Best Character For A New Player?

[Odysseus]

The last time I had a player new to DnD . I asked him what sort of character he wanted to play, in role play terms not game terms. Then generated a character for him. Which worked out really well, and is an approach i'd recomend.

 

[Pseudopsyche]

I'm about to start a new campaign with a player that is completely new to D&D. He has roleplayed a bit before (a bit of Shadowrun and Star Wars) so he should be ok from that perspective. As such I was thinking of starting him out with a nice simple character, at least until he get the hang of the rules a little more. Once we have been playing for a bit and he knows what he's doing I'll let him change to a different PC if he wants.

One critical variable is the interest level of the new player. If he's new but dedicated to learning the game, help him with character creation to get him started but let him learn the system by doing. Even a sorceror is fine; he'll get the handle of his focused selection of spells before too long. If he's just a casual player, stay away from the magic system.

 

[CanadienneBacon]

I agree with the statement that new player does not necessarily equal bad player. I think I am a little wary because the last 2 players I have had that were new to D&D (or even just 3.xE) were quite slow to pick up on the rules. That may have been more to do with those particular players than anything else though!

Olaf the Stout

That sounds like sour luck!

Given everyone's opinions, what do you think you will try? Do you know your new player very well?

 

[Wandering Star]

Yeah, I always suggest new players go with the "vanilla fighter"; It's a great opportunity for the player to pick up on the basic rules, and will give them a chance to shine in their role. New players tend to be unfamiliar enough with the system to be unable to effectively employ the strategies often required for many other classes; a wizard or cleric played ineffecctively will often fall behind somewhat in their relative power level, even though they may be of the same level as the rest of the party. These classes are far better at their roles when played by someone who understands the mechanics enough to employ their more subtle tricks and strategies.

Recommending the vanilla fighter gives the player the opportunity to get familiar with the core mechanic of the game, while playing an important role in the party, all the while watching the other players characters, and seeing their strengths and weaknesses, learning them at their own pace. And sure, they may or may not soon get bored of such a straight forward character concept, and it is a good indication that the player is ready to explore other, more "advanced" options.

 

[MonkeyDragon]

Ditto the vanilla fighter. Big strong fighter with a big sword to hit things with, and all the feats things like weapon focus or save feats that are added into the character sheet so all the math is done and the options can be as simple as possible. "This turn I can move this much, and hit with this number, or I can hit twice with this number and that number."

Obviously thie thing to emphasize is the role-playing aspect, AND let them know that this is a very simple character to be training wheels. If they like it, they can stick with it, and if not, they can switch to something more complex whenever they think they can handle the added rules.

 

[Olaf the Stout]

That sounds like sour luck!

Given everyone's opinions, what do you think you will try? Do you know your new player very well?

I don't know the new player at all. He was suggested to me by one of my current players. I am in e-mail contact with the new player though so I'll be talking to him about his character before we actually start the campaign.

After getting everyone's opinion I think that I might get an idea of what type of character he'd like to play and then suggest a character to him based off of that. If he wants to play a caster I'll probably advise him against it due to all the extra rules that requires him learning on top of the general D&D rules. However if he really has his heart set on a caster I'll let him give it a go.

I'll get the current player that introduced me to the new player to help him make his character so that he doesn't make something that is totally ineffective due to him not knowing what he's doing.

Olaf the Stout

 

[Thurbane]

In my experience, I'd say human fighter, with the most basic feats possible. No Power Attack or Combat Expertise, where the player has to keep thinking about distributing BAB. Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Improved Inititiave, Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes, Toughness etc. are good feats that are just "there" and already calculated into stat blocks...

 

[Goobermunch]

Warlock is about as simple as it gets. They're pretty fun too, which is good.

Seconded.

'Locks get a fairly simple set of things they can do whenever they want to. When they're not using any of their other powers, they nuke. It's simple and fun.

--G

 

[Pale Master]

I think D&D is pretty sink or swim. A first level wizard (for example) doesn't have that much more complexity than a first level fighter, and you don't want to turn somebody off the game by making them play some boring one-trick pony character that they never would have chosen for themselves.

Also: One-shot session with the new player before they're introduced to the group at large. I've often used it and it works well for me as player or DM. IGWSTYMMVETAIS.

["It goes without saying that your mileage may vary; ergo, this acronym is superfluous."]

 

[Wandering Star]

Yep yep... human fighter. About as vanilla as it gets. And you know, a fun character to play, really. Lots of wicked fantasy archetypes out there to emulate; I could probably think of a dozen off the top of my head right now.