I need an easy-bake character who requires little to no brain power to play decently.

[heavyfuel]

After a friend's character died due to his inability to foresee the immediate consequences of his actions, he was wise enough to realise he can't play charaters that require too much thinking and I decided to help him.

Unfortunately, I know very little about PF's classes, especially with the huge amount of 3rd party classes, and so I turn to you.

I was thinking either straight Barbarian or Fighter focusing on Archery, but any concept will do as long as a child can play it.

Some guidelines (not rules writen in stone):


Capable of dealing lots of damage, better if in the form of dice and not bonuses.
No "per day" abilities
No spell preparation of any kind
No AoE
No relying on skills, including "party-face" skills
No change-able abilities (such as Martial Flexibility)
Nothing that requires too much positoning on the field (such as a Rogue flanking)


Thanks!

[Barstro]

Capable of dealing lots of damage, better if in the form of dice and not bonuses.
No "per day" abilities
No spell preparation of any kind



If you can ignore those, a Witch that spends the entire time using Evil Eye/Misfortune/Cackle and eventually Ice Tomb is good. Spells can be for outside of combat. I hardly ever used combat spells for my Witch, and those hexes might not do damage, but they can take out enemies faster that fighting can. Also, when he gets up to Magic Jar spell, he can possess a martial enemy and go to town (on of my Witch's crowning moments).

If you want to focus Archery (not a bad choice), why not pick up a Ranger of some sort and get rid of spells? You can also go Zen Archer Monk, but that might involve too many choices.

[(Un)Inspired]

What do you mean by lots of damage? 300 dpr? 500? 1000?

What do you mean by no relying on skills? What constitutes relying?

What is the definition of a changeable ability? I honestly can't picture a character that can't change anything.

How much positioning is too much positioning?

What level do you want this build to be?

[heavyfuel]

If you can ignore those, a Witch that spends the entire time using Evil Eye/Misfortune/Cackle and eventually Ice Tomb is good. Spells can be for outside of combat. I hardly ever used combat spells for my Witch, and those hexes might not do damage, but they can take out enemies faster that fighting can. Also, when he gets up to Magic Jar spell, he can possess a martial enemy and go to town (on of my Witch's crowning moments).

If you want to focus Archery (not a bad choice), why not pick up a Ranger of some sort and get rid of spells? You can also go Zen Archer Monk, but that might involve too many choices.

Sorry, I've read the Witch, and it's way too much for him to handle.

How would suggest removing the Ranger's spell? What would be a fair trade?

Thanks!


What do you mean by lots of damage? 300 dpr? 500? 1000?

What do you mean by no relying on skills? What constitutes relying?

What is the definition of a changeable ability? I honestly can't picture a character that can't change anything.

How much positioning is too much positioning?

What level do you want this build to be?

The party is still level 3, but the main damage dealer seems to be doing around 20 damage per round, more if he can Smite Evil. Anything along those lines is acceptable.

I'd say a character is relying on skills if he has to make more than 4 skill checks per real-world hour. Alternatively, if the party as a whole is counting on his skill checks to get a job done (sneaking in undetected, disarming traps, being diplomatic, etc)

If he's required to flank or use cover, it's too much positioning.

From lv 2 through 10. Though the entire build isn't required, just the core concept of the character.

Feel free to ask any other questions

[Acanous]

You've basically narrowed the field to Fighter or Gunslinger. Everything else has one or more daily abilities/situational abilities/spells/etc.
Even Gunslinger is a stretch, I include it because Grit can be replenished without rest.

[Florian]

As much as it saddens me to say it, but this actually reads like a case of creating a dumb but deadly fighter.

[heavyfuel]

I was thinking, is there any class that resembles the 3.5 Warlock? At will powers, decent damage, few options. It'd be perfect I think




You've basically narrowed the field to Fighter or Gunslinger. Everything else has one or more daily abilities/situational abilities/spells/etc.
Even Gunslinger is a stretch, I include it because Grit can be replenished without rest.

Gunslinger might work. Would be difficult explaining the grit replenish mechanics to him, but it might.


As much as it saddens me to say it, but this actually reads like a case of creating a dumb but deadly fighter.

Hence my first thoughts... Unfortunately, he's already playing a big dumb character in another camapaign (and doing greatly btw) so I don't think he'd be too inclined to play another.

[(Un)Inspired]

Will the party be ok if one of its members is essentially an immobile turret that occasionally does damage?

If so, I suppose I'd suggest Trench Fighter. Stick a rifle in its hand and have it stand still and shoot. No daily resources, not even grit to manage.

[Spore]

My pointers are all for an Archer Fighter even before I read your post fully. The class has almost no skills to boot (give him Perception and Sense Motive) and other than that only static boni. Teach him how to use Deadly Aim at 5th level.

[heavyfuel]

Will the party be ok if one of its members is essentially an immobile turret that occasionally does damage?

If so, I suppose I'd suggest Trench Fighter. Stick a rifle in its hand and have it stand still and shoot. No daily resources, not even grit to manage.

Yes, they will. But I'm still getting acclimated with guns in general, and they don't seem to deal much damage, if at all. If this is true, then I don't think this is the character for him.

[TheIronGolem]

I was thinking, is there any class that resembles the 3.5 Warlock? At will powers, decent damage, few options. It'd be perfect I think

Kineticist (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/occult-adventures/occult-classes/kineticist) is the closest that PF has to that, but mechanics like Burn may be too much overhead for someone like this.

[(Un)Inspired]

Yes, they will. But I'm still getting acclimated with guns in general, and they don't seem to deal much damage, if at all. If this is true, then I don't think this is the character for him.

At level 3, with 20 Dex, a musket, rapid shot and deadly aim a Trench Fighter will be dealing 2d12+14 a turn.

That sounds in line with what you're looking for.

[heavyfuel]

My pointers are all for an Archer Fighter even before I read your post fully. The class has almost no skills to boot (give him Perception and Sense Motive) and other than that only static boni. Teach him how to use Deadly Aim at 5th level.

Sorry, I missed your post earlier. But yeah, it's what I was thinking too. Any reason why he needs to be lv 5 to use Deadly Aim?


Kineticist (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/occult-adventures/occult-classes/kineticist) is the closest that PF has to that, but mechanics like Burn may be too much overhead for someone like this.

Indeed seems to complex... Thanks though.


At level 3, with 20 Dex, a musket, rapid shot and deadly aim a Trench Fighter will be dealing 2d12+14 a turn.

That sounds in line with what you're looking for.

Sure does. Thanks mate!

[Florian]

@heavyfuel:

How about an archery-based Slayer? There's the illusion of complexity without any complexity being there. That class works as archery will always be simple and work, the addition of Studied Target is something any noob can handle without actually being needed.

[Grod_The_Giant]

I was thinking, is there any class that resembles the 3.5 Warlock? At will powers, decent damage, few options. It'd be perfect I think.
Update the skill list and play a 3.5 Warlock because the two systems are functionally identical? (You might also find a way to increase their damage because the base class kind of needs it, but that's not technically necessary)

[(Un)Inspired]

@heavyfuel:

How about an archery-based Slayer? There's the illusion of complexity without any complexity being there. That class works as archery will always be simple and work, the addition of Studied Target is something any noob can handle without actually being needed.

The slayer gets a ton of skills and relies on SA for damage

[heavyfuel]

@heavyfuel:

How about an archery-based Slayer? There's the illusion of complexity without any complexity being there. That class works as archery will always be simple and work, the addition of Studied Target is something any noob can handle without actually being needed.


the addition of Studied Target is something any noob can handle without actually being needed.


something any noob can handle without actually being needed.


any noob can handle

I think you vastly overestimate my player.


The slayer gets a ton of skills and relies on SA for damage

Also these.


Update the skill list and play a 3.5 Warlock because the two systems are functionally identical? (You might also find a way to increase their damage because the base class kind of needs it, but that's not technically necessary)

I thought about this, but this is our first time playing PF, and we decided to try to work with PF things only. Maybe in a later adventure.

[Zombulian]

I think you vastly overestimate my player.

I'm pretty sure the only problem we're having is imagining someone who is apparently completely incapable of thought playing a thought-based game.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Then yeah, you... probably want either a fighter or maybe a cavalier.

Archery is solid in Pathfinder, though (if anything) more feat-intensive. You have Deadly Aim (AKA ranged power attack) and Clustered Shots (stack all your damage before applying DR) which eliminate the main weaknesses of the style in 3.5, Dex to damage isn't hard (Trench Fighter 3 or Gunslinger 5), and you can add solid chunks of bonus damage to every attack with things like Smite Evil and the Luring Cavalier's Challenge.

[heavyfuel]

I'm pretty sure the only problem we're having is imagining someone who is apparently completely incapable of thought playing a thought-based game.

He's not completely incapable of it, he just has this ability severy lacking when it comes to understanding rules of a game for some reason.


Then yeah, you... probably want either a fighter or maybe a cavalier.

Archery is solid in Pathfinder, though (if anything) more feat-intensive. You have Deadly Aim (AKA ranged power attack) and Clustered Shots (stack all your damage before applying DR) which eliminate the main weaknesses of the style in 3.5, Dex to damage isn't hard (Trench Fighter 3 or Gunslinger 5), and you can add solid chunks of bonus damage to every attack with things like Smite Evil and the Luring Cavalier's Challenge.

Yup, seems like the general advice is to go archery. Let him fire and forget. I think he'll be happy as long as he's dealing loads of damage.

[Arbane]

Barbarian, maybe? He would have to track rage rounds, but you don't get much simpler than SMASH!

[Spore]

He's not completely incapable of it, he just has this ability severy lacking when it comes to understanding rules of a game for some reason.

I think I know what you mean but my image of your friend shifts from uninterested in game mechanics to drooling idiot with every other post you make. I am at the point where I cannot stop imagining you having to stop him from eating his dice.


Yup, seems like the general advice is to go archery. Let him fire and forget. I think he'll be happy as long as he's dealing loads of damage.

That was our initial thought when we built a friend's fighter as well. We lacked any capable melee line and so she was assigned the stereotypical male Dwarven Fighter (or she chose it herself, I can't remember). It was fun for the first few sessions but she was dropped out of the group due to time constraints (she really just isn't making room in her calendar for the game and she looks very bored most of the other times we play with her).

And as much as I dislike creating illusion of choice in the modern world, maybe give him SOMETHING that he has to make a choice regularly on. Even something tiny as preparing Paladin/Ranger spells: They can be impactful if done right. They are not a terrible loss if done wrong or not at all. And it is a reward for dealing with game mechanics. Problems being that both Paladins and Rangers are require a little situational awareness (Favored Enemy/Territory and Smite Evil). Both are capable archers but I really do not know what to make of your friend here.

Surely he or she is capable of making a SINGLE decision during the other's turns on what to attack. I'd go for Human Archer Paladin. Bring up the occasional demon with a big fat target symbol on their belly.

[tsj]

My suggestions. .

Race should be a monster melee race such as minotaur, half giant and the like

Class should be fighter or a barbarian with permanent rage to avoid bookkeeping


Another option is to split a template and/or a monster in to 20 levels.. like the titan ... just remove the at will magic abilities

http://www.iwozhere.com/SRD/monsters/TITAN.html

There are also other options.. . Best choice will be a monster with cr 20, 20 HD and no other abilities than SMASHING STUFF UP GOOD :) ☺

[Zombulian]

That was our initial thought when we built a friend's fighter as well. We lacked any capable melee line and so she was assigned the stereotypical male Dwarven Fighter (or she chose it herself, I can't remember). It was fun for the first few sessions but she was dropped out of the group due to time constraints (she really just isn't making room in her calendar for the game and she looks very bored most of the other times we play with her).


This was more the point I was getting at, I was just being mean. But if this player is as opposed to any sort of complex mechanics or doing anything other than pointing at people and saying "I attack! Roll for hit and damage!" Then I have a feeling this game isn't for him. He may have fun for a while messing around with his friends and rolling dice, but after too many games of this without any increase in system mastery or game mechanic understanding, you're gonna lose him.

[Barstro]

Sorry, I've read the Witch, and it's way too much for him to handle.

I think you are confusing its complex potential for a requirement.

A Witch can be perfectly viable and completely take out one or two enemies an a couple round all by himself with using only Evil Eye and Slumber. You could write those two hexes on a piece of paper and have your player point to one when it is his turn. Everything else is just potential complexity that can be ignored.

However, if you honestly feel that this person cannot possibly handle someone who needs to strategize in any way, then pick a mundane archer. Since getting within 30 feet and/or flanking is strategy, you can rule out the Rogue.

[heavyfuel]

Barbarian, maybe? He would have to track rage rounds, but you don't get much simpler than SMASH!

He's currently playing a barbarian with our other DM, so this is last resort. It does work though.


I think I know what you mean but my image of your friend shifts from uninterested in game mechanics to drooling idiot with every other post you make. I am at the point where I cannot stop imagining you having to stop him from eating his dice.

OMG! Now I can't stop picturing this! hahahahahaha

"Come on man! These are for playing! We can order pizza if you want it. Ok? Alright, we'll get a large bacon pizza. Let me just get my phone and GOD DAMNIT SPIT OUT THE DICE!"

Bonus tale: We've been playing almost weekly for over a year and he still needs help calculating his attack roll (aka, that thing written on your sheet + d20 result). About 60% of the time he gets mixed up whether or not he's Raging and if he has Power Attack on or not.




That was our initial thought when we built a friend's fighter as well. We lacked any capable melee line and so she was assigned the stereotypical male Dwarven Fighter (or she chose it herself, I can't remember). It was fun for the first few sessions but she was dropped out of the group due to time constraints (she really just isn't making room in her calendar for the game and she looks very bored most of the other times we play with her).

And as much as I dislike creating illusion of choice in the modern world, maybe give him SOMETHING that he has to make a choice regularly on. Even something tiny as preparing Paladin/Ranger spells: They can be impactful if done right. They are not a terrible loss if done wrong or not at all. And it is a reward for dealing with game mechanics. Problems being that both Paladins and Rangers are require a little situational awareness (Favored Enemy/Territory and Smite Evil). Both are capable archers but I really do not know what to make of your friend here.

Surely he or she is capable of making a SINGLE decision during the other's turns on what to attack. I'd go for Human Archer Paladin. Bring up the occasional demon with a big fat target symbol on their belly.

Pally archer has been suggested before. Might work, if he's willing to play a LG char.


My suggestions. .

Race should be a monster melee race such as minotaur, half giant and the like

Class should be fighter or a barbarian with permanent rage to avoid bookkeeping


Another option is to split a template and/or a monster in to 20 levels.. like the titan ... just remove the at will magic abilities

http://www.iwozhere.com/SRD/monsters/TITAN.html

There are also other options.. . Best choice will be a monster with cr 20, 20 HD and no other abilities than SMASHING STUFF UP GOOD :) ☺

We're playinf Pathfinder, and like I said before, we're avoiding 3.5 ports.

I'm not sure if pathfinder even HAS monster races... Will keep this in mind though. Thanks!


This was more the point I was getting at, I was just being mean. But if this player is as opposed to any sort of complex mechanics or doing anything other than pointing at people and saying "I attack! Roll for hit and damage!" Then I have a feeling this game isn't for him. He may have fun for a while messing around with his friends and rolling dice, but after too many games of this without any increase in system mastery or game mechanic understanding, you're gonna lose him.

As I mentioned above, we've been playing for over a year now. He loves the game, especially roleplaying parts. He also likes when he deals a lots of damage to things. He enjoys the game, he just can't grasp mechanics.


I think you are confusing its complex potential for a requirement.

A Witch can be perfectly viable and completely take out one or two enemies an a couple round all by himself with using only Evil Eye and Slumber. You could write those two hexes on a piece of paper and have your player point to one when it is his turn. Everything else is just potential complexity that can be ignored.

However, if you honestly feel that this person cannot possibly handle someone who needs to strategize in any way, then pick a mundane archer. Since getting within 30 feet and/or flanking is strategy, you can rule out the Rogue.

Paraphrasing him, BFC and SoS spells aren't fun. He actually used much stronger language that I'll refrain from posting. Still, he did say he was interested in trying out different character concepts, so I'll check with him. Thanks!

[Barstro]

Bonus tale: We've been playing almost weekly for over a year and he still needs help calculating his attack roll (aka, that thing written on your sheet + d20 result). About 60% of the time he gets mixed up whether or not he's Raging and if he has Power Attack on or not.


Paraphrasing him, BFC and SoS spells aren't fun.

"Find the number" and addition are too hard for him, but he doesn't want to use "Save or Suck" spells? I try to not tell other people how to have fun, but this gentleman is a walking (stumbling?) contradiction.

Spending two rounds to land a Slumber hex is the same as using two rounds to do high damage and kill, but whatever.

He sounds like the old adage "if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail", but he has a full toolbox and simply refuses to pull out anything other than a hammer.

[GilesTheCleric]

Has your group tried 5th edition? A lot of the maths is stripped from the game, leaving just three types of dice rolls in their place: d20, advantage (2d20best1) and disadvantage (2d20worst1), with no modifiers. It's a less slow system to run, and if your group squints a little at combat rules and focuses on roleplay anyway, then it's a good match. Character building is also simplified, and many more types of builds are viable with less op-fu.

[Spore]

As I mentioned above, we've been playing for over a year now. He loves the game, especially roleplaying parts. He also likes when he deals a lots of damage to things. He enjoys the game, he just can't grasp mechanics.

Okay, now I get it. For the calculating attack bonus part: I have always used most of the weapon boxes on the original PF sheet to calculate various iterations of the main weapon, simplifying the adding for everything my own character has. It then reads as such:

[Figuring he is Fighter 3, has Str 16 Dex 16, a Twohanded Sword and a Composite Longbow (+3 Strength bonus)]

Twohanded Sword - +6 - 19/x2
Slashing - melee - no Ammunition - 2w6 + 4

Power Attack (-1 Att/+3 Dam) - +5 - 19/x2
Slashing - melee - no Ammunition - 2w6 + 7

Composite Longbow - +6 - x3
Piercing - 110 ft (22 spaces) - 20 Arrows - 1w8+3

Later on, I use the last two ones for Deadly Aim and a onehanded weapon with another damage type like a morning star.

[Barstro]

Twohanded Sword - +6 - 19/x2
Slashing - melee - no Ammunition - 2w6 + 4

ETC.


That really is the easiest way to do it. I have a character with all sorts of combinations, but I could still probably make it a list of just 20. But, I'm a spreadsheet kind of guy and just put numbers in when I'm using different bonuses.

Are you all of a certain age where a cell phone app would be better, or do you prefer actual dice? I believe there are apps out there that would allow him to just enter in the weapon stats, select if he has temporary bonuses, and roll away.

[mostholycerebus]

Hard to beat a pounce barbarian for power/simplicity ratio. Building it is a little complicated, but in use: Pounce, Full-Attack, done. Usefull out-of-combat abilities, but no so many that they overwhelm.