Chimera
First Post
Definitely Fighter.
In 2e, I got sick to death of everyone chosing to play a Ranger rather than a Fighter, just because it had extra abilities. Even people who had no business playing Rangers because they had no clue HOW to do so.
To some degree, I think this has contributed to some longer-term, older players not wanting to play Fighters in 3.0/3.5.
Just in general, I'm tired of seeing people insist on playing a strange race/class combination just because of all the special abilities. Then role-playing them like a Human Fighter with special abilities.
If you want to play a Dwarf Barbarian, then have your character ACT like a Dwarf barbarian. Not like Joe Human with an attitude problem.
Oh yeah...and as far as that goes, no more PCs with "attitude problems" please. (But that's another thread altogether.)
In 2e, I got sick to death of everyone chosing to play a Ranger rather than a Fighter, just because it had extra abilities. Even people who had no business playing Rangers because they had no clue HOW to do so.
To some degree, I think this has contributed to some longer-term, older players not wanting to play Fighters in 3.0/3.5.
Just in general, I'm tired of seeing people insist on playing a strange race/class combination just because of all the special abilities. Then role-playing them like a Human Fighter with special abilities.
If you want to play a Dwarf Barbarian, then have your character ACT like a Dwarf barbarian. Not like Joe Human with an attitude problem.
Oh yeah...and as far as that goes, no more PCs with "attitude problems" please. (But that's another thread altogether.)