How to have "Training wheels" for spell casting PC's?

[2D8HP]

The Player doesn't want to take ANY metamagics. Halp! (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?550677-Player-doesn-t-want-to-take-ANY-metamagics-Halp!) thread has inspired me to ask something I've been wondering for a while now:

The Champion is the "Martial" training wheels sub class, but I don't really see a caster (or half caster) equivalent.

In a 5e game when we all rolled for stats, and I rolled a high INT, I spent some time reading up on the Wizard class (so many more options than an 0e/1e Magic-User!), I knew that there was no way for me to learn it quickly enough to play even remotely effective enough for my co-players, so I made the PC a High Elf Rogue with the Firebolt cantrip and the Investigation skill (so INT had some use), which caused another player to chastised me for playing the stats "sub-optimally", leaving a bad taste.
.
The thing is, if you play a Champion Fighter you can play a "training wheels class" which is relatively easy to master the options of (compared to other classes and sub-classes), which is fine if your character concept is "guy with a bow and a sword", but if you want to play a Magic-User in 5e, there are just so many options and resources to keep track of that it seems more difficult to learn and keep track of than some of the "Martial" sub-classes (yes someone's may be reading this and saying "It was easy for me", well congratulations, enjoy your cognitive agility while it lasts).

Without "home brew", and memory aides (like spell cards), which is the simplest rules mechanics way to play a spell-caster in 5e?

And what is the simplest way to play a spell-caster that isn't likely to get other players up in your grill about being "sub-optimal"?

[Throne12]

It warlock there

[Yagyujubei]

yeah warlock. it has the fewest spells, can get by mainly with just one spell, and regains spell slots on short rest. ezpz

[Armored Walrus]

And what is the simplest way to play a spell-caster that isn't likely to get other players up in your grill about being "sub-optimal"?

I know you've played rangers, 2d8HP. How'd you handle spellcasting on them?

Maybe Arcane Trickster or Eldritch Knight is the way for you to go. It would be pretty close, spell-wise, to the Ranger.


As far as other players getting in your grill about being sub-optimal. I suppose telling 'em to go to hell isn't the option you need to hear about?

Edit: Folks saying warlock may be factually correct in terms of spellcasting. But two things... Warlock is Cha based not Int based, and the class itself is, IMO, quite complex. It's only the spells that are easy.

[Kane0]

Agreed with warlock, but I'll go into a bit more depth.

Warlock is fully functional with a decent Cha (and Con). Casters are all about having tons of options and resources to track, but warlocks take a slightly different approach that can make it much easier if you want it to, as well as much more involved if you dig deeper.

Cantrips: Warlocks almost always pick Eldritch Blast because it's unique to them and has complimentary invocations, and you can treat this as the caster version of a fighter's basic attack. Other cantrips offer alternate attacks or, more likely, flavor abilities like making lights and sounds. The number of cantrips you get is on the smaller side too, which helps reduce analysis paralysis.

Patron: This is your warlock subclass, and unfortunately there is no champion analogue. However we do get the Hexblade, which gives you extra proficiencies and a short rest curse ability that saves you needing to bother with the hex spell, which can get fiddly when concentration becomes involved. It also allows you to use Charisma for your weapons if you decide to go down that path. If Hexblade doesn't interest you then Fiend, Fey and Great Old One all have a mix of passive and active abilites so it's largely up to you, though i'd go with GoO since you start with passive telepathy and gives you some time before you have to take into account its buttons at later levels.

Pact Magic: The warlock can cast two spells per short rest for the vast majority of it's life, much like a fighter has one action surge and one second wind per short rest. The only problem is picking out your spells and when to use them, as the upcasting and slot tracking aspects can largely be ignored for warlocks because of the design of Pact Magic. Generally you will want 'cool trick' or 'big bang' spells as these will be used much more rarely than your standard EB attack. The warlock list is on the small side and doesn't change at the start of each day too which eases the burden of deciding. If you do pick a spell which turns out to not work well for you just swap it when you level up next.

Invocations: This is the tricky part, as it adds another layer of options to choose from compared to other classes. The easy thing to do is to pick the ones that give you passive benefits. For example Beguiling Influence gives you proficiency in two speech skills, Agonizing Blast gives you +Cha to damage with your Eldritch Blast the same way you add Str or Dex to weapon damage, Devil's Sight gives you improved Darkvision, Eyes of the Runekeeper let you read anything, etc. The passive ones are usually the more solid choices anyway, so you won't feel like you are falling behind the party.

Pact Boon: It seems like another subclass choice, but not quite as involved. It's pretty much a once off choice with extra invocation options. Pact of the Chain is definitely the least simple to track and use in play, the other two just improve your weapon or add extra cantrips. I personally really like tome because it gives you any three cantrips and access to the best ritual casting, which because you don't get it until at least level 3 staggers out your intro into using magic and spells. Rituals spells function the same as regular casting except you can choose to take a minute longer to cast it in exchange for not using up one of your spell slots. But you don't need to choose this, you decide the level of depth and complexity you are prepared for.

Hope that is helpful.

[Cynthaer]

So, obviously no spellcaster can ever be as straightforward as a Champion Fighter, because spells by definition are a resource you have to choose and manage. To give a similar "on rails" experience for a spellcasting class, we want to minimize both (A) decisions at character build time, and (B) moment-to-moment decisions in-game.

The bad news is no class is built to do this, but the good news is most primary caster classes can be simplified if we just ignore a bunch of options. To maximize the blasting, we'll also avoid classes with a lot of subtle/indirect power, and classes with yet more non-spell powers/resources to track.

We'll throw out Bard, Cleric, and Druid for those reasons. Warlock's not bad, but it has a lot of build decisions to make.

That leaves Wizard and Sorcerer. All we have to do is artificially reduce our spell list to the one spell you're going to spam all day, and everything else is gravy. Then we try to pick subclasses that provide "always on" effects that you don't need to remember.

Wizard

Wizards can have the greatest complexity, because they get the most spells by far, but so what? All we care about is that it's got a bunch of spell slots for blastin' and almost no other powers.

Build:

Cantrip: Fire Bolt
Level 1 Spell: Magic Missile

Use Magic Missile until you run out of spell slots, then use Fire Bolt.

If the Arcane Recovery feature sounds like a pain to remember (you have to track whether you've used it today or not), I'm sure your DM will let you simplify it to "you get 1 extra spell slot of [your level]/2, rounded up".

For your subclass, School of Evocation. It doesn't give you anything to track; it just makes it so if you decide to start using area spells they won't affect your allies. Easy.

If you want something more powerful than an upcast Magic Missile, take Scorching Ray as a level 2 spell, Fireball for level 3, and Blight for level 4. These are all fire-and-forget damage spells; nothing too weird.

Sorcerer

Same deal as Wizard. Only differences are that (A) instead of Arcane Recovery, you get some "Spell Points" that you will immediately turn into spell slots, and (B) you'll take the Draconic Bloodline subclass for some extra HP and AC. Ignore metamagics unless/until you feel like digging into them.



For either class, fill out the rest of your spell list however you like. Whatever's got a cool name, or looks nice, or is first alphabetically. You don't have to know or care what they do. Worst case, you never look at them again; best case, you're looking for a single magic dagger in a treasure vault and you suddenly remember there's something called "Detect Magic" on your spell list.

Side note: You'll notice that everything I've described is precisely what the Sorcerer player in the linked thread has already worked out for herself. She's found the single, generally-applicable spell she wants, and has stripped away everything else she doesn't want to deal with mechanically. She may be a new(ish) player, but she knows what she's doing.

EDIT:

Edit: Folks saying warlock may be factually correct in terms of spellcasting. But two things... Warlock is Cha based not Int based, and the class itself is, IMO, quite complex. It's only the spells that are easy.
Agreed. I would say it's easier to play a Warlock "optimally" than a Wizard/Sorcerer, but the cost is that the build complexity is so much higher that it's no longer "training wheels".

In particular, a player who doesn't want to deal with picking Metamagics isn't going to be any more interested in picking Eldritch Invocations. Plus the level one choices of Pact and Patron and extra active powers coming from the Patron choice don't feel simple.

Basically, I don't think the advantage of "you don't have to pick which spell slots to use" outweighs the rest, especially when the other casters can just default to upcasting their level 1 damage spells to get the same benefit.

[strangebloke]

I honestly don't think an Evoker Wizard is that bad.

Sure, it's more complex than a champion, but you get so many spells per level, you'll be able to build something reasonably effective just by grabbing whatever blasty spells you think look neat. Casting blasty spells isn't that hard, either. "I cast fireball" is never a bad option in the eyes of your teammates, and by default it's up to the DM to determine how many you hit. Your class features are stupid-simple as well. Don't worry about friendly fire, ever. Get a small numerical bonus to your cantrips.

It isn't hard tactically or hard to build. The only challenge is the actual bookkeeping, remembering that you have 'x' spells known and 'y' spell slots etc. You've got so much flexibility that you basically can't screw it up.

Warlocks actually have a lot going on, and you have a lot of important decisions to make that have implications for the rest of the game. An undying patron bladelock who doesn't know exactly what he's doing is gonna have a bad time.

[DarkKnightJin]

It's Wis over Int, but I think a Cleric could be a pretty good 'training wheels' caster. Especially with something like Life, Tempest, or War domain. Get some Heavy Armor, a Shield, and you don't even really need to worry about a melee weapon.

Arcana Cleric if you want a pseudo-Wizard, I suppose.

I honestly might roll one of those myself sometime, if I can get over my irrational love of Heavy Armor for all my characters..

[2D8HP]

I know you've played rangers, 2d8HP. How'd you handle spellcasting on them?.....


Um... I've never played a second level (or above) Ranger in 5e, and in 1e your Ranger would get one spell they could cast once per day at 8th level so there's never been much spell casting to handle.

:redface:


.


.


...Hope that is helpful.

It was thanks.


So, obviously no spellcaster can ever be as straightforward as a Champion Fighter, because spells by definition are a resource you have to choose and manage....


That was my impression as well.


...You'll notice that everything I've described is precisely what the Sorcerer player in the linked thread has already worked out for herself. She's found the single, generally-applicable spell she wants, and has stripped away everything else she doesn't want to deal with mechanically. She may be a new(ish) player, but she knows what she's doing.


Yeah, I may be unique in that my thought on reading about "the problem" in that thread was, "That looks like a good idea to me"!


.


..


Thanks for all the great suggestions!

:smile:

[Kane0]

Also it's worth mentioning that the free basic rules found online include the Evoker alongside the Champion, so it seems the intent was the Evoker to be the go-to beginner option for casters.

[Unoriginal]

I know you wanted to play "level 0" characters, 2D8HP, and you seemed to like the idea of using NPC statblocks to simulate that when I suggested it.

Would your DM/group allow you to play the "Apprentice Wizard" from the Volo's?

And if no, would it bother you to simply emulate this statblock as much as you can while you learn the ropes?


As to avoid other players giving you **** for playing "sub-optimally", the only two solutions I know is either talking with them and explain why it bothers you to have them **** on you when you're trying to have fun, or find other players.

[LeonBH]

You start the player at level 1 and throw combat at them, leveling them up slowly until they learn how that class's spellcasting works.

[Kane0]

Secondary option: Play a race that gets a cantrip, then at level 4 or later take one of the feats that grants additional casting (Ritual Caster, Magic Initiate, Spell Sniper).
Works well when coupled with something like EK Fighter or AT Rogue after already having played a fighter or rogue before. You get spells to try out and get familiar with but can always fall back on what you did before which works just fine.

[Cynthaer]

Yeah, I may be unique in that my thought on reading about "the problem" in that thread was, "That looks like a good idea to me"!

The fact is, it is extremely difficult for many (most?) more technically-minded players to grasp just how high a barrier even minor mechanics can be for many potential players.

For many of us, a large amount of the fun comes from mastering the available options to be the most effective we can be, and using every tool at our disposal during the game. We're also used to certain types of complexity, so we're comfortable glossing over them and barely even register that they're there.

This leads to the assumption that someone who is not using their character's tools must not be having as much fun as they could be—see all the advice in the other thread on how to get the player to cast a non-Magic Missile spell. Now, this may well be true, but it's not necessarily true.

It also leads to the assumption that having more build options and abilities is strictly better, because we don't feel the "weight" of making those choices and having all that extra text on the character sheet in-game.

Therefore, the immediate thought when seeing someone who just wants to cast Magic Missile all day is that they aren't enjoying the game because they're not interested in the spellcasting options or mechanics. And again, that may be true. But just like the Champion, playing such a one-note caster can be perfect for someone who doesn't care about optimizing their combat effectiveness or reading the Spellcasting chapter, but who cares a great deal about the adventure as a whole and just likes guaranteed damage a lot.

For this player, every additional mechanic will just serve as one more thing standing between them and actually playing the game.

[Tanarii]

Wizard is the best starter class for casters.

Do not try a sorcerer or warlock or druid until you have the wizard down. They all take far more finesse. I made the mistake many others here did of assuming warlock is the caster training class, but thats just not the case. Newcomers have far more trouble with warlock than wizard most of the time.

[Laserlight]

I'd have said that ”training wheels” for a caster means you start at L1 and level the character.

But if you mean a character who is simple to play for his entire career, similar to a champion...truly, the point of being a caster is have the complexity that a champion doesn't. It's like asking ”what kind of airplane makes a good bicycle?”

If I had to pick a full caster, I'd pick sorc. Most of the work is in building the character. You know all your spells all the time, and you don't have the mishmash of warlock spells and invocations and higher level spells and patrons.

[Grod_The_Giant]

If you want a "training wheels" caster, I'd suggest one of the half or third casters (Paladin, Ranger, Eldritch Knight, Arcane Trickster). Maybe grabbing Magic Initiate on Ranger/Paladin to get used to cantrips. That'll get you used to managing spells without being so dependent on them that you can really mess them up.

[DivisibleByZero]

You start the player at level 1 and throw combat at them, leveling them up slowly until they learn how that class's spellcasting works.

This.
A first level character of any class is fairly simple. You have time to learn how it works.
Then you get level 2, and you get some new toys to play with. You learn how those work.
Then you get level 3, and you get even cooler new toys. You learn how those work.
Etc, etc, etc.

The classes were all designed like this. All of them. Start at level 1, don't 'plan your build,' and just learn as you go.
Champion may be the "easiest," but when approached this way, all of them are easy.

[2D8HP]

This...

....easy.


Given how quickly the DM's have had us rocket to second level, and up (not surprising given how few XP that takes in this edition) that hasn't been my experience, but an even bigger issue is how many games start at higher levels.

A game in which we start at First-level and stay at low levels longer would be welcome by me, but I fear that's a minority taste.

[Kane0]

You're not alone. I also like a good lowbie adventure, they really put the high end stomps of other adventures in perspective.


-Snip-
Very insightful, and i'm totally guilty of this.

[DivisibleByZero]

Given how quickly the DM's have had us rocket to second level, and up (not surprising given how few XP that takes in this edition) that hasn't been my experience, but an even bigger issue is how many games start at higher levels.

A game in which we start at First-level and stay at low levels longer would be welcome by me, but I fear that's a minority taste.

But those low levels, where you don't stay there very long, are the ones where you have the least amount of toys to learn. It doesn't take long. By the time it takes a little longer to get a grasp of your new toys, you have the time required.

Starting at higher levels, we can't help you with. The classes were designed to be easy to learn from the ground up. If you're starting on the third floor, obviously the learning curve is steeper.

[Joe the Rat]

What Warlock does in training is introduce the concept of up-casting, and mitigate resource management by preventing you from blowing a day's worth of spell slots in one go. That can be a big stumbling block.

You just have to give the opportunity to short rest.

Cleric is good for spell selection - in that if you make a mistake in what you prepare, you can change it the next day. Conversely, Sorcerer or Warlock you only need to know the spells you have, but you need to make the right decisions for what you want to do. Wizard sits between the two - You only have part of your possible spells available, but you need to decide on the day's load out.

If I were to introduce someone to casters, I'd recommend dragon sorcerer. Built-in survivability, lots of starting cantrips (let them go nuts), and classic spells. Recommend one offense, one defense, one utility, and let them experiment.

[Honest Tiefling]

Well, firstly, you remove that player from the table, preferably with a witty quip...

Through if I had to be honest, cleric would be an excellent choice. Wildshape takes some getting used to, and you have to decide early on what you want to do with it. But redoing your entire spell list? flexibility AND getting used to a multitude of spells.

Any chance of making your rogue an Arcane Trickster? I think only having a few spells to worry about and having 'hit it' as a back up option can't hurt.

[Tanarii]

If you want a "training wheels" caster, I'd suggest one of the half or third casters (Paladin, Ranger, Eldritch Knight, Arcane Trickster). Maybe grabbing Magic Initiate on Ranger/Paladin to get used to cantrips. That'll get you used to managing spells without being so dependent on them that you can really mess them up.I think this is the best advice. Eldritch Knight, uses Int, but has the base Fighter chassis you're already used to.

[2D8HP]

Paladin, Ranger, Eldritch Knight, Arcane Trickster). Maybe grabbing Magic Initiate on Ranger/Paladin to get used to cantrips. .


The "Ancients" Paladin "fluff" has long intrigued me.


I think this is the best advice. Eldritch Knight, uses Int, but has the base Fighter chassis you're already used to.


That's where I'm leaning now, start High Elf for the cantrip (and it provides a back-story reason for why a Fighter would suddenly start casting spells).

Thanks!


But those low levels, where you don't stay there very long, are the ones where you have the least amount of toys to learn. It doesn't take long. By the time it takes a little longer to get a grasp of your new toys, you have the time required....


I thank you for and appreciate the encouragement, but I suspect that I'm a much slower learner than your used to playing with (think of your dimmest older relatives and co-workers).


...Any chance of making your rogue an Arcane Trickster? I think only having a few spells to worry about and having 'hit it' as a back up option can't hurt.


Good idea! (I'm partial to Rogues), that particular PC I left facing a closed door awaiting a "next session' that never came, but I could "Standard Array" something close.

Going to look for some simpler spells.

Thanks again everyone!

[Daphne]

I like the Cleric (especially the Life Domain), you can change your prepared spells everyday (which is better than been locked to bad spells you chose for an entire level), the spell list is not that big compared to the Wizard (which has too many spells) and there's a lot less bookkeeping compared to the Druid.

I would also avoid the Sorcerer, it requires deep knowledge of the spellcasting rules.

[2D8HP]

I like the Cleric....

.....there's a lot less bookkeeping compared to the Druid..


Thanks for the tip, I appreciate it!
(and Druids skeeve me out anyway, I still associate them with the monsters calles Druids in old D&D).

[Spore]

Seconding the cleric tip. Bonus points for making them "chosen ones" without actually forcing a religious background onto them. Just have them be determined to do their domain's thing really hard. You will not raise a competent spell user by circumventing the "standard" spell system of D&D : preparing and then casting from said list.

And as Cynthaer said, there are players who cannot grasp the mechanics. People who feel all this "lists and book keeping" detracts from an enjoyable RP experience. There are players who feel like memorizing class mechanics is like homework.

So please for your sanity: Distinguish between people new and trying to learn the mechanics and others who like playing but have no interest in improving. Trust me you just waste your time in teaching the latter kind.

In almost 2 years of Pathfinder we have succeded to teach our Flame Oracle to use 1 (in letters: ONE) other class mechanic than Fireball. On a player that wanted to solve problems by talking a lot and circumventing fights.

[LeonBH]

If I had to pick a full caster, I'd pick sorc. Most of the work is in building the character. You know all your spells all the time, and you don't have the mishmash of warlock spells and invocations and higher level spells and patrons.

No, don't pick a Sorcerer if you need a training wheels caster. If you make a bad decision at creation, you will be stuck with that bad decision until you level up.

A training wheels class should provide plenty of opportunities to make and correct mistakes. And have as few non-spellcasting features as possible, so the focus is only on spellcasting.

On that note, don't pick a Warlock either.

[Saggo]

I like the Cleric (especially the Life Domain), you can change your prepared spells everyday (which is better than been locked to bad spells you chose for an entire level), the spell list is not that big compared to the Wizard (which has too many spells) and there's a lot less bookkeeping compared to the Druid.

I would also avoid the Sorcerer, it requires deep knowledge of the spellcasting rules.

It's also pretty easy to find a Cleric spell to cast, especially Life, that while not always optimal can always contribute meaningfully.

Start of the day? Aid. Start of a fight? Bless Someone hurt? Cure Wounds or Healing Word. No one hurt? Spiritual Weapon or Spirit Guardians.

[Cespenar]

No, don't pick a Sorcerer if you need a training wheels caster. If you make a bad decision at creation, you will be stuck with that bad decision until you level up.

This makes sense in a way, but I've also seen that new people can adapt to Sorcerers more easily due to the removed hurdle of the known spells/prepared spells dichotomy.

And also, other party members can help with your one-time spell selection per each level, but the aforementioned hurdle repeats itself every day.

But I definitely would advise against Warlock as well.

[LeonBH]

This makes sense in a way, but I've also seen that new people can adapt to Sorcerers more easily due to the removed hurdle of the known spells/prepared spells dichotomy.

And also, other party members can help with your one-time spell selection per each level, but the aforementioned hurdle repeats itself every day.

But I definitely would advise against Warlock as well.

That's a good way to approach it, actually. But it does require the newbie be open to (and actually following the) suggestions of a more experienced Sorcerer-player, in build and in play.

But if you're referring to newbies who adapt to a blaster Sorc, I can see that. You just pick the damage spells and sling them. They might not pick the best metamagic options or make the best tactical decisions, but I sense this context is more player-friendly. A forgiving DM would allow the newbie to repick some metamagic options.

Where it might go wrong is if the campaign steps up in difficulty. But if the DM provides allowances for the new player (which not all DMs may provide), that would be the better option, and it would work regardless if you're Sorc or Wiz or another caster class.

[DivisibleByZero]

I thank you for and appreciate the encouragement, but I suspect that I'm a much slower learner than your used to playing with (think of your dimmest older relatives and co-workers

If that's the case, then I also recommend EK or AT. They're like "wizard light" and let you learn the wizard stuff even slower.

[Unoriginal]

I know you wanted to play "level 0" characters, 2D8HP, and you seemed to like the idea of using NPC statblocks to simulate that when I suggested it.

Would your DM/group allow you to play the "Apprentice Wizard" from the Volo's?

And if no, would it bother you to simply emulate this statblock as much as you can while you learn the ropes?


As to avoid other players giving you **** for playing "sub-optimally", the only two solutions I know is either talking with them and explain why it bothers you to have them **** on you when you're trying to have fun, or find other players.

I was serious with this advice, btw. Not sure if it was clear.

Maybe see if there's a caster in the party and ask if they'd find it fun for you to play their apprentice.

[2D8HP]

....see if there's a caster in the party and ask if they'd find it fun for you to play their apprentice.


It's a good idea, I'll run it by a DM.