Whats your favorite standard fantasy class?

[gurugeorge]

Wow. Nobody likes Warlock...

What even is a Warlock?

 

[ERYFKRAD]

Wow. Nobody likes Warlock...

What even is a Warlock?

Perpetual state of armed conflict.

 

[Cryomancer]

Wow. Nobody likes Warlock...

Many people sees it as a glorified cleric and not as a apprentice of eldritch arts with an outsider patron...]

edit : KoTC2 Warlock is interesting.

 

[Asymptotics]

PnP: wizard is the most fun one to play for me personally, especially if not going for the standard fireball cannon. The utility is unmatched in my opinion and there's plenty of role-playing directions you can take based on the school you choose (necromancer in a setting where necromancy is forbidden is a fun one).

Games: Probably cleric for the heavy equipment + divine (and other) magic. Just let's you get a taste of most of what the game has to offer.

 

[Fluent]

When it comes to classes my memory always trails back to Final Fantasy 11. I loved the Red Mage class, a decent offensive caster, nasty debuffer and can handle a sword in a pinch. I liked to sublass that with either Warrior or Samurai to boost my melee and defensive capabilities. So, Red Mage/Samurai was awesome, or Red Mage/Warrior, or even Samurai/Red Mage, but I liked to keep the Red Mage at the forefront mostly. Had a lot of fun with that character, good memories.

 

[Thac0]

When it comes to classes my memory always trails back to Final Fantasy 11. I loved the Red Mage class, a decent offensive caster, nasty debuffer and can handle a sword in a pinch. I liked to sublass that with either Warrior or Samurai to boost my melee and defensive capabilities. So, Red Mage/Samurai was awesome, or Red Mage/Warrior, or even Samurai/Red Mage, but I liked to keep the Red Mage at the forefront mostly. Had a lot of fun with that character, good memories.

>standard fantasy class
>red mage
Bro, even in JRPGs that is a niche class. The first FF had it yes, but only like half of the mainline games after that.
For those with less eastern affinities, the Red Mage is a fighter/cleric/wizard all rolled into one class, but awfull at all of the above. Jack of all trades, master of none. Sometimes however he also gets really busted abilities like doublecast (2 spells per turn) added to his class. So red mages are usually either the worst or the best class in the game, which is a very odd spot for a jack of all trades type character.
They always have this red fencer aesthetic:

 

[Fluent]

>standard fantasy class
>red mage
Bro, even in JRPGs that is a niche class. The first FF had it yes, but only like half off the mainline games after that.
For those with less eastern affinities, the Red Mage is a fighter/cleric/wizard all rolled into one class, but awfull at all off the above. Jack of all trades, master of none. Sometimes however he also gets really busted abilities like doublecast (2 spells per turn) added to his class. So red mages are usually either the worst or the best class in the game, which is a very odd spot for a jack of all trades type character.
They always have this red fencer aesthetic:

Fantastic artowrk! Thanks for sharing.

Yeah, jack of all trades for sure. But while not great at any one discipline, they survive by combining what they do have into a better end result. In short, they are greater than the sum of their parts. At least if you build them well. I don't go by min/max guides or anything like that, I like to just wing it and do what feels fun and interesting, so I don't know how they rank in terms of strength of class. But I know this, I had a ton of fun with mine, and while I got a lot of "GET IN THE BACKLINE MAGE!" outburts hurled at me, I could take down tough enemies all by myself. So I didn't compete, just had fun, and enjoyed it immensely.

 

[Humanophage]

I "like" the rogue because they're crucial for exploration. Usually rogues get lockpicking to access interesting stuff, they have high dexterity so they can get into nooks, they tend to require high intelligence so they have skills like Bluff and Persuade if you add a bit of charisma. So they really open up the content - unfortunately, relatively little content is hidden behind constitution, strength, wisdom checks. Lore checks tend to be trivial. Admittedly, simply adding checks for everything would also be a bit boring. The 'secret agent' type falls into this category too.

If we're talking full party, I don't really have a preference. I suppose whoever does the summoning tends to be the most useful. You need living walls because a single fighter is not enough.

In terms of single-character combat, alternative takes on the fighter can be fun - e.g., relying on mirror image and other self-targeting spells to beef up your defence. Another alternative take is the well-armoured close combat mage using "flamethrower" type spells and incapacitation. This was pretty fun in ESO PvP.

Conceptually, I like characters who are high in Int and social skills because they tend to be conducive to interesting plots. However, the rapier-wielding swashbuckling rogue is overused. Perhaps now is the time for the Solomon Kane type character to become overused too - an inquisitor type with some ranged weapons.

 

[Darkzone]

Wow. Nobody likes Warlock...

What even is a Warlock?

Don't know, but you should ask him since he is one:

 

[Brozef]

I like all the regular classes except monk. Fuck monks they don't belong and stick out of the setting like a sore thumb.

Voted Ranger since it is the class I like most from a role playing perspective.

Spoiler

And play least since it is never well implemented or as OP as fighter, Wizard or rouge

 

[Absinthe]

>standard fantasy class
>red mage
Bro, even in JRPGs that is a niche class. The first FF had it yes, but only like half of the mainline games after that.
For those with less eastern affinities, the Red Mage is a fighter/cleric/wizard all rolled into one class, but awfull at all of the above. Jack of all trades, master of none. Sometimes however he also gets really busted abilities like doublecast (2 spells per turn) added to his class. So red mages are usually either the worst or the best class in the game, which is a very odd spot for a jack of all trades type character.

I'm pretty sure the red mage class has existed in every single Final Fantasy that featured a version of the job system (FF's class system). Even the ones that don't feature job systems usually have Red Mage style characters. In FF6 for instance, (aside from the fact that you can make almost everyone into a red mage later on when the Esper system rolls around) both Terra and Celes are basically red mages.

 

[Thac0]

I'm pretty sure the red mage class has existed in every single Final Fantasy that featured a version of the job system (FF's class system). Even the ones that don't feature job systems usually have Red Mage style characters. In FF6 for instance, (aside from the fact that you can make almost everyone into a red mage later on when the Esper system rolls around) both Terra and Celes are basically red mages.

I'd argue that Rune Knight ≠ Red Mage.
Rune Knight and Red Mage taken together however are present in pretty much every FF, that is true.

 

[Sarathiour]

But to me paladin is still the knight exemplar of chivalric virtues, not just anyone who acts as church's armed hand.

D&D 2nd edition literally took knight of the grail as the prime exemple of what's supposed to be a paladin.

 

[Cryomancer]

When he talked about red mage, I though Red Wizard of Thay,...

 

[rusty_shackleford]

But to me paladin is still the knight exemplar of chivalric virtues, not just anyone who acts as church's armed hand.

The Complete Paladin's Handbook is very much inline with this. IIRC, there's no requirement for you to even worship the deity that you serve implying that paladins have an inverse relationship with their deity as clerics do. That is, a paladin is so virtuous and righteous that a deity would choose them to represent their ideals in the mortal world.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

if it's not lawful good it's not a paladin

My apologies if this is considered derailing the thread, but I'd like to explain why I do not mind Paladins that are not 'lawful-good'.
...

The whole aligment system is based on absolutes.
For a compass to work there can be no different opinions on where is the North.
And in a world with relativisitic morality (which is objectively more realistic) where good and evil are "open to
interpretation" the alightment restrictions stop meaning shit, and you can call any murderhobo doing a god's work a paladin. And this is what we can see with alightment loosing it's importance in each new edition, and emergence of non LG paladins. But to me paladin is still the knight exemplar of chivalric virtues, not just anyone who acts as church's armed hand.

Although Gary Gygax opposed the creation of paladin-equivalents for other alignments, ideas for such were already for being proposed in 1980 and even became an official part of (non-advanced) Dungeons & Dragons:

An article titled "The Anti-Paladin NPC" appeared in Dragon Magazine #39 (July 1980) and introduced a Chaotic Evil version of the Lawful Good Paladin to serve as an antagonist, although this did result in a terse rejoinder by Gary Gygax in a letter appearing in #41: "The anti-paladin is as useful as a third leg. Paladins were designed to counter balance the weight of evil monsters in AD&D. If DMs must resort to such, to control their games, why not use a 16-ton block instead? It is at least as subtle and rational." Despite Gary's displeasure, this article was included in The Best of Dragon Magazine Volume 2 released in 1981!

Moreover, paladin-equivalents soon became official in D&D with the 1984 'Green Box' Companion Set, which not only allowed Lawful (BECMI D&D had a single-axis three-alignment system) wandering fighters the option of becoming a Paladin after reaching name level, but also allowed Chaotic wandering fighters the option of becoming an Avenger, in alliance with a Chaotic church, with similar abilities.

An article titled "A Plethora of Paladins" in Dragon Magazine #106 (February 1986) introduced paladin equivalents for the other seven alignments, noting explicitly the earlier article on "anti-paladins". Gygax had been ousted from TSR four months earlier.

 

[Daemongar]

Although Gary Gygax opposed the creation of paladin-equivalents for other alignments, ideas for such were already for being proposed in 1980 and even became an official part of (non-advanced) Dungeons & Dragons:

Think Gary failed to see the utility of anti-paladin as antagonist in stories, which was huge! Not as player classes (every evil party had one, but evil parties were rare) but for the most part as the ultimate bad guy - the guy the players aspire to kill, including the paladin in every pnp party.

Either way, i play 90% of the time as cleric in pnp and crpg. Just my niche. Good access to loot, their own weapons (nobody else wants a +2 flail), useful spells, can fight, and most rpgs can integrate them into the story line well, just like wizards and fighters. The same can't be said for thieves, while in principle a good class to play, most games have weak or lack engaging integration. Second play is usually a thief, if the game warrants it. Say what you want about BG2, it was probably the only game to try to integrate each class uniquely into the world, with keeps and such.

 

[Nano]

Say what you want about BG2, it was probably the only game to try to integrate each class uniquely into the world, with keeps and such.

BG2's keeps were boring chores that didn't even fit into the story of the game (but then again nothing does in BG2, it's all just a carnival funhouse of side quests). Icewind Dale is the IE game that bothered to implement actual class reactivity outside of the artificial "side quest for every class".

 

[Cryomancer]

But why call it "anti paladin"? Just call it death knight and give powers completely different than a paladin. Create rules for if the PC LG paladin commits an evil act, he becomes a death knight and the DM is encouraged to make him an NPC. Problem solved.

Gothic 2 is about Innos X Beliar conflict. Innos had Fire mages and Paladins. Beliar had Necromancers and Paladins.

 

[Daemongar]

Say what you want about BG2, it was probably the only game to try to integrate each class uniquely into the world, with keeps and such.

BG2's keeps were boring chores that didn't even fit into the story of the game (but then again nothing does in BG2, it's all just a carnival funhouse of side quests).

They worked into the story fine, and were engaging. They added a dimension to the game. Fitting into the story of the game doesn't make a heap of sense. The whole thing should be about finding Imoen and defeating Irenecus? Sounds rather unpleasant, and ignores the staggering amount of xps/side adventures required to level up in traditional AD&D. Also AD&D chars in the traditional sense (little known fact) at 9th or so level would be expected to construct a keep and have henchmen. Keeps fit in perfectly, and was a nice touch. Added something that few other games added to high level adventuring.

Icewind Dale is the IE game that bothered to implement actual class reactivity outside of the artificial "side quest for every class".

Not for every class. I remember Paladin's and Druids having some unique options, that's about it. IWD was a great atmospheric game, but class options and c&c are not among it's highlights.

 

[deuxhero]

My favorite is one step away from the D&D ~10 class and that's magic using hybrids. In a setting where magic is learnable (instead of just accident of birth) not being a caster is akin to being a Luddite.

Wow. Nobody likes Warlock...

Warlock exists exclusively due to D&D mechanics and this is general fantasy question. Learned magic vs. magic you're born with is established fantasy convention. All Warlock does is a very specific mechanical feature of weaker, but unlimited, spells.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

But why call it "anti paladin"? Just call it death knight and give powers completely different than a paladin. Create rules for if the PC LG paladin commits an evil act, he becomes a death knight and the DM is encouraged to make him an NPC. Problem solved.

Considering that Gary Gygax himself in original D&D referred to clerics of chaotic alignment as evil anti-clerics, who cast reversed forms of many spells and lacked the turn undead ability, it's a bit odd he was so adamantly opposed to the concept of an "anti-paladin" even if the paladin archetype is narrower than the cleric archetype. Of course, in the context of AD&D's two-axis, nine-alignment system, evil anti-paladins should really be of lawful evil alignment, allowing them to mirror the paladin with evil replacing good just as with the OD&D anti-cleric, while chaotic versions of the paladin and anti-paladin should differ in other respects.

 

[Gradenmayer]

I like the concept of Monks. While trash classes are stuck swinging their weapons or casting spells, monks just punch real fast and hard.

Issue is, the only rpg that made a fun monk class was pillars of eternity 2, every other game just botches them.

 

[gurugeorge]

I like the gameplay idea of monks (unarmed specialists), but I hate the way their lore was so obviously slotted in from second-hand influrnces like the Kung-fu tv series and the Bruce Lee craze. Same with the intrusion of samurai-like elements.

Maybe you could have something like the intrusion of Eastern-style lores into D&D, but if so then you have to have the appropriate type of Eastern races who are the only ones who have the knowledge, and you have to go a bit more deeply into authentic Eastern martial arts lore - either that or develop a Western-style monk lore with the extant races (kind of like a Friar Tuck type of deal, with Western monastic style lore rather than Eastern).

It's just jarring to have all that mixed up. Too much cultural appropriation

 

[Darkzone]

I like the gameplay idea of monks (unarmed specialists), but I hate the way their lore was so obviously slotted in from second-hand influrnces like the Kung-fu tv series and the Bruce Lee craze. Same with the intrusion of samurai-like elements.

Maybe you could have something like the intrusion of Eastern-style lores into D&D, but if so then you have to have the appropriate type of Eastern races who are the only ones who have the knowledge, and you have to go a bit more deeply into authentic Eastern martial arts lore - either that or develop a Western-style monk lore with the extant races (kind of like a Friar Tuck type of deal, with Western monastic style lore rather than Eastern).

It's just jarring to have all that mixed up. Too much cultural appropriation

Yes it is lazy, but it was the naive mid 70s and therefore Gary, Dave and the rest have an excuse for this. But doing it still in the 2k10s like in the recent books releases, like in the Xanathar's Guide to everything with the Samurai Fighter Archetype, it is just lazy. Samurai Archetype like the entire Monk class belongs to to a Rokugan or a Kara-Tur Campaign book.