Which standard classes have you never (or very rarely) seen played? (Edited)

Which standard classes have you never (or very rarely) seen played?

  • Barbarian

  • Bard

  • Cleric

  • Druid

  • Fighter

  • Monk

  • Paladin

  • Ranger

  • Rogue

  • Sorcerer

  • Warlock

  • Warlord

  • Wizard

  • I have seen all of them in play


Results are only viewable after voting.

Sword of Spirit

Adventurer
With the thread about how often people have seen psionic characters played (it seemed like a large majority of players have seen them, but it has been rarely for 35%), I thought it would be interesting to see what other classes people have never or very rarely seen played.

Obviously, "very rarely" is subjective, but if I limited it to never, half of us would just remember "oh wait, I did see one..." after submitting our responses anyway.

I'm going to include Warlord because of its presence in 4e's PHB 1, but other than that I'm going to stick with the ones in the 5e PHB.
 

Fenris-77

Explorer
I've been playing since '86 and I've never played with a Druid in the party. Weird, because while they aren't the most popular class they aren't bottom of the barrel either and they've been a class for ever. I also voted for Warlord, but I skipped 4th ed, so there's no mystery how that happened.
 

Ashrym

Hero
I've tried and played everything. I generally pick a flavor at the time, sometimes randomly or just ask the DM what he or she wants me to play.

I've only ever seen one person play a warlord, however, and never it's predecessor with the marshal. I tend to put that down to playing less 4e than other editions, however. Everything else I've seen plenty of.
 

Undrave

Adventurer
I've played a bunch of these, and seen a few more being played, but Sorcerer and Wizards? Pretty much never... Like... maybe a Wizard once in AL.
 

Vael

Adventurer
Aside from the cheeky inclusion of the Warlord (who did see plenty of play in 4e, but this is 5e), the only one I have never seen in play is the Ranger.
 

Ashrym

Hero
Was Warlord the only one in 4E PHB 1 that wasn't in 5E?
Since I didn't see anyone answer this for you, the 4e PHB1 classes are:

  • cleric
  • fighter
  • paladin
  • ranger
  • rogue
  • warlock
  • warlord
  • wizard
The warlord is the only core 4e class not in 5e.

The 4e PHB2 brought back some classic (edit -- 3e classes; sorc isn't exactly classic) classes (barbarian, bard, druid, sorcerer) and added a few more (avenger, invoker, shaman, warden).
 

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen
I can’t say there are any of these classes I haven’t seen with some regularity (obviously it’s been a long time since I’ve seen a Warlord, but I saw quite a few of them in the one edition they existed in.
 

Zardnaar

Hero
Never saw a warlord when we played 4E. Other rare ones.

Monk. Until 5E only saw one or 2 in 3E.

Sorcerer
Almost unplayed in 3E

Barbarians
Semi rare, singular in my group, new players seem to like them.
 

ccs

39th lv DM
I have never seen a 4e warlord played in 5e.

Now if you'd like to discuss the editions in general & wich PHB1 classes I've seen the least....
That'd be pretty close to a tie between the 1e Illusionist, the 1e Monk, & the 1e Assassin.
The Illusionist because most I've ever gamed with thought it inferior to the Magi User (what you'd call a Wizard)
The Monk because people thought it a bit weak & DMs said No - it doesn't fit the campaign.
Assassins because "No Evil PCs" has a long history.

For 5e? I've seen them all. Though the Sorcerer is by far the least common.
 

Tonguez

Adventurer
I’ve played a Monk but as DM have come up empty handed,
Bards dont seem to strike a chord with my players either
the poor Fighter has been beaten back by Rogues, Barbarians, Paladins and Rangers
 

delph

Explorer
I'v seen played barbarian just as part multiclass, Paladin too. Warlock isn't in 5e... but I have only 3 campaigns behind me.
 

Ashrym

Hero
Yes, although because the 4e Ranger was a non-spellcasting class and there is no option for a non-spellcasting Ranger in 5e, you could arguably count that as well.
4e was a bit of an anomaly for the ranger in that regard.

I just make a fighter with the outlander background and use feats to support the style. The concept doesn't really need the ranger name attached to it, IME.

Although, E:RftLW offers things like the mark of finding to improve the design. Hunter's mark is technically a spell using the mark but it's a very limited spell option on a fighter chassis.
 

Dannyalcatraz

Moderator
Staff member
1Ed: personally played all except Bard, and never saw it played by anyone else.

2Ed: personally played them all, including the psionic ones.

3.XEd: played all the core classes from the prior editions, plus a few of the explosion of classes- Psychic Warrior, Soulknife, Marshal, Sohei, Wu-Jen, Duskblade, Beguiler, Scout, Battle Sorcerer, etc. Really had fun with the prestige classes, too- one of my favorite PCs was a Geomancer. Hands down my favorite edition of the game because the wide variety of classes and the liberalized multiclassing rules let me design a wider variety of characters than ever. Didn’t get a chance to try any of the Incarnum or Tome of Magic classes; ToB didn’t appeal at all.

4Ed: only had a single campaign in this edition- I played a Warlock MCed with Psion. The rest of the guys in the group stayed pretty mainstream: wizards, rangers, clerics, and the like.

5Ed: haven’t touched it.
 
Last edited:

Advertisement

Top