Character classes you hate

DoomyMcDoom

New member
Jul 4, 2008
1,411
0
0
Healing classes, mainly because in any game where I have to keep others alive, I almost always end up not healing good enough and letting people die... I can play any other playstyle or class available, not such a fan of pure mages because of how squishy they tend to be, but I still prefer them over healers.

capcha:"too late" yes I was too late on that healing spell, sorry that you died and all.
 

Violator[xL]

New member
Nov 14, 2007
140
0
0
I hate the upper classes.

I don't really hate any class really. I tend to play less archer/ranger type classes, because boring. In roleplaying, I'd have a hard time playing a paladin tot the full extent. Love playing Chaotic Neutral/Lawful Evil ish, and those are a far cry from a paladin's rigid view on the world.
 

Wilbot666

New member
Aug 21, 2009
478
0
0
Great thread, very well thought out in my opinion.

My least favourite class, at least when it comes to D&D v3.5 would probably be the Warlock. Kind of boring and doesn't do very much that other classes can't do better. I much prefer my current Half-Orc Cleric of Erythnul who I purposely infected with Dire Wereboar Lycanthropy at lvl 11.
 

Zeckt

New member
Nov 10, 2010
1,085
0
0
thirion1850 said:
Archers/hunters/rangers/bow wielding annoying Legolasses. (ha, lasses) When I imagine a ranger, I imagine Aragorn. Stalking the wilderness, aim, shoot, kill. Survival within an unforgiving natural environment, learning it like the back of their hand out of necessity and will. Not taming tigers and bears because they oh so cute and then doing backflips as you fart out magical arrows and make every fletcher in the land wallow in their misery.

"Pirates" or swashbucklers. Just rubs me the wrong way. Can't place why exactly.

Druids. Especially god damn druids. The way I imagined druids were true mysterious guardians of the natural order. Unfortunately, every other roleplayer I've met didn't see eye to eye with me. Thus this definition was thus soon changed to "cocky-urban-smartass-cunts-that-also-turn-into-cats".

Zeckt said:
Monks. Every game they are put in they nearly ruin it with their ridiculously stupid gameplay! MOP Kung fu panda monks HOW ORIGINAL! taking out that human in full plate armor with a sword and shield with a stick and a straw hat in no armor? Pffft. Warcraft has become a pixar cartoon.
Warcraft's nowhere near the true awesomeness, wit and parody that was Kung Fu Panda. Also, your realism fails to apply when said human, much like his other 50 human buddies are built so well you could grind cheese on dem abz, with beards so mighty the Norsemen of old wallow in their jealousy. Whilst throwing holy hammer swirls around. Or charging at 200 miles per hour. Or moving around in said plate/robe completely unimpeded by its weight or design stupidity. I wonder when people will finally understand the fallacy of these kinds of complaints. :|
I would like to see what your monk could do against somebody who trained all their life in full plate mail on a mailed horse with a lance coming at them at full charge adept at killing unarmored infantry. Oh thats right, he would DIE
 

maninahat

New member
Nov 8, 2007
4,397
0
0
Frission said:
maninahat said:
I don't dislike any class in particular, but they all have their cliches. I tend to dislike assassins, because people always cast them as awesome, death dealing, trench-coating badasses. But every class has their own cliche. Big muscular barbarian? Do-gooder Paladins in shiny armour? Slight, tall rangers? It applies to races too.

My one piece of advice is that if you make a viking dwarf with an axe, or a haughty elf with a bow, just stop right there. Just stop and rethink how boring you're being.
I don't know. There is the opposite problem of people trying to be as "unique" as possible, only to realize that despite being having some fancy exotic class or race, they still have absolutely no personality.

I would rather go for the time tested cliches if they're not done in a way that's too annoying.
Already done (maybe even to death), doesn't necessarily mean it will be bad. At least it would rather be better than "My epic sorcerer-monk half demon half orc who uses katanas".
You're probably right. It's easy to see how someone could make and ostentatious Mary Sue. The best way to make an unusual, interesting character isn't to tack on as many distinguishing features as possible. Just taking a typical class and doing one thing differently with them, should be enough to make a stand out character - like a Dwarf who's a thief, a scrawny Barbarian, or a blue collar elf.
 

dumbseizure

New member
Mar 15, 2009
447
0
0
For me it's the generic "warrior" style classes I don't like.

Oh, you beat things by literally beating them? Generally into a small, pulp like substance? Good for you Captain Thick-head Mc-beaty man.

I love things like Thieves, assassins and (from Gw2) Elementalists (but only dual daggers).

I like classes with a lot of mobility and dueling ability.
 

CpT_x_Killsteal

Elite Member
Jun 21, 2012
1,519
0
41
Mages can get boring. Just throw fireball here, zap random maggot A and freeze random maggot C.

Also just straight up fighters can be boring.

I guess I just like anything in between.
 

prowll

New member
Aug 19, 2008
198
0
0
Snip

I would like to see what your monk could do against somebody who trained all their life in full plate mail on a mailed horse with a lance coming at them at full charge adept at killing unarmored infantry. Oh thats right, he would DIE[/quote]

You are aware this is pretty much the start of every martial art ever? People downtrodden and having to rise up against soldiers far better equipped?

Also knights were adept at killing other knights, on horseback, and slow. Nobody expects the little old guy with a staff to be a threat....
 

thirion1850

New member
Aug 13, 2008
485
0
0
Zeckt said:
thirion1850 said:
Archers/hunters/rangers/bow wielding annoying Legolasses. (ha, lasses) When I imagine a ranger, I imagine Aragorn. Stalking the wilderness, aim, shoot, kill. Survival within an unforgiving natural environment, learning it like the back of their hand out of necessity and will. Not taming tigers and bears because they oh so cute and then doing backflips as you fart out magical arrows and make every fletcher in the land wallow in their misery.

"Pirates" or swashbucklers. Just rubs me the wrong way. Can't place why exactly.

Druids. Especially god damn druids. The way I imagined druids were true mysterious guardians of the natural order. Unfortunately, every other roleplayer I've met didn't see eye to eye with me. Thus this definition was thus soon changed to "cocky-urban-smartass-cunts-that-also-turn-into-cats".

Zeckt said:
Monks. Every game they are put in they nearly ruin it with their ridiculously stupid gameplay! MOP Kung fu panda monks HOW ORIGINAL! taking out that human in full plate armor with a sword and shield with a stick and a straw hat in no armor? Pffft. Warcraft has become a pixar cartoon.
Warcraft's nowhere near the true awesomeness, wit and parody that was Kung Fu Panda. Also, your realism fails to apply when said human, much like his other 50 human buddies are built so well you could grind cheese on dem abz, with beards so mighty the Norsemen of old wallow in their jealousy. Whilst throwing holy hammer swirls around. Or charging at 200 miles per hour. Or moving around in said plate/robe completely unimpeded by its weight or design stupidity. I wonder when people will finally understand the fallacy of these kinds of complaints. :|
I would like to see what your monk could do against somebody who trained all their life in full plate mail on a mailed horse with a lance coming at them at full charge adept at killing unarmored infantry. Oh thats right, he would DIE
This is T14 Warrior armor.


That fellow that's been training all his life on a mailed horse with a lance? Yeah, he probably wouldn't be able to get on said horse or even move around in that tin can. A purple-eye-glow horse with legs as thick as toothpicks that wouldn't be able to support said plate or mail. And his lance wouldn't do jack in the end because the knight's lance in general was an impractical weapon, inferior in almost every way to a spear, glaive or halberd. Your understanding of how medieval warfare worked is hilarious since your only experience with it is through fantasy and WoW.

Also, since we've got on this, said monk would be capable of doing quite a bit considering said monk is either A) in a fantasy setting and is thus capable of doing god knows what with his palms while looking quite awesome or B) is a yamabushi, sohei, shaolin or other traditional definition of "Asian warrior monk", thus adept at evasion to make a charge useless, wields a naginata, yari, qiang, guan dao, yumi, reflex/short/recurve bow or something similar to bring down the horse and/or its rider and can utilize some rather sophisticated martial arts to get around to the armor's openings and joints. Also, the idea that monks don't wear armor into battle is also popularized by fantasy and shaolin stories, they may be skilled, but I highly doubt they're stupid and cocky enough not to do so.
 

Pyrokinesis

New member
Dec 3, 2007
185
0
0
Any Melee class, (drones,surrogates, self projections,any remote form of it excluded)

I just dont like to go fist/melee weapon first into a battle and put my hide on the line. Worse so when it involves bringing a knife to a gun fight.

Borderlands 2

"wait wait so tell me that again?"
"Instead of running in with my fists, i prefer to keep my distance and take out my enemies with a well placed shot"
"you lost me at without fists"
 

Blaster395

New member
Dec 13, 2009
514
0
0
Any class focusing on stealth in a game where the stealth mechanics are broken, uninteresting, or the game is grindy and repeating the stealthy approach procedure 500 times would drive you insane.
 

OutcastBOS

Elite Member
Sep 20, 2009
1,490
0
41
Snipers/Rogues/Theifs. I just do NOT like stealth at all. I think it's boring. Gimme a big weapon and let me charge/spray bullets in the direction of.
 

AngloDoom

New member
Aug 2, 2008
2,461
0
0
I hate played D&D only once with a group of friends who had been playing it for years. They had quite inventive characters and I really didn't see any class I hated as a result. I honestly think that the problem lies with tired clichés rather than certain classes.

I've got to say, though, after playing a Rogue I see no reason to be any class. So many abilities! =D
 

Lunar Templar

New member
Sep 20, 2009
8,225
0
0
kingthrall said:
Barbarians- Why bother being a barbarian if you can be a better "fighter" with heavier armor. Most games always focus on the fighter first as the base class so you tend to get better items and stuff Unlike barbarians the fill-er in class.

Drow Classes- Ever since that over-rated guy drizzit made peoples bookshelves I dont know how many people name themselves Drizzit 12896712789412 online when this race/class is available. Really Elminster was a far superior hero if you going to copy do it right.
i agree on barbarians, and bards really, never seen the need to be one when you can roll s fighter and ACT like a barbarian.

as for drow, eh, i actually for get Drizzit exists most the time, so, on DDO i have several Drow, (all female to).

as for other non D&D classes, any that are worthless alone. this is mostly an MMO gripe, but if i NEED a team to survive or even finish in a reasonable time, then i have no time for it. granted i like when they're around on my team, they are useful, i just hate needing other people to do my stuff
 

sanquin

New member
Jun 8, 2011
1,837
0
0
I'd like to point two things out. One about the monk and the other about the druid in D&D

Monk:
They're strong in early game yes. But once you get to level 8 or so mages are stronger, and at 12+ monks are among the weakest classes in the game. Unless you go prestige class or multi class of course. Which is good, imo. An inexperienced fighter in plate with a sword and shield won't have much use for them, but the more experienced the fighter gets, the more advantages he has over an unarmed, unarmored monk.

Druid:
Druid may seem weak, but they're actually among the most powerful in D&D. Shapeshifting is only a minor part of the class unless you go into prestige classes that enhance it. Druids' spells have more utility than a mage's, and have more combat potential than most of the cleric's.

---------------------

On topic:
Bards or instrumental classes. I just can't understand such classes and don't see much fun in them. The only bard class I ever enjoyed in a game was one that buffed with music and attacked with a bow and arrow.

Monks. (As they are implemented in games, not the concept) They're just always implemented in such an unimaginative way, or are just plain weaker than other classes when it comes down to it. Well, okay, I did like the overall feel of the monk class in Ragnarok Online, but that was the only game ever.

Paladins. Holier than thou... I hate that kind of mindset. It's probably because one of my friends used to always play a paladin (and sometimes a cleric) in D&D. And he definitely put the 'awful' in 'lawful' when playing a paladin. Plus, just the whole 'Righteousness, holiness and lawfulness' idea behind it annoys me in general.

Alchemists. There aren't many games that really have such a class, but there are some. Using flasks, potions and poisons as weapons and spending a lot of time crafting said things just...seems boring to me. Usually alchemists are weak in physical combat too, which is a thing I like.
 

Assassin Xaero

New member
Jul 23, 2008
5,392
0
0
Rouges, I guess? Mostly just those classes who really aren't strong, good for support/healing, but just needed for rather annoying things (opening locks, detecting traps, etc.). Or maybe it was just like that in one game I played? Not a big fan of most RPG's because all the goblin, troll, and fairy stuff bothers me.
 

Yan Hunt

New member
Oct 23, 2010
19
0
0
Character class creep is a side effect of the original tabletop games industry where every new supplement/edition had to have a new class, a new skill and a new pile of advantages/disadvantages or traits etc. During the early 2000's I did my stint writting games (available at a bargain bin near you). You'd be told the subject matter of the supplement and told how many new classes/skills etc you'd have to include. Some felt natural, and a part of the flow, other were real Friday afternoon efforts where you just put in whatever to get the work done and go to the pub (go back through your collections, and you'll soon see the Friday bits).
Anyway, games packed in more and more non-sense character classes and filler till the systems crumbled under their own min/maxed weight. Luckily, video games has yet to suffer under this deluge. It takes time and effort(and cash) to code in new graphics, animations, and balance it all out for PVP. Warcraft is on its 4th (5th maybe..?) expansion/supplement and has just stuck in 5 new races and a new class. That's in 8 years! For the big systems, RPGs have multiple books a month being released. Just imagine if it was the same for video games with DLC for Dragon Age or Skyrim coming out that quickly, or if there was a write your own class and skills feature for a mmorpg?

Where am I going with this? In essence there are THREE main classes - fighter, skilled and magical)and the hybrids of two of them (fighter+skilled=ranger, monk or assassin). Sadly, games designers always forget this and end up with books of half classed messes that are just padding. then problems of an inconsistent game world then arises. If you're playing on a world where gods are real and take a direct involvement in day to day lives of it's people then, what's the point of a paladin? Any hero that embodies a deities beliefs or ideals would earn their favour and support. Just look at Greek mythology.
The point is, are your classes a way to describe your character by defining their actions or combat style, or merely a list of class features? Is Robin Hood a lawful good fighter who uses a bow, a paladin who fights for the poor or a ranger?
 

verdant monkai

New member
Oct 30, 2011
1,519
0
0
I hate Vanguards on Mass Effect 3 multiplayer, they are terrible team players.

However I think people were mostly going for fantasy stuff here so I will say Thieves, I dont really hate them but I think they are boring to play as.