Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Orzel Jul 24, 2014 14:02:00	Do you think 5e should eventually include a simple arcanist who just spams a energy blast that scales with level well or a simple priest who just swings a mace and heals well? Something simple which can be given to players who desire simplicity and something simple to be strapped on a monster. _ I sorta miss turning the old brain off and spamming sometimes with my old warlocks. And I'd love some choice without harming party effectiveness.
#2 Lawolf Jul 24, 2014 14:27:16	Yes. We played a game recently with someone who was new to 5e and he decided to play a cleric because nobody else was playing one. I tried to convince him that he shouldn't play a class just because our party lacked a healer, but he insisted. It took him 3 hours to create his cleric, and it required a lot of time at the table for him to go through his spell list.   I have seen many players scared away from D&D due to how unintuitive spellcasters can be. A simple caster would be great for such players.
#3 Mechatarrasque Jul 24, 2014 14:37:10	Orzel,   As a DM I do.  I suspect you will have to pick a patron for a warlock, but I could see where you could spend all your invocations on powering up your eldritch blast (which as a cantrip you could use every round), so you could be a blaster almost as straightforward as a warrior is a melee combatant.  Book pact  is probably the easiest way to go (no pesky weapons or pets to complicate things).
#4 Marandahir Jul 24, 2014 14:39:47	As a DM, you should help the player who's in that boat by first, limiting the spell list to things that are appropriate to that character idea (Healing Word, Cure Wounds, Shield of Faith, etc), and write-up the character's list of potential abilities for the player.  Don't throw everything at a brand new player, unless that player specifically wants all the options on the table.  It's easy to get overwhelmed.  Tell him or her that you'll all figure out the character as the game goes, and as abilities become relevant, tell the player that they have the ability to manipulate fate or save that person if they want to.  Give a helping hand – the point is to keep the player playing, not to kill the character and in so doing kill any desire the player has in sticking around.  So give obvious hints, and the player will likely catch on, and say, "hey, can I use that power that I used before in this other situation?"  And you could say, "yes, but be wary, magic has its limits, so be careful how often you invoke your divine magic to heal your friends.  You might want to prepare with healing kits, some herbal salves, a healing potion or two, just in case."  And if the player bites, maybe then you work it so that the character's Cleric was a Hermit, and that's why he or she had access to herbalism to back up the healing.  You build it piecemeal.  The point is, work the newbies into it, don't throw everything at them at once.
(Reply to #3) Orzel	Mechagamera wrote:
#6 Mephi1234 Jul 24, 2014 14:58:45	Orzel wrote:
(Reply to #6) Ashrym	Mephi1234 wrote:
#8 Diffan Jul 24, 2014 15:38:10	Orzel wrote:
(Reply to #2) Azzy1974	Lawolf wrote:
#10 mestewart3 Jul 24, 2014 16:59:57	@azzy   A lot of new players want to understand what it is they are picking, which means they are going to ask a lot of questions about how the system works to understand their choices.  This especially complicated when looking through spells just because of how many there are (thankfully not yet nearly as many as there used to be... yet).
#11 Lawolf Jul 24, 2014 17:17:55	Azzy1974 wrote:
#12 Orzel Jul 24, 2014 17:43:08	It isn't all about new players. Just like some like simple fighter. Some expert players might a simple blaster or healbot.   Think the simple fighter, give it a ray attack, replace extra attack with extra blast. Second wind, Action Surge, and Indomitable could be replaced by more damage. And elemental subclass would let the simple arcanists change the damage to damage type. Or the shaper subclass could let you spam explosions and beams.
#13 strider13x Jul 24, 2014 18:04:50	having a recommended spell list for each specialist subclass would work for Wizard. We haven't seen Sorcerer and I think it may surprise us. Yes, the spell list can be daunting but, hey, we are playing D&D!
#14 LupusRegalis Jul 24, 2014 18:05:33	The Starter Set and 'Basic', what are arguably the Core of 5e, should absolutely have been by defualt a 'Simple' version of each of the Core 4 classes.  That they chose to only apply this 'simplistic' standard to the Fighter says a lot to me about the goals of 5e.  They didn't care that the divide between Players over a Simple or Complex Fighter was equal, and they didn't care that there was a strong call for Simple versions of the other classes either.
#15 Orzel Jul 24, 2014 18:29:39	strider13x wrote:
#16 ivstin Jul 24, 2014 18:32:37	Orzel wrote:
#17 Lawolf Jul 24, 2014 18:33:34	The sorcerer is arguably more complicated than the wizard. In fact, the wizard is the most simple full caster. The alpha warlock, bard, cleric, Druid, and sorcerer are all rather complex classes.
#18 Orzel Jul 24, 2014 18:37:52	Mountain dew makes it worse. I get too hopped up to read the spells right. And the crash....     The crash.
(Reply to #18) ivstin	Orzel wrote:
#20 Mephi1234 Jul 24, 2014 19:15:07	You know, I have trouble really understanding the difference between a simple blaster..... and a simple archer.    Same idea from the sounds of it - ranged bolts dealing damage.    Warlord build might be a simple healer, too.
#21 Orzel Jul 24, 2014 19:35:37	Mephi1234 wrote:
(Reply to #10) Ashrym	mestewart3 wrote:
#23 sleypy Jul 24, 2014 21:09:24	I would be interested in a simple wizard. I don't think the wizard is too far off now that they can cast lower level spells in a higher spell slot. I see no reason that a subclass couldn't work.   Clerics on the other hand is much harder. It might be easier to have a simple wizard caster and just let it have a choices to go with divine magic to make up for a smaller spell selection.