What classes are most fun/boreing at low levels?

[Rfkannen]

Most discusion here is about level 20 characters. What about lower than that? Like level 2. What classes are realy fun at level 2? What is realy boreing at level 2? Who is strong at level 2? Who is weak? What is the best level 2 multiclass? All these questions and more I want you to awnser.

[Felvion]

Would you mind if i take this to level 3? This way you make sure all of the classes get their path features and i think it's better to judge them that way.
Barbarian: Awesome! Probably the tankiest class around. I prefer spirit totem ones from bersekers. The extra damage from rage is nice plus you get some rituals that can help in terms of scouting or gathering info in the wild. I've seen it in game and it really is an awesome early class.

Bard:The limited spell selection hurts a bit and the first 2 levels may find this class more on the boring side. When they hit level 3, bards start to show glimpses of their greatness. I'd say level 3 is the sweetest spot for bard. Expertise is great that early, so are the bonus proficiencies from both paths. Valor bards skyrocket their ac and their effectiveness in battle while lore ones become the ultimate skillmasters. Cutting words is also great and very funny given that not many debuffs come in play this early.

Cleric:Only seen one in play and kinda disappointed me at early levels. Not much things to do beside spells. Channeling divinities is good but only 1 per rest. I'm negatively biased against this class for sure but still it's my evaluation!:smallbiggrin: I don't like much of their early spell list too...

Druid: Moon druids can go into their signature onion mode from level 2. The spellslots are few, it hurts every caster, other than that they are the tankiest class around when the hit 2. Second level spell choises are really good and strong though most of the list is expectedly nature related.

Figther: Nothing great until they get their paths. They are good in battle and have to rely on background or race to find things to do outside of it. EK is more interesting than the other paths early but as far as i am concerned fighters are more fun to play just a bit later (4-6).

Monk: The class offers its main features right from the very early levels but it takes them a while to scale to a satisfying point. I haven't seen one in action but in paper a level 2-3 monk is fun to play if you like the monk theme. In total, i find the monk class on of the smoother-scaling classes in the game.

Paladin: Pals are great but MAD which hurts more early. They are strong in battle, just like fighters are (maybe a bit weaker) but they also get a lot of flavor stuff including healing, few spells, detect evil ability... They are also a cha-dependent class which is great as they can also be party faces right from the start. They are fun but maybe not as effective as they'd like. They shine more as they get some higher stats later.

Ranger: At first most people considered them a weak class. This has turned out wrong and in-game experience has shown that they are great when doing very specific things. Most of the out-of-combat abilities are very situational and may not be that useful but they are very good range damage dealers. The beasmaster path is best described as awkward but hunters are awesome. Good class if you like the outlander feeling but very restricting build-wise.

Rogue: Rogues are beasts early. Cunning action and sneak attack synergise great, they have lots of skills and usually fit in tool/kit proficient backgrounds, expertise is huge at lvl 1, what not to love? At 3 they get awesome path choises. Assassinate is beasty ability and many nova damage builds include it. One of the best early classes.

Sorcerer: All casters have a hard time early on but sorcerers are the ones that hurt more. Even when metamagic comes in game (lvl 3)... Their limited spell selection combined with the few slots due to early levels result in very predictable gameplay. In fact their playstyle is determined once they pick their spells upon each level up which is bad. The get better later, when more spells, slots and sorcery points come i play.

Warlock: There was a recent thread arguing how common 2-level warlock dips are. This speaks for itself! Warlocks have really strong start and their first 2-3 levels are absolutely great. Their skill list and the invocations make this class very versatile as you can go from full melee to arcane nerd-sage to perfect charlatan. Or even all 3 combined if build carefully.

Wizard: Early game can be hard for some wizards. Low hp and defences can turn those nasty goblin criticals into one shot deaths. Surely, diviners or abjurers don't suffer that much. Wizards are the gods of the game but in early levels they have fewer slots than they used to in 3.5. Still they have the largest spell list which starts to show signs of their godly nature even in low levels. No wizard though likes those levels more than the later ones!

In overall, i think the casters are in their weakest when it comes to low levels. Druids are the exception due to moon subclass.
If i had to play a 2-3 session adventure at those levels i'd choose barbarian, druid, rogue or warlock. I would avoid Sorcerer and specific paths like champion, land druid, beastmaster, way of 4 elements, necromancer... Of course some of the above are based on personal preferences but i tried my best to be as objective as possible.

[Alucard2099]

Most discusion here is about level 20 characters. What about lower than that? Like level 2. What classes are realy fun at level 2? What is realy boreing at level 2? Who is strong at level 2? Who is weak? What is the best level 2 multiclass? All these questions and more I want you to awnser.

Just about every class other then fight is about the same... however, fighter gets the action surge ability so they win for lvl 2...

[Talderas]

Bard:The limited spell selection hurts a bit and the first 2 levels may find this class more on the boring side. When they hit level 3, bards start to show glimpses of their greatness. I'd say level 3 is the sweetest spot for bard. Expertise is great that early, so are the bonus proficiencies from both paths. Valor bards skyrocket their ac and their effectiveness in battle while lore ones become the ultimate skillmasters. Cutting words is also great and very funny given that not many debuffs come in play this early.

Level 5 is the sweet spot for bard. Bardic inspiration switches from long to short rest recharge and it goes up do d8 from d6. On top of that you gain 3rd level spells and a proficiency bonus pump up. In the scope of things, this is one of the most potent levels that a bard has. Level three is potent, along with level 10, but level 10 and level 5 give a bard so much more and level 5 is still within the range of what I would call low level play.

[Z3ro]

Just about every class other then fight is about the same... however, fighter gets the action surge ability so they win for lvl 2...

Completely disagree. Action surge is great, but it's once per short rest, sharply limiting its usage.

I'd rate the classes like this:

Paladin/Ranger/Druid/Barbarian - These classes are extremely strong. Druid's shapeshifting is huge, though once it's gone their very weak. Barbarian is all-around great, but like druid relies on rage. Paladin/Ranger are similar, in that they start getting features at 2, and both are very strong.

Fighter/Rogue/Warlock/Monk - This is probably the next tier for me; solid, but not spectacular. They can do their thing well, but it's not going to beat the first group. Warlock's EB is only one beam, rogue only gets 1d6 sneak attack, the fighter only gets one action surge, the monk only gets 2 ki points. All solid, but just not enough.

Bard/Cleric/Sorcerer/Wizard - These classes all suffer the same problem; not enough spell slots. After too long you're stuck flinging cantrips (or just attacking if you have a good enough str/dex). The best at this point is probably bard with it's skills and inspiration, but nothing here is spectacular. Not that they can't rock an encounter (sleep, for example), but they're so limited my experience is that people playing them get frustrated quickly (this obviously changes in a couple levels).

[odigity]

Level 5 is the sweet spot for bard. Bardic inspiration switches from long to short rest recharge and it goes up do d8 from d6. On top of that you gain 3rd level spells and a proficiency bonus pump up. In the scope of things, this is one of the most potent levels that a bard has. Level three is potent, along with level 10, but level 10 and level 5 give a bard so much more and level 5 is still within the range of what I would call low level play.

I just noticed that other day that level 5 is sweet for most classes, but none more than Monk and Paladin (which happen to be the two classes I'm playing so far -- yay!).

Martials get Extra Attack (or Uncanny Dodge for Rogue), and full/half spellcasters get access to a new level of spells, but Monk get Stunning Attack *and* a base damage die bump in addition to Extra Attack, while Paladin gets level 2 spells in addtition to Extra Attack. (Technically Ranger does to, but it's Ranger...)

[Rfkannen]

Completely disagree. Action surge is great, but it's once per short rest, sharply limiting its usage.

I'd rate the classes like this:

Paladin/Ranger/Druid/Barbarian - These classes are extremely strong. Druid's shapeshifting is huge, though once it's gone their very weak. Barbarian is all-around great, but like druid relies on rage. Paladin/Ranger are similar, in that they start getting features at 2, and both are very strong.

Fighter/Rogue/Warlock/Monk - This is probably the next tier for me; solid, but not spectacular. They can do their thing well, but it's not going to beat the first group. Warlock's EB is only one beam, rogue only gets 1d6 sneak attack, the fighter only gets one action surge, the monk only gets 2 ki points. All solid, but just not enough.

Bard/Cleric/Sorcerer/Wizard - These classes all suffer the same problem; not enough spell slots. After too long you're stuck flinging cantrips (or just attacking if you have a good enough str/dex). The best at this point is probably bard with it's skills and inspiration, but nothing here is spectacular. Not that they can't rock an encounter (sleep, for example), but they're so limited my experience is that people playing them get frustrated quickly (this obviously changes in a couple levels).

Sounds about right, but I have heard a lot of people say that rangers at low levels are boreing and weak, what do you think about that?

[Felvion]

Sounds about right, but I have heard a lot of people say that rangers at low levels are boreing and weak, what do you think about that?

They're not.

[Theodoxus]

One thing to remember, level 2 is essentially level .75 in terms of character development. If you look at the XP progression, the game really starts at level 4 and level 5 is where things really get good (5 is the new 2?)

Given that at most tables, you can get to 5th level in 4 to 5 sessions, most games will probably reach 7-10 before petering out (as opposed to 4-7 in 3.x).

So yeah, in this particular discussion, looking at levels 3-5 would probably be best. As such, I agree for the most part with what's been said already.

[Z3ro]

Sounds about right, but I have heard a lot of people say that rangers at low levels are boreing and weak, what do you think about that?

Eh, I can maybe see boring depending on how you play (just casting hunter's mark is a good spell, but mechanically boring), but they're by no means weak. Fighting style plus good first level spells (hunter's mark, hail of thorns) make them a very strong DPS class. Take human for cross-bow expert or sharpshooter and you're probably doing the most damage of your entire party.

[holygroundj]

fun/boring is definitely subjective.

I find it being fun when I am useful. So even though warlocks don't do a whole lot at level 2, the invocations make me feel like I'm super competitive for dpr.

Wildshaping into a direwolf just feels amazing.

Nova smiting feels bad ass.

So for me, having unique moments in combat are what makes the game fun for me.

[Ashrym]

The game tiers levels of play intentionally. Levels 1 through 4 are the apprentice tier while 5th level is meant to be the advancement point into the next tier.

I agree that levels 3 through 5 would be what to look at for "low level" play. Levels 1 and 2 flash by unless the DM intends on focusing on those extremely low levels.


Keeping on topic, I don't think any character is mechanically unfun in a roleplaying game. Roleplaying is a concept a person enjoys is just as important as rollplaying mechanics that are part of the game.

I start with a concept and build around that while fitting mechanics to reasonably contribute. Fortunately, it the easiest thing to change.


Having said that...

I am not a fan of either sorcerer subclass. One reminds me of lack of control and the other requires I must look different instead of the concept with which I choose to identify. They are both effective, mechanically, because of the extra cantrips and early metamagic. They tend to be a burst class.

Wizards bore me. Arcane recovery is better at low levels when spells are more limited but not as impacting as it first appears later. Each tradition has it's own thing but they are very mechanically similar to one another. Ritual casting is a good feature fore low levels with a wizard.

Warlocks are pretty straight forward for a spellcasting class. The spell slots appear low in number but renew on a short rest so the class tends to have more higher level slots than other spellcasters for some time, and an invocation or two spent on at-will spell like abilities is really nice when spell slots are limited for all spellcasters. Blade pact takes a bit more system mastery in the build, especially later. Chain pact familiar is great at low levels, loses out a bit later. Tome pact gives more cantrips than other casters too. I found them to be a lot of fun.

Bards are a ton of flavor. They are customized in skills and spells so are easy to match to the campaign, and song of healing helps even though it doesn't scale well. Inspiration is a good ability and I don't recall anyone not having fun with cutting words. They tend to be on the low side of damage and high side of support. Just trying to choose magical secrets and plan it out is part of the fun for me. It's my favourite class.

Druids also bore me. The ability to swap spells is handy and the list isn't bad, but I found they were a bit low on damage and poor AC, and spells used are typical of other classes that have abilities to make better use of the spells. I do enjoy the concept of selecting forms for utility and stealth as an alternative to skills and that can be fun but I got a bit sick of the class just reading forum posts about OP moon druids because high hp when armor works much better by not needed the hp; they don't last long with low AC and wildshape for hp falls behind in mechanical ability fast. I do enjoy the flavor.

Clerics are mechanically similar to bards in party support with buffing and healing. They have more damaging spells instead of status effects and skills, and better armor. Bards and clerics bothering be a bit MAD splitting focus between spells and weapons, but neither needs to be. I found the domains give more identity to clerics than traditions do for wizards. Mechanically, they can be a lot of fun. There are two things that can turn me off of the class: DM's who insist on focusing on deities interfering but some players like that, and the misconception that magical healing is required as the primary option for healing and that's what the cleric should always save spells for. I am not really a fan of the divine intervention mechanics either. I normally play a bard instead.

Rogues are awesome. They have a variety of flavour, interesting damage options because it can be tactically leveraged, bonus skills, expertise, and cunning action. They have strong hit-and-run mechanics and first strike potential. They gain damage mitigation ability later with evasion and uncanny dodge. I had quite a bit of fun with rogues.

Fighters are fun. At low levels they have flavor based on a lot of RP components because fighters encompass a lot of concepts in D&D. The variety comes in fighting style, feats, and background. I find fighters are the characters making use of shoving mechanics and such. Action surge is nice but doesn't kick in until 5th level with the extra attack feature. Second wind is effective at low levels and contributes to the grit and determination toughness aspects associated with the class. Battlemaster is a blast on an archery build because it's easy to use the same ability score for range or melee, and many maneuvers can be done at range that way, like trip and push. DEX builds also add more skill variety. It's my favourite fighter out of any edition so far.

Barbarians are very similar to fighters in how they play, but instead of fighting styles it's typically "hulk smash". Rage used for STR checks is a nice perk, reckless attack works great with heavy weapon master, and damage resistance raging is nice. Few rages per day tends to impact several associated abilities. I prefer the totem subclass because it has more design options.

Paladins play a lot like clerics with more pointy stick poking and less magic. Functionally fun and appealing flavor. I usually avoid it having had too many DM's creating too many ethical dilemmas in the past with the class. Tested it and liked it, but I avoid it and clerics for similar reasons when I can enjoy other classes rather than risk a style a DM likes and I don't. I choose classes like that when I am familiar with the DM and they don't have that style.

Monks are also rather awesome. Ki is limited at low levels so they suffer similar restrictions as several classes, but they have enough uses in the extra attack or dash options, and stunning strike at 5th. They have multiple attacks at first level and a staff if a solid choice, good ability scores to match skills, an extra attack at 5th level, movement bonus, etc. I prefer open hand later when more ki is available but shadow is also fun and opens up several options early for magic. I wasn't a fan of elemental. Not enough choices.

Rangers are another class we see a lot of other boards. I did not find them underpowered or unfun. It's another rounded class with bonus skill proficiencies and combat and magic. The magic has some more obvious magic that can be selected or more subtle magic. Hunter has some strong features and it's similar to the fighter where DEX builds can switch between ranged and melee. They have flavor and they are effective, and the first favored terrain will be pertinent to the campaign. Favored enemies are largely flavor over mechanics but selecting enemies pertaining to the campaign that one can expect to meet at various levels is okay. I select humanoids because they are typical at any level and if nothing else I learn a lot of languages. Beastmasters aren't my cup of tea but the companion is certainly more effects the ranger levels compared to the familiars players state are too good. Companions are more of an out-of-the-box support ability with additional abilities in or out of combat and granting advantage through help as a bonus action later. It was also a fun class.


Classes I currently see most commonly, in no particular order: bards, sorcerers, warlocks, rangers, fighters, rogues.

[charcoalninja]

Warlock is amazing at level 2, but my favourite is level 3. Cleric 1 / warlock 2 is outstanding.
4 spell slots, 2 of which reset on a short rest, feindish vigor, Dark One's Blessing and heavy armour makes them almost invincible.

We just leveled to 4 before last session and we had a battle vs 18 or so goblins and 2 goblin bosses and my character soaked 31 damage, but only actually took 2 real HP in damage from that whole fight.

Amazing character that can heal, AOE nuke, melee, ranged pew pew, tank, everything!