The first game I played in back in high school (AD&D2), I played a smart, sneaky, scout-type thief in a party that had both a paladin and a priest of Tempus, the god of war.
Everywhere we went, those two guys would kill the sh-t out of anything that jumped at us, fearlessly kick open any locked door that barred our path, and generally handle every situation perfectly. The campaign was very heavy on combat, and they were so much better at combat than my character that most of the time everyone was better off if I just hung out next to the party's wizard and traded snide comments with him rather than waste time trying to hit something. Backstab opportunities? Never heard of 'em; every fight was against opponents who knew where we were and the GM didn't believe in letting anyone get a backstab in while a big melee combat was raging.
I guess a few times they threw me a bone and let me disarm a trap, but that was basically the extent of it.
It was, without a doubt, the one character in my library I can point to and say "This was completely ill-suited for the game, so utterly out of place and wrong that I can't believe I even tried playing it."
My D&D3 experiences have been better, of course. Not just because the rules are so much better or because the group I'm playing with is better (though both of those are true), but because since high school I've learned to find a niche during character creation, to stake it out properly, and to let the GM and the other players know what I want to do with it. Keeps me from overlapping into other people's spotlights, and gives me something that I can shine at.
--
it also helps that there's an actual skill system now
ryan