- Joined
- Sep 3, 2014
So a while back, I seriously read through the Book of Vile Darkness for an Evil game I'm playing in, namely because I never did get to play as a Disciple of Dispater back in my first ever game. Well, one thing led to another and I began to analyze each class based on what they could do and what they couldn't... it went on from there.
Now I could do this based on when I wrote them, but I think I'll instead start from the basics; let's start with the only book you technically need to play a round of DnD:
Yes, we're going to go through the original player's handbook first. A lot of this is pretty obvious already, but it does allow me to describe to you how I'll order the classes and show you my review system. For those curious, here's the rating system:
Got it? Then let's begin:
These meat mountains of murderous fury can really only do one thing. But that one thing they do is so horrifically impressive that even blast casters can struggle to keep up (until higher levels that is). They hit and rage and they hit and rage well. And when they crit, they can even kill bosses and BBEG in one blow sometimes. They are the go-to beatstick and often the class I recommend to new DnD players.
Outside of that? Well hell, you will probably need to figure out how best to roleplay them or find something to do outside of combat, since their skill selection list is very weak and often players dump INT because the dumb brute idea is funny to them. They can serve as a very poor man’s rogue though, given their trap sense and with a magic weapon they can smash traps. They can also be useful wilderness guides, but that’s about it. They really can only do one thing, but they do it so well that they’re the only martial that can keep pace with casters.
Rating: Decent
Despite this, the reason it’s so high because a Bard is so flexible. They often provide amazing support for the role that they're filling in for. They also get access to some very odd but extremely useful spells; for example the non-core spell Instant of Power is forever amazing for you as a caster, and only the Bard and a few other odd classes get it. Instant of Power for those wondering is a beautiful way to give the finger to non-botched but still failed dice rolls.
Their most broken skill however is use magic device; enough optimization in it means you can throw out 9th level spells as a 10th level party member with the right roll and aid. A clever bard can also double or even triple cast buffs and debuffs, which often heavily stacks a fight in the party's favor. Their big weakness is you need to know upfront what role you want to play and gun for it; their average gains and limits you otherwise.
Rating: Good
Do I really need to clarify why I rank the Cleric as the best Player’s Handbook class? I do? Okay then. First of all, clerics are most likely your primary source of healing in most parties, barring weirdos who play healer or rely on some of the weirder healing paths. They have the ability to tell save or suck spells, disease, and even death to fuck off at high enough levels.
Second? You cast magic and can wear full plate with no penalties due to being a divine caster. That alone helps you live compared to the other casters, who have to rely on Bracers of Natural Armor or their pure DEX.
Thirdly? You have a very large pool of divine spells to pick on that gives you a huge option pool. Want to abuse your wisdom score to hit people from far away? Spiritual weapon. Need a distraction to bug out? Obscuring mist. Need to buff or debuff? Prayer and so much more. Only Wizards really beat clerics in that flexibility.
Another neat ability is you basically ruin a DM’s undead dungeon thanks to your turning/rebuking ability. Lastly, you as a cleric can go full on martial if you feel like it. Sure, you have an average BaB, but there’s spells that negate that for you and essentially treat you like a Paladin in purpose of ass whooping as needed. They literally do everything well, and while you may disagree, I consider these guys to be the best class in 3.5.
Rating: Amazing
The Druid is what I consider the weakest head of the three most broken classes in the series, which I admit spoils my rating early. As a player I knew (thanks @Dunsparce ) once said about them; they have a very high floor but a low ceiling to do well in.
The main effects of a druid lie in their usage of druid magic, which is one of the better magic polls you can use as a player. Its main uses are by flinging conjuration damage spells that bypass resistances as well as some nasty debuffs such as rusting grasp. They also get access to an animal companion, which you can think of as a better fighter than your fighter.
Lastly, you can perform wildshape, which allows you to just literally chimp out and rip the faces off your foes as an actual goddamn chimp. They take a lot of management to play right (to the point I never played one and it's why it's the weakest of the three heads of the infamous CODzilla), but they are one of the more versatile classes to play and just can do most things very well.
Rating: Amazing
This class has the gall to claim to be playable, but you really don’t get anything to shine with and will be forced into the backdrop by the other players. Full armor usage? Problem; the Cleric/Paladin can do that and cast magic, giving them options. Hitting hard? Fuck you Sir Strom, the Barbarian does that so much better thanks to rage stacking on that extra STR. With that in mind, what do you do?
Well… you’re there; you exist. You can use a board instead of a two-handed weapon, but they aren’t too useful for you AC wise and two-handed weapons do more damage. You do get a variety of feats, but that really only allows you to dump them all on mastering a weapon and not really give you something to call your own.
Literally the only way you can maybe have something to shine with and not kill yourself out of boredom is if you go for spiked chains. Still… don’t play this class. If you want to play this class, just pick a Warblade or a Duskblade or some shit. It’s just less pain over all.
Rating: NPC (Would be Garbage)
Did you ever want to hit something more than once from the start? Well then I would suggest playing a Ranger. Did you ever want to be a worse Ranger because you have horrible brain damage? Well here you go Jackie Chan, now go die of alcohol poisoning.
The Monk is basically a Ranger too stupid to know how to use a bow or magic, and instead rely on their fists or fancy but not that great weaponry to do the talking. They get a variety of weird and gimmicky abilities, almost all of which are either situational at best, or utterly useless. For example, Slow Fall for them only works for x amount of feet and only if you have your back to the wall. Arrow Catch relies on the seasonal passing of the Aries meteors and being a menstruating woman I think for you to succeed in something useless.
The only one that strikes me as useful is stunning strike, which can paralyze an opponent if they fail a DC for it. Even then, it's not too effective because of its biggest problem. You see, they got the shortest end of the stick in terms of characteristics needed to make them work well. Most classes need to only have one or two ability scores be good. Wizards? Need only INT and maybe DEX. Barbarians? CON and STR. Monks need four. Four.
They need STR due to their damage being tied to it, DEX for the stupidly low AC you have due to not being able to wear armor, CON due to a mediocre HD, and WIS for their special abilities and magic AC that doesn't really make up for it. On top of that, you have average BaB, meaning you don’t even get the ability to accurately hit. Have fun with flurry of misses Chow Yun Fat, because you can’t even do what the Ranger can do… there’s really only one class I consider worse, and I just talked about them.
Rating: Garbage
The class in my opinion is a bit underrated and maligned for no reason. A paladin player is no more disruptive and shit than the CN Barbarian or CE Rogue, and usually less due to the stigma of playing them. Even then I do consider them middling.
This is mainly because they can be overtaken by the cleric if they choose to focus on martial abilities. Besides this little issue, they do earn points from me given they are partial-casters that can be in heavy armor. They get quite a few neat spells that can do things like give you a +8 STR bonus when on rocky or dirt ground, but you’ll have to hunt for them because they are not in the core book. They also do not get a lot of spell slots, which means you have to be careful with your spell usage.
Their smite is their main bread and butter, basically guaranteeing a nasty hit and a good amount of damage on their foes as well. Their lay-on-hands does have some value as well, but pales in comparison to a proper cleric or healer. Still useful though to round out scratches and is a good way to stretch out healing.
One neat thing they do get is resistance to disease and fear, as well as a bonus to their saves based on their Charisma. Their other neat item is their mount, which is similar to a Druid's animal companion in that they fight with you as well, giving you some amount of minionmancy. Lastly they too can turn undead, but only do this if you have no Cleric. Paladins as a whole are perfectly playable, just not as flexible or broken many of their peers in this book.
Rating: Decent
If you ever use bows seriously as a player, this is pretty much the only class that makes Archery viable. Sorry guys, but 3.5 really nerfed the hell out of archery, mainly so casters can further be your ranged option.
Rangers get a pass because they get a variety of spell effects to throw on their arrows that can make them serve as a poor man’s caster and make bowmanship great again. Besides this nice ability though, they can hit more than once earlier than other classes due to rapid and many shot. I'll also chime in that unlike the Monk, the Ranger gets a full BaB for some reason, hence why I suggest these guys if you want to do that.
Lastly, they gain bonuses against favored enemies due to studying their ways in lore and can pick and choose where further bonuses go. It's not just added damage, but includes a few nice skill checks against them. I will note that this limits them depending on their enemies picked and the campaign played, but when those enemies come up, the Ranger can rapidly geek their foes. They also get access to some odd spells, including the aforementioned Instant of Power as well. All in all, a good martial class that can shine in specific instances, but when those don’t come up tend to fade into the backdrop.
Rating: Decent
These sneaky little shits are only lower than Bards as a good class because they do not get innate magic. Besides this little difference, I consider them to essentially fill many of the same roles in the party as each other. They and Bards hotbunk with each other on social rolls and skills, but they do have some key differences.
The biggest difference is that a rogue specializes in subterfuge over the Bard's support, and so are usually your go-tos in disarming devices, scouting out locations, or quietly going in to slit throats. They can specialize in anything out of these, and I do suggest that a player should focus on one of these major themes before creating the character. Otherwise you tend to spread yourself a bit too thin.
Lastly they have access to use magic device, which I have to emphasize as probably the strongest skill to have in this game. As a non-caster this is especially useful, since you can happily do things like wield a +5 lawful weapon and fight like a paladin as a CE rogue. Play smart, play bold, and you win.
Rating: Good
We're near the end of the finish line, which is fitting given this class just barely chokes in making it to the Amazing tier. Sorcerers can be described as a Wizard that cripples themselves for some cheap and early gains that limit them later on.
For players that hate micro, the Sorcerer does not deal with a spell book, and just intuitively pick up spells to fling. Sorcerers also do get more lower level spell slots than Wizards do. However, these cheap advantages ultimately limit them in comparison to their nerdier cousins.
You see, Sorcerers have to wait about twice as long to get to the next spell level compared to Wizards. You as a Sorcerer will always be around one spell level lower than a Wizard would be at that point. When you start to gain 2nd level spells, the Wizard gets to crack open 3rd level spells. You also ultimately get less higher level spell slots than a Wizard does. Those limitations ultimately limit them near the end, making them a shadow of those pointy hat wearing dorks.
Rating: Good
Wizards are just stupidly flexible as it is, with healing being the one thing they can't easily do. But what they can do depends on what you the player wants to do. These range from blast spells, to a variety of tool kit spells that just aid in quality of life. Sure, doing 6d6 fire damage is neat, but you can also render movement for others near impossible with Evard’s Black Tentacles. Grease makes your foe fall right over, and let’s not get started on the evil known as minionmancy.
I do consider Clerics better if only for versatility and their value as healers, but I don’t blame you if you pick Wizards as the winner. Not at all.
Rating: Amazing
Overall Tiers
Amazing Classes: Cleric, Wizard, Druid
Good Classes: Sorcerer, Bard, Rogue
Decent Classes: Barbarian, Paladin, Ranger
Playable Classes: N/A
Garbage Classes: Monk
Truenamer Class: N/A
NPC Class (Fuck you Book): Fighter (Formerly Garbage)
And with that you have a vague idea on how this will go. Up next, I'll show you the Book of Vile Darkness PrCs, and you'll get some fun surprises out of it.
Now I could do this based on when I wrote them, but I think I'll instead start from the basics; let's start with the only book you technically need to play a round of DnD:
Yes, we're going to go through the original player's handbook first. A lot of this is pretty obvious already, but it does allow me to describe to you how I'll order the classes and show you my review system. For those curious, here's the rating system:
Amazing Classes: Amazing classes are simply that; they're completely amazing. Classes that I give this score are often extremely versatile, are must have PrCs for a class, or are just plain stupidly broken.
Good Classes: Good classes often are classes that either don't do what amazing classes do as well, require a bit of digging to find support for them, or just have limitations that the player has to keep in mind. They are still versatile (you'll learn to hate this word I reckon given how often it comes up), do something very well, and allow you to have a wider role in a group.
Decent Classes: Decent classes aren't necessarily bad classes. Usually a class that makes this rung usually have only one thing they do very well, which means a player is often pidgeon-holed into a single role. They may also be limited by situations based on the campaign, making their usage limited otherwise. Lastly, they may be a bit underpowered compared to other classes, but often still work in a campaign.
Playable Classes: This is the absolute borderline for a class to be even worth playing. Classes at this point often have problems that make them not particularly fun or interesting to play. They might not get many good features, or are very situational to use. These are often underpowered or a bit boring to play.
Garbage Classes: And this is where I put classes that suck. This can be for a variety of reasons, but often are due to either being boring to play, a very weak class that gets outshone by others, or pretty much any quality that makes you just not want to play.
Truenamer Class: A very special tier of suck; these classes are so fucking awful that they are completely memorable and often already joked about. Named after the infamous Truenamer class, classes I put here are genuinely painful.
NPC Class (Fuck you Book): One other special tier of class. I do not like being constricted by the book, so often when a class is implied to be limited to NPCs I tend to get a bit salty. Because of this, I will denote what the class would be if it wasn't designed for GM use.
Good Classes: Good classes often are classes that either don't do what amazing classes do as well, require a bit of digging to find support for them, or just have limitations that the player has to keep in mind. They are still versatile (you'll learn to hate this word I reckon given how often it comes up), do something very well, and allow you to have a wider role in a group.
Decent Classes: Decent classes aren't necessarily bad classes. Usually a class that makes this rung usually have only one thing they do very well, which means a player is often pidgeon-holed into a single role. They may also be limited by situations based on the campaign, making their usage limited otherwise. Lastly, they may be a bit underpowered compared to other classes, but often still work in a campaign.
Playable Classes: This is the absolute borderline for a class to be even worth playing. Classes at this point often have problems that make them not particularly fun or interesting to play. They might not get many good features, or are very situational to use. These are often underpowered or a bit boring to play.
Garbage Classes: And this is where I put classes that suck. This can be for a variety of reasons, but often are due to either being boring to play, a very weak class that gets outshone by others, or pretty much any quality that makes you just not want to play.
Truenamer Class: A very special tier of suck; these classes are so fucking awful that they are completely memorable and often already joked about. Named after the infamous Truenamer class, classes I put here are genuinely painful.
NPC Class (Fuck you Book): One other special tier of class. I do not like being constricted by the book, so often when a class is implied to be limited to NPCs I tend to get a bit salty. Because of this, I will denote what the class would be if it wasn't designed for GM use.
Got it? Then let's begin:
Barbarian
These meat mountains of murderous fury can really only do one thing. But that one thing they do is so horrifically impressive that even blast casters can struggle to keep up (until higher levels that is). They hit and rage and they hit and rage well. And when they crit, they can even kill bosses and BBEG in one blow sometimes. They are the go-to beatstick and often the class I recommend to new DnD players.
Outside of that? Well hell, you will probably need to figure out how best to roleplay them or find something to do outside of combat, since their skill selection list is very weak and often players dump INT because the dumb brute idea is funny to them. They can serve as a very poor man’s rogue though, given their trap sense and with a magic weapon they can smash traps. They can also be useful wilderness guides, but that’s about it. They really can only do one thing, but they do it so well that they’re the only martial that can keep pace with casters.
Rating: Decent
Bard
Bards are often described as jack-of-all-trades, but in reality a better description is that a Bard is a poor man’s [ ]. This class is unique out of the core books because they can pretty much fill in for every other class, though pale in comparison. They can kind of fight, kind of work as a mage or healer, and kind of work as a thief.
Despite this, the reason it’s so high because a Bard is so flexible. They often provide amazing support for the role that they're filling in for. They also get access to some very odd but extremely useful spells; for example the non-core spell Instant of Power is forever amazing for you as a caster, and only the Bard and a few other odd classes get it. Instant of Power for those wondering is a beautiful way to give the finger to non-botched but still failed dice rolls.
Their most broken skill however is use magic device; enough optimization in it means you can throw out 9th level spells as a 10th level party member with the right roll and aid. A clever bard can also double or even triple cast buffs and debuffs, which often heavily stacks a fight in the party's favor. Their big weakness is you need to know upfront what role you want to play and gun for it; their average gains and limits you otherwise.
Rating: Good
Cleric
Do I really need to clarify why I rank the Cleric as the best Player’s Handbook class? I do? Okay then. First of all, clerics are most likely your primary source of healing in most parties, barring weirdos who play healer or rely on some of the weirder healing paths. They have the ability to tell save or suck spells, disease, and even death to fuck off at high enough levels.
Second? You cast magic and can wear full plate with no penalties due to being a divine caster. That alone helps you live compared to the other casters, who have to rely on Bracers of Natural Armor or their pure DEX.
Thirdly? You have a very large pool of divine spells to pick on that gives you a huge option pool. Want to abuse your wisdom score to hit people from far away? Spiritual weapon. Need a distraction to bug out? Obscuring mist. Need to buff or debuff? Prayer and so much more. Only Wizards really beat clerics in that flexibility.
Another neat ability is you basically ruin a DM’s undead dungeon thanks to your turning/rebuking ability. Lastly, you as a cleric can go full on martial if you feel like it. Sure, you have an average BaB, but there’s spells that negate that for you and essentially treat you like a Paladin in purpose of ass whooping as needed. They literally do everything well, and while you may disagree, I consider these guys to be the best class in 3.5.
Rating: Amazing
Druid
The Druid is what I consider the weakest head of the three most broken classes in the series, which I admit spoils my rating early. As a player I knew (thanks @Dunsparce ) once said about them; they have a very high floor but a low ceiling to do well in.
The main effects of a druid lie in their usage of druid magic, which is one of the better magic polls you can use as a player. Its main uses are by flinging conjuration damage spells that bypass resistances as well as some nasty debuffs such as rusting grasp. They also get access to an animal companion, which you can think of as a better fighter than your fighter.
Lastly, you can perform wildshape, which allows you to just literally chimp out and rip the faces off your foes as an actual goddamn chimp. They take a lot of management to play right (to the point I never played one and it's why it's the weakest of the three heads of the infamous CODzilla), but they are one of the more versatile classes to play and just can do most things very well.
Rating: Amazing
Fighter
Fuck this class. That’s all I have to say about this. Fuck this class. I'm legit not kidding; I consider the fighter class to maybe be the worst class in the book and one of the worst classes. The only classes I think are worse than them to play are Truenamer, Lifedrinker, Samurais, and Marshals. The biggest reason why I think this is because they are absolutely dull to play and cannot really have something to call their own, hence why I think they fit as an NPC class.
This class has the gall to claim to be playable, but you really don’t get anything to shine with and will be forced into the backdrop by the other players. Full armor usage? Problem; the Cleric/Paladin can do that and cast magic, giving them options. Hitting hard? Fuck you Sir Strom, the Barbarian does that so much better thanks to rage stacking on that extra STR. With that in mind, what do you do?
Well… you’re there; you exist. You can use a board instead of a two-handed weapon, but they aren’t too useful for you AC wise and two-handed weapons do more damage. You do get a variety of feats, but that really only allows you to dump them all on mastering a weapon and not really give you something to call your own.
Literally the only way you can maybe have something to shine with and not kill yourself out of boredom is if you go for spiked chains. Still… don’t play this class. If you want to play this class, just pick a Warblade or a Duskblade or some shit. It’s just less pain over all.
Rating: NPC (Would be Garbage)
Monk
Did you ever want to hit something more than once from the start? Well then I would suggest playing a Ranger. Did you ever want to be a worse Ranger because you have horrible brain damage? Well here you go Jackie Chan, now go die of alcohol poisoning.
The Monk is basically a Ranger too stupid to know how to use a bow or magic, and instead rely on their fists or fancy but not that great weaponry to do the talking. They get a variety of weird and gimmicky abilities, almost all of which are either situational at best, or utterly useless. For example, Slow Fall for them only works for x amount of feet and only if you have your back to the wall. Arrow Catch relies on the seasonal passing of the Aries meteors and being a menstruating woman I think for you to succeed in something useless.
The only one that strikes me as useful is stunning strike, which can paralyze an opponent if they fail a DC for it. Even then, it's not too effective because of its biggest problem. You see, they got the shortest end of the stick in terms of characteristics needed to make them work well. Most classes need to only have one or two ability scores be good. Wizards? Need only INT and maybe DEX. Barbarians? CON and STR. Monks need four. Four.
They need STR due to their damage being tied to it, DEX for the stupidly low AC you have due to not being able to wear armor, CON due to a mediocre HD, and WIS for their special abilities and magic AC that doesn't really make up for it. On top of that, you have average BaB, meaning you don’t even get the ability to accurately hit. Have fun with flurry of misses Chow Yun Fat, because you can’t even do what the Ranger can do… there’s really only one class I consider worse, and I just talked about them.
Rating: Garbage
Paladin
The class in my opinion is a bit underrated and maligned for no reason. A paladin player is no more disruptive and shit than the CN Barbarian or CE Rogue, and usually less due to the stigma of playing them. Even then I do consider them middling.
This is mainly because they can be overtaken by the cleric if they choose to focus on martial abilities. Besides this little issue, they do earn points from me given they are partial-casters that can be in heavy armor. They get quite a few neat spells that can do things like give you a +8 STR bonus when on rocky or dirt ground, but you’ll have to hunt for them because they are not in the core book. They also do not get a lot of spell slots, which means you have to be careful with your spell usage.
Their smite is their main bread and butter, basically guaranteeing a nasty hit and a good amount of damage on their foes as well. Their lay-on-hands does have some value as well, but pales in comparison to a proper cleric or healer. Still useful though to round out scratches and is a good way to stretch out healing.
One neat thing they do get is resistance to disease and fear, as well as a bonus to their saves based on their Charisma. Their other neat item is their mount, which is similar to a Druid's animal companion in that they fight with you as well, giving you some amount of minionmancy. Lastly they too can turn undead, but only do this if you have no Cleric. Paladins as a whole are perfectly playable, just not as flexible or broken many of their peers in this book.
Rating: Decent
Ranger
If you ever use bows seriously as a player, this is pretty much the only class that makes Archery viable. Sorry guys, but 3.5 really nerfed the hell out of archery, mainly so casters can further be your ranged option.
Rangers get a pass because they get a variety of spell effects to throw on their arrows that can make them serve as a poor man’s caster and make bowmanship great again. Besides this nice ability though, they can hit more than once earlier than other classes due to rapid and many shot. I'll also chime in that unlike the Monk, the Ranger gets a full BaB for some reason, hence why I suggest these guys if you want to do that.
Lastly, they gain bonuses against favored enemies due to studying their ways in lore and can pick and choose where further bonuses go. It's not just added damage, but includes a few nice skill checks against them. I will note that this limits them depending on their enemies picked and the campaign played, but when those enemies come up, the Ranger can rapidly geek their foes. They also get access to some odd spells, including the aforementioned Instant of Power as well. All in all, a good martial class that can shine in specific instances, but when those don’t come up tend to fade into the backdrop.
Rating: Decent
Rogue
These sneaky little shits are only lower than Bards as a good class because they do not get innate magic. Besides this little difference, I consider them to essentially fill many of the same roles in the party as each other. They and Bards hotbunk with each other on social rolls and skills, but they do have some key differences.
The biggest difference is that a rogue specializes in subterfuge over the Bard's support, and so are usually your go-tos in disarming devices, scouting out locations, or quietly going in to slit throats. They can specialize in anything out of these, and I do suggest that a player should focus on one of these major themes before creating the character. Otherwise you tend to spread yourself a bit too thin.
Lastly they have access to use magic device, which I have to emphasize as probably the strongest skill to have in this game. As a non-caster this is especially useful, since you can happily do things like wield a +5 lawful weapon and fight like a paladin as a CE rogue. Play smart, play bold, and you win.
Rating: Good
Sorcerer
We're near the end of the finish line, which is fitting given this class just barely chokes in making it to the Amazing tier. Sorcerers can be described as a Wizard that cripples themselves for some cheap and early gains that limit them later on.
For players that hate micro, the Sorcerer does not deal with a spell book, and just intuitively pick up spells to fling. Sorcerers also do get more lower level spell slots than Wizards do. However, these cheap advantages ultimately limit them in comparison to their nerdier cousins.
You see, Sorcerers have to wait about twice as long to get to the next spell level compared to Wizards. You as a Sorcerer will always be around one spell level lower than a Wizard would be at that point. When you start to gain 2nd level spells, the Wizard gets to crack open 3rd level spells. You also ultimately get less higher level spell slots than a Wizard does. Those limitations ultimately limit them near the end, making them a shadow of those pointy hat wearing dorks.
Rating: Good
Wizard
Last and certainly not least you have the Wizard, which is arguably the best class in the game. These guys are over all much more broken than Clerics if you give them the money or time to set up. This is because out of all of the spell lists, the Wizard and Sorcerer clearly have the highest number of them, over double of any other caster. Starving a wizard of money doesn't even help you, since they function better than martials do in those settings because the way weapon upgrades work.
Wizards are just stupidly flexible as it is, with healing being the one thing they can't easily do. But what they can do depends on what you the player wants to do. These range from blast spells, to a variety of tool kit spells that just aid in quality of life. Sure, doing 6d6 fire damage is neat, but you can also render movement for others near impossible with Evard’s Black Tentacles. Grease makes your foe fall right over, and let’s not get started on the evil known as minionmancy.
I do consider Clerics better if only for versatility and their value as healers, but I don’t blame you if you pick Wizards as the winner. Not at all.
Rating: Amazing
Overall Tiers
Amazing Classes: Cleric, Wizard, Druid
Good Classes: Sorcerer, Bard, Rogue
Decent Classes: Barbarian, Paladin, Ranger
Playable Classes: N/A
Garbage Classes: Monk
Truenamer Class: N/A
NPC Class (Fuck you Book): Fighter (Formerly Garbage)
And with that you have a vague idea on how this will go. Up next, I'll show you the Book of Vile Darkness PrCs, and you'll get some fun surprises out of it.
Last edited:
