Worst 4th Ed Class

[Kitirat]

Poll is about the total sum of the class. Mechanics + Fluff + Brokenness + ease to run + reduction of fun for everyone else in game + everything else, i.e. and overall opinion. Often times people just have a gut feel for the class they dislike the most. That is what this poll is about.

I forgot the artificer, ARGH.

 

[WalterKovacs]

The post PHB stuff seems to benefit a lot from the experience from the earlier stuff. However, Martial Power did a lot of make the martial classes a bit more robust, and it so even if something is missing from say the Wizard (compared to the other controller classes coming out), the books like Arcane Power will pretty much cover those.

I'd say, in the big picture, the paladin, cleric and warlock are probably the ones most needing the splat books, if only because the "two choices for main stat" seems to have been phased out completely. With the ranger at least, there are enough options to have both str and dex based builds that are viable.

 

[Jack99]

I think we have insufficient data to answer that question Half of the classes you have on your list are not yet published and thus subject to changes. Not only that, but we only have a small fraction of the classes.

 

[blargney the second]

Where's the monk option?
-blarg

 

[Lancelot]

I'd tick the "battlerager fighter" option, if there was one. Broken, un-fun, book-keeping nightmare, slows the game down, etc.

Having said that, the other fighter builds all seem fine, as do all the other classes I've experienced so far (everything from PH, + a couple of the PH2 preview classes).

 

[Engilbrand]

I don't get why people say that the Battlerage Vigor Fighter is broken and unfun, let alone a bookkeeping nightmare. I've found that it's incredibly easy to keep track of temporary hit points, and it has some fun abilities.
As it is, I don't recognize any of the classes as below-par. There are a couple that I'm not currently interested in, but that's just because I love stepping into combat and laying into things. I play a lot of Swordmages.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I went Warlord, mostly for the secondary effects the class has.

#1: A Warlord's "marital healing" is a big cause of Shroedinger's Hit Points, reinforcing the fact that hit points mean a million different things that aren't clear until you're healed.

#2: A Warlord's major ability is "pushing little pieces of plastic around on a map," which is a big source of the minis-centric focus of combat (and the combat-centric focus of the game).

#3: The space used for the Warlord took the place of space that could've been used for something cool -- like the Bard.

#4: "War*" overdose. Oh 4e and your idiotic naming conventions...

I've got no real big problem with any of the classes, but the Warlord is the poster child for several things that I don't enjoy about 4e, like it was presented solely to rub those things in my face. It's kind of the same reason I'm not a huge fan of Dragonborn -- I see you're marketing ploy, Coast, but you've missed the mark, and you've misapprehended what I enjoy out of D&D.

The rogue is a secondary offender, mostly for being all XTREME NINJA ACTION and no crafty thief trickery.

Everyone else is pretty okay. I'd prefer a knightly paladin to a god-powered beat-down factory, but I understand that the latter is probably more generally appealing. I don't mind wizards loosing the swiss-army-knife quality to a certain degree (spread that out! Rituals are a golden idea!). Warlocks are indulgent but inoffensive. Swordmage is some fun times.

But the Warlord made a huge crater with her impact, so I've gotta direct what little hate I have for any of the classes that-a-way.

 

[Tuft]

#4: "War*" overdose. Oh 4e and your idiotic naming conventions...

You mean the Warden Warlord Warlock Warforged on a Warhorse, Wielding a Warhammer?

It must be because of that one that multiclassing is limited to one class; WoTC must be afraid of the inevitable reality implosion if one of those creatures were created, an event which would probably form a massive Eye of Terror - "In The 40th Edition, There Is Only War*!"

 

[Cadfan]

I selected "none." I have a few complaints, but they're minor, and aren't enough to call a class "bad." None of them relate to specific powers, since I don't think that even the most broken power combination justifies tarring the entire class instead of just the power.

1. The aegis of shielding swordmage doesn't work right. I'm convinced that they did not intend for you to fight with a two handed weapon while using a class that gets bonuses for using a one handed weapon and an empty hand, but the rules on versatile weapons have that result.

2. The star pact warlock doesn't work as intended. I know this because what is or is not intended is beyond my abilities to intuit. Are you supposed to pick one stat? Are you supposed to play as a dual stat character? If so, are you supposed to pick up chainmail armor to fix your AC problem? I honestly don't know.

3. Are you intended to immediately pick chainmail armor when you play as a barbarian? Because your AC is either 13+a non favored stat, or, 16 in heavy armor with a feat. The latter is higher and scales properly by level, producing as much as a 6 point difference in AC over the course of your career. Same question for the constitution focused shaman.

4. Wizard. You're not below par in strength, regardless of what your detractors believe. But you're completely lacking in flavor. You're a collection of generic energy attacks, plus Ritual Casting. Your feats have no coherence to make customizing you more fun, and your feat prerequisites are illogical. And due to popular demand it looks like abilities that really should be in other classes are going to be added to your spell list, turning you into the 3e style "everything magical packed into a giant list" wizard. Everyone will be happy about that, except me. Hope I'm wrong here, but... we'll see.

 

[yesnomu]

3. Are you intended to immediately pick chainmail armor when you play as a barbarian? Because your AC is either 13+a non favored stat, or, 16 in heavy armor with a feat. The latter is higher and scales properly by level, producing as much as a 6 point difference in AC over the course of your career. Same question for the constitution focused shaman.

No idea re: the shaman, but the DDXP Barb appeared to add Con to AC, rather than Dex. (It was miscalculated, but even so.)

EDIT: But if the Thaneborn Barb adds Cha to AC, I'm just going to lose it. That would be absolutely absurd.