What Classes are roleplayed the WORSE ?

[Rashak Mani]

Lately I have been roleplaying very well an innocent paladin... and it struck me how badly most Paladins are played: Righteous Buffons or Wacko Crusaders. Sometimes I see a lot of Rogues played like sociable criminals too.

Of course religion is hard to bring to life in a social game... as is criminal behaviour of some rogues. Are there classes harder to roleplay properly or that people treat in a less than serious tone ?

So what classes do you feel are (usually) roleplayed the worse ? (multiple choices)

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

Clerics, Barbarians, and Paladins.

Most Clerics I see are just...too...I'm not sure to describe it other than uptight. Yes, it fits some characters, but it gets real old after a while. Not everyone has the same personality!

Barbarians...same problem to an extent. They all seem to be the carboard cut-out stupid idiot rager...or at least, that's all I've ever seen. I would love to see one into Tactics or very charismatic...but haven't.

Paladins...I'll say this. My significant other REFUSES to play a Paladin or let ME play one at the same table because of the reservations she has against them...all because of the usual annoying Lawful Stupid stereotype.

 

[BryonD]

obviously any class can be played poorly.

And I have certainly seen each of the examples you list.

But the classes I have seen non-roleplayed the most frequently are fighter and wizard. Both classes offer the least resistance to playing an "if it moves kill it" type.

A paladin saying "It moved, my duty compels me to kill it" is just a slight fraction above" Dude, it moved!!! I cast magic missle!!!" or "Dude, it moved!!!! I charge!!!"

 

[Elf Witch]

Lately I have been roleplaying very well an innocent paladin... and it struck me how badly most Paladins are played: Righteous Buffons or Wacko Crusaders. Sometimes I see a lot of Rogues played like sociable criminals too.

Of course religion is hard to bring to life in a social game... as is criminal behaviour of some rogues. Are there classes harder to roleplay properly or that people treat in a less than serious tone ?

So what classes do you feel are (usually) roleplayed the worse ? (multiple choices)

I think paladins and clerics rank up at the top for bad role playing. I too get tired of the fantatical kill everything in sight holy warrior. As for clerics I would like to see more flavor with who the god is I think a lawful good cleric of ST Cuthbert is going to be played differently than a a lawful good cleric of Herioneus. Instead of picking your gos for the kewl domains pick the god that best suits your concept.

Rogues can drive me crazy too not every rogue is going to be a chaotic neutral who steals everything not nailed down even from thier own party. They have so many skills to choose from you have a lot of choice on different flavors.

 

[hunter1828]

Paladins and monks. I've met few people that can carry off the Lawful nature of either one effectively. Not saying no one can, just I haven't gamed with anyone that can.

hunter1828

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

PAL A DINS!

However, lots of classes have ridiculous stereotypes, such as monks, bards, etc.

 

[2d6]

99.9% of the Barbarians I've played with are far too cosmopolitan.

 

[Hand of Evil]

Paladins; I think it has to do with the DM and player not really thinking world myth and working on the code to round it out for the campaign. Clerics run close behind for the same reason.

 

[shadow]

Really, I don't think that there is a "good" and "bad" way to roleplay each class. For example, if a player wants to play a crusading paladin, what's wrong with it? (Afterall you can argue that several "good" people in real life are pretty militant and fanatical.)

If I would have to pick a class, I would say clerics, rogues, and druids.

I've seen to many people get way too into the cleric class and the tenets of their gods (some people get so into it it's a little freaky!). I can/can't do this because my god encourages/forbids it. While I guess it's not technically bad role-playing, it gets annoying for the whole party to have to accomodate the demands of the cleric. (Especially if the player is playing the cleric as a very strict follower of some religion.)

Too often rogues get played as kleptomaniacs. "I pick his pocket!" Sure they were called "thieves" in previous incarnations, but that doesn't mean that they try to steal everything in sight! I always thought the survival instinct would override player's need to steal from everyone, but I've been proven wrong on numerous occasions (including a rogue who was killed by a fellow party member whom he was trying to steal from!)

Finally, from time to time I've seen druids played as "hippy nature freaks" who shun all civilization/technology and don't care a thing about what happens as long as the land they protect isn't harmed. (I guess it goes back to the true neutral thing of 2e.) It gets annoying when druids refuse to work with the party because they don't care about the party's goals because "they don't involve protecting nature."

 

[TiQuinn]

I would say Psions (Psionicists).

Players like to play them because they have cool and different powers, but when I ask them about their character's motivations and backgrounds, they usually can't give much detail outside of:

A) They are mysterious and brooding
B) They are shunned by their family for their strange powers that they began manifesting at puberty.

This is just in my experience, but my players usually want to play them like members of the X-Men.