Which core class sucks the most?

[Firebeetle]

I'm sure this has been done before, but I've got an argument to settle. Having said that, no gambling please.

Which class sucks the most? It's that simple. Feel free to say why you voted the way you did.

If you're looking for a definition of suck, I'll leave that to you. If you said the sentence "________s sucks the most" what class would you put in the blank?

 

[Mark CMG]

Which class sucks the most?

Commoner.

 

[BluWolf]

Courtesan.


Sorry. I could not resist.

 

[Crothian]

Cleric. One class cannot cover the whorshipers of all gods. A cleric of war and acleric of knowledge should not seem so much alike.

 

[kyloss]

I voted monk, but wanted to put bard in there as well, monk because he is supposed to be a melee type but generaly falls short at it, and bard keeps getting pushed into a secondary secondary support role(not a typo). In doing so they are losing some of the old flavor that they used to have that i liked, little rouge, little wizard little fighter, good 5th character or good with other nonstandards with some casting- paladin ranger etc. Why they morphed it into social cleric without the combat ability i dont get. But I have to agree with crothian on the cleric thing, Also I rember that the druid was presented in 2e as an example of a specialty priest, to give ideas of what you can do with them.

 

[jmucchiello]

I said Bard because just about every 2nd ed character I played had some bard in him. And not one 3E character has. I've played all the other standard classes and I just can't make a bard. Maybe someday.....

 

[Sejs]

Sorcerer. I can play every other core class (yes, even bard) and be happy with it, but I can't seem to play a straight sorcerer without thinking to myself "Okay, and why am I not playing a wizard, again?"

I don't know, maybe if sorcerers had their own spell list, or something else that set them appart from being a wizard from a different angle of approach. I mean a druid and a cleric are night and day - why then are a wizard and a sorcerer cast on the same coin?

Just gets me.

So yeah, my answer is: Sorcerers suck the most because they're not their own class.

 

[Pseudonym]

Paladin.

 

[Mouseferatu]

I voted monk, but wanted to put bard in there as well, monk because he is supposed to be a melee type but generaly falls short at it, and bard keeps getting pushed into a secondary secondary support role(not a typo). In doing so they are losing some of the old flavor that they used to have that i liked, little rouge, little wizard little fighter, good 5th character or good with other nonstandards with some casting- paladin ranger etc.

My thoughts, and my vote, exactly.

Thankfully, the more-or-less fantastic Dragon Compendium from Paizo solved both problems for me. I'm seriously considering, in future campaigns, replacing the monk with the battle dancer (though with some flavor tweaks and changes), and the bard with the savant.

 

[Imret]

Had to go with monk, the only class whose abilities take about 12 levels to mesh together correctly. He's a half-hearted melee combatant, a lackluster hit-and-run combatant, and a questionable infiltrator before Abundant Step. Plus, it doesn't fit in the PHB; it should be right before "samurai" in OA. Or, better, be dropped entirely then partially reconstructed via a couple feat chains.