D&D 5E Survivor Core Classes- Fighter Wins!

[Wulffolk]

Paladins, 40 years of telling everyone else how to live their lives...

Check, check, check check, out my Paladin
Special
I think I'm special
I do
You can see it in my dice
You can see it when I laugh at thee
Look down on thee
I walk around on thee
Just one more fight
About my leadership
And I will straight up
Leave your group
Cause I've had enough of this
And now I'm ****ed
Yeah
This time I'm 'a let it all come out
This time I'm 'a stand up and shout
I'm 'a do things my way
It's my way
My way, or the highway

Really? Seriously? Using a Limp Bizkit song to make your point?

Wow! I just wish there was a way to take XP away from somebody.

I always imagined that the Excalibur theme music, O Fortuna of Carmina Burana, suited the Paladin much better than Limp Bizkit.

 

[rgoodbb]

This Survivor thread has an interesting methodology.

The haters get 2 points, but the fans only get 1 point.

So, it might be especially good for identifying classes with high "pain points", places of difficulty even where the overall design is decent.

So it seems the Fighter, Paladin, Wizard, and Rogue are hated least ... and have the fewest problems?

I hate the Wizard most. Can I get some more hate points please?

 

[Seramus]

This Survivor thread has an interesting methodology.
The haters get 2 points, but the fans only get 1 point.
So, it might be especially good for identifying classes with high "pain points", places of difficulty even where the overall design is decent.

It's hard to say. Mostly because repeat voters have such a huge impact on the outcome, and our preferences are probably not sufficient sample size to represent... anything, really.

So it seems the Fighter, Paladin, Wizard, and Rogue are hated least ... and have the fewest problems?

Could be. Paladin aside, it's nice to see the 'original three' lasting so long. We also saw that Warlock was incredibly contested, with people both loving it (myself included) and hating it.

 

[Yaarel]

Fighter WINNER WINNER CHICKER DINNER!

UPDATE- FATALITIES!

Sorcerer #51
Barbarian #81
Ranger #120
Monk #131
Cleric #203
Druid #209
Bard #246
Warlock #263
Wizard #294
Paladin #301
Rogue #304

Maybe put the fatalities in reverse order to convey a sense of decreasing success.


Fighter − WINNER − Adamantine Medal

−−−FATALITIES−−−

Rogue − Platinum Medal
Paladin − Gold Medal
Wizard − Electrum Medal
Warlock − Silver Medal
Bard − Copper Medal
Druid
Cleric
Monk
Ranger
Barbarian
Sorcerer



Fun thread!

 

[Redthistle]

This was so much fun - my thanks to everyone who contributed!

 

[The Old Crow]

This Survivor thread has an interesting methodology.

The haters get 2 points, but the fans only get 1 point.

So, it might be especially good for identifying classes with high "pain points", places of difficulty even where the overall design is decent.

So it seems the Fighter, Paladin, Wizard, and Rogue are hated least ... and have the fewest problems?

I think it depends on how one defines "problems" as far as this thread goes. The OP stated that we could vote for whatever reason, however capricious. As far as Fighters go, the warrior stepping into the unknown, weapon clenched in hand, is a very strong archetype that I think is powerful enough to overcome even perceived design flaws.

 

[Redthistle]

Taking the long view, RPGs had their genesis in war games in which fighters are the only "class". It's fitting that the fighter won.

A bit of whimsy: imagine this thread were a story-board for a graphic book or a movie and each poster described the actions in their respective posts.

It would be like the speed-dating version of a multi-author tale.

 

[Maxperson]

I appreciate your interest in multiple versions of Paladins, and I am all for adding Oaths that make sense, but I think that the Alignment system was part of the root of the problem. I am glad that D&D has moved away from allowing Alignments to define character's. I have not used Alignments for decades now. I prefer to define character's by their nature and demeanor, personality traits and motives, etc.

Okay. Since the thread is over and I won't be derailing anything now, I agree with you. For my personal game I tell people they can pick an alignment or nor. My players develop personalities for their PCs and those guide better than any alignment ever could. My point was not so much that alignment was key to the 1e paladins, as they were effectively different classes, not just paladin X with smite chaos instead of smite evil. More oaths would be good.

 

[Yaarel]

I think it depends on how one defines "problems" as far as this thread goes. The OP stated that we could vote for whatever reason, however capricious. As far as Fighters go, the warrior stepping into the unknown, weapon clenched in hand, is a very strong archetype that I think is powerful enough to overcome even perceived design flaws.

Yeah. Since the days of Gilgamesh thousands of years ago, the *first* stories revolved around the Fighter archetype venturing off to seek a place in the world.


It seems to me, stories like Harry Potter, where the Wizard archetype becomes the central hero reflects a shift away from the Bronze Age and toward a new technological reality.

 

[steeldragons]

Feh. You go to bed on the West Coast thinking "it's not midnight yet" and now just LOOK what happened.

Lousy final. Very disappointed in you ENworld.