Got a new - and newish to DnD - player interested in joining my table, so we're going to trial them and see how they like it (trial more for whether they like it, and of course table dynamics).
A couple of the people at the table were themselves newish and have picked up a lot of the core player skills by now, so I'm not worried for that exactly. What I am worried about though is that the table is at level 6. It wouldn't really be fun if we had most folks at once level and then one person at a lower level I think, though this is an option I suppose. But for a newish player, coming in at level 6 might be overwhelming right?
So, what would help me is to soundboard some of the "best" classes to jump into an existing game with for someone like them. They're up for a bit of a challenge, but they also asked me for my advice on what classes might be easier than others. So what I'll present to them is a vetted order with a bit of rationale for why, and then let them decide who they think would be fun.
Not all the classes are available given the nature of my campaign, nor are all the subclasses. We're using the 2024 rules for him. We have then:
Paladin (homebrewed oath)
Fighter (any)
Sorcerer (Wild Magic, Aberrant)
Warlock (Genie)
Bard (Dance and Creation are the two I'd encourage, thematically, but any could probably work)
Druid (any, but Wildfire would be thematic)
Ranger (they've expressed more interest in this than not, though not all subclasses are created equal)
If they are new, I would recommend a melee character (Fighter, Barbarian or Rogue {if you allow them}, followed by simpler hybrids (Ranger, Druid, Paladin). I try to discourage new to ttrpg players from full casters as their first character because of analysis paralysis during combat. Something where they have a more limited number of options until they get comfortable with combat. If they are experienced with other RPGs and play a lot of casters, then they can possibly handle casters, especially Warlock and Sorcerer.
Champion doesn't have a lot of complexity and the feeling of getting to crit on 19s and 20s always feels good.
Simple is good, but make sure it has at least some optional complexity. My very first character was a fighter, and I quickly grew annoyed with not having much to do outside of combat (and not having many levers to pull in general).
What does the current party look like? If there's an unfilled niche, giving the new player a place to shine would be a good way to bring them in.
Simple is good, but make sure it has at least some optional complexity. My very first character was a fighter, and I quickly grew annoyed with not having much to do outside of combat (and not having many levers to pull in general).
What does the current party look like? If there's an unfilled niche, giving the new player a place to shine would be a good way to bring them in.
This is a great question, and we're actually kinda good in terms of how folks are playing. Some people are up in the mix, some people are hanging back. Pretty much everyone is classed in a way that lets them be melee or ranged/spellcasting – which means, nobody is min-maxed really, but everyone feels like they can adjust. A lot of the core skills are represented and even most tool proficiencies.
So, saying "no" to the new player was certainly an option. But the party members themselves were like "sure yeah!" and you know, it's a challenge for me too as the DM and I can't shy away from that growth.
The newish player has played some short games before so they aren't totally like "what's this funny dice" level of new. I think presenting them the spectrum with some honest pros/cons is the best I can do as a DM to support them, with perhaps my own bias towards someone that can do a bit more than a champion fighter so that they're kinda forced into learning basic spellcasting.
Based on what I'm seeing folks say elsewhere, it's like
EASIEST > HARDEST (from my list; I guess I could add barbarian)
Fighter (Champ)/Barbarian (I dunno, Zerker or Beast) > Paladin/Warlock (heavy to build, easy-ish to play)/Ranger/Fighter (the others) > Bard/Sorcerer/Druid
Though it is a really rubbish class in the 2024 ruleset (and the 2014 version too) I'd recommend the Ranger for a new player at this level.
The reasoning is very simple. It has all the benefits of a simple fighter, but gives the player the option of learning and exploring the magic system and resources like spell slots.
Run a one shot for familiarization of the system. That way they don't get overwhelmed with choices and won't be under leveled (and die). This fosters a positive group dynamic as well.
I would recommend against any class that prepares spells, because just looking through that list can be a bit of a time sink. Less of an issue for a class that can't change spells on a long rest, though I think bard might not be the most satisfying starting experience, most people would rather start out by hitting things, not being support.
So, the Easy options are probably
Barbarian (fighter): can't get a lot simpler than "I rage and attack", and that will do an adequate job for most barbarian subclasses.
Fighter (champion): slightly more resource management (the barbarian only has to worry about rages, the fighter has both second wind and action surge and has more than one use for second wind) but still a very straightforward play style. I don't really recommend it, though, because the Champion is kind of bad before tier 3.
Every other option is noticeably more complex. However, a lot of the complexity can be safely ignored for some classes because you don't really need to make use of a lot of options.
Fighter (eldritch knight): You'll do okay if you can remember that you know shield.
Paladin: You'll do okay if you remember how divine smite works.
Ranger: You'll do okay if you remember how hunter's mark works.
Warlock: the hex/eldritch blast/agonizing build is leaving a bit more potential on the table than the others mentioned above, but is still functional.
I would recommend against any class that prepares spells, because just looking through that list can be a bit of a time sink. Less of an issue for a class that can't change spells on a long rest, though I think bard might not be the most satisfying starting experience, most people would rather start out by hitting things, not being support.
So, the Easy options are probably
Barbarian (fighter): can't get a lot simpler than "I rage and attack", and that will do an adequate job for most barbarian subclasses.
Fighter (champion): slightly more resource management (the barbarian only has to worry about rages, the fighter has both second wind and action surge and has more than one use for second wind) but still a very straightforward play style. I don't really recommend it, though, because the Champion is kind of bad before tier 3.
Every other option is noticeably more complex. However, a lot of the complexity can be safely ignored for some classes because you don't really need to make use of a lot of options.
Fighter (eldritch knight): You'll do okay if you can remember that you know shield.
Paladin: You'll do okay if you remember how divine smite works.
Ranger: You'll do okay if you remember how hunter's mark works.
Warlock: the hex/eldritch blast/agonizing build is leaving a bit more potential on the table than the others mentioned above, but is still functional.
Can always count on you Pantagruel. And everyone else who's been on this thread.
Alrighty, I'm getting enough of a "trend" to get a sense of what to narrow this down to: 1) barbarian, 2) fighter, 3) paladin, 4) ranger, and 5) warlock. Not a huge reduction but still.
In terms of 2024 subclasses/expanded, it seems like almost any of the barbarian classes are pretty straightforward. Fighter seems easiest as a champion/samurai and scales up with the others (I myself have played a lot of fighters, it's probably my favorite go-to class but a lot of what makes it fun is what you bring to it as a role-player. Same with barbarian I imagine). So that's where I'm thinking I say "these are the simplest to get good at".
Followed by: the other fighter subclasses (owing to a step-up in potential actions besides hitting things), the paladin home-brew oath (mainly in tracking smites and channel divinities and preparing spells), and ranger (hunter or beast master, where it's a mix of managing spells/BAs and possibly a pet). Either of these latter two could be good middle-grounds for someone who wants to play melee, ranged, spellcasting, or utility. I'd probably put hunter as easier than BM since you don't need to think about two things' attacks on a turn.
Lastly, the warlock – which I agree with some folks isn't that hard to play, but does require some hand-holding to set up. They'd be limited to the Genie so at least that question is resolved, and once an invocation is picked you just live with it. Looks like 2024 got rid of the Pacts so, maybe this is now a bit easier than before – you just pick your patron and spells and invocations.
How is this line up with folks' perceptions based on their experiences?
I think you should ask them what type of hero archetype they want to be and let them play that. Just because the party is level 6 doesn't mean the new play doesn't deserve a session 0.
Doesn't matter if it's a caster. Choose the initial load out for them to cover gaps in party abilities and explain in general terms what the spells do.
I wouldn't pigeon hole them into "easy" classes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
I agree with the others, the main thing for coming in at level 6 as a new player is to avoid having too many features you need to learn how they work. The big one there is spellcasting since a full spellcaster at that level has 10+ spells prepared and probably 50+ to pick from which can be overwhelming and lead to the new player picking "bad" spells or forgetting what their spells do so not knowing when they should use them.
So: Monk is actually the most simple, they have almost no choices to make when building them, and only a few option in combat to keep track of. Barbarian/Fighter are next since Weapon Mastery is a effectively a mini-version of spellcasting in 2024, but are pretty easy to play Paladin/Ranger next as they have some spellcasting that is important to making their character be effective, but not too much. Warlock next as they don't have that many options in combat, but are a ton of work to build. Bard/Sorcerer then Druid/Wizard are the most complex, with lots of spells to learn and for Druid also all the beastshapes to learn as well.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hey fellow DMs,
Got a new - and newish to DnD - player interested in joining my table, so we're going to trial them and see how they like it (trial more for whether they like it, and of course table dynamics).
A couple of the people at the table were themselves newish and have picked up a lot of the core player skills by now, so I'm not worried for that exactly. What I am worried about though is that the table is at level 6. It wouldn't really be fun if we had most folks at once level and then one person at a lower level I think, though this is an option I suppose. But for a newish player, coming in at level 6 might be overwhelming right?
So, what would help me is to soundboard some of the "best" classes to jump into an existing game with for someone like them. They're up for a bit of a challenge, but they also asked me for my advice on what classes might be easier than others. So what I'll present to them is a vetted order with a bit of rationale for why, and then let them decide who they think would be fun.
Not all the classes are available given the nature of my campaign, nor are all the subclasses. We're using the 2024 rules for him. We have then:
Thanks for the input!
If they are new, I would recommend a melee character (Fighter, Barbarian or Rogue {if you allow them}, followed by simpler hybrids (Ranger, Druid, Paladin). I try to discourage new to ttrpg players from full casters as their first character because of analysis paralysis during combat. Something where they have a more limited number of options until they get comfortable with combat. If they are experienced with other RPGs and play a lot of casters, then they can possibly handle casters, especially Warlock and Sorcerer.
Champion doesn't have a lot of complexity and the feeling of getting to crit on 19s and 20s always feels good.
Simple is good, but make sure it has at least some optional complexity. My very first character was a fighter, and I quickly grew annoyed with not having much to do outside of combat (and not having many levers to pull in general).
What does the current party look like? If there's an unfilled niche, giving the new player a place to shine would be a good way to bring them in.
This is a great question, and we're actually kinda good in terms of how folks are playing. Some people are up in the mix, some people are hanging back. Pretty much everyone is classed in a way that lets them be melee or ranged/spellcasting – which means, nobody is min-maxed really, but everyone feels like they can adjust. A lot of the core skills are represented and even most tool proficiencies.
So, saying "no" to the new player was certainly an option. But the party members themselves were like "sure yeah!" and you know, it's a challenge for me too as the DM and I can't shy away from that growth.
The newish player has played some short games before so they aren't totally like "what's this funny dice" level of new. I think presenting them the spectrum with some honest pros/cons is the best I can do as a DM to support them, with perhaps my own bias towards someone that can do a bit more than a champion fighter so that they're kinda forced into learning basic spellcasting.
Based on what I'm seeing folks say elsewhere, it's like
EASIEST > HARDEST (from my list; I guess I could add barbarian)
Fighter (Champ)/Barbarian (I dunno, Zerker or Beast) > Paladin/Warlock (heavy to build, easy-ish to play)/Ranger/Fighter (the others) > Bard/Sorcerer/Druid
Though it is a really rubbish class in the 2024 ruleset (and the 2014 version too) I'd recommend the Ranger for a new player at this level.
The reasoning is very simple. It has all the benefits of a simple fighter, but gives the player the option of learning and exploring the magic system and resources like spell slots.
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
Melee classes for a first PC.
Run a one shot for familiarization of the system. That way they don't get overwhelmed with choices and won't be under leveled (and die). This fosters a positive group dynamic as well.
I would recommend against any class that prepares spells, because just looking through that list can be a bit of a time sink. Less of an issue for a class that can't change spells on a long rest, though I think bard might not be the most satisfying starting experience, most people would rather start out by hitting things, not being support.
So, the Easy options are probably
Every other option is noticeably more complex. However, a lot of the complexity can be safely ignored for some classes because you don't really need to make use of a lot of options.
Can always count on you Pantagruel. And everyone else who's been on this thread.
Alrighty, I'm getting enough of a "trend" to get a sense of what to narrow this down to: 1) barbarian, 2) fighter, 3) paladin, 4) ranger, and 5) warlock. Not a huge reduction but still.
In terms of 2024 subclasses/expanded, it seems like almost any of the barbarian classes are pretty straightforward. Fighter seems easiest as a champion/samurai and scales up with the others (I myself have played a lot of fighters, it's probably my favorite go-to class but a lot of what makes it fun is what you bring to it as a role-player. Same with barbarian I imagine). So that's where I'm thinking I say "these are the simplest to get good at".
Followed by: the other fighter subclasses (owing to a step-up in potential actions besides hitting things), the paladin home-brew oath (mainly in tracking smites and channel divinities and preparing spells), and ranger (hunter or beast master, where it's a mix of managing spells/BAs and possibly a pet). Either of these latter two could be good middle-grounds for someone who wants to play melee, ranged, spellcasting, or utility. I'd probably put hunter as easier than BM since you don't need to think about two things' attacks on a turn.
Lastly, the warlock – which I agree with some folks isn't that hard to play, but does require some hand-holding to set up. They'd be limited to the Genie so at least that question is resolved, and once an invocation is picked you just live with it. Looks like 2024 got rid of the Pacts so, maybe this is now a bit easier than before – you just pick your patron and spells and invocations.
How is this line up with folks' perceptions based on their experiences?
I think you should ask them what type of hero archetype they want to be and let them play that. Just because the party is level 6 doesn't mean the new play doesn't deserve a session 0.
Doesn't matter if it's a caster. Choose the initial load out for them to cover gaps in party abilities and explain in general terms what the spells do.
I wouldn't pigeon hole them into "easy" classes.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
I agree with the others, the main thing for coming in at level 6 as a new player is to avoid having too many features you need to learn how they work. The big one there is spellcasting since a full spellcaster at that level has 10+ spells prepared and probably 50+ to pick from which can be overwhelming and lead to the new player picking "bad" spells or forgetting what their spells do so not knowing when they should use them.
So:
Monk is actually the most simple, they have almost no choices to make when building them, and only a few option in combat to keep track of.
Barbarian/Fighter are next since Weapon Mastery is a effectively a mini-version of spellcasting in 2024, but are pretty easy to play
Paladin/Ranger next as they have some spellcasting that is important to making their character be effective, but not too much.
Warlock next as they don't have that many options in combat, but are a ton of work to build.
Bard/Sorcerer then Druid/Wizard are the most complex, with lots of spells to learn and for Druid also all the beastshapes to learn as well.