Give me a insidiously designed 3 level character

[CyberThread]

Give me something dumb, mishapen , and just a lack luster 3 level character. Someone who had a mid life crisis at 18 and decided to try a little bit of everything unable to decided what to do with his life so he dabbled around knowing some things but accomplishing nothing. Also no ability to sing , so no cheating and trying to be 3 levels of bard.

[Flashy]

I'd propose a mountain dwarf Wild Magic Sorcerer 1/Druid 1/Monk 1

At 3rd level this poor unfortunate has...


A bunch of bonus proficiencies that don't work with his class features
Reduced speed
Resistance to poison damage
Three 1st level spell slots
A d4 martial arts die
AC = Dex + Wis
Four Cantrips
The perpetual risk of instant death
The ability to gain advantage on a roll 1/long rest
Literally nothing else

[Giant2005]

Ranger 1/Paladin 1/Fighter 1.
His fighting ability is much the same as a level 1 Fighter, except that he has the HP of a level 3 and can't wear Heavy Armor. Ranger and Paladin only bring ribbons to the table at level 1 and gloriously enough, between them they manage to bring in 2 1st level spell slots with no spells to cast with them.

[PoeticDwarf]

Ranger 1/Paladin 1/Fighter 1.
His fighting ability is much the same as a level 1 Fighter, except that he has the HP of a level 3 and can't wear Heavy Armor. Ranger and Paladin only bring ribbons to the table at level 1 and gloriously enough, between them they manage to bring in 2 1st level spell slots with no spells to cast with them.

Ranger 1/paladin 1, because they can't do anything. But for me sounds druid 1 better, because fighter is a good character and druids don't get anything at lv. 1. So you can't wear better armor than hide armor, you have less hp, not the best saving throws and you have 2 lv. 1 spell slots. With in combat not any good spells.

A fighter 1 has a fighting style and 1d10+1 heal as bonus action.

[Giant2005]

Ranger 1/paladin 1, because they can't do anything. But for me sounds druid 1 better, because fighter is a good character and druids don't get anything at lv. 1. So you can't wear better armor than hide armor, you have less hp, not the best saving throws and you have 2 lv. 1 spell slots. With in combat not any good spells.

A fighter 1 has a fighting style and 1d10+1 heal as bonus action.

It would have 3 first level spell slots.
You raise some good points - I mostly went with Fighter for the third level just to prevent the Ranger and Paladin levels from counting for anything (They add a spell slot level if the third class is a caster). Of all of the non-spellcasting classes, it looked to me like Fighter had the least to offer for a single level.

[CNagy]

Ranger 1/Paladin 1/Fighter 1.
His fighting ability is much the same as a level 1 Fighter, except that he has the HP of a level 3 and can't wear Heavy Armor. Ranger and Paladin only bring ribbons to the table at level 1 and gloriously enough, between them they manage to bring in 2 1st level spell slots with no spells to cast with them.

Ranger and Paladin don't have the Spellcasting feature at level 1, so you don't get the multiclass spellcasting chart.

[Shining Wrath]

Wild Magic Sorcerer 1 / Ranger 1 / Wizard 1. Needs CHA, DEX + WIS, and INT. Has 6 + 5 + 4 = 15 HP, which is pretty bad for a level 3 character. Take Half-orc for the race because STR is not one of the things she needs and this character shouldn't ever engage in melee.

[AvatarVecna]

Wild Magic Sorcerer 1 / Ranger 1 / Wizard 1. Needs CHA, DEX + WIS, and INT. Has 6 + 5 + 4 = 15 HP, which is pretty bad for a level 3 character. Take Half-orc for the race because STR is not one of the things she needs and this character shouldn't ever engage in melee.

The problem here is that you get 2nd lvl multiclass casting and a bunch of lvl 1 spells, which isn't terrible. That said, how about...

Drow Paladin 1/Ranger 1/Barbarian 1
Stats (before adjustment): 12/11/9/15/11/14

You've got no casting, you've got no AC, you've got no fighting style, you've got no HP (well, relatively), you've got no decent rage stats, you've got no decent smiting and you should focus your skills on things you're never going to use.

[JAL_1138]

Also no ability to sing , so no cheating and trying to be 3 levels of bard.

...I don't quite understand this. Three levels of Bard isn't cheating to get a lame character too easily. It's one of the worst ways to attempt to get a lame character. All you could do is try to pick weak spells and rarely-used skills. This is 5th, remember? Bards are good now.

[Inevitability]

Ranger/Paladin/Barbarian. Specialize in archery, claiming "he's a ranger, it's only natural". Also, be a standard human. On top of it all, refuse to actually buy anything but holy symbols from your starting money.

[DireSickFish]

I'm a fan of the Ranger/Paladin/Any other martial but I have another suggestion.

Warlock 1/ Barbarian 1/ Druid 1

The trick here is to not take Eldrich Blast on your warlock. Now you need Str, Cha, Wis, Con, and Dex. Dex mainly because you have no heavy armor proficiency. Arguably your best class feature at this point is rage, which locks out all of your spellcasting from the other two classes. Your HP will be okay and you still have 2 saves I suppose.

[Giant2005]

Ranger and Paladin don't have the Spellcasting feature at level 1, so you don't get the multiclass spellcasting chart.

That is very true it seems!
With that in mind, I'd go with an Aasimir Wizard 1/Ranger 1/Paladin 1. By using point buy, the best stats you could achieve would be 13 in all stats, except for your primary stat which would reach 14 (Str, Dex or Int depending on what combat style you wanted to focus on) and Con which would be 11.
It would have 18 HP, a crappy +2 modifier on your primary attribute, 2 spell slots, the ability to recover 1 spell slot once per day during a short rest, medium armor, shield and martial weapons proficiency, and a couple of ribbon effects that are a challenge to find a use for.

[Ralanr]

Barbarian 1/wizard1/bard 1

I'm AFB, but I don't think this works at all.

[Slipperychicken]

Give me something dumb, mishapen , and just a lack luster 3 level character. Someone who had a mid life crisis at 18 and decided to try a little bit of everything unable to decided what to do with his life so he dabbled around knowing some things but accomplishing nothing. Also no ability to sing , so no cheating and trying to be 3 levels of bard.

How did he get enough experience to hit level 3 then?

I think you'd be better off representing this poor soul with commoner stats (maybe level 1 rogue to be generous?), as even normal people with marketable skills don't have class levels.

Also, bards don't have to sing. You can easily just not take the perform skill and instead rely on the three instrument proficiencies.

[Ziegander]

Isn't Ranger 1/Paladin 1/Fighter 1 Aragorn? Let's see, great orc tracking skills, lay on hands, and great weapon fighting... seems like a pretty okay character in truth.

[Shining Wrath]

Isn't Ranger 1/Paladin 1/Fighter 1 Aragorn? Let's see, great orc tracking skills, lay on hands, and great weapon fighting... seems like a pretty okay character in truth.

It's Aragorn when he was 15.

Aragorn at the time of LotR was over 200 years old IIRC, and would probably be more like Ranger (Hunter) 20 / Paladin (Ancients) 5 / Fighter (Commander) 10 or thereabouts.

[KorvinStarmast]

Isn't Ranger 1/Paladin 1/Fighter 1 Aragorn? Let's see, great orc tracking skills, lay on hands, and great weapon fighting... seems like a pretty okay character in truth.
Betrothed to the most beautiful (or second most beautiful) woman in the world, whose dad is an immortal and a minor power in the world? Heir to a kingdom? Has enough experience as a Ranger to track Gollum to Mordor and back? (See appendices in ROTK, it's off camera action .. before FOTR starts). Has about 50 mounted retainers, Knights, who show up carrying his banner?

No, not quite Ranger 1. More like Ranger Lord. :smallwink:


See also Shining Wrath's post ... (except he never found his steed, so Paladin 4). :smallbiggrin:

[Ziegander]

It's Aragorn when he was 15.

Aragorn at the time of LotR was over 200 years old IIRC, and would probably be more like Ranger (Hunter) 20 / Paladin (Ancients) 5 / Fighter (Commander) 10 or thereabouts.


Betrothed to the most beautiful (or second most beautiful) woman in the world, whose dad is an immortal and a minor power in the world? Heir to a kingdom? Has enough experience as a Ranger to track Gollum to Mordor and back? (See appendices in ROTK, it's off camera action .. before FOTR starts). Has about 50 mounted retainers, Knights, who show up carrying his banner?

No, not quite Ranger 1. More like Ranger Lord. :smallwink:


See also Shining Wrath's post ... (except he never found his steed, so Paladin 4). :smallbiggrin:

You guys crack me up. Keep up the good work.

[CyberThread]

How did he get enough experience to hit level 3 then?

I think you'd be better off representing this poor soul with commoner stats (maybe level 1 rogue to be generous?), as even normal people with marketable skills don't have class levels.

Also, bards don't have to sing. You can easily just not take the perform skill and instead rely on the three instrument proficiencies.


Because he still learned something, just not commited enough to learn more of it.

[KorvinStarmast]

Also, bards don't have to sing. You can easily just not take the perform skill and instead rely on the three instrument proficiencies.
Poetry works OK in lieu of singing, doesn't it? Sort of like Bob Dylan ... never really could sing. :smallbiggrin:

Zieg:

You guys crack me up. Keep up the good work.
As Gandalf once said to Sam: "Get offa my lawn."

Wait, he never said that.

As you were. :smallbiggrin:

[Bard1cKnowledge]

Warlock1/ Ranger 1/ druid 1

Only two lv 1 spell slots, two cantrips, nothing better than hide, and no metal simple weapons

Hehehe