Hey Guys,

The Chinese New Year is coming up and so I thought I'd introduce my daughter to D&D as we have some time.  I'm an experienced DM but I've never run an adventure like this before.  I am planning to create two archetypes for her to choose between and have the other for her to command, but RPd by me, to give her any necessary pointers.  I honestly don't know what type of game she'd like to play yet or which of the pillars she will be most interested in. 

So my question is - if there were only two PCs, which combination would cover the most bases (pillars)?

My recommendation is for both characters to be able to heal the other. That is, given, a wide range, so the two most important roles to be filled are melee/tank and ranged/damage. With those two ideas, my thoughts lead to Paladin and Ranger.

I'd suggest you ask her what she'd like to play... and adapt accordingly....her experience will be much different than if she's playing a class she doesn't like

You don't have a healer? make it so that healing potion are pretty common and used as a bonus action....you can find ways to adapt to make her happy...

She wants to be a mage which has low survivability?  Have your NPC be a tank that can give his life for her as she escape....and hire a new NPC....give her extra spell slot... whatever suits what you're going to run

The campaign that i'm running, i've allowed the players to get a free feat at level 1 (but banned variant human so that they couldn't double down) which is pretty cool.  Lucky feat might be of interest...considering that a few fails when you're only two players might be more critical than when you have other players that can cover for you.  Orc might also be interesting to come back up with 1 HP... but then again she may want to play a specific race too.

But otherwise, to give a suggestion; As for a combo, you need a reliable Tank and a reliable DPS with the ability to heal and have enough HP.  The previous suggestion seem to be the better choice as the key word here is reliable.  Hunter can also act as a support for instance to add to the action economy, escape or funnel with it's available spells to choose from.

Two bards with different subclasses. Or just let her play whatever she likes, and you play a bard. They can cover most of the bases in a pinch. 

Actually, come to think of it, you might let her play whatever, and you play one of the sidekick classes to compliment her choice.

Druid is usually my go to in a small party. They are very versatile and can compliment most any partner. I’m currently playing a spores druid alongside a goo warlock, for example. Paladin is often a good choice for beginners. They are very resilient and have a chassis that is quite forgiving of rookie choice-making. That said, I’d encourage her to play what she likes and make a druid to fill the gaps. 

Bard might work. Druids, paladins, and clerics also are good options, but to play a cleric you sort of need to know your D&D deities. I would say druid and bard, and you can replace one of those with a non-spellcaster.

Hey all,

I just wanted to say a big thanks and let you know the outcome.  She wanted to be somebody who loves nature but could also do magic, so we decided on a Circle of the Moon Druid.  The DMPC will be a Clockwork Soul Sorcerer - thought it would make for interesting odd couple role playing.

Quote from GameMasterTheo >>

Bard might work. Druids, paladins, and clerics also are good options, but to play a cleric you sort of need to know your D&D deities. I would say druid and bard, and you can replace one of those with a non-spellcaster.

 Just sayin', you definitely are not required to know the deities of whatever world you're playing in to be able to play a cleric. They usually serve a god, yes, but knowing (or not knowing) who that god is (from the player's point of view) doesn't have any mechanical impact. Plus, the deities in different worlds are most often different, and a DM might customize them or create an entirely new pantheon or system. Or just have a world with no gods at all.