Classes Ranked by Ease of Learning

[Catullus64]

How would you rate the twelve classes in the PHB based upon how difficult they are for new players to learn? My personal list will be examining the classes as they are for levels 1-3, since that seems like the default area for a new game with new players to take place. Others are free to treat of a more extensive range of levels. My ranking is from easiest to hardest. Most of the basis for this is my own experience with new players, on both sides of the DM screen, so maybe some of this is due to how good or bad I am at teaching and explaining certain aspects of the game.

1. Fighter. Obviously subject to some variation based upon martial archetypes, but the class gives you only a small number of combat decisions to make and two very simple resources to manage.
2. Barbarian. As above, only with Reckless Attack and Unarmored defense adding in some additional decisions in combat and character building respectively.
3. Bard. What?! Bards, versatile skill monkeys extraordinaire, third easiest? Well, your small selection of spells at early levels eases decision making, and features like expertise and Jack of All Trades simply require you to be able to read the numbers on your character sheet. Inspiration can take a bit of learning, but the burden of knowing how to use it is shared by your companions!
4. Rogue. The general lack of resource management makes the Rogue, in my eyes, beautifully simple, but I will concede that Cunning Action and Sneak Attack require some more refined game sense than many new players have, and the Hiding rules can be a source of confusion even for veteran players.
5. Cleric. You have to choose and manage a subclass right out of the gate, as well as choose your spells from an entire list every day. That said, a Cleric's playstyle, once the character is built, is not difficult to master.
6. Sorcerer. Another class that requires you to choose a subclass right from the start. Small number of spells might seem to make this easier to play, but the fact that your spells slots, metamagics, and some subclass features are all competing for your sorcery points can be a source of great difficulty.
7. Paladin. Your damage output and your overall utility are both competing for your resources, and despite the relative flexibility of the Sacred Oath Tenets, it still has the most tricky roleplaying constraints of any class.
8. Wizard. Ranks this high by virtue of having one of the most versatile spell lists to select from, even before you get into things like preparation and the classes' unique interaction with rituals. Doesn't rank higher because it, ironically, has less bookkeeping than some other classes.
9. Monk. As the sorcerer and paladin will attest to, having many class features that all draw upon the same resource is a major source of difficulty, and the monk has perhaps the highest density of features of any class. Add in a bit of the movement and engagement rules required for the Rogue, and the potential rules confusions springing from martial arts, and I almost consider bumping it up to number ten.
10. Ranger. Until I look and see how laughably complex this class's two first level features alone are. Compare the length of the text required to describe Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer with that required to describe Action Surge and Second Wind. That, plus the need to append a massive safety warning to new players about not going Beast master.
11. Druid. See the above comment on clerics, and add in Wild Shape, the biggest vortex of complicated rules interactions on any class feature list, even before you consider the analysis paralysis involved in choosing beast shapes.
12. Warlock. Pact Features, Extra Pact Spells, Pact Boons, Eldritch Invocations, a casting system unique from any other class: that's a heckuva lot to keep straight while learning the game itself. All this, plus a set of roleplaying demands second only to the Paladin in terms of prominence.

[Vorpal Crowbar]

How would you rate the twelve classes in the PHB based upon how difficult they are for new players to learn? My ranking is from easiest to hardest.
.

IMO:
I see them in groups:

Easiest:
1. Fighter - very fun, but straight forward (unless you choose battlemaster)
2. Ranger - a mostly simple class
3. Barbarian - Fun, couple of tricks, not hard to master

Intermediate
4. Paladin - little bit of magic, but their called Lawful-Stupid for a reason.
5. Monk - Fun, several tricks, not hard to master
5. Rogue - easy to play play poorly; harder to master.

More Difficult:
6. Sorcerer - the most straight forward of the full casters.
7. Warlock - lots of moving parts, easy to forget some of your toys.

Very Difficult:
8. Cleric - Vital role in the party, a real mix of abilities, role-play is really integrated into the character too.
9. Druid - similar to cleric, hard to say which is more complex.
10. Bard - bard is a subtle class, great role-play and creativity are needed.

Extremely Difficult:
11. Wizard - This class has no equal. It is the most difficult, because it requires the most creativity. This can be a huge stumbling block, especially for new players. The shear number options, number of spells, the infinite possibilities, and subtle uses; Illusion, Conjuration, Enchantment, Necromancy, and Transmutation schools have many spells that are very open-ended.
(If you are just playing a blaster -evocation wizard - Its about as complex as ranger though.)

Cheers,

VC

[mephnick]

I'd bump sorcerer higher since it's the only class you can actually break by making simple mistakes.

[Nidgit]

Most of this is on point. The 2-3 things I'd change would be to rank Rogue a little more difficult, since their damage output hinges so greatly on the player's ability to understand the mechanics of Sneak Attack, and to switch Sorcerer and Wizard. Wizard has a high entry bar in terms of looking through spells, but aside from that it's not too bad. Even if you pick your spells poorly, there's enough versatility and room for new spells that it's easy enough to fix. Meanwhile, pick your Sorcerer's Metamagics wrong and you're stuck like that until Level 10. Tougher resource management, fewer learned spells, and a still-large catalog of spells make it one of the easiest classes to mess up.

[PhoenixPhyre]

One thing to consider is how permanent mistakes are. Clerics are low permanence, while bards and sorcerers are higher.

[Catullus64]

One thing to consider is how permanent mistakes are. Clerics are low permanence, while bards and sorcerers are higher.

Eh. A Bard or Sorcerer who picks up a dud spell can swap it out at the next level. Still higher permanence than a cleric, but not enough to sway my ratings.

[Naanomi]

Because of access to every class’ spell list, Bards are challenging to level up; even if in play it isn’t that bad

[PhoenixPhyre]

Eh. A Bard or Sorcerer who picks up a dud spell can swap it out at the next level. Still higher permanence than a cleric, but not enough to sway my ratings.

But pick a bad metamagic... Or a bad magical secret...

And sometimes you need a different spell load out quicker than once per level, or you want to try a different niche. Clerics can do that much easier than bards or sorcerers.

[Catullus64]

But pick a bad metamagic... Or a bad magical secret...

And sometimes you need a different spell load out quicker than once per level, or you want to try a different niche. Clerics can do that much easier than bards or sorcerers.

Magical secrets didn't enter into my consideration, since I was treating only of the lowest levels. As for metamagics, I don't think any of them are especially bad.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Magical secrets didn't enter into my consideration, since I was treating only of the lowest levels. As for metamagics, I don't think any of them are especially bad.

Metamagic choice depends strongly on play style. So bad as ill suited, not bad as in no value for anyone.

In general, bards and sorcerers require more planning than clerics or druids.

Of course, in my experience teaching lots of people how to play, the hardest thing is the mindset. And that's not class dependent as much.

[Citan]

Hi!

Interesting thread.
For my rates to be natural, note that I didn't look at your OP past the first few lines. ;)

My main points of evaluation will be:
- difficulty to live (survive).
- complexity of build.
- complexity of efficient use while still enjoying it.

Short list just under, details in spoilers...

EASIEST
Fighter
Cleric
Barbarian ~= Ranger
Druid ~= Paladin ~= Rogue ~= Bard
Wizard ~= Monk
Warlock ~= Sorcerer.
HARDEST

1. Fighter: very little dedicated tactical options, fundamental mechanics that are easy to understand, high resilience (at least against mundane attacks) easily achievable, high versatility thanks to armor/weapons and FS (melee or ranged), and 0 strings attached roleplay-wise.
Fighter is like the fundamental block everything else is built-on, especially when feats are put aside. ^^
The only small drawback is that unless you go EK with high INT, you play mostly the same way from level 3 up to level 20.

2. Cleric: although there are strings attached roleplay-wise, this class is otherwise very close to Fighter in terms of complexity...
- Very easy to understand fundamental mechanics and expected role (even if, we all agree on that, Cleric is not just a healer).
- High resilience for the role (high AC, WIS saves).
- In spite of it being the spellcaster, the fact that...
a) You can change all spells every day
b) You can completely ignore Channels Divinity and other Domain perks and still be plenty functional (although this would be obviously a big waste, it's not required for the class to work).
c) Most spells are kinda clear-cut in their effects (except for the Divination ones, but one could argue that near all the work is on DM side there) so while some require tactical awareness to really work, you could also just spend your time buffing or otherwise use "basic" spells such as Guiding Bolt.
One could make a counter-argument that being really efficient in healing actually requires tactical finesse (to only use in-fight heal when it really has a positive impact on action economy), which is true. :)
But in most campaigns, "good enough" is enough imx.

3. Ranger: honestly extremely close to Cleric and Fighter in essence, thanks to respectable AC, built-in versatility (most abilities working either at range or in melee) so you can just hop back when too much threat, and the few number of spell known and slots which makes it easy to manage...
But on Hunter side, choosing the right options for your character does require some smarts if you want to benefit from them regularly. On Beastmaster side, the fact that the beast is very frail forces you to be extremely careful, so can be a pain for quite some levels.

3. Barbarian (ex-aequo): intuitive fundamentals, intuitive role, very high resilience, so why not first? Because the overly melee nature of the class, and the fact that Reckless Attack provides advantage against you, actually implements a requirement for thoughtfulness. I've see quite a few Barbs just rushing in blindly, certainly dealing damage, but often ending dead "too early" if I may say so, or worse, turned against the party...

5. Druid: decent AC, great spell list, can prepare, so why not higher? Because...
- many of their control spells being battlefield based can more easily affect allies: you need to be careful and anticipate, or restrict yourself to small area spells which are easier to use.
- Wild Shape is like in the top 3 features of all games, but only if you know what to do with it. It's a feature that could warrant a guide of its own, plus some use-cases may have different rulings depending on DM. So it requires not only creativity, but also experience enough to know what questions to ask DM in session-0 so both agree on expected potentialities. Counter-argument: much like Channel Divinities, although not using it is a sad waste of potential, you technically don't need to use it for the class to "work".

5. Paladin (ex-aequo): high resilience, many built-in features, melee orientation makes him easy to start with...
But the limited number of spells known and prepared, the fact that Aura are limited to 10 feet most of your life and the ability to burn slots for extra damage (which may be either a blessing of a curse) all require wits, to assess what to prepare, how to position yourself and more importantly when (or not) to burn slots.

5. Rogue (ex-aequo): good in melee and ranged, Expertise in skills, many features screaming "be subtle and nasty", and great defensive features against occasional damage...
But if you're ranged, you'll often need to rely on Hide to get advantage or keep track of where your buddies are to get the "advantage bypass" to enable Sneak Attack.
If you're melee, you need to pace yourself to avoid having more than one or two direct threats against you, because swarms are bad news to you.
In both cases, the fact that you can deal very high damage but has only (mostly) one chance per round to do so means you have to be very attentive to what your friends are doing and memorize as much as you can about enemies to pick the target that has the best "chance to hit / impact on action economy" ratio.
All of this means that, while it's easy to be a decent character, to really enjoy it and really contribute you have to improve quite a number of facets.
Of course, for someone who is a tactician at soul, you can easily bump Rogue to the "easiest" tier. :)

5. Bard (ex-aequo): I know it may seems a bit harsh, but it already escaped the next tier by a small margin.
Bard can be great, no doubt about it, and its spell list has many intuitive ones. Plus he has Expertise and Jack of All Trades, so with the skill system, it's simple enough to make oneself useful...
But Bard is also a guy with limited armor (barring archetypes), limited spell known among a great list (although this list is biaised towards a few specific roles), no concentration proficiency, and Magic Secrets which can be high to "optimize" for a given party.
Plus the fact a good amount of his spelllist are creative ones and his natural "party-face orientation" means people will often expect you to be the negociator (at least if nobody else with CHA), which can add to the overall complexity (counter-argument: there are enough Bard spells so you can completely avoid all creative ones and still be effective).



9. Wizard: I know I'll get yelled at for that XD, but I don't care, it's only my opinion after all. ^^
Wizard is a 1d6, no-concentration caster that "just" learns 2 spells per level and otherwise relies on loot to expand its options.
And that can be actually a bad thing: with its spell list providing an overwhelming number of great spells every level, it's extremely hard to choose without external help.
Counter-argument: there are enough iconic spells, and enough easy ones, that a player could pick to play without much thinking (Shield, Fireball, Counterspell) etc...
But then comes the slot management: although Wizard has much fuel thanks to Arcane Recovery, at lowest levels, it's not uncommon to struggle for slots because having blown a Shield because bad anticipation. Or used a Fear and then only realizing it affects allies. XD Many many great spells, but a good chunk of them are not friendly.
Let's not be afraid for it though: although it gets "number 9", it's not like there is that big a step behind the previous ones.
You just need to be extra careful at how you expose yourself to enemies and what spells you "carry" for the day.

10. Monk: yeah, it's sad, probably a bit harsh... But the fact that Monk is a melee only guy with only decent AC, an ability that is powerful but difficult to enable (Stunning Strike), defensive/mobility abilities as well as other abilities that are great but potentially non-friendly or costly, and everything depending on a single shared resource, makes the Monk deceptively hard to be played efficiently until you get enough ki pool to get a bit of breathing space (I'd say ~level 7/8): it's like to get both challenges of Barbarian (positioning management) and Paladin (resource management).
On the plus side, it ends as a true beast provided you get there. ;)

11. Warlock: this rating is mainly due to options. I love those and the way you mix and match different "sources" to build something that feels unique, but we can't be blind about the fact that there are particular synergies in some combinations.
Because 5e is very well designed, you probably never can build a "bad" Warlock, but the margin of error between "decent" and "great" is significant.
The only intuitive point of Warlock is its Eldricht Blast cantrip.
If you just want to blast away from a range, then you can easily bump Warlock to the top tier. In all other cases it requires some preprocess to really memorize and associate all options and see their implications.
Beyond that, the fact you have only two slots per short rest, and no control over the latter, means that even more than a Paladin you have to be careful on how and when to use them, if you don't want to be frustrated.
(Counter-argument: for those who want to play "a caster" but don't like resource management, having only two slots can actually be a great boon: I've seen some players plenty content with using EB on nearly all turns while occasionally unleashing a powerful Fireball or Fear).

11. Sorcerer (ex-aequo): Sorcerer has another kind of complexity: although it's not advertised at all, the fact that he has very little number of spell known and little number of metamagics known, with subsets of the former being really great with only one or two of the latter, means that to properly build a Sorcerer you need to already have a decent knowledge of all the available spells (or at least the ones you fancy) to understand what Metamagic to pair with.
Beyond that, the limited spells means you have to choose spells that a) you can enjoy for a long time using repeatedly and b) that can still be meaningful in a wide array of situations.
So you basically need to plan away your leveling (maybe the only class for which it's nearly a true requirement) and can as such very easily end in a frustrating situation if you didn't have the required insight beforehand.
And you need to be fine with focusing on a particular role.
On the plus side, Sorcerers can surpass others in their own league when properly built.



Please note that although I may sound harsh in my evaluations, overall...

1. The difference between the "easiest" and the "hardest" is not that big, Sorcerer and Warlock excepted (because you can just make choices that, efficient or not in theory, don't actually represent what you really wanted to be/do): it's more about the difference between "put your brain aside and you will still rock", "put your brain aside and you'll be just decent but probably wasting potential" and "put your brain aside and you'll certainly have a hard time -and your party with you-".

2. I didn't take any archetype into consideration, because it would have complexified things up to a point I wasn't ready to face tonight. But some archetypes can completely change the way you play a class, thus its rating.

3. Unless you really try to, it's hard to make a really sucky character. D&d 5e is beautiful like that.

4. With just one knowledgeable friend avaiable, 95% of the "building complexity" can be brushed off, as well as a good chunk of the "playing complexity". In such cases, all classes are easy enough to enjoy. ;)

5. These are ultimately, as much as I tried to support them with arguments, only one guy's views. :)
So while I'm fairly confident there is some truth inside, I won't say it's a definitive or objective evaluation. I'm actually impatient to see whether and how other people's views may collude or collide with mine (and more importantly why). ^^

EDIT: added a non-spoilered short list for those who don't have time to read inside spoilers. :)

[Fire Tarrasque]

So...
I wrote out a whole, huge list of reasons... But... That's gone. I lost it when I lost internet for a minute.
So, here's a bare bones list of MY thoughts.

1. Barbarian.
2. Fighter*.
3. Rogue*, Eldritch Knight.
4. Ranger, Arcane Trickster.
5. Moon Druid.
6. Warlock, Sorcerer.
7. Paladin, Bard, Druid*.
8. Cleric.
9. Wizard.

[KorvinStarmast]

4. Paladin - little bit of magic, but their called Lawful-Stupid for a reason.
not in 5e, unless you don't know what you are talking about.

[Mercurias]

As a new player who is having trouble finding a game (My first campaign just fell through), here is how I rate them from my research.

Melee
1. Barbarian: Rage and crunch things into tiny pieces. Sometimes you have to rage less than other times because you might have a long while between naps. The build is extremely simple, and if you throw in a few social skills makes for an easy and powerful starting class.
2. Paladin: More resource management here than the Barbarian, but also more gameplay options. Still has a lot of power to throw around. It’s hard to sneak in a poorly-made Paladin.
3. Fighter: What makes me, a fairly new player, shy away from this class is the sheer number of feats and options to choose from. I’ve read several guides on the fighter class, but my head still can’t quite get around how to build it and from what direction.

Stealth
1. Rogue: The options are narrowed down enough here that I feel I could build one of these if told to focus on one or two things plus stealth and murder.
2. Ranger: Ranged Combat has slightly different rules and that scares me. Someone hold me tight. Also I’d forget to mark nonstop.
3. Monk: What is ki and how do I not burn all of it? Too many choices and I don’t know which are terrible yet.

Magic
1. Warlock: Basically this is a Sorcerer with daily spell slots rather than sorcery points and a really awesome mainstay attack. Easy to be a decent blaster and have a little spell variety for extra stuff.
2. Bard: Feels similar to the Warlock since it can easily flex without needing a lot of added planning in the build progression. Easy to be an effective supporter.
3. Druid: Complex, but not THAT complex. Pick spells for the day based on what you think you’ll have happen, and your skill set seems focused more on control and support with a touch of healing. Follow the lines and remember everything isn’t solved by turning into a bear.
4. Cleric: Wisdom is a weird focus for spells, and if you aren’t a melee then why do you have medium armor and combat focuses? Melee Combat always feels like it takes too much focus to have it be an option for a healer with healer feats and skills. I don’t get this one.
5. Sorcerer: I feel like Sorcerers have to be laser-focused in order to be effective. That kind of focus means a lot of research on what spells to choose and what metamagic feats to acquire. It’s like you have to plan the entire build from level 1.
6. Wizard: Oh ye gods too much. It feels like this would be easier if it were about eight different classes. The opposite problem from the Sorcerer. Way too easy to spread yourself way too thin.

[Asmotherion]

IMO:
I see them in groups:

Easiest:
1. Fighter - very fun, but straight forward (unless you choose battlemaster)
2. Ranger - a mostly simple class
3. Barbarian - Fun, couple of tricks, not hard to master

Intermediate
4. Paladin - little bit of magic, but their called Lawful-Stupid for a reason.
5. Monk - Fun, several tricks, not hard to master
5. Rogue - easy to play play poorly; harder to master.

More Difficult:
6. Sorcerer - the most straight forward of the full casters.
7. Warlock - lots of moving parts, easy to forget some of your toys.

Very Difficult:
8. Cleric - Vital role in the party, a real mix of abilities, role-play is really integrated into the character too.
9. Druid - similar to cleric, hard to say which is more complex.
10. Bard - bard is a subtle class, great role-play and creativity are needed.

Extremely Difficult:
11. Wizard - This class has no equal. It is the most difficult, because it requires the most creativity. This can be a huge stumbling block, especially for new players. The shear number options, number of spells, the infinite possibilities, and subtle uses; Illusion, Conjuration, Enchantment, Necromancy, and Transmutation schools have many spells that are very open-ended.
(If you are just playing a blaster -evocation wizard - Its about as complex as ranger though.)

Cheers,

VC


I'd bump sorcerer higher since it's the only class you can actually break by making simple mistakes.

True. I'd put Sorcerer Right next to Wizard. Actually, I'm tempted to rank it even higher. If you don't know what spells you're aiming for, how and when to use them, you'll end up with a pretty bad Sorcerer, wile the Wizard, with the amount of Spells he'll know, can always make up for a poor choice or two.

On the other hand, a Sorcerer, optimised correctly, can give some of the most powerful builds in the game, as long as you know the how-to's

The only caster that is hard to mess up (as long as you get Agonising Blast) is the Warlock.

The Prepared Divine Casters are also quite Easy, at least compared to the Spells known Casters, since, even if you make poor spell choices one adventuring day, all you need is a prayer, and the next day, you have new toys to play with ('till you find the best ones).

My ranking of Spellcasters would be, from easyest, to hardest:

1) Druid, Cleric (Lots of options, refresh your spells every day, ability to learn through trial and error).
2) Warlock (As long as you have Agonising Blast as your main Weapon, you just need to get into the mindset of "1-2 cool combos I can pull with my spells and invocations", and remember your abilities like other classes do theirs. It's a little more complex than a fighter, but a lot more versalite, so you can design to fit any theme you desire.
3) Bard (Is a bit more dificult to pull than Warlock, mostly because you don't have a main weapon in the form of a magical blast that deals tons of damage. That said, you can tailor it to your needs, and play a specific concept optimally, ending up a great Bard. As I see it, the only reason I don't put it right next to the Warlock is that it lacks directly offensive/deffensive abilities at levels 1-4, but makes up for it if played smartly indirectly.
4) Wizard (Many options, a lot of resource managment, and a lot of thinking. It's not only about what spells to use, but also about when, how, where and many other variables that I care not analyse right now. As my best friend puts it, "you have to actually have a high Int score as a Player to effectivelly play a Wizard, reguardless of what your character sheet says". Sure, there are "average" Wizards, whose Character Sheet says 18 or even 20 Inteligence, but they actually role play only half of it, and rely on one trick pony strategems. But that's not how playing a Wizard should Feel like, generally speaking.
5) Sorcerer (There it is. Use what you have right, and you have an Arcane Railgun on a Tank on your hands. Mess it up, even one step, and you end up dragging the party around with loose parts and pieces that don't quite fit together. Attempting to play a Sorcerer, is like getting your hands on heavy pieces and gears that you don't quite know how to place together, and everyone expects you to build a railgun out of it. Having knowlage of 5e Spells and other Mechanics is like having a Blueprint. What you're going to end up doing with this loose parts is either actually building a solid Railgun, and upgrade it as you go, or, panic, and use up the pieces you have as amunition, destroying any chance you have at making a solid character build. So, yes, in my not so humble oppinion, the Sorcerer is the most Difficult class to master, but also the most rewarding once you do, as you will have a much better understanding of all the classes through it.

[Vorpal Crowbar]

not in 5e, unless you don't know what you are talking about.

To each their own, man. I welcome contrasting view points. I've played every class in 5e and have observed plenty of PC paladins. PCs seem to pick it up in the easier than half of classes. I stand by my opinion that they are Immediate; they do have a mix of spells for healing/damage/control, but their spell list builds slowly, their placement of the battlefield is usually pretty simple; which is one of the reasons why playing a monk or a rogue is more difficult. On my list, movement, # options (magic or otherwise), battlefield control, role-play subtleties, and non-combat mechanics plays heavy in my rankings of how ease it is to learn.

For Example, a comparison in non-combat:


A 7th lvl Paladin options include curing someone who is ill or Blind because they have Lesser Restoration. Which are kinda obvious uses.
Conversely, a 7th lvl Wizard could divert a river by themself. Because they have Fabricate and make several casts to create a large plow out of X, then transform into a Brontosaurs to pull it with Polymorph. Which is a rather complex and more subtle use.


Cheers,

VC

[Asmotherion]

To each their own, man. I welcome contrasting view points. I've played every class in 5e and have observed plenty of PC paladins. PCs seem to pick it up in the easier than half of classes. I stand by my opinion that they are Immediate; they do have a mix of spells for healing/damage/control, but their spell list builds slowly, their placement of the battlefield is usually pretty simple; which is one of the reasons why playing a monk or a rogue is more difficult. On my list, movement, # options (magic or otherwise), battlefield control, role-play subtleties, and non-combat mechanics plays heavy in my rankings of how ease it is to learn.

For Example, a comparison in non-combat:


A 7th lvl Paladin options include curing someone who is ill or Blind because they have Lesser Restoration. Which are kinda obvious uses.
Conversely, a 7th lvl Wizard could divert a river by themself. Because they have Fabricate and make several casts to create a large plow out of X, then transform into a Brontosaurs to pull it with Polymorph. Which is a rather complex and more subtle use.


Cheers,

VC

Nothing about a Brontosaurus is Subtle. Sorry, had to be said. XD

All in all, it's not so much what class you use, but rather how you use it.

For example, you can simplify what you just described into a simple casting of Control Water. If that's not enough, you can use some help from a Wall spell, like Wall of Sand, until the Flow becomes more stabilised. More Complex is not always more optimal, especially with spell slot economy.

[Arkhios]

7. Paladin. Your damage output and your overall utility are both competing for your resources, and despite the relative flexibility of the Sacred Oath Tenants, it still has the most tricky roleplaying constraints of any class.

There it is again! IT'S TENET, not TENANT.

Tenants are people, Tenets are ideals.
/end of rant.


That out of the way, I fully agree with your judgment overall. Well done. :smallbiggrin:

[Beelzebubba]

There are several ways a class can be easy or hard to learn.

A Land Druid is up there because of the breadth of spellcasting, the strategic chops needed to use control spells effectively, the low damage their spells inflict, the number of concentration spells they have, and the situational smarts needed to use weak wild shape animals. (That's not even getting into the amount of bookkeeping and dice management for Wild Shapes and Conjure Animals/Woodland Beings/etc. spells.) I'd call them even harder than most Wizards because of their breadth. You have so many moving parts, and so much bookkeeping, it's easy to do nothing due to paralysis of choice or just not thinking of a thing until later.

But, a Sorcerer has so few things at their disposal, and the penalties for building them 'wrong' are so harsh (it's the one true 'trap option' class in 5e, even more than the Warlock because they aren't guided by well-designed constraints), that you need to come to the class with a lot of system mastery or else they can end up hobbled. If you don't know any better, they can just seem boring or under-powered, which is an opposite problem; it's a problem of opacity, clarity, and having so many choices 'baked in' early on that you can always feel like you're waiting on next level to fix an earlier dumb decision.

I'd call both of those the 'hardest', for different reasons. They're not significantly harder than, say, an Illusionist Wizard (which requires creativity and game sense to pull off), but they are harder. As far as a Sorcerer vs. Bards and Warlocks, those two are a bit more 'on rails', so it's harder to screw them up in comparison to getting such a broad spell list, so much freedom, so few choices at the end. IMO and all that.

[Ding]

My list looks pretty similar, but I'd move monk down a little and push sorcerer and wizard up. If we're talking fairly new players, monks do have to manage their ki, but the majority of the features that use ki aren't very complicated and are just generally good (stunning strike, flurry of blows, things like that). Plus, monks get tons of nice passive features as they level up that smooth out the experience.

Sorcerers choose spells from a fairly small list, but it requires substantial planning with regards to metamagic synergy and what role they want to play in the party. For example, a lot of sorcerers will just blast evocation spells all day long, while others might want to play more of a support role with hold person, haste, counterspells, etc. Choosing the wrong spells and/or metamagics is a pretty significant blow to your character's effectiveness. Finally, wizards are definitely the most intimidating class in terms of spell selection. Reading your spell list really just takes patience and a decent understanding of how 5e works, but there are TONS of spells to get through. You then need creativity and a good memory to remember your various options whenever sticky situations arise, both in and out of combat. Furthermore, questions always arise about interactions between spells/effects, even for veteran players. The good news for wizards is picking the wrong spells isn't a terribly big deal. As long as your DM is a decent person, they will give you chances to copy new spells, especially if you picked some real stinkers :smalltongue:. And aside from spell slots, not too much in terms of resource management.

TL;DR I would do something like this:
1. Fighter
2. Barbarian
3. Rogue
4. Bard (I moved bard up just because lots of spells to pick from and a little resource management. IMO a rogue's optimal combat style is pretty apparent after a fight or two, even if the rules are a little convoluted)
5. Cleric
6. Monk
7. Paladin
8. Sorcerer
9. Ranger (I'm tempted to put sorcerer above ranger, but in all honesty I've never really been that interested in playing a ranger and thus am not as familiar with the class, so I'll leave it be)
10. Wizard
11. Druid
12. Warlock

[Requilac]

I would list it the following way.

1) Fighter: I don't mean to insult fighters, quite the contrary I actually am quite fond of them, but if I am being honest their main point is to repeatedly hit things with their weapon the hardest. They have less features over-all, and the ones they do have are pretty easy to manage. That and they get a ton of passive ones, such as seven ABIs and three extra attacks.

2) Barbarian: These where made with the intention of the strategy of going in and just bashing heads without stop. They are pretty simple because almost every turn they are going to take the attack action, but some complexity is added in because they have to manage resources such and has more featues.

3) Rogue: It requires a pretty good understanding of the rules to properly use sneak attack, but it doesn't have any complex resource pool such as spell slots or ki points so it is simple enough.

4) Monk: It doesn't cast spells so it is automatically better than spell-casters, but ki points can be a little hard to manage.

5) Warlock: While there are a lot of options to choose from such as invocations and pact boons, they don't really have to manage too many resources in the common sense and are well known for spamming features so they aren't as bad.

6) Ranger: They have spells, but are much more likely to to just make straight up attacks.

7) Paladin: Being able to tank automatically makes you a lot simpler to run as you don't have to worry quite as much about cover and not getting hit, but determining when to use smites can be more than a little difficult for newbies.

8) Bard: You are going to be spending just as many turns attacking or granting inspiration and less casting spells. Also your main focus is out of combat encounters which gives you a lot more time to think about what to do.

9) Cleric: The ability to take decent damage mixed with the fact that you are in a support role and half the time you will be doing what other people need you to do makes everything simpler, but having to cast spells most turns can be a little overwhelming.

10) Wizard: Yeah sure you are casting spells all the time which greatly complicates things, but you also only get like three class features which lessens the blow.

11) Sorcerer: You have to manage both sorcery points and spell slots now.

12) Druid: Wild shape. That should speak for itself.

[The Jack]

Wizard is the easiest full caster. The only problem is the sub classes are really hard to pick from and you're short on cantrips. The only problem with the wizard is that they're the fullest caster and suck at everything else.

Warlock is easy if you get your head around the way it does spell slots.


Fighter is the most intuitive lad/lass and Is the best example of easy to learn, hard to master.