PDA

View Full Version : Help me suggest a class for my new player



true_shinken
2010-07-22, 11:07 PM
So, I got a new player for my campaign. He is an old friend that will be joining and he has not played RPG in a few years, plus he never was very into D&D (more of a (old) World of Darkness type).
The is at level 10, so I think it might perhaps be a bit too complicated for him.
Party has a human Barbarian/Hellreaver, a human Mystic Ranger/(ex)Assassin/Jade Phoenix Mage, a human Rogue/Swashbuckler/Invisible Blade, a hellbred Monk/Ardent (he currently goes with Vow of Poverty, but I'm trying to get him to drop it - it gimps him so much!) and a hobgoblin Sorcerer (with a single level of Fighter).
Which class would you suggest for this new player? I thought maybe a support class, but I know he likes being in the frontlines...
Help me, playground!

Jjeinn-tae
2010-07-22, 11:14 PM
What about warlock? They have support abilities, can make a good "frontlines" guy if you use the channel eldritch blast through melee attack blast shape, and with the ability to wear light armor with a decent dexterity he could probably be pretty survivable. Assuming you aren't expecting something incredibly optimized of course.

Greenish
2010-07-22, 11:17 PM
Warblade is nice, though getting dropped at level 10 complicates things somewhat.

Warlock and dragonfire adept are pretty simple, but neither is very frontliney.

Barbarian has rather few options, but what it has (rage -> charge) is strong.

Favoured Soul can stand in the frontlines, and with some help at spell selection has decent but manageable number of options.

Dread Necromancer and Beguiler require him to get in grasp with quite a few spells, but otherwise they're nice. He can start out using handful of fun spells and expand from there as he learns.

Duskblade has few spells known from a limited list (but many uses of said spells, no need to skimp) and very straight-forward approach to combat. It's the basic magic knight.

Kylarra
2010-07-22, 11:28 PM
DFA is frontline-y enough though, since you can play it with just a con focus and breathe on everything in front of you. It's also free (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20060912a&page=2).

true_shinken
2010-07-22, 11:32 PM
What about warlock? They have support abilities, can make a good "frontlines" guy if you use the channel eldritch blast through melee attack blast shape, and with the ability to wear light armor with a decent dexterity he could probably be pretty survivable. Assuming you aren't expecting something incredibly optimized of course.

Hmm, I think that might work. I even have a handbook on melee warlocks, might as well put that advice in play...


Warblade is nice, though getting dropped at level 10 complicates things somewhat.
Yeah, my first thought was a martial adept, but I already know from the JPM player that they might be a bit hard for a beginner to play (though she certainly bit more than she could chew - she has to choose between ranged and melee each round, has (Mystic) Ranger and Assassin casting, Knowledge Devotion (she keeps forgetting to make those knowledge checks) and maneuvers. Amusingly enough, she fills the healbot role with Healing Touch, a few items and Devoted Spirit maneuvers.
...but I digress ^^ Yeah, 10th level martial adepts are kind hard on a beginner.


Warlock and dragonfire adept are pretty simple, but neither is very frontliney.
You certainly can build a melee warlock, though. Do you have any idea on how a melee dragonfire adept would work (if at all)?


Barbarian has rather few options, but what it has (rage -> charge) is strong.
We already have a Lion Totem Barbarian/Hellreaver in the group, so I think another charger would be pretty redundant.


Favoured Soul can stand in the frontlines, and with some help at spell selection has decent but manageable number of options.
Also one of my first thoughts. Probably gonna suggest him that.


Dread Necromancer and Beguiler require him to get in grasp with quite a few spells, but otherwise they're nice. He can start out using handful of fun spells and expand from there as he learns.
Dread Necro is even made to be in the frontlines. Didn't even think of that. Thanks for pointing it out.
A Beguiler, though... I don't think would find it's niche in the party. We already have an assassin and a rogue. Don't think a beguiler would add much to the party.


Duskblade has few spells known from a limited list (but many uses of said spells, no need to skimp) and very straight-forward approach to combat. It's the basic magic knight.
Man, Duskblade is one of my favourite class of all times but I didn't even think about it. Can't believe it! ^^
So I guess I'll show him Warlock, Duskblade, Dread Necromancer and Favored Soul. Let's hope he likes one of them.

Jjeinn-tae
2010-07-22, 11:32 PM
DFA is frontline-y enough though, since you can play it with just a con focus and breathe on everything in front of you. It's also free (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20060912a&page=2).

Why did I buy that book now? :smallconfused:

The only problem with that is lack of base attack, but breathing fire is a front line thing.

Greenish
2010-07-22, 11:37 PM
Do you have any idea on how a melee dragonfire adept would work (if at all)?Well, it's poor BAB, and the main attraction is the breath weapon, which requires standard actions, so actually hitting things is rather inefficient. Does standing near the front and breathing on enemies count?

Dread Necro is even made to be in the frontlines. Didn't even think of that. Thanks for pointing it out.

Man, Duskblade is one of my favourite class of all times but I didn't even think about it. Can't believe it! ^^One sometimes overlooks the strangest of things. I don't like to think about the minutes (hours!) I've spend looking for a thing I was currently holding in my hand, for example…

dgnslyr
2010-07-23, 12:23 AM
Warblade's not to complicated, it's only about half a dozen maneuvers at any given moment. Lion Totem Barbarian is even easier, just Rage+Pounce everything within 60'.

Superglucose
2010-07-23, 12:41 AM
I am a big believer in Druid as the first class anyone plays in D&D at lower levels.

If he wants to be in the front lines, he can grab a stick and start hitting things. If he wants to cast spells, he can simply cast spells. It's all around a good introduction.

I am also a HUGE believer that the first class should be a caster of some sort.

So I am going to say he should play a straight cleric. With a Cleric the Vancian Casting is pretty easy. "Pick some spells from this list that sound cool. Here's how to cast, here's how to attack, go nuts." Maybe point him towards some of the combat spells like Divine Power, etc. And if his spell choice today was bad, he'll get to prepare all new spells tomorrow!

EDIT: Plus screwing up a cleric is hard.

Rixx
2010-07-23, 01:00 AM
Barbarian or Fighter is straightforward and rather nice. I don't think level 10 is a good "beginner" level, though - it's about that point that the rules start to get more complex.

Prime32
2010-07-23, 07:56 AM
My vote's for dragonfire adept as long as he has the Entangling Exhalation feat.

Kylarra
2010-07-23, 08:27 AM
You actually have enough melee-bots right now, so I think DFA or Warlock or some similar ranged support character with the option of standing closer if necessary would probably be the best choice. Admittedly, I'm biased towards DFA as it is one of my favorite classes, but with entangling exhalation and breath effects, it provides a fair amount of variety, in a simple form for a newbie.

thompur
2010-07-23, 09:29 AM
Yeah, I gotta go with Warlock. Very little resource management. Give him a Chausible of fell power and/ or a Warlock Scepter, give him a little guidance on invocations and feats and he's golden.

As a recommendation, I strongly suggest Flee the Scene. It's virtually the only invocation that can directly help other party members.

Petrankov
2010-07-23, 11:35 AM
I usually have new players (especially starting at high levels) play something basic. Fighter or Rogue straight up. Once they have the hang of the rules then I let them start poking around the books for something more interesting.

Lysander
2010-07-23, 11:54 AM
I am a big believer in Druid as the first class anyone plays in D&D at lower levels.

If he wants to be in the front lines, he can grab a stick and start hitting things. If he wants to cast spells, he can simply cast spells. It's all around a good introduction.

I am also a HUGE believer that the first class should be a caster of some sort.

So I am going to say he should play a straight cleric. With a Cleric the Vancian Casting is pretty easy. "Pick some spells from this list that sound cool. Here's how to cast, here's how to attack, go nuts." Maybe point him towards some of the combat spells like Divine Power, etc. And if his spell choice today was bad, he'll get to prepare all new spells tomorrow!

EDIT: Plus screwing up a cleric is hard.

I agree with cleric. He can enter melee and has spells that are undeniably useful (including the band-aid kit).

true_shinken
2010-07-23, 12:10 PM
I am a big believer in Druid as the first class anyone plays in D&D at lower levels.
"Lower levels"? This is level 10! O.o The big guns have been big guns for a long time now...


I am also a HUGE believer that the first class should be a caster of some sort.
This is probably the first time I've heard someone say something like that.


Warblade's not to complicated, it's only about half a dozen maneuvers at any given moment. Lion Totem Barbarian is even easier, just Rage+Pounce everything within 60'.
The problem with martial adepts is that you first need to get your player to get the basics of melee combat... and then learn a completely new set of rules. Kind of complicated.
We already have a Lion Totem Barbarian in the game; adding another one would be a bit redundant, I believe.


You actually have enough melee-bots right now, so I think DFA or Warlock or some similar ranged support character with the option of standing closer if necessary would probably be the best choice. Admittedly, I'm biased towards DFA as it is one of my favorite classes, but with entangling exhalation and breath effects, it provides a fair amount of variety, in a simple form for a newbie.
Thing is the player enjoys being in the thick of combat. I don't think he'd enjoy a ranged characted. A melee warlock could fit both roles, though.


Yeah, I gotta go with Warlock. Very little resource management. Give him a Chausible of fell power and/ or a Warlock Scepter, give him a little guidance on invocations and feats and he's golden.

As a recommendation, I strongly suggest Flee the Scene. It's virtually the only invocation that can directly help other party members.
Yeah, I'm going to suggest Warlock and really really hope he plays one. He'd be a lot of a glass cannon without the right directions, though.

gbprime
2010-07-23, 12:18 PM
Your first class needs to have special abilities without being complicated. Druid and cleric are out, because of the vast array of spells to choose from. If you're going to start with a caster, start with a spontaneous caster with a fixed spell list, and have the DM help with the list.

But warlock... that's awesome for a beginning player. You have mystical powers, but not so many that you cannot choose them yourself, and you can be a frontline fighter, ranged support, stealth expert, diplomat/con artist... and can use wands and staves for nearly anything else.

Kylarra
2010-07-23, 12:21 PM
Warlock does have more book support, but I honestly think you're dismissing DFA a bit too out of hand, considering they're far tougher than warlocks and thus have greater survivability in the thick of things, being able to be nearly purely CON focused and having a higher base HD.

true_shinken
2010-07-23, 12:33 PM
Warlock does have more book support, but I honestly think you're dismissing DFA a bit too out of hand, considering they're far tougher than warlocks and thus have greater survivability in the thick of things, being able to be nearly purely CON focused and having a higher base HD.

I'm not dismissing them, I'll point them out as an option to the player. ^^
I'm just totally in love with melee warlocks, like my guide makes crystal clear.

Ruinix
2010-07-23, 12:37 PM
druid. is to damn hard to fuk up with a druid and can be optimized to the wildshapes or to the caster side. and is a good add to the party for buffs and support heal.

gbprime
2010-07-23, 12:43 PM
druid. ... is a good add to the party for buffs and support heal.

Provided the player knows which spells to select, yes. That's why we're not recommending it for a FIRST character. The class has so much choice of what to do each and every day, a new player might easily get lost.

Ruinix
2010-07-23, 01:28 PM
Provided the player knows which spells to select, yes. That's why we're not recommending it for a FIRST character. The class has so much choice of what to do each and every day, a new player might easily get lost.

but he have ALL avaible, and he can wrong 1 day with this or that spell and can swap for the next day. he can experiment with it. and even if that is to hard willshape optimize is an easy and powerfull way to go.

spontaneus caster with fixed spells is a very very harsh way to go with a new guy, cause any error have to carry all the way to the next level.

true_shinken
2010-07-24, 12:14 PM
but he have ALL avaible, and he can wrong 1 day with this or that spell and can swap for the next day. he can experiment with it. and even if that is to hard willshape optimize is an easy and powerfull way to go.
That's reasonable, except the player might not realize he does neet physical stats as a druid, might buy a magical scimitar, might not even realize how powerful wild shape is (since he probably never say the stats of any animal, specially the most powerful like the fleshraker).
He can experiment with his spells and that's about it. Even if he does want to experiment with spells and wild shape forms, that requires a major amount of book-keeping.
"Oh, wait, now I'm an eagle, what are my stats again? Does it affect my saving throws?"
Druid is a very difficult to play class. I certainly don't think it's a good idea for a player new to the game.


spontaneus caster with fixed spells is a very very harsh way to go with a new guy, cause any error have to carry all the way to the next level.
That's the good thing about DFAs and Warlocks. They don't have rubbish invocations. Even the ones that are bad are not so bad, really.

Shpadoinkle
2010-07-24, 06:18 PM
Personally, I'd run a one-shot game at level 3 or 4. I think a warlock or dragonfire adept would be a good introductory character, since they're pretty much just "You have these abilities and can use them whenever." After that session you can have him read over the books and see if there's another class he wants to try. If he's happy with that character though, you can just level it up to 10-ish and introduce him to the regular game.

aivanther
2010-07-24, 06:40 PM
The only problem with that is lack of base attack, but breathing fire is a front line thing.

Nice thing about DFA: Least invocation- endure exposure. It's a 24 hour endure elements + immunity to your breath effect. IMO every Dragonfire Adept should get this first level and put it on all your fellow party members every day.

dspeyer
2010-07-25, 12:21 AM
spontaneus caster with fixed spells is a very very harsh way to go with a new guy, cause any error have to carry all the way to the next level.

Just house-rule that. Suggest he play a sorcerer and then let him retcon his spells after the first session.

Alternatively, beguiler. Practically no chargen.

This has the advantage that once he settles, he can learn the intricacies of a short spell list and be good to go.

Superglucose
2010-07-25, 12:40 AM
Provided the player knows which spells to select, yes. That's why we're not recommending it for a FIRST character. The class has so much choice of what to do each and every day, a new player might easily get lost.
Versus selecting good feats? But the advantage to Druid is the spells can change day to day.


"Lower levels"? This is level 10! O.o The big guns have been big guns for a long time now...
Any character at level 10 will be confusing for a first timer. The rules for magic items alone will give them fits.

[/quote]
This is probably the first time I've heard someone say something like that.
[/QUOTE]
All of the reasons that people give for not starting with a caster and starting with something insane like a Warlock (I've been playing for years and I still don't understand invocations) or boring like a Fighter are crazy.

There is nothing, I repeat, nothing, that is exceptionally difficult with the casting system. The advantage to the divine casters is that they are notoriously difficult to build poorly, and even if you pick the wrong spells you can do it again tomorrow... with all different spells if you want!

Humans don't learn by being talked at. They learn by watching and doing.

So I believe the best way to teach D&D is to a) start at level 1. Not level 4, not level 10, level 1. And b) have them play a caster... preferably a divine caster. What better way to learn how to make a good character than to see that "Longstrider" isn't as useful as "Entangle" because you don't move all that much in combat? You don't just learn how to play your character (and with Druids you learn melee and casting), you learn how the game works.

I'm possibly biased though, because I started with a wizard. He was an evocation specialist and while it wasn't great (lol pewpew with transmutation banned), I had fun. And I learned how the rules worked.

true_shinken
2010-07-25, 10:27 AM
Versus selecting good feats? But the advantage to Druid is the spells can change day to day.
Yeah, but that does not matter when you choose to build toward a concept that sucks - like for example, the 'druid as meant to be played' from the PHB, sword and board.
You really think a player that goes scimitar-and-wooden-shield and then focuses on wild feats will realize he's not doing so well because he's not picking the right spells?



Any character at level 10 will be confusing for a first timer. The rules for magic items alone will give them fits.
The rules for magic items...? You have X slots, and Y money to fill those slots. What's confusing about this? The variety of magic items might overwhelm a new player, but the only way to avoid that is Vow of Poverty and it not only locks the player on a saint-like alignment, it spends two feats and is actually weaker than the alternative.




This is probably the first time I've heard someone say something like that.

All of the reasons that people give for not starting with a caster and starting with something insane like a Warlock (I've been playing for years and I still don't understand invocations) or boring like a Fighter are crazy.
Well, that's because you find melee boring, it seems. A fighter can still have lots of options in combat. Someone with Double-Hit, Evasive Reflexes, Stand Still and Sidestep, for example gets two hits on each attack of opportunity. He can choose each hit to 1) deal damage, 2) stop the target in his place, 3) be replaced by a 5-foot step. Every time he does 1 or 2, he also gets a 5-foot step before that. And that's just four feats.
On a sidenote: I have a player that goes with a Mystic Ranger/Assassin/Jade Phoenix Mage in this groups. Sometimes she just freaks out due to sheer amount of options she has. I wonder if it doesn't stress her, even. Recntly I made a one-shot game and she chose a dwarf fighter only with passive feats like Improved Toughness and Weapon Focus. She got to focus on the interactions and not with which she should do next round, and seemed to have a lot more fun.
Ergo, being more powerful is not a goal for everyone. If the character can contribute to the party meaningfully in a way, most people are already fine by that.
Any caster requires a lot of book-keeping. If you get a fighter, you need to remind or have on you like 2 or 3 sheets of paper with his feats. For a caster, you will almost literally have a spellbook...


There is nothing, I repeat, nothing, that is exceptionally difficult with the casting system. The advantage to the divine casters is that they are notoriously difficult to build poorly, and even if you pick the wrong spells you can do it again tomorrow... with all different spells if you want!
There is


Humans don't learn by being talked at. They learn by watching and doing.
Being a teacher myself, I strongly disagree with you.


So I believe the best way to teach D&D is to a) start at level 1. Not level 4, not level 10, level 1.
That much is evident. I just don't have the choise right now, since I'm mid-campaign.


And b) have them play a caster... preferably a divine caster. What better way to learn how to make a good character than to see that "Longstrider" isn't as useful as "Entangle" because you don't move all that much in combat? You don't just learn how to play your character (and with Druids you learn melee and casting), you learn how the game works.
The amount of book keeping of a caster might just scare the player away, though. Not everyone wants to be powerful or to 'learn how to play your character'. Melee characters are intuitive - we all know that hitting people as hard as we can make them drop. Now, for a beginner to know if it is better to blind the enemy, or to use an area of effect against the mook, or to buff his friends, or to use wild shape... That's just too much. For a druid, you must learn about conditions, melee, casting and don't get me started on polymorph. I think it's too much, really.


I'm possibly biased though, because I started with a wizard. He was an evocation specialist and while it wasn't great (lol pewpew with transmutation banned), I had fun. And I learned how the rules worked.
Well, an evocation specialist plays surprisingly a lot like a ranged warlock, does he not? :smallsmile:

Evard
2010-07-25, 12:04 PM
There are many different ways people learn, some subject you can talk at me and others I do better with a more hands on approach.

I would say have the player be a druid... but the UA Aspect of Nature. It would easily allow the player make up their own aspects of nature and it will give them more than a sword and board feel... The UA version feels more like a manga character so if they like manga/anime then that would help.

true_shinken
2010-07-25, 12:10 PM
It would easily allow the player make up their own aspects of nature and it will give them more than a sword and board feel...

You want a new player to homebrew his own material?!

Evard
2010-07-25, 12:21 PM
with you guiding him of course. He basically gives you the main feel or idea of it and you make it happen going along with the guidelines of the UA aspect of natures that are already listed.

this will also serve to give him a feel of the mechanics

Thrawn183
2010-07-25, 12:28 PM
I'm going to say Dragonfire Adept. Focus exclusively in Con and put him in full plate. He doesn't need to be proficient with it. Add in Endurance and Steadfast Determination and you'll quickly find that the character will end up more durable than any other front liner you've ever seen (simultaneously awesome hp/ac/fort/will).

In addition the mechanics are quite simple, and you never need to worry about blasting fellow pc's.

Evard
2010-07-25, 12:55 PM
What is the dragonfire adept?

Caphi
2010-07-25, 12:56 PM
It's from Dragon Magic. It's like a warlock with slightly different invocations and dragon breath powers.

Kylarra
2010-07-25, 01:00 PM
What is the dragonfire adept?

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20060912a&page=2