PDA

View Full Version : Difficult classes



ronpyatt
01-07-2007, 10:10 AM
Are there character classes/races that you find difficult to play or just don't like playing? and why?

I find it hard to get into playing a wizard or an elf. Wizards are cool, but the memorizing of spells is annoying. The elf strikes me as too fragile to have a long lifespan. The cleric and druid classes are nearly as bad as wizards with having to pick spells for the day. Druids otherwise are one of my favorite classes. Is there a spontaneous version of the druid (like the sorcerer is to the wizard). Still nothing beats a straight up fighter when you just want to slash through opponents.
Worst of all is the paladin and its lawful good zeal. I just don't find it very fun.

gurusloth
01-17-2007, 02:16 AM
Never cared to play bards. I've played with bards, and appreciated the music buff, but I've never wanted to be one. I prefer classes that are more specialized; in the long run a jack-of-all-trades tends to get overshadowed by the other classes.

I agree with your beef about memorizing spells, as well. Clerics are decent, since they can turn undead and spontaneously convert to healing spells, so even if you take spells you aren't using, it's not a total wash. Druids are in a similar boat; they have wild shape, animal companions, and can convert unused spells to regeneration spells. Wizards are pretty much right out, though. I might take a wizard cohort for the item creation and buffs, but that's about it.

Ed Zachary
01-17-2007, 01:33 PM
Bards... for the reason you stated, they are too jack of all trades, master of none.

Paladins... because they are too locked into a mindset of all lawful good all the time.

I like wizards because of the variety they can have, and don't consider it that challenging with spell memorization.

Zijaerdran
01-23-2007, 07:39 PM
Paladins are probably my least favorite class. And for no different reasons than previously mentioned. It also seemed to me that Players that chose Paladins usually used then to confound and frustrate other players (and the DM) by manipulating their alignment to suit their own needs (which seemed more feindish than divine to me). Luckily I've never had to run a game with a Paladin in it. I also don't like the fact that rangers are only useful if the DM decides to focus opponents around the rangers chosen enemies. I liked the favored terrain option in Unearthed Arcana but still the class was locked into being truely effective in the chosen terrain.

...and thus concludes my two cents, take it for what its worth (which is probably nothing more than a flagon of cheap ale).

Cheers,
Z

rabkala
08-05-2007, 01:09 AM
Is there a spontaneous version of the druid (like the sorcerer is to the wizard).

It would be easy to make one, just use the Favored Soul from the Complete Divine as a guide.

My favorite class has always been the cleric, followed closely by the wizard. They are the most powerful as you progress in levels and the magical flare that draws many to the game.

My least favorites are bard and fighter. Nothing about the bard seems appealing to me, and they have always fallen short compared to the other classes power. The white bread fighter is too straightforward and boring to hold my attention for long. Fighters are just around to hold the enemy back long enough for the true power (wizards and clerics) to come to bear.

shilar
08-05-2007, 09:03 PM
For me its barbarians. I just cant get into the right mindset. I've tried bards never really worked for me. Maybe thats because my DMs always expected me to compose poems, music and such. I like the occasional fighter I actually find a lot of flexibility in the class. But since my rolls never seem to go well I never last long. I usually lean towards rouges, rangers and wizards.

ajmuszkiewicz
08-06-2007, 01:24 AM
I've never been able to get into druids. I mean, I think they have a really cool set of abilities, they fill a neat niche in the campaign, and I always write NPC druids into my campaigns, but I myself can't play the things. They just seem so awfully complicated, requiring a mess of prep work to make the best of their class features (like Wild Shape). I'd love to use one, but I've got to admit to being intimidated by compiling different sets of stats for different forms. The closest comparison I see is prestatting the fiendish or celestial whatevers for the various summon monster spells.

As far as races go, I just can't stand elves. They just come off as so... limp-wristed is probably the least offensive way to put it.

fmitchell
08-06-2007, 01:38 AM
As far as races go, I just can't stand elves. They just come off as so... limp-wristed is probably the least offensive way to put it.

Tolkien had a real thing for elves: they're beautiful, they're immortal, they're wise, they're moral, they're good at everything ... ugh. D&D followed the standard depiction while trying to keep them sort-of balanced, and ended up with frail critters who nevertheless are the oldest and noblest race.

I was thinking this evening about turning fantasy tropes on their head. (Yes, again.) What if the elves were short-lived, clannish, fractious, and unlikeable pointy-eared jerks, who just looked pretty? What if the dwarfs were in fact true guardians of nature and wilderness, from the bones of the earth to mountain peaks, wise and immortal, reticent among mortals yet capable of great mirth?

Nah, wouldn't work. Orlando Bloom has more fans than Warwick Davis.

Moritz
08-06-2007, 08:05 AM
Never played a Bard, doubt I ever will. It just doesn't strike my interest at all as they do not seem to excel in any one thing. So they're just a mutt that can sing, woo.

Never been a big druid fan either. All that tree hugging, dolphin lovin, free indian hippie crap that spews crap like, "Worgs need love too.". Yeah, whatever.

I'll probably never do a wizard (even on NWN), too much paperwork. I think the wizard in my D&D game had like 6 or 8 pages for a character sheet. I may do a sorcerer, but only because I wanna see the rain of fireballs upon orc encampments.

I still prefer Paladin, and will be the first to admit that it is a very difficult class to play correctly.

fmitchell
08-06-2007, 10:01 AM
To contribute to the main discussion, I've played wizards (magic-users in 2ed), and could probably handle a cleric, but I'd rather play a rogue, fighter, or monk.

Never did cotton to druids or rangers; maybe I'm too much of a city boy, kewl class abilities aside.

Barbarians are a caricature of Conan, and I had a bad experience when a barbarian character had my magic-user tossed out of the group. (There were out-of-game forces at work, admittedly.)

Paladins never appealed to me either; whether it's the mixture of fighter and cleric or the holier-than-thou connotations I don't know. Maybe I'm just chaotic good by nature.

I agree with someone else's assessment of bards: a little bit of everything (maybe to mimic the 2nd ed bards), but not enough of anything.

As far as races go, I played an elf once, but these days I'd rather stick to humans. D&D races always struck me as walking stereotypes. Mind you, I did play an elfling (halfling/elf hybrid) in Midnight, and I've had ideas for a half-orc monk character.

starfalconkd
08-06-2007, 10:07 AM
I like bards. They make excellent spokesmen and party leaders. You just hang out in the back and buff your companions with spells and songs. And you can also heal. You make a great secondary for just about everything. Plus, with the right feats and spells, you can be an up front fighter or archer.

I'm not sure about having trouble playing anything. I'm the dm, I don't think I'm allowed that option. ;P

TheYeti1775
08-06-2007, 10:35 AM
Never been a big druid fan either. All that tree hugging, dolphin lovin, free indian hippie crap that spews crap like, "Worgs need love too.". Yeah, whatever.
ROTFLMAO loved that one.


I'll probably never do a wizard (even on NWN), too much paperwork. I think the wizard in my D&D game had like 6 or 8 pages for a character sheet. I may do a sorcerer, but only because I wanna see the rain of fireballs upon orc encampments.
Scrolls are your friend.
I still feel sorry for one DM. About 3 years ago, I was playing a Wizard. The DM worked out that I could make a scroll as long as I had alloted the time and had the materials. Well I always bought supplies in every town, we had a wagon. Mage rode in wagon, always took first watch and made scrolls. DM just let me do it, whenever there wasn't an interruption.

Then comes we have to defend a town.
I think the DM was attempting a 'capturing' force for our party, we layed out the plans for defense.
All and all, the numerous scrolls I had created. 20 were 6th and 7th level Fireballs. Along with several Invisiblity scrolls, and some Evard's Black Tentacles. The DM then asked when I made them all, and I told him I had been making them whenever there was down time as we had discussed. Luckily I had been keeping it all on one page with crossed out lines of ones that got interrupted with a note of how and why.
Well Fireballs rained down over the town in the battle, the King's forces came into town a day or two later (we had sent a message about the attack about to happen as we thought we were going for a TPK).
Their accompanying Wizard asked how many Mages we had, as they had seen the scorched evidence. And the 17 1/2 yr old pipes up "Just me". Just a priceless feeling.:D

rabkala
08-06-2007, 10:48 PM
Ooops, I missed your racist remark.

I am prejudiced against gnomes. I admit it. It all started back in 1e with the whole illusionist thing. I tried to be blind to their differences, but then the Dragonlance tinker gnome happened to my game. I swore from that moment on, gnomes were just not for me.

Ed Zachary
08-07-2007, 07:18 AM
I swore from that moment on, gnomes were just not for me.

I've never played a Gnome, nor do I ever intend to.

I'm not a fan of Dwarves or Halflings either.

Moritz
08-07-2007, 08:34 AM
Gnomes don't do it for me at all. But I've a friend that always does a gnome wizard. While I do like Dwarves because of the bonuses they get right along with being a contrast in real life, as I am 6'5".

Ed Zachary
08-07-2007, 09:34 AM
While I do like Dwarves because ... along with being a contrast in real life...

Yeah, by that logic of contrast I should want to play a Paladin...

TheYeti1775
08-07-2007, 09:37 AM
I've never played a Gnome, nor do I ever intend to.

I'm not a fan of Dwarves or Halflings either.
Ed's not racist, he is 'height'ist. :D

=================
I've only played one Gnome. That was a 3.0 Deep Gnome Fighter in Forgotten Realms. Ended up having a Charisma of 6. He was a Fighter with a Heavy Pick, and had an attitude about people taller than him. Course he was short even for a Gnome. Came out to 2'10" tall. Needless to say he was always picking fights, cause he assume everyone overlooked him.
I've made Dwarves and Halflings as NPCs and used them, but I don't think I ever played one in any edition. mmmm might have to remedy that one day.

Ed Zachary
08-07-2007, 10:21 AM
Ed's not racist, he is 'height'ist.

To quote Randy Newman...

Short people got no reason
Short people got no reason
Short people got no reason To live

They got little hands
Little eyes
They walk around
Tellin great big lies
They got little noses
And tiny little teeth
They wear platform shoes
On their nasty little feet

Well, I dont want no short people
Dont want no short people
Dont want no short people `round here

Short people are just the same
As you and i
(a fool such as I)
All men are brothers
Until the day they die
(its a wonderful world)

Short people got nobody
Short people got nobody
Short people got nobody To love

They got little baby legs
That stand so low
You got to pick em up
Just to say hello
They got little cars
That go beep, beep, beep
They got little voices
Goin peep, peep, peep
They got grubby little fingers
And dirty little minds
Theyre gonna get you every time

Well, I dont want no short people
Dont want no short people
Dont want no short people 'round here

ajmuszkiewicz
08-07-2007, 10:25 AM
While I do like Dwarves because of the bonuses they get right along with being a contrast in real life, as I am 6'5".

I love dwarves, but I've never played one for exactly the same reason (and height).

buddha_belly
08-07-2007, 03:10 PM
Personally I like fighters, warmages (like a sorcerer only this one makes a much bigger bang), and samuri from oriental advetures.

I can't stand bards, also I don't like barbarians and rangers (If I wanted someone who could dual wield I'd take fighter at least he wouldn't have to worry about only fighting a certain creature to be good)

Moritz
08-07-2007, 06:27 PM
Oh, SAMURAI!

Dude, Oriental Adventures was broken... You could take any oriental character vs any normal D&D character level to level and the oriental character would WIPE the floor with the standard. But I loved that game.

And I still watch the hell out of any movie with Toshiro Mifune or Shintaro Katsu, over and over.

Argent
08-14-2007, 12:15 PM
In 2nd Ed, one of my favourite class combos was thief/wizard. But while I still love the rogue in 3.5, I'm not as excited about the wizard. I'll tend toward the sorcerer if I want a spellcaster. About the only thing the wizard has over the sorcerer, imo, is item creation feats. And I haven't had a campaign yet where it was appropriate for me to play a wizard that specialized in that stuff. If I ever get into one, I'd love to do it, because I think that might be fun.

I've never gotten into playing Barbarians, and I couldn't tell you why. Druids, too.

ajmuszkiewicz
08-14-2007, 10:31 PM
On a similar tangent, I've always wanted to play a monk, but I've never had the chance. I've never been the party's "fifth man," that odd man out who gets to play whatever the hell he wants since the party already has a healer, a bruiser, a sneak and an arcanist.

Moritz
08-15-2007, 07:55 AM
I've always been under the impression that the monk was broken. Sure, doing more damage with your hands is a bonus, but in all the Kung Fu movies I've ever seen, they pick up a sword or a stick from time to time. And they're definitely not at a disadvantage when they fight with those items, like they are in D&D.

ajmuszkiewicz
08-15-2007, 10:43 AM
I've always been under the impression that the monk was broken. Sure, doing more damage with your hands is a bonus, but in all the Kung Fu movies I've ever seen, they pick up a sword or a stick from time to time. And they're definitely not at a disadvantage when they fight with those items, like they are in D&D.

And depending on your monk build, your PC monk may not be either. I really have to say that there are enough feats (official WotC feats at that) out there that add capability and benefits for using non-core monk weapons.

shilar
08-15-2007, 11:51 PM
Some of the feats that let monks multiclass are really broke. I saw one that let a monk multi class freely with a rouge and levels stacked for monk damage and backstab damage. 2D10+10D6= ouch

ajmuszkiewicz
08-16-2007, 12:46 PM
Some of the feats that let monks multiclass are really broke. I saw one that let a monk multi class freely with a rouge and levels stacked for monk damage and backstab damage. 2D10+10D6= ouch

But in order to get all that damage, you have to forgo taking any levels of any prestige class, you don't gain the benefit of any other class features, etc. Really, the benefits are only so great. Broken? No way. Rewarding for dedicating yourself to a particular build? Yes.

Kell Tainer
08-18-2007, 10:39 PM
I seem to be the opposite of many of you, I prefer to play wizards. Especially gnome wizards. I had one that had more HP than most of the fighter types. Also, no matter what I did this character would not die. The Con bonus and bonuses for being small sized helped make that character very tough to hit or hurt.

Wizards are a little tougher than sorcerers, but if played right they can be far more useful and powerful. Sorcerers can't specialize, they don't get bonus feats, and have a very limited number of spells known. It may just be the academic in me, but I prefer to be able to know as many spells as possible, it gives you a lot of options.

My main dislikes are the bard, monk, and druid classes and the half-orc race. I am a scientist, so playing an idiot (half-orc) gets very irritating. The three classes just don't seem interesting to me.

Ed Zachary
08-18-2007, 11:35 PM
I seem to be the opposite of many of you, I prefer to play wizards.

Me too, I prefer Wizards and Sorcerers, followed by evil Clerics. But I despise Gnomes, and would rather play an Elf with lots of personality flaws.


My main dislikes are the bard, monk, and druid classes and the half-orc race.

Then you'd love my on-line game here... we have a Bard, a Druidess, an unwashed Monk, and a Half Orc Barbarian in the group!


I am a scientist, so playing an idiot (half-orc) gets very irritating. The three classes just don't seem interesting to me.

What fields of science do you specialize in?

Kell Tainer
08-19-2007, 03:16 PM
I am a geologist. For those who don't know, geology involves all of the other sciences. You have to be part chemist, part physisist, part biologist, and part outdoorsman (or woman). We commonly have to go far afield to do our research, which requires lots of camping, hiking, etc. Once we have our samples we use chemistry, physics, and/or biology to assist in our studies.

You're right, I would like your game. As long as they are playing classes and races that I dislike it leaves me free to play the more interesting classes and races.

Ed Zachary
08-19-2007, 04:24 PM
I am a geologist. For those who don't know, geology involves all of the other sciences. You have to be part chemist, part physisist, part biologist, and part outdoorsman (or woman). We commonly have to go far afield to do our research, which requires lots of camping, hiking, etc. Once we have our samples we use chemistry, physics, and/or biology to assist in our studies.

Do you work with petroleum, mining, or civil engineering? Mining would be my guess.


You're right, I would like your game. As long as they are playing classes and races that I dislike it leaves me free to play the more interesting classes and races.

Same way I play... let someone else play the mundane fodder characters while I do all the fun (for me) stuff.

Kell Tainer
08-19-2007, 09:17 PM
Actually none of the above. I am still in school at the moment and I plan on going into academia when I finish my PhD. I primarily focus on igneous rocks (i.e. volcanoes and related rocks).

DrAwkward
09-14-2007, 05:31 PM
Druids otherwise are one of my favorite classes. Is there a spontaneous version of the druid (like the sorcerer is to the wizard).

The Spirit Shaman (Complete Divine) is more spontaneous that the druid, and has the same spell list.

If you want an arcane that is more flexible, consider War Mage (Complete Arcane). They spontaneously cast from thier entire spell list. They do have a fairly specialized spell list, though.

I have a good time playing any of the core base classes. There are a few new base classes in the Complete books and Miniatures Handbook that I look at and just can't fathom what might make them playable.

DrAwkward
09-14-2007, 05:33 PM
Some of the feats that let monks multiclass are really broke. I saw one that let a monk multi class freely with a rouge and levels stacked for monk damage and backstab damage. 2D10+10D6= ouch

Mmmmm. Stunning fist + Flurry + Sneak Attack.

Digital Arcanist
09-15-2007, 05:19 PM
So far, there hasn't really been a class I hate to play. Playing a cleric can get a little tiresome because of the constant need and resentment of the group with regards to healing. Barbarians are difficult as well because I am an academic by nature and I can't really get into character.

For me, I will actually bow out of a group if someone is playing a monk who took the vow of peace and poverty. They always turn out to be useless in a fight but demand their share of the loot so that they can give it to their order/temple. It is always a point of contention in the group and often diminishes my enjoyment.

Ghezryln
09-15-2007, 06:02 PM
In the magic-lite play-by-post game, my 8th level monk (Str=12) is doing fairly well...

Attack: 14+(d20=08)=22... Damage: 4+(d10=5)=9
Attack: 14+(d20=11)=25... Damage: 4+(d10=3)=7
Attack: 09+(d20=13)=22... Damage: 4+(d10=8)=12

In this attack he had three hits doing 28 points of damage. Not quite a fighter or Barbarian, but the third best combatant in a group of ten.

Vimachipal
09-15-2007, 09:07 PM
For me, I will actually bow out of a group if someone is playing a monk who took the vow of peace and poverty. They always turn out to be useless in a fight but demand their share of the loot so that they can give it to their order/temple. It is always a point of contention in the group and often diminishes my enjoyment.

Worse than that is a pauper monk who has the flaw of 'Stinky'.

starfalconkd
09-16-2007, 07:54 AM
For me, I will actually bow out of a group if someone is playing a monk who took the vow of peace and poverty. They always turn out to be useless in a fight but demand their share of the loot so that they can give it to their order/temple. It is always a point of contention in the group and often diminishes my enjoyment.

Has this happened to you more than once?

Oldgamer
09-17-2007, 10:28 AM
I don't like bards either, though they fit in as the extra or missing classes since they can multi-task so well. I like when someone else plays them though, they give bonuses when singing and can heal when the cleric is unconscious (in case of someone playing a battle cleric) or out of prayers for the day (which at low levels happens all too much)

I enjoy playing warriors the most, paladins, knights, barbarians...then sorcerers and wizards, then clerics. I play using mini's too, and I had an elf sorcerer...just try and find a mini for that...no one makes one since elves are more inclined towards wizards...

Digital Arcanist
09-17-2007, 12:11 PM
Yeah Starfalconkd its happened more than once. I've played with seven different monks with VoPov/VoPeace combo and two with VoPeace. All of them sucked. The players were just trying to min/max their characters. What is the point of having a huge AC if you just run from combat everytime? There were a few instances were the monk would stand outside of the cave and "watch the horses" while the rest of the party entered the dungeon. When the DM gave the monk the same XP as the rest of us, I got up and left the table and didn't come back.

Oldgamer, there is a common D&D mini for an Elf Sorcerer! I can't remember which set its out of but I am currently using it as my mini for a campaign. I think it was out of the first set.

Ed Zachary
09-17-2007, 03:22 PM
I have never played a Monk.

As a player I've only been in a group with one Monk.

As a DM I've only had a player run a Monk once.

Now we have a Monk in the play by post game.

All three Monks have been effective members of the party. I guess Digital Arcanist was just subject to some bad players, and I was with some good players.

Oldgamer
09-17-2007, 04:21 PM
I played a monk once, not in 1st or 2nd Ed (I don't think they existed in 2nd Ed) but I did play one that was a 15th ECL multi-classed with rogue and sorcerer and he was a blast, he really kicked but hand to hand because he could use his thief's sneak attack , then stunning fists, then blast you with magic...pretty cool. Though he was the only one I've ever played or played around...

Moritz
09-17-2007, 04:53 PM
I am a geologist. For those who don't know, geology involves all of the other sciences. You have to be part chemist, part physisist, part biologist, and part outdoorsman (or woman). We commonly have to go far afield to do our research, which requires lots of camping, hiking, etc. Once we have our samples we use chemistry, physics, and/or biology to assist in our studies.

I envy your life. I often consider doing some geological studies. However, I'm already settled with being a Chiropractor.

Oldgamer
09-18-2007, 06:49 AM
Oldgamer, there is a common D&D mini for an Elf Sorcerer! I can't remember which set its out of but I am currently using it as my mini for a campaign. I think it was out of the first set.


I wish I could've found one... I bought a High Elf Wizard instead....he was actually my first mini and when I painted him....I had such vision, but unfortunately he turned out looking like a clown with my skills :o

starfalconkd
09-18-2007, 07:02 AM
Yeah Starfalconkd its happened more than once. I've played with seven different monks with VoPov/VoPeace combo and two with VoPeace. All of them sucked. The players were just trying to min/max their characters. What is the point of having a huge AC if you just run from combat everytime? There were a few instances were the monk would stand outside of the cave and "watch the horses" while the rest of the party entered the dungeon. When the DM gave the monk the same XP as the rest of us, I got up and left the table and didn't come back.

That's ridiculous. The whole point of Vow of Peace is to attempt to role play a character who does not kill people and attempts peaceful solutions. Said character should be attempting diplomacy rolls and using his aura to avoid combats. Failing that he is allowed to knock people out with non-lethal damage. Also, this character may kill undead and constructs. Oh, and playing an exalted monk and running away and leaving your friends behind would revoke exalted status, I would think. It sounds like the people were playing this all wrong. Don't give up on the idea all together, just be very wary of it.

Ed Zachary
09-18-2007, 11:38 AM
The whole point of Vow of Peace is to attempt to role play a character who does not kill people and attempts peaceful solutions.

LMFGDAO!!!

If most Americans were asked to name three peace loving democracies, out of ignorance they would name the only three nations violently occupying other nations.


Said character should be attempting diplomacy rolls and using his aura to avoid combats.

Diplomacy as a solution to avoid combat... what a novel idea!

Oldgamer
09-19-2007, 08:03 AM
Just ask Miss South Carolina, she knows all about maps and geography :confused: I speak often with D&D friends online in other countries and am finding our edyukashun as a whole sucks. A friend of mine in Germany, granted he is a math professor with a PHD by the time he was 24, speaks better English than I do and probably 80% of Americans...they learn the language simultaneously with German growing up as children. How many languages does the average American speak??? I speak English with smatterings of Gaelic (Scottish), and enough phraseology from Japanese, French, German, & Spanish to get me to a bar with maybe a hotel nearby with water.