Rank the D&D 3.5 classes!

[Gradine]

That fact that people get things wrong does not invalidate those who get it right.

_
glass.

Well, I mean, the Tier list was pretty wrong, but the recommendations to avoid mixing tiers was laughably wrong

 

[Gradine]

Also, I played a Truenamer, and it was pretty fun. Granted, I never got too high level with that PC, which is where the math really starts breaking down.

 

[Maxperson]

Ooh, I didn't even notice this was an ancient thread! I'm a Necromancer and didn't know it!

Braney raised it.

 

[Maxperson]

That fact that people get things wrong does not invalidate those who get it right.

_
glass.

Sure, but the fact that these rankings are primarily based on subjective criteria doesn't invalidate people with a different opinion than yours.

 

[James Gasik]

Braney raised it.

I participated! I get a trophy right?

 

[Maxperson]

I participated! I get a trophy right?

Honorable mention?

 

[TwoSix]

Amazing to see how much the meta changed within a few years. The 3.5 tier system was pretty much set by the time PF1 came out, and nobody was considering Druid at the bottom anymore.

 

[Gradine]

People got Fighter anywhere from best to second-worst.

The meta never had a chance vs. actual experience.

Good riddance

 

[CleverNickName]

Hmmm...for me?

Cleric > Druid > Fighter > All other class options > insurance salesmen > people calling about my vehicle's warranty > Bards

 

[glass]

Well, I mean, the Tier list was pretty wrong, but the recommendations to avoid mixing tiers was laughably wrong

I'm not going to get in to a "is not" - "is so" argument with you. Suffice it to say that I consider the Tier list to be very accurate, and the advice that players from with classes from widely-spaced tiers may lead to problems to be well-founded. That your experience did not include any such problems in no way disproves their possibility.

_
glass.