-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
What classes did you play, which did you like?
- Thread starter TerraDave
- Start date
Voadam
Legend
I liked playing them all, though I only decided to play the two paladins I did because of the understanding I had with the DMs about how code and alignment stuff would be handled.
Paladin alignment and code mechanics could have significantly detrimented my fun under certain interpretations and DM handling.
Paladin alignment and code mechanics could have significantly detrimented my fun under certain interpretations and DM handling.
Robert Ranting
First Post
I enjoyed playing a cleric, druid, and ranger. I did not enjoy playing a Fighter or a Rogue with a few levels of fighter. I played a Paladin/Archivist gestalt for a few sessions, but I did not count it in my vote, since that is a whole other beast entirely from single-class paladin.
I think much of this is dependent on my attitude about the game and the level of mechanical knowledge and munchkinry that is necessary to play an effective character. If I want to play a druid who focuses on mounted combat and hardly ever uses wildshape or summons creatures, I can do that and still fill the role of backup melee and healer (and I have). The druid is flexible enough, and powerful enough, that this sub-optimal choice still works.
In my experience, it is a lot easier to mess up a fighter, which is a shame, since it is often the class given to new players who are just learning the game. Part of this has to do with the fighter's lack of options. Fighter's have to fight well, they don't have any skill or spell options to fall back on. Conversely, they offer lots of feat choices, but only a few of those options are actually good at helping the fighter do his job effectively. It is all too easy for someone like myself to settle on a feat combination that looked cool, only to find out that it is utter rubbish in play. As the old saying goes, it gave me just enough rope to hang myself with.
The same thing can also be said for spellcasters, but aside from the sorceror and bard, they can actively change their spell selection during play. Even if it costs a wizard money to do so, he can add new spells to his book, and a divine caster who picks the wrong spells one day can just pray for different ones the next (if he survives his mistake). Fighters on the other hand, need to be re-written, switching out feats, making sure they meet skill and BAB prereqs for the replacement feats, perhaps reshuffling ability score points or even ditching fighter levels for another base class or PrC. In the end, the fighter just takes a lot more work and mechanical knowledge to not screw up. There is no safety net, no fallback, no guidelines in the class itself for how to do it well, and as a person who doesn't want to put a huge amount of time mulling over my build, those are things I want and like to have with a class.
Robert "Then Again, I Probably Would Have Went With TWF and Monkey Grip Anyway" Ranting
I think much of this is dependent on my attitude about the game and the level of mechanical knowledge and munchkinry that is necessary to play an effective character. If I want to play a druid who focuses on mounted combat and hardly ever uses wildshape or summons creatures, I can do that and still fill the role of backup melee and healer (and I have). The druid is flexible enough, and powerful enough, that this sub-optimal choice still works.
In my experience, it is a lot easier to mess up a fighter, which is a shame, since it is often the class given to new players who are just learning the game. Part of this has to do with the fighter's lack of options. Fighter's have to fight well, they don't have any skill or spell options to fall back on. Conversely, they offer lots of feat choices, but only a few of those options are actually good at helping the fighter do his job effectively. It is all too easy for someone like myself to settle on a feat combination that looked cool, only to find out that it is utter rubbish in play. As the old saying goes, it gave me just enough rope to hang myself with.
The same thing can also be said for spellcasters, but aside from the sorceror and bard, they can actively change their spell selection during play. Even if it costs a wizard money to do so, he can add new spells to his book, and a divine caster who picks the wrong spells one day can just pray for different ones the next (if he survives his mistake). Fighters on the other hand, need to be re-written, switching out feats, making sure they meet skill and BAB prereqs for the replacement feats, perhaps reshuffling ability score points or even ditching fighter levels for another base class or PrC. In the end, the fighter just takes a lot more work and mechanical knowledge to not screw up. There is no safety net, no fallback, no guidelines in the class itself for how to do it well, and as a person who doesn't want to put a huge amount of time mulling over my build, those are things I want and like to have with a class.
Robert "Then Again, I Probably Would Have Went With TWF and Monkey Grip Anyway" Ranting
Li Shenron
Legend
Interesting how the Cleric is the second last class which people have never played. Almost 90% of the people have played a Cleric at least once. Of those, only a small minority didn't like it.
That means to me that the minority which advocates the Cleric is unfun is a very noisy one.
That means to me that the minority which advocates the Cleric is unfun is a very noisy one.
StreamOfTheSky
Adventurer
Wow, that's amazing....I've played and enjoyed a member of each class (most good times = rogue, hands down) except Fighter....Poor Fighter. Well, I just started a Fighter that's going to be an antagonist in an online community. Once he gets more time, I may grow to really like him. Unfortunately, he uses a heavily houseruled Fighter variant I made up, so I don't think that'd count.
I've pretty much played every class in 3E at some time and liked almost all of them (exceptions being the bard (requires an excellent build utilizing dozens of sources to be half-decent) and cleric (never played (a straight) one!) - I just don't feel comfortable in a supporter role for extended periods of time).
However I voted 'disliked playing sorcerer & wizard' since both classes absolutely pale compared to psions. Psionics are superior to magic in pretty much every way (mechanically, that is) - IMHO, of course...
However I voted 'disliked playing sorcerer & wizard' since both classes absolutely pale compared to psions. Psionics are superior to magic in pretty much every way (mechanically, that is) - IMHO, of course...
w_earle_wheeler
First Post
I've had some fun times playing barbarians, usually multi-classed.
I didn't vote in any direction for the bard, because while I've played one, he died too quickly for me to decide if I liked him or not.
I love the 3e cleric, and I'm always willing to play one in a group that doesn't have a cleric. With domains, feats and multi-classing, clerics were the most fun for me to play.
The druid is, strangely, the only class I've never wanted to play in 3e. It just didn't interest me.
The fighter is great. I loved the ability to customize.
I've always liked playing the 3e monk even though he never really fit in or hit the "sweet spot" in level.
I like the paladin, but I've never had a chance to play one as a PC in 3e.
I've only played a ranger as a minor multi-class buff. Like the druid, the class never interested me.
And as for the wizard versus the sorcerer, I've always preferred the wizard.
So, in order of fun, I'd have to say my top 3 are:
Cleric
Wizard
Fighter
My favorite clerics were multi-classed. One was a half-orc barbarian/cleric who had the trickery domain. The other was a dwarf fighter/cleric designed to be a problem solver and reserve tanker. I've always wanted to build a nice cleric/rogue combination but haven't gotten around to it.
When playing a wizard, I almost always think way too hard about what I'm going to do when I'm grappled or tied-up and imprisoned without a spellbook. For this reason, I always took eschew spell material and spell mastery and made sure I knew a variety of spells that could be used without somatic or verbal components without the need of metamagic.
I didn't vote in any direction for the bard, because while I've played one, he died too quickly for me to decide if I liked him or not.
I love the 3e cleric, and I'm always willing to play one in a group that doesn't have a cleric. With domains, feats and multi-classing, clerics were the most fun for me to play.
The druid is, strangely, the only class I've never wanted to play in 3e. It just didn't interest me.
The fighter is great. I loved the ability to customize.
I've always liked playing the 3e monk even though he never really fit in or hit the "sweet spot" in level.
I like the paladin, but I've never had a chance to play one as a PC in 3e.
I've only played a ranger as a minor multi-class buff. Like the druid, the class never interested me.
And as for the wizard versus the sorcerer, I've always preferred the wizard.
So, in order of fun, I'd have to say my top 3 are:
Cleric
Wizard
Fighter
My favorite clerics were multi-classed. One was a half-orc barbarian/cleric who had the trickery domain. The other was a dwarf fighter/cleric designed to be a problem solver and reserve tanker. I've always wanted to build a nice cleric/rogue combination but haven't gotten around to it.
When playing a wizard, I almost always think way too hard about what I'm going to do when I'm grappled or tied-up and imprisoned without a spellbook. For this reason, I always took eschew spell material and spell mastery and made sure I knew a variety of spells that could be used without somatic or verbal components without the need of metamagic.
Gold Roger
First Post
I didn't play that many characters, so I'll go character by character.
First was an unholy amalgan of ranger/barabarian/fighter. Despite my best efforts to the contrary, all this guy could do was roll for attack. I liked him, but not because of the classes, which all bored me.
Second was a halfling rogue. He wasn't build for sneaky melee attacking and we fought mostly undead, so he was near useless in a combat. Didn't like him and don't like sneak attack focused combats, as its in the end, just rolling attacks with more damage.
Third was a wizard. I liked playing him, except for the whole running out of spells deal.
Fourth was a Monk. Powergamed to death to be competitive. Worked nicely, but not really because he was a monk.
Current character is a cleric. Again, love it, except that we tend to have many successive battles and being out of spells just sucks.
As you can see, I appear to be right in the target group for 4th.
First was an unholy amalgan of ranger/barabarian/fighter. Despite my best efforts to the contrary, all this guy could do was roll for attack. I liked him, but not because of the classes, which all bored me.
Second was a halfling rogue. He wasn't build for sneaky melee attacking and we fought mostly undead, so he was near useless in a combat. Didn't like him and don't like sneak attack focused combats, as its in the end, just rolling attacks with more damage.
Third was a wizard. I liked playing him, except for the whole running out of spells deal.
Fourth was a Monk. Powergamed to death to be competitive. Worked nicely, but not really because he was a monk.
Current character is a cleric. Again, love it, except that we tend to have many successive battles and being out of spells just sucks.
As you can see, I appear to be right in the target group for 4th.
Phaeryx
First Post
My favorite base class is non-core: the Scout, from Complete Adventurer. I never tire of it. It's like it was made just for me, with some of the best aspects of the Rogue and Ranger rolled into one. Love the skirmish ability, evasion, speed bonus, high skill points per level, and the wide range of class skills. Great for multiclassing with Fighter. Also works just as well or better than the Rogue for qualifying for the Thief-Acrobat, one of my favorite prestige classes.
