My favorite class in any version of D&D is probably the 2nd edition AD&D bard. You can wield a sword (or any other weapon), but you kinda suck at it. You can play around with arcane spells, but you are clearly inferior to an actual wizard. You can attempt several thieving abilities, but you're not as good as a real deal thief. You can wear armor up to chainmail and play the mandolin or flute or something and maybe inspire the troops a little bit. In short, you have a wide variety of interesting things you can try to do, just don't expect to be very good at any of them. You have a good reason to try to talk to a lot of monsters, but also several neat little tricks when that fails.
In fact I once got into a rather ridiculously intense email argument with a DM over the second edition Bard. He was gearing up to run a 2nd ed. campaign and looking for players. I suggested that I would like to test my theory that a half-elf bard makes a better Gandalf than the standard Mage type classes. Wield a sword? Check. Give inspiring speeches on the eve of battle? Check. Know things about mysterious magic rings? Check. Use persuasion to forge new alliances? Check. Cast spells only after other avenues are exhausted? Checkity-check. And the half-elf part gave me a slightly elonged lifespan over mere men while still allowing me to move amongst them as if one of their own.
Despite being a veteran HERO System player who understood the difference between fluff and crunch, he absolutely rejected my character concept out of hand. Never mind that my choice of class and race was perfectly legit under the rules, dude just didn't think it made any sense to play a wizard using any other class than the normal one prescribed. If I was to play a bard, he would expect me to carry a lute and dress in poofy-sleeved vests and whatnot. My head nearly exploded with frustration.
Anyway, that's water long under the bridge. What's your favorite class and why?
PoP!
-
I have drawn three pieces today, and this -- with no hint of irony or
self-deprecation -- is the best of them all.
%202.png)
.JPG)
.jpg)
.png)
.jpg)
Posts
My favorite class is the Basic/Expert cleric.
ReplyDeleteWhy? I honestly have no idea. I love the idea that you have to wield blunt weapons because of this ill-defined belief that blunt weapons don't "shed blood". I love the Van Helsing-esque ability to turn undead. I even love the fact that you can reverse your spells, but it's a Chaotic act to do so. None of that explains my irrational attachment to the Cleric though.
I never got to play much when I was younger - I was almost always the DM - but when I did I played a cleric. And I've played clerics in every version of the game, and frankly the B/X version of the cleric is still my favorite.
Love the 2nd edition bard - might even be my favorite class, now that I think about it. I tend to veer towards the bard in 3rd edition and Castles & Crusades as well.
ReplyDelete2e Bard, or 1e Bard from Dragon #56, for many of the same reasons you stated. Very good class for filling in needed gaps in an emergency basis.
ReplyDelete2nd ed bard as well. I had the bard handbook as well. I loved being the blade as a flashy fighter who wasn't a fighter.
ReplyDeleteGestalt Human Paragon/Sorcerer/Dragon Disciple/Paladin/Monk/Marshal?
ReplyDeleteNah. No sane DM would ever allow that.
I have a weird love for the 2nd ed Ranger.
4e archer ranger (though I much prefer Microlite 20 or 3.5e) 'cause I want to be Robin Hood, and he don't cast no spells.
ReplyDeleteI like Magic Users, but I suppose I prefer a multiclassed Thief/Magic-User. I loves me some Gray Mouser.
ReplyDelete'cause I want to be Robin Hood, and he don't cast no spells.
Not to be antagonistic, but why not just play a fighter and pick up a bow?
In AD&D, I loved the Monk. So flavorful. So...bad. d4 HP? REALLY?!
ReplyDeleteI currently run a Pathfinder game (close enough, right?), and I think that from that, the class I like the most is the Inquisitor from the APG. Neat mix of abilities and fluff, and all sorts of diverse ways to build it.
I like Magic-users a lot, but Druid is definitely my favorite - spells, level based special abilities, shapeshifting and nonsensical limitations galore.
ReplyDeleteB/X Thief, my first and still my favorite. I really like the Pathfinder Alchemist class as well though- they can make potions, throw bombs, and go all mister Hyde every once in a while.
ReplyDelete1e Illusionist. I really disliked that, in 2e, Illusionists just became a generic Wizard specialization. 1e illusionists had their own spells, their own special spell ink and read magic, and they had amazingly powerful spells -- how many 1st level MU spells were as useful for as long as 1e Color Spray?
ReplyDelete@Evan... because in 4e, a fighter with a bow is about the same as anyone else with a bow.. worse, actually, because if he's holding a bow, his primary way of controlling enemies is nerfed (can't make opportunity attacks). (If you meant in 3.x, that's different, depending on what sourcebooks the DM is allowing.) (Pathfinder Skirmisher Ranger (in the APG), at a quick glance, looks like a good way to get a 3.5-ish ranger who doesn't cast spells but has a lot of tricks and options.)
ReplyDeleteI figure the only reason rangers cast spells at all was that some of the things Aragorn did were best modeled, in the mid-70s, by spells. IIRC, the first draft of the ranger actually appeared in the Strategic Review, so he's been around a while...
Ranger from 1E! They're like the Special Forces for a fantasy setting.
ReplyDelete2nd AD&D mage, simply because that's where my original and main character did his adventuring, until he retired to take up a teaching position in Greyhawk.
ReplyDeleteI like wizards just because I can indulge my collector side, and get as many spells and enemy spell books for my library as I can :)
Otherwise, I like fighters. I'd really like a ranger, if they weren't so burdened with spells or animal companions.
My favorite class I've ever actually played was 1e monk. Tons of fun, and being able to save to avoid missiles was just cool as shit. I hoped they would shoot their arrows at me, so I could chop them from the air. And so many neat little abilities as they progress.
ReplyDeleteI am very fond of the bard on paper, but my only experience playing one was for one session in Pathfinder at 1st level, and it was pretty lame. That's probably just due to the over-codification of skills in that system, though.
First off, just play a Fighter and tell everyone you're a Wizard. Take Spellcraft so you seem to be casting the right spells, but always do ones without visible effects. Convince DM to "roll saving throws" against your "Charm Person spells" and secretly fail to add the bonuses for all the great spells you cast on your friends. . Make everyone wonder why you can also use a sword and platemail. Make up a fake character sheet that you refer to throughout the game to foil snooping fellow players.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, I always liked Thief. You get a bunch of cool stuff to do and you generally have a reason to not be in front getting bitten. Cleric is also a great choice (Hold Person on four people and Fire Trap on your oil flasks at 3rd level is awesome, plus Continual Light at 5th in case the Wizard doesn't have it yet). I like interesting choices more than power, these days.
I think my favorite has always been the Cleric, no matter the edition.
ReplyDeleteWith a Cleric, you've got a guy who can fight *and* cast spells. He's the group healer, so he's an important member of the party. And as a conduit of god(s), he has a fair amount of pull in society.
Things only got better for the Cleric in 2e, when you got a variety of weapons, armor and special abilities based on what kind of deity you worshiped. So that was cool, too.
But the underlying thing for me with Clerics was that being a devoted follower of a particular god was like having an instant personality template. Why did your character decide to follow the God of Storms? It's a question that demands an answer, so it helps you to figure out backstory and motivations.
What, no Fighter love?
ReplyDeleteFighter. All editions. You have a lot of hp. Now go deck yourself in a lot of metal and pick up the biggest weapon you can find. Brute force solves everything. Door locked? BRING IT DOWN. Well-kept secret? Slap some people around a little bit, someone's bound to "sing".
Runner-up: The cleric and derived classes. I'm particularly fond of less martial variants such as the AD&D 2e specialty priest, the 4e invoker and the Pathfinder oracle.
Thief / Rogues (any edition) are my bread-and-butter D&D class.
ReplyDeleteThey're not half-bad at fighting, can talk their way into and out of places, and generally have the skills to cover the backsides of the other classes.
Just some thoughts...
Maybe that GM was objecting to ditching the dependency on a prop (harp or lute)/ I suppose we'll never know if the GM would have accepted a bard-based wizard with the requirement of pounding his staff on the ground in place of playing music.
ReplyDeleteMy preferred class in (TSR) D&D is magic-user, although if you count "elf" as a class, I'd say I like that more, precisely because I like the magically-gifted fighter archetype more. I don't remember if 2e bards work like 1e bards or not, but if they don't, I probably would have liked them a lot, too. And probably would have wanted to re-skin 'em the same way, although I wouldn't mind playing a bard as a Felimid Mac Fiall clone.
OGRE Mark V. Lots of fun to roll over infantry units. And if things go really badly you can self-destruct and go out on high note.
ReplyDeleteB/C Companion Bard. My favorite class with my favorite edition with great implementation.
ReplyDeleteI'm fond of the Pathfinder monk, mainly because it's so very silly.
ReplyDeleteIf you like the 2E bard class, you might want to check out the bard in Adventures Dark and Deep. Lots of similarities there, but they have more unique voice/music related spells.
ReplyDeleteAlthough personally I'd go for a mountebank.
I adore the Summoner from the Pathfinder Advanced Players' Guide because it takes a typical D&D concept -- monster summoning -- and runs it to its logical conclusion. And with the right mindset, you can keep running into the absurd.
ReplyDeleteWant to be a Pokemon master? You can do that. Want to have a single badass monster you can buff into indestructibility? You can do that, too. You can even work as a nice hunter-killer team, with your summoned creatures rounding things up in melee and then your PC dropping offensive spells on them.
Or you can do like my gnome did, and declare yourself to be a knight while riding your monster into battle and charging your enemies with a lance. (Character history and description may be found here.
I loved the Bard class in 2nd edition and played one for a good long time. She was more of your general adventurer or scoundrel than a minstrel or whatever. (Interestingly, in 2nd edition, Fafhrd & the Gray Mouser both had levels in Bard.)
ReplyDeleteActually, I like any kind of "jack-of-all-trades" class, as I find they most often let me emulate the fictional characters I'm fond of. Unfortunately they're usually inferior (mechanically) to the other classes.
The 3e and 4e bards are too focused on the "magical music" angle that I was never really into.
B/X elf used to be my all time fave. I've always loved the F/MU combo. I was also always a big fan of elves. For some reason, I take a lot of shit for that these days.
ReplyDeleteFighter. Simple. Straight-forward. It’s all about the character I create on top of it rather than mechanics.
ReplyDeleteWell, except in 3e. There, fighter isn’t the simplest class anymore. I’ve been wanting to try an Aristocrat/Fighter combo in 3e. Fewer feats (simpler), better skill selection (more flexible), and more starting money. Haven’t had the chance yet.
Cleric, however, may be becoming my favorite class. (The original fighter/magic-user.)
Mage-wise, I prefer the 1e or 3e druid played as a mage. It seems to fit my idea of a mage better than MU does.
Much love for the OA Bushi here. Love the Seven Samurai feel to the class.
ReplyDeleteI have a tendency to play dex fighters or rangers, but I really have a fondness for bards and thieves/rogues. Something about the flexibility of skills/abilities. Any edition will do, really.
ReplyDeleteFighter, any edition.
ReplyDeleteI like swords and hate spells.
My favourite character is a 3.5 elf wizard. He does fire. Lots and lots of fire. I took specialist feats and whatnot so that he has a +2 caster level for fire spells - that is,a 11d6 fireball at 9th level. He's also a psychopath, complete with incessant laughter.
ReplyDeleteWizards in general are cool: they're just SO powerful.
2nd edition Bards rule! Especially if you have The Complete Bard. Some of those kits are tremendously fun to play.
ReplyDeleteBTW, I love your concept of Gandalf as Bard.
Robert Fisher said...
ReplyDeleteFighter. Simple. Straight-forward. It’s all about the character I create on top of it rather than mechanics.
Like the man said.
Thieves/rogues are a pretty close second though.
I love the Magic User but as I never get to play the older editions my current favorite is 3.5 Cleric because the spontaneous healing means I can load up with lots of weird spells like stone shape and not adversely affect my ability to heal.
ReplyDeleteA like a lot the 2nd edition Ranger, but the Bard is my second choice. The 3rd edition Bard is the best class of that D&D edition in my view.
ReplyDeleteI've seen the power of a 2E Bard in long-running campaign and the key is magic items - he can use a lot of different magic items.
ReplyDeletePersonal favorite tends towards Clerics - good armor, good weapons, some spells - they cover all the bases.
My favourite class for you would be a knight who is a henchman for a buck-toothed hobbit who never shuts up.
ReplyDelete3.5 Barbarian, and I have very rational and well tought-out justifications. They go as followed:
ReplyDeleteWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGHHH!!!!!!!
Barbarians are cool, they are like fighters, but with more HP, more skills, versatile abilities and rage is worth any selection of feats.
Your Gandalf-as-2E-Bard near-perfectly sums up how I've always seen, played, and run bards, particularly the scholarly aspect. So, I have to say Bard.
ReplyDeleteThe Techno from Arduin Grimoire. "There's no such thing as unicorns!"
ReplyDelete(Right place this time.)
Oh, man, if we're bringing Arduin in.... so many amazing ideas, no idea if they play at all well... the witch hunter, the saint, the star powered mage, the rune weaver....
ReplyDeletePS:Today's capcha is "psionyl", which should be a class, or an item, or a drug. A drug sounds good. 50mg of psionyl, stat!
I used to be partial to the Fight/Magic-User/Thief (Half-)Elven combo-class. I find it like a 2e Bard, but without as much limits... Except you have wait to gain levels, as you have to slit your EXP 3-ways, and you get only an average amount of HP, as each level-gain only gives only a 3rd of a HP. I just found it easier to pile up all the needed EXP to advance all the levels at once, and have the player roll d6 for each level.
ReplyDeleteOh there are so many good classes for different concepts. But my favorite Jack-of-all-Trades is the 3.5 factotum. (It's from the dungeonscape book) It's got skills, healing, combat, and arcane spells. What I particularly like is that they can often use their inspiration to be almost as good as a specialist, just not as often or as long. With some of the Jacks, some abilities are nerfed enough to become useless. For example, if you try and play a Jack by multiclassing, you lose caster level and have access to lower level spells. You are going to have trouble getting through spell resistance and your spells will be less effective than a specialist. A factotum has full caster level, and his spell level is usually one or two down from a specialist. But they only get a few spells per day - I think they max out at 8 (and they don't get more for a high stat).
ReplyDeleteI've always had a penchant for the AD&D Paladin (Cavalier kit when applicable). I grew up on Arthurian Legends and a knight in shining armor with benevolent divine abilities and occasionally a sweet horse really appealed to me.
ReplyDeleteThe race restriction always irritated me though.