Which class is the most useless?

[airwalkrr]

And your rogues should try WMD sometime--the spellcasters should share their scrolls with the rogue.

Weapons of Mass Destruction?

Yes...
Yes, I imagine that would make just about any class more powerful.

 

[airwalkrr]

Lots of interesting discussions here. I sent nearly everyone a free book, based on their vote. You all should find one of the followings for free in your emails:

Why thank you! Thank you very much! How did you know I like free stuff?

 

[airwalkrr]

Darn, I knew I should have chimed in!

But since I have now, why no love for the Monk?
I've never played one or played with a fellow player who ran one.

Perhaps you just answered your own question.

 

[airwalkrr]

Riiiight. When a 6th level character can dish out 100+ HP of damage with one swing using a core-only build I don't think I would go so far as to say they're "not even that amazing at fighting".

I'd like to see that build, unless you are assuming a critical hit, in which case "meh."

 

[TheLe]

[imager]http://www.thele.com/thelegames/temp/UK.jpg[/imager]

Why thank you! Thank you very much! How did you know I like free stuff?

Everyone likes free stuff.

Except my cats. They're pretty picky.


`Le

 

[Brother MacLaren]

6.) Bardic Knowledge is entirely too vague. Another poster is obviously using it as Knowledge (everything), but it's not intended that way. Bardic knowledge needs a better definition.

Since I'm the only one who pointed out the awesomeness of the Knowledge skill, I assume you're talking about me. But what I said was:
1) Bards get ALL Knowledge skills as class skills, and these are the primary way to know the abilities and weaknesses of monsters aside from prior experience. Huge advantage IF the players play their characters as dumb as they should upon first encountering a new critter.
2) Bards have 6 skill points per level and typically have a high Int -- more skills and a bonus on each Knowledge skill.
3) For monsters where the weakness or ability is part of cultural folklore (even in some obscure tale), it's reasonable to allow a Bardic Knowledge check at a +5 or +10 DC. In some cases. Not all. I think I saw this on WOTC in the past, could be mistaken.

You might disagree with the last part, but my main point was the Knowledge skills -- not the Bardic ability. The bard can, if he chooses to, have more such skills than anybody else. That's not something to dismiss lightly.

But perhaps it's just watching too much Doctor Who that makes me think great Knowledge checks can be a fantastic way of solving problems.

 

[Jin_Kataki]

The Ranger. A fighter can more than make up for him. His spells arent that great or usefull and his animal companion is a joke.

While I somewhat agree if we are talking only core classes here he is kind of irreplaceable of you ask me. Yes he is essentially a fighter, but he is a fighter with a better list of class skills and can do more than a fighter in a non hack and slash game. If we go outside the core classes I think the scout is leaps and bounds better than the Ranger. I play rangers and scouts on a regular basis and I hardly ever utilize the animal companion or the spells of the ranger.

 

[Nonlethal Force]

3) For monsters where the weakness or ability is part of cultural folklore (even in some obscure tale), it's reasonable to allow a Bardic Knowledge check at a +5 or +10 DC. In some cases. Not all. I think I saw this on WOTC in the past, could be mistaken.

You might disagree with the last part, but my main point was the Knowledge skills -- not the Bardic ability. The bard can, if he chooses to, have more such skills than anybody else. That's not something to dismiss lightly.

I personally think that it is a valid point. However, I also think that most DMs handwave the typical metagaming during combat (especially at higher levels). I mean, most people are going to know how to fight orcs, goblins, and other humanoids. But how many people without a single point in knowledge (anything) is going to know how to fight an ooze? Or a demon? etc.

I'm not saying that fighters are stupid about their tactics, but few gamers actualy RP out the learning curve because that would put their character (and precious equipment) at risk.

 

[Rustam]

I've seen the most powerfull classes played poorly, and the weaker ones played superbly. In the end, the person at the wheel is the main factor in the use (ful/less) ness of the class.

I really must agree, it's not the character class, it's the player.
Just as in RL, teamwork wins the day, drawing on each others strengths to carry the day.

Of course, that is the point of the game.

 

[froggie]

Clerics?????

Huh?