What do you feel is the most commonly played class?

[Douche]

I ask "feel" because I doubt there are any reliable statistics of how many characters there are in each class (like you might be able to check in an MMO)

So, based on your experience, what do you feel is the most commonly played class?

EDIT: Someone created a strawpoll. Guess I'll put it here for visibility


Here, how about a quicky strawpoll to consolidate our experiences.

http://www.strawpoll.me/12206346

[DragonSorcererX]

Probably Warlock 'cause it is so edgy...

[Specter]

Of all the groups I played on, 90% of them had a paladin, for some reason.

[SilverStud]

Honestly it's hard to say. I see more rogues than anything, but everyone talks about sorcerers and warlocks much much more.

So from all of my games, rogue is the most commonly played.

From what I would guess or "feel" maybe sorcerer or warlock?

[Flashy]

Of all the groups I played on, 90% of them had a paladin, for some reason.

This. Paladins are EVERYWHERE.

[MrStabby]

Paladin.

Always paladin.

Never enough with the paladin.

Too much, stop already...

[Foxhound438]

i've been in campaigns containing every class, but in every single one of them except maybe 2 or 3 there has been a barbarian

Strangely, most of them have been played by the same player.

Also strangely, it's almost always annoying now, considering how flat the character is and how often I've seen it.



Aside from that guy, I feel like rogues are pretty common.

[DragonSorcererX]

Honestly it's hard to say. I see more rogues than anything, but everyone talks about sorcerers and warlocks much much more.

So from all of my games, rogue is the most commonly played.

From what I would guess or "feel" maybe sorcerer or warlock?

Because DRAGONBLOOD (or something similar involving DRAGONS) is the most awesome and badass thing a character could have, and pacts are edgy.

[Nicrosil]

The most common classes at my table are probably sorcerer, warlock, rogue, and fighter, in that order.

[Oramac]

This. Paladins are EVERYWHERE.

It's gotta be regional. I almost never see paladins unless I'm playing one.

Around here, I'd say Fighter or Warlock is the most common.

[SilverStud]

It's gotta be regional.

Paladin is a staple crop in many parts of the world.

[LaserFace]

I have never played with a Paladin that wasn't me. And I'm almost always not a Paladin.

Most common is probs Fighter over here.

[JumboWheat01]

Bard's the most common in my group, and not all by the same person, but not everyone's made one yet. I guess we like it because it's the jack-of-all-trades class.

[xyianth]

That depends. Does dipping count as playing a class? If it does, then 5e is straight drowning in warlocks. The trading market for souls is probably doing very well in 5e.

If playing a class is less about having the class on your character sheet and more about the theme your character portrays, then paladin is probably the most played class. Honestly, it feels like practically every table in every tavern filled with adventurers has at least one paladin nursing a pint with his/her mates.

Either way, the days of parties without a charisma based character are long gone. You are far more likely to have an entire party of charisma based characters now. And sadly, almost everyone of them will be dumb as a box of rocks. (dumped int)

[Ruslan]

I have DMed a total of 25 Player Characters in 5E. The breakdown is:

4x Wizard
4x Paladin
3x Rogue
3x Monk
3x Cleric
2x Barbarian
2x Bard
2x Warlock
1x Ranger
1x Fighter

No Druids or Sorcerers.

[NecessaryWeevil]

Well, this is our second campaign. First campaign was Wizard, Paladin, Ranger, Rogue. Second campaign is Barbarian, Fighter, Cleric, Bard. No overlap whatsoever (dips don't count).

So, I don't know that one is more common than the other (recognizing of course that you can't draw conclusions from such a small data set).

[DarthPenance]

Until now I've played 4 games, and so the classes would be like this:

4 Fighters
4 Rogues
1 Ranger
1 Barbarian
1 Bard
1 Cleric
3 Warlocks
3 Monks
2 Wizards
1 Paladin

No Druids or Sorcerers
I'd say Fighter is more common since in one campaign we had 3 of them, the rogue was only 1 person in the 4 campaigns

[XmonkTad]

My groups tend to have fighters in every party. Warlocks are probably a close second, followed by monks. Never had a paladin or a ranger. We tend to multiclass a lot.

[Sigreid]

I think it would be wizard. Probably because there isn't a class overlap with them I don't think I've been in more than 1-2 games since the 70's that didn't have at least one wizard. Aside from that, it's the power to alter reality without being beholding to any other power and that's just neat.

[JAL_1138]

I see a lot of Clerics and Fighters, seems like.

[Sception]

Paladins, I'd guess because of Aura of Protection. At level 6+, the difference between a party that has Aura of Protection and a party that doesn't is just enormous.

[Flashy]

I'll do a full listing. Across 6 groups (two of which were one-shots) there have been...

5x paladins
3x warlocks
2x clerics
2x rogues
2x druids
2x barbarians
2x monks
2x rangers
1x fighter
1x wizard
1x sorcerer
0.5x bards (one of the paladins later multiclassed)

[ChubbyRain]

I ask "feel" because I doubt there are any reliable statistics of how many characters there are in each class (like you might be able to check in an MMO)

So, based on your experience, what do you feel is the most commonly played class?

Paladins, Rangers, and Wizards are fricken everywhere.

Ranger wins the award for most "can I remake my character". Seriously, ive never seen such a high turnover, expectations meet reality I guess.

Paladins sound, looks, and play like a bamf.

Wizards are iconic, though I prefer Sorcerers/Warlocks.

[The Shadowdove]

Warlock and rogues.

Paladins, barbarians, and fighters close tied for second.

[8wGremlin]

Why not set up a google form and ask this, share the results, so we can all see them.
and get some actual data.

[Blas_de_Lezo]

Here, my feel is fighters. Paladins tend to be considered as yihadist, inquisitors with swords, or any other kind of religious fanatical homicides, and are usually mocked.

[MrFahrenheit]

For all you folks listing PCs you've experienced, let me ask you this:
Are all (or most) from the same campaign? And if so, is it mainly one player who can't keep a character alive playing them?

...because then it doesn't count! Jk, but there's no way barbarian is the most commonly played class, even if that's the case in my campaign...

Seriously though, I'd say a tie between paladin or rogue, judging from the forums and my new players (and new characters from anyone-but-my-death-guy).

[DragonSorcererX]

What i have seen from the thred, the three most played are: Paladin, Fighter and Warlock.

But fighter being there doesn't mean anything because this class is so versatile that it can be a ranger better than a ranger, it has some ToB stuff, it can be a teleporting tank, and it also has an archetype for Drake Sword wielding Casuls, etc...

[toapat]

Ranger wins the award for most "can I remake my character". Seriously, ive never seen such a high turnover, expectations meet reality I guess.

i Assume your DMs havent seen the UA ranger? they reworked the class so its stronger and not as janky. Spell list still sucks though.

I Fell the most common classes would be Ranger and Rogue. Ranger because of World of Warcraft and that cultural "Hunter = Easy to play" and Rogue because its simple while not being impossibly boring.

Overal:

Paladins are popular because they are badass, and Barbarians are popular because their Cultural Image is badass.

Monks are popular for Wrong Genre Savvy reasons

Wizards and Clerics are popular for people wanting to play full spellcasters, while clerics also get a kick from people who understand the Holy Trinity but dont understand that straight Spells into Healing = Bad.

Rangers are popular because of WoW hunters and people wanting a pet bear/Nonsomestic Supercuddly beast

Druids are popular because of people who want to be cats, Hippies, or Hippy cats

Rogues are popular either for Sneak Sneak or for the same core technical problem that boosts cleric popularity, in that people without good technical knowledge or technical skill want to cover traps despite any other class can trap almost as effectively.

Warlocks are popular because they are Edgelords, or because they sound more fun than Sorcerers, Wizards, Fighters, and rogues

Sorcerer: Because you are Born of Dragons, Magical Trolling, and because its less intimidating on the surface than Wizard.

Bard: Power Metal.

Fighter: Popular either because of situations such as the PF Gunslinger was created as a subclass or because of Holy Trinity necessitation

[ChubbyRain]

i Assume your DMs havent seen the UA ranger? they reworked the class so its stronger and not as janky. Spell list still sucks though.

I Fell the most common classes would be Ranger and Rogue. Ranger because of World of Warcraft and that cultural "Hunter = Easy to play" and Rogue because its simple while not being impossibly boring.

Overal:

Paladins are popular because they are badass, and Barbarians are popular because their Cultural Image is badass.

Monks are popular for Wrong Genre Savvy reasons

Wizards and Clerics are popular for people wanting to play full spellcasters, while clerics also get a kick from people who understand the Holy Trinity but dont understand that straight Spells into Healing = Bad.

Rangers are popular because of WoW hunters and people wanting a pet bear/Nonsomestic Supercuddly beast

Druids are popular because of people who want to be cats, Hippies, or Hippy cats

Rogues are popular either for Sneak Sneak or for the same core technical problem that boosts cleric popularity, in that people without good technical knowledge or technical skill want to cover traps despite any other class can trap almost as effectively.

Warlocks are popular because they are Edgelords, or because they sound more fun than Sorcerers, Wizards, Fighters, and rogues

Sorcerer: Because you are Born of Dragons, Magical Trolling, and because its less intimidating on the surface than Wizard.

Bard: Power Metal.

Fighter: Popular either because of situations such as the PF Gunslinger was created as a subclass or because of Holy Trinity necessitation


It isn't the DM. Plus this takes into account adventure league.

Besides, ranger would still win that award if the character changed to spell-less (or another type) ranger as they still want to get rid of their current class.

Our core groups dont touch the ranger unless we are making joke characters for one shots.

[Cl0001]

With groups I'm in, I'd say the most popular is fighter, barbarian, rogue in that order. Everyone I know skips between wizard, cleric and sorcerer when they want to play a caster.

[JumboWheat01]

Here, how about a quicky strawpoll to consolidate our experiences.

http://www.strawpoll.me/12206346

[Armok]

Oddly enough, it's the monk at my table. There's always one or two monks at any given time in my games... I'm thinking of just expanding my campaign world to include an eastern inspired land of kung fu and ninja at this rate.

[Miffles]

Elf rouge i was in a d&d club and over 90% of the people there were even rouges

[jas61292]

Lets see, just counting major campaigns and not one-shots my group of 4-5 so far has had:

Fighter: 4
Paladin: 4
Cleric: 3
Monk: 3
Barbarian: 2
Rogue: 2
Sorcerer: 2
Wizard: 2
Bard: 1
Druid: 1
Ranger: 1
Warlock: 1

And most of the popular ones have had multiple people playing them. The 4 fighters were all different people. So were the 3 clerics. The Paladins had one person playing it twice, but that's all. The only exception is the monk, where all three were the same guy.

Though I have to say, my favorite part about looking this over is remembering how one of my group members has somehow managed to go through 11 characters across 5 campaigns as a player, while no one else has had more than 5 (across 3-4 campaigns as a player, due to that guy being the only one there the entire time not to DM at least once).

[ChubbyRain]

Elf rouge i was in a d&d club and over 90% of the people there were even rouges

Psh, I'm sure some of them were odd rouges too.

[JumboWheat01]

Psh, I'm sure some of them were odd rouges too.

It's posts like this that make me really wish there was a like system.

[gfishfunk]

Every group I have been in has had a rogue. Most have had a fighter. Then Ranger. I almost never see clerics, sorcerers, or druids.

[Pex]

Pact of the Chain Fiendish Warlock and Moon Druid

[Foxhound438]

Paladin is a staple crop in many parts of the world.

yeah, basically everywhere that grows corn rotates into paladin once every 3 years or so.

[Foxhound438]

Either way, the days of parties without a charisma based character are long gone. You are far more likely to have an entire party of charisma based characters now. And sadly, almost everyone of them will be dumb as a box of rocks. (dumped int)

that may be in part due to the stat requirements by caster class:

Bard: charisma
Cleric: wisdom
Druid: wisdom
sorcerer: charisma
warlock: charisma
wizard: int

3 charisma and only 1 int, plus the apparently prolific half casting charisma class. A person could argue that EK's and AT's count as int classes, but a lot of builds for them dump int and use stat ignoring spells, most commonly self buffs.

[toapat]

that may be in part due to the stat requirements by caster class:

Bard: charisma
Cleric: wisdom
Druid: wisdom
sorcerer: charisma
warlock: charisma
wizard: int

3 charisma and only 1 int, plus the apparently prolific half casting charisma class. A person could argue that EK's and AT's count as int classes, but a lot of builds for them dump int and use stat ignoring spells, most commonly self buffs.

there are 4 Int caster classes, 4 Wisdom, and 4 Charisma. and then barbarian gives no Rages

[Cespenar]

Rogues in my experience. Mostly because people I know tend to think about group roles, I guess.

[Alatar]

It's posts like this that make me really wish there was a like system.

I was thinking the very same thing for the very same reason. "Odd rouges" deserves xp.

Over 1.6 campaigns, we've had 4 clerics and 3 fighters. Zero bards so far. (Only one rouge.)

[ChubbyRain]

I was thinking the very same thing for the very same reason. "Odd rouges" deserves xp.

Over 1.6 campaigns, we've had 4 clerics and 3 fighters. Zero bards so far. (Only one rouge.)

Rogues do sometimes wear rouge. Especially if they have the friends cantrip!

[toapat]

Rogues in my experience. Mostly because people I know tend to think about group roles, I guess.

rogues, clerics, and fighters get rolled for the "holy Trinity" purpose way too often, but if any of the 3 gets it the worst, its the cleric

[djreynolds]

Yeah I see cleric a lot, especially for newbies who may not have played before but still want to be helpful.

But in AL play I see powergamers show up with paladin multiclasses mostly, can't blame them. Paladin could be the best written class, just very cool.

[toapat]

Yeah I see cleric a lot, especially for newbies who may not have played before but still want to be helpful.

But in AL play I see powergamers show up with paladin multiclasses mostly, can't blame them. Paladin could be the best written class, just very cool.

i think theres problems with Core paladin in 5th, but compared to every other class in the edition, its the most interesting on the surface. Its also one of the most controllable since its power is delivered through Attack rolls which are fairly evenly balanced against AC as opposed to saving throws which are essentially random, and Smites can be held back for critical explosions.

[djreynolds]

I just like the feel, they can compete with melee, have decent AC, decent HP, lay on hands, and good spells for the party... and can smite.

They just multiclass so easily with bard, warlock, and sorcerer.

The only thing they might lose out on is the exploration pillar with heavy armor.

I think, honestly for a new player, paladin are tough to screw up even if you waste all your spells you can still swing away.

Hey new guy just max out charisma and we will all stand next to you and your Auras

[Davemeddlehed]

The D&D board on reddit ran this a few weeks back:

http://www.strawpoll.me/12126178/r

[djreynolds]

WOW

Rogue 13%
Monk 11%
Fighter 10%
Wizard/cleric 9%
Bard/paladin/warlock 8%
sorcerer 7%
ranger/barbarian 6%
druid 5%

Awesome, thanks for this

[Alatar]

Rogues do sometimes wear rouge. Especially if they have the friends cantrip!

Those are the odd ones.

[Cespenar]

Cleric is understandable beside the helper/healer role as well: choosing among a wide menu of gods' tenets and RPing them have always been a fun aspect of D&D.

Funnily, even though it's possible, you see a lot less characters besides the religious classes actually roleplaying their religion.

[Arkhios]

Paladin is my personal Favorite, but in a game I DM the group consists of 3 rogues, a cleric, and a fighter, but since I made the Inquisitor sub-class for rogue, the cleric's player has expressed his wishes to play one.

Who am I to say no, because I want to see how it works out, plus it's been sort of a running gag that the group already had three rogues (group's defacto leader has been humorously talking about a "Rogues Gallery" referring to their group, so the fourth rogue is definitely welcome).

Obviously, each rogue is of a different archetype: Arcane Trickster, Assassin, Thief, and soon: Inquisitor.
(The fighter is of course an Eldritch Knight)

Anyway, I digress. I'm not sure if my observation on this regard is particularly valid, but rogue seems rather popular.

Apart from that, I feel that paladins, warlocks, and sorcerers (single or multiclassed) are the most popular.
Oh, and bards, too.

[gfishfunk]

Paladin could be the best written class, just very cool.

I'm just 100% in disagreement: Paladins are the poorest designed class (or neck-and-neck with druids). I play a Paladin, love it, but it is not well designed.

[ChubbyRain]

The D&D board on reddit ran this a few weeks back:

http://www.strawpoll.me/12126178/r

As I recall, the bias in the poll prevents you from using this as "these are what people are using" and you have to say "these are what people of reddit have responded with". The difference being that reddit may not be a good sample since the ppl who responded via reddit reddit may have allowed for multiple answers from the same user, may have had people answer who don't play D&D often or at all, and has no way of verifying the results (run it multiple times, under similar circumstances, and ccompare the results. Plus you are looking at one population, redditors who play D&D.

As someone who helps with psych questionnaires, strawpolls don't give you any legitimate answer on a broad topic.

In not saying that the results in real life can't reflect the numbers they got, just that the numbers they got may or may not reflect the real numbers in real life because they are running on a specific population that is based around a members that frequents a "group/club".

Psych actually has this problem with research because for a lot of things they can't get funding and they use college kids for a lot of their research.

[Syll]

1x paladins
1x warlocks
3x clerics
3x rogues
3x druids
1x barbarians
2x monks
3x rangers
5x fighter
1x wizard
2x sorcerer
1x bards

I wouldn't have thought so as a gut reaction, but once i put the classes down apparently it's fighter. Druid is a little skewed because all 3 were played by the same person, and if it weren't for me there would have been no bards/sorcerers/warlocks or paladins represented.

Edit: and every one of those fighters was a dual-wielder.

[Plaguescarred]

The rogue i feel is the most commonly played class.

[MisterSocrates]

From the games I recall off the top of my head recently:

Fighter x4.5
Cleric x3
Wizard x3
Rogue x2
Barbarian
Bard
Druid
Monk
Warlock
Ranger x0.5

Oddly, zero Paladins.

[Joe the Rat]

AL, FLGS, Home game, every table had a rogue. Most had a fighter or cleric, but one of the two would occasionally be missing.
I'm not going to weigh in on casters, as I skew the numbers there a bit (my family always has a Warlock).

[toapat]

I'm just 100% in disagreement: Paladins are the poorest designed class (or neck-and-neck with druids). I play a Paladin, love it, but it is not well designed.

Paladin class features and its subclasses barring the UA ones are well designed. the Spell list is whats garbage and kinda in need of an overhaul.

[Arkhios]

Paladin class features and its subclasses barring the UA ones are well designed. the Spell list is whats garbage and kinda in need of an overhaul.

I'd argue that even the spell list is well laid out.

[MrConsideration]

My group has a weird surfeit of Rangers, but Sorcerer and Bard probably come second.

Rare choices seem to be Druid or Monk.

[toapat]

I'd argue that even the spell list is well laid out.

i think the spells on their own are fine and the list itself is fine, but the problem is the List when combined with Divine Smite isnt fine.

[Arkhios]

i think the spells on their own are fine and the list itself is fine, but the problem is the List when combined with Divine Smite isnt fine.

Eh? I'm not sure I understand what you mean by that. Could you elaborate?

[Waazraath]

Most played as far as I've seen: barbarian and cleric.

As for the paladin: very well designed class imo. Strong defensive and offensive options, little utility with the spells, not too much, not too strong area effects, but great nova. And it's a party to have one in your party, with its save aura.

[toapat]

Eh? I'm not sure I understand what you mean by that. Could you elaborate?

the spell list is not sufficiently meaningful when compared to Smite. its a Good spell list, with decent utility and effects, that pales in comparison to dumping +18d8 with a critical hit

[Biggstick]

There is a Rogue at almost every single table I've ever played at, online or irl.

If for some reason there wasn't a Rogue, then there was someone playing a Fighter with Thieves tools.

I've played in 3 to 5 different 5E games a week since November of 2014. They ranged from online Roll20 to irl games. Only one has been the same consistent game ever since, while the others have shifted due to the campaign ending, falling apart, or me simply moving to a new game. As I've said, I honestly can't remember playing in a game where we didn't have a Rogue, so my feelings are that Rogues are the most commonly played class in 5E.

[ChubbyRain]

the spell list is not sufficiently meaningful when compared to Smite. its a Good spell list, with decent utility and effects, that pales in comparison to dumping +18d8 with a critical hit

I would like to see a base class Paladin without the ability to smite BUT with a more robust selection of smite spells.

[PhoenixPhyre]

I'm the DM for 3 campaigns currently (no player overlap)

0 barbarian
2 bards
2 clerics
2 druids
3 fighters
2 monks
0 paladin (used to be 1, but he switched to sorc when he died)
2 rangers
3 rogues
2 sorcerers
2 warlocks
1 wizard

So basically even, but no pallies or barbs.

Mostly teenagers though. They go for "cool looks" over optimal mechanics. Both rangers are BM, both warlocks are GOO tomelocks.

[gfishfunk]

Paladin class features and its subclasses barring the UA ones are well designed. the Spell list is whats garbage and kinda in need of an overhaul.


I'd argue that even the spell list is well laid out.


i think the spells on their own are fine and the list itself is fine, but the problem is the List when combined with Divine Smite isnt fine.


Eh? I'm not sure I understand what you mean by that. Could you elaborate?


the spell list is not sufficiently meaningful when compared to Smite. its a Good spell list, with decent utility and effects, that pales in comparison to dumping +18d8 with a critical hit

This is weird - I just created a new post on this subject. I agree that the spell list is well laid out, but toapat nails it - Smite crossing over with smite spells. Since Smite is the main feature...yeah.

[toapat]

This is weird - I just created a new post on this subject. I agree that the spell list is well laid out, but toapat nails it - Smite crossing over with smite spells. Since Smite is the main feature...yeah.

you fundamentally missunderstand the problem. the Spell list is Fine, if it wasnt fuel for Smite. The problem is theres No in class reason to not burn spells on smiting

[gfishfunk]

you fundamentally missunderstand the problem. the Spell list is Fine, if it wasnt fuel for Smite. The problem is theres No in class reason to not burn spells on smiting

And you may have misread my post. First, the spell list is fine. Its great. I agree.

The problem is at-will smite is stronger than bonus action smite spells.

This is the thread that I discuss the matter. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?513402-The-Paladin-An-Argument-That-It-Is-Poorly-Designed).

Its a fun class with a design problem at the core feature: at-will smite.

[toapat]

And you may have misread my post. First, the spell list is fine. Its great. I agree.

The problem is at-will smite is stronger than bonus action smite spells.

This is the thread that I discuss the matter. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?513402-The-Paladin-An-Argument-That-It-Is-Poorly-Designed).

Its a fun class with a design problem at the core feature: at-will smite.

smite spells are more powerful than the class feature smite If you have the patched versions, the issue is they are not on current hit,

This is also completely irrelevant since the considerations of investing spell slots into smiting dont exist. THAT is the problem. Not timings, not effects, not numbers. the Paladin spell list is irrelevant in comparison to Divine smite. You cannot add limitations to divine smite and not render the paladin completely unplayable. Paladins need the actual ability to solve conflict through spells without Violence, which they dont have

[Thrasher92]

Well, at my table everyone has their usual classes that they play.

I typically play wither a wizard or a rogue. Another guy usually plays a melee character like a Fighter, Barbarian, or Paladin. A third ALWAYS plays a ranger, druid, or some one super in tune with nature. The others tend to switch it up more and can be somewhat random.

If I had to make a guess at the most common class at our table it would be rogue.

[SaintRidley]

Not sure about overall. From the three games I'm playing in or running right now:

4 Rangers (2 PHB Hunters, 1 UA Beastmaster, and 1 UA Deep Stalker)
3 Fighters (1 Champion - multiclassing Barb, 1 SCAG Banneret, 1 EK)
2 Barbarians (1 Wolf totem, 1 multiclassed in and at 1st level)
2 Rogues (2 thieves)
1 Bard (Lore)
1 Cleric (storm)
1 Druid (Moon)
1 Paladin (Ancients, going to multiclass GOOlock)
1 Warlock (Fey Tomelock)
1 Wizard (abjurer)

Group compositions for each game:

Two Rangers (both Hunters) the Bard and the Paladin make one group (I'm DM)

The Champion/Barbarian, Banneret, and Thief make another group (I'm the Champion, it's a primitive no-magic game)

The EK, Barbarian, Cleric, Warlock, and Wizard make another group (I'm the EK)

The remaining two Rangers (Deep Stalker and Beast), Druid, and remaining Thief make the last group (I'm the Druid).

Maybe we could make a thread to take a census of what people are playing or seeing played in groups they DM?

[Arkhios]

smite spells are more powerful than the class feature smite If you have the patched versions, the issue is they are not on current hit,

This is also completely irrelevant since the considerations of investing spell slots into smiting dont exist. THAT is the problem. Not timings, not effects, not numbers. the Paladin spell list is irrelevant in comparison to Divine smite. You cannot add limitations to divine smite and not render the paladin completely unplayable. Paladins need the actual ability to solve conflict through spells without Violence, which they dont have

But they do. They still have their spells (which you said are powerful). No-one is telling you that you absolutely MUST use Divine Smite all the frikkin' time. It's a player's individual choice to do that, if that's what rocks their boats. If you use your smites sparingly, only on criticals, instead preferring to cast spells when they're absolutely needed, the whole play experience is quite different.

[JumboWheat01]

It does make me want to try a ranged paladin, who can't use their smite with their weapon of choice. Losing out on smite, but still having all those tasty goodies, and a good sized spell list.

[Arkhios]

It does make me want to try a ranged paladin, who can't use their smite with their weapon of choice. Losing out on smite, but still having all those tasty goodies, and a good sized spell list.

Even though only a few of Smite Spells work with any weapon (Branding and Banishing Smites), it could be very interesting to see them used with a ranged weapon. Also, Elemental Weapon (IMHO, the best spell paladins get) works fine with a ranged weapon.

[toapat]

They still have their spells (which you said are powerful).

the problem isnt really that their spells arent powerful (Shield of Faith, Aura of Vitality, Destructive Wave, Banishment, Death Ward, Every Single Smite Spell, Geas), their spells are typically ludicrously good. the problem is that they have to rely on, granted a very good selection of, their skill selection/Paying for skills in order to really gain types of situations they can perform in.

[Arkhios]

the problem isnt really that their spells arent powerful (Shield of Faith, Aura of Vitality, Destructive Wave, Banishment, Death Ward, Every Single Smite Spell, Geas), their spells are typically ludicrously good. the problem is that they have to rely on, granted a very good selection of, their skill selection/Paying for skills in order to really gain types of situations they can perform in.

And how is that different from any other class? I don't see the point in your argument. Or the problem whatsoever.

Currently, it seems to me that you are arguing just for the sake of arguing.

PS. A general observation: Why is it that whenever someone makes a longer than a few sentence post regarding a paladin, the whole thread becomes a crapshow. Every. Single. Time.

[toapat]

And how is that different from any other class?

Fullcasters do get enough spells learned that they can at least interact with the majority of challenges without relying on skills, although thats comparing classes on different powerscales, so lets go with Paladin vs the classes that arent Wizard, Sorcerer, Warlock, Cleric, Bard, and Druid: Probably after Ranger, paladin is actually probably the most technically versatile non-fullcaster, which is fine technically, if the problem that Divine Smite actually kinda requires that the character have a much more highly diverse spell list so that there will be more frequent contact with a paladin having to carefully consider investing smites.

[JumboWheat01]

Paladins have more spells available to them at one point than Sorcerers, though. Not as many spell slots, sure, but more spells to chose from per day than a Sorcerer will ever know. And the ability to change them on a day-to-day basis.

[toapat]

Paladins have more spells available to them at one point than Sorcerers, though. Not as many spell slots, sure, but more spells to chose from per day than a Sorcerer will ever know. And the ability to change them on a day-to-day basis.

well, if were going by spells Known, a lvl 2 paladin has more spells known (not prepared/slots though) than a Sorcerer or Bard can ever know, since they gain the entire base class list at that level

but that doesnt relate to paladins being popular because its the stronges "on Demand" damage class

[Foxhound438]

I'd argue that even the spell list is well laid out.

Your lower level spells have a crap ton of good tag-on effects, and having buffs that are good regardless of levels due to bounded accuracy (bless comes to mind) is a huge boost to paladins.

[Foxhound438]

But they do. They still have their spells (which you said are powerful). No-one is telling you that you absolutely MUST use Divine Smite all the frikkin' time. It's a player's individual choice to do that, if that's what rocks their boats. If you use your smites sparingly, only on criticals, instead preferring to cast spells when they're absolutely needed, the whole play experience is quite different.

^pretty much this. paladin is by a veeeeeery large margin my absolute favorite class, and I almost never use divine smite, because the tack on effects for the other smite spells are just so much better than pure damage. The only time I don't want to use another smite spell is if I already have bless active... which is in fact, a spell not being used to divine smite.

Not to mention the utility spells.

[Misterwhisper]

I have now DM'ed or played in 7 games for 5th edition.

EVERY game, no exception had a Bear Totem Barbarian who took Pole Arm Master.
EVERY game but 1 had a Lore Bard, the only reason the first one didn't is because nobody had tried one yet, as soon as someone gave it a try it completely replaced rogues.
Not a single game had a Warlock in it but one, I played the warlock and after they saw how the mechanics worked the class was banned.


BARBARIAN 7 (All Bear Totem)
BARD 6 (All Lore)
CLERIC 3 (1 Life, 1 Nature, 1 Arcane)
DRUID 2 (both Moon)
FIGHTER 5 (3 Champions with a bow, 2 Battlemasters)
MONK 2 (1 Open Hand, 1 Shadow)
PALADIN 6 (4 Vengeance, 2 Ancients)
ROGUE 1 (Swashbuckler)
RANGER 3 (all were Darkstalker)
SORCERER 4 (3 Dragon, 1 Storm)
WARLOCK 1 (the class was banned after half the campaign when the DM intentionally killed it)
WIZARD 3 (2 evokers, 1 deviner)

[Iamcreative]

Not a single game had a Warlock in it but one, I played the warlock and after they saw how the mechanics worked the class was banned.


Can I ask why the warlock ban? Just out of curiousity

[Misterwhisper]

Can I ask why the warlock ban? Just out of curiousity

To quote the DM: "I am not tailoring my game with short rests just because you chose to play a sh**y class"

Our GM refused to use short rests because he found them stupid.

[Iamcreative]

To quote the DM: "I am not tailoring my game with short rests just because you chose to play a sh**y class"

Our GM refused to use short rests because he found them stupid.

Huh but the monks stuck around? Odd but alright

Edit: also, rogues have been in every game Ive been in so thats what Id say.

[DireSickFish]

To quote the DM: "I am not tailoring my game with short rests just because you chose to play a sh**y class"

Our GM refused to use short rests because he found them stupid.

Monks must love him.

I voted Clerics. Not sure it's 100% accurate, but in a lot of our parties having a healer of some type seems to be someones priority. They have a lot of sublcasses that can fundamentally change how the group plays. That being said we have had a lot of variety in what people want to play.

[Misterwhisper]

Monks must love him.

I voted Clerics. Not sure it's 100% accurate, but in a lot of our parties having a healer of some type seems to be someones priority. They have a lot of sublcasses that can fundamentally change how the group plays. That being said we have had a lot of variety in what people want to play.

We only had combat about once every 4 games, so Monks did not have nearly the issue I did.

[DireSickFish]

We only had combat about once every 4 games, so Monks did not have nearly the issue I did.

Why did you have an issue? Spell slots for utility more important than monk ki?