D&D General What is your favorite class(es), and what about makes them so fun?

[Valetudo]

Basic: Elf was the only class I remember playing.
1st edition: Half orc cleric assasin.
2nd: Dwarf fighter cleric.
3rd: dwarf fighter cleric.
4th: Warord
5th: I have never played, only dm.

 

[DEFCON 1]

So how would you go about making them flavorful? curious I like to think that a subclass does that.

To me, the Witcher has become the iconic "flavorful" arcane warrior in fantasy today. It is first and foremost a weapon-user above anything else (just like the Ranger and Paladin are)... and it has a very specific reason for its existence, in that it is a monster hunter that uses arcane magic to defend itself against the magics of the monsters it hunts. Now some people would say that the Ranger should technically fall under this umbrella (being the prototypical hunter class), but I would disagree. Rangers are very specifically about wilderness survival and protecting animals and nature from those that would destroy them. Any "monster hunting" would be purely an extension of that. Whereas Witchers are only about tracking down and killing aberrations and monsters on behalf of the regular citizenry that hire them. And their use of arcane magic specifically goes to and enhances that. It's not just a fighter that casts spells (your prototypical Eldritch Knight)... the Witcher's flavor is specific.

Now granted... parts of the Warlock leans in that direction, and the Witcher concept also gets covered to a certain extent by Darrington Press's Blood Hunter class (the closest mutant Witcher/monster hunter archetype WotC/D&D Beyond probably has.) So the reasoning could be made that a Witcher class isn't necessary, and I honestly can't argue with that (especially if the whole/only reason someone wants an "arcane warrior" class is merely because of the symmetry aspect of adding it to the Ranger's primal and Paladin's divine "half-caster" status, which seems to be the clarion call for many people's desire for it to be a thing.)

But I'll be honest... right now there are what I would call three "generic" classes-- ones with little to no flavor or fluff in the base class-- it's pretty much purely all just mechanics-- and who gets all their identity from their subclasses. The Fighter, the Rogue, and the Sorcerer. And honestly I just don't think a "generic" arcane warrior class is really useful or adds to the game on top of those three. If you already have a generic warrior in the Fighter, and a generic arcane caster in the Sorcerer... my instinct is to just throw more magic into a Fighter or more weapon-use into a Sorcerer, rather than create a whole new class that splits the difference. But that's just me.

 

[Mind of tempest]

To me, the Witcher has become the iconic "flavorful" arcane warrior in fantasy today. It is first and foremost a weapon-user above anything else (just like the Ranger and Paladin are)... and it has a very specific reason for its existence, in that it is a monster hunter that uses arcane magic to defend itself against the magics of the monsters it hunts. Now some people would say that the Ranger should technically fall under this umbrella (being the prototypical hunter class), but I would disagree. Rangers are very specifically about wilderness survival and protecting animals and nature from those that would destroy them. Any "monster hunting" would be purely an extension of that. Whereas Witchers are only about tracking down and killing aberrations and monsters on behalf of the regular citizenry that hire them. And their use of arcane magic specifically goes to and enhances that. It's not just a fighter that casts spells (your prototypical Eldritch Knight)... the Witcher's flavor is specific.

Now granted... parts of the Warlock leans in that direction, and the Witcher concept also gets covered to a certain extent by Darrington Press's Blood Hunter class (the closest mutant Witcher/monster hunter archetype WotC/D&D Beyond probably has.) So the reasoning could be made that a Witcher class isn't necessary, and I honestly can't argue with that (especially if the whole/only reason someone wants an "arcane warrior" class is merely because of the symmetry aspect of adding it to the Ranger's primal and Paladin's divine "half-caster" status, which seems to be the clarion call for many people's desire for it to be a thing.)

But I'll be honest... right now there are what I would call three "generic" classes-- ones with little to no flavor or fluff in the base class-- it's pretty much purely all just mechanics-- and who gets all their identity from their subclasses. The Fighter, the Rogue, and the Sorcerer. And honestly I just don't think a "generic" arcane warrior class is really useful or adds to the game on top of those three. If you already have a generic warrior in the Fighter, and a generic arcane caster in the Sorcerer... my instinct is to just throw more magic into a Fighter or more weapon-use into a Sorcerer, rather than create a whole new class that splits the difference. But that's just me.

it is the making of functions for sub classes and other threats as monster is a versatile term

 

[Corinnguard]

what is it you enjoy about it anyway?

What do I like about Laser Llama's Magus class?
1. It's take on the Two-Weapon Fighting style. Unlike the PHB version of Two-Weapon Fighting which has you using a Bonus Action to make an attack with your offhand weapon, LL's take on the fighting style has it where you can make your offhand attack a part of your Attack action. So this essentially frees up your use of the Bonus Action for something else like spellcasting or using another Magus feature that might need the Bonus Action. At 1st level, the TWF Magus can put both of his light weapons into his Arcane Armory and use a bonus action to summon both of them into his hands. They will also count as something magical for the purposes of overcoming resistances and immunities to non-magical damage. By 2nd level, the weapons in his Arcane Armory could be used as a spellcasting focus for his spells and perform the somatic component of his spells with them. He can also use a bonus action at 2nd level to place a spell into one of his Arcane Armory weapon for a Spellstrike. Any spell placed with an Arcane Armory weapon will stay there until he actually hits an opponent. So I am thinking that I could take a spell such as Chromatic Orb, use up two spell slots and load with both of his light weapons for a damage combo. Thunder and Lightning (very, very frightening ). Fire and Cold. Radiant and Necrotic. Etc. When the TWF Magus reaches 5th level and gains Extra Attack, he'll be able to make four melee attacks instead of the three if he was using the PHB version of TWF.
2. The Magus' Aegis ability. It sounds like a good way to reduce the amount of damage caused any damage-dealing spell, including those with an Area of Effect. If you can completely reduce the amount of damage down to zero, the hostile spell is dispelled and doesn't harm you or your party. You can even upscale the amount of damage you want to reduce by sacrificing a spell slot at a particular level. And you can do all of this as a Reaction.
3. Spellsunder. You can sunder a magic spell at 10th level. How cool is that? You are literally attacking a magic spell with a physical weapon.

My favorite Magus subclass is Order of the Blade Dancers. I like this subclass because I like DEX based combatants. I like the idea of my character 'dancing' across the battlefield, dodging blows while landing his own in rapid succession.

 

[GuyBoy]

no as that class seems to have the role adventure it does not make sense as no other class is the adveturer class if that makes sense they are all something else the thing that makes them or builds them.

what was it like more or less?

The Illusionist (as far as I can remember, and I'm talking over 40 years ago...) had its own spell list, albeit with overlap from wizards, and the spells literally allowed you to change reality to suit your aims. They were almost unlimited in scope and allowed for immense creativity. Things like Programmed Illusion and Permanent Illusion were so flexible, and Phantasmal Killer was terrifying in the days of save or die.
IIRC there was also a thing about gnomes being illusionists a lot.

 

[DammitVictor]

Monk (1e/3e): My very first PC, and one of my favorite secondary classes in 3.X. It's not so much that I love the Monk archetype, as the Monk class is the only class that does what I think every D&D character should be able to do.

Druid (any): A nature-oriented spellcaster, and the first healing class that didn't depend on The Gawdz.

Shugenja (3e): Great variety of spells, spontaneous, healer, again not anathema.

Dragonfire Adept (3.5): It's like a Warlock, but it's a dragon and it's not weird and gross.

Dragon Shaman (3.5), Bard (3.PF), Witch (PF), Vitalist (PF): Have you picked up the trend here?

Soulknife and Aegis (PF): I already loved the 3.5 Soulknife even though it wasn't great. The PF Soulknife (and Aegis) is genuinely great, with an actual combat BAB and blade skills that give them an amazing variety of combat options. The Aberrant Aegis archetype is even better.

Shifter (PF): Okay, so this is objectively terrible and my favorite archetype is objectively the worst, but the Oozemorph Shifter is just the coolest thing ever (after the Soulknife and Aegis) and the Legendary Shifter and its archetypes actually make it a pretty good class.

Also, huge shout-out to Rogue Genius Games' entire line of Rogue Genius Guide to the Talented $CLASS supplements which make every class better and even the anathema classes tempting.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

Monk (1e/3e): My very first PC, and one of my favorite secondary classes in 3.X. It's not so much that I love the Monk archetype, as the Monk class is the only class that does what I think every D&D character should be able to do.

what's the bolded supposed to mean? i'm genuinely curious

 

[DammitVictor]

what's the bolded supposed to mean? i'm genuinely curious

After a few levels, the Monk runs faster, jumps higher, and punches-- literally punches-- harder than any other class. They can dodge and deflect all kinds of physical attacks, pick up all sorts of weird little resistances, and channel their innate magical non-spell energy into a grab-bag of weird little semi-magical tricks.

Should they be better at all of that than the other classes? Probably, yes. But the other classes don't do it at all.

I love the Monk class, but I would much rather divide the Monk-- say, for example, the Qingong Monk archetype from PF-- up into three or four separate ability progressions and dole those out to all of the other classes.

 

[Cadence]

Cleric in just about every edition I've played. Mediocre or better in combat, mediocre or better in spell-casting, customizable built in plot hook, and (except for one or two back in the customizable 2e days) your party always has someone who can cast healing spells.

 

[Mind of tempest]

What do I like about Laser Llama's Magus class?
1. It's take on the Two-Weapon Fighting style. Unlike the PHB version of Two-Weapon Fighting which has you using a Bonus Action to make an attack with your offhand weapon, LL's take on the fighting style has it where you can make your offhand attack a part of your Attack action. So this essentially frees up your use of the Bonus Action for something else like spellcasting or using another Magus feature that might need the Bonus Action. At 1st level, the TWF Magus can put both of his light weapons into his Arcane Armory and use a bonus action to summon both of them into his hands. They will also count as something magical for the purposes of overcoming resistances and immunities to non-magical damage. By 2nd level, the weapons in his Arcane Armory could be used as a spellcasting focus for his spells and perform the somatic component of his spells with them. He can also use a bonus action at 2nd level to place a spell into one of his Arcane Armory weapon for a Spellstrike. Any spell placed with an Arcane Armory weapon will stay there until he actually hits an opponent. So I am thinking that I could take a spell such as Chromatic Orb, use up two spell slots and load with both of his light weapons for a damage combo. Thunder and Lightning (very, very frightening ). Fire and Cold. Radiant and Necrotic. Etc. When the TWF Magus reaches 5th level and gains Extra Attack, he'll be able to make four melee attacks instead of the three if he was using the PHB version of TWF.
2. The Magus' Aegis ability. It sounds like a good way to reduce the amount of damage caused any damage-dealing spell, including those with an Area of Effect. If you can completely reduce the amount of damage down to zero, the hostile spell is dispelled and doesn't harm you or your party. You can even upscale the amount of damage you want to reduce by sacrificing a spell slot at a particular level. And you can do all of this as a Reaction.
3. Spellsunder. You can sunder a magic spell at 10th level. How cool is that? You are literally attacking a magic spell with a physical weapon.

My favorite Magus subclass is Order of the Blade Dancers. I like this subclass because I like DEX based combatants. I like the idea of my character 'dancing' across the battlefield, dodging blows while landing his own in rapid succession.

ah, mechanics I see where you coming from, the mechanics are not the bit I feel is lacking.

 

[Lanefan]

The Illusionist (as far as I can remember, and I'm talking over 40 years ago...) had its own spell list, albeit with overlap from wizards, and the spells literally allowed you to change reality to suit your aims. They were almost unlimited in scope and allowed for immense creativity. Things like Programmed Illusion and Permanent Illusion were so flexible, and Phantasmal Killer was terrifying in the days of save or die.

Even at low level, what you can do with Phantasmal Force (1st level spell), Improved PF (2nd level) and Spectral Force (3rd level) can get quite metal. The differences:

PF only affects vision
IPF affects vision and hearing
Spectral affects all five senses, including touch - which means it can do damage if the recipient believes it.

With these spells 1e Illusionists also pioneered what we now know as the concentration mechanic, as those illusion spells lasted as long as you could maintain concentration (plus an extra round or two for the higher ones).

And even a simple PF can produce fun results. Our ship had just docked in a new town, and a snooty customs official had come on board with orders that nobody was to access or leave the ship until he was done. So, guessing (and hoping!) from that order that he'd be the next to use the gangplank, while the official talked to the captain my chaotic* Illusionist quietly cast PF and spent the next 15 minutes ve-ery slowly moving that gangplank three feet to the right; such that when he went to disembark - splash.

Result: official's snootiness greatly reduced for a while due to embarrassment as he's unceremoniously fished out of the harbour.

* - I've always felt a certain degree of chaos in one's outlook (both as player and character) is vital to playing an Illusionist well.

IIRC there was also a thing about gnomes being illusionists a lot.

Yes, I think they and Humans were the only species that could be effective Illusionists.

 

[Ath-kethin]

I'm a Forever DM^TM, and have been since 1994 or so. My go-to concept when I have managed to NOT be DM been has been "competent person who can cast a few spells" for basically ages. The character concept is typically patterned off characters like Harry D'Amour and John Constantine, so there's a specific way I need the whole thing to work. In 2e it meant a bard (ignoring the music/performance aspect of the class) or multiclass mage/thief. In Basic D&D and DCC it means an elf, really. In the WotC D&D era it's been trickier, since there hasn't been an option for a 1st level mage/thief since the 3.0 DMG had a sidebar on the subject.

In 5th Edition it basically means a Rogue/Thief with the Magic Initiate feat plus convincing the DM to allow me to take Magic Circle as a ritual (which for some reason it isn't one already).

 

[Lanefan]

I'm a Forever DM^TM, and have been since 1994 or so. My go-to concept when I have managed to NOT be DM been has been "competent person who can cast a few spells" for basically ages. The character concept is typically patterned off characters like Harry D'Amour and John Constantine, so there's a specific way I need the whole thing to work. In 2e it meant a bard (ignoring the music/performance aspect of the class) or multiclass mage/thief. In Basic D&D and DCC it means an elf, really. In the WotC D&D era it's been trickier, since there hasn't been an option for a 1st level mage/thief since the 3.0 DMG had a sidebar on the subject.

In 5th Edition it basically means a Rogue/Thief with the Magic Initiate feat plus convincing the DM to allow me to take Magic Circle as a ritual (which for some reason it isn't one already).

Isn't that niche what Arcane Trickster is there to fill?

 

[Ath-kethin]

Isn't that niche what Arcane Trickster is there to fill?

If so, it does a real sh*t job at it, and similar classes (like the 3.5 Beguiler) have been just as bad.

Firstly (and least importantly), I don't like the name. I don't want my character to be a "trickster."

Secondly, limiting a character to the "spells known" mechanic kneecaps it to an untenable degree IMO. One of the major advantages of the mage/thief and even the bard in 2e was access to many useful low-power spells thanks to having a spellbook. As I mentioned there's a specific flavor I'm going for - a kind of crafty academic if you will. Part of that concept is the ability to access an every-expanding array of low power magic, and limiting the character to a handful of spells and/or only certain spell schools just doesn't fit the bill.

 

[cbwjm]

If so, it does a real sh*t job at it, and similar classes (like the 3.5 Beguiler) have been just as bad.

Firstly (and least importantly), I don't like the name. I don't want my character to be a "trickster."

Secondly, limiting a character to the "spells known" mechanic kneecaps it to an untenable degree IMO. One of the major advantages of the mage/thief and even the bard in 2e was access to many useful low-power spells thanks to having a spellbook. As I mentioned there's a specific flavor I'm going for - a kind of crafty academic if you will. Part of that concept is the ability to access an every-expanding array of low power magic, and limiting the character to a handful of spells and/or only certain spell schools just doesn't fit the bill.

I agree with this, I've been thinking of providing eldritch knights and arcane tricksters the spellbook feature from the wizard and allowing any spell school.

 

[Ath-kethin]

I agree with this, I've been thinking of providing eldritch knights and arcane tricksters the spellbook feature from the wizard and allowing any spell school.

It's amazing how a minor change makes such a huge difference, isn't it?

 

[Corinnguard]

ah, mechanics I see where you coming from, the mechanics are not the bit I feel is lacking.

Okay. I spend more time trying to figure what I can get out of a particular class/subclass feature. I am a bit of a min-maxer. While I find the description and role of the Magus somewhat interesting, I don't think too much about it. It's mostly there to give you ideas for your character's backstory.

 

[Mind of tempest]

Okay. I spend more time trying to figure what I can get out of a particular class/subclass feature. I am a bit of a min-maxer. While I find the description and role of the Magus somewhat interesting, I don't think too much about it. It's mostly there to give you ideas for your character's backstory.

I have nothing aginst optimisation but role play is the bit no one can get to work hence why it has not crystallised into a thing yet.

 

[pogre]

I don't participate as a player often, (I usually DM), but when I do I usually run clerics. I can built an ethos for my PC centered on their chosen deity and also create all kinds of moral quandaries and story hooks for the DM to use if they so choose.

 

[cwallach]

Warlocks are fun because with Eldritch Blast handling combat there is room for a lot of specialized spells. And those add variety.

Barbarians are fun when in hulk smash mode.