I need Simple Potent Builds (3.5)

[Cisturn]

Hey playgrounders, I need some help. I convinced two of my friends to join my dnd game, but they're both noobs and I dont know how to properly build the type of characters they want to play. The first guy wants to play a Paladin (he's used to WoW) and the other wants to play some kind of buffer, leaning towards bard.

They're both at level 9 with a 32 point buy, and 36000 gold. Does any have any ideas for a fairly simple build, that's fairly strong and most importantly fun to play?

[Thurbane]

Druid 9
Wizard 9
Cleric 9

LOLOLOL - now that that's out of the way, let's continue...

[Waker]

Are these two going to represent the whole team or just additions to it? Because if it's a two-man team that will impact what builds will be survivable.

[Dusk Eclipse]

Druid 9
Wizard 9
Cleric 9

LOLOLOL - now that that's out of the way, let's continue...

Bad Thurbane, everyone knows you prestige out of Cleric and Wizard ASAP




To help more, what sources do you have access to, expected level to reach, houserules that we might need to know?

[Reynard]

For Paladin guy, try pointing him at the Tome of Battle, the Crusader in particular. He should find the maneuvers and stances fairly easy to understand.

Straight Crusader 9 is a decent build, though a dip in Bard could be handy for Dragonfire Inspiration (Taking Song of the White Raven) if he wants to be a source of pain for his foes and joy for his friends.

The other guy would probably find the any of the full casters best suited to being a buffer-type, with Druid and Cleric coming out ahead. (Druid also brings a Animal Companion to the table, which might be problematic.) Of the two, Druid focuses more on buffs for animals while the Cleric is good for actual party mates.

[The-Mage-King]

For the Paladin guy, give him a Crusader. Look through the handbook, and let him pick what maneuvers seem cool to him.


For the bard guy... Use the Bard handbook.


EDIT: Swordsage'd! At least, for the first thing.

[Saint GoH]

Having been a long time WoW player myself, I second third the Crusader for the character wanting to be a paladin-ish type. They are almost a direct transfer, from self-healing to excellent solo capabilities. Granted Crusaders don't get Templars Verdict or Divine Storm (although it'd be lovely if they did )

As for the other one... Druid can be fairly complicated, buts loads of fun if you have someone there to hold your hand. Just point him to the MM and say "You get to play as that for a little while, have fun". I would also suggest War-Weaver from the miniatures handbook if you have the buffer go a Wizard route. Being able to buff all your allies at once will be very handy, and allow him to do something after he casts the buffs.

[Cisturn]

Yes, They're joining a team of a Cleric 10, an Archivist 9 and a Duskblade 9. The Cleric (me) uses persist-ed buffs to be in the front line, and the Archivist is blasty. I'm not sure about the Duskblade, he used to be our sorcerer but he died last session and just rerolled this guy.

To my knowledge all books are open.

[Innis Cabal]

Druid 9
Wizard 9
Cleric 9

LOLOLOL - now that that's out of the way, let's continue...

Hey, are those some of those Tear Won classes I keep hearing about? Someone should make a list of them so everyone can reference it and get a widely skewed idea of how the game is actually played as opposed to how it could be played.

[Waker]

Ok, now that we know what the rest of the team is that will impact the selection.
I strongly suggest the buffer player go as a Wizard, probably specialize in Transmutation and then prestige into War Weaver from Heroes of Battle. It will definitely overcome the tedium of being a buffer by letting you throw everything out all at once.
Crusader would work for the WoW angle of self-healing and whatnot. You could also go with a paladin and use some of the divine feats and battlecaster to turn you into a fairly decent melee character while still having spells.

[sonofzeal]

+1 for Crusader on the "Paladin". Simple, powerful, only requires one book.


As for the Buffer.... Bards depend on a lot of non-Core material scattered through dozens of book to reach full potential. Wizard or Sorcerer is not a bad idea, with proper spell choice. Cleric or Druid are also possible.

[Callista]

Actually, cleric/druid/wizard wouldn't be that good an idea. These are powerful only if you know how to make them powerful--they are not that good for newbies.

[sonofzeal]

Actually, cleric/druid/wizard wouldn't be that good an idea. These are powerful only if you know how to make them powerful--they are not that good for newbies.

Cleric's dead easy, there are few ways to make an ineffective Cleric, especially since you can trade out spells every day if you want. Druid, I'd recommend against for a newb based mostly on the bookkeeping and the complexity of Wildshape. Wizards can be tough though, you have to be strategic in spell choices, and that requires decent system knowledge. But if his goal is "buffer", he's going to be Transmutation-focused and that's a huge step in the right direction already.

[JupiterPaladin]

People are always quick to offer ToB classes in place of the classic ones, and sure they may be mechanically superior, but does that ALWAYS have to be the advice? When a player is new to D&D in general I always have better luck giving them a core build that doesn't have too much crazy stuff. After they learn the game, give them an option to re-roll or retrain classes/feats/whatever.

[sonofzeal]

People are always quick to offer ToB classes in place of the classic ones, and sure they may be mechanically superior, but does that ALWAYS have to be the advice? When a player is new to D&D in general I always have better luck giving them a core build that doesn't have too much crazy stuff. After they learn the game, give them an option to re-roll or retrain classes/feats/whatever.

Why Core though?

I mean... I could toss a newb the PHB, or I could toss him ToB. Either is going to be brand new to the guy, he's going to have to learn the classes either way. I don't really see why Core should be priviledged that way, when ToB is much easier to build a decent character (there's really no serious way of screwing up too badly), and when it's generally more fun to play too (everyone loves having options beyond "I attack it again").

[JupiterPaladin]

Why Core though?

Depends on the player really, but in my own experience a lot of noobs get overwhelmed by too many options and slow down the actual game. Playing 2 or 3 sessions with a basic character isn't horrible. I have always been very generous with re-rolls and conversions after they start knowing what's going on.

As far as not having options aka "I attack it again", I have never seen this in a real game. A lack of hundreds of options laid out on the character sheet does not mean you have no options. Even a basic Fighter can choose to do stuff other than just swing a sword.

[sonofzeal]

Depends on the player really, but in my own experience a lot of noobs get overwhelmed by too many options and slow down the actual game. Playing 2 or 3 sessions with a basic character isn't horrible. I have always been very generous with re-rolls and conversions after they start knowing what's going on.

Core has what, eleven classes? ToB has three. Presenting those three and giving them the choice between them reduces those sorts of overwhelming decisions.

And I'd never suggest playing with a "basic character" is a terrible thing. But I also don't see why people get so up in arms about recommending the use of ToB in situations where - hey, guess what - it really is a sweet option.

[JupiterPaladin]

Well sonofzeal, you may have been luckier than I have been with new players. The ones I've had were all totally new to the concept of tabletop gaming, and most were very slow to learn the basics.

[Fishy]

-1 Druid, +1 Spirit Shaman.

Forget Wild Shape, forget Animal Companions, forget trying how many Entangles and how many Faerie Fires you're going to need during the day. Try out interesting spells and swap them out later if it turns out they suck. It's the best casting mechanic ever.

On top of that, Guide Magic means you actually want to take 10 levels of the same base class, which never happens.

[sonofzeal]

Well sonofzeal, you may have been luckier than I have been with new players. The ones I've had were all totally new to the concept of tabletop gaming, and most were very slow to learn the basics.

Oh, same with many of the ones I've known. But most people will understand a Maneuver card if you hand one to them. That simplifies the build choices, and gets everything spelled out.

One girl I played with had a Crusader for a bit, and then a trip-focused Fighter, and she found the Crusader far more easy to play. Once she got the recovery mechanic down, it was just a matter of chosing the maneuver she wanted. The trip Fighter though, had to deal with Attacks of Opportunity, reach weapons, and a trip mechanic that's partially defined one place and then modified heavily by the feat in a different place, and kept getting confused about when exactly her turn was anyway because she did more rolling when it wasn't her turn.

So no, I don't think you have to master the Core classes before you're"ready to play ToB.

[JupiterPaladin]

So no, I don't think you have to master the Core classes before you're"ready to play ToB.

To be fair I never said they had to master the core classes. Besides that when I say core I should be more clear anyway. I consider a lot of books to be our core, like PHB2, DMG2, Incarnum, all of the Completes, and the Forgotten Realms and Eberron campaign settings come to mind. Our last noobs were a Duskblade and a Sorcerer/Archmage

[Kylarra]

To be fair I never said they had to master the core classes. Besides that when I say core I should be more clear anyway. I consider a lot of books to be our core, like PHB2, DMG2, Incarnum, all of the Completes, and the Forgotten Realms and Eberron campaign settings come to mind. Our last noobs were a Duskblade and a Sorcerer/Archmage

Your "core" appears to be "most of the alternate classes sans explicitly ToB", admittedly I don't see ToM in there, but most people pretend 2/3s of it doesn't exist anyway.

on topic, if they really must be a paladin, and crusader is bad for some reason, might I suggest the PF paladin?

[Thurbane]

Speaking for myself and my group, I always recommend that n00bs to D&D stick with a core only (PHB) build for their first character (or least their first few levels of that character). The basics you need to master (combat, skill system etc.) are all there in the PHB, so if you’re playing a PHB class, all the info you need is right there in one book (or in the SRD).

I’ve found that most, after their first character (or maybe two), are then keen to start exploring non-core options.

YMMV.

[sonofzeal]

To be fair I never said they had to master the core classes. Besides that when I say core I should be more clear anyway. I consider a lot of books to be our core, like PHB2, DMG2, Incarnum, all of the Completes, and the Forgotten Realms and Eberron campaign settings come to mind. Our last noobs were a Duskblade and a Sorcerer/Archmage

Wait.... Magic of Incarnum? Really? Even I struggle with that! Incarnum and Binding are hands-down the most complex and counterintuitive subsystems in the game. More than that, Incarnum is relatively rare in most gaming circles, more rare than ToB in my experience.

As Kylarra said, I have to seriously question your concept of "Core".

[dextercorvia]

So long as the others can help with the spell list, may I recommend a nice Sorcerer for the buffer. After playing it for a level, he will probably want to PrC into something with class features.

[Hawk7915]

Player 1: Depending on how he's specced, he'll probably feel more at home with either a Crusader 9 or a Cleric 6/Prestige Paladin 3 to get the "WoW Paladin" feel; straight Paladin 9 won't probably do it for him. Either build will be tough but not impossibly so on a newbie.

Player 2: In the same vein, I'd try a Bardblade or a Bard-barian (depending on level of complexity). Bardblade is better but slightly harder to player. I'd either go Bard 2/Warblade 7 or Bard 4/Warblade 5, depending on whether he wants to focus on spellcasting or having powerful attacks. "Song of the White Raven" means as long as he just stays in White Raven stances, he can Inspire Courage as a swift action and his ToB and Bard class levels stack for purposes of his bonus. Make him human and add Power Attack, Song of the Heart, Improved Initiative, Practiced Spellcaster, and Lingering Song. Nice, simple, and plenty effective.

An alternative is an arcane caster, transmutation focused and banning Enchantment and Illusion (I find they're hardest on newbies). Avoid traditional uber transmutation effects (like Polymorph) in favor of being able to spam Haste, Bull's Strength, etc to help the party out.

[Psyren]

admittedly I don't see ToM in there, but most people pretend 2/3s of it doesn't exist anyway.

I like Shadowcasters

(It's such a pity they never got around to that last 3rd of the book. All the pages are blank except for some fluff.)

[MeeposFire]

I like offering TOB classes since they are harder to screw up than older classes. One caveat though is that I always offer to go through the book to choose their maneuvers. I usually ask for a concept and then help create that concept.

I will admit though that I do have a soft spot for all the non-spellcasters in the game so I would absolutely allow other stuff too.

[Tytalus]

People are always quick to offer ToB classes in place of the classic ones, and sure they may be mechanically superior, but does that ALWAYS have to be the advice? When a player is new to D&D in general I always have better luck giving them a core build that doesn't have too much crazy stuff. After they learn the game, give them an option to re-roll or retrain classes/feats/whatever.

In this case, it makes a lot of sense. One player wants a character with a WoW Paladin feel to it (i.e., special attacks that recharge over time). He'll find nothing in core that gives him combat options even like that, while the crusader's maneuvers are quite similar, if with a somewhat different flavor.

My experience is that new players tend to get lost in core, where there are bad options a-plenty. A fighter with poor feats, or - worse - a wizard/sorcerer with poorly picked spells is no fun to play. On the other hand, it's very hard to screw up a ToB build.

[Amphetryon]

Given the rest of your party's composition, you might see how the Bard wannabe feels about War Weaver. Yet another handbook.