D&D 3E/3.5 Fav 3.5 core class

[Darklone]

A sorcerer is simply an aggressive bard

 

[Thanee]

What's aggressive about a sorcerer?

Bye
Thanee

 

[Darklone]

Might be the stinking cloud smell...

 

[blargney the second]

It's interesting to see how many people have voted rogue.

Since the beginning of the 3e era, rogues have gone down from my favourite class to my least favourite. I love the skill points, but I truly hate the d6 hit die and sneak attack. While extra d6's of damage are nice in theory, I found it to be useless against far too many creatures in practise. I really don't like having primary class features that are obsolete before you even begin playing.
-blarg

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

It's interesting to see how many people have voted rogue.

Since the beginning of the 3e era, rogues have gone down from my favourite class to my least favourite. I love the skill points, but I truly hate the d6 hit die and sneak attack. While extra d6's of damage are nice in theory, I found it to be useless against far too many creatures in practise. I really don't like having primary class features that are obsolete before you even begin playing.
-blarg

Not sure why entirely, but ever since Tome of Battle, my view of Rogues has also gone down. Just not that much. I guess the fact the ToB classes all get 4 or 6+ skills, (much) better HD, and end up doing more damage in many cases against any enemy type has something to do with it. I mean, I like how well Rogues and Bards do out of combat, but that book really just plain left them out classed in combat (Everyone's already talked about what it did to the Fighter, but never seen an analysis of what it did to the core "strikers."). And I want to play a character who excels only out of combat about as much as I do a "healbot."

Far as Rogues and Bards go, I've considered it for years, next campaign on it will be official: they get d8 HD and CODzilla gets d6. Might help a tad.

 

[Bob the Destroyer]

I voted Sorcerer even though I tend to use Elements of Magic.

-Bob the Destroyer

 

[Aus_Snow]

If anything is surprising (to me), it's that Cleric is so popuiar. You know, that class that conventional wisdom / propaganda has dictated is no fun at all, and will only be played by those forced to, to fill the missing role, or something along those lines.

Huh.

 

[Runestar]

Rage can help make you useful against enemies you can't SA, and the weapon proficiencies are just icing.

Just curious, what exactly do you mean here? You can still sneak attack while raging, after all.

I too would go with barbarian. Simple, straightforward and a blast to play. Thank PHB2 for steadfast determination and indomitable soul.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Just curious, what exactly do you mean here? You can still sneak attack while raging, after all.

I too would go with barbarian. Simple, straightforward and a blast to play. Thank PHB2 for steadfast determination and indomitable soul.

I mean if SA isn't working, +4 str helps a lot, as it would almost always in melee?

Rage, and all of a sudden (until later levels) you effectively have the BAB of a Fighter and +2 damage (+3 if you two-hand something). At least until mid-levels, that alone can make the Rogue respectable (but not great) in melee. The will save bonus covers another (man, they have a lot) Rogue weakness, as does the +con for fort saves and (assuming a cleric to heal you after the fight before you "rage suicide") extra hp.

And by the time a rage isn't enough to cover for the fact you're a weak little sissy, you have enough ranks in UMD to never be completely useless in a fight ever again.

 

[Nifft]

From that list? Druid.

In all of 3.5e? Binder, Psion or Swordsage.

Cheers, -- N