Worst Character You Can Make? (In Good Faith)

[Gale]

My own opinion of 5th edition is that it's pretty balanced, and that most of the classes are totally playable as is. Hence, I've been wondering for awhile now how bad could a character possibly be in this fairly well-rounded system? However, in pursuit of that goal I quickly realized the worst character ever is probably just a weird multiclass build, aimed at picking up the fewest and least helpful class features possible.

So here's a hopefully more interesting question. What is the worst character build you can make in good faith? I'll define "good faith" as meaning most DMs wouldn't look at your character sheet and suspect you of trolling, or at least advise you that you should change some things. One of the primary goals is to not have your DM bat an eye at your character before the first session.

I'll go further and define a bad character as one who struggles to contribute both in and out of combat in any meaningful way. A character that struggles to succeed at the mechanical side of D&D. (Combat, skill checks, survival, etc.) I won't ask that they be bad at roleplay or totally unhelpful, because even a commoner in the hands of a crafty player can be a fun addition to the party and is definitely better than nothing.

I'm curious about this because I'm wondering what kind of pitfalls an inexperienced player might fall into.

Assume the character starts at level 8. Any backgrounds, classes, items, feats, races, etc. are allowed as long as they aren't from a specific setting. No custom lineage or modifying racial abilities. Normal starting gold. Normal point buy. Multiclassing must meet all requirements as normal.

[Dualswinger]

a wizard with one level of barbarian so they can never cast a spell

[CTurbo]

Build a Human or Gnome Wizard with a 16 Int to start and show up wearing a chain shirt under your robes.

Chain Shirt is a medium armor which provides 13+Dex AC that Wizards do not get proficiency in.

You can't cast any spells wearing armor in which you are not proficient.

[Lunali]

The wizard/barbarian and the mail wearing wizard require choices in game to continue being as bad as advertised. The armor can be taken off and the barbarian doesn't have to rage all the time.

I think my personal choice would be a monk without significant dex or wis as it then becomes a choice between having any armor and being able to do damage.

[MaxWilson]

I think my personal choice would be a monk without significant dex or wis as it then becomes a choice between having any armor and being able to do damage.

I'd go for that except that <<One of the primary goals is to not have your DM bat an eye at your character before the first session.>> and wouldn't that make the DM bat an eye? I think we're looking for something more mainstream, in which case I'm going to have to vote for something I've actually seen in play: an Eldritch Knight 4/Arcane Trickster 4 is pretty bad for level 8. Give it Protection fighting style and use both ASIs to boost Constitution and Intelligence while leaving Dex around 14. It winds up being not much better than a Rogue 3.

Expertise in Thieves Tools and Acrobatics.

[Lokishade]

Strength based melee wizard won't come online until level 11, where you just have 10 minutes of Tenser's transformation and only if you manage concentration in the thick of combat. Being an abjurer helps with a 21 HP buffer that can be added to the 50THP the spell gives you. To comply with the "in good faith" requirement, as in trying to make something that refuses to work work, I would pick Dwarf for the usable selection of weapons and armor. For feats, I'd go with something that help with concentration, since this build is centered around that single gimmick.

Speaking of gimmicks, I'd like to try a fighter who is neither nimble nor strong. With a Vuman, I'd start with Magic Initiate: Druid for the cantrip Shilelagh and max out wisdom as soon as possible. In battle, he would hit with a stick that hurts as much as a longsword wielded by a strong arm. For protection, he would count on heavy armor and a shield, which means his movement will be 20 ft. Still in the "in good faith" spirit, I would capitalize on all the wisdom skills, while picking the Healer feat to really feel like a cleric who missed his calling. Since you have decent Animal Handling, a mount may even be used to compensate for your lack of mobility. I'd pick Samurai to really double down on maxed out wisdom.

[Luccan]

Probably an Undying Bladelock that leans into its subclass via spells and also really tries for the Gish archetype. Don't take Eldritch Blast. Choose a different ranged cantrip if you like, Prestidigitation, And a blade cantrip. Your non-subclass spell should probably be something truly useful to that effect. I'd pick Hex, since that's a classic choice that can also back up your debuffs, but doesn't exponentially increase your versatility. No one should blink at that. Go Standard Human, spreading out your Point-Buy to make a fairly even character, "dumping" Int or Wis. Spend your two ASIs pumping your melee stat and Charisma simultaneously. Pick Hermit background. They do get an Herbalism kit, but otherwise just have a blanket, some prayer scrolls, and 5 gold. Medicine's main use is redundant since you get Spare the Dying. Background features rarely come up anyway, but Discovery in particular has no mechanical impact. If you "dumped" Int, your Religion check isn't all that impressive (probably worse than a dedicated Wizard or Int-focused Artificer without the skill). I'm imagining an older hermit who feared death and made a deal with some fitting patron (since your 10th level ability adds decades to centuries onto your life).
Invocations: Armor of Shadows, Eldritch Smite, Relentless Hex, Thirsting Blade

So, the obvious problems here are that you're a single-class gish blade warlock that isn't a Hexblade and your spells aren't anything to write home about. You do have support for being a gish, but have basically used up all of your magic supporting that archetype. Your spells that don't lack applicability in many cases. Your ranged options can't be improved through further invocations and your only damage dealing, non-cantrip spell deals poison damage and targets Con. You'll do... fine, but building this character in any other manner (better spell selection, more powerful race, different subclass and/or pact boon, even focusing on three stats rather than most of them), would result in a much better PC.

I don't think many DMs would object to the way the character is built, you can meet the bare minimum of competence at least and clearly have a concept in mind. That's the key here, I think. Abandoning your necessary stats or preventing your character from using their abilities is gonna set off all kinds of red flags.

[5eNeedsDarksun]

Probably Berserker Barbarian 4/ Wizard 4. You're still tier 1 with both your classes (limited to level 2 spells and 1 attack on an action), they aren't synergistic at all, and the Barb subclass was rightly voted the worst on this forum in a recent thread.

[DaFlipp]

Not as elaborate as some of the above, but I could see a core book Beastmaster Ranger with main stats in Strength and Con turning out to be pretty terrible at most, if not all, of the things he's supposed to be good at, while still looking like an *attempt* at a cohesive build.

[CTurbo]

Not as elaborate as some of the above, but I could see a core book Beastmaster Ranger with main stats in Strength and Con turning out to be pretty terrible at most, if not all, of the things he's supposed to be good at, while still looking like an *attempt* at a cohesive build.


Beastmaster Ranger with a Quipper companion that he carries around in a fishbowl lol

[MaxWilson]

Not as elaborate as some of the above, but I could see a core book Beastmaster Ranger with main stats in Strength and Con turning out to be pretty terrible at most, if not all, of the things he's supposed to be good at, while still looking like an *attempt* at a cohesive build.

At least he'd have Extra Attack and a free meatshield though, even if he picked all the worst Ranger spells. I don't see him being worse than the EK 4/AT 4 or the Barb 4/Wiz 4.

[Contrast]

However, in pursuit of that goal I quickly realized the worst character ever is probably just a weird multiclass build, aimed at picking up the fewest and least helpful class features possible.

In fairness I know someone doing a 'multiclass everything' build in AL and while the character isn't good they haven't been as bad as I expected just because they upcast Bless every combat with is a reasonably useful way to contribute.

If you really want the DM to not bat an eye just make an optimal Sharpshooter fighter build and then announce that your character had an epiphany recently and is now a pacifist who will only use non-violent methods. Character is immediately basically unplayable.

You could probably make a bard pretty bad by choosing niche spells. A strength based whispers bard as a mob enforcer or something.

A wizard who focuses all their spell selections on illusions/divination spells in a game with a DM who doesn't support that kind of play perhaps.


At least personally the most useless I've ever felt while trying to play a good character and contribute was when I played as an alchemist. Just felt like a worse wizard with a 1 level dip in cleric who had sold all my best spell slots for some low power magic items.

[MoiMagnus]

I'm note sure that's the worst, but something quite low while being very "reasonable" would be:

A warlock pact of the blade,
+ With high Str (to be able to strike), mid Cha (because you're a warlock), and crappy Dex & Con (because you don't want to dump mental abilities for RP reasons).
+ Without Eldritch Blast (because you have the pact of the blade)
+ All its spell slots will be burn for Hex (because that's a good spell, but unfortunately he keep losing his concentration each time he takes some damages), so what he choses is not really relevant.
+ Only warlock invocations that require to consume spell slots.
+ Two feats used to learn proficiency in heavy armours (because you have a high Str)

Note that this character would not be useless. He would just be absurdly inefficient compared to a fighter of the same level, or even compare to the same character build with Dex instead of Str (and better feats).

[Droppeddead]

Not as elaborate as some of the above, but I could see a core book Beastmaster Ranger with main stats in Strength and Con turning out to be pretty terrible at most, if not all, of the things he's supposed to be good at, while still looking like an *attempt* at a cohesive build.

This. Or pretty much any pre-Tasha's Beatsmaster, really. Then again. I might suggest the player of trolling... :P

[TyGuy]

I think the two good faith builds are something that utilizes the weakest class options as straight class or a multiclass. PHB BM ranger and 4E monk come to mind. And, the weakest race is in the same book, dragonborn. Personally, I think a dragonborn monk that weaves their lineage damage type into their martial combat sounds really cool. But that is one weak option.

But to your point. Bounded accuracy and all, a good player could still squeeze some mileage out of a dragonborn 4E monk. Just wouldn't do well in a game focused on high difficulty combat.

[ProsecutorGodot]

As far as "unique" takes go, I think MoiMagnus has provided close to what I would envision as a viable but altogether poor build. This Warlock would do everything he sets out to do well enough that I wouldn't take much of a second glance but if I did do more than a quick inspection it would quickly jump out as something done better in one of several different ways.

You'll find that most "bad but viable" options are simply subclasses/features that were printed weak and never tuned (PDK, Arcane Archer, Blade Pact) or not entirely out to troll but clearly picking sub optimally (Beast Master with a weak companion, MAD ability spread)

5E is pretty good at making it obvious when a character is built not to function.

I'll throw out a suggestion while I'm here: A strength focused Paladin who took a supportive oath subclass, such as Redemption. Pick Triton (a good paladin race) but you prioritize increasing Strength and Dexterity before Charisma and Constitution so that you can increase your initiative (good) and keep your ranged attack options relatively competitive with your melee attacks. No spears, we go with Heavy Crossbow.

18/16/12/10/12/12 (ASI at 4 and 8 spent increasing Strength and Dexterity/Charisma with intentionally non-negative modifiers in dump stats)
-You lack a high Con to make use of Aura of the Guardian freely
-You lack a high Cha to make use of the exceptional oath spells that Redemption has but can still freely cast bless (and sleep at these levels) to avoid standing out as a bad spellcaster
-You can use Emissary of Peace to disguise yourself as the party face with a low/middling charisma score
-Your aura is technically helpful but offers only a +1 bonus when it could be as a high as a +4 at this point with only a loss in Dexterity, which is a fairly unnecessary pickup.

It's difficult to make a bad Paladin, but this is one that I wouldn't be very happy with seeing.

[Unoriginal]

I think the two good faith builds are something that utilizes the weakest class options as straight class or a multiclass. PHB BM ranger and 4E monk come to mind. And, the weakest race is in the same book, dragonborn. Personally, I think a dragonborn monk that weaves their lineage damage type into their martial combat sounds really cool. But that is one weak option.

But to your point. Bounded accuracy and all, a good player could still squeeze some mileage out of a dragonborn 4E monk. Just wouldn't do well in a game focused on high difficulty combat.

Four Elements Monk got a decisive boost with the Tasha's. Not sure if it'd count as "good faith" to not use those options if available.

[clash]

Probably the least ineffective character I could make at level 8 while realistically trying to achieve a fun concept is a paladin 2 monk 4 druid 2. The concept is smiting kung fu panda. Using both flurry of blows and smite while wildshape. The problems: you need at least 13 str, DeX, cha, and wisdom. You only have enough ki to support 4 flurries. You can't wear good armor. Your unarmored defense won't be great. Niether will your hp. Your wildshape is capped out at cr 1. You have no extra attack or even 2nd level spells known. No stunning fist. And only one asi to help shore up your thin spread stat array.

[TyGuy]

Four Elements Monk got a decisive boost with the Tasha's. Not sure if it'd count as "good faith" to not use those options if available.
Oh, haven't seen it. Did the variant make it through so martial arts BA attack can be done after spending ki?

[ProsecutorGodot]

Oh, haven't seen it. Did the variant make it through so martial arts BA attack can be done after spending ki?

That's exactly what it did, so long as you use your action to spend Ki you can use a bonus action to make an unarmed strike or attack with a monk weapon.

Monk's were a big winner as far as optional class features go.

[da newt]

I played at a table with a Halfling Nature Cleric / Great Old One Tome Warlock. Although there was a consistent theme, the player went on to make many poor decisions including not taking Eldritch Blast and never investing in AC or Warcaster ...

[Unoriginal]

My own opinion of 5th edition is that it's pretty balanced, and that most of the classes are totally playable as is. Hence, I've been wondering for awhile now how bad could a character possibly be in this fairly well-rounded system? However, in pursuit of that goal I quickly realized the worst character ever is probably just a weird multiclass build, aimed at picking up the fewest and least helpful class features possible.

So here's a hopefully more interesting question. What is the worst character build you can make in good faith? I'll define "good faith" as meaning most DMs wouldn't look at your character sheet and suspect you of trolling, or at least advise you that you should change some things. One of the primary goals is to not have your DM bat an eye at your character before the first session.

I'll go further and define a bad character as one who struggles to contribute both in and out of combat in any meaningful way. A character that struggles to succeed at the mechanical side of D&D. (Combat, skill checks, survival, etc.) I won't ask that they be bad at roleplay or totally unhelpful, because even a commoner in the hands of a crafty player can be a fun addition to the party and is definitely better than nothing.

I'm curious about this because I'm wondering what kind of pitfalls an inexperienced player might fall into.

Assume the character starts at level 8. Any backgrounds, classes, items, feats, races, etc. are allowed as long as they aren't from a specific setting. No custom lineage or modifying racial abilities. Normal starting gold. Normal point buy. Multiclassing must meet all requirements as normal.

With those specifics, I'm gonna say: lvl 8 frontline Bladesinger with low CON and no more than 16 in DEX (ex: a varient Human who spent both ASIs on feats).

Don't get me wrong, this build is still a Wizard and still useful. But while it is possible to build a frontline Wizard, this is not the way.

This build will have worthwhile AC and not bad damage, but sooner or later they will have to block attacks with their guts, or roll CON or DEX saves, and they just won't have the resilience to make-do with the consequences.

So while this build is not as bad as others, it is actively worse at what it's supposed to specialize than it is at being a generic Wizard, so IMO the build missing its purpose makes it among the worst.

[Tanarii]

Small race Barbarian*
Eldritch Knight with dumped Int.
Dexadin + Sorcadin (meaning Str 13 required to multiclass)
Human Champion Soldier with 14/14/14/14/14/11 stats

The last one technically doesn't make the cut because it'll do just fine in combat. But the way most DMs appear to run skill checks (with DC 15 being average), being good at lots of off check abilities with +2 doesn't do enough.

*despite that halving barbarian has been on my wish list for years. Curse of the always DM

[Mitchellnotes]

Sorcerer with really bad spell selection. Even with this, you'd end up having some impact some times. Of all the 5th level classes, I think sorcerers have the most potential pitfalls that can't be fixed just in spell selection. Changing spells is a little easier now, but still takes time

Cantrips: friends, prestidigitation, light, gust, control flames, true strike, etc.

1st: identify, jump, detect magic
2nd: dust devil, knock
3rd: tongues, water breathing, water walk
4th: charm monster, stoneskin
5th: creation, far step
6th: arcane gate

[Martin Greywolf]

Sorcerer with really bad spell selection. Even with this, you'd end up having some impact some times. Of all the 5th level classes, I think sorcerers have the most potential pitfalls that can't be fixed just in spell selection. Changing spells is a little easier now, but still takes time

Cantrips: friends, prestidigitation, light, gust, control flames, true strike, etc.

1st: identify, jump, detect magic
2nd: dust devil, knock
3rd: tongues, water breathing, water walk
4th: charm monster, stoneskin
5th: creation, far step
6th: arcane gate

Maybe toss in some really subpar damaging spells (Witch bolt?), because I'd definitely ask this player if he's okay with not doing damage.

[Guy Lombard-O]

Sorcerer with really bad spell selection. Even with this, you'd end up having some impact some times. Of all the 5th level classes, I think sorcerers have the most potential pitfalls that can't be fixed just in spell selection. Changing spells is a little easier now, but still takes time

Cantrips: friends, prestidigitation, light, gust, control flames, true strike, etc.

1st: identify, jump, detect magic
2nd: dust devil, knock
3rd: tongues, water breathing, water walk
4th: charm monster, stoneskin
5th: creation, far step
6th: arcane gate

For added (lack of) oomph, make sure your metamagics don't mesh well with this spell list. And start with "well-rounded" stats (nothing above a 14 after racials), because you dislike min-maxing.

[MaxWilson]

Sorcerer with really bad spell selection. Even with this, you'd end up having some impact some times. Of all the 5th level classes, I think sorcerers have the most potential pitfalls that can't be fixed just in spell selection. Changing spells is a little easier now, but still takes time

Why is changing spells easier now? Are you assuming UA?

[Mitchellnotes]

Why is changing spells easier now? Are you assuming UA?

Nope! Just misremembering the new features in tasha's. After doublechecking, looks like fixing a spell list is just as hard as it has been.

[MrStabby]

Probably an Undying Bladelock that leans into its subclass via spells and also really tries for the Gish archetype. Don't take Eldritch Blast. Choose a different ranged cantrip if you like, Prestidigitation, And a blade cantrip. Your non-subclass spell should probably be something truly useful to that effect. I'd pick Hex, since that's a classic choice that can also back up your debuffs, but doesn't exponentially increase your versatility. No one should blink at that. Go Standard Human, spreading out your Point-Buy to make a fairly even character, "dumping" Int or Wis. Spend your two ASIs pumping your melee stat and Charisma simultaneously. Pick Hermit background. They do get an Herbalism kit, but otherwise just have a blanket, some prayer scrolls, and 5 gold. Medicine's main use is redundant since you get Spare the Dying. Background features rarely come up anyway, but Discovery in particular has no mechanical impact. If you "dumped" Int, your Religion check isn't all that impressive (probably worse than a dedicated Wizard or Int-focused Artificer without the skill). I'm imagining an older hermit who feared death and made a deal with some fitting patron (since your 10th level ability adds decades to centuries onto your life).
Invocations: Armor of Shadows, Eldritch Smite, Relentless Hex, Thirsting Blade

So, the obvious problems here are that you're a single-class gish blade warlock that isn't a Hexblade and your spells aren't anything to write home about. You do have support for being a gish, but have basically used up all of your magic supporting that archetype. Your spells that don't lack applicability in many cases. Your ranged options can't be improved through further invocations and your only damage dealing, non-cantrip spell deals poison damage and targets Con. You'll do... fine, but building this character in any other manner (better spell selection, more powerful race, different subclass and/or pact boon, even focusing on three stats rather than most of them), would result in a much better PC.

I don't think many DMs would object to the way the character is built, you can meet the bare minimum of competence at least and clearly have a concept in mind. That's the key here, I think. Abandoning your necessary stats or preventing your character from using their abilities is gonna set off all kinds of red flags.

This is a good shout. Looks kind of viable, but is likely to disappoint.

I am wondering if you could create a build - thinking ranger/monk that looks good but falls foul of an over-congested bonus action.

Ranger 5, monk 3 so you get extra attack (anything else would be too suspect), horizon walker for ranger and open hand for monk. It kind of works as just a dex/wisdom based generic fighter but only being able to get use of a very narrow set of class abilities at any one time. MAD classes but falling down on ASIs vs a single class. Add to this that you take alm the bonus action ranger spells. Throw in a race that doesnt quite fit for RP reasons (dragonborn, goliath...). So something like an arctic theme with a white dragonborn and arctic themed ranger would probably pass suspicion that you were deliberately building something bad.

[Kane0]

Low or mismatched stats, using incompatible weapons and armor, picking bad skills/spells/feats, being a squishy in melee or similar poor tactical choices (for example trying to examine or talk to a creature instead of defending yourself)
Race/Class choice isnt really the biggest factor

[RogueJK]

Champion Fighter whose go-to in combat is to stand in the back and shoot once with a crossbow using their 10ish DEX. Bonus points if it's a Hand Crossbow and the enemies are 30+ feet away.

Land Druid who apparently secretly wants to be a Moon Druid and therefore Wild Shapes into CR sub-1 creatures in combat, using their entire first turn to Wild Shape, then their next turn making an attack that deals low single digits, then gets knocked out of Wild Shape, then spends their next turn getting back into the same Wild Shape form, effectively spending 3 turns to deal like 4 damage.

Rogue/Wizard/Other Squishy who stands on the front lines making single STR-based Unarmed Strikes, missing most but occasionally dealing 1 damage.

[Rerem115]

Speaking from experience, probably the worst non-troll build I've seen in actual play is one that's been mentioned already: single-classed Half-Orc Strength-focused PHBeastmaster with a sub-optimal companion choice. Here's the highlights of the build:

18/8/16/8/16/8 (ASI at 4 and 8 spent on Brawny and Animal Handler)
-Skills are Athletics*, Animal Handling*, Insight, Intimidation, Investigation, and Survival
-Dueling Fighting Style, so you can hit extra hard with your battleaxe
-Favored Terrain of Forests and Mountains is useful...Situationally. Much like your Favored Enemies of Fiends and Undead.
-You're reasonably beefy, and have decent AC...if you had heavy armor, which you don't. You're looking at AC 16 (Half-Plate+Shield) at best.
-You have Hunter's Mark, Goodberry, Fog Cloud, Silence, and Spike Growth as spells known.
-Your Black Bear companion has decent damage and tankiness...at around level 3. Less so when its AC is barely better than yours at 8th level.

In combat, you and your companion are a lot less durable than they appear at first glance, and while your damage is respectable (if you can close the distance), since your companion makes most of your attacks for you, it's hard to leverage Hunter's Mark or Dueling. Out of combat, you're specialized in Surviving the wilderness, Animal Handling, and Athletically lifting your bear. On the off chance that your Favored Enemies come up, you have advantage on Intelligence checks (that you lack proficiency and the Ability Scores to really leverage), and some languages which will likely never arise.

[verbatim]

any Paladin/Sun Soul Monk needs four attributes that aren't CON at 13 and can't smite with unarmed strikes. Before Tasha's I would have said Beastmaster Ranger instead of Sun Soul Monk.


RP justification: the player wanted a radiant themed ranged equivalent to their divine smites.

[MaxWilson]

Speaking from experience, probably the worst non-troll build I've seen in actual play is one that's been mentioned already: single-classed Half-Orc Strength-focused PHBeastmaster with a sub-optimal companion choice. Here's the highlights of the build:

18/8/16/8/16/8 (ASI at 4 and 8 spent on Brawny and Animal Handler)
-Skills are Athletics*, Animal Handling*, Insight, Intimidation, Investigation, and Survival
-Dueling Fighting Style, so you can hit extra hard with your battleaxe
-Favored Terrain of Forests and Mountains is useful...Situationally. Much like your Favored Enemies of Fiends and Undead.
-You're reasonably beefy, and have decent AC...if you had heavy armor, which you don't. You're looking at AC 16 (Half-Plate+Shield) at best.
-You have Hunter's Mark, Goodberry, Fog Cloud, Silence, and Spike Growth as spells known.
-Your Black Bear companion has decent damage and tankiness...at around level 3. Less so when its AC is barely better than yours at 8th level.

In combat, you and your companion are a lot less durable than they appear at first glance, and while your damage is respectable (if you can close the distance), since your companion makes most of your attacks for you, it's hard to leverage Hunter's Mark or Dueling. Out of combat, you're specialized in Surviving the wilderness, Animal Handling, and Athletically lifting your bear. On the off chance that your Favored Enemies come up, you have advantage on Intelligence checks (that you lack proficiency and the Ability Scores to really leverage), and some languages which will likely never arise.

You can just use the beast for tanking and opportunity attacks (which helps its durability because it will Dodge automatically) and keep your attacks for yourself, so Hunter's Mark and Dueling actually help. And Spike Growth is awesome in chokepoints and against mobs.

And you can use Grapple + Shove Prone to partially compensate for low AC against non-mobs.

[CheddarChampion]

I think 5e does a better job, at least compared to earlier versions, of having fewer "Trap options."

That said, I think something like a standard Tiefling (+2 Cha, +1 Int) Purple Dragon Knight with TWF that focuses on Cha first and Dex second would be pretty bad. You have low AC, low HP, low damage, high Persuasion. You can't even cast Hellish Rebuke while holding two weapons!

[Yakmala]

I could see someone in good faith attempting to make a "Fist of the Northstar" style Strength based Monk that focuses on Strength and Con and dumps Dexterity and Wisdom. Sure, it still works, but they are going to have a terrible AC, not be able to land many stunning strikes, will be poor at evading and will be worse at deflecting missiles.

[GiantOctopodes]

I'm firmly in the camp of player actions trumping all. Depending on the choices a player makes, a character can be a hero, totally a non-factor, a hindrance, or anything in between. This is true regardless of whether they're a literal commoner or an actual deity.

That being said, in terms of the challenge provided, this is my take:

Trixie Trixfoot
Forest Gnome
8th level Path of the Berserker Barbarian
16 Dex, 16 Int, 13 Cha, 12 Wis, 10 Con, 8 Str
Skills: Athletics, Intimidation, Acrobatics, Medicine
Tool Proficiencies: Cobblers Tools, Painting Supplies
Languages: Common, Gnomish
Feats: Savage Attacker, Inspiring Leader
Feature: Rustic Hospitality
Trinket: Knife of Relative

Trixie doesn't remember much about her parents. They died when she was very young, leaving her to fend for herself on the streets. She was left with nothing more than her father's blade, which she keeps and cherishes to this day. She grew up nearly feral, though by necessity she did get very good at repairing her own shoes, when she could get them, and making new ones, when materials permitted. She learned how to take care of herself and patch herself up, surviving by her wits and by raw, unbridled ferocity. She can also be quite charming - folks are apt to take pity on her and take her in, and not just due to her small stature and childlike frame. It was while being welcomed at a kind family's home she first discovered her greatest love, and a natural gift of hers - painting. No matter how welcoming folks are, inevitably she leaves, returning to the streets and wilds she truly calls home. She's perpetually seeking something, she's just not sure what it is.

So, what do you think? All PHB, mono-class, Dex as highest stat. As a DM, would you even take a second look after a glance at it, if a player handed you this summary? If yes, would it be enough for you to tell the player to pick different things, and what would you recommend they change? If not, upon closer examination, what exactly is this character supposed to be good at?

Their best ability is probably their minor illusion cantrip, and it's a cantrip. They're ok to good-ish at things they're proficient in, Very good at Acrobatics, ok-ish at ranged and melee combat. They're defensively strong, but lack any real incentive for enemies to target them. Their feats make it so they can reroll 1 damage dice, which is inevitably going to be a small one, and so that if they spend 10 minutes prior to a fight they can grant others 9 temporary HP. Even their feature is weak - peasants will give them lodging if they need it, and will protect them from the law, as long as they risk nothing by doing so. Again, hardly useless, in the right hands, but I definitely think this character would struggle to meaningfully shine in just about any scenario, amongst just about any party.

[Pondincherry]

My first character was a halfling Ranger. I only got to Level 2, and I quickly realized some of the flaws and decided to multiclass and optimize them away if we'd gone any farther, but it would be pretty easy to make it bad while making a good-faith effort to be decent. Especially if I stuck with my original idea.

Rangers have always seemed like a "longbow" class to me, which gives Disadvantage on every attack since I also wanted to play a halfing.
Hunter's Mark seemed a lot more boring than the other options, so I didn't take it as one of my spells.
I planned to be a Beastmaster (pre-Tasha's) with an "interesting" companion, not something strong like a bear or wolf.
I picked my skills based on character concept, not optimization, so I was proficient in a bunch of intelligence-based skills.
I think I may have put points into Intelligence? It's been a while.
Part of my character concept was that I wanted to build a library in my hometown, so I was planning to blow a bunch of my hard-earned treasure purchasing books, paper, ink, etc.

[MaxWilson]

That being said, in terms of the challenge provided, this is my take:

Trixie Trixfoot
Forest Gnome
8th level Path of the Berserker Barbarian
16 Dex, 16 Int, 13 Cha, 12 Wis, 10 Con, 8 Str
Skills: Athletics, Intimidation, Acrobatics, Medicine
Tool Proficiencies: Cobblers Tools, Painting Supplies
Languages: Common, Gnomish
Feats: Savage Attacker, Inspiring Leader
Feature: Rustic Hospitality
Trinket: Knife of Relative

...
So, what do you think? All PHB, mono-class, Dex as highest stat. As a DM, would you even take a second look after a glance at it, if a player handed you this summary? If yes, would it be enough for you to tell the player to pick different things, and what would you recommend they change? If not, upon closer examination, what exactly is this character supposed to be good at?

As a DM it's glaringly obvious that a Berserker who pumps Int and Dex at the expense of Str and Con is headed for issues. (Being a Small race is also going to compound the problem.) If the player asked for advice I'd definitely point out that they're restricting themselves to attacks with relatively weak (non-heavy) weapons, so don't get much benefit from Frenzy, and can't use Reckless Attack or the Rage damage boost and can't multiclass, on top of the inherent problems of being a melee class with mediocre Con. Also can't grapple above size Medium. And Savage Attacker is a waste, especially with weak weapons.

I don't normally review characters but if someone asked me to look at this one it has huge and obvious liabilities. I don't think it meets the "DM wouldn't notice" test any better than a Cha 8 Bard does.

[JackPhoenix]

As a DM, would you even take a second look after a glance at it, if a player handed you this summary? If yes, would it be enough for you to tell the player to pick different things, and what would you recommend they change? If not, upon closer examination, what exactly is this character supposed to be good at?

No, I wouldn't take a second look, I would ban it outright. No gnomes.

[heavyfuel]

In good faith, I think the worst character one can make is something that doesn't work - or works really poorly - in D&D. Namely, Tanking.

Tanking is great in videogames where the AI chooses to attack the closest person regardless of the actual threat they pose, but this doesn't work in D&D (unless the DM plays the enemies stupidly).

So I can see someone who doesn't fully grasp this going for something like:


Hill Dwarf Totem Barbarian 20

Starting scores 13 14 15+2 8 10+1 12

First ASI on Durable, then max Con, then Tough feat, then +2 Dex twice

Really high AC, really high HP, and resistance to pretty much all damage.

However, a completely useless character that any enemy will ignore as they reach level 20 hitting for 1d8+1 (1d8+5 when raging)

[Rerem115]

You can just use the beast for tanking and opportunity attacks (which helps its durability because it will Dodge automatically) and keep your attacks for yourself, so Hunter's Mark and Dueling actually help. And Spike Growth is awesome in chokepoints and against mobs.

And you can use Grapple + Shove Prone to partially compensate for low AC against non-mobs.

When they could use Spike Growth, it was decent, yes. The bigger issue was that the bear struggled to frontline with its zero saving throws, 14 AC, and 32 hitpoints. The Ranger wasn't much better; they had Barbarian AC, but not the resistances to back it up, and both frequently went down fast after closing to melee.

[RogueJK]

The bigger issue was that the bear struggled to frontline with its zero saving throws, 14 AC, and 32 hitpoints.

Same issue that Moon Druids run into at Level 4/5ish. That Bear form that seems so powerful at Level 2/3ish due to its high damage output for those levels quickly loses steam against tougher enemies due to its poor defenses.

[Unoriginal]

In good faith, I think the worst character one can make is something that doesn't work - or works really poorly - in D&D. Namely, Tanking.

Tanking is great in videogames where the AI chooses to attack the closest person regardless of the actual threat they pose, but this doesn't work in D&D (unless the DM plays the enemies stupidly).

So I can see someone who doesn't fully grasp this going for something like:


Hill Dwarf Totem Barbarian 20

Starting scores 13 14 15+2 8 10+1 12

First ASI on Durable, then max Con, then Tough feat, then +2 Dex twice

Really high AC, really high HP, and resistance to pretty much all damage.

However, a completely useless character that any enemy will ignore as they reach level 20 hitting for 1d8+1 (1d8+5 when raging)

Even in video games the actual tank (at least in team-based games) is the one who can *make* the monsters target them, or get in the ways of the enemies' attacks when they attack someone else, or protect the rest of the team. Rather than just be a damage sponge if they happen to be targeted.

The same character taking Ancestral Barbarian rather than Totem would actually be a tank.

[LordShade]

Assume the character starts at level 8. Any backgrounds, classes, items, feats, races, etc. are allowed as long as they aren't from a specific setting. No custom lineage or modifying racial abilities. Normal starting gold. Normal point buy. Multiclassing must meet all requirements as normal.

I think caster/caster multiclasses are pretty bad builds that I could see a player trying to make in good faith. Cleric/mages were popular characters in my old 2e games, and I could see someone who was experienced with a prior edition trying to replicate something similar here. Something like a Cleric X (Knowledge or Arcana)/Wizard X, or Sorcerer X/Wizard X, but instead of the usual 1-3 level dip, they go full progression in both, alternating levels. For example, the cleric/wizard would be 6/5 at party level 11. ASIs are spent in a mixture of boosting both int and wis (+1/+1 each time), with a mix of useful (eg warcaster) and trap (elemental adept or ritual caster: druid) feats.

[MaxWilson]

When they could use Spike Growth, it was decent, yes. The bigger issue was that the bear struggled to frontline with its zero saving throws, 14 AC, and 32 hitpoints. The Ranger wasn't much better; they had Barbarian AC, but not the resistances to back it up, and both frequently went down fast after closing to melee.

That's where the auto-Dodge helps significantly. AC 14 and disadvantage to attackers is better than a displacer beast (but with less HP). Zero saves is a problem but at least you've got advantage on Dex saves.


In good faith, I think the worst character one can make is something that doesn't work - or works really poorly - in D&D. Namely, Tanking.

Tanking is great in videogames where the AI chooses to attack the closest person regardless of the actual threat they pose, but this doesn't work in D&D (unless the DM plays the enemies stupidly).

So I can see someone who doesn't fully grasp this going for something like:


Hill Dwarf Totem Barbarian 20

Starting scores 13 14 15+2 8 10+1 12

First ASI on Durable, then max Con, then Tough feat, then +2 Dex twice

Really high AC, really high HP, and resistance to pretty much all damage.

However, a completely useless character that any enemy will ignore as they reach level 20 hitting for 1d8+1 (1d8+5 when raging)

At least you've got advantage on grappling checks, plus Extra Attack and decent speed (35'). You can force at least one enemy to acknowledge your presence, unless it's a Wraith or something else immune to grappling or too big to be grappled.

[RogueJK]

In good faith, I think the worst character one can make is something that doesn't work - or works really poorly - in D&D. Namely, Tanking.

Tanking is great in videogames where the AI chooses to attack the closest person regardless of the actual threat they pose, but this doesn't work in D&D (unless the DM plays the enemies stupidly).


It's not that Tanking works poorly in D&D... It's just that simply standing around with high AC/HP/Damage Resistance and merely hoping the enemies are always going to be dumb enough to voluntarily focus on you rather than someone squishier is a poor Tanking strategy.

Rather, you should have methods of preventing/discouraging attacking anyone other than you, or at least a way to intercept the damage, so that you can force yourself to become the focus of more attacks/damage and can then make good use of your higher AC/HP/Damage Resistance/etc.



Even in video games the actual tank (at least in team-based games) is the one who can *make* the monsters target them, or get in the ways of the enemies' attacks when they attack someone else, or protect the rest of the team. Rather than just be a damage sponge if they happen to be targeted.

The same character taking Ancestral Barbarian rather than Totem would actually be a tank.

Exactly right. Other examples of abilities that allow for more effective Tanking would be stuff like an Oath of the Crown Paladin with Champion Challenge, or an Oath of Redemption Paladin utilizing Aura of the Guardian and Rebuke the Violent, or a Cavalier Fighter using Unwavering Mark, or a Battlemaster Fighter with Goading Attack, or any Paladin with the Compelled Duel spell, or any frontliner with the Sentinel feat and/or the Protection fighting style. I'm sure there are others that I'm forgetting.

[verbatim]

oddly enough for tier 1 play I'm going to say most multiclasses with moon druid.

The CR being tied to druid level really gets in the way of a lot of otherwise really interesting concepts while wildshaped:


smite
rage
sneak attack/cunning action
monk speed bonus/unarmed strikes/flurry of blows


Some of these presumably get better when you unlock the elemental wildshape options but running a build that doesn't come online until double digits sounds horrible.

[togapika]

Maybe a human wizard with these starting stats:
Int 9, Con 9, Str 17, Dex 14, Wis 15, Cha 12. (I don't know if this is too suspicious.)
I don't know if this is too suspicious

I'd sure as heck be suspicious of a wizard whose sole necessary stat was a 9, let alone a strength of 17

[RogueJK]

I think another easy way to hamstring a character is to 50/50 (or I guess even 33/33/33) multiclass, with only a few exceptions. This is one of the few real "traps" in 5E character building that I can think of, other than making obviously poorly synergistic stat/class combos like a Wizard with 9 INT.

Outside of Tier 1 or so, 50/50 multiclassing can really hamper your character, because you end up with lots of low-level abilities but no mid-level or high-level abilities. Enemies are scaling based on the assumption that the characters will have things like Extra Attacks, higher level spellcasting (especially 3rd level spells in early Tier 2, for example), stronger defenses from higher level class abilities, etc. You'll end up being noticeably less effective than other single-classed party members.

Sure, you may have a bazillion cantrips and 1st level spells known, but everyone else is throwing out 3/4/5/etc. level spells. Sure, you may have a bunch of skills and low-level minor abilities, but you're a (non-BB/GFB, non-sneak attack) weapon attacker with only one attack for minimal damage. Etc.


It's especially easy for a newer player to fall into, because they may approach their character like "I want to play a Cleric, but be a better melee fighter than a regular Cleric, so I'll go 50/50 Fighter", and they just end up with a character that's a worse Fighter than a Fighter, and a worse Cleric than a Cleric, and behind the power curve compared to all their other party members. Or "I want to play a Sneaky Wizard-Thief, so I'll go 50/50 Rogue/Wizard". Or "I want to play a Raging Bear, so I'll go 50/50 Barbarian/Druid". Or similar.

[Sception]

I'd start with the worst subclass of the worst class - so a sun soul or elemental monk - then multiclass with something that makes sense thematically (has to be a plausible character) but doesn't fit mechanically (wrong stats, abilities don't synergize.

So... How about a multiclass Sun Soul monk / Redemption paladin. Perfectly thematic combination of virtuous radiant goodness for an oath of poverty style unarmed and unarmored holy warrior, but no mechanical synergy at all. Can't smite on unarmed or sunbeam attacks, can't use armor or shield proficiencies with unarmed defense, wrong stats everywhere for everything mean even if you try to optimize you're going to be a mess, low ac means your best buff spells will lose concentration frequently, multiclassing delays progress in both classes, and in particular the better paladin features will be slow to come online since you'll favor monk levels - after all you fight unarmed and unarmored due to your vow of poverty so you're mostly a monk - and will be weak even when you do get them due to stat problems. The defining features of redemption paladin also encourage enemies to attack you instead of your allies, which makes you actively detrimental to party tactics since you're probably the most vulnerable party member to attacks.

EDIT: Verbatum beat me several posts back, but yeah, this multiclass is the worst combination that doesn't look like it's being deliberately bad on purpose.

An interesting follow up question might be 'as a DM, what combination of house rules and divine blessings would you use to try to make such a character a viable party member?

[n00b]

https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?623517-Wizard-Guide

[opaopajr]

I've seen enough n00bs (AL & elsewhere) try to armor up their Wizards or Sorcerors once they are told "you can, but there's a big penalty..." Usually some high concept excuse of "my complex background has REASONS!" Been an AL GM and have even had The Talk with them -- and got push back defending their high concept. /shrug

Sometimes in games you are better served by just saying, "No." :smallwink:

So that's my vote for said worst character in 'good faith'. Been there, tried unconvincing that, and watched it... survive when it shouldn't have? Something about ambushes when unarmored let them shine. That and well, armor penalty doesn't affect the other Abil checks or Saves. Cements my idea that WotC made a functional safety net for PC char-gen this edition (it is more polite than saying 'foolproof', I suppose).

Ayam De MosSpesshu, a.k.a. "Snowflake"
Multiclass Wild Sorceror, Transmuter Wizard. Acolyte. Basic Human (the only "unbelievable for AL" bit :smalltongue: Assume any other race, I chose this one for passable stats.).
STR 10, DEX 10, CON 14, INT 16, WIS 11, CHA 16

Hvy Armor: Chain Mail AC 16.
Armor Prof Penalty: STR DEX Disadv atk, save, abil rolls. Can't cast spells (but oh so defies your expectations! :smallsigh:)
Heavy Penalty: -10 Spd.
Spells: some nonsense that only matters when they are caught undressed out of their 'special reasons'. :smallsigh:

They all should've died earlier, but AC 16 is decent... and the dice gods love fools I guess. Glad most never figured out Dodge gave Adv to DEX Saves to cancel out their DEX Save Disadv. It could've caught on and become a thing before AL readjustment ended at 5th lvl. :smallbiggrin:

But yeah, hard to be completely worthless in 5e. You gotta really try!

[Witty Username]

Probably the classes that are easiest to make build mistakes and are campaign dependent. Ir rather wrong decisions from an optimization perspective.
I would argue sorcerer, warlock, monk and ranger.
Warlock sorcerer multiclass are actually pretty interesting as they are very powerful but can produce weird results if you don't know what you're doing (for example, I made a bard warlock and accidentally torpedoed my ability to cast 9th level spells).

My final verdict would be Rangers an Eldritch knights, both have decisions with wrong answers that can dramatically change level of power. They also create false expectations, ranger's restrictions on fighting styles and EK's primarily evocation list imply power in those areas even though this is not necessarily true.
EK works best when blasting is minimized.
Ranger is good at archery, but GWF is still probably better than TWF on them. And spell selection can make/break you.

[Luccan]

Probably the classes that are easiest to make build mistakes and are campaign dependent. Ir rather wrong decisions from an optimization perspective.
I would argue sorcerer, warlock, monk and ranger.
Warlock sorcerer multiclass are actually pretty interesting as they are very powerful but can produce weird results if you don't know what you're doing (for example, I made a bard warlock and accidentally torpedoed my ability to cast 9th level spells).

My final verdict would be Rangers an Eldritch knights, both have decisions with wrong answers that can dramatically change level of power. They also create false expectations, ranger's restrictions on fighting styles and EK's primarily evocation list imply power in those areas even though this is not necessarily true.
EK works best when blasting is minimized.
Ranger is good at archery, but GWF is still probably better than TWF on them. And spell selection can make/break you.

TBF, two weapon fighting isn't particularly great on most classes

[Pex]

Beastmaster Ranger with a Quipper companion that he carries around in a fishbowl lol

I would say any Ranger without joking. I've seen many Rangers played. They've all been played the same. The characters were more defined by Sharpshooter Feat than the class itself with the occasional Pass Without Trace spell. Once in a while a subclass feature came in handy, but I find Ranger to be more One Trick Pony than the stereotypical Warlock casting Eldritch Blast again. Perhaps the class is not useless for the thread criteria, but I've seen it too many times. New player joins playing a Ranger and it's all about Sharpshooter, nothing else.

[bid]

Mountain dwarf 17 15 17 8 8 8.
Assassin 3 with stealth and disguise kit expertise.
Dipped barbarian 2 for naked armor and solo SA using reckless attack.
Dipped champion 3 for defense style and crit fishing.
Using TWF to maximize rage damage or shield and whip.


You could prolly do something nice with 4e / assassin / war cleric because you can Wis BA failed SA and still keep you offhand free for martial art.

[Blood of Gaea]

A "pugilist" Strength Monk who still tries to invest a little in Dex/Wis. Starting with something like:

* Str: 14+2
* Dex: 14
* Con: 13+1
* Int: 8
* Wis: 14
* Cha: 8

You'd be deceptively alright up until the party gets to 4th and then 8th level, then you'd really start to feel the impact of your MAD stats as you just cannot get the stats a Monk needs. I could easily see this going under the radar of a new DM.

On top of the fact that Monks are just generally one of the least overall impressive classes, that's about as weak as you get while still trying your best to build a specific concept that seems reasonable.

Tortle would not be taken for flavor reasons, part of their backstory involves being a different race, perhaps Goliath.

[sithlordnergal]

I would go with a pure Fiend Bladelock that uses Strength instead of Dex and no feats. In fact, the build would look like the following:

Race: Human


---Level 1---

Str: 16

Dex: 10

Con: 14

Int: 10

Wis: 14

Cha: 14


---Level 8---

Str: 16

Dex: 14

Con: 14

Int: 10

Wis: 14

Cha: 14


Class: Fiend Pact Warlock

Pact Boon: Pact of the Blade, make sure you use a Greatsword

---Invocations---

Beguiling Influence
Devil's Sight
Eldritch Smite
Fiendish Vigor




---Cantrips---


Booming Blade
Chill Touch
Friends



---1st Level Spells---


Armor of Agathys
Hex
Command




---2nd Level Spells---


Crown of Madness
Shadow Blade
Blindness/Deafness




---3rd Level Spells---


Spirit Shroud
Counterspell




---4th Level Spells---


Charm Monster




Now at first glance this might seem ok. We're using a strength build that dumps Dex, we're swinging a Greatsword, we have Hex, we have Booming Blade, we have some decent spell picks, and we even have both combat and utility Invocations. Heck, we can SMITE people! But the devil is in the details. For example:

- We have to rely on Temp HP for our defense. With a 14 Con and a 14 Dex, we're looking at an average of 59 HP and a 14 AC by level 8. Temp HP can help a little, but enemy damage scales really, really quickly. CR 5 creatures tend to do an average of around 20 damage per round, meaning even Armor of Agathys' massive 20 Temp HP with a 4th level spell slot is only gonna last a single round of combat. The other Temp HP methods only net you 8 and 11 Temp HP respectively, and you can't easily refresh that Temp HP without wasting an Action to cast a spell or manage to get a kill.

- We're a Strength based melee GISH that uses a Greatsword, but we don't have Thirsting Blade. This means we can only attack once per round, and we're relying on Booming Blade to pick up the slack of our missing Extra Attack. This small choice kind of breaks the build. Spells like Hex or Spirit Shroud, which would normally be quite powerful, are extremely weak now. Instead of dealing 6d6+9 per round with Hex, which is an average of 30 damage per round, you're dealing 3d6+1d8+3, for an average of 18 damage per round and an additional 9 points of damage if the creature moves 5 feet.

- Our saves are abysmally low with a 14 Charisma. This is enough to get by...in Tier 1, but by Tier 2 its basically unusable, especially at level 8. This is made worse by the fact that we have Command, Charm Monster, Crown of Madness, Blindness/Deafness, and Friends on our spell list. Our low save DC will make those spells functionally useless. This also affects pur Spell Attack, which is a solid +5 to hit at level 8. By the way, Save DC is only 13 at level 8...the same number you'd get if you have at level 1 with a 16 Charisma.

- Speaking of spells, we only get 2 spell slots per short rest, but the build has spells that don't take the lack of spell slots into consideration. Counterspell is great...on literally any other Caster. Shadow Blade is wonderful...if you weren't Pact of the Blade. Same with all the other Concentration spells. To add to this, we also have Eldritch Smite, which is yet another drain on our spell slots. Finally we went with Chill Touch for our Ranged cantrip. Chill Touch is another excellent and powerful Cantrip, and it provides some really powerful but specific riders. But its also a single attack with a d8 damage that scales with level, making it useless with Hex. By level 8 its doing 2d8+1d6.

- And finally, our Invocations. Proficiency in Persuasion and Deception are a nice little touch, but you have a fairly low Charisma. This build might do in a pinch if there isn't anyone else with a better Charisma, but toss it in a party with a Paladin, Bard, or even a Rogue, and its basically useless. Devil's Sight and Fiendish Vigor are really nice, you get Temp HP and you have Darkvision. But the Temp HP is far too low to be of any use after a few levels, while the spell list fails to utilize Devil's Sight's greatest strength, seeing in Magical Darkness. And finally Eldritch Smite, its an excellent choice to add in some damage, but we only attack once per round and we only get 2 spell slots per encounter. Meaning you have to choose between it and a spell that might do something more useful.


TL;DR: Basically, this is a strength based Pact of the Blade GISH build that uses Fiend instead of Hexblade. It tried to be a party face and a high DPR GISH, but fails due to low charisma and no Extra Attack. Its spells all compete with each other due to Concentration, low Save DC means most creatures will pass the save anyway, the spells tend to not last long which puts a drain on a class with limited spell slots, and low AC/HP means it can't tank.

[Kane0]

-Snip-

I think this highlights how good the balance window is overall in 5e. This doesnt strike me as terrible, all that i’d really feel is necessary is swapping around some spell/ASI/Invoc choices and we’re pretty much back on curve if the player is feeling lacklustre.

AC, face skills and spell attack/DC are only 2-4 points behind normal/optimal, damage output is a little behind but not useless, the character will still be able to contribute somehow in most circumstances even if they arent the best and feel a but squishy when targeted in combat.

[Unoriginal]

I would go with a pure Fiend Bladelock that uses Strength instead of Dex and no feats. In fact, the build would look like the following:

[...]
---Level 1---

Str: 16

Dex: 10

[...]

---Level 8---

Str: 16

Dex: 14

[...]

Now at first glance this might seem ok. We're using a strength build that dumps Dex

[...]

TL;DR: Basically, this is a strength based Pact of the Blade GISH build that uses Fiend instead of Hexblade. It tried to be a party face and a high DPR GISH, but fails due to low charisma and no Extra Attack. Its spells all compete with each other due to Concentration, low Save DC means most creatures will pass the save anyway, the spells tend to not last long which puts a drain on a class with limited spell slots, and low AC/HP means it can't tank.

Spending your two ASIs into DEX is not "dumping DEX". A DM would see you're sabotaging the build on purpose if you do that + don't take Thirsting Blade.

A STR-based Pact of the Blade Fiend Warlock can be a pretty damn good gish. Even with the stats you wrote for the lvl 1, if you spend their two ASIs on STR and get Thirsting Blade they'd be a somewhat effective one (although they'd have to choose between terrible AC or wearing plate armor and such not casting spells).

[Asisreo1]

Its probably the Wizard, if you think about it. Just don't invest in the best spells a spellcaster can take and only take moderately good or niche spells.

When a wizard's spells aren't up to snuff, they're the worse class in the game since they have nothing going for them at all except their spells. Wizard's spell list is also filled with these underwhelming spells.

To start with: level 1 take Witch Bolt, Color Spray, Comprehend Language, Ray of Sickness, Protection from Good and Evil, and Identify to get the Wizard on the wrong track.

[KorvinStarmast]

a wizard with one level of barbarian so they can never cast a spell That is incorrect. Rage is a finite resource. Once rages are expended, spell casting is not impacted at all.

I note that three pages in, most of the builds in this thread are not in good faith. (Troll builds are not fun for the rest of the table, unless the whole table is in on the joke).

Why do I say "not in good faith" in this case? RTPHB: each class has a quick build guide right there in black and white.

If you can't follow that easy to read, easy to follow, guidance, then maybe you ought to be playing Scrabble. Or Pictionary. Those games are also fun.

[Rerem115]

Tangentially related to the issue of Rangers, the worst build is a character optimized for another campaign. Is it a beer and pretzels dungeon crawl? Probably not the best idea to play an Inquisitive Rogue with Expertise in all Charisma skills. Similarly, the PAM/GWM/Sentinel Battlemaster Fighter probably feels a more than a little out of place in a high-intrigue setting with robust law enforcement and punishments for violence.

[Kane0]

Its probably the Wizard, if you think about it. Just don't invest in the best spells a spellcaster can take and only take moderately good or niche spells.

When a wizard's spells aren't up to snuff, they're the worse class in the game since they have nothing going for them at all except their spells. Wizard's spell list is also filled with these underwhelming spells.

To start with: level 1 take Witch Bolt, Color Spray, Comprehend Language, Ray of Sickness, Protection from Good and Evil, and Identify to get the Wizard on the wrong track.

Hold up, why is color spray bad? I get that Sleep lasts longer, has better range and inflicts a superior condition but blindness against more HP isnt terrible.

Ray of sickness is likewise not as amazing as say catapult but its still solid damage plus rider against the right target

Totally right on Witch Bolt though, theres nothing redeeming there.

[Asisreo1]

Hold up, why is color spray bad? I get that Sleep lasts longer, has better range and inflicts a superior condition but blindness against more HP isnt terrible.

Ray of sickness is likewise not as amazing as say catapult but its still solid damage plus rider against the right target

Totally right on Witch Bolt though, theres nothing redeeming there.
Its one of your whole spell slots for a condition that only last 1 round each. Ray of sickness only affects 1 target and for it to have been a better option than Magic Missile, it needs to both hit and the target must fail their save. Otherwise, they do less damage both as an average and their consistency is worse on the damage. The chance that the spell both hits a creature and they fail their save is small. Even with a 80% hit chance and a 70% save fail, you only have a 56% chance both effects activate.

Color Spray's Blinded is decent but at 33 average HP over roughly 2 creatures, they'd probably be taken out by a spell like Burning Hands which has the same area, does enough damage to kill certain low CR/HP creatures and does damage. Damage itself isn't necessarily better than a condition but at these levels another attacker could mop up anyone not dead by the BH damage. 1 turn less in the combat is much better than 1 turn with Adv/Disadv.

[sithlordnergal]

Spending your two ASIs into DEX is not "dumping DEX". A DM would see you're sabotaging the build on purpose if you do that + don't take Thirsting Blade.

A STR-based Pact of the Blade Fiend Warlock can be a pretty damn good gish. Even with the stats you wrote for the lvl 1, if you spend their two ASIs on STR and get Thirsting Blade they'd be a somewhat effective one (although they'd have to choose between terrible AC or wearing plate armor and such not casting spells).

Hmmm...you might be right about the 2 ASIs to Dex. Perhaps one ASI to Dex, one ASI to Strength, you'll have an 18 Strength and you can play the Dex as boosting your AC just a bit. As for Thirsting Blade, that's easily dealt with by saying you have Booming Blade to take Thirsting Blade's place. No need to have it, especially since I have had a Bladelock that used Booming Blade in place of Thirsting Blade before and it worked out nicely. Though mine was a Hexblade with far higher AC.

And while yes, Fiend Bladelocks can be a potentially effective gish, they're also very easy to make into an ineffective gish.

[Arkhios]

As pointed out already, Wizard with one level of Barbarian CAN cast spells most of the day; Rage twice before long rest for 1 minute at a time is hardly "never able to cast spells".

Also, Barbarian is proficient with light and medium armor, and shields, meaning a Wizard gets all those proficiencies (if they started as a Barbarian) or only the shield proficiency (if they started as a Wizard).
Plus weapons, of course.

Anyone casting spells can cast them in armor they are proficient with. So, if you started with one level of Barbarian, a Wizard could cast their spells even while wearing light or medium armor (shield doesn't affect spellcasting one bit). No need to take the armor off.

Barbarian/Wizard is not as bad as advertised. Personally, I would use rage as a fall-back option, when hit points are going down, or just when spells are no use against the target but it needs some whacking with a big stick or a pointy thing.

[dmhelp]

Vhuman battlemaster 4/moon druid 4
S 16 d 8 c 8 i 8 w 16 ch 15
Feat gwm
Style gwf
Uses greatsword and hide armor (ac 11)
Asis in str x2 to get to 20
Maneuvers commanders strike (give up attack and ba for someone else), goading attack (disadv if they dont attack you), and sweeping attack (damage a second target within 5’)

Wild shape as a bear until out of bear hp x2 then rip **** with your greatsword. You will be dropping so much damage that people won’t mind healing you.

[JellyPooga]

Barbarian/Wizard is not as bad as advertised. Personally, I would use rage as a fall-back option, when hit points are going down, or just when spells are no use against the target but it needs some whacking with a big stick or a pointy thing.

Barbarian/Abjurer could be remarkably tanky, to be fair. A 5/15 split with Tier1/2 being mostly getting Barbarian to 5th, then finishing your career as Wizard. Use spells for utility and when you're out of Rages and you've got both Rage damage resistance and Arcane Ward extending your HP pool. Could be a fun (and effective) build.

edit: Now that I think about it I kinda want to play this now. Start off as a Barbarian shamanic/runecaster type, playing off the magic side of things as talking to spirits, tribal rituals and such, a "spellbook" that's a pouch of runes, wading in to battle alongside the other melee types. As play goes on, he learns deeper mysteries and more arcane uses of his magic, but always using it most to protect himself and his allies.

[SteadyAim]

Low Int Wizards (BS) are actually pretty good. A different EK fighter. Excels at grappling in AMF.

[Gignere]

Its probably the Wizard, if you think about it. Just don't invest in the best spells a spellcaster can take and only take moderately good or niche spells.

When a wizard's spells aren't up to snuff, they're the worse class in the game since they have nothing going for them at all except their spells. Wizard's spell list is also filled with these underwhelming spells.

To start with: level 1 take Witch Bolt, Color Spray, Comprehend Language, Ray of Sickness, Protection from Good and Evil, and Identify to get the Wizard on the wrong track.

If picking the wrong spells for a wizard is bad imagine if someone picked the wrong spells for a sorcerer. Because at least for wizards if you picked the wrong spell you may find better spells and add it to your spell book. If you picked the wrong spell as a sorcerer you’re SoL until level up and compound that with picking the wrong or less synergistic metamagics with your spells known and you can basically have a waste of space and this is even if you optimized abilities and ASIs.

[Asisreo1]

If picking the wrong spells for a wizard is bad imagine if someone picked the wrong spells for a sorcerer. Because at least for wizards if you picked the wrong spell you may find better spells and add it to your spell book. If you picked the wrong spell as a sorcerer you’re SoL until level up and compound that with picking the wrong or less synergistic metamagics with your spells known and you can basically have a waste of space and this is even if you optimized abilities and ASIs.
Sorcerers are a subclass-strong class. The newer generation gets useful spells automatically known to them and the PHB ones have d8 worth of HD and permanent Mage Armor or the ability to grant advantage on saves with uses dependent on the DM.

They'd be in a similar boat but poorly-selected sorcerers will usually hedge out as more reliable, even if as a vulnerable meatshield, compared to a poorly-selected wizards.

Its a stretch that the sorcerer chose metamagics that completely do not synergize with spells and call it good faith since a sorcerer with the twinned metamagic and only AoE spells would instantly alert the DM to trolling or poor understanding of the actual effects.

[Gignere]

Sorcerers are a subclass-strong class. The newer generation gets useful spells automatically known to them and the PHB ones have d8 worth of HD and permanent Mage Armor or the ability to grant advantage on saves with uses dependent on the DM.

They'd be in a similar boat but poorly-selected sorcerers will usually hedge out as more reliable, even if as a vulnerable meatshield, compared to a poorly-selected wizards.

Its a stretch that the sorcerer chose metamagics that completely do not synergize with spells and call it good faith since a sorcerer with the twinned metamagic and only AoE spells would instantly alert the DM to trolling or poor understanding of the actual effects.

We’re talking about a good faith build that can be bad, not all sorcerer subclasses get the additional spells and some like the draconic subclass you can pick the wrong dragon type. I can totally see someone picking a green draconic sorcerer and pick the spells matching their bloodline (these are generally terrible) and say picked the reroll damage spell damage metamagic and maybe extend meta magic. Especially for someone just starting out to play 5e. That sorcerer would be terrible.

If you’re just relying on subclass abilities I will contend that some wizards subclasses are if not better than sorcerer subclasses are at least equal. Like diviner/abjurer/chronurgy/war wizard/bladesinger.

[Asisreo1]

We’re talking about a good faith build that can be bad, not all sorcerer subclasses get the additional spells and some like the draconic subclass you can pick the wrong dragon type. I can totally see someone picking a green draconic sorcerer and pick the spells matching their bloodline (these are generally terrible) and say picked the reroll damage spell damage metamagic and maybe extend meta magic. Especially for someone just starting out to play 5e. That sorcerer would be terrible.

If you’re just relying on subclass abilities I will contend that some wizards subclasses are if not better than sorcerer subclasses are at least equal. Like diviner/abjurer/chronurgy/war wizard/bladesinger.
We're not talking about bad or even terrible. We're talking about worst. Honestly, all good faith builds are workable in the game as long as you know how to play them.

Offensively, Green Dragon may seem like the worst subclass since poison is resisted or immune when used on a wider variety of monsters, but typical campaigns of bandits, goblins, beasts, and monstrosities won't have poison as commonly resisted enough that it would make a clear difference. Poison attack spells are rare and not very great in the grand scheme of things but they typically come with riders, which might possibly offset the poor damage and such.

Defensively, Green Dragon is one of the best in the game. Not as good as Red/Gold Dragon but poison damage is a very common damage type and being able to resist it bolsters a feeble spellcaster significantly. Poison is found on fiends, beasts, monstrosities, undead, and even some humanoids which make it very reliable even in a campaign with undefined monster types unlike fire damage which relies on knowing you're in a fiend/elemental type environment.

Empowered is a great metamagic and probably underrated. Extended can be unfortunate if the player thought to use it in 1 minute concentration spells, though. It has its uses but you definitely have to know which spells you want it to synergize with otherwise you won't be able to do as much as you'd expect.

[Gignere]

We're not talking about bad or even terrible. We're talking about worst. Honestly, all good faith builds are workable in the game as long as you know how to play them.

Offensively, Green Dragon may seem like the worst subclass since poison is resisted or immune when used on a wider variety of monsters, but typical campaigns of bandits, goblins, beasts, and monstrosities won't have poison as commonly resisted enough that it would make a clear difference. Poison attack spells are rare and not very great in the grand scheme of things but they typically come with riders, which might possibly offset the poor damage and such.

Defensively, Green Dragon is one of the best in the game. Not as good as Red/Gold Dragon but poison damage is a very common damage type and being able to resist it bolsters a feeble spellcaster significantly. Poison is found on fiends, beasts, monstrosities, undead, and even some humanoids which make it very reliable even in a campaign with undefined monster types unlike fire damage which relies on knowing you're in a fiend/elemental type environment.

Empowered is a great metamagic and probably underrated. Extended can be unfortunate if the player thought to use it in 1 minute concentration spells, though. It has its uses but you definitely have to know which spells you want it to synergize with otherwise you won't be able to do as much as you'd expect.

I just don’t see a good faith wizard build underperforming a sorcerer build, at level 5 the wizard will have access to minimum 14 spells, even if someone rolls randomly to pick their spells they will luck into something that is probably damn useful.

A sorcerer (not Tasha bloodlines) has 6 spells known if they picked 3 duds that would be half the spell known that are garbage, hell they can pick all 6 garbage spells.

Whereas the wizard can pick 10 garbage spells and still have 4 useful ones, assuming the DM was super stingy with scrolls and access to other spell books.

By level 5 if the wizard needs to remediate, all the DM need to do is just drop a spell book with the good wizard spells. The sorcerer (outside of a reroll) will need to level up 2-4 levels to change out their spells known.

[Asisreo1]

I just don’t see a good faith wizard build underperforming a sorcerer build, at level 5 the wizard will have access to minimum 14 spells, even if someone rolls randomly to pick their spells they will luck into something that is probably damn useful.

A sorcerer (not Tasha bloodlines) has 6 spells known if they picked 3 duds that would be half the spell known that are garbage, hell they can pick all 6 garbage spells.

Whereas the wizard can pick 10 garbage spells and still have 4 useful ones, assuming the DM was super stingy with scrolls and access to other spell books.

By level 5 if the wizard needs to remediate, all the DM need to do is just drop a spell book with the good wizard spells. The sorcerer (outside of a reroll) will need to level up 2-4 levels to change out their spells known.
You're going to be hard-pressed to find Sorcerer spells that both underperform and can be taken while keeping the "good-faith" going. The Sprcerer's spell list is basically the highlight list of the wizard's spell list. Taking all the better spells while removing the niche ones like Knock or Arcane Lock.

Plus, if a Sorcerer needs to course correct, they can change the poorly chosen spells with better spells. Where the wizard has to keep the spells they mistakenly chosen. Giving rewards goes both ways so its hardly a matter for me.

If a wizard wants different spells, introduce spellbooks and spell scrolls. If a sorcerer wants different spells, give them wands and staves.

[Arkhios]

Barbarian/Abjurer could be remarkably tanky, to be fair. A 5/15 split with Tier1/2 being mostly getting Barbarian to 5th, then finishing your career as Wizard. Use spells for utility and when you're out of Rages and you've got both Rage damage resistance and Arcane Ward extending your HP pool. Could be a fun (and effective) build.

edit: Now that I think about it I kinda want to play this now. Start off as a Barbarian shamanic/runecaster type, playing off the magic side of things as talking to spirits, tribal rituals and such, a "spellbook" that's a pouch of runes, wading in to battle alongside the other melee types. As play goes on, he learns deeper mysteries and more arcane uses of his magic, but always using it most to protect himself and his allies.

Though it's unlikely I will ever play the character myself, occasionally I like to envision a character who is the ancestor of my current character in our home campaign (ATM, on hiatus). He is/was a nomad in his youth, an improbable candidate to become a wizard, being member of a barbaric tribe, scarce with arcane knowledge. I usually envision him as a variant human having started with a level of barbarian, often with Magic Initiate (Wizard), though some other feat granting some spells could work as well, especially now with the options available in Tasha's. His career as a wizard would lead to either War Magic or Evocation, becoming the great and famous archmage of his era.

[Sandeman]

As a melee fighter you can sink a lot of ability points into Dex and then wear heavy armor.
"Its good for initiative and for the times I need to do ranged attacks."
It shouldnt trigger any attention from the DM.

[Aaedimus]

Im going into Eberron with a 1 sorc, 2 druid (stars), 1 warlock, tiefling character that's not a joke character. He's not gonna have level 2 spells till lvl 6 and has pretty much 0 martial ability

[Unoriginal]

Im going into Eberron with a 1 sorc, 2 druid (stars), 1 warlock, tiefling character that's not a joke character. He's not gonna have level 2 spells till lvl 6 and has pretty much 0 martial ability

What makes him not a joke character, then?

[ProsecutorGodot]

As a melee fighter you can sink a lot of ability points into Dex and then wear heavy armor.
"Its good for initiative and for the times I need to do ranged attacks."
It shouldnt trigger any attention from the DM.

I already made this suggestion (with Paladin, rather than fighter) and I was still hesitant to do so because anything more than a cursory glance should throw up red flags.

It fills all the technicalities of good faith (you're doing it for what is objectively a mechanical advantage in initiative) but the opportunity costs (Constitution, Wisdom, Strength) and the fact that simply carrying some thrown weapons or even a bow without Dex would be just fine for ranged needs.

I think an experienced DM would see something wrong here quickly, and it would function as a lesson for a new DM on what to look out for if they start to see the inevitable problems that would come with this type of character.

[Tanarii]

I've seen plenty of optimization recommending Str primary with secondary Dex/Archer Style for Champions. Of course, they're often designed as Stealth as well, which means Medium armor (possibly including Dex 16 and MAM), not HA. But not always. Being able to switch up your Greatsword for a Longbow when very long range is needed would have value in a campaign with plenty of open terrain.

Otoh Both Str and Dex 18-20 while wearing HA might draw some attention.

[ProsecutorGodot]

I've seen plenty of optimization recommending Str primary with secondary Dex/Archer Style for Champions. Of course, they're often designed as Stealth as well, which means Medium armor (possibly including Dex 16 and MAM), not HA. But not always. Being able to switch up your Greatsword for a Longbow when very long range is needed would have value in a campaign with plenty of open terrain.

Otoh Both Str and Dex 18-20 while wearing HA might draw some attention.

I suppose fighter does have a bit more freedom with its extra ASI and lack of spellcasting score dependency. In retrospect, it probably seemed so bad on Paladin when I wrote it down because Paladin (especially with particular oaths) have a bit of MADness where even EK Fighter doesn't struggle much with their scores.

I suppose this falls into the other end of the spectrum then... Is this even a bad character?

20/16/16/8/10/8 VHuman Champion Fighter with MAM (or HAM/Alert for heavy armor) is perfectly functional.

[Yuroch Kern]

Honestly, the worst character I ever made was a rush job. No thought, just randomly generated. 5e could still make it work, but with no real motivation, it's just a 2D sack of hitpoints and not ideal immersion. You may get lucky, but pre'gens are at least thought out.

[Tanarii]

Honestly, the worst character I ever made was a rush job. No thought, just randomly generated. 5e could still make it work, but with no real motivation, it's just a 2D sack of hitpoints and not ideal immersion. You may get lucky, but pre'gens are at least thought out.
Interesting. I've played a few randomly generated characters in AL. Random race, class, background. Random personality traits off the PHB tables. They've been some of the most fun I've ever had in D&D.

[opaopajr]

The thing with the armor issue, both incognito spellcaster and high DEX/heavy armor, is it is easily solved by switching gear or other simple context changes. That's what is so challenging about this challenge. Fifth edition doesn't let "natal abort" char-gen occur like 3.PFe (this is a good thing, IMO). Situational flexibility is still a very powerful factor in TTRPGs, unlike more finite structured games like video games, and something I consider one of its ongoing strengths.

edit: Also I am like Tanarii, I loved my random PCs. A lot of them challenged my stuck-in-a-rut optimization (or anti-optimization!). Sometimes you don't know what you've been seeking until you stumbled upon new flavors.

[Yuroch Kern]

Interesting. I've played a few randomly generated characters in AL. Random race, class, background. Random personality traits off the PHB tables. They've been some of the most fun I've ever had in D&D.

Worst is difficult. Making it work and having fun is something we can all do, presumably, with anything we get handed or devise. There are the useless spells that we make work because we either didn't understand them or that's all the DM lets us find. But worst as you point out does not mean bad. Actively making an unoptimised being is difficult, since outside the stat bonuses, you are still a race/class combo with abilities that work. Is the point of the thread making an unplayable character that never works? A Standard Human, fire-specialty Evoker without the Elemental Adept feat...in...um...an elemental Plane of Fire Campaign is close.

[Tanarii]

Worst is difficult. Making it work and having fun is something we can all do, presumably, with anything we get handed or devise. There are the useless spells that we make work because we either didn't understand them or that's all the DM lets us find. But worst as you point out does not mean bad. Actively making an unoptimised being is difficult, since outside the stat bonuses, you are still a race/class combo with abilities that work. Is the point of the thread making an unplayable character that never works? A Standard Human, fire-specialty Evoker without the Elemental Adept feat...in...um...an elemental Plane of Fire Campaign is close.
My point was "no real planning" has nothing to do with immersion. In fact, "builds" in advance are often detrimental to immersion. And fun.

I mean in terms of worst and probably not in good faith, randomly rolling spells for a spell caster could easily end you up there. For any class, randomly rolling ability scores in order after picking class could end you up there pretty easily too.

[EndlessKng]

Honestly, the way to be the worst is to focus on something that isn't super well supported in the mechanics. One of Tulok's lowest performing builds on YouTube was arguably Captain Boomerang, not because the classes he was using were bad or because of weak subclasses, but because his weapon of choice, thrown weapons, had almost no support at the time - the same build would have likely been far deadlier as an archer build.

Having said that, your choice of eighth level puts you in an interesting position. Two combat classes of fourth level would get two ASIs, but no second attack. This is incredibly debilitating. You could make it worse still by having one class at 4, one at 3, and one at 1, or two at 2 instead, depending on the classes in question.

Hmmm... I would probably pick core book Ranger for one half (pretty obviously). Go with a weaker subclass for "flavor reasons." For the 4/4 build, you'd probably want to avoid Fighter; it's a solid class regardless of the number of levels with a fighting style off the bat and action surge at level 2. Instead, I'd probably go Berserker Barbarian in this case. Rage IS useful, but Berserker's "level of exhaustion" is painful as a cost, especially since it removes the ability to use the Ranger's spells (especially Hunter's Mark).

For a 4/3/1 split, on the other hand... Here is where you could really debilitate yourself with MAD. Using Standard Point Array and a race with a +1 (or better, a +2) to Strength, put Charisma at 15, Wisdom at 14, Dexterity at 13, and Strength at 12, with Int 10 and Con 8 (flip the last two if the negative Con would give it away - a Con 10 still sucks). Then apply the racial bonus, and go four levels of Ranger and one of Paladin. You won't gain casting abilities from the paladin side (nor a boost to casting since you're at an odd number of levels when halving), and you won't get smite, either Furthermore, using a stat boost to meet two two-stat class MC requirements is seriously a poor choice versus using them to boost your main two traits. This build also puts Wisdom and Charisma, the casting stats, at the top, in what already seems to be a more martial build, and favors the one that doesn't even have spells yet, and FURTHER puts the Dexterity in an awkward "odd number" situation. Putting a +2 into strength may seem to be a stronger answers, but again, it's putting the better stat increase into a lower ability, making the build way too "even" to be effective at any one thing. For the next three levels, go Berserker Barbarian again - now you're a berserker with bare minimum attack stats, an AC of 11 without a shield, no extra hit points from Constitution, and two incompatible class features. Also, make sure any skill picks run off of the lowest scores possible. Now, you will still get an ASI, but you can throw that away by either putting the points into Int and Con (not increasing their modifiers since they're still odd) or take a feat that doesn't help the build any but is viable on paper - Elemental Adept is a great one here, especially if none of your spells are damaging or typed spells.

[Yuroch Kern]

My point was "no real planning" has nothing to do with immersion. In fact, "builds" in advance are often detrimental to immersion. And fun.

I mean in terms of worst and probably not in good faith, randomly rolling spells for a spell caster could easily end you up there. For any class, randomly rolling ability scores in order after picking class could end you up there pretty easily too.

As this thread is proving, worst needs a lot of planning to completely snap class abilities over the knee. Advance builds are not random, they are in advance and have time to be glowered at leading to character. A no plan, on the spot is a do it now, without a reconciliation of ability. I presume you, like me, are experienced enough that it may not ever be an actual problem, but worst character is usually one that happens to not work in a campaign setting, and the only good faith for that kind of being existing is on the DM.

[Kurt Kurageous]

A divination wizard who chooses poorly in learning spells is pretty useless. Nah, don't need shield, mage armor, damage/control...focus on divination instead!

[ProsecutorGodot]

A divination wizard who chooses poorly in learning spells is pretty useless. Nah, don't need shield, mage armor, damage/control...focus on divination instead!

As long as they've got a damaging cantrip they're a perfectly functional character.

[XmonkTad]

A divination wizard who chooses poorly in learning spells is pretty useless. Nah, don't need shield, mage armor, damage/control...focus on divination instead!

But a diviner focused on divination could actually be a real asset to the team! Locate person/object, arcane eye, detect magic, ect. The wizard divination spell list is full of great spells, and since you're a diviner you get spells slots back when you actually use them! Honestly one of my first characters was a diviner focused on divination and I would absolutely play that gnome again.

I would note that I personally would judge a character to be poorly made/optimized if failed to do as much as a standard-array-standard-human-champion fighter. It would look something like this:

Human Champion Fighter 8
16+4/15/14+2/13/11/9 (with racial + ASI), stats are in order for even MORE STANDARD
HP: 69 AC: 20 Speed: 30
Fighting Style: Interception (Constantly eating your reaction for 1d10+8 damage reduction)
Armor: Full Plate (Pretty standard, though powerful)
Hands: Longsword and Shield (Standard stuff)
Background: Soldier (Yawn, as per quick build)
Skills: Acrobatics, Animal Handling, Athletics (B), Intimidation (B)

Average attack: 1d8+5+3=12.5 x2 = ~25 DPR (bit more from improved critical)

Bob has lots of odd ability scores, no racial features, "meh" skills, a good chunk of HP, and a fair AC. Making him worse would likely require obvious sabotage, while any optimizer could easily make him better.


I like the idea of a "rage mage" as worst character, and a Bardbarian 4/4 split sounds like it could be very sad to me.

[Yuroch Kern]

But a diviner focused on divination could actually be a real asset to the team! Locate person/object, arcane eye, detect magic, ect. The wizard divination spell list is full of great spells, and since you're a diviner you get spells slots back when you actually use them! Honestly one of my first characters was a diviner focused on divination and I would absolutely play that gnome again.

I would note that I personally would judge a character to be poorly made/optimized if failed to do as much as a standard-array-standard-human-champion fighter. It would look something like this:

Human Champion Fighter 8
16+4/15/14+2/13/11/9 (with racial + ASI), stats are in order for even MORE STANDARD
HP: 69 AC: 20 Speed: 30
Fighting Style: Interception (Constantly eating your reaction for 1d10+8 damage reduction)
Armor: Full Plate (Pretty standard, though powerful)
Hands: Longsword and Shield (Standard stuff)
Background: Soldier (Yawn, as per quick build)
Skills: Acrobatics, Animal Handling, Athletics (B), Intimidation (B)

Average attack: 1d8+5+3=12.5 x2 = ~25 DPR (bit more from improved critical)

Bob has lots of odd ability scores, no racial features, "meh" skills, a good chunk of HP, and a fair AC. Making him worse would likely require obvious sabotage, while any optimizer could easily make him better.


I like the idea of a "rage mage" as worst character, and a Bardbarian 4/4 split sounds like it could be very sad to me.

Ah yes. The cardboard cutout. Pretty bad and uninspired. I suppose my worst is lack of imagination, not effectiveness.