Gladius Legis
Legend
With all the talk about how such and such class sucks in 5e, here is a list of the worst classes in the history of Dungeons & Dragons, considering all editions of the game.
You will notice that no classes from 5e are on this list. No matter how much you may dislike a class from 5e, you have to admit that compared to some real stinkers from past editions, even the worst of 5e's classes at least exhibit a base level of competence.
Without further ado, The Hall of Suck:
3.0 Ranger: As much hate as the 5e version of the Ranger has gotten for six years (and yes, I've contributed to some of it), it is a dadgum titan compared to its 3.0 rendition. This class was good for one thing and one thing only: A 1-level dip for a Rogue to get free Two-Weapon Fighting and Ambidexterity in light armor. That's literally it. The 3.0 Ranger's rap sheet of deficiencies stretched for miles. Favored Enemy scaling was, to put it mildly, backwards. If you wanted your highest damage bonus against something big and bad like dragons or demons, you had to pick them at 1st level, when you likely hadn't even seen one of those in your life. Otherwise your latest Favored Enemies were always your weakest ones. Ranger spells were garbage in 3.0, on top of the spellcasting system of 3e that screwed over half-casters. And for a "skilled" warrior class, the Ranger didn't have enough skill points to do much of anything. They didn't get enough feats to do much of anything, either, basically making them an NPC Warrior with a d10 hit die. The 3.5 revision, fortunately, lifted the Ranger to semi-comptence (at least as competent as a non-full spellcaster could expect to be in that edition).
3.0/3.5 Paladin: Half-Fighter, Half-Cleric, All Gimp. Make no mistake, in 3e, the other prominent half-caster class was no better off than the Ranger was. The 3e Paladin was easily the weakest version of the class ever and certifiably one of the weakest classes in the history of D&D. Like the Ranger, the Paladin was little more than an NPC Warrior with a d10 hit die, as it didn't get enough feats to do much of anything. Paladin spells sucked, and the Paladin sucked at casting them (again, 3e system screwed your spellcasting over if you weren't a full caster). The only thing the 3.0 Paladin got to look forward to as it leveled was more uses of Cure Disease per day. How exciting. The Smite was also the weakest it ever was, far and away, as all it did was give weaksauce bonuses to hit and damage on a single hit, and only if the target was evil. Adding insult to injury, the 3.0 Paladin could only ever Smite once per day. The 3.5 Paladin's only upgrade over its 3.0 counterpart was that it could use that dogpoo Smite ability a few more times per day at higher levels. So unlike the Ranger, the Paladin stayed inept in 3.5, making 3e in its entirety just a sad time to be a Paladin.
4e Vampire: First of all, vampire isn't something that should've been a class in the first place. Second of all, supposedly this class was supposed to fill the Striker role, which means dealing high levels of damage. And this class ... didn't. At all. It was outdamaged by every other existing Striker and even a number of non-Striker classes. And it had hardly any healing surges, and its way of keeping healed up to compensate for that fact, well, pardon the pun, but it really sucked. None of its powers were conducive to the Striker role, and on top of that, its powers were split between weapon and implement, making it even more difficult to build one to a satisfactory level of performance.
1e Monk: Complain about the 5e Monk all you want, it's at least competent. This version of the Monk wasn't. Somehow, this thing is supposed to fight in melee despite having the same hit dice as a Magic-User. Which back then was a d4. Barf. And it got even worse from there. It leveled up slower than any other class, even Magic-Users and Paladins, and it never received bonus experience. And it used the Thief attack table, which meant it just didn't hit much. The "best" features it got were stun and kill attacks that were practically mathematical impossibilities. Just a bad class, and easily the weakest in 1e.
You will notice that no classes from 5e are on this list. No matter how much you may dislike a class from 5e, you have to admit that compared to some real stinkers from past editions, even the worst of 5e's classes at least exhibit a base level of competence.
Without further ado, The Hall of Suck:
3.0 Ranger: As much hate as the 5e version of the Ranger has gotten for six years (and yes, I've contributed to some of it), it is a dadgum titan compared to its 3.0 rendition. This class was good for one thing and one thing only: A 1-level dip for a Rogue to get free Two-Weapon Fighting and Ambidexterity in light armor. That's literally it. The 3.0 Ranger's rap sheet of deficiencies stretched for miles. Favored Enemy scaling was, to put it mildly, backwards. If you wanted your highest damage bonus against something big and bad like dragons or demons, you had to pick them at 1st level, when you likely hadn't even seen one of those in your life. Otherwise your latest Favored Enemies were always your weakest ones. Ranger spells were garbage in 3.0, on top of the spellcasting system of 3e that screwed over half-casters. And for a "skilled" warrior class, the Ranger didn't have enough skill points to do much of anything. They didn't get enough feats to do much of anything, either, basically making them an NPC Warrior with a d10 hit die. The 3.5 revision, fortunately, lifted the Ranger to semi-comptence (at least as competent as a non-full spellcaster could expect to be in that edition).
3.0/3.5 Paladin: Half-Fighter, Half-Cleric, All Gimp. Make no mistake, in 3e, the other prominent half-caster class was no better off than the Ranger was. The 3e Paladin was easily the weakest version of the class ever and certifiably one of the weakest classes in the history of D&D. Like the Ranger, the Paladin was little more than an NPC Warrior with a d10 hit die, as it didn't get enough feats to do much of anything. Paladin spells sucked, and the Paladin sucked at casting them (again, 3e system screwed your spellcasting over if you weren't a full caster). The only thing the 3.0 Paladin got to look forward to as it leveled was more uses of Cure Disease per day. How exciting. The Smite was also the weakest it ever was, far and away, as all it did was give weaksauce bonuses to hit and damage on a single hit, and only if the target was evil. Adding insult to injury, the 3.0 Paladin could only ever Smite once per day. The 3.5 Paladin's only upgrade over its 3.0 counterpart was that it could use that dogpoo Smite ability a few more times per day at higher levels. So unlike the Ranger, the Paladin stayed inept in 3.5, making 3e in its entirety just a sad time to be a Paladin.
4e Vampire: First of all, vampire isn't something that should've been a class in the first place. Second of all, supposedly this class was supposed to fill the Striker role, which means dealing high levels of damage. And this class ... didn't. At all. It was outdamaged by every other existing Striker and even a number of non-Striker classes. And it had hardly any healing surges, and its way of keeping healed up to compensate for that fact, well, pardon the pun, but it really sucked. None of its powers were conducive to the Striker role, and on top of that, its powers were split between weapon and implement, making it even more difficult to build one to a satisfactory level of performance.
1e Monk: Complain about the 5e Monk all you want, it's at least competent. This version of the Monk wasn't. Somehow, this thing is supposed to fight in melee despite having the same hit dice as a Magic-User. Which back then was a d4. Barf. And it got even worse from there. It leveled up slower than any other class, even Magic-Users and Paladins, and it never received bonus experience. And it used the Thief attack table, which meant it just didn't hit much. The "best" features it got were stun and kill attacks that were practically mathematical impossibilities. Just a bad class, and easily the weakest in 1e.
Last edited: