Least Tactically Intensive Classes?

[gooddragon1]

So, I was thinking that playing a wizard usually requires you to be good a tactics and planning (especially at low levels) to stay alive. Probably the same with any ranged character (maybe doubly so for ranged weapon using characters). Then I wondered:

What would be the least tactically intensive classes/builds that could reasonably contribute in a general campaign?

My suspicion is that it would be the barbarian, but I'm not much of an optimizer so I don't know for sure. As such, just asking here.

Because some days you feel like playing chess. Others you just want a game of tic-tac-toe.

[ViperMagnum357]

Spellcasters are obviously out. A Charger needs to prioritize targets, and make reasonable decisions about target priority and lining up lanes for Charging/Bullrushing. Overall, I would think the simplest in terms of application would actually be a Spiked Chain tripper. Two-hander is simpler than TWF/MWF with spinning swords; the build basically just spends each turn parking itself somewhere inconvenient for opponents, and making AoO for anyone moving through their reach. More setup overall than a Charger, but perhaps the simplest to play competently and contribute meaningfully.

[Troacctid]

An archer is probably even easier. Swift Hunter for traditional bow and arrow style, or Warlock for flying laser blaster style.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Frenzied berseker. The only decisions you make in combat are who's first and how much power attack and sometimes only the latter.

I wouldn't recommend it if you're new though.

[ExLibrisMortis]

If you discount the character building complexities, a bard(sader) is pretty easy. Inspire Courage, haste, stand somewhere where Iron Guard's Glare will do some good.

[gooddragon1]

An archer is probably even easier. Swift Hunter for traditional bow and arrow style, or Warlock for flying laser blaster style.

What do you do if you can't skirmish the enemy? What if enemies with reach get close?

[daremetoidareyo]

Hands down, it's dragonfire adept. Just blast cones of fire, (no attack rolls) over and over again.

[AvatarVecna]

I'm fairly certain this exact scenario is what fighter was designed for: a class that does a single, simple thing from 1st lvl to 20th, and just gradually does that thing better.

Logic Path:
Are you adjacent to a ****er? If yes, go to A; if no, go to B.
Full attack the ****er.
Locate nearest ****er and move towards them. Are you adjacent to them now? If yes, go to 1; if no, go to 2.
Single attack the ****er.
Move towards them again and end your turn.

No thought, no brain. Just spamming the same move over and over, and every resource you have goes towards upgrading the thing you're already doing. Weapon Supremacy feat tree, +5 weapon, +5 armor, maybe some mobility items, but nothing too complicated. If you accidentally gave yourself the ability to do anything on your turn besides move and attack, you ****ed up.

[Faily]

When I started out with D&D 3.5 (totes newb to D&D when I did), I was suggested to play Cleric.

And it still remains my fall-back suggestion for 3.5 and Pathfinder when I or others want an easy option.

Yes, Cleric is a caster, but you can change your spell-list each day, so no need to feel locked in or trapped by options!
Proficiency with Medium (and Heavy in 3.5) Armor bulks you up to be able to stand in the front. Along with d8 HD, you're probably only second to the frontliners in terms of HP.
No need to worry about taking damage, you can fix that.
At low-levels, you can easily just throw a buff or two and just stand back and let the frontliners do the work (Bless to improve attack, Shield of Faith to improve AC). Or join the fray yourself.


Cleric is one of those classes that remain my favorite, because you can play it super-easy like with training-wheels for those who don't have great tactical skill or don't yet know all the moving pieces in the game. The class on its own is so solid that feats become just gravy added on top, making it easy to avoid horrible mistakes, imo. And at the same time, Cleric can also be played with lots of nifty tricks, options, and more complex optimization if you so choose.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

I'd say a Bard focused on Inspire Courage and firing a bow when he's not casting Haste. Just stay in the back and shoot at a target nobody is in melee with.

[Quertus]

I guess it depends.

For me, playing a monster, with no option to be anything but what it is, would be the least thought intensive.

Playing the flying ball of darkness warlock whose only thought is "shoot it until one of us is dead" sounds simple (and easier than the archer, which was my first thought, who cares more about people getting into melee). Just remember to take feats to not care about where you shoot (precise shot, improved precise shot?)

Playing the living bandaid is also pretty simple. Even though any class that qualifies can likely do much more.

[Troacctid]

What do you do if you can't skirmish the enemy? What if enemies with reach get close?
That's what Tumble is for.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

I'm fairly certain this exact scenario is what fighter was designed for: a class that does a single, simple thing from 1st lvl to 20th, and just gradually does that thing better.Well, that was probably the intent, but most of a fighter's repertoire gets significantly worse after a certain point, as most enemies will be immune to what he can do other than mindless sword-smackage. Anything size-based, such as grappling or tripping, won't work against things of a certain size larger than the fighter, and most things with access to magic will have an answer that simply nopes the hell out of him. There aren't many things at higher levels that don't have one of those two things, aside from other fighters and their ilk, of course, but fighter is an NPC class dressed up as a PC class, so throwing other NPC classes at him would probably work.

So, yeah. "I'd hit it" would be pretty much a complete lack of tactics at that point.

[gooddragon1]

That's what Tumble is for.

In most circumstances, but it won't help against undead vs skirmishes I think.

The cleric with just heal spells seems nice, but in core it deals little damage early on imo.

[Zaq]

Warlock is very point-and-click. DFA has been mentioned, but knowing how to position yourself to hit the maximum number of enemies in a cone (cones are super obnoxious!) takes some finesse.

There’s also Crusader. Honestly, most of the time you can just play the maneuver card you just drew and you’ll be fine. You rarely have to care about positioning for a full attack. You basically can’t actually run out of maneuvers, so you don’t have to worry about rationing your toys in any way. And as wise folks before me have said, a random pick from a set of awesome is still awesome.

[Troacctid]

In most circumstances, but it won't help against undead vs skirmishes I think.
Swift Hunters typically deal more damage against undead than any other creature type, so I dunno what you're talking about.

[gooddragon1]

Swift Hunters typically deal more damage against undead than any other creature type, so I dunno what you're talking about.

I thought skirmish didn't work against undead.

Liking the crusader, forgot about the one. It does use tactics of a certain sort, but not the kind you'd mind. Selecting maneuvers might be the only sticking point...

[Troacctid]

I thought skirmish didn't work against undead.
The whole point of Swift Hunter is it negates skirmish immunity.

[zlefin]

it depends how much contribution you want to do; and how tactical the gameplay is in your group. (i.e. do they use battlemaps or mind's eye, how smart do monsters play).
It's easy to have a character who's contribution is a little low, but still somewhat helpful.


One simple thing that should be fairly survivable is a healbot cleric. It's not that effective, but people like having them anyways. As a cleric you can easily build enough defenses to not die too easily. and tactically it's fairly straightforward, just cast healing spells on whoever is wounded. Though you will at times need to decide how to prioritize the healing and whether to use status condition removers.

Some of the alternates to a wizard, while weaker overall, are more durable and could be played in a decent way as blaster. Either warmage or battle sorceror could do that.

[The Viscount]

I thought skirmish didn't work against undead.
It usually doesn't, but a feature of swift hunter is that it allows you to use skirmish against favored enemies regardless of normal immunity.

[gooddragon1]

The whole point of Swift Hunter is it negates skirmish immunity.

It usually doesn't, but a feature of swift hunter is that it allows you to use skirmish against favored enemies regardless of normal immunity.

Hmm. It does. I'll have to remember that.

But the ranger still has to worry about getting hit really hard though. Admittedly, again, I don't know.

[Troacctid]

Hmm. It does. I'll have to remember that.

But the ranger still has to worry about getting hit really hard though. Admittedly, again, I don't know.
Both Scout and Ranger come with reasonably-sized hit dice. With uncanny dodge, you should always be able to keep your Dex bonus to AC, and if you go Scout 5, evasion makes you good against AoE effects too. Since you're always moving around, enemies will have trouble getting off a full attack against you. You can also just be a raptoran and fly around out of ground creatures' melee reach.

[Particle_Man]

How about bard? You stay in the back and sing.

Crusader is nice because your strikes are standard actions so you don’t have to remember that you don’t get multiple attacks if you move.

Warlock is pretty point and click. Raptoran warlock has possibilities. Teleport up and glide down?

[AvatarVecna]

Well, that was probably the intent, but most of a fighter's repertoire gets significantly worse after a certain point, as most enemies will be immune to what he can do other than mindless sword-smackage. Anything size-based, such as grappling or tripping, won't work against things of a certain size larger than the fighter, and most things with access to magic will have an answer that simply nopes the hell out of him. There aren't many things at higher levels that don't have one of those two things, aside from other fighters and their ilk, of course, but fighter is an NPC class dressed up as a PC class, so throwing other NPC classes at him would probably work.

So, yeah. "I'd hit it" would be pretty much a complete lack of tactics at that point.

Such is the nature of choosing a class that both designs and plays like tic-tac-toe in a system that ranges both of those from tic-tac-toe to 5th-dimensional-chess. I don't say it's a good option by any stretch of the imagination, but if what you want is a brainless build that doesn't require thinking to build or play, core fighter has your back.

[Particle_Man]

The core only horizon tripped build might work here.

[mabriss lethe]

Auras are always a great passive choice: sure, one doesn't do a whole lot on its own, but your tactics are:

"Go to where the people/things are: hang out and let your aura do its thing. If you've got other things to do, do them. If not, sit down and have a beer. "

[Troacctid]

Auras are always a great passive choice: sure, one doesn't do a whole lot on its own, but your tactics are:

"Go to where the people/things are: hang out and let your aura do its thing. If you've got other things to do, do them. If not, sit down and have a beer. "
You gotta remember em, though.

[Goaty14]

Honestly, it all comes down to how much effort it takes to play the class decently (i.e a wizard filling all his slots with meta-magicked magic missile isn't very complex. A much better point of contention would be the class that does the best AND is the least tactically complex.


You gotta remember em, though.

Except that's a class feature, not a combat decision. Do note it's tactical decisions that the thread is about, not class complexity. Taking points off for the marshal having auras is like taking points off for the barbarian having rage.

Otherwise, the commoner would be the #1 class for this thread due to the lack of class features presenting him with the most limited options, and thus the least complex.

[Cosi]

A Sorcerer honestly isn't that bad for this, particularly if you pick single target ranged spells. Doesn't take a lot of effort or energy to pick a target, pick a spell, and roll to hit.

[skunk3]

Warlocks are extremely simple to play, plus they are fun and versatile if you want them to be.

[Ramza00]

A Sorcerer honestly isn't that bad for this, particularly if you pick single target ranged spells. Doesn't take a lot of effort or energy to pick a target, pick a spell, and roll to hit.

A Save or X Sorcerer does pretty well if you have a rod fo sculpt spell. Combine with the following feat chain.

Snowcasting->Cold Focus->Greater Cold Focus->Draconic Aura Choose Energy Cold
Dragonblood Subtype (Upgrades your Save DC boost from +1 to +2 to +4 after 7th level)
Summon Component.

Summon Component is a 1st Level Sorc Spell that is Swift Action use it to summon Snow and add the Cold Descriptor to your spells.
Cold Descriptor boosts your Save DCs by 2 with Greater Cold Focus, and a 1 to 4 Save DC boost by Draconic Aura Energy Cold depending on your level.

Pretty much all your spells will get this +3 to +6 save dcs. You can also stack other save boosters including the traditional spell focus line.

Rods of Sculpt Spell allow you to on the fly reshape your spells and often allow you to hit multiple targets at a time even if very far away .

Oh there is also an expensive magic item a form of male that is armor but also boosts cold dcs an additional +2. Located here. http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fw/20030323a

----

Plus since you are a dragonblood sorcerer anyway you can also do wings of cover. This does not just black people trying to full attack you it also breaks line of effect and thus most targetable spells do not work. Furthermore you can also give yourself a cover bonus to ac and to reflex saves with wings of cover so almost all forms of effect wings of cover allow you to choose on the fly as an immediate action do I want this to affect me? Aka a form of reactive simplicity where you do not need to be proactively thinking in a tactical sense.







----

Going Back to the OP (gooddragon1) and his question. What classes are high in the proactive tactics vs reactive just play it by ear depends alot on what level of play you are playing (aka character level) and what your group consists of and how your group members are going to be involving you or not with their spells and class abilities.

For example right now I am in the process of character development of a gestalt character who is going to be a crusader / psion with a 2 level dip into targetter. Well this character is going to be thicket of blades with a kusarigama. Thicket of Blades + Kusarigama + Huge Size via Expansion means I take up 15 feet of space but I get to cover an additional 30 feet of space with reach. Stand Still allows me to stop opponents from moving in effectively a 40-ft radius circle around me. Thus I can reactively protect allies. Yet the real meat of the build is to be a javelin thrower with a gauntlet of endless javelins. This allows me to be offensive.

Effectively I am reactively tactical and proactively just kill things by throwing spears of force into them. Flavorwise I may play this character as spiderman with my kusarigama as web shooters throwing webbing with my stand still 30-ft range, with me throwing webbing / javelin of death at those farther than 30-ft.

Now how this whole build is going to work well is not the gestalt but because I will have a bard ally PC who will be boosting our damage with dragonfire inspiration sonic. Now my spears are deadly without needing me to provide things like power attack or precision damage, and my stand stills are effective even with a light weapon that barely does any damage and I am not going to do any power attack.

[ben-zayb]

A fallen paladin. Hey, you even get less feats to worry about than the fighter!

Warlock with 24hr buff invocations and the Dimension Door invocation is one p&p version of a point and click video game character. A volley archer fighter would be another one.

[Luccan]

Dragon Shaman or Marshal. What? You said least tactically intensive, not good (actually you kind of did). You pick an aura or two (stop here if Marshal), you use a breath weapon. On the occasion you healer can't get to a buddy in time, you have something for that, but other than that you're set. I recommend a line breath weapon, btw. Less worrying about hitting allies.

For a slightly more useful class, Healer. Eventually you'll get a Unicorn, but you can just give it simple commands and let the DM decide how to interpret them (if your DM is cool with that). Other than that, you heal. Occasionally, you might Speak with Animals or Calm Emotions, but those are both pretty situational.

[Cosi]

A Save or X Sorcerer does pretty well if you have a rod fo sculpt spell.

I think Sculpt Spell is probably not what OP is looking for. It's adding an additional layer of tactical choices to each spell you use, and AoE spells require a lot more tactical thought than single target ones to begin with (don't have to worry about hitting your allies with scorching ray). Though it is true that the 10 ft cubes mode of Sculpt Spell makes it easier to avoid hitting allies.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Risen martyr. Before the class, you're dead, so you have no choices to make at all. And after the whole class is taken, you're dead, so you also have no choices.