Best Designed Classes?

[Ziegander]

In the playground's opinion, which 5th Edition classes are the best designed? Which are the most fun/most elegant/most effective/most interesting?

In my opinion, personally, the Barbarian, Monk, Paladin, and Warlock are the overall best designs. For reasons. What about you guys?

[Theodoxus]

Overall - Warlock; best utilization of at will, encounter (short rest) and daily (long rest) abilities and casting features.

It's so good, I'm inclined to refurb most of the classes onto its chassis. I'd keep the Wizard and Cleric as they currently are, but rebuild everything into the warlock. (Removing redundancy - such as sorcerer and bard and replacing them with a Pact (dragon and music, probably).

I'm not saying every class will be a pact... just built along the lines of the warlock. This would have added benefits of more daily abilities for some classes that don't have any (like fighter).

[Ashrym]

Bard. It's highly customizable to allow for variety of concepts all in the same chassis.

Warlock has a lot of potential with more invocation options if they were to be added but is still good as is.

Rogues are awesome this edition.

I like 5e fighters as well now that backgrounds and feats can provide variety on the base class.

I would call those my top 4 in the design.

[Ziegander]

Rogues are awesome this edition.

I keep forgetting how right you are about that.

Hmm... I may have to knock Warlock down to Top 5 status, with the Rogue supplanting it... Or maybe Monk, Paladin, Warlock, and Rogue/Barbarian are a tie for "4th best" designed class.

[ThermalSlapShot]

At low level Cleric, Rogues, and Dragon Sorcerers awesome pretty awesome.

Going higher level, past 8 or so, the rogue doesn't change much and is left behind compared to others.

[Ashrym]

At low level Cleric, Rogues, and Dragon Sorcerers awesome pretty awesome.

Going higher level, past 8 or so, the rogue doesn't change much and is left behind compared to others.

Is that because cunning action goes out of style, or because you don't appreciate reliable talent, bonus feat, or things like thief's reflexes, death strike, magical ambush, or spell thief?

I disagree. I find rogues are good from start to end.

[ThermalSlapShot]

Is that because cunning action goes out of style, or because you don't appreciate reliable talent, bonus feat, or things like thief's reflexes, death strike, magical ambush, or spell thief?

I disagree. I find rogues are good from start to end.

As many people have stated before me...

They do exactly the same thing at level 17 (randomly chosen) as they do at level 2.

They don't actually grow, they stagnate.

All of the Rogues high level tricks fit right into low levels and what PCs can do. Try doing that with the Spells what casters get.

Seriously, even reliable talent could be a pre-level 10 ability without breaking the game.

[Giant2005]

Going higher level, past 8 or so, the rogue doesn't change much and is left behind compared to others.

I find the opposite to be true. Aside from Expertise, a low-level Rogue doesn't have a lot going for it (With the exception of levels 1-4 where it has comparatively high DPR due to the other classes waiting until level 5 for their damage scaling to kick in).
It is the late level abilities that make the class even worth considering imo, but sadly those abilities come in too late to be much of a consideration at all (Which is why I personally wouldn't consider the Rogue to be a well-designed class).


I like customization options, so having said that the Bard and Warlock are my two preferences for Magical Secrets and Invocations respectively. The Paladin and Monk are both pretty cool too but I'm not sure I'd consider either of them to be well designed - the Paladin design suffers by being all about the base class with the subclass offering relatively little (The opposite end of the spectrum tot he Ranger) and the Monk could never be considered well designed as long as it has the extremely poorly designed Way of the Four Elements subclass attached to it.

[ThermalSlapShot]

I find the opposite to be true. Aside from Expertise, a low-level Rogue doesn't have a lot going for it (With the exception of levels 1-4 where it has comparatively high DPR due to the other classes waiting until level 5 for their damage scaling to kick in).
It is the late level abilities that make the class even worth considering imo, but sadly those abilities come in too late to be much of a consideration at all (Which is why I personally wouldn't consider the Rogue to be a well-designed class).


I like customization options, so having said that the Bard and Warlock are my two preferences for Magical Secrets and Invocations respectively. The Paladin and Monk are both pretty cool too but I'm not sure I'd consider either of them to be well designed - the Paladin design suffers by being all about the base class with the subclass offering relatively little (The opposite end of the spectrum tot he Ranger) and the Monk could never be considered well designed as long as it has the extremely poorly designed Way of the Four Elements subclass attached to it.

I'm not saying people can't have fun with the rogue at higher level, but no matter what, they stagnate.

It would be like if casters stop learning new Spells once they hit 3rd level Spells and didn't even get higher spell slots.

I've played a rogue fom level 2 - 16 (first level was a playtest rogue then 5e/Basic came out) and I've had fun. However they are lacking once you get to high mid levels and beyond. Now, they aren't a fighter, but they still don't become anything more than what they were and they don't really break out of the martial glass ceiling.

[Giant2005]

I'm not saying people can't have fun with the rogue at higher level, but no matter what, they stagnate.

It would be like if casters stop learning new Spells once they hit 3rd level Spells and didn't even get higher spell slots.

I've played a rogue fom level 2 - 16 (first level was a playtest rogue then 5e/Basic came out) and I've had fun. However they are lacking once you get to high mid levels and beyond. Now, they aren't a fighter, but they still don't become anything more than what they were and they don't really break out of the martial glass ceiling.

I think we just have different preferences.
For example, I'd consider the ability to never have disadvantage (And by proxy never lose advantage if you have it) far superior to pretty much all but the most broken spells. I'd even be willing to consider it superior to the most broken spells if you played in a game where the DM was chucking out disadvantage a lot more than he should.

[Ziegander]

For example, I'd consider the ability to never have disadvantage (And by proxy never lose advantage if you have it) far superior to pretty much all but the most broken spells. I'd even be willing to consider it superior to the most broken spells if you played in a game where the DM was chucking out disadvantage a lot more than he should.

Hey, I like the Rogue a lot, buuuuuut... what are you talking about?

[Giant2005]

Hey, I like the Rogue a lot, buuuuuut... what are you talking about?

It turns out I completely made up the ability. I was trying to remember the function of Elusive which is the exact opposite of what I said. Rather than never having disadvantage, the enemies never have advantage against you.
I guess I could try and save face by claiming that I meant "the ability to never have disadvantage on defense", but I'm sure everyone would see through that ploy :smallbiggrin:

[ThermalSlapShot]

I think we just have different preferences.
For example, I'd consider the ability to never have disadvantage (And by proxy never lose advantage if you have it) far superior to pretty much all but the most broken spells. I'd even be willing to consider it superior to the most broken spells if you played in a game where the DM was chucking out disadvantage a lot more than he should.

And it's fine that you prefer low fantasy games, but D&D has been sold as a *start at low level and raise to high level* type of game.

If the rogue was 10 level long and had all the abilities that they currently have I wouldn't have much of a problem. But level should be a constant item and not variable between the classes.

It would be as if one person with strength 16 could get a +3 to attack rolls/damage but another person with 16 Str gains a +1 to attack rolls/damage.


Edit: Giant2005 Don't worry I knew what you meant. I do the same thing every so often.

[Giant2005]

And it's fine that you prefer low fantasy games, but D&D has been sold as a *start at low level and raise to high level* type of game.

If the rogue was 10 level long and had all the abilities that they currently have I wouldn't have much of a problem. But level should be a constant item and not variable between the classes.

It would be as if one person with strength 16 could get a +3 to attack rolls/damage but another person with 16 Str gains a +1 to attack rolls/damage.


Edit: Giant2005 Don't worry I knew what you meant. I do the same thing every so often.

It's not so much a low fantasy vs high fantasy issue. I don't care about either really and never even make the distinction.
My preferences are more influenced by constant abilities vs limited-use abilities. I put a lot more weight on things that are always useful to me rather than things that are only useful once per day or only in niche circumstances.
Killing everything with a Meteor Swarm is undeniably more awesome than being able to dodge all day long with impunity but when you consider that you can only kill everything with Meteor Swarm once per day, it is less cut and dry (Unless you only encounter one fight per day). Due to my playstyle the difference is even more profound - I tend to hoard my resources in order to be sure that they are available if I really need them to be available, so for me that one time per day Meteor Swarm is more likely to be a 0/day Meteor Swarm as the emergency situation I was saving it for probably isn't even coming.

[ThermalSlapShot]

It's not so much a low fantasy vs high fantasy issue. I don't care about either really and never even make the distinction.
My preferences are more influenced by constant abilities vs limited-use abilities. I put a lot more weight on things that are always useful to me rather than things that are only useful once per day or only in niche circumstances.
Killing everything with a Meteor Swarm is undeniably more awesome than being able to dodge all day long with impunity but when you consider that you can only kill everything with Meteor Swarm once per day, it is less cut and dry (Unless you only encounter one fight per day). Due to my playstyle the difference is even more profound - I tend to hoard my resources in order to be sure that they are available if I really need them to be available, so for me that one time per day Meteor Swarm is more likely to be a 0/day Meteor Swarm as the emergency situation I was saving it for probably isn't even coming.

Caster have cantrips and enough low/mid level spell slots (starting at level 4 or so) that they don't really run out unless the DM forces them to run out.

It really isn't a constant versus limited option anymore since casters get so many options that are X/day it comes down to constant versus semi constant.

And it really does come down to low versus high fantasy. What the 5e rogue gains doesn't really push the imagination which makes it a low fantasy rogue.

Look at the 13th Age Rogue, at first level they can gain the Thievery Class Talent which gives them bonuses to steal stuff. At a later level they gain the ability to steal anything. They can steal a dream, vision, a spell, or a memory! This shows a progression from low fantasy to high fantasy. The 13th age rogue doesn't stagnate.

You can have constant abilities which go from low level to high level and show a progression from low fantasy to high fantasy so that you don't have a class that stagnates.

[Ashrym]

As many people have stated before me...

As many people stated before you......

....the world was flat. Several people being wrong before you cannot make you correct. ;-)

At least in this case it's only opinion anyway, and subjective.


They do exactly the same thing at level 17 (randomly chosen) as they do at level 2.

They don't actually grow, they stagnate.

All of the Rogues high level tricks fit right into low levels and what PCs can do. Try doing that with the Spells what casters get.

Seriously, even reliable talent could be a pre-level 10 ability without breaking the game.

I disagree,

Reliable talent makes it easy to autosucceed 15 and 20 DC checks and rogues gain enough interesting abilities in the class and subclasses. I find they have a nice mix of passive and active benefits to keep them engaging, and I also find that the subclass abilities promote the archetypes well.

I find the class well designed.

[ThermalSlapShot]

As many people stated before you......

....the world was flat. Several people being wrong before you cannot make you correct. ;-)

At least in this case it's only opinion anyway, and subjective.



I disagree,

Reliable talent makes it easy to autosucceed 15 and 20 DC checks and rogues gain enough interesting abilities in the class and subclasses. I find they have a nice mix of passive and active benefits to keep them engaging, and I also find that the subclass abilities promote the archetypes well.

I find the class well designed.

For a low fantasy low -mid level class? Sure is pretty well created.

But the rogue isn't alone, there are other classes and creatures that show progression from level 1 - 20 and how they learn new things while getting better at their lower level abilities. The rogue doesn't actually get better at anything or learn anything really all that new, they stagnate at around level 10.

Which is fine, I didn't say someone couldn't have fun with it, but that doesn't mean that it hasn't stagnated.

You can find the class well designed but some people found the Delorean well designed too.

[Dralnu]

Here's some of my primary criteria for "best designed"

1) Does the class mechanics match its flavor? Does it play how you would expect it to play, do the things its description says it does?
2) Are the mechanics functionable? Are they intuitive? Does it work well?
3) Is the power progression relatively smooth, or is it filled with huge power spikes and/or dips in power? Big peaks and valleys are bad, in my opinion.

I'd give it to Rogue or Warlock.

Rogue is just so good from start to finish. There are spikes and low points like all classes, but for the most part it's a smooth progression, something I value highly for "best designed."

Warlock I've seen from levels 1-7 and I really like it. I love its design, its a joy to read. I love how modular it is, how many decisions you get to customize. You get to choose invocations, spells, subclass, and your pact perk. It excites me. I hear from folks that it peters off hard at high levels though.

Most other classes have issues with big power spikes and dips, in my opinion. Moon druid is an obvious example of huge peaks and valleys. Barbarians I consider simply too good early levels and then smooths out later. Fighter gets out of the Barbarian's shadow only at 11th with his third attack, that's way too late, it's out of the level range that most players will ever experience. Monk is pretty ridiculous early on (FoB at lvl 1-2? I forgot) but dips a bit too low mid/high levels. Wizards/sorcerers are kind of lame for the first couple levels, they only start picking up around level 5. And on.

EDIT: I should also mention that I'm biased towards design specifically in the levels 1-11 range. This is because I mostly play in the 1-6 range, sometimes up to 11-12. This matches WOTC's survey results that says the same thing for most players. (https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/news/april-survey-results) So I really want those early/mid levels to be as good as possible, caring a lot less about the high-end which almost nobody plays.

[Giant2005]

And it really does come down to low versus high fantasy. What the 5e rogue gains doesn't really push the imagination which makes it a low fantasy rogue.

I think you are really selling the Rogue short. With some good magic Armor or perhaps some multiclassing (Or both), he can wade into an army of Goblins and actually expect to not be hit. They would only have a 0.25% chance of hitting him which is pretty damn amazing - even DC's The Flash with his super speed and super reflexes tends to get hit well and truly more than that. If something is superior to the Flash, you can pretty safely say that is falls way up there in the realm of high fantasy.

[ThermalSlapShot]

I think you are really selling the Rogue short. With some good magic Armor or perhaps some multiclassing (Or both), he can wade into an army of Goblins and actually expect to not be hit. They would only have a 0.25% chance of hitting him which is pretty damn amazing - even DC's The Flash with his super speed and super reflexes tends to get hit well and truly more than that. If something is superior to the Flash, you can pretty safely say that is falls way up there in the realm of high fantasy.

Out of all the stagnant classes the rogue is my favorite, but compared to the game itself I just see how badly 10+ is designed.

I don't assume magic in 5e, not that I don't like magic, its just that you don't need it for 90% of the game and the math works without it.

A low fantasy character can wade into battle and barely get hit. That's a product of the system not because of what the class can do, well not mostly because of the class.

The Flash gets hit because the story says he gets hit, superhero comics/stories/movies need to have some sort of tension or else people will yawn. Also the flash is usually a goof, which is what gets him in trouble more so than his lack of ability.

[Ashrym]

For a low fantasy low -mid level class? Sure is pretty well created.

But the rogue isn't alone, there are other classes and creatures that show progression from level 1 - 20 and how they learn new things while getting better at their lower level abilities. The rogue doesn't actually get better at anything or learn anything really all that new, they stagnate at around level 10.

Which is fine, I didn't say someone couldn't have fun with it, but that doesn't mean that it hasn't stagnated.

You can find the class well designed but some people found the Delorean well designed too.

It doesn't actually stagnate either, though. The class increases in abilities like perfect disguises or stealing spell knowledge.

Even the higher fantasy options become available if the DM is running a campaign that way because all he needs to do is adjust DC's to match ability checks perceived as possible. That enables the rogue similar to 3e epic skill DC's. If the DM says stealing a dream is 25 or 30 DC you're at that level of fantasy.

For me that would be a versimilitude issue and ruin the class so cannot please everyone. Going beyond versimilitude is magic so I would just play a larcenous bard for something like that, getting back to customization and another class I think is well designed.

[Giant2005]

A low fantasy character can wade into battle and barely get hit. That's a product of the system not because of what the class can do, well not mostly because of the class.

The Rogue is really the only one that can pull it off. Well the others can if they are lucky but the Rogue does it much better due to Elusive. If anyone else tried the same thing, the Goblins would just help each other to cancel the person's disadvantage but they can't do that with a Rogue - being a Rogue is a difference between being hit 1 in 20 attacks and being hit 1 in 400 attacks.

[ThermalSlapShot]

The Rogue is really the only one that can pull it off. Well the others can if they are lucky but the Rogue does it much better due to Elusive. If anyone else tried the same thing, the Goblins would just help each other to cancel the person's disadvantage but they can't do that with a Rogue - being a Rogue is a difference between being hit 1 in 20 attacks and being hit 1 in 400 attacks.

You have to be attacked so many times within a session to make that worth it /recognized that it's a bit of a stretch.

Elusive is awesome but it isn't a high level ability. You could place that at level 5 and it would fit right in.

Also, if you are getting constantly surrounded then you aren't roguing it up right. You have Cunning action for a reason.

In 5e, using a tactic that gets you surrounded is a bad idea. Whirlwind is bad for this specific reason.

[Giant2005]

You have to be attacked so many times within a session to make that worth it /recognized that it's a bit of a stretch.

Elusive is awesome but it isn't a high level ability. You could place that at level 5 and it would fit right in.

Also, if you are getting constantly surrounded then you aren't roguing it up right. You have Cunning action for a reason.

In 5e, using a tactic that gets you surrounded is a bad idea. Whirlwind is bad for this specific reason.

I'm not saying it is a good idea. I am just saying that it is an amazing talent to be able to wade into an army, allow 15 of them to surround you in melee, while the others try to pelt you with arrows, and still not get hit. That is a feat that is right up there with anything that has existed in fiction.

[NoseFeratu]

I would have to say that the Warlock takes the cake as far as this is confirmed.

Its fluff matches the actual mechanics of the class almost completely, and having played one from levels 1-11, I can say in all honesty that the Pact Magic system works remarkably well without being obscenely overpowered. It's a fairly simple class to get into (especially compared to the Cleric and Wizard), though it manages to stay enjoyable, as it feels like there's always something new to try out. Warlocks have the tools for finishing most encounters, and Pact Magic's unique recharge method encourages players to actually use their spells, as opposed to hoarding them for "when the time is right", as is the downfall of many traditional Vancian casters. I also appreciate how the Warlock is something different- It's truly like no other class.

As an honorable (pun intended) mention, I love what was done with the Paladin. The fluff definitively separates them from Clerics for once, and it feels like the mechanics embrace the idea of the Paladin being both a protector who sacrifices him/herself for the good of others (Challenge, etc.) as well as a fierce warrior (Smites). I also salute WotC for designing a version of the class that actually works for a whole campaign. (AD&D's restrictions were infuriating and 3e reduced the class to a 2-level dip).

[ImSAMazing]

In the playground's opinion, which 5th Edition classes are the best designed? Which are the most fun/most elegant/most effective/most interesting?

In my opinion, personally, the Barbarian, Monk, Paladin, and Warlock are the overall best designs. For reasons. What about you guys?

Warlock. Warlock has useful attacks, but has good utility/more damage/cool spells with his lvl 3rd Pact Boon. His Pact choice also reflects his power, but overall a warlock is really cool.

[PoeticDwarf]

Rogue is good designed, you have the skills, you have the sneak.

Bard and cleric are the best designed spellcasters I think.

Barbarian is my other favourite, but I don't like to be THE tank.


Sorcerer and (moon)druid aren't very good designed, is my opinion.



The ranger is (one of the) best archer(s) but isn't balanced.
The wizard is just a basic spellcaster with nice features and many spells.
The warlock is a weird thing, but is good designed.
I like the monk and fighter, but they are a little bit simple (just keep making attacks, it doesn't matter if you miss because you can make three others.)

[PoeticDwarf]

Rogue is good designed, you have the skills, you have the sneak.

Bard and cleric are the best designed spellcasters I think.

Barbarian is my other favourite, but I don't like to be THE tank.


Sorcerer and (moon)druid aren't very good designed, is my opinion.



The ranger is (one of the) best archer(s) but isn't balanced.
The wizard is just a basic spellcaster with nice features and many spells.
The warlock is a weird thing, but is good designed.
I like the monk and fighter, but they are a little bit simple (just keep making attacks, it doesn't matter if you miss because you can make three others.)
And the paladin, that's what we call an interesting class!

Sorry I wanted to put the paladin in my other post, but I don't now how I can delete this now...

[ThermalSlapShot]

I'm not saying it is a good idea. I am just saying that it is an amazing talent to be able to wade into an army, allow 15 of them to surround you in melee, while the others try to pelt you with arrows, and still not get hit. That is a feat that is right up there with anything that has existed in fiction.

I'm not saying that it hasn't existed in fiction, but that doesn't mean that the fiction is high level or high fantasy. Elusive is a low level/low fantasy ability that was placed at a higher level because of bad design.

Being able to steal someone's memory? That is a high level ability. Being able to physically shift your molecules and walk through a walll? That is high level/fantasy.

The bad design is not what the rogue can do, just when they get to do it. Like other stagnant classes their cool abilities come on too late* which causes the bad design.

Kind of like how at level 15 or whatever the Ranger can gain evasion. That is a low level ability given to a class near the end of its progression. That is and design. Should a Ranger get it at level 7? No, but they shouldn't get a low level ability at such a high level.

Again it is like if the wizard was gaining access to only low level Spells 1-3 and never went above that. People would be quite mad at the design of the class. That is how people look at the stagnant classes (including rogue) and feel.

*too late and are low level abilities acting as if they are high level abilities.

[Steampunkette]

The Warlock is a really strong class design to begin with. Pact of the Blade has some issues, in my (and a few other people's) opinions, but by creating a more survivable/gishy Patron I feel like I more or less solved my issues with it.

It's also a really flexible character class for design and concept. It's a great stand in for necromancers, a nice chassis for pet-masters in general, and with a little tweaking of the Patron feature it's a really great Pathfinder-style Inquisitor. Toss Light Sabers and Psychic Powers at it and it makes a mean Jedi (with Knights following the blade pact line). And with the right Background and a few invocations it would make a really great Rogue-styled Jack Class.

[Gwendol]

Monk for the non-casters, and cleric for the casting classes. Both have a mix of abilities that make them interesting and fun.

[SharkForce]

Monk for the non-casters, and cleric for the casting classes. Both have a mix of abilities that make them interesting and fun.

except that clerics have that absolutely awful ability to call on their deity. that particular part of the cleric is just bad.

[ThermalSlapShot]

except that clerics have that absolutely awful ability to call on their deity. that particular part of the cleric is just bad.

The idea is sound, the execution is not so much.

Could have probably been made to work like a limited wish/Minor miracle type ability.

[Easy_Lee]

My vote goes to rogues, monks, and wizards. Each is designed with some specific things in mind. Rogue does the skills, scaling damage, and stays alive. Monk is fantastic against casters, has high mobility, and is very difficult to CC. Wizards just cast lots and lots of spells, with features that let them cast more spells and specialize in a school. In the case of all three, their features are all focused on what the class is designed to do, which to me is good class design.

[BoutsofInsanity]

I have been DMing two parties for about a year now. We have just reached level 14. I have had...

Warlock
Barbarian (Frenzy)
Fighter
Barbarian (Bear)
Monk 3/Warlock11
Paladin
Rogue
Sorcerer


At lower levels the Barbarian reigned king in flavor and efficiency. Unless I wanted to DM fiat and throw psychic characters at the party all the time, Rage rocks. She tanks like a champ, takes lots of attacks with power attack and crushes all who oppose her. The Bear tanks all, he doesn't care what I throw at them, he takes it on the pecks and kills it with a swing of his hammer. And you know what, they still reign as deadly in upper levels. And oh lord they crit like a boss.

The fighter's key phrase is consistency. He isn't nearly as dynamic, but he is reliable. He tanks, battlefield controls with sentinel, and crits like a boss with three to four attacks. He is only remarkable as the player. The class may not be flashy, but by God does it do it's job.

Paladin... I am not gonna lie, the Paladin makes my job hard. By far one of the most powerful classes in the game. I've had more encounters wrecked by the passive charisma bonus to saves for her and the party. I am going to charm the barbarian? Nope, the Paladin runs next to him and removes it. I poison the low constitution character? Nah bruh, Paladin gives them a plus five to the save by standing next to them. The Paladin's are the bro's of the system.

The straight warlock was different then what I was expecting. By far the easiest class to screw up. This class is for thinkers. They have a select few powers that when applied correctly can change the flow of the fight or situation. So I think the design, which was a reaction to the sorcerer was clutch. It is a complicated class, it does require thought and strategy. Which is why this player was not as effective as the others. But once she swapped to the sorcerer...

I had an encounter, after the blowing of sorcerer points, that four monsters took 96 lightning damage in one round. I was impressed. The sorcerer is simple, with an easy resource management system with the opportunity to feel dynamic and powerful all rolled into one.

Then the red headed stepchild. My multiclass monk/warlock. Level 1-3 as a monk was just fine. But that swap to warlock was brutal... Till level 7. Add in one homebrew feat that gives your wisdom bonus as bonus ki points and goodness is this a slick combo. Two attacks of the blade, followed with a flurry of blows. Along with the martial arts feature of knocking people prone, or away, with eldritch blast forcing them an additional 10 feet? Chucking lighting with WitchBolt and teleporting around I have a damn jedi floating around. Then, having the ability to apply a spell that will change the flow of the battle in just one move? Easily my favorite class style so far. It does require three stats. But it is doable with the rules the way the system works.

The rogue has been talked about enough, but regardless, yes the rogue rocks.

In conclusion... The barbarian rocks as far as fluidity, integration of the standard feats, purpose and flavor. The Barbarian tanks, doesn't wear armor, hits like a truck, and generally feels really good. It has one of the best level 1 dips around. The Paladin, for other reasons, feels and plays exactly like a Paladin should act. A teamwork focused tank who heals, smites, and protects those who remain with them. Finally the Sorcerer is easy to use, with enough complication to be interesting, and you get to roll lots of dice.

[Gwendol]

except that clerics have that absolutely awful ability to call on their deity. that particular part of the cleric is just bad.

Hm, yeah. It's late in the game and a plot vehicle in disguise. I'm a forgiving nature. :-)

[1Forge]

Honestly I read through and theirs really only support for rogue and warlock...

The argument for rogue was good, and then nothing... no one defended paladin, or wizard, or fighter even. Just rogue and warlock.

So im here to right this terrible crime. Here is my top 3

1) Bard: they win because they can do anything, and pull off great flavor RP wise while still giving an awsome charcter statistically. not to mention they are the most fun to play! ( I played with a DM who kept trying to kill my character but i solved nearly every encounter either peacefully or through guile. I sometimes didnt even have to roll initiative!)

2) Fighter: These guys are the unsung heroes of D&D, they take on the greatest dangers with nothing more then a chunk of metal on a stick. They work harder then almost all other classes to try to keep up with flying paladins, fire slinging wizards, and lightning striking clerics.

3)Rogue: these guys are like fighters but a little different flavor-wise. They are sharp as a knife, quick as a wink, and bear tongues of quick silver. Overall a fun class to play especially with a fun DM.

(ranger got 4th on my list and wizard got 5th. Paladins, clerics, monks, and barbarians, followed in that order; druid and warlock tied for last. Though that dosent mean i dont like them i often play paladins and other classes i just felt they often didnt aquire the versitility or flavor of the top 3)

[djreynolds]

A bard or paladin is a welcome addition to any party. They are the most complete and can enhance any party. Can tank, heal, support, or strike? But I hate them.

[zinycor]

You can find the class well designed but some people found the Delorean well designed too.

Any car that allows you to go back in time to rock is very well designed

[GiantOctopodes]

Best Designed Class:

The Bard- because a Bard is a welcome addition to virtually Any party. The Bard is the most versatile class, capable of accomplishing literally any role between his skill selections, expertise, full spellcasting, and ability to borrow key spells from other classes. Between team buffs, enemy debuffs, summons, and healing, he provides great support that not only leaves him succeeding, but helping everyone else succeed as well, making him appreciated rather than resented for his usefulness in many situations. For the same reasons, plus having Charisma as a key stat, the Bard is also the single best class with which to run a solo campaign.

The Druid- with an extensive spell list and one of the best overall spellcasting methods (getting to choose from every spell on their list each day), the Druid is one of the best spellcasters in the game. Their raw versatility can only be matched by a Wizard, and even then, the Wizard must actively seek out and learn their spells for their spellbook, and can lose them, while the Druid starts each level with the whole list available. Despite that, the Druid also is a fearsome melee combatant with Wild Shape, having some of the best tanking abilities in the game due to their HP recovery systems inherent in Wild Shape. Due to the many bonuses they receive from their spellcasting and wildshape, they also are excellent for stealth and scouting, and offer unique social opportunities due to their ties to the land. A class which simply never fails to have something to contribute.

The Rogue- a non-spellcaster base class with many, many options available to it. Beyond being able to contribute effectively in and out of combat in a wide variety of situations, they tie their effectiveness to skillful and strategic gameplay from the player. By demanding constant interaction and engagement from the player and an understanding of the situation to maximize their effectiveness, they are just flat out very fun to play. Almost never with a Rogue will they pass their turn with "I keep standing where I am and hacking at the thing in front of me".

The Warlock- By having spells return on short rests, and with at will abilities in Invocations, combined with the best ritual casting of any class, the Warlock is another class that always has something fun to do. The class is also chock full of flavor and built in DM Plot hooks, which make it really easy to build a great story, and isn't that what it's all about anyway?

Anyhoo, those are my picks for the top 4. Sure some people will disagree- for example, someone who doesn't want their character's story to be about the pact thing probably won't like a Warlock. Someone who doesn't like stealth and scouting, and / or someone who believes social interactions should be handled without dice rolls based on the player's interactions, probably won't appreciate what a Rogue has to offer. If you've already got a Bard and a Ranger in your party and are going with a gritty, urban, futuristic setting Druids might not seem very appealing. If you hate the whole Skald thing, and think that it's ridiculous that someone would start playing music in the middle of a battle, you've obviously not watched Fury Road, and might not like the bard. But nonetheless, for the people the classes are trying to appeal to, I feel they're very well designed to accomplish that, and that's what makes them my best designed classes.

That's also what earns the Barbarian their spot at #5.

[Steampunkette]

For Warlocks: Screw the Lore if you don't like it. Write your own.

If you don't want your character bound to the Fiend, but like the Fiend's powers, just take the Fiend pact and ignore all the flavor text that involves a fiend or other patron controlling you.

Sure it takes away a plot hook for the DM, but it's not gonna change the way the class functions or unbalance it in any way, shape, or form.

I even made a Warlock-Inquisitor for the Church. Who needs a Fiend to be your patron when you can work for the Pope?