> > That would also work. In fact, it is by far the easiest way to go about a one-character game. However, if you have a six-character party, assassins in the back would not help much, and I'd rather have my casters gain SP normally rather than 1 or 2 per level, as they would if they were retrained to a non-spellcasting class. Of course, this is all assuming that the characters in question are in the back three positions (as they should have beenm if they were casters originally). If not, then by all means, retrain to assassin.
>
> The plan I had in mind was something like this:
> 1) Initially: Knight-Knight-Knight-Wizard-Sorcerer-Rogue
> 2) As soon as possible: Assassin-Assassin-Assassin-Wizard-Sorcerer-Rogue
> 3) When the two spellcasters have learned all their spells, swap their classes: Assassin-Assassin-Assassin-Sorcerer-Wizard-Rogue
> 4) When they have learned all of both sets, Assassin-Assassin-Assassin-Druid-Druid-Rogue, either with the same three assassins as before, or by moving your front three back and your back three forward.
>

Rogues are fighters, and therefore useless in the back row. You may as well have two Knights/Assassins and a Rogue, and retrain the Rogue as an Assassin or a caster as soon as your spells make him obsolete. You'll have more SP that way.

If you simply must have a fighter in the back row, at least put him fourth, in case somebody gets paralyzed. Then again, with experienced casters and plenty of SP, paralysis should be a very rare problem indeed.

For the ultimate party, you'll want to shoot for Assassin-Assassin-Assassin-caster-caster-caster, where all six members preferably know all spells. I like to use the SP from my front three for healing between battles and DISARMing.

^v^:)^v^
FB