Which do you think is the most popular, Warrior, Thief or Mage?
http://strawpoll.me/6161985
>>43950278
I'd unironically want Cestree in my party.
Whichever is strongest, since only Vorthos cares about thematics, and there's maybe one Vorthos for every hundred Timmy's, Spikes, and Johnny's.
>>43950278
Mage, hands down D&D made sure of that.
>>43950455
Unironically, maybe, but unerotically?
>>43950969
I blame Howard for that. And Moorcock a little.
>>43950278
Thief, because a locked door or chest triggers my curiosity every time.
Warrior.
Always. Fuck the mechanics and stats, I just like being the bulwark damage soaking tank. When I stand on the bridge nobody gets past.
My guess is that warriors are the most popular, followed by mages, and then thieves.
Warriors are the centerpiece, the guy that the entire story tends to revolve around. Playing a warrior basically means that you get a chance at playing the main character. Yeah, you might not be the strongest character, but you're the guy everyone wants to root for.
>>43951514
Of course not, who wouldn't want to motorboat those huge slabs of chest meat?
>>43952686
Whoa, when did Knights come back
>>43951514
I mean, she seems nice enough so even unerotically, but like >>43953200 said, who wouldn't want to motorboat the hell outta that.
While I think Thief is a bit more popular than the others, I know which one I prefer.
>>43953200
>>43954372
It's the only decent thing to do.
>>43950278
>Videogames and most Tabletops: Warrior
It's pretty much iconic to be the guy with the sword and armor. In most games they're also the easiest class for beginners to get into. In MMO's in particular, they're usually the most played and get the most updates, to the point of being able to overpower classes that counter them.
>DnD: Mages
DnD is garbage and magic is better than literally everything 99.9% of the time with almost no counters. You could limit casters to level 1 spells and they could still do more than most of the other classes most of the time. Yeah, fuck DnD.
>Personal: Thief/Rogue
I like handling situations in creative ways. I like having options for handling situations (without having bullshit wild-card magic), I like the whole attitude that comes with someone willing to bend the rules a little. Shame that other players never use the archetype as an excuse to be anything more than a jackass who steals from the party or an edgelord assassin.
>>43952686
See this is what kind of keeps me torn on whether or not I prefer Fighter or Rogue archetypes.
on one hand, Fighters are great for scratching that heroic itch. They look cool, wield cool weapons, and there's something really satisfying about going toe to toe with four people and coming out on top. You don't do the most damage, but you'll win by sheer attrition and when you leave, you'll leave with the dragon's head in one hand and the unconcious wizard in the other after he took more damage than his 1d4 hit points could handle.
But on the other hand, Rogues are so thematically versatile, even more so than fighters. They can be played so many different ways, ranging from sneaky guerrilla fighter to icy spy to broody assassin to calculating thief. I also have a tendency to like their personality types better, but that's mostly because I have an affinity for selfish characters. Don't get me wrong I love Lawful Good but I think characters who are self-centered or who don't care much about others lend themselves to much more interesting development.
As for Mages; I'm not a fan. I've tried, but every time I play a spellcaster it doesn't take very long for the novelty to wear off.
>>43950278
I wish there was a good way to play a thief in a standard RPG game, but I just dont think it is possible. Sneaking in doesnt really work unless everyone in the party can sneak, and then it is usually done better with magic. Picking locks and disabling traps can occasionally be useful, but a lot of the time, they can be circumvented pretty easily, and if they cant, then there is going to be a problem when all of the pressure if placed on one person's rolls. Stealing things is often frowned upon, and even if it wasnt by that particular group, it is in the setting as a whole, so there are often significant repercussions for relying on stealing in any significant degree. Scouting ahead is fine and dandy, except that individual action causes a headache in a party setting, as it results in most of the group sitting back and doing nothing, which is boring. This also applies to sneaking into places on your own, when the rest of the party doesnt have sneak skills.
Obviously, thieves certainly have a home in some types of campaigns. Urban ones, ones with lots of intrigue, ones with more Operator type quests. But in a standard "Go save the princess" campaigns, they just do not belong.
Ukraine riots, back before it turned into an actual war.
>>43956052
>I wish there was a good way to play a thief in a standard RPG game, but I just dont think it is possible.
>Sneaking in doesnt really work unless everyone in the party can sneak, and then it is usually done better with magic.
I really, really, really wish there was some way to do stealth well in an RPG. I've got a friend who is obsessed with playing stealthy characters, but it's so hard to make it interesting for the rest of the group, especially because if I don't just treat him as being nigh-invisible, he always fucks up a roll and gets himself and the rest of the party killed because he scouted too deep.
>>43956052
You just need a better GM dude. Aside from the part about magic doing it better (fuck DnD), Thieves are almost essential for a good party.
Sneaking? Extremely useful for providing cover-fire to the party during a fight. Extremely useful for getting a look into places you're not supposed to be while another party member plays distraction with the guards. Extremely useful for infiltrating a fort and getting the gate open so the party can get in and kill the bandits who have holed up there.
Lockpicking. Unless you're in the middle of combat, there should be a way to "take 20" or whatever your system's equivalent for that is. A good GM will leave a few lockboxes around for you to toy with and pick up the party a bit of extra loot.
Stealing isn't stealing when you're taking things from the badguys... or when you're in a situation where the party HAS to bend the rules a little to make some progress. Sometimes pocketing a ring with a certain emblem on it can be just the clue you need to advance the plot, or forging a document can be just what you need to get information out of someone.
Spotting and disabling traps is infinitely useful. I'm not even sure what to say here except that your GM was utter shit.
Other highly useful things:
Disguise. Infinitely useful for bending the rules a little. Can be applied to the whole party in most systems due to aid/assist skills.
Blackmarket connections: Self explanatory.
Parkour and Acrobatic things: Because the warrior in a heavy suit of metal sure as hell isn't doing it, unless your GM is shit.
Party Face: I know bards generally do this better... but Charismatic thieves are a thing too. Not every thief needs to be a burglar, scam artists and con-men are a thing too...
>>43950278
Honestly, really REALLY like the warrior mage archetype. Like, psychic warriors from 3.5. Sure, they weren't good in game, but they had powers that almost exclusively augmented their physical abilities, thematically, I love that.
>>43953200
>>43955716
>>43954372I honestly prefer a large A or small B cup.The elf would be my choice. I love her sorta shitty personality.
>>43954124
A couple years ago. During the protests in Kiev.
Some LARP guys over in Ukraine put on their armor on things to give added protection against the beatings and weapons of the riot cops.
I read a story of a guy who was a hobbyist blacksmith forging improvised armor for protesters as well.
>>43955904
>As for Mages; I'm not a fan. I've tried, but every time I play a spellcaster it doesn't take very long for the novelty to wear off.
Magic, in my opinion, is like a spice. A warrior's cool, but a warrior who imbues their sword with fire is even cooler. A rogue is cool, but a rogue who uses magic to fuck with their mark is even cooler.
Meanwhile, a mage is just hanging back and lobbing fireballs. He's not getting directly involved in the conflict, yet he's getting a disproportionately important role for how much risk he's in. Sure, if he misses his lightning bolt, he loses out on some mana or a spell slot or something, but that's it.
>>43957001
> A warrior's cool, but a warrior who imbues their sword with fire is even cooler..
You're kinda right. I'd rather play a Jedi than just a plain vanilla swordguy. And I'd prefer both over a classic wizard.
>>43950278
Hybrid Warrior+Mage all day every day.
I like Mages the best, but only the good kind.
Like, the kinds that stretches his arms out to attack or bites his own fingers off so he can spit up spiders, not generic fireball man.
>>43956052
Stealth users are a point where you ought to consider splitting the party. While it's something that very much depends on the party's current goal, there are plenty of things it can achieve.
For example if the party needs to get into a castle, the rogue can sneak in somehow and open the gates for everyone else. Another example would be needing to steal something in which case the party can go cause a distraction to distract guards while the rogue does his thing.
The DM ought to also provide opprotunites for extra loot that can be accessed by the rogue far more easily than by less skilled other classes. Such as locked chests, some built into walls or simply very heavy and hard to bash open.
>>43956052
>Stealing things is often frowned upon
I thought that was part of the appeal for playing thieves. That you're skilled at making a living through illegal means.
Though I can see why you'd rather not play a character like that if someone else is playing Sir Lawful McNoFun
>>43957045
>>43957001
Exactly. Best theme.
>>43956521
>Spotting and disabling traps is infinitely useful
>A lot of the time, they can be circumvented pretty easily, and if they cant, then there is going to be a problem when all of the pressure if placed on one person's rolls
They arent "infinitely useful" they are "useful up to exactly the point where you rolls fail, and then you fuck everything up for everyone"
Disguise, like stealth, isnt particularly useful unless the person in question is useful in this skill group. If I dress somebody up like a servant, unless they know how a servant behaves and how to imitate it, they are going to fuck it up. While this might be useful as another trick to sneak into somewhere for the rogue specifically, it will once more result in the party being split. I prefer to work under the assumption that every situation that splits the party is worst than a situation that results in the whole party being together in the same circumstances.
And as far as it being the GM's fault, I dont really think it is the GM's job to force a ton of situations into the game for the sake of one player. Yes, they should be thinking of every player when they design a situation, but when more than a small portion of the prep work goes into making one player feel like they are useful, that isnt the fault of the GM, that is the fault of the archetype. And in almost all of those situations, it is just the character being a toolbox. If they dont have the specific tool they need, they are useless anyway.
>>43955753
>DnD: Mages
>DnD is garbage and magic is better than literally everything 99.9% of the time with almost no counters. You could limit casters to level 1 spells and they could still do more than most of the other classes most of the time. Yeah, fuck DnD.
It's been improved a lot in 5e. Partially because they balanced spellcasting considerably, but mostly because it's really easy for anyone who wants some to get a touch of magic here or there, and with the way even cantrips stay relevant at higher levels, it's not a wasted ability for a rogue to have a 1st level spell fifteen levels down the road.
>>43958964
I haven't even looked at it yet. Are psychic warriors back for it?
>>43958964
It's a bit of a step back from 4e though as magic IS still vastly more versitile.
>>43958995
4e sort of went the route of "decrease versatility across the board", while 5e went the route of "Yeah, magic allows people to break natural laws so of course it's going to be versatile, but everyone can get magic if they want it."
And, with ability checks being crazy broad and easy to use now, even a character without any skills, spells, or abilities but with good ability scores has a wealth of options available to them in any situation.
>>43958980
They're back, but so far Psychic Warriors are just part of Unearthed Arcana, which means that there's probably still some room for developing them, and we might see a more complete class in a physical book down the line. Still, as is, they're pretty neat.
>>43952530
In games where it's mandatory to have a thief to open certain chests, I find it hard to resist the urge to play one. But, that's why I like games like Neverwinter Nights, where you can just bash open any door or chest by dealing enough damage.
>>43959165
Cool. Still have the same flavor/feel?
I enjoy powerful warriors who have just a little bit of magic. Even though Gandalf is the archetypal wizard, I like that he's not shooting fireballs or lightning everywhere and instead just stabs a massive firedemon to death.
>>43957957
So... the party falling for 10/10 traps is just the same as the party getting damaged by 2/10 traps. Yeah, great logic.
Also, servants are expected to be seen, not hear. It's really not that hard to coach the other players to act like ass-kiss lackeys (Whether they can swallow their pride and do it or not is another issue) while the charismatic players take on the important roles.
Also also, forcing a ton of situations for the sake of ONE PLAYER? For a character who's literally equipped to hand more situations than any other non-magic class in the game? Yeah... OK. Just OK.
Are you arguing just to argue, because the stuff you posted is nit-picky to the point of retardation.
>>43950278
While I voted Thief, I know that Mage will win because nerds like nerds.
Pose the question to a group of people that don't primarily consist of grognards and you may get another answer, but magic is... Magic. Any real person can be a Warrior or Thief, but no one can be a Mage.
Thus the only real answer isTranscendentalist.
>>43950278
My personal preference is warrior-mage. I love the shit out of holy warrior paladin types that use magic (divine or otherwise) to bolster their fighting for JUSTICE!, and when I'm not playing those I usually play blaster casters or eldritch knight types, which are basically warriors with more pizzazz.
>>43956521
>Party Face: I know bards generally do this better... but Charismatic thieves are a thing too. Not every thief needs to be a burglar, scam artists and con-men are a thing too...
I personally love the way Fantasy Craft splits the rogue class into Assassin (geared more toward social intrigue and covertly ganking lone high-priority targets) and Burglar (geared more toward the traditional slippery, super-sneaky, nimble, tricksy type rogue). The social vs. second-story-man rogue archetypes are distinct enough that they deserve their own separate classes.
Plus it even has the Emissary class for an even more social/intrigue-focused spy type, and an honest-to-God dedicated face class in the Courtier, who can hook the party up with all kinds of sweet shit with his crazy amounts of resources and connections, and disrupt enemies in combat with slick banter.
>>43957001
IMO, the pure Mage archetype is more of an advisor/supporter role. Buffs, control, knowledge, that sort of thing. More the sort of role your Merlins and Gandalfs, classic wizard protagonists in literature and folklore serve. A fireball-chucker isn't really a "pure" mage, it's a ranged warrior with style.
Warrior = combat
Rogue = trickery & practical expertise
Mage = support & theoretical/lore expertise
Cuz otherwise it's more just that the mage is an alternative means of doing what the other archetypes do. So bards, even though generally considered sort of a "hybrid" class, are really more definitively a mage, because their primary role is to support the rest of the party. A wizard, on the other hand, could be a mage, if he prepares a lot of buff and control spells that help his party do their jobs better, but he could also be a warrior or a rogue depending on what he prepares that day.Fuck 3.PF and its omnicompetent casters. Fuck them so hard.
>>43956646
>Some LARP guys over in Ukraine put on their armor on things to give added protection against the beatings and weapons of the riot cops.
That's what happens when you give murderhobos a cause to fight for.
>>43957198
Yeah, best way to handle sneaky types is to set things up so that the sneaky one can arrange some manner of advantageous circumstance for his less sneaky allies. Scouting for useful intel, weakening enemy forces by sabotage, diversion, or quietly thinning the ranks, opening up shortcuts and back entires, acquiring useful gear/valuable loot others couldn't get at (at least not without much more difficulty), etc.
If the only scenarios you're arranging for stealth skills are "here is a place where enemies block your way, you must either sneak past or fight your way through", that's pretty lame GMing.
>>43959897
For the most part?
Mage
114 votes (43%)Warrior
91 votes (34%)Thief
59 votes (22%)264 total votes
I think it's falling within expected parameters so far.
>>43950278
Cleric. There's always a cleric. All else is optional.
>>43950278
Fighter, ironically because I would either be a thief or a mage in real life (assuming I could even get a PC level).
I hate how magicless classes always seem to be gimped.
Thieves are lowest on the list?
I thought everyone liked the rougeish dex based characters like Ezio from Assassins Creed or Garret from Thief.
I always dislike playing spellcasters because most systems I've played always seem to have a list of spells to pick from. I think the coolest part about being a wizard would be making your own spells, or having a select suite of spells that you specialize in. Things like that. I dunno, I feel like having a big 'ole list of stuff you have to pick from is really limiting. So I usually play nonmagical classes but I can't decide if I like plain fighters or thieves better.
>>43967787
Everyone likes them, but they are rarely people's *favourite*
>>43966264
>I hate how magicless classes always seem to be gimped.
>tgcomplaintdepartment.jpg
>>43950278
Mage because MAGIC!
You can swing a sword or pick a lock in real life, but magic... oh boy.
Warrior
I love the aesthetic of using normal human means against supernatural horrors
>>43970181
>using normal human means
Picture unrelated?
>>43970275
Being stronk and having a wound that bleeds aren't so crazy as to put him into wizard tier
