Next-token prediction with the logarithmic loss is a cornerstone of autoregressive sequence modeling, but, in practice, suffers from error amplification, where errors in the model compound and generation quality degrades as sequence length $H$ increases. From a theoretical perspective, this phenomenon should not appear in well-specified settings, and, indeed, a growing body of empirical work hypothesizes that misspecification, where the learner is not sufficiently expressive to represent the target distribution, may be the root cause. Under misspecification -- where the goal is to learn as well as the best-in-class model up to a multiplicative approximation factor $C\geq 1$ -- we confirm that $C$ indeed grows with $H$ for next-token prediction, lending theoretical support to this empirical hypothesis. We then ask whether this mode of error amplification is avoidable algorithmically, computationally, or information-theoretically, and uncover inherent computational-statistical tradeoffs. We show: (1) Information-theoretically, one can avoid error amplification and achieve $C=O(1)$. (2) Next-token prediction can be made robust so as to achieve $C=\tilde O(H)$, representing moderate error amplification, but this is an inherent barrier: any next-token prediction-style objective must suffer $C=Ω(H)$. (3) For the natural testbed of autoregressive linear models, no computationally efficient algorithm can achieve sub-polynomial approximation factor $C=e^{(\log H)^{1-Ω(1)}}$; however, at least for binary token spaces, one can smoothly trade compute for statistical power and improve on $C=Ω(H)$ in sub-exponential time. Our results have consequences in the more general setting of imitation learning, where the widely-used behavior cloning algorithm generalizes next-token prediction.