request: class/race/etc choosing advice for a mostly-newbie

[illubuster]

Hello all,
Im about to start a new campaign with a few mostly-strangers I met through Roll 20 and I need some advice on how I can best support (or tank for, or etc) my party. We met up for a zero-minus-one session today (the real zero session will be in a few days when our last new member will join us for the first time) and so far, it looks like our party will be a Glamour Bard, a Divination Wizard, and a Life Cleric (or maybe Order/War or a Crown/Watchers Paladin) and then me. What would you all recommend for a fourth member?

My first impression is that we need something beefy on the frontline that can also deal a lot of damage - but we also lack a skill monkey. So far I've come up with rogue or monk, maybe try dodge-tanking?

Further details in the spoiler for context.
I have all kinds of ideas for character concepts I like, but Im not experienced enough to feel confident about my choice. I feel like I should probably be an off-tank and/or a beefy frontline damage-dealer, since the rest of our team appears to consist of hybrid-support-y type roles, including a healer/tank, at least from my newbie perspective.

I rolled an 11, 11, 12, 14, 14, and 16. I’m interested in inquisitive/swashbuckler/arcane trickster rogues (or maybe the psi blades one?); barbarians in general, although none of their more DPS-y roles outside of Zealot seem like they would be all that powerful that good to me; Rune Fighters look amazing, but again, idk; and Monks, particularly Shadow, seem like they might have the flexibility and damage dealing potential I crave. I hope to fulfill one or two social/non-combat niches, maybe a second/backup face after our bard, an insight/perception boy, or a skill monkey. Locks and Druids are also very interesting to me.

I'm willing to consider home brew classes, but naturally it would be easier for my group if I just choose something official. For races, our DM seems happy with anything that doesn't have flying naturally, but I think I have a slight preference for standard fantasy races, especially half orcs or any variety of elf, given the setting.

Setting is War of the Burning Sky (idk much about anything beyond the basic set dressing), and the DM says we will have maybe 40% combat, 60% everything else. DM says he is not against us hiring an NPC to tank for us or whatever, or even a secondary PC for one or all of us players to manage, depending on how things work out, but I would prefer to have a balanced fighting team with just the four of us.

Sorry, I know that this is a lot (I’m gonna look up how to make spoiler tags to make this less enormous, but maybe this is okay because it is MY post?) but I would greatly appreciate any input!

[Corvino]

Beefy frontliner definitely seems like the way to go with that party, though pinning the 'Cleric or Paladin" player down about their class would help.

If they're definitely a Cleric (of whatever domain) then a Paladin of some kind would work well. They can be be very tanky while still putting out respectable spike damage.

Alternatively a Moon Druid would really round out the party with a very different spell list to the others, while still being pretty bloody tanky.

I'm kind of suggesting these because you still get spellcasting - with 3 full casters in the party a magic-less Barbarian or Fighter might feel a bit left out. While there's a bit less caster/mundane disparity in 5th Edition compared to other Editions, Bards, Wizards and Clerics are very powerful and flexible. It might be fun roleplay-wise to be the token "guy who can't fly or reshape reality", but it can be frustrating to be overshadowed.

[illubuster]

That's a good point about possible non-caster envy. If I went Paladin, I assume that would look like maybe Vengeance with Polearm Master, maybe with Spear/Shield if I'm more of a main tank, and my stats would go 16 cha, 14 str, 14 con, 12 dex (or wis), 11 int/wis (or int/dex)?

I was also kinda looking at some hexblade tome warlock stuff, since they would be SO good out of combat, but potentially good-enough frontliners given the right kind of support.

[Corvino]

Your stated stat array would work well for a Half-orc Paladin - starting with 16s in Str and Cha and a 15 Con (which you could bump with Resilient later on, if needed). Or move things around and go Half-elf (17 Str, 15 Con, 16 Cha with racial boosts would be pretty solid - evening up the odd numbers with an ASI later). You could keep Dex at 12 for Initiative & saves, or move it to Int/Wis for skills & saves.

I'm playing a level 7 Half-orc Ancients Paladin at the moment, with Duelling fighting style and planning on picking up Sentinel at level 8. It does decent damage, can do Face roles pretty well, and is very hard to kill. The +2 AC from a shield instead of 2-hander makes a big difference, as does the Orc racial. With Sentinel it should be hard to ignore too (and thus very tanky).

It's worth thinking about the requirements of Paladin Oaths and the rest of the party as well. Ancients and Vengeance are pretty easy to fit in to "Good" or "Neutral" parties. It depends how strict your DM is in interpretation too - I would talk to them and the other players before settling on Paladin. A Devotion Paladin is not going to get on well with Evil teammates, but a Vengeance Paladin might see them as a means to an end for example.

[Woglin]

... and a Life Cleric [/B](or maybe Order/War or a Crown/Watchers Paladin) ...
I reckon bard, wizard, cleric and paladin is probably pretty close to the ideal 4-person party. So, my suggestion would be to lock the other players choice down, and take whatever is left between cleric and paladin.
Both of those can make great frontline classes, and you can never have too many spell casters in a party. If paladin isn't available, and you're not keen on cleric, than I'd personally go with a barbarian or fighter. Having said that, "tanking" in 5e is a bit weird, and more about grabbing the sentinel feat than and building for survivability, than playing any specific class.

[whateew]

While you seem to know a good bit about party comp and what builds you like, I found that what I most wished I knew when making my first character was what type of gameplay I'd enjoy the most, and what there would be most of.

If you are the type who enjoys combat, and the game is going to be combat based, you could make a very fun barbarian or fighter. Ancestral guardian comes to mind for example, applying a debuff to one enemy per round that almost forces it to attack you. This could be fun with a bugbear, making most out of your reach to stand elsewhere and opportunity attack someone else - and if you take Pole Arm Master, you could punish them for entering your range again, which I think would be quite fun. If you take PAM at 4th, you could have an attacking range of 15ft on your turns (or 10ft with a spear and shield if you want to focus on AC!), make a nice bonus action attack for rage damage, and meaningfully tank. While this is now bordering a little dumb, a funny combo could be PAM and the crusher feat, letting you push around individual enemies and potentially forcing them to re-enter your range to almost guarantee a reaction attack.

However, lots of games focus more on exploration and roleplay, and you might find a heavily optimised combat chara ends up being underwhelming. If you are the type who would enjoy a varied competency, you may end up finding barb or fighter a bit one-sided.

Paladin is a nice start, with a great combat and tanking, but between a high cha for socialising, healing hands, and an underwhelming but present spell list, you can get some usage outside of combat (especially in an undead focused campaign, which many are!)

One that might be a bit more overwhelming, but one I find quote fun, is a shillelagh and magic stone ranger. You are only a tank insofar as you sit at the very front with scalemail and a shield, but you get a more interesting spell list in my opinion, and the Tasha's features let you feel very skillful outside of combat with expertise, languages, etc. A fun build might be a beast master ranger, who puts their disposable brave familiar (say, the Tasha's cauldron one) in the path of harm so that you get two meat walls to obstruct foes, intimidate them into focusing on you, and be a nuisance with opportunity attacks.

If you really want to get funky, try one of the attacking artificers. You get to enjoy intelligence skills, but you make a solid tank. You could be the armourer, sitting chunky at the front of the line with a shield and a thunder gauntlet, or a battlesmith, doing a similar pet-obstruction type thing. You only really need to focus intelligence which is nice, and you get a simple but enjoyable spelllist. However, their magic infusions can be a very intimidating choice point, so be warned.

Apologies for the wall of text! Does anything tickle your fancy? And if you are secretly pining for a full spell caster but feel the need to be a tank, that can be done too. As woglin said, clerics make for pretty solid "tanks." You can focus on wisdom and be a traditional but chunky cleric, or if you wanted to get a bit messy you could try a weapon focus cleric - while not super optimal, I personally find a tempest cleric with booming blade and the crusher feat to be a very fun war cleric vibe. I think that's a bit of a stretch, but if you are curious id love to tell you more.

[Eldariel]

Honestly, nothing wrong with anything that can fight (though the Life Cleric already can; but it can be nice to add something that can aid there). If you wanna be a caster (which is probably good for the party as a whole and you personally):
- Swords Bard
- Bladesinger Wizard
- Any Cleric
- Moon Druid
- Hexblade Warlock

Same with anything that can summon/get underlings: Shepherd Druid & Necromancer Wizard obviously stand out but any summoner or minionmancer can complement the frontline just fine. If I played something fighty, I'd make sure I can fight at range though since the one big problem with many spellcasters is that their attack range is limited so if engaged at very long range, they might have trouble affecting the enemy. Thus this would let you fill a unique niche in the party. Swords Bard with Crossbow Expert + Sharpshooter or Bladesinger Wizard with Sharpshooter and racial proficiencies (Elf/Half-Elf with Weapon Training) would do that perfectly.


Obviously Druid is great since the party lacks a Druid and Druid list is superb (Goodberry, Pass without Trace, Plant Growth, Conjure Animals!), but second Wizard or Bard is more than fine too especially since you have backline versions of both classes, so frontline/fighty versions would complement them great.

OTOH Wizard is great because two Wizards can copy from each others' spellbooks and there are enough great Wizard spells that you both can specialise away from each other.

Warlock is another list the party lacks (though it doesn't have that much party utility compared to other lists) and Warlocks are just solid in general.

Finally, all Clerics are fine and indeed, something like Twilight or Peace or Arcana Cleric is never amiss though this party could also use e.g. Zeal or Light Cleric for some AOE Damage (since the Wizard will probably mostly go for control spells though they can pretty freely mix it up with AOE damage too).


From half-casters, Artificers and Paladins are both obviously also desirable and solid for the party.

[nickl_2000]

If it's allowed, how about an Artificer? With Battle Smith, you can get your AC incredibly high and can dish out some decent weapon damage with your two attacks and magic items. Plus you get spells at level 1, so no magic envy.

Add onto that the Steel Defender, which has a reaction to impose disadvantage on anyone not attacking it.

Then, they also get Thieves Tools at level 1 and expertise in them at level 6

[da newt]

5e is very forgiving when it come to PC builds - you can make almost anything work well. This party is pretty well set up so far - there isn't a glaring hole that needs to be filled. There isn't an obvious tank (the cleric/pali can fill that role well if they want to), but IMO you can create a very effective party without dedicated frontliners if the team is into that sort of combat style.

Figure out what you want to play - what will make you happy / what you are interested in, and play one of those.

My Opinions:
I like rogues, but they are a little squishy at times and pretty 2 dimensional (SA & skills/scouting).
Monks can be fun, but pop-pop-stun is a little repetitive.
Clerics and Palis are great at doing a bunch of things well - very good all-arounders with a bunch of tools including heals and support.
If you really like tactical positioning and tanking, look at a AG Barb - Echo Knight Fighter MC. Having a shadow twin is handy.
It's really hard to go wrong.

This thread is a great collection of build ideas: https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?583957-An-Eclectic-Collection-of-Fun-and-Effective-Builds

As for race - again it's hard to go wrong especially w/ Tasha's AS swap rule in place. I'd be tempted to go custom lineage with a +2 in your primary stat for 18 and a feat at lvl 1 (if you go half feat - you get a +1 too, RES CON/WIS/DEX for what ever your class is missing is always handy).

[KorvinStarmast]

11, 11, 12, 14, 14, and 16
My suggestion: Mountain Dwarf Ancestral Guardian Barbarian.
S 14 (+2) D 16 C (14+2) I 11 W 12 Ch 11.
Based on how I've seen barbarians play, I'd suggest a sword and hammer if you are not using armor.
If you go with the medium armor approach,
S 16(+2) D 14 C 14(+2) I 11 W 12 Ch 11

My other suggestion would be a Mountain Dwarf Fighter, Cavalier, if you get to use the Xanathar's Guide source material. stats as per the second one.

[Ettina]

You don't lack a skill monkey. Bards get to choose any three skills instead of two from a list, and then during their level progression they get expertise in four skills. Rogues, the stereotypical skill monkey class, get four from a list and expertise in four. So bards are almost as good of skill monkeys as rogues are. Although rogues do get expertise faster.

[Eldariel]

You don't lack a skill monkey. Bards get to choose any three skills instead of two from a list, and then during their level progression they get expertise in four skills. Rogues, the stereotypical skill monkey class, get four from a list and expertise in four. So bards are almost as good of skill monkeys as rogues are. Although rogues do get expertise faster.

OTOH Bards also get Enhance Ability much faster than Rogues do (with Tasha's, Arcane Tricksters can get it as a second level spell on level 7 by expending their non-school spell while Bards can get it on level 3 with plenty of slots to use it in short order [6 slots for it on level 5 if necessary]). And Lore would get 3 more skills not to mention all Bards also get half proficiency in all ability checks. So far as being a generalist skill monkey goes, nothing really beats the Bard (though a second Bard to throw Inspiration back and forth would of course make things a bit better, not to mention someone with Guidance on top of it).