D&D 3E/3.5 Which D&D 3.5 Core Base Class is the Most Powerful?

[TwoSix]

Here's a theoretical question. Can you make determinations about the strength of a class without looking at all the components that the class can leverage? Is the class description the totality of the class?

I mean, it's easy to say "Oh, Druids are broken with Natural Spell" or "Get rid of the most egregious spells and spellcasting isn't so bad." It's not wrong. But isn't a druid-only feat in the core book or the list of druid-only spells in core just as much a part of the class as the class description?

 

[Ahnehnois]

Here's a theoretical question. Can you make determinations about the strength of a class without looking at all the components that the class can leverage? Is the class description the totality of the class?

Those rules that are external to the class are not irrelevant, but they're not really part of the class either. Feats and spells are simple examples of modular design elements that are optional both from the player and DM perspective. If DM's don't like Natural Spell (or polymorphs, or divinations, or whatever), they can ban or change those things without changing the class itself. I'd argue that a druid without access to Natural Spell or with a PF polyorph is still a druid, while a druid with d6 HD, poor BAB, and the bard spell progression is not a druid, it's a modified or different class.

The reason I call the druid the most powerful is not because it gets access to the best spells or feats, but because the things actually in its description outweigh the other classes; druids have decent values in almost every major commodity (BAB, HD, skills, etc.) and a number of useful class abilities. The same logic applies to fighters. There is a problem with high-level fighter feats not being worthwhile, but that's not the class itself. The problem with the class itself is that besides the BAB and feats, it doesn't get much. Saves and skills are unimpressive, and there are a lot of dead levels. Both the classes and the feats are separate, but relevant considerations.

 

[TwoSix]

The same logic applies to fighters. There is a problem with high-level fighter feats not being worthwhile, but that's not the class itself. The problem with the class itself is that besides the BAB and feats, it doesn't get much. Saves and skills are unimpressive, and there are a lot of dead levels. Both the classes and the feats are separate, but relevant considerations.

I guess that's part of the problem, right? When the bulk of your class features leverage an external subsystem (whether that be feats or spells), where else can you look to determine what the class actually is?

I think that argues for fewer classes with more robust in-class mechanics, with multiple alternate abilities (a la Alternate class features) that can be swapped in or our. Bards (with music, high skills, spells, and moderate combat ability) and druids (with wild shape, animal companion, spells, moderate skills, and moderate-to-high innate combat ability) are good examples.

 

[delericho]

I think that argues for fewer classes with more robust in-class mechanics, with multiple alternate abilities (a la Alternate class features) that can be swapped in or our.

Broadly, I agree with this. Although rather than going for alternate class features as presented in PHB2 and elsewhere in 3e, I would advocate going for SWSE-style Talent Trees instead.

I do agree that if doing this it would be a good idea to also condense the class list - indeed, there's an argument for compressing every Fighter-like and every Rogue-like class together into a single non-magical class. Though I suspect that would be a bit too radical for some.

 

[RUMBLETiGER]

my 2 cents:

-Any class that has a built in Cohort has more actions it can take per turn.
-Any class that has a spell list has access to options that classes without spell lists have.
-Any class that can Summon can generate it's own combat allies.
-Any class that can restore hitpoints has an advantage over classes that cannot restore hitpoints.
-Full BAB is better than 3/4 BAB is better than 1/2 BAB.
-Greater sized HD means greater survivability.
-More SAD is better than more MAD.
-Good saves are better than poor saves, this also means greater survivability.
-More skillpoints and in-class skills are better than less skillpoints and less in-class skills.
-More feats granted are better than not adding feats.
-Classes with class features granted more levels have more options than classes with dead levels.
-Classes with access to martial weapons or a wider weapons list have more options than classes with only simple weapons.
-Classes that can wear heavier armor will have better AC than classes with lighter or no armor, unless the class features suppliment armor for AC.
-class abilities that have longer durations, or can be used more times per day, and better than abilities with short durations or very limited number of uses per day.

Use the Commoner as the baseline. 1/2 BAB, no class abilities, 1 simple weapon, no armor, all poor saves, d4 HD, 2 skillpoints per level.

Considering all the above, Druid (most mechanically powerful built-in cohort, spell list, Summons, healing, 3/4 BAB, d8 HD, Wisdom depenant only, 2 good saves, 4 skillpoints per level, only 2 dead levels regarding class features, up to Medium armor) really numerically has more advantages than the other base classes.

Contrast to the Fighter. All Marital weapons, better BAB, better armor, combat abilites that can be used endlessly throughout the day, better HD, many more feats to choose from. This is still a number of useful features, however he has less overall, and not ones as powerful as the Druid does.

Imagine (maybe I'll do this one day) making a spreadsheet that listed these features I've described across the top, and listed classes down the side. Then, you place check marks for each class that contains the above feature. Then, you simply count which classes have the most things going for them. I'm not suggesting all of these features are the same in terms of usefulness or power, but it'd be a handy tool to use at a glance.

Can anyone think of additional, important features that should be added to my list?

 

[TwoSix]

Broadly, I agree with this. Although rather than going for alternate class features as presented in PHB2 and elsewhere in 3e, I would advocate going for SWSE-style Talent Trees instead.

I'm broadly OK with Talent Trees, although I think SWSE wimped out by not going classless.

I do agree that if doing this it would be a good idea to also condense the class list - indeed, there's an argument for compressing every Fighter-like and every Rogue-like class together into a single non-magical class. Though I suspect that would be a bit too radical for some.

I would argue you could boil down most classes into 3 basic archetypes.

Pragmatic guy: This guy just wins fights, and knows how to handle himself in almost any situation. Fighter abilities with rogue/ranger type skills.

Tricky guy: Has a way out any situation, gets more dangerous the longer he has to prepare. Rogue type combat, lots of skills, artificer/wizard type magic, where magic is part of his toolkit.

Magic guy: Weird, crazy abilities are in this guy's blood. Where tricky guy learns magic to gain power, magic guy is trying to figure out how to use the magic he already has the best way possible. Cleric, warlock, sorcerer type abilities all fall here.

Multiclass these 3 together to get things like paladins.

 

[Ahnehnois]

I guess that's part of the problem, right? When the bulk of your class features leverage an external subsystem (whether that be feats or spells), where else can you look to determine what the class actually is?

I don't see this as a problem, per se. Spell-based classes are always this way (two wizards with different spells are completely different characters). The introduction of feats and skills in 3e pushes more information out of the class description, yes, but to me that's a good thing.

I think that argues for fewer classes with more robust in-class mechanics, with multiple alternate abilities (a la Alternate class features) that can be swapped in or our. Bards (with music, high skills, spells, and moderate combat ability) and druids (with wild shape, animal companion, spells, moderate skills, and moderate-to-high innate combat ability) are good examples.

Bards and druids are somewhat more specific than fighters, but still highly variable based on spell selection (and a number of alternate class features and such in late-3.5 books). In any case, I don't see an argument for more in-class mechanics. If anything, I see an argument for more out-of-class mechanics, allowing for more flexibility on the DM's and players' side. If a class is just a jump-off point that enables you to tap into various external subsystems, class balance becomes easier (there's less to balance), and more playstyles are accommodated (one fighter takes simple feats that improve basic combat stats, another takes tactical feats that grant esoteric maneuver combos).

 

[Sadrik]

Druid
Cleric
Wizard
then everyone else

Psion may edge out druid though
Barbarian is best fighter type

Also if considering the core PrCs in the base game and how much character builds are important to 3e I thing the Mystic Theurge and Eldritch Knight are pretty solid characters too. Druid/Wizard/Mystic Theurge and Paladin/Sorcerer/Eldritch Knight are pretty good.

 

[RUMBLETiGER]

It also depends upon how long an adventuring day is. Casters will eventually run out of spells.

 

[airwalkrr]

Thank you everyone for your responses and comments. This has been very helpful thus far. Please do feel free to carry on the discussion.

I will go ahead and contribute my own opinions on the subject. I happen to agree that the holy trinity of cleric, druid, and wizard are the most powerful because of their sheer versatility. I partly wanted to see if my poll would confirm that or if there were other expectations. My own personal feeling is that clerics are the most powerful overall simply because they have the versatility of the druid and wizard plus the best healing abilities. With the core rules only, the druid is probably the best if only because of Natural Spell. But if clerics are allowed access to divine feats such as Divine Metamagic and Persistent Spell then I feel they have the edge at almost all levels of play. The wizard has the most game-changing spells, but can also be an easy target and has to choose spells carefully (scrolls might be more or less common in any given campaign setting so one cannot always rely on them), so I think the class takes the most skill to play out of the three and thus has the most potential for mistakes in character play and character building.

With the results of this poll in mind, I am going to start another poll that excludes the three primary prepared casters from the list.