PDA

View Full Version : Fun Characters for New Players (3.5)



soir8
2010-01-03, 09:59 AM
I'm running a casual 3.5 game with 3 friends who are all relatively new to D&D. None of them own their own set of D&D books, so I asked them to just look through my books and pick out something they liked, and I'd make the characters for them.

They picked Swashbuckler, Warlock and Paladin as base classes. They're all lvl 7, human except the Gnome Warlock, with 32 pt buy.

For the Swashbuckler I've come up with a Swashbuckler 3/Rogue 4, with 2 weapon fighting and Daring Outlaw to give some impressive damage.

For the warlock... well, I've just given him 7 levels of warlock, with Eldritch Glaive, Fell Flight, Eldritch Spear, etc.

Because the guy chose the Paladin of Slaughter variant, and because the Swashbuckler's good-aligned, I've ended up changing his character to Favoured Soul 4/Fighter 2/Warpriest 1, in an effort to give him a badass evil divine warrior type character without the restrictions of a paladin.

Can anyone recommend any other ways to build these characters, to make them as fun as possible for my dear pals? The only thing I'm not keen on using is ToB, because I haven't read all of it yet and I haven't liked it so far, but that's not to see I won't use it if it's really worthwhile for the players :smallsmile:

Thanks for any contributions :smallbiggrin:

ex cathedra
2010-01-03, 10:09 AM
I would make the Paladin either a Crusader (I really really strongly suggest this) or a Cleric/Bone Knight.

Also, Crusader. Really. It keeps the same flavor, while being very effective in melee and a great in-combat flanking buddy for the swashbuckler. Favored Soul and Cleric do work for a divine warrior, but having a full caster in the same group as the other two could be bad if the caster began to grasp the power within his or her reach.

The Swashbuckler seems fine, but I'm having a hard time not recommending that he take a two level dip in swordsage.

As for the warlock, it's kind of hard to suggest other options considering how PrC-unfriendly the class is.

DragoonWraith
2010-01-03, 10:13 AM
Tome of Battle is, in my opinion and that of many others, among the best-written books in 3.5. It is the only one to substantially improve the situation for melee characters as compared to casters in one, easy to use book (non-ToB melee can be optimized, but it means combing through several books and making near-perfect combinations; ToB you can literally just take what sounds cool and it'll work fine). In pure damage, non-ToB melee can beat ToB, but ToB gives melee far more options, the versatility they desperately needed. Furthermore, the system is really not that hard to understand. I won't try to derail the thread with this topic (though unfortunately, it's rather likely that this will happen), but if you are just "not keen" on it at the moment, I strongly recommend giving it a chance. It's an excellent book, especially for new players.

Anyway, Warlock would be my #1 choice for a new-player class. It's excellent. Taking Scribe Scroll and maybe Craft Wondrous Item by 12th (for the UMD'd crafting ability) is an excellent choice. Taking ranks in Use Magic Device is a no-brainer, what with their ability to take-10 in it. Other than that, try to find a Prestige Class for him; Warlock 4 and Warlock 12 are the only really unique and cool features that doesn't get progressed by "+1 level in a(n arcane) spellcasting class", so PrC's are recommended. While there are certain optimal choices (a level of Binder plus Hellfire Warlock, perhaps with Legacy Champion cheese), that's probably unnecessary for a new group and there are tons of other good options for Warlocks out there.

Swashbuckler is quite solid, though I'm not as familiar with how to build them. Daring Outlaw is solid. Maybe levels of Factotum to really boost that Int synergy?

Paladins... are a problem. Personal preference, but I don't like them; policing other characters is a pain. Plus, they are weak. Good choice replacing that. For the record, as mentioned above, I suggest the Crusader for this: an Evil Crusader can be quite awesome. If you're interested, there's also some sweet homebrew disciplines that can go quite well with one.

However, for Favored Soul/Fighter/Warpriest... not familiar with the Warpriest, but Cleric is probably better in melee than Favored Soul/Fighter, and definitely better at casting. On the other hand, a well-built melee Cleric will probably (err, definitely) outshine your other two characters, so that's probably not a good choice. Not really sure what to suggest, as I'm unfamiliar with most divine casters.

Finally, do you really want Good and Evil characters in the same party, especially for a group of new players? That seems likely to be a recipe for disaster. I'd strongly recommend suggesting that the player who wants to play an Evil character choose a Good character for this first campaign, get some experience first, and then you can run an Evil campaign. Mixing the two is rarely a good idea. If you do do it, caution them both (but especially the player of the Evil character) that they are to make the party work and that intra-party fighting/player-vs-player is not going to be appreciated (as I assume is your desire; certainly I would want to avoid it in a new group).

Kesnit
2010-01-03, 10:28 AM
I'm going to disagree with the above 2 posters about ToB. If you had an overpowered class (WIZ, DRU, etc) and a melee type, that would be one thing. With the class mix you have, there is no need for ToB, and it can be very complex for new players.

soir8
2010-01-03, 10:51 AM
Handy advice so far :)

My only real problems with ToB are that I don't like the flavour and I don't want to have to learn another gameplay mechanic :smalltongue:. I'll look into Crusader and Factotum, but the guy's gonna need at least half-decent spellcasting so that he can heal. Warpriest PrC seems good as it only gives 1/2 spellcasting progression whilst providing strong BAB and group buffing/support abilities, and Favoured Soul instead of Cleric gives him an easier spellcasting mechanic and some cool roleplaying potential.

I'm not worried about conflict between the good player and the evil player getting out of hand; it's their second adventure in D&D (the first was a short dungeon crawl that only lasted a few sessions; this is their first real campaign) and I know how they tend to play. The paladin player tends to be pretty laid back, so I don't see him going on murderous rampages in the name of evil too often.

Aldizog
2010-01-03, 11:02 AM
If you're not keen on ToB, then don't use it. And don't worry too much about damage output; you're the DM, and the core MM monsters are CR balanced for a really nonoptimized party. No point in starting an arms race with yourself.

The Swashbuckler/Rogue sounds like a lot of fun; make sure that you have plenty of challenges where physical skills matter (Balance, Tumble, Climb, etc.). The skill tricks from Complete Scoundrel are a good fit for this PC, though I'd remove the "once per encounter" limit. Probably would only want to use a skillmonkey PrC, so that rules out Tempest and Dervish (which might otherwise be fun). Perhaps Dungeon Delver, or Thief-Acrobat?

The warlock is an excellent choice for new players and hard to go wrong. Toss in some random magic items (such as scrolls of interesting spells) so the warlock can have some fun with UMD. I don't think a PrC is necessary.

For the evil holy warrior, maybe just straight Favored Soul? The build you have isn't bad; Prestige Paladin might be another option. Normally Favored Souls don't qualify for Warpriest since they can't Turn Undead. But you're the DM.

Pharaoh's Fist
2010-01-03, 11:04 AM
And don't worry too much about damage output; you're the DM, and the core MM monsters are CR balanced for a really nonoptimized party.

Shadows. Alips. The Tarresque.

ex cathedra
2010-01-03, 11:09 AM
I understand if you don't want to learn a new mechanic, but it's mostly rather simple, and Crusader has a large bias towards healing, support, and tanking. They have a built-in delay damage mechanic, strikes that heal themselves and allies, maneuvers that grant allies actions, and... well, they're really cool. It's your choice, but I think that a crusader would be a great addition to that party.

Pigkappa
2010-01-03, 11:47 AM
I've come up

Why don't you just let them choose? If a player tells you he'd like to play an Evil Paladin and you give him a Favoured Soul 4/Fighter 2/Warpriest 1, that's not really what he asked for. Also, this way he'd have to learn 3 different classes, to start looking for fighter feats, and so on.

Since they aren't experienced, it's unlikely that there will be problems about balance. I'd just give them Swashbuckler 7, Warlock 7 and Paladin of Slaughter 7 (assuming you really want a mix of Good/Evil characters). Also, telling the Paladin that he could lose his powers if he lets the Swashbuckler perform too many Good deeds will grant some funny RPing, if you can handle the situation (that is, find a really good reason for them to stick together).

soir8
2010-01-03, 12:10 PM
Damn, hadn't noticed turn undead was a requirement... might houserule it, but I do like to stick to the rules where they're reasonable...

We did 1 session using lvl 5 characters which I quickly whipped up, so they were just straight up Swashbuckler, Warlock and Paladin. The Swashbuckler did indeed find an opportunity to make use of his skills, climbing the rock walls of a cave to get round a large underground pool full of bloodbloaters. There was an old boat on the other side of the pool, but unfortunately before he could row it back over to the rest of the party he failed a move silently check and got attacked by a couple of Quaggoths. His allies quickly rushed through the water to help him and we almost had a TPK on the first session :D

@Pigkappa; Like I said, I'm the only one who actually has the books, and they're trusting me to make fun characters based on what they asked for. Since having to roleplay an evil paladin in a good party, with his decisions and behaviour restricted by a code and the rest of the party always worrying about when he's gonna betray them, probably wouldn't be much fun for him (although I'll admit I'd enjoy it) I'm doing my best to keep the martial/magical flavour of the paladin but... well, better.

It'll also be helpful if I can convince the player to slowly change his alignment, which wouldn't work as well with a paladin.

I'm getting to really love these forums, probably the most friendly, polite and civil forums I've ever been on :smallbiggrin:

dspeyer
2010-01-03, 12:23 PM
I'd suggest you talk to your players about what they mean by wanting to be good and evil respectively. If they regard alignment as just names for sides (and evil is the sexy side), let be and make that your world. If they're serious, get them to talk it out OOC.

As for a paladinish class, I'd advise against crusader. The maneuver-granting mechanic makes no sense. Sure it's easy to run (so long as the player stays away from the edge cases), but a new player is likely to want to know what an encounter is. Good luck answering.

At level 7, straight favoured soul is pretty effective melee. It's 2 BAB points behind full, but free weapon focus makes up one of them. Just pick a patron deity with a good weapon, like Kord.

Pigkappa
2010-01-03, 12:29 PM
Since having to roleplay an evil paladin in a good party, with his decisions and behaviour restricted by a code and the rest of the party always worrying about when he's gonna betray them, probably wouldn't be much fun for him (although I'll admit I'd enjoy it) I'm doing my best to keep the martial/magical flavour of the paladin but... well, better.

I'd still try to make it as simple as possible, since they are new to the game. You could ask him if a Ranger 7 is ok - that can be of any alignment, has a little amount of spells, has some martial abilities, can heal a little, and is certainly simpler than a FSoul/Fighter/Warpriest. The ranger doesn't have a special mount, but (weak) the animal companion is not so different after all.

Aldizog
2010-01-03, 12:50 PM
At level 7, straight favoured soul is pretty effective melee. It's 2 BAB points behind full, but free weapon focus makes up one of them. Just pick a patron deity with a good weapon, like Kord.
Favored Soul does look like a really good pick and it does fit the model of "divine warrior." (3/4 BAB really isn't that bad even without considering Divine Favor at low levels and Divine Power at mid levels.) Do you have a custom list of deities or are you using the PHB ones?
For the PC in question, some sort of CN war-god might be a good choice. Can start CE, and drift to N, CN, or even CG.

soir8
2010-01-03, 01:25 PM
Multiclassing isn't so hard to grasp that they have a problem with it at this point. Since the character's CE, I'd planned on making him a favoured soul of Erythnul, and was going to slowly go through an arc of Erythnul giving him great power while he becomes closer to the other characters until eventually he has to choose between committing some atrocity for Erythnul and keeping his friends. If he chooses his friends and his alignment changes, he gets the patronage of a new god. If he decides to stick with the power of Erythnul... who knows, he could end up corrupting the rest of the party to evil :smallwink:

My biggest worry in terms of roleplaying so far is the Warlock, who needs help with the concept that while a CN character is supposed to look out for themselves without caring about the rules, that doesn't mean robbing an impoverished family with a sick and dying daughter of the last of their wealth and possessions.

Flickerdart
2010-01-03, 01:29 PM
For healing, drop Wands of Vigor or Cure Light Wounds and let the Warlock UMD them. No need to waste spell slots in combat.

Xenogears
2010-01-03, 01:31 PM
My biggest worry in terms of roleplaying so far is the Warlock, who needs help with the concept that while a CN character is supposed to look out for themselves without caring about the rules, that doesn't mean robbing an impoverished family with a sick and dying daughter of the last of their wealth and possessions.

Nuetral should really be the easiest alignment to roleplay since it is the one most people have in real life. It's supposed to mean (barring the devoted to nuetrality version which is just confusing) that they are willing to put themselves on the line for the people they really care for, might do some things to help strangers but not if its a ot of work or dangerous. So I might give my friends 50 bucks, might hand out a few dollars to a charity, but if some stranger walks up and asks to borrow 50 bucks im gonna say no. Thats nuetral.

Narazil
2010-01-03, 02:25 PM
Nuetral should really be the easiest alignment to roleplay since it is the one most people have in real life. It's supposed to mean (barring the devoted to nuetrality version which is just confusing) that they are willing to put themselves on the line for the people they really care for, might do some things to help strangers but not if its a ot of work or dangerous. So I might give my friends 50 bucks, might hand out a few dollars to a charity, but if some stranger walks up and asks to borrow 50 bucks im gonna say no. Thats nuetral.
No, just no. That is as much Good as it is Neutral - you could have a perfectly good reason as to why you wouldn't give money to charity or strangers - you not having a lot of money, ect. And trusting friends over strangers is hardly neutral, it's.. Well, a bit Lawful.

DragoonWraith
2010-01-04, 12:14 PM
I'm going to disagree with the above 2 posters about ToB. If you had an overpowered class (WIZ, DRU, etc) and a melee type, that would be one thing. With the class mix you have, there is no need for ToB
Strongly disagree. In fact, Warlocks are right about on par with the ToB classes. They still fall well short of Wizards and Druids.


it can be very complex for new players.
This I disagree with even more. You choose your maneuvers, and no matter what you choose you will be awesome. This is far easier than choosing spells where you have to find the spells that are amazing, or else be much weaker than you could otherwise be.