It's good class, but nobody plays it!

[Gunslinger]

Until I just started playing one, I hadn't seen anyone play a bard. I have seen plenty of rogues, single and multi classed. Also, far too many barbarians(one of the weakest classes IMO). No single classed sorcerers either, because at higher levels they pale in comparison to wizards. Also I haven't seen a single classed monk.

 

[Ravellion]

For some reason, rogue's are not real popular in my group. In fact, only a total of one has played in our two long term games, and I played him and dropped out at 4th level. Barbarians and druids are also something nobody plays, but I think that's because people don't really see them as the adventuring type.

I have trouble with that as well... people just try to survive traps IMC! Not always successfully though

Rav

 

[EarthsShadow]

in my games I have played in since the release of 3E, the most common classes played have been, in this order: Rogue, Monk, Ranger, Barbarian, and Sorceror. No one has played a wizard, fighter or cleric for that matter.

 

[Voneth]

I am playing a Lizardman Druid, and while I might play a lizardman again, I doubt I will play a druid again based on my experiences and the comments I have heard from another druid player.

The class is cool, but it seems that some GM's and players don't know exactly what to make of the animal companions. Some GMs seem sort of parionid that these critters could give too much of an edge, or don't want to deal with another NPC to keep track of. And some players keep thinking their companions are attack dogs, literaly.

My own GM was pretty strict about my animal companions. He also continualy forgot to keep track about my animals in combat, until gave that responsiblity to me. In additon to that, he contualy found excuses to have them run off from unnatural enemies (we kept running into undead and demons from day one in his games)

Now that I am 15th level and my spells outstrip any dire lion I could have, he seems pretty happy, though he keeps acting like I am whining if I we have to leave my animal behind (as when we teleport across a continent).

Between that and having only Entangle when we do dungeon crawls all day, I am opting for a Sorcerer class/multi class next time.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Hmmm, in my game we have had no monks and no clerics except for an NPC.

It seems that clerics have an invisible 'wuss' sign in the minds of the players, even though the cleric NPC has a pretty good track record.

The Auld Grump, take two cure light wounds and call me in the morning...

 

[maddman75]

For my group its wizards. We've had several sorcerers, but so far only one wizard, and she's going for arcane trickster, not standard mage.

They love the power of the sorcerer, however. If I were to play one or the other, I'd probably go wiz - I like flexibility and getting spell levels faster more than throwing lightning bolts all day.

 

[jasamcarl]

Until I just started playing one, I hadn't seen anyone play a bard. I have seen plenty of rogues, single and multi classed. Also, far too many barbarians(one of the weakest classes IMO). No single classed sorcerers either, because at higher levels they pale in comparison to wizards. Also I haven't seen a single classed monk.

Your comments about Barbarians and Sorcerers are pretty off the mark. Though the fighter has a feat advantage over the Barbarian, very few of said feats has much applicability in every combat and if they do it comes at the expense of using other feats; the fighter's strength is in combat versatility, not power. A barbarian can usually get pretty far with the power attack chain which, coupled with their increased strength and constitution, gives them a slight edge in continuous combat power. Their skill list and points are also an advantage, as is damage reduction.

The same logic applys to sorcerers versus wizards. With its extra feats and spellbook, a wizard is certainly more versatile over the long haul than a sorcerer. But the sorcerer always has a superior number of spells and greater incombat versatility with spontaneous casting.

I think you are mistaking versitility or 'cool' factor for real power.

 

[Michael Tree]

The only classes I've never seen are sorcerer, psion, and psychic warrior.

I have never seen a single classed rogue, druid, or ranger.

 

[carrot]

We are doing quite well - all of the classes have been played at one time or another, just nobody ever plays a single classed character!

It has to be said that the Druid was pants - but that might be more because he was a pacifist and a multiclassed Cleric.

The Barbarian rocks - barbarian/fighter/frenzied beserker, just tends to want to kill other party members when frenzying...

The Ranger was ok, but was a little dull in the city based campaign that we were playing in.

The Paladin was ok, but died a little early on, and the player wanted something more fun to play.

Apart from these classes, we generally have all of the main ones covered.

 

[The Cardinal]

in the campaign I GM: no rogues (except for a short stint of a rogue/ranger PC)

in the campaign I play in: no single-class wizards (but my next PC will be one)

in all campaigns: absolutely no friggin' bards!!!