Which class do you hate the most?

Serendipity · Mar 1, 2012

Barbarian. Call it a berserker and I'll learn to let go of the hate. Not before.
(Better yet, junk the class completely and make it a theme. A theme that has nothing to do with going berserk.)

Tallifer · Mar 1, 2012

I really dislike playing alongside evil characters, so I voted against the assassin. Of course it does not help that my first character ever was stabbed in the back by a party assassin.

Incenjucar · Mar 1, 2012

Wizards.

So much space wasted on a single, bland class.

Bungus · Mar 1, 2012

Assassin... No real place in a heroic campaign.

NewJeffCT · Mar 2, 2012

Tallifer said:
I really dislike playing alongside evil characters, so I voted against the assassin. Of course it does not help that my first character ever was stabbed in the back by a party assassin.

not a huge fan of assassin PCs, unless it was done by a secretly evil PC pretending to be a rogue or something like that.

It was done really well in my old gaming group by one very good player. (no, not me... it was before I joined the group)

trancejeremy · Mar 2, 2012

Two fantasy assassins that make good D&D characters:

Arbas the Assassin in Darkness Weaves. Definitely an anti-hero, but anti-heroes have a place in fantasy - much of D&D was inspired by Vance's Dying Earth, which was almost entirely full of anti-heroes.

Morley Dotes from the long running Garrett P.I. series of novels by Glen Cook.

Mercule · Mar 2, 2012

I almost voted for cleric because they aren't priests, but are pretty redundant with paladins. I also don't like the idea of having some of the coolest toys but never using them because you have to be a medic.

Minigiant said:
If ranger wasnt my favorite class, it would be my most hated.

I agree, but disagree with the reasons. A ranger is a border guard. Someone who defends civilization by unconventional means, which generally means being at the fringe -- the quintessential dude in the dark corner. The 1e ranger was a ranger. The archer-ranger was a bit off, but not horrid. As soon as they picked up TWF, they ceased to be a ranger.

Serendipity said:
Barbarian. Call it a berserker and I'll learn to let go of the hate. Not before.
(Better yet, junk the class completely and make it a theme. A theme that has nothing to do with going berserk.)

Ultimately, this is where my vote went. And why. The 1e barbarian was kinda interesting only because they made a huge trade in advancement for the power they got and also broke a lot of mechanics. Of course, if you tried to run a 6th level fighter and 6th level barbarian together, the barbarian was broken. If you ran a 60,000 xp fighter and a 60,000 xp barbarian together, it was much better.

StreamOfTheSky · Mar 2, 2012

Shocked Monk and Psion aren't getting more (undeserved) hate, based on the kinds of topics you tend to see on the forums...

So anyway, I voted Fighter. Often the most beloved class on these forums. Over the years, as I've tried to balance the other non-casters, I've steadily grown to hate this generic, completely flavor-devoid class. There isn't a martial-caster disparity often, the problem is framed ONLY in the terms of "fighter is underpowered!" But that's just the tip of my hate-berg. Anything I try to do to buff classes other than Fighter (who I also try to buff, it just tends to attract less flak when I buff him) there's this glass ceiling. "You can't out fight the fighter!" It doesn't matter what style of fighting it is, whether it's skirmishing, archery...whatever. Because "a fighter's job is fighting! It's in his name! He must be the best at it!" it ends up being a cement block around the feet of other underpriviledged characters in the ocean of D&D. Anything to buff the fighter has to maintain his generic "capable of anything" crap else it loses the "flavor" of being a Fighter.

I'm sick of it. Please, just go away, you horrible boring class that's about nothing more than how many +'s you have on rolls. I hate you. Give me a bunch of different martial classes to cover different things that are actually hyper capable of those things. Give me swashbuckling duelists who can parry spells. 2H weapon wielders that can heft giant swords and create avalanches by cleaving into the side of a mountain. Give me archers who can blot out the sun with arrows and shoot just fine in melee, disarming you of your sword as you're charging at him and in midswing.

Just not the generic fighter. Please.

Holy Bovine · Mar 2, 2012

I don't think i can choose a most hated class. I don't really hate any class but there are a number I would not play and would encourage others not to play either. Most notable assassin (you're evil - no evil allowed), bard (no matter what it all comes down to "Bluff, bluff, bluff the stupid Ogre!"), psychic warrior (soooooo weak), illusionist (um - isn't that just a specialist wizard?), warlock (confusing & redundant) and even barbarian as no one ever plays them like they are from a backwater culture.

Minigiant · Mar 2, 2012

Mercule said:
I agree, but disagree with the reasons. A ranger is a border guard. Someone who defends civilization by unconventional means, which generally means being at the fringe -- the quintessential dude in the dark corner. The 1e ranger was a ranger. The archer-ranger was a bit off, but not horrid. As soon as they picked up TWF, they ceased to be a ranger.

I don't think we disagree in reason. The ranger is a guardian who used weapons as one of his main methods. Rangers don't just protect civilization from the fringe and wilds, the protect nature from the urban corruption. Archery is okay as a good ranger would be close to roaming wolf packs and bandits and they might want some distance before engaging. Two weapon fighting is a stretch but a ranger would want something in the off hand. But TWF is a stretch. Throwing axe maybe more sense.