The WORST Classes

[Asmo]

I lack the ability to convey the vitriolic hatred I have for druids. It seethes in my guts like a nest of angry wasps.

Now we´re talking!

Asmo

 

[tylermalan]

Now we´re talking!

Asmo

Yeah, man! I need to make hate threads more often...

 

[tylermalan]

They have the worst saves in the game.

They're tremendously MAD (only Monk and Ninja are worse).

They had almost every means of ranged SA taken away, and fell behind the other melee classes for melee damage/suvivability (just look at Fighter, Paladin, and even Barbarian and TWF Ranger compared to 3E). The medium BAB also severely crimps their melee ability.

The skill change BADLY destroyed much of their niche protection as being the "skill guy." Now thanks to their MAD, they're lucky to be the best at any skill at all, other than Disable Device (partly due to the trapfinding bonus, partly because no one else really would care enough to put ranks in it).

It's more a case of Rogue not being very good at anything at all. The game rewards specialization, being the second best in the party at most roles isn't really that useful. Bard has always had a similar problem, but at least gets solid buffing and decent spellcasting to compensate.


Now, I happen to really like rogues, and monks. So if this thread is about HATE, then my choice is Gunslinger, hands-down. It does pirouettes as it dances over a decade of broken rules precedents in its tango with its dance partner, "my power is limited only by DM fiat," gaining grit points while doing so.

A guy was about to play a Gunslinger in this Carrion Crown game we are playing. The DM shot him down, and I think I heard an angelic choir singing just for me... I hate that class! And I've never even seen it in play!

So, could you expand a little more on why the skill changes hurt the Rogue's niche?

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Monk, Ninja, Samurai - not because of any mechanical weakness, but because my settings very seldom have that much of an Eastern bent.

The Auld Grump

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

A guy was about to play a Gunslinger in this Carrion Crown game we are playing. The DM shot him down, and I think I heard an angelic choir singing just for me... I hate that class! And I've never even seen it in play!

So, could you expand a little more on why the skill changes hurt the Rogue's niche?

Well, basically, "class skills" used to really mean something, it was actually sort of a class feature in its own right. Now it's just a +3, and any schmuck that multiclasses just 1 level can snag all of those bonuses and never look back. The extremely punitive cross class skill rules in 3E that everyone (but me) seemed to hate were a massive form of niche protection. "Yeah, your sorcerer has 10 points higher charisma than me, but with half the max ranks allowed and basically having to spend all your skill points just on that one skill, you're not terribly incentivized to jump on Use Magic Device [or Intimidate, or Diplomacy; basically pick any class and skill based on its primary stat that it didn't have as a class skill], now are you? And even if you did, I'm still going to end up better at it. Nya!"

That's all gone now. The rogue might still be the best at dex-based skills, only, but Ranger and some others can give him a run towards the obsolete bin on those, too. So again, rogue can't even come close to the most damage, can't outshine the other classes at any skill except maybe disable device, is squishy/weak/MAD as hell, instead of being good party support is actually one of the most party-dependent (with the sneak attack nerfs, I'd say even more so than monk; for ranged SA you're basically begging for Greater Invis or sucking), oh and maneuvering into flanking just so you can do not completely worthless damage is now super deadly. Have fun!

Unless your party is super unbalanced in representation (lots of warriors or mages, and most would argue the latter can handle anything anyway), I can't really justify ever needing the rogue in a party with characters all of different types.

EDIT: And yeah, good for you. I think I've decided that just as "no D&D is better than 4E D&D" for me, so too is "No D&D/PF better than D&D/PF with the PF gun rules."

 

[tylermalan]

Well, basically, "class skills" used to really mean something, it was actually sort of a class feature in its own right. Now it's just a +3, and any schmuck that multiclasses just 1 level can snag all of those bonuses and never look back. The extremely punitive cross class skill rules in 3E that everyone (but me) seemed to hate were a massive form of niche protection. "Yeah, your sorcerer has 10 points higher charisma than me, but with half the max ranks allowed and basically having to spend all your skill points just on that one skill, you're not terribly incentivized to jump on Use Magic Device [or Intimidate, or Diplomacy; basically pick any class and skill based on its primary stat that it didn't have as a class skill], now are you? And even if you did, I'm still going to end up better at it. Nya!"

That's all gone now. The rogue might still be the best at dex-based skills, only, but Ranger and some others can give him a run towards the obsolete bin on those, too. So again, rogue can't even come close to the most damage, can't outshine the other classes at any skill except maybe disable device, is squishy/weak/MAD as hell, instead of being good party support is actually one of the most party-dependent (with the sneak attack nerfs, I'd say even more so than monk; for ranged SA you're basically begging for Greater Invis or sucking), oh and maneuvering into flanking just so you can do not completely worthless damage is now super deadly. Have fun!

Unless your party is super unbalanced in representation (lots of warriors or mages, and most would argue the latter can handle anything anyway), I can't really justify ever needing the rogue in a party with characters all of different types.

EDIT: And yeah, good for you. I think I've decided that just as "no D&D is better than 4E D&D" for me, so too is "No D&D/PF better than D&D/PF with the PF gun rules."

Hmm, that makes a lot of sense. What are they supposed to get to offset this? Trapfinding? Rogue talents?

 

[Noir le Lotus]

They have the worst saves in the game.

This one is true and it's the main problem of the rogue ...

They're tremendously MAD (only Monk and Ninja are worse).

Rogues are MAD ?? They need Dex and that's all. Int is no longer mandatory with the skill consolidation (Knowledge Local is the only Int-based skill and 8 SP are enough to cover all the basic skills needed) but can be useful. He needs a bit of Con like any other class. Cha is necessary only if you wants to play social. Wis and Str are ok with a 10.
[/QUOTE]

They had almost every means of ranged SA taken away, and fell behind the other melee classes for melee damage/suvivability (just look at Fighter, Paladin, and even Barbarian and TWF Ranger compared to 3E). The medium BAB also severely crimps their melee ability.

Ranged SA was never the main thing of rogues as it needed a lot of support (Blink, Greater Invi ...). Now SA can apply to almost any creature and that's a good change for rogues. Medium BAB was already in like this in 3.5, nothing has changed. Things are even better now that rogues can have the Weapon Finesse feat with a rogue talent : one less feat tax !!

The skill change BADLY destroyed much of their niche protection as being the "skill guy." Now thanks to their MAD, they're lucky to be the best at any skill at all, other than Disable Device (partly due to the trapfinding bonus, partly because no one else really would care enough to put ranks in it).

It's more a case of Rogue not being very good at anything at all. The game rewards specialization, being the second best in the party at most roles isn't really that useful. Bard has always had a similar problem, but at least gets solid buffing and decent spellcasting to compensate.

Rogues are still the best at what they are supposed to do : Disable Device, Stealth, Acrobaty, etc ... Classes relying heavily on Wisdow are better spotter than him, but nothing has changed since 3.5 where druids & rangers were better than rogues for this.

 

[EUBanana]

Rogues, and thieves before them, always sucked. D&D has never been kind to these guys. I think they got better, in increments, and in PF they are a little better again, but their tiny improvements never come near the awesomeness every other class ends up getting.

PF hasn't really changed that.

 

[gamerprinter]

Monk, Ninja, Samurai - not because of any mechanical weakness, but because my settings very seldom have that much of an Eastern bent.

The Auld Grump

And here I don't like Summoner, because it doesn't fit in my Eastern campaign...

I really don't like Summoner, actually, and not because it's weak, rather because its too strong - from a GM's POV, I can't stand Summoner...

 

[concerro]

My number one choice for worst class is Druid.

A class that just irks me to no end. It had some style in older editions. Not enough to really bother playing. It could have been a hedge wizard casting spells both arcane and divine. Much like the druids I would envision from a pseudo medieval fantasy setting. Instead they have been co-opted by hippies. Barf.


How did it make number one? Over-inflate it with power (shape-shifting, full casting and the two best saves) just to make it a viable choice.(given the horrendous roleplaying opportunities) A splash of neutrality to aid players who are allergic to real alignments. Add in some stupid pet and bingo you have the worst class in the game.


The runner up is anything not found in the Core Rulebook.

I lack the ability to convey the vitriolic hatred I have for druids. It seethes in my guts like a nest of angry wasps.

I think we need to define worst. I thought the OP meant worst in terms of most likely to not be useful, which does not fit the druid at all.