Which core class you never play?

[Li Shenron]

Is there any PHB core class that just doesn't inspire you at all, or that you feel like its strategies don't appeal your much? I have always said that I wanted to try ALL of them early or late, but after 3 years of gaming I noticed that there are some that I have lost interested in without even trying: the Monk, the Barbarian and the Paladin.

Druid and Ranger I would gladly try once, but there is always someone else playing one and I don't want to overlap. However I think that there is not much space to customization here, and I probably play them only once (like I did with a Bard).

Here I am mostly talking about playing a class either in single-class characters or at least being the main class of a multiclassed characters. For example, I could easily take a couple of Barbarian levels to give a Fighter a savage feel, but the point is that I will just probably never play a full or mostly Barbarian PC.

Nowadays, when I get to make a new character, I rather play again the same classes I played before, usually trying a different idea with feats or multiclassing or I aim to some PrCl, but I am always wishing to play one among Figther, Rogue, Cleric, Wizard or Sorcerer.

What about you?

 

[FireLance]

Sorry to sound so contrary in such an early post, but I could play any core class. I've always maintained that it's not the class that matters but the way you play the character. I can have fun playing a barbarian or a wizard, a rogue or a paladin, a bard or a druid.

 

[Gez]

I've never played a barbarian, nor a bard, nor a ranger. I can see myself playing a ranger, though. But not a bard or a barbarian. These archetypes don't interest me.

 

[Li Shenron]

Sorry to sound so contrary in such an early post, but I could play any core class. I've always maintained that it's not the class that matters but the way you play the character. I can have fun playing a barbarian or a wizard, a rogue or a paladin, a bard or a druid.

That's a perfectly legit answer! I try to add it to the poll if I can manage that...

...ehm, does anybody know how to edit a poll?

 

[Painfully]

The bard never inspired me, although I've seen it played by others reasonably well.

It just doesn't occur to me that if I was putting together a party to go out and vanquish evil, that I'd pick the guy that took his skill points to be a musician/singer/dancer. I suppose he suffers a bit from the "last guy to get picked," syndrome IMO. In a small party, I can understand his diversity, but I'd go with a rogue instead just because he doesn't rely on a lute or mandolin in order to apply himself.

Having said that, I AM trying to put together an evil bard villain to help me get over my detachment with bards...besides, I can have him sing songs to taunt the PCs that way.

 

[Doctor Futurity]

I play bards, I enjoy them.....but I think some of the "teeth" to the bard went away with 2nd edition, which actually had a much more expansive take on the class, I think (alas, prestige classes and the sorcerer have diminished the bard to a pure loremaster/musician role). But hey, still like the bard.

However, the monk is my most neglected class. As a GM, it seems I always have a player who favors them, and unless I'm running my Oriental Adventures campaign, I am always working out a tale explaining the presence of the venerable kung fu master. The monk is just very out of place in the more traditional western fantasy settings (as presented) and is therefore a hard fit. Now, when I am doing OA.....the monk steps up to the forefront.

Druids are kind of rare.....but they have a place in my campaigns, and some players love them. As a player, I like to mix it up with a druid every now and then.

 

[Bauglir]

I agree with Painfully about bards. I just can't reconcile the guy that carries a lute and sings a song (possibly prancing around as he does it) with the heroic nature of D&D. Plus I've found that the rogue tends to be able to perform the bard's typical role well enough, particularly with some backup from a wizard where enchantments are required...

Barbarians also I dislike for flavour reasons. Each of the other classes has an implied level of competence and training leading up to their class abilities. The fighter is trained in the use of all weapons and armour, the rogue has learned a multitude of skills, the wizard has spent years poring over books.

The barbarian on the other hand gets angry and hits things really hard!

I do appreciate that the barbarian does have training in the use of martial weapons, as well as a suite of skills. Still the feel of the class has always been for me 'big dumb guy who somehow manages to substitute getting really angry for actual skill'..

That said, the most recent character I made was a barbarian/fighter.

In this case he's a half-fiend trying to turn to good. The barbarian rage gives a nice mechanic to show his evil impulses breaking through from time to time. (I even added a low DC will save which must be made when he rages, and if he fails, he becomes crazed and his alignment shifts to CE for the duration of the rage)

Haven't had a chance to play him as yet though. He's a backup character for the game I'm playing in at the moment.

 

[Crass]

Is there any PHB core class that just doesn't inspire you at all, or that you feel like its strategies don't appeal your much? I have always said that I wanted to try ALL of them early or late, but after 3 years of gaming I noticed that there are some that I have lost interested in without even trying: the Monk, the Barbarian and the Paladin.

I played a bard twice in AD&D, but the class lost all appeal with 3 and 3.5 eds. It has a niche, but I like to play my characters in ways that would not fill the bard's niche well at all (I tend to like combat a little too much).

Also, I played a sorceror once in 3.0, and found it far less stimulating to play than a wizard. They'll have to drag me down, kicking and screaming, before I'll play another sorceror - it seems a class designed for the lazy man to use, or for those that have little forethought and/or imagination. (I also played a hybrid sorceror/wizard-type custom-made character in a campaign run by the infamous Hong, but that character just faded into obscurity. As it was not a "pure" sorceror (as per the PHB), I will not really classify it in this discourse).

 

[Turanil]

There should be a second poll asking what class people do prefer play. Personnaly I am amazed at the number of fighters or rangers I did play. Also, I much like clerics and bards.

Anyway, I don't play monks because for me this Shaolin archetype does not belong to European medieval heroic fantasy. They belong to an Asian type of campaign setting, but if I was to play in such a setting I would probably still choose another class.

 

[Gez]

Only mods can edit a poll. Mere mortals are not trusted with this earth-shaking power. Just imagine the dreadful consequences if you make a poll entitled, say, "Are you stupid" and then, two days after, you edit the "Yes" answer to read "No" and the "No" to read "Yes" ?

Okay, that example isn't all that good. But still, only mods can edit polls.