. Pavlovian encouragement may be necessary at first. Hand out bonuses to people who both plan (and RP) their characters. Awesome should always be rewarded. Cooperation is awesome, involvement is awesome, using the environment is awesome (and should always either be a minor or be more effective than an at-will if a standard. Try to have at least one awesome environment thing for a fight, but this is a digression)

Getting past norming into a cooperating group is hard. And here is where I'd like to direct the reader. If everyone has a good to-hit and powers that aren't red or purple, then the deciding thing is tactics. As a GM, use effort-based XP to basically "auto-level" the enemies so that players eventually have a mix of easy and hard fights, regardless of what level they are.

Optional party generation trick: After figuring out the reason for adventuring (never ever just meet in a tavern) have everyone, including the DM, write down a race on a blank sheet of paper. Pass the sheets around the circle. Then, everyone chooses a fun class for the race. Pass. Based on the race and class given to you, choose 2 backgrounds, pass. Then next person chooses 2 more backgrounds. Pile all x+1 characters in the center and everyone grabs one they like. The players then detail the particular class features they want and the rough "theme" of the character. Encourage them to imagine a moment of awesome. Then let the person who loves paperwork generate a short list of powers to choose from at each level.

Comments strongly encouraged as well as feedback.

I've used the party generation trick when running games of Pax Draconis many many years ago. It was highly successful. The rest of the discussion is based on landmines that have exploded in parties I've played with or GMed for.

Also, be aware of suicidal characters; it almost always means they want to swap out. Let them do so, because it'll just threaten the party otherwise.

On reflavouring, and its difficulties: link

In OD&D high level characters had more hit points, a improved to-hit chance, and due to acquisition of magic items, a superior armor class. Wizards and clerics had increased damage due to higher levels spell but all the other classes had flat damage curve. If it increased it was solely due to having a magic item. The difference between the highest and lowest values was not dramatic in OD&D. High level character could be overwhelmed through attrition.

Starting with AD&D 1st, the difference between the highest level and the lowest level began to increase. Non-wizards, particularly fighters, also improved how in much damage they did as well as enjoyed a improved armor class, more hit points, etc.

With 3rd edition the wealth of options increased dramatically for all classes. A trend that was continued in 4th editions. This was especially telling in the use of the open ended ascending AC. Both editions made it easy to push the armor class of high levels to point where a natural 20 was needed by most lower level creatures. Given the fact that the methods of dealing damage increased both in frequency and amount dealt this one-two punch meant that not even attrition tactics were effective against the highest levels.

The open ended scale was also applied to skills and other non-combat skills. Leaving higher level characters with bonuses larger than the +19 difference generated by opposing d20 rolls. This also led to effect where the difficulty of mundane objects became trivial high level characters. Leading to many authors to develop special variant of doors, traps, in the quest to find challenges for high level character. These variants were considered by some to push the limits of being believable.

D&D 5e in contrast caps the open ended bonuses of previous editions. An example is the proficiency bonus which starts at +2 at 1st level and +6 at 20th. Ability scores at capped at 20 when a character levels and gains a attribute increase. Monster to hit bonus and Armor Class are similarly scaled.

This result in a game in which the power balance is similar to that of the 1974 edition of OD&D. Although it is achieved by using a different set of mechanics and numbers.

Character differences The mechanics of the 1974 edition of OD&D were very minimalist compared to later editions. When players attempted as their characters to deal with traps, roleplay with NPCs, figure out mechanism. They had to use their own skills in conjunction with the referee rulings. The implication of this is that in terms of mechanics there was little that was different between characters.

This extended partially into combat where all classes started out with the same to hit chances and dealt the same damage (1d6) regardless of weapon.

AD&D 1st, and 2nd edition made the classes very different from one another. 3rd edition refined the flexibility introduced in 2nd edition so that just about any type of character could be produced throughout the 20th level of play. However this was achieved through the combination of combined specialized elements from classes and feats. Feats and classes themselves were highly specific. A pure fighter was very different than a pure Wizard.

The difference between the characters in 5e returns D&D to a situation similar to that of 1974 OD&D. However unlike the minimalist OD&D, the differences between characters are baked into the mechanics through bounded accuracy.

It can be basically summed up as Any character can attempt any actions but some are better than other at certain actions. A handful of abilities (like spellcasting, martial skill, religion, etc) remain the specialized ability of a specific class. Everything else, anybody can do.

In OD&D the everything else boiled down to player skill. In D&D 5e adds specific mechanics that can be improved through advancement. In the D&D 5e Basic Set this is mostly due to the choice of proficient skills and what ability gets increased. This produced a dynamic that is unique to 5e.

• 2nd edition every character could specialize through kits as well as classes. Kits often focused on non combat abilities.
• 3rd edition every character could either specialize by taking repeated levels in the same class and specific feats or they could become generalists by taking levels in other classes.
• Each characters has specialized abilities as a result of their class but are generalists otherwise.