D&D General Lamest D&D classes all time

[slobster]

Agree. So they would just need to add four little words to the subclass to correct that. "Instead of sneak attack."

I mean I was just joking. I actually love bards, it's just that part of what I love about them is giving them naughty word.

 

[Panda-s1]

Back when I was living in LA (technically in Eagle Rock, so not the main city but it's all sprawl down there) I was walking to class from my house once and, out of nowhere, a hawk came barreling out of the sky and absolutely annihilated a pigeon on the sidewalk about 40 feet in front of me. We had a coyote that lived somewhere nearby and was a regular sight at night, and there were like 6 species of snake that lived in the easement right behind my college. That's not to mention all the vermin, insects, and other life adapted to living inside and among buildings. And I just imagine that your average fantasy city is less dense and less smothering of the natural world than modern LA.

Yeah an urban druid doesn't sound so impossible to me!

I used to live in the LA area, even the heavily urbanized areas have trees. palm trees. I miss palm trees :/

Love or hate, little in between for the urban druid, which isn't really a druid. In fact, it's not a druid so much that the description says they don't get their powers from the nature gods, they get them from the "spirit of the city." They worship the "purity of society," whatever the hell that means.

We can ask perhaps Huey Lewis or Glen Frey.

I'm not sure at what population a city becomes godlike and begins granting powers like "Crowdsurf" - I mean "Crowdwalk,", but ultimately it wouldn't have made much sense to have nature gods empowering vengeful druids to oppose cutting down trees to make cities and savage the land for precious metals and then empower the exact opposite to worship the end result of that.

I mean the "spirit of the city" just sounds like a stand in for nature or whatever spirit inhabits the forest (or however that works). I'm not sure if all druids would necessarily agree that cities=bad either, and some of them would probably see merit in helping the ecosystem of a city than shunning it.

I think the problem is that in this particular case the Druid in question didn't have anything involving that urban nature AT ALL.

Yeah even though I'm on board for the urban druid concept, looking back on the actual execution of the class talked about here, it was pretty bad. Fortunately in literally any edition of D&D you can make an urban druid by writing "druid" on your character sheet and then discussing with your GM that you actually channel the spirits and creatures of the city, and then maybe swapping out a skill or two, and then you are good to go!

uh they still get an animal companion. and wildshape. also a lot of the typical druid spells? not sure if that's not involving urban nature "AT ALL".

also doesn't change the fact the OP's reasoning was "cities are the opposite of nature this is BAD!"

 

[slobster]

uh they still get an animal companion. and wildshape. also a lot of the typical druid spells? not sure if that's not involving urban nature "AT ALL".

also doesn't change the fact the OP's reasoning was "cities are the opposite of nature this is BAD!"

Well an animal companion would be fine in an urban setting. You get a hawk or big alley cat or a sewer-dwelling dire badger. I wouldn't let the urban druid choose a panther just like I wouldn't let a swamp druid choose a polar bear, but it still seems easy to keep in theme.

Wildshape is likewise fine. An urban druid that spends a lot of time as a pigeon or rat for spying sounds cool.

Spells depends on edition, and I honestly don't recall all the things druids can cast in all editions. Might take some work, but refluffing is a powerful tool.

The OP's reasoning on urban druids in general is whatever, this is fundamentally a comedy thread and I'm not inclined to be argumentative about it. But I was just sharing my own take on the druid, not defending or really clashing with anyone on theirs. Cheers!

 

[Panda-s1]

Well an animal companion would be fine in an urban setting. You get a hawk or big alley cat or a sewer-dwelling dire badger. I wouldn't let the urban druid choose a panther just like I wouldn't let a swamp druid choose a polar bear, but it still seems easy to keep in theme.

Wildshape is likewise fine. An urban druid that spends a lot of time as a pigeon or rat for spying sounds cool.

Spells depends on edition, and I honestly don't recall all the things druids can cast in all editions. Might take some work, but refluffing is a powerful tool.

The OP's reasoning on urban druids in general is whatever, this is fundamentally a comedy thread and I'm not inclined to be argumentative about it. But I was just sharing my own take on the druid, not defending or really clashing with anyone on theirs. Cheers!

I'm talking about the actual class itself. urban druids can take an animated object as a companion, but can also have things like small animals or a horse or eventually a giant insect. wildshape is roughly the same idea, and they don't get all the druid spells (shillelagh is missing), but they still get a lot of nature and weather related spells.

I know this guy is trying to be funny, but the article as a whole seems like a bad attempt (also he didn't say these classes were "lame", he called them embarrassing). he did a different article about the most useless spells in d&d and people in the comments tore him apart for including stuff like tenser's floating disc and otto's irresistible dance.

 

[Ashrym]

I don't really need to troll bard players; they practically troll themselves. And not to get political or anything, but my national anthem was written to be mocked...just ask anyone in choir who ever had to sing the wretched thing, or anyone in band who had to play it. It's kind of a mess.

I was worried that came out worse in the comments than it sounded in my head, lol. It sounded light hearted in my mind typing it but later I though, hmmm, maybe not.

I'm up for playful mocking of any class. This guy teaches rhythm'n'bruise. ;-)

(I kid, of course. There's nothing wrong with bard players, although most of them need to finish reading Chapter 3. My barbs are for the bard class, which is so two-dimensional that it could have been replaced with a Rogue subclass and a lute.)

Well, no, if the bard is two dimensional then there is something wrong with the players who make it so. ;-)

Bards are what the players make of them, just like any other class. If find it hard to be two dimensional with so many options and styles of bard to pattern after.

That's ridiculous!

Bards don't get sneak attack.

What? We can totally make a 1e bard in 5e. 6 levels of fighter, 4 levels of thief, 10 levels of druid. Or however a person wants to split it up or just make the arcane trickster, and pretend you are a bard instead of a minstrel pretending to be a real bard. ;-)

Simpler to just take a valor bard with the criminal variant: spy background and focus on spells shared with druids but if a person really wants sneak attack.....

I'm one of those players who builds the concept first and then picks the mechanics that match it after. Then I'll call myself whatever I want.

 

[3catcircus]

I don't like this poll - there was no option for "all of them."

Actually, the poll would have been better if one of the options was "99% of all 3.x prestige classes."

 

[JeffB]

Not sure why the OD&D Fighting Man would be on the "lame" list? I'm guessing people don't understand OD&D.

Fighting Man had significant advantages the other classes did not have. This was even more-so after GH was introduced. They were the only class to benefit in combat from Strength bonuses (not just percentile strength), and Fighting Man was the only class able to use their DEX bonus to "Parry" (Improve AC) . Along with increased size HD, variable weapon damage (Greatsword against large creatures FTW), best attack bonus chart and larger selection of magic items/weapons available to them.

Paladins and Rangers did not benefit from Strength or Dex bonuses.

It's actually the only time in D&D History where the Fighter was the best at fighting.

 

[Laurefindel]

Not sure why the OD&D Fighting Man would be on the "lame" list? I'm guessing people don't understand OD&D.
(...)
It's actually the only time in D&D History where the Fighter was the best at fighting.

I think it was more a tongue-in-cheek jab at the lack of originality of the name « fighting man ».

in defence of the OP, with classe such as « fighting-man » and « magic-user » , it’s surprising that the cleric wasn’t called the « prayer-maker » or something.

personally, i kind of like the old names as descriptive titles, but « cleric » and « thief » should have been given similar generic names for it to work. Reducing to fighter and mage was otherwise the right thing to do IMO

 

[JeffB]

I think it was more a tongue-in-cheek jab at the lack of originality of the name « fighting man ».

in defence of the OP, with classe such as « fighting-man » and « magic-user » , it’s surprising that the cleric wasn’t called the « prayer-maker » or something.

personally, i kind of like the old names as descriptive titles, but « cleric » and « thief » should have been given similar generic names for it to work. Reducing to fighter and mage was otherwise the right thing to do IMO

Ahh OK. Well the name was a carryover from Chainmail, due to their equivalence in man to man combat-but thanks for the FYI.

I still say Magic-User. I have to force myself to say Wizard or Mage.

Yeah, I'm old.

 

[Laurefindel]

I came here just for the jester, and it's not on the list

The sage class was pretty weak as well.

If we take the mechanics of that particular class ( later kit?) aside, the concept of a jester background / rogue / bard subclass is sound.

i found a new respect for the jester in a medieval wedding « MCed » by a jester where I was invited a few years ago. Because that’s what jesters were: MCs, wedding signers, entertainers, presenters, and ad-hoc referees.

in a high medieval settings where the king’s court is in great parts composed of brutish lords and knights (and their wife’s and daughters), the best person to enforce courtesy is the jester. Because the famous but brutish knight can not afford to look more ridiculous than the king’s clown in front of the whole court. If someone’s too loud, too impolite, too out-of-place, the jester intervened by setting the example (often in a tongue-in-cheek or sarcastic kind of way). You’d look stupid if the jester was more courteous, respectful of women, well-spoken, and composed than you. So the jester forces you into your best behaviour because you (most likely) aren’t as witty as he is, AND he’s protected by the king/lord who is more than happy to have someone enforce manners for him.

Then the jester is an entertainer, playing music, juggling pins or whatever, or introducing musicians/entertainers. If the court was a show, he’d be the opening act, the master of ceremony, and the stage manager at the same time.

After supper there would be games of brawn and agility, again introduced and refereed by the jester (who at this point is likely to be the only sober person left). The jester would challenge the strongest, rig the games for the weakest, ridicule those who weren’t nice before, praise the winners and cater to the drunken knight’s testosterone and ego, giving them (at last) an opportunity to challenge / beat / punch one another in relatively harmless ways.

All this for the entertainment of the lord and lady and their court. A good jester would be able to do all that without getting killed by a frustrated knight or an annoyed lord, making him probably the smartest man in the court. A jester’s INT is as important, if not more, than his CHA.

An adventuring jester would take these skills at judging people, playing to their ego and needs, and wit their way out of trouble with them in their adventuring life. Not the most efficient dungeon delver, but an excellent social guy/gal.