|
For a melee, I agree on Fighter. As for casters, I would recommend Sorcerer or Oracle, as they have limited spell lists, so you only need to know those spells that you chose for yourself. With a Cleric, you can pick any spells from the Cleric list for a given day, so should have a decent knowledge of what's available for you.
|
As a beginner, I would suggest avoiding prepared casters, they are more complicated then spontaneous casters, since prepared casters have to choose how many times they want to be able to cast each spell ahead of time, while spontaneous casters can use any spell that they know so long as they have spells remaining.
For melee types, Fighter and Barbarian are both easy in their own way, Fighters get a lot of choices and make it harder to make mistakes with feats since they get one every level, where as barbarians are more simple - they get mad and kill things.
The age categories are a good indication of how 'simple' a class is in my opinion, Barbarian, Oracle, Sorcerer, and Rogue - the Intuitive classes, are going to be easier to pick up, though they can be harder to recover from early mistakes (however with level 1 rebuild, this is less of an issue). Note that the highest age category for player characters is nearly all prepared spell casters (except monk, which is complicated in it's own way).
I mean think about it, if it takes 1-4 years for a human to become a level 1 barbarian after adulthood or 2-12 years to become a monk, which one do you think is going to be less complicated?
Now, this is not to say that beginners cannot handle the 'Trained' classes, and parties will always welcome a cleric, but in my opinion, the 'Intuitive' classes are easier to pick up.
Fighter.
Take a two handed weapon. Move, hit. Move, hit. There are no decisions to make, no rounds of rage to burn no spells to look up, your entire character is on the sheet.
By the time you do anything more complicated you'll have advice from someone at the table and a little experience of your own to weigh in with.
|
I think it's a bit easier to say which classes to avoid, as they demand complex builds/good game knowledge
-Prepared Casters (Cleric, Wizard, Witch)
-Complex Combat Mechanics/Too Many Moving Parts (Cavalier/Samurai, Monk, Magus, Alchemist, Gunslinger, Inquisitor, Paladin, Wild Shape Druid, Ninja)
-Build A Pet (Summoner, Companion Druid)
-Does Everything Classes; Makes Teaching them specific combat roles harder (Bard, Druid, Paladin)
Prepared classes aren't entirely off the table, but they require some preparation on the player's part of learn the spell list. I generally recommend new players play Rangers, Sorcerer/Oracle, or Fighters first. Rogues and Barbarians are done so with some guidance on how the class works.
Rangers are a great first combat class as the player can pick a combat style and an enemy they want to be good at fighting; easy things to grasp early in learning the game with a structure that shows you what feats you'll need. By the time the Animal Companion comes into play, they've got 4 levels under their belt. The companion is also not integral to their success in combat, so mistakes in creating it are easier to recover from.
Sorcerers/Oracles are good first casters because the player can pick a theme and get a pre-made structure to fulfill that theme, with a built in mechanic to swap out spells later on.
Rogues, Fighters, & Barbarians are good first choices, but require more guidance (Feat/Rage Power/Talent Selection, Stat Changes from Raging, Good Trap Protocol, Necessary Skills for the Rogue, Etc.) Fighters are useful for being simple if necessary.
I would also not recommend rogues for beginners, since they really need a deep tactical understanding.
Fighters, Paladins, Rangers should all be ok though.
|
|
Before paladins get their more complex stuff, like spells (and they don't get that many of them anyways) and divine bond, which happen at levels four and five, they're quite straightforward. I was recommended a paladin for a simple build last summer, and now she's level eight. Most of the playing her has been the routine of "start moving towards the enemy, drawing my weapon, move next to them, attack, next turn; if I have taken damage, add one use of lay on hands before or after the attack".
Though if you don't want to play a goody two-shoes type of character, paladins are not your thing.
Barbarians I think would work quite easily as well, less feats to ponder about, just get angry and start hitting stuff with nice, big weapons.
|
|
I don't understand why you would say rogues are ok but ninjas are not. As far as I can tell, ninjas aren't any more complicated than rogues, unless you're referring to the whole ki pool thing. Other than that, ninjas are just rogues with a better weapon proficiency list and tricks instead of talents.
Ki-Pool & Poison Use push the class into the "too many moving parts" realm for me to be comfortable suggesting it to a new player.
Of course, if any new player walks up, sees Ninja, and wants to play one I'm certainly not going to argue. Same goes for any class considered "advanced" that someone gets really excited about. Said excitement is a great tool for teaching them not just the class but also the game, so I want to tap into that.
Melee: (one weapon) Ranger over Fighter. The mechanics are similar enough, but then they get some salient skills to do heroic things like jump, climb, swim, sneak, notice enemies, etc. Newbies will think their hero can do these things (or will want to after seeing others do them), even if he can't.
Note: There's a lot of risk in the frontline to newbies who don't know a ghoul from a zombie or a Warrior w/ sword and shield from a raging Barbarian with a greataxe. Or what reach means.
Also, in PFS, the frontline is often congested as lots of people play melee characters in those 5'-10' areas.
Ranged: Archer (Fighter/Ranger/et al). This is the easiest role for a newbie. They're less likely to get in anybody's way (charge lanes/AoEs) and won't have to risk themselves to contribute, nor will they have to take stupid risks just to get a swing in before the battle's over.
(Lack of game knowledge less a factor if not having to gauge risks.)
Caster: Sorcerer. Oracle's nice, but only if it has nice ranged offense and isn't primarily a healer.
Give them Toughness, and they should survive.
Cheers, JMK
Seriously, someone actually USES the poison use feature? Regularly?
That's kind of like basing a druid character design around Trackless Step. Sure, it's nice situationally, but it's not something you'll be using in every battle. Or even often, unless it's a specific sort of campaign.
One Archetype someone new might play is the Kitsune Trickster. You get a little bit of access to spells and the Rogue.
But for a beginner, I would stay away from casters as much as possible. Unless that person has no problem with keeping track of spells, then a Bard or Paladin might be fine. I wouldn't touch a Ranger for a beginner just because of having to figure out what to do with favored enemy and terrains.
It all depends on where the 'newbie' is on the learning track.
|
Barbarians the way to go for a new player, simple yet effective. Doesn't get intimidated by all the feats but is durable and has a lot of cool abilities. Magic wise cleric and sorcerer is your best options due to all the preplanning a wizard needs. Cleric gives you EP guidelines and rather simple to a new commer.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the most rewarding easy character is a switch hitting ranger. You are decent at melee and ranged combat, you have alot of skills to contribute so you don't feel useless, and at lvl 4 you can play around with some spells that aren't too taxing or game breaking either way. You don't have to be too feat intense to be viable. I would stay away from animal companions at first though.
i recommend starting them as a bard, it allows them to experiment with a little of everything and find out what they like.
easiest my group has found, is get an example of what they want to play. [esp for the star wars campaign, but works otherwise] Then help them build off of that. definitely start at level 1.
Fighter, is harder to setup but generally easier to play. I admit, though, ranger for the most part, is the simplist to work I think. (Char sheet has multiple attack lines, use one for the favored enemy/power atk/spells/non-power attack)
For caster, sorc is simplish (depending on type and game), or cleric, or I would actually say alchemist (though I would bring alchy slow. work with mostly bombs, etc and build him up from there)
Depends mostly on how much he is doing on his own, and how much you are helping with. If you (and i mean group/dm) are helping him every step of the way, almost any class works. [I'd nix summoner though I love it, and wizard].
Overall, I'd say a sorc is the easiest. A blaster sorc. But any requires help to learn (welcome to complex ruleset games)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think ranger makes a good choice to learn the game. You start out as a pretty good martial type with only a couple special abilities like favored enemy, then after a few levels you get an animal companion and a few spells. This lets you learn different aspects of the game gradually. Plus they have some nice skills which is always a good thing.
fighter is the most simple class there is! :-)
for building it you need to select 1 feat each lvl thats it between lvling its move attack! move attack!