D&D 5E What class do you think people argue about the most?

[Mind of tempest]

Monks - so many “they don’t belong in the game” and “they suck and need to be fixed”.

probably beat out bards in that regard.

I am the latter and never get me started on talking about how I would fix them.
the former I just disagree with in very over-the-top ways.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Maybe? But we were discussing Monks and I noted that people have been arguing for and against Monks for a very long time, and the arguments sometimes seemed even more intense than even Fighter debates. So I figured I'd find out for sure, which class gets more, ah, "love".

Honestly, it goes in waves IME. Fighters get more debate on the front of martials vs. casters, but also on the mundane, heroic, superheroic issue.

Monks sometimes get tossed into the mix about poor class or ineffective class design.

If I had to choose, I would have to give it to fighters over monks in general.

 

[Charlaquin]

Rangers, without a doubt. All of the classes get argued about, whether they’re overpowered or underpowered, or such and such mechanics is bad, or they need this or that archetypal ability, or they’re too complex or not complex enough, that’s all standard stuff. But rangers are the only ones that get entire triple digit threads of people arguing about what they even are.

 

[overgeeked]

Quadratic wizards vs linear fighters.

An argument as old as D&D.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Quadratic wizards vs linear fighters.

An argument as old as D&D.

And yet one I never heard a whisper about until I started playing 5E.

 

[Mecheon]

See, I was gonna come in and say Warlords

because people absolutely argue about them the most

And yet one I never heard a whisper about until I started playing 5E.

Was def there back in the 3E days, though during 3E stuff eventually codified into the tiers and it was generally understood "You cannot have anything remotely approaching a balanced party with just the base classes"

 

[CreamCloud0]

Honestly, it goes in waves IME. Fighters get more debate on the front of martials vs. casters, but also on the mundane, heroic, superheroic issue.

Monks sometimes get tossed into the mix about poor class or ineffective class design.

If I had to choose, I would have to give it to fighters over monks in general.

Yeah, fighters get more discussion spotlight due to being an iconic class of the genre and supposedly the ‘starter’ class for newbies, not to mention it being the martial icon for LFQW, the monk on the other hand is much more obscure in comparison so discussion of it gets pushed to the side more often.

 

[overgeeked]

And yet one I never heard a whisper about until I started playing 5E.

And? Your lack of experiencing that argument doesn't mean it didn't happen, only that you didn't experience it.

 

[John R Davis]

Pretty sad thing to argue about.
Some classes more complicated than others so may prompt a discussion I guess.
Personally never had any problem with any 5e class even if they felt a bit odd.

 

[TwoSix]

And yet one I never heard a whisper about until I started playing 5E.

You just lucked out. I remember those discussions happening on Optimization boards going back to 2002 or so.