Easy-Go Classes for Beginners?

[vagabundo]

This has bugged me too.

But I haven't tried 4e with anyone complete new to DND. If I did I think I'd actually just run 4e using just the at will attacks, using sheets similar to those from DND xp.

 

[Rechan]

Similarly, with respect to the power choices, you can "hand" someone a premade rogue as easily as you could hand them a rogue in earlier editions. New players should probably not make their own first character, I don't think this is any different than past editions.

As a general rule, I do not think that players should make their character until they have played the game. Understanding the significance of the various condition effects or how well they play together goes a long way when you're selecting your powers. First timers will pick something not realizing what it really does.

 

[an_idol_mind]

That has been one of the barriers preventing me from getting terribly interested in the current rules. 4th edition would really benefit from an intro class, but I don't see that happening due to the way the powers are structured.

 

[Ourph]

I really do think Ranger is the correct answer here. Give the new player a pre-gen Ranger (maybe an Elf, because Elven Accuracy is a pretty easy racial power to grok and they make decent Rangers).

IMO, the melee Ranger is easier to run for a newbie than the bow Ranger, because Quarry choices are easier for melee Rangers.

Give the character Twin Strike, Hit & Run, Dire Wolverine Strike and Jaws of the Wolf (the simplest Ranger powers, IMO) and you've got a character that is effective but doesn't require a lot of deep tactical thinking. It's essentially the sawed-off shotgun of the 4e world, just point it at the thing you want dead and pull the trigger.

The most difficult decision the player will have to make with this character is which encounter to use his Daily power in.

 

[Imaro]

I really do think Ranger is the correct answer here. Give the new player a pre-gen Ranger (maybe an Elf, because Elven Accuracy is a pretty easy racial power to grok and they make decent Rangers).

IMO, the melee Ranger is easier to run for a newbie than the bow Ranger, because Quarry choices are easier for melee Rangers.

Give the character Twin Strike, Hit & Run, Dire Wolverine Strike and Jaws of the Wolf (the simplest Ranger powers, IMO) and you've got a character that is effective but doesn't require a lot of deep tactical thinking. It's essentially the sawed-off shotgun of the 4e world, just point it at the thing you want dead and pull the trigger.

The most difficult decision the player will have to make with this character is which encounter to use his Daily power in.

Well, I'll add the player needs to understand the "striker" concept as well... this is not a class that should stand toe to toe with alot of monsters and expect not to have the glass canon effect. Though the funny thing is that, IMO, it is often the stand toe to toe character that most who want less complexity really desire. Instead the Ranger not only forces you to do round by round evaluation of the damage being inflicted upon ones character, but also to make judgements and evaluations on movement and terrain, as he must be careful not to get locked down by either terrain or an enemy or more importantly enemies.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

It goes a little deeper than just class. 4E is a complex tactical game, and for the most part the strategies "run up and hit things" or "stand back and shoot" are fairly ineffective in their purest forms. Movement, teamwork, and strategy are important, and closing your eyes and mashing the attack button isn't something the game rewards.

 

[Ourph]

Well, I'll add the player needs to understand the "striker" concept as well... this is not a class that should stand toe to toe with alot of monsters and expect not to have the glass canon effect. Though the funny thing is that, IMO, it is often the stand toe to toe character that most who want less complexity really desire. Instead the Ranger not only forces you to do round by round evaluation of the damage being inflicted upon ones character, but also to make judgements and evaluations on movement and terrain, as he must be careful not to get locked down by either terrain or an enemy or more importantly enemies.

I agree that even the Ranger requires some inclination to think outside the "run to the nearest foe and attack until dead, rinse, repeat" box. However, the considerations you bring up (i.e. - run away when you're low on HPs, don't allow yourself to get flanked or surrounded by enemies, don't get backed into a corner, etc.) are things that don't depend on a lot of system-specific knowledge to understand and implement. They are more or less real-world, common-sense considerations. To me, they are materially different from some of the more esoteric aspects of tactical play that other 4e classes require (like the Fighter, for example, whose marking ability is really one of the less intuitive aspects of 4e's tactical play, IMO).

In my own personal experience, new players have a lot of fun with the melee Ranger, even those who are not tactically inclined. They may not be as effective as a Ranger played by someone who loves the tactical aspects of the game, but they hold their own enough to provide an enjoyable play experience without demanding an intimidating level of system mastery.

 

[Rechan]

I would also say that a warlock is pretty easy. I mean, especially an Infernal lock. Just shoot shoot shoot shoot shoot. Sure, you throw your curse around, but all you're doing is pouring buckets of damage on the target. The infernal warlock powers are pretty straight forward.

 

[Jhaelen]

Well, I don't know.

It's true that all (PHB1) classes are similar in complexity whereas in 3E some were clearly more complex than others. But all in all, I think 4E characters are still easier to create than (most of) the least complex 3E characters.

Using the Character Builder it's even easier: Select a race and class combination from the recommendations, choose a build, pick the default stat distribution and you're ready to go.

I especially disbelieve that the fighter was a good intro-class in 3E. In my experience it was one of the more challenging classes if you wanted to create an effective character. My vote for the best intro-class goes to the barbarian.


My 3E group is just in the process of preparing for a series of 4E trial sessions. From what I've seen so far, the players that experience the most difficulty in creating characters are the power gamers that used to plan out optimized 20 level builds before starting play.

I recommended to look no further than level 3 powers to avoid the overwhelming 'wall of powers' effect I had when first reading the PHB. Since it's just a test run, they can just create new characters if they believe they'd made mistakes that cannot be corrected by retraining - assuming we decide we want to continue playing 4E...

I'm also particularly pleased that the two players that are the typical 'fighter'-players in the 3E group have chosen a wizard and a cleric as their 3E characters, respectively. The barrier that kept them from playing spellcasters in 3E is definitely gone and that's a very good thing.


We'll see how difficult actual play will be. Judging from some of the reports I've seen on this board, I expect combat to be a bit slow and maybe even challening in the beginning. But I also expect it to get better quickly, since most of them are quick to master new systems.

 

[amysrevenge]

But I also expect it to get better quickly, since most of them are quick to master new systems.

I'm sure that that's how you'll find it. Personally, I know two people who went from "never played an RPG" to "frequent DM" in less than 6 months of playing 4E. And frankly, one of the two is "the girlfriend" (not mine lol) who got dragged into a game partially against her will.