Not a single class, particularly in this edition. PC’s are barely heroe’s even at 14th level, and they certainly aren’t superheroes. You should have included “None” as an answer.
Paladin or Fighter if your going into Melee, otherwise I’d say a Wizard. Paladin would specialise if they had a decent amount of HP, Fighter if they are a little lower on HP. Wizard for big AOE’s and shorter fights.
Not a single class, particularly in this edition. PC’s are barely heroe’s even at 14th level, and they certainly aren’t superheroes. You should have included “None” as an answer.
If you think that 14th level characters are "barely heroes," I'd say your expectations of what a character's power level should be have been skewed by shonen and/or Pathfinder or 3rd Edition.
As for taking down an army by one's self? Depends on the size of the army, the composition of the army, the terrain upon which the fight will occur, and how long a time frame there is to work with. Because here's the one thing that you're not going to do: stand up and face the army head-on. The name of this game is asymmetric warfare and that means it's time to fight dirty. Attack at night, destroy their provisions, poison water sources, assassinate officers, set traps, but whatever you do, don't fight fair.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Not a single class, particularly in this edition. PC’s are barely heroe’s even at 14th level, and they certainly aren’t superheroes. You should have included “None” as an answer.
If you think that 14th level characters are "barely heroes," I'd say your expectations of what a character's power level should be have been skewed by shonen and/or Pathfinder or 3rd Edition.
As for taking down an army by one's self? Depends on the size of the army, the composition of the army, the terrain upon which the fight will occur, and how long a time frame there is to work with. Because here's the one thing that you're not going to do: stand up and face the army head-on. The name of this game is asymmetric warfare and that means it's time to fight dirty. Attack at night, destroy their provisions, poison water sources, assassinate officers, set traps, but whatever you do, don't fight fair.
I’m regards being skewed, not to mention by novels and films upon which D&D has supposedly been based. 20th level heroes are supposed to be able to challenge gods or epic monsters of legend, yet there’s no way I see a 20th level fighter cleaving through an army (unless it was an army of CR 0 or 1/8th schmucks).
Paladin or Fighter if your going into Melee, otherwise I’d say a Wizard. Paladin would specialise if they had a decent amount of HP, Fighter if they are a little lower on HP. Wizard for big AOE’s and shorter fights.
Why Fighter and not Barbarian? Barb gets a great deal of resistance to all the damage that matters, more health, and only attacks one fewer time than the fighter. Persistent Rage means you don’t have to worry about duration and Rage itself grants a solid damage boost. Add in mobility and the ticket is sold. Mind you, I’m disputing the class v. class, not whether or not I think the OP’s question has a legitimate answer.
Not a single class, particularly in this edition. PC’s are barely heroe’s even at 14th level, and they certainly aren’t superheroes. You should have included “None” as an answer.
If you think that 14th level characters are "barely heroes," I'd say your expectations of what a character's power level should be have been skewed by shonen and/or Pathfinder or 3rd Edition.
As for taking down an army by one's self? Depends on the size of the army, the composition of the army, the terrain upon which the fight will occur, and how long a time frame there is to work with. Because here's the one thing that you're not going to do: stand up and face the army head-on. The name of this game is asymmetric warfare and that means it's time to fight dirty. Attack at night, destroy their provisions, poison water sources, assassinate officers, set traps, but whatever you do, don't fight fair.
I’m regards being skewed, not to mention by novels and films upon which D&D has supposedly been based. 20th level heroes are supposed to be able to challenge gods or epic monsters of legend, yet there’s no way I see a 20th level fighter cleaving through an army (unless it was an army of CR 0 or 1/8th schmucks).
I'm unaware of any D&D novels or films where a lone protagonist cleaves through an entire army. Any non-D&D books or films are by definition not representative of the game of Dungeons and Dragons. Do you think elves in D&D are underpowered because they're not the semi-divine beings that are exponentially better than humans at everything the way they are in Lord of the Rings?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
A thousand archers will kill any class in an instant. If they win initiative, some classes may have a chance to take out a fraction of those archers before they die.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
One fair point is that the OP never told us the numbers of the army (let’s call it 2,000) nor their exact strengths and disposition. I suppose I feel it’s more accurate for me to wish a player could destroy the battle readiness of a regiment or whatever, prior to their own capture. But 5e really doesn’t support that. You could have done it in any edition previously, but not 5e.
Edit: Okay, I say that but it was almost always the wizards and clerics that were able to do so. 4e changed things and made other classes able to do so as well, but we all know what happened with 4e.
A druid with firestorm, tsunami, or storm of vengeance. Or a wizard with the wish spell who uses it to cast one of those 3 spells. Should be enough based upon the very loose information. But without knowing the army size, composition, power level - an army of standard 0 level soldiers is very different to an army of 10th level fighters, rangers and paladins. Plus battlefield terrain will have a big impact.
I don’t see fighting an army solo as being possible in D&D, save for a 20th plus Wizard with the spell absolute immunity. Otherwise the best you’d have is a relatively high armor class, stoneskin, and mirror image. Against that, as mentioned, you’re likely to lose initiative against a fair number of soldiers, and between just the foot soldiers and the archers, you will be shredded. At 21st you can have Absolute Immunity (good luck shredding that), possibly a second 9th level spell for a devastating Meteor Swarm, and then an endless barrage of fireballs.
Firestorm doesn’t effect a big enough area, storm of the century is actually kind of weak in combat and requires concentration. Tsunami could be a crusher though.
Firestorm doesn’t effect a big enough area, storm of the century is actually kind of weak in combat and requires concentration. Tsunami could be a crusher though.
As I said, very specifically, when I gave those examples, it would depend entirely on the size and composition of the ‘army’, and the layout of the terrain.
Paladin or Fighter if your going into Melee, otherwise I’d say a Wizard. Paladin would specialise if they had a decent amount of HP, Fighter if they are a little lower on HP. Wizard for big AOE’s and shorter fights.
Why Fighter and not Barbarian? Barb gets a great deal of resistance to all the damage that matters, more health, and only attacks one fewer time than the fighter. Persistent Rage means you don’t have to worry about duration and Rage itself grants a solid damage boost. Add in mobility and the ticket is sold. Mind you, I’m disputing the class v. class, not whether or not I think the OP’s question has a legitimate answer.
Fair point! I was basing it off of making more attacks because I assumed these soldiers were low HP, otherwise an army of them would be un-fightable. But that’s a really good point, Barbarian has an effective 2.5~ times HP more than Fighter or Paladin, and also, *S M A C C* ;)
I'm sure people are thinking wizard for damage spells. I figured Druid, for summoning and transforming. I think my current Sorlock could handle himself pretty well too.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
as you read in the title "which 5e class could fight a army solo"
If a player (the player in this case is you) was to go up against a army solo what class would you pick?
notes for this it will be a open combat fight so no killing in the night
and please say why if you wish.
He who fight and runaway live to fight another day
What level?
Mother and Cat Herder. Playing TTRPGs since 1989 (She/Her)
lets say 14
He who fight and runaway live to fight another day
Not a single class, particularly in this edition. PC’s are barely heroe’s even at 14th level, and they certainly aren’t superheroes. You should have included “None” as an answer.
Paladin or Fighter if your going into Melee, otherwise I’d say a Wizard. Paladin would specialise if they had a decent amount of HP, Fighter if they are a little lower on HP. Wizard for big AOE’s and shorter fights.
If you think that 14th level characters are "barely heroes," I'd say your expectations of what a character's power level should be have been skewed by shonen and/or Pathfinder or 3rd Edition.
As for taking down an army by one's self? Depends on the size of the army, the composition of the army, the terrain upon which the fight will occur, and how long a time frame there is to work with. Because here's the one thing that you're not going to do: stand up and face the army head-on. The name of this game is asymmetric warfare and that means it's time to fight dirty. Attack at night, destroy their provisions, poison water sources, assassinate officers, set traps, but whatever you do, don't fight fair.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I’m regards being skewed, not to mention by novels and films upon which D&D has supposedly been based. 20th level heroes are supposed to be able to challenge gods or epic monsters of legend, yet there’s no way I see a 20th level fighter cleaving through an army (unless it was an army of CR 0 or 1/8th schmucks).
Why Fighter and not Barbarian? Barb gets a great deal of resistance to all the damage that matters, more health, and only attacks one fewer time than the fighter. Persistent Rage means you don’t have to worry about duration and Rage itself grants a solid damage boost. Add in mobility and the ticket is sold. Mind you, I’m disputing the class v. class, not whether or not I think the OP’s question has a legitimate answer.
I'm unaware of any D&D novels or films where a lone protagonist cleaves through an entire army. Any non-D&D books or films are by definition not representative of the game of Dungeons and Dragons. Do you think elves in D&D are underpowered because they're not the semi-divine beings that are exponentially better than humans at everything the way they are in Lord of the Rings?
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
And yet, for some reason D&D draws upon stories just like that, as listed in the inspirational reading part of the Player’s Handbook.
A thousand archers will kill any class in an instant. If they win initiative, some classes may have a chance to take out a fraction of those archers before they die.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
One fair point is that the OP never told us the numbers of the army (let’s call it 2,000) nor their exact strengths and disposition. I suppose I feel it’s more accurate for me to wish a player could destroy the battle readiness of a regiment or whatever, prior to their own capture. But 5e really doesn’t support that. You could have done it in any edition previously, but not 5e.
Edit: Okay, I say that but it was almost always the wizards and clerics that were able to do so. 4e changed things and made other classes able to do so as well, but we all know what happened with 4e.
I'm going with Cleric, just call on some Divine Intervention and hope your DM agrees with your great need for a Wrath of God spell
A druid with firestorm, tsunami, or storm of vengeance. Or a wizard with the wish spell who uses it to cast one of those 3 spells. Should be enough based upon the very loose information. But without knowing the army size, composition, power level - an army of standard 0 level soldiers is very different to an army of 10th level fighters, rangers and paladins. Plus battlefield terrain will have a big impact.
ok let say the army is made of CR 1 soldier , and the higher ranks go up the higher the CR value is
He who fight and runaway live to fight another day
I don’t see fighting an army solo as being possible in D&D, save for a 20th plus Wizard with the spell absolute immunity. Otherwise the best you’d have is a relatively high armor class, stoneskin, and mirror image. Against that, as mentioned, you’re likely to lose initiative against a fair number of soldiers, and between just the foot soldiers and the archers, you will be shredded. At 21st you can have Absolute Immunity (good luck shredding that), possibly a second 9th level spell for a devastating Meteor Swarm, and then an endless barrage of fireballs.
Firestorm doesn’t effect a big enough area, storm of the century is actually kind of weak in combat and requires concentration. Tsunami could be a crusher though.
First thing i'm asking myself when reading the question is: an army of what? Fluffy Bunnies or Pit Fiends?
As I said, very specifically, when I gave those examples, it would depend entirely on the size and composition of the ‘army’, and the layout of the terrain.
Fair point! I was basing it off of making more attacks because I assumed these soldiers were low HP, otherwise an army of them would be un-fightable. But that’s a really good point, Barbarian has an effective 2.5~ times HP more than Fighter or Paladin, and also, *S M A C C* ;)
I'm sure people are thinking wizard for damage spells. I figured Druid, for summoning and transforming. I think my current Sorlock could handle himself pretty well too.