Help me NOT optimise a character for Wildemount.

[Socksy]

I am terrible, terrible munchkin who likes wacky, special snowflake, and most importantly powerful builds.

This isn't really an issue, because I'm happy to help newer players optimise, and I tend to play support characters - nobody minds too much if I'm optimised to make everyone else better.

For this game, I need to not do that.

The GM is a lovely person who is new to gaming generally as well as to GMing, and I'm determined not to let my habit of building something broken get in the way of her experiences (the rest of the players have played with me for years, so they know what I'm like and are happy to tell me to tone it down if I'm being too much, or will ask me not to take whatever broken ability I'm eyeing up, so I'm not so worried in that regard).

The other issue is that I've never seen Critical Role and I'm not familiar with the general optimisation level of 5e. There's a good chance I could accidentally make something broken, or that doesn't fit at all into the Wildemount setting.

A friend has suggested a Hill Dwarf Monk, because apparently monks aren't tier 5 any more, but also don't have anything which can accidentally break the game, and "Pile-of-Hit-Points-Man" works for a low optimisation level. The books we have access to are the core books (I'm not actually sure what this means for 5e, PHB and DMG maybe?) and the Wildemount book, which I don't have but am happy to buy.

Thanks in advance!

[noob]

Monks have excessive burst power potential(ex: you can get really high odds of stunning just by using lots of ki points on stunning in one turn) which can be an issue if it is used tactically.
I suggest you pick a rogue and manage to always get disadvantage for failing to do sneak attacks.
Ex: play a blind rogue: it will also prevent you to use uncanny dodge.

[Neoh]

You can definitely go the "Improve everyone else" optimisation route.

Look up Treantmonk God Wizard guide on google, he made a google doc for his Wizard build.

It's a guide for Wizards centred around debuffing enemies and buffing your allies, controlling the enemies and battlefield. You could play it without a single damaging spell if you wish to, but it's better to have something to help out with damage tho.

It's a pretty old guide so it doesn't take into account the new races, subclasses and feats.

If you want to help your allies, even more, I suggest taking 1 level in Cleric too, gets you some nice spells (Bless in particular) and proficiency in armours.

[noob]

You can definitely go the "Improve everyone else" optimisation route.

Look up Treantmonk God Wizard guide on google, he made a google doc for his Wizard build.

It's a guide for Wizards centred around debuffing enemies and buffing your allies, controlling the enemies and battlefield. You could play it without a single damaging spell if you wish to, but it's better to have something to help out with damage tho.

It's a pretty old guide so it doesn't take into account the new races, subclasses and feats.

If you want to help your allies, even more, I suggest taking 1 level in Cleric too, gets you some nice spells (Bless in particular) and proficiency in armours.

In the preface he declared that the gm was new to gming and so that he did not want to make the party too op in the fear to harm the fun of the gm who is following an adventure path (and so might not be very good at adjusting it to the power of the party)

[Neoh]

In the preface he declared that the gm was new to gming and so that he did not want to make the party too op in the fear to harm the fun of the gm who is following an adventure path (and so might not be very good at adjusting it to the power of the party)

I mean, it's not like the god wizard is broken or anything. It's just a wizard that focuses on support instead of throwing Fireballs left and right. Control doesn't break the game, having 180 DPR does.

[Mastikator]

Wild magic sorcerer if you can convince your DM to always roll wild magic surge. Chaos Bolt is very thematic for that too.

[Socksy]

In the preface he declared that the gm was new to gming and so that he did not want to make the party too op in the fear to harm the fun of the gm who is following an adventure path (and so might not be very good at adjusting it to the power of the party)

Exactly this - I don't want the GM to feel either like the monsters aren't fun/aren't a threat, or to feel like she has to customise and scale things to us.

A rogue might work, especially if I focus on investigative and not combat skills.

[nickl_2000]

A support Lore Bard is always a good addition to a party and should be fitting into almost any theme. You can heal nearly as well as a cleric or Druid and you can pick up skills to fill in where needed. With the skills you aren't going to walk through combat encounters, but you will be able to give a lot of out of combat RPing.

You are still buffing with bardic inspirations and by the time you get your first magical secrets you will know what the party needs and have a good feel of the campaign.

[kingcheesepants]

Aside from some high level spells and a handful of specific combos there isn't anything particularly broken in 5e especially if you're sticking to core (if by core you mean PHB only), Paladins tend to be easy to become really good and there are a decent number of ways to make any spell caster at least a bit cheesy. Rouges and monks are pretty safe but they can also become scary effective if you use them right. I'd say if you want to play a non support character who almost certainly won't break anything go with a barbarian or a non battlemaster fighter and then pick a small race such as a gnome or a halfling. You can use sword and shield and be perfectly viable but since the most egregious builds utilize heavy weapons (pole arms, greatswords, longbows) and you won't be effective with a heavy weapon you won't be in much danger of breaking anything no matter how effective you make yourself.

[J-H]

The default rogue chassis is pretty good, with:
-Very strong skills
-Decent single-target damage
-Reasonable defenses (Evasion, Slippery Mind, Uncanny dodge)
-The ability to sneak attack with one attack on their turn, then sneak attack again if they can get another attack off-turn with their reaction.

However, nothing is broken or cheese-able beyond "does a pile of d6 of damage sometimes."

With just PHB rogue classes (no Swashbuckler) I recommend Arcane Trickster for some spellcasting. Thief can be very mobile IF your GM uses 3D terrain...new GMs may not. The Healer feat pairs well with thief to make a backup healer (BA healing with a healing kit 1/target/SR).

[Unoriginal]

There's a good chance I could accidentally make something broken

It's quite impossible to accidentally make something broken in 5e.

Well, aside from, ironically enough, using the random tables in the Wildemount book, which may result in your PC becoming a Weretiger.



Look up Treantmonk


Never read anything from Treantmonk if you're beginning with 5e.

Opinions on the quality of his work differs, but even if you like it the guy is heavily biased toward a certain way to play and it risks giving players new to 5e a skewed perspective.

[Socksy]

It's quite impossible to accidentally make something broken in 5e.

Well, aside from, ironically enough, using the random tables in the Wildemount book, which may result in your PC becoming a Weretiger.

That's pretty funny. I'm not sure what we're doing with regards to those, I'll ask the GM.

[Neoh]

Exactly this - I don't want the GM to feel either like the monsters aren't fun/aren't a threat, or to feel like she has to customise and scale things to us.

A rogue might work, especially if I focus on investigative and not combat skills.

Well, you also said that nobody minds if you optimise to make everyone else better.

Honestly, none of the classes are broken by themselves. If you just pick a class without multiclassing and focus on raising your stats and not take any feats at all, you won't be a problem.

Also, I don't think babysitting a new DM is the way to go personally. If she wants to get a feel for the game she has to play the game without the players having to gimp themselves. Sometimes things go well, sometimes they don't, DnD is a dice game. You can play a character that sucks in every aspect, it doesn't change the fact that another one at the table might roll max damage on his Fireball and finish a battle in a single round. She might also roll really well and wipe your entire party 2 sessions in.
**** happens. That's part of the fun of the game.

[Sillybird99]

Pretty much any phb non or half-caster (excepting paladin and battle master) without multiclassing or feats will be safe to play without fear of being too strong. Still a lot of options for making an interesting character RP-wise with backgrounds (especially custom background). Eldritch knight and arcane trickster might be your best bets for having a reasonably fun and effective low-OP character that does more than roll for attack. Either character could be made more fun and helpful with ritual caster (though it is a feat).

I played a very low op spell-less ranger x/ rogue 2 with ritual caster (wizard) who just used a longsword. Very cool character. Almost useless in combat lol. But it was fun.

[Neoh]

Never read anything from Treantmonk if you're beginning with 5e.

Opinions on the quality of his work differs, but even if you like it the guy is heavily biased toward a certain way to play and it risks giving players new to 5e a skewed perspective.

OP seemed pretty experienced with DnD in general though, I don't think reading a simple guide could change his whole way of playing the game.

[Unoriginal]

A rogue might work, especially if I focus on investigative and not combat skills.

If you want to do investigation stuff, you could use the Hill Dwarf Monk idea with the Way of the Cobalt Soul subclass (available for free and legally here (https://www.dndbeyond.com/classes/monk)).

The Way of the Cobalt Soul is a setting-specific feature of Wildemount/Critical Role, basically an international organisation of truth-seeking monks, spies and researchers.

That way you can do investigation, combat stuff without being OP, and fit in the campaign setting without issues.



OP seemed pretty experienced with DnD in general though, I don't think reading a simple guide could change his whole way of playing the game.

All editions of D&D need to be treated like the whole different systems they are. Having assumptions from past editions is not helpful, and is one of the reasons why Treantmonk's work is best avoided until you can have an informed opinion on them.

[Keravath]

If you are playing 5e for the first time then don't worry about it. 5e has a much flatter power structure and better class balance than previous versions. If you want to avoid optimization by accident then just pick a class from the players handbook and don't multiclass. The result will be a character pretty much comparable to everyone else.

Also, don't use rolled stats. Use the point buy rules or standard array from the PH. The easiest way to obtain unbalanced characters has always been using rolled stats.

If you like skills then rogue or bard (especially lore bard) are good choices. Bards are also decent support characters since they are full casters. However, wizard, cleric, monk, paladin, fighter, barbarian etc all have good features that scale up. Some of these work best with multiple stats that are good which means that they have less room for the occasional feat.

Anyway, most 5e "optimization" comes from multiclass dips of 1-3 levels to overcome some perceived shortcomings of the main class being played. If you stick to PH races/classes and avoid multiclassing, I don't think you will create a character that is anymore or less capable than everyone else's.

[Neoh]

All editions of D&D need to be treated like the whole different systems they are. Having assumptions from past editions is not helpful, and is one of the reasons why Treantmonk's work is best avoided until you can have an informed opinion on them.

I'm aware of that, but every munchkin I know doesn't take things at face value, since they are optimizers they are always thinking about the ups and downs of every single thing in the game.

[Frogreaver]

The key to not overly optimizing is to get hooked on your character concept to the extent that you will pick many thematic options over the most optimal. So find a character concept you like and dig into it.

Something like a Blaster Wizard fits this paradigm well.

If you really something that you cannot break, then a rogue primarily focused on archery seems ideal. You'll be solid middle of the road and can contribute with skills out of combat. (Though some DM's can't deal well with reliable talent at level 11).

Then there's the option of making a very optimized character but playing him in very untactical ways.

[Miele]

I'd certainly pick lore bard, support and creativity all in one bundle, without being overpowered damage wise.

[Sillybird99]

@OP do you have any idea what the others are playing?

[Socksy]

@OP do you have any idea what the others are playing?

A Pallid Elf with some sort of glass cannon melee Ranger build, a Druid, and I'm not sure about the others, I think we might have a wizard? The Ranger has gone for a lot of Unearthed Arcana stuff though and Tasha's Cauldron of Hideous Laughter or whatever it's called.

We've rolled for stats (mine are great, sadly) and on those background tables (I am successfully not a weretiger).

[Unoriginal]

A Pallid Elf with some sort of glass cannon melee Ranger build, a Druid, and I'm not sure about the others, I think we might have a wizard? The Ranger has gone for a lot of Unearthed Arcana stuff though and Tasha's Cauldron of Hideous Laughter or whatever it's called.

We've rolled for stats (mine are great, sadly) and on those background tables (I am successfully not a weretiger).

If Unearthed Arcana stuff is allowed then you REALLY don't have to worry about being the one making an unbalanced character.

[Ionathus]

Aside from some high level spells and a handful of specific combos there isn't anything particularly broken in 5e especially if you're sticking to core (if by core you mean PHB only), Paladins tend to be easy to become really good and there are a decent number of ways to make any spell caster at least a bit cheesy. Rouges and monks are pretty safe but they can also become scary effective if you use them right. I'd say if you want to play a non support character who almost certainly won't break anything go with a barbarian or a non battlemaster fighter and then pick a small race such as a gnome or a halfling. You can use sword and shield and be perfectly viable but since the most egregious builds utilize heavy weapons (pole arms, greatswords, longbows) and you won't be effective with a heavy weapon you won't be in much danger of breaking anything no matter how effective you make yourself.

This right here is the answer. If you're used to 3.5e or another system with loads of complexity, loopholes, and cheese, 5e is going to be a jolt because it's got a lot of those extremes sanded off. It's a lot harder to exploit -- not impossible, but you will likely find your PC to be "only" very competent at best.

With the party composition you mentioned, maybe pick up a straightforward frontline fighter like a bear totem barbarian. You'll find it difficult to instinctively "break" that class's core mechanic in 5e. Grapple things and rage a lot, deal plenty of damage and take very little, ham it up, chew the scenery, have a great time. You'll be good.