Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Gladius Legis" data-source="post: 8056128" data-attributes="member: 68748">Aside from the one case of an early Vampire class that never saw publication, Vampire was a race or a race template. And it always worked better in D&D as a template, because it allowed flexibility in what a vampire could be. Some vampires in D&Ds other than 4e were fighters, others mages, and such.Vampire was more Tier 5. Here is the definition of Tier 5:"Capable of doing only one thing, and not necessarily all that well, or so unfocused that they have trouble mastering anything, and in many types of encounters the character cannot contribute. In some cases, can do one thing very well, but that one thing is very often not needed. "Fits the 4e Vampire to a tee, I'd say.The Vampire was split along both of those lines, actually. Most DEX powers were weapon-based and most CHA powers implement-based.Every single one of these classes had party compositions where they could be placed in without incident. Just as many AD&D parties with Paladins had them without incident as not. Same with the 2e Thief. 1e Barbarian was OK if nobody at the table was a Magic-User. And Templar was there for Dark Sun parties who wanted to be evil.I wholly reject the premise that any of these classes belong on any worst list when they all had situations they could cooperate in well enough, and none of them were mechanically inept.I'd argue the 3.0 Ranger and the 3.0 and 3.5 Paladin also mechanically did not work.3e Monk was pretty bad. But still better than the Ranger in 3.0 and the Paladin in both 3e revisions.Thief skills were not situational. There was always a use for opening locks and disabling traps in evey AD&D game I've ever played. 3e Rogues had their issues with Sneak Attack-immune enemies but was still one of the better martials. And all martials were obsoleted by full casters, so the Rogue was in the same boat there.</blockquote>

Verification