Conan, what is best in play?

[GilesTheCleric]

I hope to be playing at an actual 3.5 tabletop in the near future, and am stuck for ideas on what to build. I expect to be playing with a clever youngster new to D&D, a 2e vet, and possibly someone who has some 3.5 experience and is a budding optimiser. I want to particularly focus on making sure that the youngster has a good time and that the vet doesn't feel useless in the new system. I also would like something that's interesting to play (for me, that means having more than one trick, and/or unique mechanical crunch). All my pre-fab builds seem too polarizing for such casual play, even the supporting/ buffing/ cohort ones.

What do you recommend?

[Venger]

I hope to be playing at an actual 3.5 tabletop in the near future, and am stuck for ideas on what to build. I expect to be playing with a clever youngster new to D&D, a 2e vet, and possibly someone who has some 3.5 experience and is a budding optimiser. I want to particularly focus on making sure that the youngster has a good time and that the vet doesn't feel useless in the new system. I also would like something that's interesting to play (for me, that means having more than one trick, and/or unique mechanical crunch). All my pre-fab builds seem too polarizing for such casual play, even the supporting/ buffing/ cohort ones.

What do you recommend?

Can you give any direction about what kind of character you'd like to play?

What is your own relative experience level with 3.5/tabletop as a whole? Have you played it before? Have you played a lot of a specific class, or kind of class and want to stick to it, or do you want to branch out into something different? How much bookkeeping are you comfortable with?

[MeeposFire]

I would recommend a bard (single or multi depending on the level range).

1. They excel at buffing which means you can help the youngster out when needed.

2. They are not a one trick pony even if you boost one aspect. For instance I usually build bards with a focus on singing (primarilly song of courage) but even when I do that I still have excellent skills, solid spells, excellent item use, and with the singing solid melee or ranged attacks while I am boosting others.

3. Bards have flair which tends to make them memorable.

4. Bards are also interesting because they really are not a rush in and attack class and since they are not primary casters you will always be considering your options and will not usually end a fight with one spell.

5. They can be fairly powerful but often in that power they do not always bring the attention to themselves (unless you point it out or people are being observant). With my bard even at low levels you can easily get +3 on inspire courage and with slightly more investment that can be made up to even a +6 (that will make you feel stupid powerful for a while so I would personally stick with the +3 unless you really need the power or you want to prove just how nasty a well made bard can be) and that +3 is actually potent but since it is not a fist full of dice all at once people tend to forget how much damage you granted to the party in one encounter (if you ever feel like you don't do enough keep track of the bonus damage you granted and the misses you turned into hits I promise you will actually be one of the heavier hitters in most parties assuming you have people that make attack rolls).

[GilesTheCleric]

Can you give any direction about what kind of character you'd like to play?

What is your own relative experience level with 3.5/tabletop as a whole? Have you played it before? Have you played a lot of a specific class, or kind of class and want to stick to it, or do you want to branch out into something different? How much bookkeeping are you comfortable with?

Thank you for the quick response! I'd probably like to be a supporting-type, though that could manifest in many ways (CC, de/buffs, teamwork, divination).

I'm sorry that I've been away from gitp for so long that you have forgotten me :smalleek:. Regardless, those are excellent questions. I'd say that I'm a reasonable optimiser, willing to go beyond the easy solutions of DMM:P, scry'n'die, mailman, ubercharger, etc. I've been playing 3e since ~2004 or 2005, and have played 2e, 3e, 4e, a hint of 5e, and other systems. Surprise, I play mostly clerics, since it's a class that can optimise into any niche. I've already played bardblade, ubermount, sniper archer, CoDzillas, lumomancer cleric, tenebromancer cleric, necromancer cleric, and shadowpouncer. I'm fine with replaying anything, but new would be neat. I spend a mode of 40 hours per build, and have a filing system for all the materials I considered. I think my median number of classes per build is 5, and I don't think I've ever played a fully mundane character. I often use rules like teamwork benefits, bloodlines, skill tricks, traits, and of course piles of ACFs and sub levels. Book keeping is fun for me.

[Cerefel]

You could play a binder and/or chameleon and swap out your options regularly.

[Venger]

Thank you for the quick response! I'd probably like to be a supporting-type, though that could manifest in many ways (CC, de/buffs, teamwork, divination).

I'm sorry that I've been away from gitp for so long that you have forgotten me :smalleek:. Regardless, those are excellent questions. I'd say that I'm a reasonable optimiser, willing to go beyond the easy solutions of DMM:P, scry'n'die, mailman, ubercharger, etc. I've been playing 3e since ~2004 or 2005, and have played 2e, 3e, 4e, a hint of 5e, and other systems. Surprise, I play mostly clerics, since it's a class that can optimise into any niche. I've already played bardblade, ubermount, sniper archer, CoDzillas, lumomancer cleric, tenebromancer cleric, necromancer cleric, and shadowpouncer. I'm fine with replaying anything, but new would be neat. I spend a mode of 40 hours per build, and have a filing system for all the materials I considered. I think my median number of classes per build is 5, and I don't think I've ever played a fully mundane character. I often use rules like teamwork benefits, bloodlines, skill tricks, traits, and of course piles of ACFs and sub levels. Book keeping is fun for me.

Any time. Ok. That's a good starting point.

My apologies. I do much of my posting to the site from mobile so I often don't really look at username. I didn't mean to come off as condescending, I just scoured the OP for something to suggest baseline familiarity.

if you like bookkeeping, and you want to avoid overshadowing your friends while serving as their cheerleader, similar to the classic god wizard, have you thought about archivist? they're very rewarding, and don't sacrifice power while simultaneously doing a pretty good job of making sure you don't hog all the spotlight. if you want to turn your note-taking to your advantage, you might even consider chameleon and use ALL the spells.

[Mr Adventurer]

Archivist is actually stronger than Cleric, though.

OP - I think we need to know more about what your party-mates are going to be. The things you've listed, that you're used to, are absolutely leagues ahead of what a neophyte is going to do.

In 2e, you'll recall that Fighters were actually good, so the guy may make that mistake. Same with blaster wizards.

You also don't want to overshadow the newbies, because that can be very off-putting. So, at your level of player experience, I wouldn't recommend playing a 'jack of all trades' (Factotum, Chameleon, Druid, Binder) because it'll be too easy to outshine less powerful builds even in their own niche.

I think that might be a good way of putting it actually: help protect the newbies' niches.

A Bard could work well, if the party doesn't need anything in particular.

[Venger]

Archivist is actually stronger than Cleric, though.

OP - I think we need to know more about what your party-mates are going to be. The things you've listed, that you're used to, are absolutely leagues ahead of what a neophyte is going to do.

In 2e, you'll recall that Fighters were actually good, so the guy may make that mistake. Same with blaster wizards.

You also don't want to overshadow the newbies, because that can be very off-putting. So, at your level of player experience, I wouldn't recommend playing a 'jack of all trades' (Factotum, Chameleon, Druid, Binder) because it'll be too easy to outshine lesser builds.

A Bard could work well, if the party doesn't need anything in particular.

Oh, absolutely, since it's cleric+. I just meant it has greater access to helpful buffs for the party than cleric alone. it can help shore up deficiencies by doling out buffs to party members and impede enemies with bfc, buff the fighter, etc. it's good at support and is comparatively easier to play that way as opposed to straight cleric, many of whose best spells can't be shared with friends.

[Cerefel]

I still think a jack-of-all-trades can be a good option, especially if it's the kind that picks a role at the start of a day. Just don't pick a role that would step on toes.

[GilesTheCleric]

I don't really know what the rest of the party might play. Guesses: the youngster might play rogue or sorcerer; the vet might pick ranger, fighter, rogue, or druid; the 3.5 guy also happens to like clerics, but might go with anything T3+.

Bard sounds reasonable. What sorts of things might work on it without being DFI/ fochlucan-level?

I fear that a T1 like archivist might overdo things no matter how I try to keep it in check. Maybe a Sha'ir would at least slow the versatility down?

Even in a party of fighters and blaster wizards, I'm sure there's a way to inconspicuously boost their effectiveness. Bard iirc can play several songs at once with tricks, so I could give several small bonuses to AC, to-hit, and dmg, possibly with some marshal/ DFA auras on top. Binder is really intriguing -- I could see some sort of festering anger/ shield other / stigmata / divine ward combo in conjunction with the variable abilities of the binder. Isn't there a feat or ACF (maybe orc-related or in drag mag) that converts str to con/hp?

How well do you all think that going entirely non-combat might work? For example, if I had a artificer, transmuter or conjurer-type who could eg. Fabricate solutions to problems, but perhaps couldn't use the fabrications themselves? Iirc there's a luck-based PrC that gives you a roll to see if you have sundry items in your pack that you had "forgotten" you bought back in town (does anyone remember the name of it? Also, fingers crossed it's not kender-only).

[AvatarVecna]

I don't really know what the rest of the party might play. Guesses: the youngster might play rogue or sorcerer; the vet might pick ranger, fighter, rogue, or druid; the 3.5 guy also happens to like clerics, but might go with anything T3+.

Bard sounds reasonable. What sorts of things might work on it without being DFI/ fochlucan-level?

I fear that a T1 like archivist might overdo things no matter how I try to keep it in check. Maybe a Sha'ir would at least slow the versatility down?

Even in a party of fighters and blaster wizards, I'm sure there's a way to inconspicuously boost their effectiveness. Bard iirc can play several songs at once with tricks, so I could give several small bonuses to AC, to-hit, and dmg, possibly with some marshal/ DFA auras on top. Binder is really intriguing -- I could see some sort of festering anger/ shield other / stigmata / divine ward combo in conjunction with the variable abilities of the binder. Isn't there a feat or ACF (maybe orc-related or in drag mag) that converts str to con/hp?

How well do you all think that going entirely non-combat might work? For example, if I had a artificer, transmuter or conjurer-type who could eg. Fabricate solutions to problems, but perhaps couldn't use the fabrications themselves? Iirc there's a luck-based PrC that gives you a roll to see if you have sundry items in your pack that you had "forgotten" you bought back in town (does anyone remember the name of it? Also, fingers crossed it's not kender-only).

Depending on your starting level, and your tolerance for cheese, I might suggest supplementing your Bard levels with War Weaver. War Weaver loses a caster level, but allows you to apply single-target spells to the whole party limited by class level; with a touch of early entry cheese, you can go Bard 4/War Weaver X. After that, I recommend either Mindbender 1/Sublime Chord 1/(some full casting progression PrC) X, or if you're DM is willing to allow even more shenanigans, Uncanny Trickster 1/Sublime Chord 1/Uncanny Trickster 2/(some full casting progression PrC) X, with Uncanny Trickster advancing War Weaver. The effective War Weaver levels 6 and 7 advance your SC casting, and more importantly allows that "apply single target spells to the whole party" trick to be used with 6th and 7th lvl spells. Both of these builds focus more on spellcasting than on skills or Bardic Performance, though, which you might not prefer for obvious reasons.

[GilesTheCleric]

By not focusing on the music, I should be able to provide those nice "under the radar" buffs, while at the same time being able to create bigger effects if necessary via spells. It seems like it should scale nicely across levels 1-10.

To keep things in perspective, what about the other approach -- to be more "T4"? Does an archivist or something else help protect the others' niches better than a bard as described above might?

[Venger]

By not focusing on the music, I should be able to provide those nice "under the radar" buffs, while at the same time being able to create bigger effects if necessary via spells. It seems like it should scale nicely across levels 1-10.

To keep things in perspective, what about the other approach -- to be more "T4"? Does an archivist or something else help protect the others' niches better than a bard as described above might?

try incarnate. a dip or splash goes well with crusader if you don't want to take it straight. you can provide some nice utility and support to your friends