Worst 4th Ed Class

[ProfessorPain]

I have always been a fighter guy. And I didn't really like playing a fighter in 4E. Not really sure why. It just didn't 'fit' like the 3E fighter for me.

 

[Starfox]

Also selected none. I would have picked the Warlord, but I've not seen one in play yet. The warlord had great appeal for me as an idea, but I imagined more a baton-wielding, speech-holding, shakespearean, high-charisma leader rather than the back-to-back we fall united guy we got.

In other words, the range of their powers is too short, and this is too closely ingrained in the class. The warlord got close, but no cigar.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I don't enjoy Clerics. But I haven't in 3E either, so I am not sure it's a game system fault, and not just a thematic problem.

I am playing a Wizard in one campaign, I enjoy it. Haven't experienced much negative with them, and I don't think any of the other Wizard players in the other campaigns complained so far.

PS: I don't think any of the classes are underpowered, though, neither Cleric nor Wizard.

 

[Plane Sailing]

The warlord got close, but no cigar.

Where he should have been ranged burst?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Also selected none. I would have picked the Warlord, but I've not seen one in play yet. The warlord had great appeal for me as an idea, but I imagined more a baton-wielding, speech-holding, shakespearean, high-charisma leader rather than the back-to-back we fall united guy we got.

In other words, the range of their powers is too short, and this is too closely ingrained in the class. The warlord got close, but no cigar.

This reminds me of a little project idea of mine - modifying classes or creating builds that "ignore" some of the ground rules for a class, often breaking its role or its "suggested" ability scores.
So far I got:
- "Lead from the Rear" Warlord with ranged weapons (Dex is not one of the main class abilities)
- A Fighter that works as a Striker. (Fighter is a Defender, and besides, we already have the Rogue! )
- A Rogue that uses INT for his secondary class benefits.

 

[Jack99]

- A Fighter that works as a Striker. (Fighter is a Defender, and besides, we already have the Rogue! )

Tempest fighter does this quite well.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Tempest fighter does this quite well.

But I can do even better. We have the technology!

 

[Lizard]

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.

OTOH, my Ranger w/multiclass to Warlord has a LOT of fun "Inspiring" people. He has two modes for "healing", depending on his mood:
a)Angry Drill Sergeant:"Get up and do your job! We've got things to kill!"
b)Creepy Follower Of The Raven Queen:"You are not yet deserving of the release of death. Fight on!"

It's a lot more fun to roleplay than laser cleric healing. "I zap the monster pew pew pew... oh, and you get some hit points back."

 

[Alaxk Knight of Galt]

PS: I don't think any of the classes are underpowered, though, neither Cleric nor Wizard.

Actually, this was a shortcoming of this thread. "Worst Class" is highly depended upon reader.

Worst Class could be, for example

• Uninteresting
• Underpowered
• Overpowered
• Least reply value
• Worst designed

For my buck, it was design value. Wizard misses on so many marks. Loss of flexibility from previous editions, removal of non-combat spells, stuck with an undefined/poorly defined role, poor support feats, and given very weak class choices.

The flip side of this is Ranger. It has a very meaningful class choice (Range, Two-Weapon Fighting and now Beastmaster), powers that tie into this choice (or are flexible enough to be used with both), interesting feats (both class and weapon - though I will give you Martial Power added a number of options), and a role with a clear purpose (deal damage).

 

[Lizard]

Don't really get the hate on for the wizards or warlords, possibly voted for primarily by the pro 3e crowd?

Warlords in my experience are extremely good (I'm tempted to say best class in the game) and Wizards (especially with their dailies) can reshape an entire battle in a single turn and thank goodness they aren't deities in comparison to everyone else anymore.

a)Huge whiff factor.
b)Dailies are unimpressive.
c)Generally hard to use AE spells in a typical melee environment and not frag half your team.
d)Mostly useful only if you're facing minions, due to poor damage output. (Low damage seems to be "balanced" with area effects, which is useful only if you face a lot of low hit points opponents spread over a large region.)

When we've had minion-heavy fights, the wizard has been very useful; in fights without minions, he's mostly reduced to doing Magic MISSile, if you get my drift...