What to be or not to be?

loki44

Explorer
Here's my situation: Looks like I might be joining a 3.5 campaign mid-stride. The other PC's are around 13th level which is where I'll enter the game. I have a lot of gaming experience but haven't played much 3.5 at all. I'm a relative noob compared to the other players. I recognize that in playing a 13th level character there is a fair amount of complexity insofar as the rules go.

Apart from advising me to play what I want, which character class/race do you feel would be "easiest" to play at 13th level without getting too bogged down by the rules?
 

log in or register to remove this ad


A human Fighter. That would be the easiest route to go. No spells to learn. Just pick your butt load of feats and grab a sword and start swinging.
 

Human Fighter with a fun prestige class. Fun being defined but what you like, many prestige classes for the fighter are both fun and simple.
 

If you want extreme ease, Half-orc Barbarian is the way to go. About the only thing that changed between it and 3.5 was the DR breaks got lower, and you don't have to worry about butt-loads of feats either.
 

Oh, go for it and play a druid!

Just jump right in and play. Have a bear and hawk statblocks pre-prepared so you can shapechange with minimal game impact. C'mon. Everyone needs a healer and druids get to zap things too!
 

I recently started playing a cleric beginning at 12th level. From experience, I can say do not play a high-level spellcaster if you're not familiar with the rules! :D

A fighter, ranger, or barbarian would be good.
 

Human Fighter with Greater Weapon Spec - Greatsword; Power Attack, Great Cleave et al. High STR, good DEX, good CON. Go get some. :)
 

Note: I'm a player in the game loki44 is joining.

Fighter or barbarian are good suggestions. If you choose feats such as weapon specialization, that simply add a flat amount to attacks and damage, you can factor all those in ahead of time and not have to do any figuring on which to use when during an actual game.

We did have a player, my nephew, who was practically a total newbie to pen and paper RPG, although he had a good bit of computer RPG experience, and he played a druid. Seemed to do okay.

Several of us have copies of the Dummies book that just came out. It does have suggestions for builds for what they figure are the easiest classes to play (fighter, rogue, sorcerer and cleric).

For my money, if you decide to play a spellcaster then the spontaneous casters are easier to play. You have to do some work away from the game table picking spells, but you don't to take time during a game deciding which spells to prepare. It is sort of like taking an at-home, open-book test each time your character levels and you have to pick new spells. But you don't have as many pop quizes during games. I don't think there are any spontaneous divine spellcasters approved, but I think the DM has indicated he would be receptive one if you are interested.

Dang, my rambling probably just makes it more confusing. Instead, I'll use an analogy that might help. If you play any golf you probably know that some people are very serious about their game. They have no patience for amatuers and hacks. If you play with them, they won't offer you any advice but they will harumph and express displeasure that you are slowing down their game. Playing with them, you will feel constantly under pressure, and you won't have any fun.

There is no one like this in our group.
 

How about a human paladin? Simple enough if you just want to stick to fighting, but still allows use of some special abilities, and you can dabble in spellcasting without it getting overwhelming. You can allow the character to "grow" without waiting to take other levels, just by choosing to ignore some abilities at first.

Though I must admit, for extreme ease, a big dumb barbaian with a big axe and All-Power-Attack-All-The-Time is hard to beat. But that schtick might get old after a bit.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top