Hm... seems like you're using IE. Can I suggest a better browser, such as Firefox, Chrome or Opera? There are other choices too.

If you wanna stick with IE, or can't switch, I'll warn you right now, while most of this site should work with IE, stuff might come up buggy, so you might not enjoy it as much...

What is your favorite D&D class?

Dec 11, 2019 12:20 am
@Adam, that was funny.

@Belus312, I never got to play warlord much in 4e. I had one made, and we played half a session before it fell apart due to serious and crummy real life issues shutting us down. I especially wanted to see the "pacifist" warlord in action.
Dec 11, 2019 12:39 am
2e - Psionicist
3e - Psion
4e - Never played
5e - Wizard or Artificer
Last edited December 11, 2019 10:52 am, a total of 1 time
Dec 11, 2019 4:44 pm
Never heard of Yuck. Is it a good class? What role does it plays?
Dec 12, 2019 10:27 pm
A Yuck is like a ranger, but for ooze monsters instead of animals.
May 1, 2020 2:20 pm
I'm not a huge fan of multi-classing, so I tend to play classes that can stay interesting for a lot of levels.

I also like to contribute, so I very much tend to fill the holes in the party roster. Nothing quite saps the fun as being a character who cannot really contribute to anything the party does because is always someone else in the party is so much better at things you can do.

That being said, some of my favorite character/classes I have played.

3x -- Warmage
4e -- Runepriest
5e -- Paladin and Wizard
Pathfinder -- Summoner and Gunslinger
Pathfinder 2e -- Barbarian
Starfinder -- Biohacker
May 3, 2020 9:58 pm
I really, really enjoyed being a Factotum in D&D 3.5, it was one of the last classes put out there before they gave up on 3.5 and started forcing 4e down everyone's throats.

Other than that, a Paladin and a Sorcerer are always fun.
May 3, 2020 10:49 pm
Dumb_Paladin says:
started forcing 4e down everyone's throats.
Not starting an edition war, but forcing the newest edition is what they do. Did the same thing with 3.5 after 3.0 and with 5th after 4E.
May 4, 2020 2:05 am
I wasn't trying to start one either. I was way too invested monetarily in 3.5 to be ready, or willing, to buy a lot of new books. It took a while before my group even moved to another system. Even if I had enjoyed 4E more, I was not ready for the sticker shock of spending all that cash on buying multiple books.

When I finally moved to Pathfinder, I bought books very, very slowly.
May 4, 2020 2:11 am
Dumb_Paladin says:
I wasn't trying to start one either. I was way too invested monetarily in 3.5 to be ready, or willing, to buy a lot of new books. It took a while before my group even moved to another system. Even if I had enjoyed 4E more, I was not ready for the sticker shock of spending all that cash on buying multiple books.

When I finally moved to Pathfinder, I bought books very, very slowly.
Tell me about it. Every time they push a new version and stop publishing older versions, there is a long debate at nearly every table on if/when to switch. I shudder to think about how much money I've spent over the decades trying to keep up with editions only to realize that I probably should not have.
May 4, 2020 2:31 am
I enjoyed 3.5 so much, I don't consider any of the spending a waste, thankfully. Even though it was a lot.

But when I started to get into other RPG systems, I pretty much stopped at the core books, until I'd played for at least a year, maybe two.

Factotum was a really fun class that isn't much discussed. Kinda a "everything in my toolbox" class, but of course a dilettante at best, and nowhere as good at them as the "real" people who did them. I wish they'd have made something similar for Pathfinder.
May 10, 2020 8:11 am
in ALL of D&D? wizards. however it varies through the editions..... And though 5th edition is very cinematic and flashy and fun.... it is also very broken.....
May 14, 2020 7:45 pm
In previous editions, I always liked playing the agile scoundrel who could handle itself in a fight. In 3.5, the game quickly became dominated by magic. Rogues were my first go-to, but I quickly learned that if there's plenty of stuff out there that is immune to sneak attack, all you are is a peasant with a knife. I really disliked that about the rogue, and I am happy later editions didn't fall into the immunity pit. Instead, I really liked the factotum; the ultimate jack of all trades, so they could do a little bit of everything and could make really sassy scoundrels.

Ironically, my longest-played 3.5 character was supposed to be for a oneshot; a Favored Soul of Helm (He Who Is Ever Watchful!), built completely for defense (himself, and then the party). By no means all-powerful, but a really tough nut to crack and the person who stood at the front to hopefully keep the baddies from the squishies. It was actually quite fun to play.

Pathfinder brought a breath of fresh air. Only when I started playing Pathfinder did I realize how bland some of the 3.5 classes were, with dead levels everywhere and such. At first Pathfinder only had the base stuff, but I did play a rogue and considered it vastly improved, even if it still had some of the old flaws. But it was the new classes they came up with. First the summoner, but later I really loved the Investigator, which is in my book the ultimate skillmonkey in Pathfinder. It made me sad I never had tried the alchemist which I mistook for something else (I thought they focused in bombs, while in reality they're as close as you can get to a Witcher). But the Investigator could be decent in a fight, had plenty of magic to beef itself up, and had tons and tons of skills which they could boost rolls for. Decent in combat, a powerhouse at everything else, which is often how I prefer my characters.

I tried and disliked 4E so I'll skip that.

But in 5th edition, much to my surprise, I fell completely in love with the fighter. Super easy mechanics, still a badass. Although the warlock is a close second, which surprised me even more as when I first read it, I thought the class really must suck. But that was because I mistook the warlock for a squishy caster, while in reality it is actually one of the more beefy casters out there, with plenty of options to make them into quite fun combatants. But the fighter.. I don't know. It's just so nice and simple to pick up, skills really aren't as big of a thing as they used to be in 3.5/Pathfinder so skill monkeys don't excel as much as they used to over the baseline. That allows me to play class types I previously never explored.
May 14, 2020 8:03 pm
I have been keen on Rogue combinations of Fighter and Spell casters.
May 18, 2020 8:16 pm
I like playing the outdoor types, Barbarians and Rangers. I keep meaning to go outside my comfort zone and play a totally different type of character but it just doesn't happen....
May 19, 2020 12:13 am
Hey, those are mine, too! I'm rapidly warming up to enjoying all of them. I'm playing a grappling Fighter/Bard in a game, and I really want to try the homebrew Pugilist class. It sounds like a ton of fun, and I hear it's pretty well balanced.
May 19, 2020 11:08 am
I have only played a tiny bit of D&D...it was 3.5 a few years ago. But, I do like the Monk class. :)
2 of 2
< 1 2

You do not have permission to post in this thread.