Best D&D class?

[Chimera]

I've given this some thought lately after the group I play with had a discussion on killing NPCs and by extension PCs. We came to the conclusion that overall, the cleric is the best class. A decent attack bonus, spells that can heal AND harm, pretty good saves, full armor proficiency WITHOUT spellcasting failure, and a pretty darn good hit die. And unlike the fighter, the cleric starts out pretty good at 1st level with his physical characteristics, and then by the time he gets to higher levels, his spellcasting powers are in full swing.

Compared to say, the monk who people might say is the best class. Fast..yes. Crazy saves..yes. Hard to hit? Once he gets some levels, yeah. But he starts out pretty weak, and his damage dealing potential, while higher than the cleric, never reaches the level of the fighter/barbarian. He also has no spells, can't wear armor if he expects to get his wisdom bonus to AC, and too many attributes that are important for him. A monk needs strength, dexterity, and wisdom, while the cleric could get along fine with wisdom. Thats not to say they aren't useful, very stealthy and with their saves and spell resistance, they are incredibly effective mage-killers.

Wizard? Very weak early on, very powerful later on in the game but always vulnerable to getting his body turning into a punching bag if any one gets close.

The druid is good, having most of the powers that a cleric does except for the armor wearing and a somewhat weaker spell selection. But he makes up for this with his other abilities.

Bards are good IF you are in a campaign where skill checks are being used (diplomacy, bluff, gather information, etc.) Otherwise, he isn't all that useful.

Thoughts?

[BlueFlames]

I'm reminded of a line I read a while back... "What do you call a powerful evoker? A sorcerer."

Under most circumstances, I'd say that Sorcerers make for incredibly powerful characters. Once they get their hands on level three spells, they become obscenely powerful damage-dealers, and if you toss in a couple of summoning spells at the mid and high levels, it's easy for them to live without a proper meat-shield. Quicken Spell is, of course, an essential feat, so that you can make a meat-shield and deal some damage in the same turn. A Sorcerer's biggest problem is being overwhelmed by a force of numerous opponents. A dozen goblins with a single Rogue level, coming from all directions, will probably down a Sorcerer (assuming they don't all have morale when the body count climbs), but an Ettin or two would be meat to the same Sorcerer.

For raw killing potential, Wizards are totally overshadowed by Sorcerers. Wizards do make for great utility casters, since they can change their spell selection every time they rest, and since intelligence is their casting ability, they get a ton more skill points too, but if you're looking to cook your foes, you can't get past the fact that Sorcerers can cast more Fireballs.

As solo damage-dealers, priests are definately underrated. Granted, at the low spell level's there isn't too much that deals damage directly, but there are spells like Sanctuary and Darkness that can help you attack with less chance of effective reprisal, while also enhancing your getty-away factor. If you're good-aligned, the spontaneous healing makes for wicked-awesome survivability in regular combat too. Once you get to the fifth spell level: "Flamestrike; you die." Seventh: "Destruction." It just gets better from there.

Druids can be pretty effective too. They've got more damage spells than priests, but don't have the spontaneous casting.

Paladins can be pretty crazy, but in order to reach that level of craziness, they need some incredibly high stats. Having your CHA bonus dumped onto all of your saving throws, coupled with self-healing, evil smiting, d10 HP, and undead turning (not to mention several other class features) makes for one heck of a melee combatant. The alignment restriction and need for such incredible stat rolls has kept me away from the class for some time though.

Pure-class Fighters or Fighters with a couple Barbarian levels can be pretty awesome in melee too, but without enhancements to their saving throws, they're pretty vulnerable to most damage spells. They also don't usually have any self-healing abilities, so those gobs of hitpoints from d10 hit dice (or d10s with a couple d12s) just translate into weeks of downtime after combat, so where Wizards rest more often, Fighters have to rest longer.

Rogues are perfect for killing anything that's being adequately distracted. Unfortunately, if the target survives the initial rapier-to-the-back, it will typically turn around, and in head-to-head combat, rogues don't stand much of a chance. They're also great utility characters with their 8+INT skill points, and improved evasion makes them great caster-slayers. Though it's one heck of a large niche, Rogues are still niche characters that need to be in a party to be fully effective. It could easily be a pretty small party, with just a Fighter or Priest to absorb damage, while the Rogue positions himself for the kill, or the rogue dodging spells, while the Fighter or Priest retaliates, but alone, it's a marginal class.

As a pure class, Rangers tend to be pretty weak too. If you want to be a pure-class character that dual-wields, take a high-DEX fighter and grab all the two-weapon combat feats as soon as you meet the prerequisites. Furthermore, despite efforts to fix this problem, Rangers have most of their unique class features are somewhat front-loaded and/or available as feats, so unless you're going for some of those Favored Enemy epic feats later on, advancing beyond the tenth Ranger level becomes somewhat silly. (The flipside of all of this is, Rangers can be quite fun to roleplay, but if you're looking for raw combat potential, it's not a great class.)

Then there's Bards and Monks, which are both pretty weak, really. As you pointed out, Chim, Monks don't get to use most of their spiffy abilities when wearing armor or wielding weapons, so they don't get to benefit from all of the enchantment bonuses to damage that other characters get. Sure, you deal 2d10 (2 - 20) damage on an unarmed strike at the twentieth level, but that tirelessly-raging, +5 greataxe-wielding Barbarian will be dealing 2d6+5 (7 - 17) with a better base attack bonus, and will be wearing some badass medium/heavy armor that will make a +4 AC bonus look like peanuts. The class features of the Monk just aren't a worthy trade-off down the road.

I debate the effectiveness of a Bard in any situation, but if they're not in a party, they lose even more. Typically, they can't perform while working at a task they're performing to improve. In other words, a Bard can't sing a song to grant skill bonuses while using those skills, and likewise with attacks and such. Sure, he can use fascination and mass suggestion to slow down low-will save opponents, and Bardic Knowledge is great for impromptu item identification, but it's just not useful if there aren't other characters around to exploit those perks.

If I had to rate them, I'd place Sorcerer, Cleric, and pure-class Fighter on top of the heap. Bards, Monks, and Rangers (to a lesser extent) would be at the bottom. Paladins, Wizards, and Rogues are alright, but Wizards get outdone by Sorcerers; Rogues need some support, and Paladins just need stats too crazy-high in order to be effective.