Newbie T3 Char recommendations

[mafddawg]

So, I might have rope a newbie rpg-player into playing dnd 3.5 t3 with us. I'd like to set him up with something simple for him to expand into while feeling free to mold his play experience. The group is a high-op(I know you're reading this) t3 group atm, so i'd like for him something that's powerful but straighfroward and simple, yet room to grow.

My guess is single classed Crusader, but if he does want to flex his charop wings does anyone have springboard to jump from there?

[Arranis Thelmos]

Ask him about what roles he'd like to play in a party. Is he interested in front-line fighting, manipulation of enemies, control of the battlefield, buffing party members, that sort of thing. After determining his role in the party, center a build around his interests. If you center a character around his interests, he can make his own playability experience from there.

Hope that helps! :smallsmile:

[Lonely Tylenol]

If it's a high-op group, I'd put him in a slightly higher than T3 position (like, say, Spontaneous Druidic Avenger) and let that bridge the gap in his play experience. It also lets him do a little of everything with the right spell selection, without overwhelming him with different options (in my games, I tend to gear newer players toward spontaneous casters, so as to avoid the issue of overwhelming them with options).

[VGLordR2]

For this power level, I would recommend a Dragonfire Adept. They are very simple to play, but there are several ways to customize them. They have a very caster-y feel, without actually getting into the complex casting system. Also, they is not so powerful as to dominate a group, but they can hold their own very well. It also has some pretty awesome flavor, and they are immensely fun to roleplay. I think it's perfect for a player who is just starting to dip their feet into the D&D world.

[Kuulvheysoon]

I think that you've got the right idea when it comes to ToB.

I'd actually suggest Warblade, though. Feats like Exotic Weapon Proficiency can be awful tempting for a new player, and Warblade lets you actually get some mileage out of it.

They're also perfectly playable straight to 20th level, and as long as he picks maneuvers that even just sound cool, he'll be fine. Add in the fact that he can switch them out anyways...

[Zyoto12]

The binder isn't a bad option either. Decent power, and easily adaptable to nearly any role, and only one book to read through. Should be able to let your player experiment a bit with what role he wants to do.

[Greyfeld85]

If it's high-op T3, and he's a new player, then give him something slightly higher power but simple, like a Sorcerer.

[Draz74]

If it's high-op T3, and he's a new player, then give him something slightly higher power but simple, like a Sorcerer.

Eh, Tier 3 is often just as powerful "out of the box" as Tier 2. Sometimes more. Unless the Tier 2 character stumbles onto using options like Gate or something.


The binder isn't a bad option either. Decent power, and easily adaptable to nearly any role, and only one book to read through. Should be able to let your player experiment a bit with what role he wants to do.

Binder gets my vote for "most complicated non-Vancian class in the game." (With the possible exceptions of Incarnum.) Not so newbie-friendly IMO.

Dragonfire Adept, Warlock, Crusader, Warblade, Beguiler are much better choices.

[Greyfeld85]

Eh, Tier 3 is often just as powerful "out of the box" as Tier 2. Sometimes more. Unless the Tier 2 character stumbles onto using options like Gate or something.

So.... what's your point, exactly?

[Kuulvheysoon]

So.... what's your point, exactly?

I think what he means is that although classes like the sorc have the potential to become T1/2, doesn't mean that you'll build it as such if you don't have the necessary experience/knowledge.

Like how a blaster (non-mailman) sorc isn't a T2 character.

[Greyfeld85]

I think what he means is that although classes like the sorc have the potential to become T1/2, doesn't mean that you'll build it as such if you don't have the necessary experience/knowledge.

Like how a blaster (non-mailman) sorc isn't a T2 character.

But that goes for pretty much every class created, ever. Wizard, Druid, Archivist, Psion, Cleric... even T1 classes become T4 or lower if you use the wrong spells.

The point is to give the player a class that's simple to learn and isn't innately weaker than the other PCs. Of course he's going to need a little help choosing spells that don't suck, but that goes for every single class in the game.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

As long as you have enough INT to cast the spells, the Beguiler is IMO the hardest class to permanently screw up in the game (that is, highest utter basement floor of optimization). They have a fixed spell list with many, many useful things on it at each level, and while their skills, d6 HD and light armor use are nice benefits over a wizard, you don't strictly need to make proper use of them.

The Warblade is probably the easiest T3 class you can use to "keep up" with a high op group (highest reasonable floor of optimization outside of a druid). Just a few nice core feats like Power Attack, Combat Reflexes and EWP: Spiked Chain, combined with the mere suggestion to "focus on Iron Heart and/or Diamond Mind, and get White Raven Tactics," will ensure the player contributes... at least to combat.

[eggs]

Without familiarity with the contents of the monster manual, it isn't even clear what the most powerful spells (like Planar Binding, Polymorph) can do, let alone what they can do that's worth doing.

I'd expect a newbie with a Warblade to be more useful/to die later than a newbie with a Sorcerer. Even with Polymorph and Celerity preemptively added to the character sheet.

[Sgt. Cookie]

Can't go wrong with Bard.

Seriously, has there ever been a bad Bard build?

[Person_Man]

I would suggest avoiding a melee class. Having DM'd for a lot of new players, I've found that handling things like Power Attack, iterative attacks, and various modifiers (flanking, higher ground, invisibility, etc), can be a real chore for new players, and that they often choose to do things with a low probability of success because they misunderstand the game rules.

The solution to this problem is to give them no bad options. So I agree with the idea of using a Sorcerer with a reasonable but fun spell list. Just ask the player what types of things he would like to do, pick out the spells that do those things simply, print them out for him, and let him know how many times per day he can cast them. For example, lets say you're a 10 level character. The list could be:


0th (6 per day) Detect Magic, Read Magic, Detect Poison, Prestidigitation, Mending, Open/Close, Ghost Sound, Mage Hand, Message,
1st (7 uses per day): Shield, Mage Armor, Enlarge Person Magic Missile, Alarm.
2nd (7 uses per day): Protection from Arrows, Glitterdust, Scorching Ray, Shatter, Invisibility.
3rd (7 uses per day): Fireball, Lightning Bolt, Displacement.
4th (6 uses per day): Solid Fog, Bestow Curse.
5th (4 uses per day): Hold Monster.


That gives them a solid mix of offense, defense, control, and utility. All of its core. It covers most of the stereotypical things a magic user can do. And there are no abusive "open ended" spells (Alter Self, Polymorph, Summon Monster, Dominate Person) which would cause major headaches for the group.

[Draz74]

So.... what's your point, exactly?

My point is that he will likely be fine with a T3 class, rather than something with "slightly higher power."

[ShneekeyTheLost]

My suggestions will be giving choices based on what the new player wants to do with his character. I will be using a logic tree to determine my suggestions.

Does he wish to play a beatstick/fighter/someone who hits things?

If so, then: Do you want to be the 'tank' who just tells things 'is that all you got', or do you wish to be more of a 'striker' who isn't as able to take a hit, but has things other than 'beating on it' as an option?

If Tank, then: Do you want self-healing and area-effect lockdown, or near immunity to just about anything someone will throw at you? If the former, Crusader. If the latter, Warblade.

If Striker, then Swordsage, possibly with some Rogue thrown in

Does he wish to play an 'archer'? Swift Hunter

Does he wish to play a 'caster'?

Do you want a secondary attribute (i.e. sneaky caster, blasty caster, etc...) or just a jack-of-all-trades caster?

If jack of all trades, then Sorcerer

If 'sneaky caster' then Beguiler.

If 'Blasty' then ask "Do you want to do more damage, or apply more 'save or lose' effects?"

If Damage, then Warlock, building to HFW
If 'SoL' then DFA

If he expresses an interest in fighting and casting, then ask what sort of casting to go with fighting:

If 'mostly self buffing', then Suel Archanamach build or PsyWar
If 'channeling spells into attacks', then Duskblade dip on a Sorcerer into Spellsword dip and Abjurant Champion or Duskblade dip into Warmage build
If 'battlefield control, then dance in' or 'party buff/support' then Bard

Do not steer a newbie to Wizard, it will simply frustrate him.

Does he wish to be a 'sneaky bastard type'?

Do you want to shiv people in the spleen? If so, then Rogue/Swordsage
Do you want to shoot people at range? If so, Swift Hunter
Do you want to be able to 'fill in any blank'? If so, then Factotum
Do you also want some casting to shut things down? If so, then Bard or Beguiler

All of these sneaky bastard options include 'locks and traps' handling and enough skill points to handle whatever skillmonkey aspect he wishes to take on.

[Greyfeld85]

My point is that he will likely be fine with a T3 class, rather than something with "slightly higher power."

The problem with most T3 classes is that they're more complex than most newbies should really be playing on their first run. Figuring out the nuances of illusion/charm spells for a beguiler, learning a whole new combat system for ToB classes, discovering how to make creative use of your limited invocations for DFA/Warlock, etc etc.

Players who've never roleplayed before shouldn't be thrown in the deep end with nuanced classes and class features that require a moderate level of system mastery to use properly.

That's why I suggested the Sorcerer. With a spontaneous spell list, the new player doesn't have to worry about a constantly changing daily loadout. With a large spell list to pick from (AKA every splat book in existence), he can decide what sort of caster he wants to play. As a class with no class features to speak of, he can focus on his spells and familiar instead of having to also figure out how to work them together properly with a slew of other abilities.

It really is the perfect "beginner" class, and without extensive knowledge of the system, he's unlikely to accidentally break the game just because he's playing tier 2.

[Greyfeld85]

Without familiarity with the contents of the monster manual, it isn't even clear what the most powerful spells (like Planar Binding, Polymorph) can do, let alone what they can do that's worth doing.

I'd expect a newbie with a Warblade to be more useful/to die later than a newbie with a Sorcerer. Even with Polymorph and Celerity preemptively added to the character sheet.

Um... that's actually a good thing. You're talking about spells that are known to break the game in the right hands. A newbie can still throw out Grease or Fly or Summon Monster Whatever. The extent of a player's contribution isn't limited to how many game-breaking spells they know how to abuse.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

I would suggest avoiding a melee class. Having DM'd for a lot of new players, I've found that handling things like Power Attack, iterative attacks, and various modifiers (flanking, higher ground, invisibility, etc), can be a real chore for new players, and that they often choose to do things with a low probability of success because they misunderstand the game rules.

The solution to this problem is to give them no bad options. So I agree with the idea of using a Sorcerer with a reasonable but fun spell list. Just ask the player what types of things he would like to do, pick out the spells that do those things simply, print them out for him, and let him know how many times per day he can cast them. For example, lets say you're a 10 level character. The list could be:


0th (6 per day) Detect Magic, Read Magic, Detect Poison, Prestidigitation, Mending, Open/Close, Ghost Sound, Mage Hand, Message,
1st (7 uses per day): Shield, Mage Armor, Enlarge Person Magic Missile, Alarm.
2nd (7 uses per day): Protection from Arrows, Glitterdust, Scorching Ray, Shatter, Invisibility.
3rd (7 uses per day): Fireball, Lightning Bolt, Displacement.
4th (6 uses per day): Solid Fog, Bestow Curse.
5th (4 uses per day): Hold Monster.


That gives them a solid mix of offense, defense, control, and utility. All of its core. It covers most of the stereotypical things a magic user can do. And there are no abusive "open ended" spells (Alter Self, Polymorph, Summon Monster, Dominate Person) which would cause major headaches for the group.I don't see how that sorcerer is any less of a chore for new players. They still have to learn what 16 spells do, ignoring the cantrips, and when's a good time to use which spell. Compared to that, learning about situational bonuses and power attack isn't so bad.

[Person_Man]

I don't see how that sorcerer is any less of a chore for new players. They still have to learn what 16 spells do, ignoring the cantrips, and when's a good time to use which spell. Compared to that, learning about situational bonuses and power attack isn't so bad.

Perhaps it's been different for your group. But based on my personal experience, I disagree.

As I stated above, the first step is to ask the player what kinds of things they want to do. Blow stuff up? Mind control? Invisibility? Flight? OK, here's your stack of index cards on how you can do those things. In combat, pick one of those things, and it happens. And the key to (non-open ended) spells is that they work exactly the same way every time, with no other modifiers applied to them in the vast majority of situations. They have the same range, the same damage, and the same effect, in virtually every combat. My 12 year old cousin was able to figure out a Sorcerer after just 1 combat (using colored Poker chips for how many spells he got to cast for each spell level, and color coded index cards. Each time he cast a particular spell, he'd give me the appropriate chip. I think they experience also taught him a lot about money).

Now compare that to the experience I had with a 30 year old PhD who wanted to play a D&D for the first time as a Ranger. She constantly struggled with the "grind" of various bonuses and math inherent to such a character. Ranged attacks vs melee attacks, Rapidshot vs Manyshot, range increments, managing magical ammo, her animal companion's attacks, memorizing spells, what Skills could and could not be used for and what bonuses applied to them, and so on. The key problem for her was that even though her options were fairly limited (Choose Ammo and make a Full Attack or Move + Standard Action attack, or cast a spell, and then have your Animal Companion make a Full Attack or Move and Standard Action attack), she was constantly befuddled by the jumble of math and positioning (avoiding attacks of opportunity) behind it. Even when I did all of the math for her, she felt frustrated and disconnected from her character, who often contributed little to combat. After just 3 combats, she asked for an easier character, and was delighted with her next character, a Spirit Shaman (with no melee related spells).

3.X D&D is just a very fiddly game. If you want a new player to have fun at it, you need to boil it down to a manageable list of fun and easy to use options. Magic does that quite well. If you prefer melee, then Tome of Battle is also a good idea, though I would suggest only selecting standard action maneuvers, and avoiding Feats like Power Attack, Stone Power, Improved Trip, etc.

[Particle_Man]

I would argue that from a simplicity point of view warlock, dragonfire adept and crusader are winners because they never run out of something cool to do, so you don't have to worry as much about resource management.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

*snip*Firstly, next time a new player wants to play a caster I might steal that poker chip idea.

I think the problem is the fiddly bonuses, and not the melee per se. I agree that melee is prone to such bonuses, but anyone can be caught in attacks of opportunity, anyone can used ranged attacks (Scorching Ray's on that Sorcerer list), and anyone can get fiddly buffs from the rest of the party.

You're right about normal melee versus ToB, though. A warblade is going to be a more enjoyable experience than a ranger. You move if you have to, maybe do a boost, do a strike, and you're done. I still don't see why power attack is such a big deal, except that newbs (and/or anyone who doesn't know the exact AC) will make a mistake in how much to use. That said, I also play with a bunch of gamers who use excel and other computerized sheets, or are just good at calculating the bonuses in their head. In that case if you know you're going to commonly add a bunch of fiddly bonuses you can just plug them into a formula and have excel sum it up for you. I'm starting to see the difference in play styles...

Also, while I get that improved trip involves two attack rolls at different fiddly bonuses and then another potential attack with another fiddly bonus, I've seen mechanics-averse indie gamers pick up tripping without much trouble. It's probably the easiest melee trick to learn.

[gomipile]

I would recommend Spirit Shaman as well. It is technically low T2, but is very easy to play. I think it would fit very well into a high op T3 group. Also, a single classed Spirit Shaman is very hard to screw up, as though options each day are limited, the player can just pick something better the next day.

[eggs]

Um... that's actually a good thing. You're talking about spells that are known to break the game in the right hands. A newbie can still throw out Grease or Fly or Summon Monster Whatever. The extent of a player's contribution isn't limited to how many game-breaking spells they know how to abuse.
It's a good thing if the primary concern is a new player breaking the game using system mastery and tactics.

It's a bad thing if the primary concern is a new player struggling to have fun in encounters designed for a high-op group.

If this player has no experience with RPGs, I'd expect the latter to be a bigger problem.