What Core Class was actually fun to play

[Rechan]

I found clerics and wizards unfun because the high amount of pre-adventuring work. Selecting your spells from dozens of choices on each spell level, memorising the descriptions so you don't have to flip open one or more rulebooks with every spell cast, getting always stocked up on scrolls and wands...

I found it frustrating that you had to decide ahead of time what you were going to be good at, and then the DM throws stuff that your memorized spells don't do jack against.

Cleric: "We're going into the Swamp of Ickiness. Well, I'll memorize Delay Poison and Lesser Restoration, in case we get hit by wraiths or poisonous creatures."

DM: "Today you'll be facing trolls and lizardmen."

Cleric: "%$*#!"

 

[The Little Raven]

I found it frustrating that you had to decide ahead of time what you were going to be good at, and then the DM throws stuff that your memorized spells don't do jack against.

I've met a couple DMs who revel in doing this. They'd ask to look at your list of prepared spells, jot them down, then make sure most of them are useless. Needless to say, they never lasted more than one game session.

 

[Rechan]

I sometimes wonder if others underestimate the usefulness of the tactical options trip, disarm, sunder, bullrush or grapple. Maybe it's just because too many monsters are a lot larger then PCs (making these options less useful), but at least I was able to play an entertaining fighter this way.

Grapple is a headache and a half. If you don't have the Imp Grapple feat, try grappling that heavy hitting armor guy and see how quickly you're splattered.

Sunder = "Thanks Bill, there goes the magical weapon we could've used or sold." Also useless against monsters that don't bother to wield weapons.

Bullrush - "Oooh, he moved back 5'! He... takes a 5' step this round and is back where he started." Unless you're fighting on somewhere with narrow ledges, it's... not a fantastic option. When you're just in the middle of the forest or road, or in a dungeon with no hazards, which is most of the time, meh.

Disarm - Requires 2 feats to get to, rather than 1. Also is useless against monsters without weapons.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

I personally found a really fun base-class for both in-combat and outside-combat stuff was the Beguiler. There versatility of the spells, social skills and rogue skills is great.

 

[billd91]

You're kidding, right? Take a stroll through the 5 MMs, and other monster books. Undead are the most popular. There's an undead for every type of death - I'd be surprised if there isn't "Slipped on a bar of soap in the shower" Undead.

Undead make the best sense as guardians of tombs and ancient places, as they're low maintenance and always retain. Liches and Vampires are some of the most common monster BBEGs outside of Fiends and Illithids.

And aside from rats and wolves, what do 1st level PCs fight? Skeletons and zombies.

And how many other undead types, in a typical campaign world, would count as being anything nearly as common as skeletons and zombies? Ghouls? Anything else? Not particularly. The frequency of a monster type in the MM is absolutely irrelevant. It only shows that the type of monster inspires a lot of creativity. Dragons are very common in the first MM. But, in most circumstances, they aren't very common in the campaign world. That's the kind of frequency that should be most relevant.

If you're finding your rogues are being sidelined too often, maybe the problem rests with adventure design. If vampires and liches are common BBEG in a campaign, maybe the DM is relying on too few ideas.

 

[Remathilis]

Seriously? I'm not being snarky here. Or, if I am, I totally don't mean to be. But, what's fun about "aid another"?

I have an artificer in my game who can't hit for beans, but between his iron-defender homoculi (which he adds extra HD to) and his buffs, aid anothers, and flanks, seems to do quite well for himself. He almost NEVER gets the killing blow, but he adds anywhere from a +2 to +8 bonus to a characters attacks via buffs, flanks, and aiding.

Then again, it takes a special kind of player who wants to sacrifice personal glory and satisfaction to be support role character. Not everyone can play that kind of character day in, day out.

 

[The Little Raven]

I have an artificer in my game who can't hit for beans, but between his iron-defender homoculi (which he adds extra HD to) and his buffs, aid anothers, and flanks, seems to do quite well for himself. He almost NEVER gets the killing blow, but he adds anywhere from a +2 to +8 bonus to a characters attacks via buffs, flanks, and aiding.

Since that player controls that iron-defender homonculi, one would assume it is performing actions, and therefore that player and his character is useful. That is entirely different than only ever having the option to grant another player a +2 bonus to some roll.

It's like telling the cleric and the wizard "Hey, it sucks this entire adventure is in a dead-magic zone, but you can still give everyone else a +2 bonus on rolls with aid another. That's fun!"

Then again, it takes a special kind of player who wants to sacrifice personal glory and satisfaction to be support role character. Not everyone can play that kind of character day in, day out.

We're not talking about glory, we're talking about fun. If I'm spending a game session and the only thing I can do during the entire game session is make someone else get a +2 bonus on a roll, that is seriously lame.

 

[Nifft]

But I don't think I'd want to use "Aid Another". Anyone can do that, it doesn't feel like something that's unique to my character.

Ah, I see.

I think the original poster was saying that he also had enjoyed using that action, not that he build a character around the use of it. I'd agree with you that it's not something to optimize for and plan on using all the time, unless you're doing something interesting in addition.

Cheers, -- N

 

[DamnedChoir]

I really agree with a lot of these posts. There were too many mechanical shortcomings and pitfalls that affected each class. Whenever I felt even remotely cool, my powers were quickly nullified by something that made me lame again and I quickly got bored.

The DM always felt bad about throwing things at us, sometimes without the intention, that nullified our cool abilities and made us fall back on lame tactis that weren't very fun and exciting to beat them.

3.0 and 3.5, no matter how badass you are, there's always something that nullifies your abilities.

 

[Rechan]

If you're finding your rogues are being sidelined too often, maybe the problem rests with adventure design. If vampires and liches are common BBEG in a campaign, maybe the DM is relying on too few ideas.

The Age of Worms adventure path would like to have a word with you.

Now, add in with undead Oozes, Elementals, Plants, and Constructs, and you have a problem.