22 classes: What are the successful ones?

[fletch137]

I'm familiar with the tier ratings, but I'm assuming the "yes" and "no" answerers are addressing the original question of succeeding at intent.

None of the people I game with are set to be the most powerful character at a table, but I've seen a couple disappointments in players thinking their character was supposed to do something and finding out it was ill-equipped to do it. The Dragon Shaman, fer instance, was a bit of a let-down, and our bard player stuck with it far longer than anybody thought he should have.

Personally, I was eyeballing the Knight (or the Marshal) since I dig the 4e Warlord a lot. It appears those don't live up to my expectations either.

 

[Dandu]

None of the people I game with are set to be the most powerful character at a table, but I've seen a couple disappointments in players thinking their character was supposed to do something and finding out it was ill-equipped to do it.

All too common if you go entirely by the class description. Fighters, for example, should be able to lead armies, bodyguard important individuals, fight in combat, and so forth as indicated in the PHB. Unfortunately, they can only do one of those things, and not that well.

Alas!

 

[Stormonu]

A lot of it seems not to be the fact that a given class isn't successful, but more so how much system mastery do you need to make it successful. I've seen kick-ass bards, monks and fighters - and quite the reverse.

 

[Dozen]

People in the thread seem to be judging "most powerful", as far as I can tell, and that isn't what he asked for, either.

You might have a point there... Let's see if I can fix my post up, at least.

 

[Jackinthegreen]

Personally, I was eyeballing the Knight (or the Marshal) since I dig the 4e Warlord a lot. It appears those don't live up to my expectations either.

Would you like some tips on creating a character that can do that sort of thing well in 3.5?

 

[Dandu]

Would you like some tips on creating a character that can do that sort of thing well in 3.5?

With cat-like tread!

 

[Wycen]

Having read the conversation after the list and responses I went back to reread the OP. Here's my brief synopsis.

Barbarian, yes it seems barbarianish
Bard, yes, it seems bardish
Beguiler, meh, maybe, but I've never played one
Cleric, yes
Dragon Shaman, meh, never played one
Druid, yes
Duskblade, maybe, but never played one
Favored Soul, yes
Fighter, yes
Hexblade, meh, having the word blade in the name should mean they are good at fighting but mine wasn't
Knight, yes
Marshal, kinda, did they ever get Leadership for free, if so, yes
Monk, yes, except, no. Should be renamed "class that is good at avoiding taking damage."
Paladin, yes
Ranger, yes
Rogue, yes
Scout, yes
Sorcerer, yes
Swashbuckler, meh, I remembering reading their progression and thinking it had too many dead levels
Warlock, yes, but should be renamed, "blast at will class."
Warmage, yes
Wizard, yes

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Monk, yes, except, no. Should be renamed "class that is good at avoiding taking damage."

Hmmm...most of my buddies who are martial artists of any skill are quite adept at avoiding hits or turning them into glancing blows...

 

[Oversquid]

Alright, question for you guys, because tweaking up all of the classes has been an ongoing project of mine. For your information, I'm tweaking up all classes to be approximately Tier 1 or 2 or somewhere in between. Of course some tweaks won't be nearly as enormous as others. Still, could I get a more complete Tier Categorization from you guys here? I'll post a more complete list (Discounting the Book of Erotic Fantasy, unless you want to include them anyways, then by all means):

Archivist (Heroes of Horror)
Ardent (Complete Psionic)
Artificer (Eberron Campaign Setting)
Barbarian (PHB I)
Bard (PHB I)
Beguiler (Player's Handbook II)
Binder (Tome of Magic)
Cleric (PHB I)
Crusader (Tome of Battle)
Divine Mind (Complete Psionic)
Dragon Shaman (Player's Handbook II)
Druid (PHB I)
Duskblade (Player's Handbook II)
Erudite (Complete Psionic)
Factotum (Dungeonscape)
Favored Soul (Complete Divine)
Fighter (PHB I)
Healer (Miniatures Handbook)
Hexblade (Complete Warrior)
Incarnate (Magic of Incarnum)
Knight (Player's Handbook II)
Lurk (Complete Psionic)
Marshal (Miniatures Handbook)
Monk (PHB I)
Ninja (Complete Adventurer)
Paladin (PHB I)
Psion (Expanded Psionics Handbook)
Psychic Warrior (Expanded Psionics Handbook)
Ranger (PHB I)
Rogue (PHB I)
Samurai (Complete Warrior)
Scout (Complete Adventurer)
Shadowcaster (Tome of Magic)
Shaman (Oriental Adventures)
Shugenja (Complete Divine)
Sohei (Oriental Adventures)
Sorcerer (PHB I)
Soulborn (Magic of Incarnum)
Soulknife (Expanded Psionics Handbook)
Spellthief (Complete Adventurer)
Spirit Shaman (Complete Divine)
Swashbuckler (Complete Warrior)
Swordsage (Tome of Battle)
Totemist (Magic of Incarnum)
Truenamer (Tome of Magic)
True Necromancer (Heroes of Horror)
Warblade (Tome of Battle)
Warlock (Complete Arcane)
Warmage (Complete Arcane)
Wilder (Expanded Psionics Handbook)
Wizard (PHB I)
Wu Jen (Complete Arcane)

Also as an added bonus, can you also include maybe a sentence or two as to why each class has the tier that they have? Thanks guys!

And I do think this is on topic, its just that it includes a little more than what the original poster asked for.

 

[Wycen]

Oversquid's list is kinda what I figured would eventually happen, someone would ask about all the other classes. Is a factotum successful at being a factotum? I suppose it depends on what definition of factotum you are using. As a dungeon crawling jack of all trades, I'd say no, because I'd hear the word and say, "shouldn't that guy be busy running someone's business?" Your mileage may vary.

My original response by the way was going to suggest that the oldest classes, thus those from the original Players Handbook, are the most successful, based on that book being the most needed.