D&D 5E How well can you make your favourite character?

[Jester David]

So far, we've seen six and (two half) classes and four races.
For those of you who have favourite characters covered by the playtest, how well can you recreate them? How well does 5e let you emulate or reimagine old favorites? Can you do it at low levels or only higher levels? Does the addition of background help create any characters?

 

[Bluenose]

Ranger. No.
Warlord. No.
Fighter/Mage. No.
Fighter/Thief. No.
Wizard. Yes. Background helps.
Fighter. No, because the non-combat abilities he got from his particular set of stats and NWPs/Skills can't be duplicated in Next. He's also a lot easier to take out magically than he should be.

 

[Garthanos]

I have some issues deciding on my favorite character.... if I stick with my absolute favorite and use the previous packet.. with the Sorcerer .. I do have to admit next manages fairly well. The other faves starting with a Warlord almost not at all.

 

[n00bdragon]

My favorite characters tend to be spellswords and gish but I also like mixing it up with straight up meaty men who can carve around in melee combat. An archer can be cool too though.

None of these look like fun to play in 5e. I want to knock people around with my blows in a meaningful way or light people on fire with my flaming sword. The 5e fighter just does damage damage and more damage. Heaven help you if you want to be useful outside of dealing damage.

 

[YRUSirius]

Uh... you can still improvise an action with a fighter reasonably well?

Just because you don't have a maneuver called "Push" doesn't mean you can't push an enemy into the reach of another ally...

-YRUSirius

 

[Garthanos]

Uh... you can still improvise an action with a fighter reasonably well?

Just because you don't have a maneuver called "Push" doesn't mean you can't push an enemy into the reach of another ally...

-YRUSirius

The results would be as useful as t on a b. You are perfectly free to waste any action you like...

OK I am exaggerating but unless there is a cliff for them to go off... meh.

 

[YRUSirius]

Hm, I don't see that. A fighter prolly has good strength so he can do improvised actions that contest his opponents attributes, like a push. A warrior without weapons has a better chance to push a goblin into lava than a weak wizard without spells.

But let's try to go back to favorite characters: Tyrion Lannister or Jon Snow seem to be fairly easy to create.

-YRUSirius

 

[Garthanos]

In 4e if my warlord pushes an enemy in to reach of an ally the ally gets an extra attack and a bonus based on my tactical capabilities. The improvise you mention would have to give the ally both an extra reaction and advantage to put it in to Next turns.

 

[YRUSirius]

Only if I want to emulate the 4E warlord but improvise actions would not be useless if I wanted to do something effective with my fighter other than doing damage. Creativity.

-YRUSirius

 

[The Shadow]

Considering my favorite D&D character is a 1) gnomish 2) multiclass thief-3) illusionist, not very well at present.

And no, the current Illusionist wizard tradition is not an adequate substitute even for the 2e specialist, much less the 1e class. The whole point in playing an illusionist, as I see it, is that you *can't * fall back on evocation damage, you have to be sneaky and creative.