(if this belongs more in a different thread,feel free to move it)

I have heard from some people that fighter is the best class for noobs,but I have also heard the same about monk,rogue and barbarian.

Which class is the best/easiest for someone to play as their first character? Why?

The Fighter class (in general) has the fewest moving parts to track all at the same time. That means that it’s easier to play that while learning the rules than it would be to play some of the other classes and learn the rules at the same time. Once you learn the rules fairly well, then the rest of the classes just add to them incrementally by comparison.

Edit: Fighter also has the absolute least restrictions on anything (like Monks and Barbarians cannot wear armor, and Monks and Rogues are restricted to specific weapon options), so that it lends itself more easily to any player concept.

Also, Fighters get the most ASIs of any class, which makes it more forgiving of “mistakes” in character progression choices made early on by less experienced players.

2nd Edit: You don’t have to pick the champion as the subclass, there are other subclasses. The Samurai or Arcane Archer (or maybe even Cavalier) would both probably be good choices for new players. Eldritch Knight adds spellcasting, and I would personally save that mechanic for a second character. Battle Master is generally considered the “best,” but it’s can be a bit much to juggle while also still learning the rules.

If you do go Barbarian, don’t pick the Berzerker. There are some... disappointments with the features that might frustrate a new player enough to not have fun.

I would recommend the Barbarian. It is very durable, has simple mechanics and you'll do just fine by repeating these sentences: "I rage", "I reckless attack". :D

It also carries a very strong and flavourful RP concept that offers two big benefits for new players:

- it's easier to to get into the role than other classes

- if you do something "stupid" it still fits the character

The subclasses are a bit more complex than Champion Fighter, but they give you some really nice options that aren't hard to understand or track, since they mostly depend on your rage. And if you want to occasionally throw a lightning bolt at your enemies instead of just attacking, it's possible. :-) (Storm Herald for lightning).

Honestly, my pick here is barbarian.  You can make a simpler character, with fewer moving parts, but after playing a champion to 10...it was incredibly boring.  By the end of the campaign, I was /hoping/ to die so I could do something else.  Fortunately, we didn't continue on with that party after we finished storm king's thunder.  My champion had crap skills and combat was literally mainhand - mainhand - offhand spam every-single-round.  Non champion fighters have more moving parts and are also more flavorful.  Battlemaster is widely accepted as the best of the bunch, but probably also the most confusing for new players.  Samurai is probably the most newb friendly, Eldritch Knight is probably the best /learner/ class in the game in general as you have the opportunity to learn some magic, but if you don't use it...you've still got a pretty solid fighter chassis to fall back on.  EK is forgiving of bad picks.

Barbarians though, are simple enough that if you make no choices, you'll still be effective spamming the attack action.  It's not ideal mind you, but you won't outright suck.  barbarian though /does/ have rage, reckless attack and other cool features though to make things feel more interesting when you play.  Barbs are definitely what I'd recommend for a first timer with thier big hit die and the ability to soak damage (rather than avoid it) via rage.  That makes an incredibly flavorful, yet forgiving of mistakes character.

Rogue is more complex than it looks because you need to try and get advantage in order to get it's sneak attack...which is what makes it special.  That can be easy or difficult depending on how you set the character up...but for a new player, how you go about getting that advantage may not lead to intuitive or fun character picks.

Monk, definitely would not recommend.  Monk players in general can't even agree if the class is good or not, let alone how to get the most out of it.  The chances for a new player picking it up and doing well with it are slim.  The best hope would be that they simply do not know how poorly they are doing.

I don't know about this. I understand that for some people, picking a simple class can ease them into the game before they move onto the more complicated stuff, but my first character was a grave domain cleric, and I loved the complexity. Preparing new spells based on what I thought would happen the next day, saving my party members from certain death with circle of mortality, cursing the boss so my paladin friend could land a huge smite on it, and occasionally hopping into the front lines to deliver some inflicted wounds made me feel like a flexible and powerful asset to my party.

I believe that if you give your new players too simplistic classes, they will think the game is monotonous. Now I understand not everyone is ready to handle a cleric, druid, or wizard, so I say give them paladins. If you want to go the simple route, it's simple: I roll to hit. I hit. I'm going to add a divine smite on that. But for players who want to experiment, the channel divinity options provided by subclasses are unique but pretty simple, spell slots are super easy to keep track of with D&D Beyond, the prepared spells aren't too complicated, a lot of them just add more damage, and they can change spells out after a long rest to give your players some choice. Also, divine smite and the bonus action smite spells make rolling a nat 20 so much more exciting. Your newbie still has heavy armor and a d10 for hit dice, so they aren't going to feel super vulnerable as long as there's another melee combat character in the group.

From what's listed I have to say Barb. Simple enough, but also vast in how you can configure their subclasses over time so the player feels like their progression through the game is good mechanically and the Barb gives plenty of RP stuff depending on the setting / ingenuity of the player. It also lets you just trash things when you need to or just WAAAGH! and get things done in combat with little regard.

But that said I have to agree with GreatMageSteve about the Paladin. It's just complex enough to remain interesting as well while maintaining power and a pleasant mix of skills to help the newer player keep track of things. Also if they do miss something with Paladin, its not likely the end of the world.

My new player wanted to be a rogue, so I told her, "Your special attack is "sneak attack." Basic tactics? Just hit what the fighter hits and you can use it. (Or if you've happened to sneak up on someone, but we're less worried about that right now.)"

Worked like a charm, she loved it, and she can grow into the other abilities as she plays!

Part of the problem with this is that different people think about things differently, and that crosses over heavily into class selection and character theme.  Some people are really good at running interference for other people.  Those individuals would find it easy to understand playing some types of Fighter, Barbarian, Paladin, and Cleric.  Other people are better at sitting on the perimeter of the fight, and either attacking from there (Ranger, some types of Bard, some types of Fighter, some types of Rogue) or taking a more supportive role (most kinds of Cleric, some kinds of Druid, some kinds of Bard, some kinds of Artificer).

For me, in every game I play I always gravitate toward the magic users.  Wizard and Sorcerer speak to me.  Cleric is also a possibility, as is Warlock.  Spellcasting is just what I understand, using a wide array of effects to either attack or redirect the enemy.

Without knowing anything about a given individual, it's really really hard to suggest a class that would be "easy" for someone to learn and to learn the game with.

It may be due to my race choice also simplifying it, tortle so armour is out of the process, but my Paladin is my first character (if you dont count my first ever session where i was the DM). I have also played a fighter during an oneshot. they are both quite easy in the early levels and, depending on your choices at the subclass choice levels, can have a bit of extra stuff to track.

Fighter, especially champion subclass. Literally you just go up to enemy, attack, repeat until its dead. Go to next enemy, attack, repeat until dead. Wether melee or ranged it's the same thing. You don't have features or special powers or stuff. Just you, a weapon and the attack action.

Also the reason I will never play it - by ******* christ is that boring. Effective? Yes. But way to basic and repetitive for me. But for some it may be a good way to be introduced into the game.

The other subclasses offer more, like battle master or eldritch knight, which feature additional effects and resource management. I think these are better for newbies who want to have a taste of variety. It could be a good practice run to other classes.

-

Barbarian, although similar to Fighter in main playing, still has features and requires more tactics. You can't really fight well at range, so you have to think about overcoming that restriction. You have the rage mechanic to add modifiers and resistence to certain types, you have reckless attack but it has a downside so you have to think about when to use it and really pay attention to adv/dis situations and the subclasses vary a lot - some like Totem add different tactics, some change a lot of the playstyle. Some have mechanics that require more thought.

Barbs are still easier than most class, but not as easy as Fighters in my opinion. I've known people who have been confused about some barbarian base class abilities, I've not met anyone confused about Fighter base class abilities.

-

Rogues require more understanding. Knowing when you get sneak attack can be tricky in some situations, especially since some subclasses change that, and you have to play with skirmishing tactics - you cannot just stay there attacking. Ideally you attack, move, hide, attack or something along these lines. You therefore have to be careful about the situation and landscape, you need to move around more tactfully. And unlike Fighter and Barbarian, you have a lot more out-of-combat stuff too. Rogues are the main members of the party who check for traps and sometimes rogues have to, well, go rogue - go on their own ahead to scout, assassinate, or because they're the only ones able to get around the guards without detection and stuff like that.

Rogues require a lot more thought and tactic to play well which can be a bit much for a newbie.

-

Monks are similar to Rogues in that they are also skirmishers - they are not the best for just standing there and attacking, they need to move around (there's a reason they get so much speed). Monks are also less effective at range, so tactical movement is key. Monks get a lot of features for both in and out of combat, and they also have resource management in ki. Out of all the classes they probably suffer the most from resource management in that you must use Ki to be properly effective but you can run out of it really quickly in a battle with no way of getting more until after the battle is over.

Monks are cool, but you have to really know what you're doing to be effective with them. There's a reason forums are filled with a very polarised view of monks between being "underpowered, almost useless" to "encounter-breakingly overpowered". Especially the Open-Hand subclass - Open-Hand Monks are probably the only ones who can one-turn-kill a Tarrasque, should dice be in your favour. If you don't know what you're doing, you'll probably be downed quicker than the spellslingers.

Monks are assuredly not for newbies, at all.

Monks and rogues are actually not that simple but a new player can really do whatever they want if they take the time to learn the systems.  Monks especially have a lot going on. That said, my first character 20 years ago was a wizard and I did just fine.

I went with Barbarian as most noob friendly.  Fighters are pretty straight forward, especially champion.  However, they're pretty customizable which may be daunting.  Either one would be just fine though.

Quote from IamSposta >>

The Fighter class (in general) has the fewest moving parts to track all at the same time. That means that it’s easier to play that while learning the rules than it would be to play some of the other classes and learn the rules at the same time. Once you learn the rules fairly well, then the rest of the classes just add to them incrementally by comparison.

Edit: Fighter also has the absolute least restrictions on anything (like Monks and Barbarians cannot wear armor, and Monks and Rogues are restricted to specific weapon options), so that it lends itself more easily to any player concept.

Also, Fighters get the most ASIs of any class, which makes it more forgiving of “mistakes” in character progression choices made early on by less experienced players.

2nd Edit: You don’t have to pick the champion as the subclass, there are other subclasses. The Samurai or Arcane Archer (or maybe even Cavalier) would both probably be good choices for new players. Eldritch Knight adds spellcasting, and I would personally save that mechanic for a second character. Battle Master is generally considered the “best,” but it’s can be a bit much to juggle while also still learning the rules.

If you do go Barbarian, don’t pick the Berzerker. There are some... disappointments with the features that might frustrate a new player enough to not have fun.

 Monks can wear armor: I had one with negative wis and leather armor (it was a dwarf) a pretty decent character build lol.

Well, sure, okay, they can wear armor. But it is not a build for a new player just learning things.

Quote from I_Love_Tarrasques >>

Quote from IamSposta >>

The Fighter class (in general) has the fewest moving parts to track all at the same time. That means that it’s easier to play that while learning the rules than it would be to play some of the other classes and learn the rules at the same time. Once you learn the rules fairly well, then the rest of the classes just add to them incrementally by comparison.

Edit: Fighter also has the absolute least restrictions on anything (like Monks and Barbarians cannot wear armor, and Monks and Rogues are restricted to specific weapon options), so that it lends itself more easily to any player concept.

Also, Fighters get the most ASIs of any class, which makes it more forgiving of “mistakes” in character progression choices made early on by less experienced players.

2nd Edit: You don’t have to pick the champion as the subclass, there are other subclasses. The Samurai or Arcane Archer (or maybe even Cavalier) would both probably be good choices for new players. Eldritch Knight adds spellcasting, and I would personally save that mechanic for a second character. Battle Master is generally considered the “best,” but it’s can be a bit much to juggle while also still learning the rules.

If you do go Barbarian, don’t pick the Berzerker. There are some... disappointments with the features that might frustrate a new player enough to not have fun.

 Monks can wear armor: I had one with negative wis and leather armor (it was a dwarf) a pretty decent character build lol.

Monks are not proficient in light armor.  You'd have to take the feat that gives you proficiency with it or "you have disadvantage on any ability check, saving throw, or Attack roll that involves Strength or Dexterity, and you can’t cast Spells."

There’s feats and Multiclassing for that, which is why I said it is less than ideal for a new player.

It was a dwarf.

Out of those four I'd say Rogue. Monks are a bit too specialized, Barbarians are risky and Fighters can be a bit too simplistic which can make them boring. Rogues on the other hand can do decent damage (I like the "hit what the fighter hits"-advice) and do other things in combat (so you don't have to be super careful about the whole "action vs bonus action" thing) and they have lots of skills and utility outside of combat which means that they are fun to play since they will more often succeed at, say investigating a room unlike the poor Fighter or Barbarian who doesn't have enough skills to do that.

The best class for any player is the one they want to play.

Lay out the basic four. Give them a rough outline of what they do. 

Start playing. They will pick it up because its who they want to be.

If they want to whack things, let them.

If they want to cast spells, let them.

If you hand a Fighter to a Harry Potter fan, they will get disenchanted quick. Especially when a different player gets to be a wizard.

One of the great things about Fighter is that it's an easy class the multiclass out of.  Take some levels of fighter, then swap over to wizard, cleric, druid, rogue, or whatever and you've got free proficiency with all weapons and armor, constitution as a proficient save, and a fighting style.  Not a bad deal.

Quote from Wysperra >>

The best class for any player is the one they want to play.

Lay out the basic four. Give them a rough outline of what they do. 

Start playing. They will pick it up because its who they want to be.

If they want to whack things, let them.

If they want to cast spells, let them.

If you hand a Fighter to a Harry Potter fan, they will get disenchanted quick. Especially when a different player gets to be a wizard.

 Love this advice!

Also, just because classes can have complicated, optimized tactics doesn't mean a new player has to fight that way. It's not the end of the world if they aren't super efficient at first--they can grow into it! Just start off by saying "Here are 2 simple, default attacks/spells. Once you get the hang of these, we can show you more." 

Heck, if they want to be a druid cause shapeshifting appeals to them, give them 1-2 climbing/exploring creatures (cat/spider/etc) and one fighting creature to start. Let them pick something that appeals to them (wolf? panther?), and let them know that more options are on the way as they get the hang of it. 

As to whether they die the first couple of times they play...the DM has a good bit of control over that! Hopefully they aren't out to crush a brand new player.