Introducing new people to 3.5

[flappeercraft]

So I have two friends I'm trying to introduce to 3.5. One is an avid player of 5e and has lots of experience there and once touched upon 3.5 but very briefly to the point of not really knowing its mechanics. The other has never played D&D at all. I've given them copies of the PHB and DMG. Anything else that would help introduce them properly and get them to learn quickly preferably?

[Mike Miller]

Run a one-shot or two to help them learn. If you do multiple one-shot, have them use different classes each time to use different builds. Also, start low-ish level. I know you prefer high level high op play, but that probably isn't the best way to start them out!

The Sunless Citadel is written with new players in mind and has "useful" tips for beginners. I say it that way because it mentions things you may not even think of as a veteran with system mastery.

[flappeercraft]

Run a one-shot or two to help them learn. If you do multiple one-shot, have them use different classes each time to use different builds. Also, start low-ish level. I know you prefer high level high op play, but that probably isn't the best way to start them out!

The Sunless Citadel is written with new players in mind and has "useful" tips for beginners. I say it that way because it mentions things you may not even think of as a veteran with system mastery.

Yeah the one shot is a good idea. Yes I prefer high level and high op but there is no way I would start them with that, I'm not insane.

I'll look into sunless citadel. Thanks for the suggestion.

[Mike Miller]

Yeah the one shot is a good idea. Yes I prefer high level and high op but there is no way I would start them with that, I'm not insane.

I'll look into sunless citadel. Thanks for the suggestion.

You're welcome. Keep in mind my suggestions were opposites; one-shot vs. module. If you do like the looks of SC, you may want a single one-shot so they can mess up character creation. Then run SC to give them a chance to both redo mistakes and level up a couple times.

[Falontani]

Be very accessible and be ready to answer questions/give tips. Make sure to let them know when certain modifiers are affecting them like flanking, cover, etc. Remind them of special actions like fighting defensively vs total defense.

[Crake]

You're welcome. Keep in mind my suggestions were opposites; one-shot vs. module. If you do like the looks of SC, you may want a single one-shot so they can mess up character creation. Then run SC to give them a chance to both redo mistakes and level up a couple times.

I mean, sunless citadel could quite easily be a one-shot adventure, just sayin.

[Silva Stormrage]

I would mostly try to help them with the character building minigame. That is something that can overwhelm a lot of new players, especially ones from 5e in my experiance.

Try to push them towards the classes that are pretty much built right out of the box, Beguiler, Duskblade, any of the martial adepts, etc. Something with a decent amount of options that they can't screw up by trying to be too clever or specialized. I have seen some new players try to build something like two weapon fighters without the actual mechanical knowledge to make a build like that work and then get frustrated with the game.

[Mike Miller]

I mean, sunless citadel could quite easily be a one-shot adventure, just sayin.

That would be a very long session and I think the new players would retain the "lessons" of how to play better over multiple sessions.

I think it was 5-7 sessions when I ran it. Maybe 2-3 hours each session with 4 PCs.

[Uncle Pine]

Start at 1st level, but skip the bulk of how to handle character creation altogether. Ask for a character concept, as vague or as specific as the player wants, then make a good character that fits the concept on the spot - this shouldn't take long for a 1st level character. Briefly explain the general purpose of any ability the character has that needs to be triggered (i.e. "you can try to destroy undead creatures with light" for turn undead, "you can become more powerful in combat by getting angry" for rage, or "you can create a nasty fog cube whenever you cast any of these spells you have that are from the Conjuration school" for cloudy conjuration). You introduce most of the rules and how to regarding character creation during level ups later on, which will both come after the players have already taken a bit of familiarity with concepts such at to-hit, AC, turns, etc. during actual play and represent smaller, more gradual changes to their character compared to its creation from scratch.

Starting with a one-shot, or rather a "tutorial-shot", is always great. However, instead of following that up with other one-shots using different characters I like to hand out some minor "tutorial rewards" that are unlikely to be gamebreaking (i.e. a slotless cloak pin that gives +1 AC) and then start the real adventure or campaign with the same PCs, minus any xp or loot that they have gathered during the one-shot. They of course get to keep their cloak pins. The reason behind this is twofold: the reward, however small, gives the players a small sense of achievement and continuity, while moving from the tutorial to the main adventure using the same character means that they are much more likely to grow attached to it if they haven't already. From my experience, if you tailor a player's first character very closely to the concept provided, they're going to love it. Although if that doesn't happen and a player wants to switch character, feel free to let that happen.

[Telonius]

It's probably going to be tougher for the 5th-ed person than the total newbie. When you've started in one edition, sometimes it's a bit tough to forget that what works in one doesn't work in the other. In particular, I'd really, really suggest having folded notecards so they can remember what buffs are up, and for how long. (I recommend this in general, but for somebody who's not used to tracking bonuses themselves it's going to be just as important).

I generally don't like turning down character concepts, but in this case I would also ask them to stay away from Druids, Monks, and Artificers until they have some more system mastery. (If they suggest Truenamer, give your best hammed-up burst-into-tears begging not to do it). Those are some of the hardest characters to play, and they really don't need to deal with all of that nonsense while they're trying to learn the rules. Subsystems as well (Incarnum, Tome of Battle, and the like). They're great options, but let the players get the basics down first.

[MeimuHakurei]

It's probably going to be tougher for the 5th-ed person than the total newbie. When you've started in one edition, sometimes it's a bit tough to forget that what works in one doesn't work in the other. In particular, I'd really, really suggest having folded notecards so they can remember what buffs are up, and for how long. (I recommend this in general, but for somebody who's not used to tracking bonuses themselves it's going to be just as important).

I generally don't like turning down character concepts, but in this case I would also ask them to stay away from Druids, Monks, and Artificers until they have some more system mastery. (If they suggest Truenamer, give your best hammed-up burst-into-tears begging not to do it). Those are some of the hardest characters to play, and they really don't need to deal with all of that nonsense while they're trying to learn the rules. Subsystems as well (Incarnum, Tome of Battle, and the like). They're great options, but let the players get the basics down first.

Druids are far easier to play than Monks and Artificers since you can rely on your animal companion to help you wail on things you can't beat down yourself. Plus your spellcasting is just as idiot-proof as the Cleric's.

[Battleship789]

Druids are far easier to play than Monks and Artificers since you can rely on your animal companion to help you wail on things you can't beat down yourself. Plus your spellcasting is just as idiot-proof as the Cleric's.

The problem with druids for a new player isn't difficulty of play, but difficulty of bookkeeping. You need to keep track of your character, animal companion, spells, and eventually wildshape forms (heaven forbid you decide to summon.) Just controlling a simple melee character can be very daunting for a new player, let alone the added complexities of a druid.

I'd also suggest running two oneshots before starting up a longer campaign (maybe even shorter, just one or two combat and social encounters to get used to the mechanics): one with fairly simple characters (a Rogue and a Barbarian seem like good examples, both have an ability beyond "I attack with my sword" but aren't too complicated in Sneak Attack and Rage, and have passable skill lists for the non-combat mechanics) and another with more complicated ones (spellcasters are probably the best option, though other subsystems like psionics, martial adepts, or incarnum might be fine to introduce, depending on the players' experience with other games.)

[Uncle Pine]

As anecdotal as it may be, every time I had to introduce a group of completely new players to the game the so-called difficult classes haven't been an issue. This is what the players picked:
Group 1:
- duskblade
- rogue
- scout (who then multiclassed ranger for Swift Hunter)
- barbarian (this was the only person who had already played 3.5e in this group)

Group 2:
- generalist wizard
- druid (mounted archer, didn't do a lot of summoning)
- cleric (who then branched into crusader)
- warblade (this was the only person who had ever played a tabletop RPG before in this group, although it was World of Darkness)

Group 3 (the only group of the 3 who started at ECL 2):
- shaper psion (did a lot of astral construct summoning)
- an Egyptian Transformer (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?518092-What-base-class-for-an-ECL-2-Transformer) (Otherworldly warforged divine minion of Nephthys barbarian 1)

That said, I agree about avoiding Artificers - although it may be possible that I only consider them too much bookkeeping for new players simply because I myself find them to be too much bookkeeping. :smallbiggrin:

[flappeercraft]

As anecdotal as it may be, every time I had to introduce a group of completely new players to the game the so-called difficult classes haven't been an issue. This is what the players picked:
Group 1:
- duskblade
- rogue
- scout (who then multiclassed ranger for Swift Hunter)
- barbarian (this was the only person who had already played 3.5e in this group)

Group 2:
- generalist wizard
- druid (mounted archer, didn't do a lot of summoning)
- cleric (who then branched into crusader)
- warblade (this was the only person who had ever played a tabletop RPG before in this group, although it was World of Darkness)

Group 3 (the only group of the 3 who started at ECL 2):
- shaper psion (did a lot of astral construct summoning)
- an Egyptian Transformer (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?518092-What-base-class-for-an-ECL-2-Transformer) (Otherworldly warforged divine minion of Nephthys barbarian 1)

That said, I agree about avoiding Artificers - although it may be possible that I only consider them too much bookkeeping for new players simply because I myself find them to be too much bookkeeping. :smallbiggrin:

Hmm, I'll see about it. Also I agree with Artificers not being used too. I consider them too much bookkeeping myself and I generally do not care about bookkeeping due to how much I optimize.

[Doctor Awkward]

I am a big fan of doing official published modules when introducing new players, especially ones that allow you to start them off at first level. Level 1 feels like a waste of time to veterans, but for new players it keeps it simple to ease them into the game.

For character creation, it's also probably best to stick to the basics. Don't set them up with a full 1-20 character build, but rather something small that meets their concept as close as possible for first level. One of the best introductions I've ever seen a DM do for a player who had never done any tabletop gaming before and had no idea what they wanted to do was ask them, "Who is your favorite Lord of the Rings character?"

The most important aspect is not letting them get overwhelmed with the mechanics. As the DMG states early on, "Simply have the player tell you what they want their character to do, and then translate that into game mechanics for them." Rather than trying to explain every single rule up front, just explain the rules that are being used as they come up in the game.

It's also important to let the player make their own decisions as much as possible when creating the character. If you suggest things to them, they are just going to do what you say and end up playing a character that you made rather than one they made themselves.