D&D 5E The classes that nobody wants to play

[psychophipps]

And if you only take 1-2 levels of paladin, you don't have to serve anyone at all.

Lanliss as well...

I will simply point out that what you gentlemen think makes a Paladin what they are and what I think makes a Paladin what they are are completely different things.

Sent from my XT1254 using EN World mobile app

 

[Valdier]

Lanliss as well...

I will simply point out that what you gentlemen think makes a Paladin what they are and what I think makes a Paladin what they are are completely different things.

And that is perfectly ok, your game, your house rules. We are talking about 5e though, and per the rules, it doesn't support your assertion for what a paladin is, or how they work. 1e/2e paladins were a different game and I would agree with the Lawful Stupid view of them back then. That has changed over the last decade (give or take a few years).

 

[Lanliss]

Lanliss as well...

I will simply point out that what you gentlemen think makes a Paladin what they are and what I think makes a Paladin what they are are completely different things.

Sent from my XT1254 using EN World mobile app

As with everything, you can run it how you want. I was just mentioning the reason that a Warlock/Paladin is entirely possible within the fluff of the two classes. I am sure a lot of people probably do it for the optimization dips, but I can think of a few fun characters to roleplay that blend the two.

For example, Saint Nicholas is an Archfey in my world, and he might as well be an Ancients Paladin himself, as much as he believes in good and fun. So, a PC could actually be both a Feylock of Saint Nicholas, and an Ancients Paladin. If they really wanted to serve a master, they could be a Paladin of Saint Nicholas, though he doesn't really ask fealty.

Other combinations that mesh well are Fiend/Vengeance (classic "anything to get revenge" character), or Devotion/Undying for a character who has sworn themselves, blade and blood, to a Lich/other creature of Undeath.

 

[LarryD]

I play and DM in three campaigns, and the only class not picked across them all has been wizard.

 

[Hussar]

I have to admit, I'm rather surprised Sorcerer seems so unpopular. Again, personal experience and all that, but, our group seems to really love them. Had two in one campaign. Ranger I kinda understand because of all the kerfuffle. To be honest though, the archer ranger in our Dragonlance game was a damage god for a LOT of the campaign. No -5/+10 cheese. Just really effective. I'm playing a revised ranger in our Ravenloft campaign, and she's been extremely effective. I'm really liking the revised class.

Eh, it'd be a funny old world if we all liked the same things.

 

[neq.the.glockenspiel]

I still have no idea why cleric is not the most popular class. In 5e especially where you have both toughs and a wide range of spells. Plus as the one holding the hit point purse strings under some circumstances, why not call the shots? Follow me or no free heals?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ogre Mage]

I still have no idea why cleric is not the most popular class. In 5e especially where you have both toughs and a wide range of spells. Plus as the one holding the hit point purse strings under some circumstances, why not call the shots? Follow me or no free heals?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A lot of it has to do with longstanding stereotypes about the cleric as being a healbot and nothing else, which most players don't want to play. That is how clerics are usually seen as opposed to healing being a form of leverage. Some players dislike the roleplaying restrictions on the cleric class. For instance, in some cases the dogma of your deity may call on you to heal others regardless of whether they are behaving appropriately or not. Perhaps there is also a roleplaying stereotype about the cleric being a pious, holier-than-thou stick-in-the-mud who never has any fun. That is too bad, because a good DM-player partnership can really flesh out your PCs connection to the deity, illuminate the kind of guidance he or she provides for you -- it can make for a rich role-playing experience. Every deity's portfolio is different and provides a different focus for your character. They're not all about healing.

 

[Ogre Mage]

I have to admit, I'm rather surprised Sorcerer seems so unpopular. Again, personal experience and all that, but, our group seems to really love them. Had two in one campaign. Ranger I kinda understand because of all the kerfuffle. To be honest though, the archer ranger in our Dragonlance game was a damage god for a LOT of the campaign. No -5/+10 cheese. Just really effective. I'm playing a revised ranger in our Ravenloft campaign, and she's been extremely effective. I'm really liking the revised class.

Eh, it'd be a funny old world if we all liked the same things.

Sorcerers are popular in my local gaming area as well. But I now see the sorcerer has dropped even further in these polls, so much so that it is now as unpopular as the monk, which earlier had been in dead last by itself. Did the new UA for sorcerers rub people the wrong way?

 

[FrogReaver]

Sorcerers are popular in my local gaming area as well. But I now see the sorcerer has dropped even further in these polls, so much so that it is now as unpopular as the monk, which earlier had been in dead last by itself. Did the new UA for sorcerers rub people the wrong way?

I think most people have just always liked wizard better than sorcerer and since they fill such a similar niche sorcerors get dropped for wizards. Just IMO. Personally I think the sorcerer is a great class and is the best buff class in the game. Maybe a lot of players don't like to play the ally buff role. That would certainly explain it's poor performance.

 

[Tallifer]

The roleplayers I know like variety, so I have seen almost every class. 4th Edition had a few stranger classes, and those never saw the table: Battlemind, Seeker, Ardent, Warden... however had the edition lasted, I am sure we would have tried them.