D&D 5E Which classes work best for what you expect?

[Sacrosanct]

A variation of your favorite class poll. Instead, this is about which classes you think were designed the best in terms of how you expect them to play. Playstyles don't matter. Narrative or power gaming? Don't matter. This is all about how you feel personally. Note this doesn't mean they are your favorite class, only that the class works best as to how you think they should be designed. For example, maybe the monk is your favorite class, but you think the fighter, cleric, and wizard do the best job of doing what you think those classes should do.

There are 3 options you can choose

Paladin is at the bottom because I honest to god forgot about them until the last minute. So close to being totally omitted completely. Your influence is strong @lowkey13 ....

 

[iserith]

I don't actually have a notion of how the classes "should" be. I set my expectations according to the game rather than come into the game with expectations that were set by some other game. I find this works well in sidestepping any potential discontent on these grounds.

So I guess I'll just vote Paladin.

 

[Tony Vargas]

The Druid, Bard, & Paladin stand out, to me, as having delivered well on those classes' core concepts and both history and potential shown in the past.

The Ranger, Sorcerer, and Fighter are the most disappointing in that same regard.

(And, I recuse myself on the issue of the Monk & Barbarian, since they're too... "culture-specific," I guess might be an OK way of putting it.)

 

[Undrave]

Man, I really don't feel like I got enough experience, both in the past and in this edition, to effectively vote...

I guess the Barbarian I've been playing with is effective at his job, I just started playing a Monk and I'm already enjoying it a lot. I'm gonna vote for Bards since they work really well as support character from what little experience I have.

I will say I am severely disappointed in the Cleric. I wanted a support class and it just... doesn't work. It feels too selfish and on aside from throwing Bless or a Heal, it doesn't feel like a support character on a round-per-round basis.

Part of that might just be that the number of tactical 'lever' the Cleric can pull on is just too small in 5e? It doesn't help that they get only ONE attack cantrip in the PHB, making it SUPER boring. They needed something in the same vein as Vicious Mockery.

I will say that Guidance is pretty darn great and help the Cleric feels more supportive, at-will, in the other pillars of play, but once the combat start you might as well just be a Fighter with Magic Initiate.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

The opposite question would be easier to answer. Many classes, regardless of their strengths, don't feel like what I would expect from the class: Barbarians are a tank class with middling damage, Paladins are the ultimate nova striker, Monks are on par with with Wizards in terms of actual muscularity, and Bards spend most of their time casting generic spells rather than performing.

The only classes that really meet expectations are the Fighter, Rogue, and Ranger. Even the Wizard is no longer what I expected, since they're throwing cantrips around every six seconds, rather than carefully managing their magic use.

 

[5ekyu]

So for me, classes that meet their expectations

Very well
Barbarian
Bard
Cleric
Druid
Paladin
Rogue
Wizard

Adequately but have problems
Fighter (often a little short when looking at DPR alone, but fine when realizing it's big on defense and sustain too)
Monk (just so-so for some, sum of parts not reliably good as a whole)
Ranger (some good sub-classes meet expectations, others fall short and base class abilities too prone for setting-shaft)

Not well
Sorcerer (outside of DPR, not enough ability to fit their obvious and magnificent sub-classes thematically - meaning they will fall short of reaching their concepts)
Warlock (outside of DPR, not enough ability to fit their obvious and magnificent sub-classes thematically - meaning they will fall short of reaching their concepts)