Help Me Choose a Class for a New Campaign

[Expected]

I was originally going to play a Fighter or Barbarian in a new campaign, but our party is melee oriented so far and I want to choose something that will synergize with them and shore up our weaknesses.

It is a 5 person party consisting of a Fighter, Paladin, Ranger (TWF), Bard (College of Swords), and myself. I was thinking of rolling a High Elf Arcane Trickster Rogue with a longbow, Elven Accuracy, and max Int, or a Sorlock (Shadow Sorcerer 17/Pact of the Tome Hexblade Warlock 3).

Any advice? The DM has played earlier editions for more than a decade and this is his first time with 5e if that helps at all. It'll be 50/50 combat and rp.

[cajbaj]

Looks like all 4 will be frontline fighters. They'll have damage covered. I'd go full Divine Soul, for support-y goodness and twinned Haste.

[Mythalidor]

Depending on what you actually want to do with your character changes what would be best to suggest. Because you could always do something like Life Cleric or Lore Bard to be a supportive character, but since you mentioned Sorlock, I would say Divine Soul 17/Hexblade 3. I actually hate the Hexblade patron, but it has some good supportive and offensive abilities, such as gaining the shield spell, and you gain Eldritch Blast for damage.

[BloodSnake'sCha]

Shadow monk will work great, you will be fast(If you get to the archer in half a turn will his range really help him?), able to buff all the party for stealth and disabled high profile enemies.

I will say a single rogue level and 2 bladesinger is nice(especially if you roll high stats or find a headband of intelligent).

[Ritorix]

With a group like that, I wouldn't be trying to do any additional DPS. What it needs is a control-oriented class like a wizard, sorcerer or land druid. Set up the fights so your party can be successful. The divine soul is also a good suggestion. They can swing from full 'passive' support to full debuff/control.

[Stygofthedump]

Trickery cleric.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

I was originally going to play a Fighter or Barbarian in a new campaign, but our party is melee oriented so far and I want to choose something that will synergize with them and shore up our weaknesses.

It is a 5 person party consisting of a Fighter, Paladin, Ranger (TWF), Bard (College of Swords), and myself. I was thinking of rolling a High Elf Arcane Trickster Rogue with a longbow, Elven Accuracy, and max Int, or a Sorlock (Shadow Sorcerer 17/Pact of the Tome Hexblade Warlock 3).

Any advice? The DM has played earlier editions for more than a decade and this is his first time with 5e if that helps at all. It'll be 50/50 combat and rp.


Dude.

Gnome Sage Barbarian (Wolf Totem). Use the climb onto bigger creature action and rage out to give everyone advantage as you cling to the creature's leg.

Or any other barbarian you wanna play. I'm just biased toward the Gnomebarian.

You don't really have to go ranged or magic, the DM isn't supposed to try and kill your characters, just challenge them. If range is a weakness of your group, have fun with it! Use the dodge or dash action until you get in close.

[Expected]

I find support (Cleric) boring and I'd like to do damage as well because these players are new and will most likely make suboptimal builds. However, the reason why I was going to consider an AT Rogue is that Sneak Attack will be so easy to get with 4 frontline fighters and I can use Magical Ambush + Tasha's Hideous Laughter/Sleep/Fear/Hypnotic Pattern for control while being useful out of combat (expertise in Investigation and Perception) as well as proficiency in many skills. Not to mention the synergy with Hold Person and Sneak Attack. The only thing is that I don't know whether to go melee or ranged.

If I do melee, I'd wield a dagger and dip into Fighter for shield proficiency and get Sentinel (for use with Mirror Image to trigger).

For ranged, I'd get expertise in Stealth, a longbow and use BA Hide to get advantage to proc Elven Accuracy for the + chance for crits. Is it realistic to use cunning action to hide each turn for the trivantage?

[Expected]

Barbarian is definitely an option and what I wanted to do. I hope the DM challenges us though with difficult encounters (I like a challenge) which is why I try to optimize and min-max my characters.

[BloodSnake'sCha]

I find support (Cleric) boring and I'd like to do damage as well because these players are new and will most likely make suboptimal builds. However, the reason why I was going to consider an AT Rogue is that Sneak Attack will be so easy to get with 4 frontline fighters and I can use Magical Ambush + Tasha's Hideous Laughter/Sleep/Fear/Hypnotic Pattern for control while being useful out of combat (expertise in Investigation and Perception) as well as proficiency in many skills. Not to mention the synergy with Hold Person and Sneak Attack. The only thing is that I don't know whether to go melee or ranged.

If I do melee, I'd wield a dagger and dip into Fighter for shield proficiency and get Sentinel (for use with Mirror Image to trigger).

For ranged, I'd get expertise in Stealth, a longbow and use BA Hide to get advantage to proc Elven Accuracy for the + chance for crits. Is it realistic to use cunning action to hide each turn for the trivantage?

Clerics can do tons of damage and no one said you have to take support and healing spells.

Anyway, to hide every round can be realistic.

You jump to cover and make a noise in one side of the cover, you jump from the other side with an arrow ready and shoot the guy that was looking at the other end of the cover.

It is like throwing a grande at one side of the wall and get ready to shoot the enemies that run away from the grande in the other side.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Barbarian is definitely an option and what I wanted to do. I hope the DM challenges us though with difficult encounters (I like a challenge) which is why I try to optimize and min-max my characters.

Optimizing amd min-maxing in 5e isn't the same as in previous editions.

You don't need to optimize or min max to take on challenging encounters in 5e, your class out of the box, will give you enough stuff. If you pick barbarian, you're best bet would be to not focus on damage but on other aspects of a character (when choosing additional items like feats).

As a Barbarian I would grab Ritual Caster, Actor, or Resilient (Wis). Your strength can stay at 16 for a long time thanks to reckless attack.

If you're going to optimize, optimize the entirety of a character and not an aspect that is already optimized.

[BloodSnake'sCha]

Optimizing amd min-maxing in 5e isn't the same as in previous editions.

You don't need to optimize or min max to take on challenging encounters in 5e, your class out of the box, will give you enough stuff. If you pick barbarian, you're best bet would be to not focus on damage but on other aspects of a character (when choosing additional items like feats).

As a Barbarian I would grab Ritual Caster, Actor, or Resilient (Wis). Your strength can stay at 16 for a long time thanks to reckless attack.

If you're going to optimize, optimize the entirety of a character and not an aspect that is already optimized.

I disagree, I think the character need to be amazing in the stuff she do.


For example:
My glamour bard have a full kit of charm and illusion spells, the diplomat feat from UA and expertise in acrobatics and deception because he is an acrobat, singer and player.

I did have the option to give him some damage or knowledge skills but it will be out of his area(my bard party really need damage, from a meta play point of view it is a mistake)

Min-maxing is a style of play, it may not be needed anymore but it doesn't make it less fun.

I say that if you want to go barbarian and damage go for it.

Take a PAM, GWM,maybe a dip for GWF(and maybe 3 levels for champ fighter for better crit range) and reakless attack a lot.
Half-orc for better crits as you can get a lot of them.

I think the Zelot barbarian is the most fun but bear totem is very nice for not dieing.

It is the difference between:
"It is OK to die" vs "I will not die".
LOL :)

[SpawnOfMorbo]

I disagree, I think the character need to be amazing in the stuff she do.


For example:
My glamour bard have a full kit of charm and illusion spells, the diplomat feat from UA and expertise in acrobatics and deception because he is an acrobat, singer and player.

I did have the option to give him some damage or knowledge skills but it will be out of his area(my bard party really need damage, from a meta play point of view it is a mistake)

Min-maxing is a style of play, it may not be needed anymore but it doesn't make it less fun.

I say that if you want to go barbarian and damage go for it.

Take a PAM, GWM,maybe a dip for GWF(and maybe 3 levels for champ fighter for better crit range) and reakless attack a lot.
Half-orc for better crits as you can get a lot of them.

I think the Zelot barbarian is the most fun but bear totem is very nice for not dieing.

It is the difference between:
"It is OK to die" vs "I will not die".
LOL :)

You can disagree, but it doesn't change that in 5e the classes, versus what you expected to go up against, are already amazing right out of the box. Which is why feats are an **optional** rule.

It's actually a trap to optimize for damage. Your party will always be able to do enough damage to deal with encounters. People seem to forget that it isn't "barbarian versus target(s)" but "party versus target(s)".

Dealing 30% more damage is a waste of resources in a game tgat xovers social, exploration, and combat. If you want to make a damage dealer and not optimize your character go ahead, but you aren't optimizing your character or min-maxing at that point, you fell into a character trap.

Barbarians (and other classes) really don't get many explorative and social features so if you want to actually optimize your character you would focus on that. Or Resilient Wis, that damage doesn't mean squat if a caster stops you from attacking.

[BloodSnake'sCha]

You can disagree, but it doesn't change that in 5e the classes, versus what you expected to go up against, are already amazing right out of the box. Which is why feats are an **optional** rule.

It's actually a trap to optimize for damage. Your party will always be able to do enough damage to deal with encounters. People seem to forget that it isn't "barbarian versus target(s)" but "party versus target(s)".

Dealing 30% more damage is a waste of resources in a game tgat xovers social, exploration, and combat. If you want to make a damage dealer and not optimize your character go ahead, but you aren't optimizing your character or min-maxing at that point, you fell into a character trap.

Barbarians (and other classes) really don't get many explorative and social features so if you want to actually optimize your character you would focus on that. Or Resilient Wis, that damage doesn't mean squat if a caster stops you from attacking.
That's defence on the optimization goal.

You can make your goal a barbarian explorer but then why you take the barbarian class if it doesn't gives you a good exploration abilities?(I think the totem one do give some nice exploration stuff).

You can be an angry fighter without being a barbarian by class, you can be a barbarian by heart.


The goal is the most important thing IMO when you min-maxing and optimizing.

And optimizing for damage is great if the party don't have damage(in this case they have enough IMO).

[Throne12]

I dont know if your DM allows UA stuff. But I'm playing a zeal cleric mostly melee. In a group of Samurai fight, lore bard, spore druid, and a celestial warlock. Me the samurai and bard are melee. We are at level 14 now I'm not putting out as much raw damage as the Samurai but I do get 3 attacks with my flame tounge viking axe. 1regular attack, 2 from haste, then 3rd from class ability. I can get a 4th with orcish fury but only if I get dropped and use Relentless Endurance. Oh and I dont have a single heal spell.

But what I'm trying clerics are not just healing or support. I love clerics because you can switch your spells out every long rest. You can take damage and battle spell and be a war god Incarnate. Or you can help your party out with support and healing spell. Or you can do what I usually do and have a mix of support, healing, and combat spells.

[Mythalidor]

I find support (Cleric) boring and I'd like to do damage as well because these players are new and will most likely make suboptimal builds. However, the reason why I was going to consider an AT Rogue is that Sneak Attack will be so easy to get with 4 frontline fighters and I can use Magical Ambush + Tasha's Hideous Laughter/Sleep/Fear/Hypnotic Pattern for control while being useful out of combat (expertise in Investigation and Perception) as well as proficiency in many skills. Not to mention the synergy with Hold Person and Sneak Attack. The only thing is that I don't know whether to go melee or ranged.

If I do melee, I'd wield a dagger and dip into Fighter for shield proficiency and get Sentinel (for use with Mirror Image to trigger).

For ranged, I'd get expertise in Stealth, a longbow and use BA Hide to get advantage to proc Elven Accuracy for the + chance for crits. Is it realistic to use cunning action to hide each turn for the trivantage?

What about AT 4/Illusion Wizard 16, since you want to "support" but in a more controlling combative way. Wizard has a lot of variety to its spell list, and shares attributes with AT Rogue, to keep you from going too MAD. If you don't want Illusion Wizard, you could try War or Bladesong if you wanted, they might be able to work.

[Warlush]

I know i say this every time, but I'll say it again. Personally I'd play a pact of the chain warlock. Since the rest of your party has damage covered and the bard should still be the "control" caster, you could just take fun useful spells and invocations. Read every language, at will detect magic, at will disguise self, at will silent image, etc. You'd have the best scout possible, along with respectable damage and control. I love the GOO patron but you really can't go wrong with any. Most folks would suggest Celestial, for obvious reasons.

But most people hate warlocks so a close second for me would be divination wizard, or maybe Knowledge Cleric. Cover all the INT skills and ritual casting need.

Nah. Be a warlock.

[SirGraystone]

Dealing 30% more damage is a waste of resources in a game tgat xovers social, exploration, and combat. If you want to make a damage dealer and not optimize your character go ahead, but you aren't optimizing your character or min-maxing at that point, you fell into a character trap.

I agree and many DM (myself included) faced with a party of PCs optimized for damage will just put bigger monsters to keep the fight challenging.

[CTurbo]

You could roll up a straight Tempest Cleric and be the most damaging character in the party while also not taking a single healing spell if you don't want to.

A blasting Sorcerer would be a good addition. Divine Soul as mentioned above would also be really strong for the group.


If you're looking to shore up the party weakness then you shouldn't be looking to build a high damage character.

I think a High Wis based character would round out the party best. Cleric, Druid, or even Monk. Of course a high Wis Rogue would work so if you wanted to make a Rogue, it would work just fine.