I need some second opinions both on what you guys think will be more fun and more useful.
I am about to start a game this weekend and I came up with a pretty cool character! She's a Centaur that believes in reclaiming the "wild lands" or nature in the name of the Fey. She wants to restore harmony in nature form the "industrialists" and civilization. And she is very much going to do this using violence. Lots of violence.
My first reaction was to make her an Oath of Conquest Paladin. I liked the idea of her being this Noble Fey who looks down on "filthy industrialists" aka humans. I liked Oath of Conquest because I thought it was a cool idea to run her as this fully plated knight that will storm into battle with a lance like heavy Calvary. I'm starting to think about her potential as a Barbarian though.
I think I could still play a pretty regal Barbarian who's just an aggressive stomping Calvary unit. The Totem barbarian could give me some cool nature stuff too. I don't want to multiclass though.
I started thinking like this because I found out what my party was going to be. We have a: DPS Bard, Cleric, Blasting Sorcerer, Blasting Wizard who wants high Cha, and a Rogue. As far as I'm aware, I will be the only one tanking in my party. The Cleric will probably front line with me, but has made it known that he intends to be the support of the group.
Both a Paladin and Barbarian could be great tanks, but I'm still torn. My Cha will not be very useful in this party. I almost feel like its worth it to double down on Str, Con, and Dex to be the wall of beef my party needs.
What do you guys think? I know both classes are good options, but is one objectively better here?Is it better to go full tank as Barbarian or should I use the Paladin for sustain? I love both classes, but I want some opinions since I'm so conflicted :/
Look up barding. It would have to be modified to have the torso for the humanoid half and the barding for the horse part, which could make it potentially more unique and more expensive depending on the DM.
As for the OP, it sounds like you'll have plenty of damage including some good potential burst. This might make the survival aspect much more intriguing. Furthermore, armor is a little more representative of what your character is trying to fight against. Going barbarian would allow her to eschew an additional symbol of civilization by foregoing the heavier armors at least. Plus, the image of a stampeding centaur that's in a rage is very appealing to me. That's it, I'm officially not happy with you since I now have another cool character concept that I probably won't get to explore.
I don't think either is clearly objectively better. Personally I like the Paladin from a role-play standpoint, but like you said, class doesn't limit your roleplaying, so I think it comes down to which class you like the mechanics of more!
I think both classes would work with a centaur. Personally, I think barbarian makes more sense thematically as centaurs are typically more "free and wild" than the stereotypical lawful paladin.
However, going from your party I'd recommend paladin paladins work well as general warriors, but they also have some magic tricks to help support their party. You already have plenty of damage from your wizard, sorcerer, and rogue. Paladin can output good enough damage to supplement them, while also helping out your cleric and bard with the support role. Though if bard and cleric are both thinking of going full support/heals, then a paladin might not be needed.
I love the theme of a barbarian centaur. Especially the way you described your character’s personality and goals. Even though it would be sub-optimal I can see you raging, charging into the middle of a group of enemies, and kicking behind you.
I need some second opinions both on what you guys think will be more fun and more useful.
I am about to start a game this weekend and I came up with a pretty cool character! She's a Centaur that believes in reclaiming the "wild lands" or nature in the name of the Fey. She wants to restore harmony in nature form the "industrialists" and civilization. And she is very much going to do this using violence. Lots of violence.
My first reaction was to make her an Oath of Conquest Paladin. I liked the idea of her being this Noble Fey who looks down on "filthy industrialists" aka humans. I liked Oath of Conquest because I thought it was a cool idea to run her as this fully plated knight that will storm into battle with a lance like heavy Calvary. I'm starting to think about her potential as a Barbarian though.
I think I could still play a pretty regal Barbarian who's just an aggressive stomping Calvary unit. The Totem barbarian could give me some cool nature stuff too. I don't want to multiclass though.
I started thinking like this because I found out what my party was going to be. We have a: DPS Bard, Cleric, Blasting Sorcerer, Blasting Wizard who wants high Cha, and a Rogue. As far as I'm aware, I will be the only one tanking in my party. The Cleric will probably front line with me, but has made it known that he intends to be the support of the group.
Both a Paladin and Barbarian could be great tanks, but I'm still torn. My Cha will not be very useful in this party. I almost feel like its worth it to double down on Str, Con, and Dex to be the wall of beef my party needs.
What do you guys think? I know both classes are good options, but is one objectively better here? Is it better to go full tank as Barbarian or should I use the Paladin for sustain? I love both classes, but I want some opinions since I'm so conflicted :/
I would argue Barbarian, i have a hard time to imagin a full plate armor for a horse torso.
Attack: [roll]3d20dl2+6[/roll] Damage: [roll](if([roll:-1:critical], =0, 1d8, 2{1d8}.expand()))+4[/roll] Sneakattack: [roll](if([roll:-2:critical], =0, 2d6, 2{2d6}.expand()))[/roll]Look up barding. It would have to be modified to have the torso for the humanoid half and the barding for the horse part, which could make it potentially more unique and more expensive depending on the DM.
As for the OP, it sounds like you'll have plenty of damage including some good potential burst. This might make the survival aspect much more intriguing. Furthermore, armor is a little more representative of what your character is trying to fight against. Going barbarian would allow her to eschew an additional symbol of civilization by foregoing the heavier armors at least. Plus, the image of a stampeding centaur that's in a rage is very appealing to me. That's it, I'm officially not happy with you since I now have another cool character concept that I probably won't get to explore.
Edit: ddb.ac/characters/18218916/nTV2vR
I don't think either is clearly objectively better. Personally I like the Paladin from a role-play standpoint, but like you said, class doesn't limit your roleplaying, so I think it comes down to which class you like the mechanics of more!
Wizard (Gandalf) of the Tolkien Club
I think both classes would work with a centaur. Personally, I think barbarian makes more sense thematically as centaurs are typically more "free and wild" than the stereotypical lawful paladin.
However, going from your party I'd recommend paladin paladins work well as general warriors, but they also have some magic tricks to help support their party. You already have plenty of damage from your wizard, sorcerer, and rogue. Paladin can output good enough damage to supplement them, while also helping out your cleric and bard with the support role. Though if bard and cleric are both thinking of going full support/heals, then a paladin might not be needed.
How to add tooltips on dndbeyond
I love the theme of a barbarian centaur. Especially the way you described your character’s personality and goals. Even though it would be sub-optimal I can see you raging, charging into the middle of a group of enemies, and kicking behind you.
Professional computer geek
I am a big fan of Centaur Rogue Scout.
and you have a halfling mounted combatant type that rides you as a friend/party member.
Blank