5e - Melee Character

[Kaskos]

Good Evening Playgrounders,

I have a small game coming up soon - and by small I mean a very small party so much so I technically need to be mostly self sufficient.
Think of him pretty much as a loner.
I am kinda stuck on one of two classes:
Fighter and Ranger (unearthed arcana - no spells)
With that goes 2 races I am torn on - Dwarf (+2, +2) or Human (variant)
With those races in mind also - I am not against a Strength based build.

Sticking within those idea's and liking the idea of having superiority dice and manoeuvres (which both have enough of)
Am I gimping myself by not going straight for a Dex Based Fighter
Am I pinning too much on my thoughts that a rangers skill list and out of combat utility will surpass a fighters so much more than the fighters raw progression?

I would love to hear some idea's or possibilities from people.
I love the thought of a dual wielder so my mind goes from things such as:

Human - Dex Based Fighter - Dueling - Feat: Polearm Master
Dwarf - Strength Fighter - Duel Wielding Style, Hand Axes

Really undecided.
Any pointers, tips or experience greatly appreciated.

[Kane0]

If you need to be self sufficient you should probably look to balance raw combat potential with skills and utility. A spelless dex ranger could work well, having the dice for combat and allowing more skills and other abilities to help out in most situations. They also get that healing salve ability which is handy, and you could use your human feat for something like mobility, inspiring leader, lucky or healer. Dex itself allows both melee and ranged combat as well as helping saves, ac and skills rounding out a lot of useful things for you.

Then if you need more combat power you can dip a couple foghter levels for their little heal, their action surge and maybe champion for crits and their athlete ability or bm for more dice. Hell you could even go for more fighter like 6 or 11 for bonus ASIs and the bms great know thy foe ability plus more attacks and a second fighting style.

[Slipperychicken]

Human - Dex Based Fighter - Dueling - Feat: Polearm Master

Quarterstaff isn't a finesse weapon. IIRC, none of the weapons mentioned in polearm-master are finesse weapons.

[newsman77]

Are you totally against the paladin? I only ask because they're not bound to being lawfully stupid anymore and can be pretty self sufficient with Lay on Hands (5hp healed per level) plus spells. You can turn your spells into healing, utility or just outright burst damage in the smite. Plus at level 6, you get your CHA as a bonus to your saves. I play a paladin now and I love it.

I don't think you can go wrong with either build. Personally, I like the dex based fighter for lower levels but strength builds for the long term game.

As for race, human is the way to go! The feat at level 1 is very powerful and can help you survive.

[Shining Wrath]

No one does self-sufficient like a Valor Bard .... just sayin'.

[Tenmujiin]

The beat way to get superiority dice is to get 3 levels in both ranger and battlemaster since they are so front loaded. Many consider it to basically be an exploit but it is RaW legal, much like the polearm master dueling quarterstaff

[HoarsHalberd]

Human - Dex Based Fighter - Dueling - Feat: Polearm Master
Dwarf - Strength Fighter - Duel Wielding Style, Hand Axes

Really undecided.
Any pointers, tips or experience greatly appreciated.

Firstly: Duelling+Polearm mastery is a very, very contentious issue at the best of times. But also, it's not a dex weapon.

Now on point, for pure solo ability, a dex based ranger would be best of the two classes you've said. Said ranger is dex/wis and thus can be good at stealth and perception, allowing it to have the advantage in most scenarios, and sleight of hand/survival can be used to feed yourself and get by, of the two I'd go for survival.

[JAL_1138]

No one does self-sufficient like a Valor Bard .... just sayin'.

Really. They do everything. Melee, ranged, spellcasting, skillmonkey--if you want it, they've got it. No, not as good with weapons as a fighter, ranger, rogue, barbarian, or paladin--but they're not half bad, either. Take Variant Human with Warcaster at 1, or take half-elf for the skills and take Warcaster instead of an ASI later, grab a rapier, and grab some variety of crossbow, and go for it.

[Person_Man]

To be self sufficient, I think you would need effective Stealth (Expertise and/or Pass without Trace) and healing.

Given those parameters, your options are Ranger, Druid, Bard, or Trickery Cleric. Any of them would work fine.

Of those choices, I personally lean towards Druid. Cast Pass Without Trace and then Wildshape into something innocuous, like a bat or rat. Then you can basically go anywhere. And if you're ever caught, you can just fly away. If you're really, really paranoid about it, you can dip 3 levels into Arcane Trickster Rogue for Expertise, Cunning Action, and Mage Hand Legerdemain.

Also, when you're basically by yourself, you should avoid combat whenever possible, instead of focusing your resources on melee. Why risk death when you can just slip past your enemies and take their stuff? If you must engage in combat, use alternative tactics when possible instead of melee. Poison their food, lure them over traps, trick enemies into attacking each other, using ranged attacks with kiting, etc. Trust me, it makes solo-ish games a lot more fun.

[The J Pizzel]

Valor Bard is the correct answer.

But, out of your two options, I've always had a little love for a dwarf charging into combat with a battleaxe and flanged mace (or any combinations of two weapons). Don't know why. Def not self-sustaining though. Aside from Second Wind you have no heals, no buffs, no utility, no anything other than just "hit it till it dies". That's why Valor Bard is so much fun.

[Kaskos]

Some of the choices I have made are due to mechanics of the game.
One of the reasons I cant take a druid or a Pally for instance but I am ok with that.

I am really torn over Strength and Dex though.
I know the majority of the world would look at me with a frown as to why I would consider Strength over Dex when looking at AC, Initiative, Popular Saves, No. of skills etc
I think I have settled on Human for Race.

So I am on the thoughts of: 'Ranger' (unearthed arcana version)
Do I go Human - Strength - Polearm Master Feat (then I think Defense for the Armour Class - Hunter and Horde Breaker)
or something more like
Human - Dex - Dual Wielder Feat (then I think Two Weapon Fighting - Hunter and Horde Breaker)
I do like Giant Slayer but I think I would get more out of Horde Breaker.

Ranger I think has more utility than a Fighter aswell if you are wondering why I opted for a commonly thought of sub par class (when comparing melee Ranger to melee Fighter)

(Note: Rogue and Bard were contenders early on but I have played both these classes already)

[Mandragola]

Monks are really self-sufficient too of course. Wood elf monks make fantastic all-rounders. Barbarians work well too for that matter, as do clerics. Still...

You're allowed to have both strength and dex - though obviously other stats will suffer. You might want to make a medium armour-wearing guy with S16 and D14. Strength gives you way more flexibility with any magic items you might come across. Then you'll also have enough dex to sneak, do ok on initiative and so on.

Multiclassing could seriously help. Fighters and Rangers are very dmg front-loaded, so after about level 6 it starts to look interesting to have a level or two in rogue and/or barbarian.

[HoarsHalberd]

Some of the choices I have made are due to mechanics of the game.
One of the reasons I cant take a druid or a Pally for instance but I am ok with that.

I am really torn over Strength and Dex though.
I know the majority of the world would look at me with a frown as to why I would consider Strength over Dex when looking at AC, Initiative, Popular Saves, No. of skills etc
I think I have settled on Human for Race.

So I am on the thoughts of: 'Ranger' (unearthed arcana version)
Do I go Human - Strength - Polearm Master Feat (then I think Defense for the Armour Class - Hunter and Horde Breaker)
or something more like
Human - Dex - Dual Wielder Feat (then I think Two Weapon Fighting - Hunter and Horde Breaker)
I do like Giant Slayer but I think I would get more out of Horde Breaker.

Ranger I think has more utility than a Fighter aswell if you are wondering why I opted for a commonly thought of sub par class (when comparing melee Ranger to melee Fighter)

(Note: Rogue and Bard were contenders early on but I have played both these classes already)

Essentially for Ranger, dex is the better choice. You'll have to put at least 14 in dex anyway to get the AC you'll want, and with WIS as a secondary stat as well you'll be very MAD going strength. So Dex ranger with dual wielder feat is the better choice of the two. You can still use ranged weapons if you have a need, stealth is the most important skill for a loner, followed by perception which you'd be able to get higher by focussing on dex and leaving STR at a healthy 10.

[Kaskos]

I think one of the downsides to going dex is the weapon choice. The only real choice with dual wielding too is Rapier isn't it?
By only I mean the only d8 damage weapon that is finesse and thus a dex weapon

[TrollCapAmerica]

I think one of the downsides to going dex is the weapon choice. The only real choice with dual wielding too is Rapier isn't it?
By only I mean the only d8 damage weapon that is finesse and thus a dex weapon

True but a D8 with a One handed weapon is as good as it gets. Outside of fluff/style choices theres no real downside

[JAL_1138]

Fluff a scimitar as a German-style hunting-hanger if you're willing to take a d6 instead of d8. Or fluff your rapier as a pig-sticker a village smith made from scrap rebar (I've seen a few of those from eastern Kentucky knifemakers and they looked mighty unpleasant to be on the pointy end of) or a smallsword (slightly shorter, stiffer rapier with a far less complicated hilt).