Troll Lord Games

What is it?

hmm...

Fighter

Wizard, IF they have the Sleep spell. Otherwise I go with Fighter as well.

Wizard!

Depending on spell selection, it is either wizard or druid. Druid is more useful in more situations -- that sleep spell is not going to help, but the magic stones will. Or shillelagh. Plus, the druid can heal you up, albeit slowly, afterward with goodberry.

So, for all-around versatility.... druid wins. All of these. Every time.

Please define what you mean by "powerful." It might mean a change in answer.

Cleric.

R-

In most situations probably a Fighter.

serleran wrote:Please define what you mean by "powerful." It might mean a change in answer.

I would saaay... an across the board ability to succeed, turn situations to advantage, be self sufficient, survive, etc. and including overall potential to affect one's environment, etc.

A very broad view o' power.

All things being equal, so to speak, at 1st level I'll go with the cleric.

I went with cleric, but probably could've also gone with fighter or paladin. That being said, it's a bit like picking the most powerful ant.

It's got to be cleric. The cleric has spell casting, turn ability, hit points close to a fighter's, and a BTH at most 2 below a fighter's. They get access to all armor and a wide selection of weapons (including swords, depending on the cleric's deity). Clerics just plain kick ass.

I would have gone with the cleric but we are talking 1st level. The cleric runs out of spells by lunch time and the fighter still fights the same, all day. I say fighter by a nose....

Fighter.

Snoring Rock wrote:I would have gone with the cleric but we are talking 1st level. The cleric runs out of spells by lunch time and the fighter still fights the same, all day. I say fighter by a nose....

I think Sound Burst alone puts the cleric over the top. It's like Sleep, but with lethal damage and stunning capacity. A good BTH, good hit points, other spells, and turning. Fighters are snazzy at first level, but they're pretty one-dimensional compared to a cleric at first level.

I may agree, but after you sound burst what; twice for the day, you are done being "all that". Now you have to stand next to the fighter the rest of the day and fight with BtH that is 2 less than the fighter (on average). I would agree more at say 4th level and higher. The cleric has to leave some spell space for healing as well.

But then again, define "power". Is it combat? The cleric beats the fighter on his own merits as an all around do it all class at first level. Combat straight up? No. I say this but my favorite class is cleric. At first level it is pretty even across the board. Well, the arcane casters are meat.

Snoring Rock wrote:I may agree, but after you sound burst what; twice for the day, you are done being "all that".

Then you turn the undead rushing at the party. Then you jump into melee next to the one-dimensional fighter and kick some more ass. Weapon specialization is great, no question. But the 1st level cleric is just slightly less potent than the fighter in combat, plus he has spells and turning. And if you think CLW is a wimpy burden the cleric has to drag around all day, try not taking any healing spells some time. Then watch the rest of the party beg for the cleric to take it again the next day. CLW is powerful. It may not kill anything, but the party notices it big time if it's not there. All hail the cleric!

Buttmonkey wrote: I think Sound Burst alone puts the cleric over the top.

Why? A fighter can stand outside that range and kill your cleric with bow fire. It you are going hand to hand you can't use it against him without hurting yourself. The AC of a cleric, at 1st level, is going to be lower than a fighter due to less money to buy armor. The weapons you use will, overall cause less damage, the fighter will hit opponents 33% more often than a cleric, etc.

I think we need to have a fight off. We can use Roll 20 and we can all make characters, with NO magic items, at level 1, 6 and 12, and then have death fights and see which class is left standing the most often.

A fight off would be very cool.

Another thing to consider ~ 1st level wizards and clerics who get that 2nd 1st level spell (bonus) are gonna be tougher to fight.

The wizard would probably take sleep and magic missile and the cleric would shield of faith himself and have sound burst!

Knight. Gets a horse. Fire arrows until range is an issue, close to melee with lance (3d8 on a charge), using horse as partial cover, horse possibly soaks HD for sleep spells, drop from saddle and finish combat with chosen melee weapon. High starting coin so may well have a lance and good armor out of the gate. Good resistance to Command and Charm Person and fair chance to break through a Sanctuary. Horse can bite and trample if necessary.

Now, take the fight indoors, maybe not, but on a sufficiently large battlefield, I think the knight has great chances.

(EDIT: ok, on the sleep spells weak gets hit first, so the horse is of no help. This is why knights should carry a bag full of hamsters. And the Riding Horse probably won't attack. Still a killer 1st level class. The Knight _may_ have prohibitions on cowardly ranged weapons, but they are a practical battlefield weapon.)

slimykuotoan wrote:

serleran wrote:Please define what you mean by "powerful." It might mean a change in answer.

I would saaay... an across the board ability to succeed, turn situations to advantage, be self sufficient, survive, etc. and including overall potential to affect one's environment, etc.

A very broad view o' power.

If powerful=self sufficiency in multiple environments (dungeon, wilderness, urban) then I think the needle is going to move towards classes like cleric, paladin, and the ultra powerful druid. Animal friendship alone makes the druid a party in himself.

But I think people more typically mean one of two things. Either most powerful in a mono a mono fight vs other classes, as some suggest above. This is never a particularly fruitful line of discussion because it bogs down with discussion of preparation, surprise, running away and fighting later when the other is not prepared, range of encounter etc. Plus this kind of thinking is the antithesis of D&D gaming

D&D gaming is a team sport. Which is the other way to approach the question of "powerful". The wizard needs a front line of warriors, the warriors need healing and buffing from the clerics, the spellcasters benefit greatly from scouting allowing them to prepare the right spell ahead of time etc. Who is most vital to the team? When a player misses a game, which class is most missed such that the session turns into a much more difficult grind/near death experience without their presence?

Jyrdan Fairblade wrote: ..., it's a bit like picking the most powerful ant.

That has to be one of the best lines I've read here ... made me almost laugh lemonade out my nose!

I'll admit I didn't vote. .... I just can't pull the trigger on it. There are some that no matter what I can't see as being in the running. But then the ones that have a chance are to close and there are to many variables and 'what iffs' ....

That said, I like some of the points, some of them I'd never thought of because I've never played the class they refer to: Druid, with animal friendship and its spells, etc etc etc. That further leads me to not being able to make the call.

Treebore wrote:I think we need to have a fight off. We can use Roll 20 and we can all make characters, with NO magic items, at level 1, 6 and 12, and then have death fights and see which class is left standing the most often.

AWEsome idea.

slimykuotoan wrote:

Treebore wrote:I think we need to have a fight off. We can use Roll 20 and we can all make characters, with NO magic items, at level 1, 6 and 12, and then have death fights and see which class is left standing the most often.

AWEsome idea.

It is a lot of fun, my group and I did this back in my 1E AD&D days, because we had a similar question one night while out at dinner.

Aramis wrote:and the ultra powerful druid. Animal friendship alone makes the druid a party in himself.

Not really. It sometimes appears that way as most GM's don't understand that spell. "If the caster spends most of the time at sea, in cities or otherwise in places that the animals don’t like, the animals desert or will return to their native lands, and the caster will not be able to retain even half
the maximum hit dice. Remember, these creatures are loyal friends but are not pets or servants. They won’t remain loyal if being the caster’s friend becomes too onerous."

Becoming the Druid's meat shield & replacement for a Fighter would DEFINITELY fall under "too onerous".

That depends a great deal on the animal... and their personality, which should be determined by the DM. Even a wolf can be cowardly or a chicken a warbird.

serleran wrote:That depends a great deal on the animal... and their personality, which should be determined by the DM. Even a wolf can be cowardly or a chicken a warbird.

Yes, a GM is free to house rule. However, these are animals and don't have human like motivations, fears, etc. Undomesticated animals almost NEVER fight for non-hunting reasons or immediate defense when attacked. As I said, played by the spell description (without GM house rules) it isn't that powerful.

ALSO, reread part about taking them out of their native environment. That severely limits the animal's usage.

Yes the CK is the final arbiter but animal friendship is most likely the most abused spell out there. Well next to silent image...

Arduin wrote:

Aramis wrote:and the ultra powerful druid. Animal friendship alone makes the druid a party in himself.

Not really. It sometimes appears that way as most GM's don't understand that spell. "If the caster spends most of the time at sea, in cities or otherwise in places that the animals don’t like, the animals desert or will return to their native lands, and the caster will not be able to retain even half
the maximum hit dice. Remember, these creatures are loyal friends but are not pets or servants. They won’t remain loyal if being the caster’s friend becomes too onerous."

Becoming the Druid's meat shield & replacement for a Fighter would DEFINITELY fall under "too onerous".

Heh, I don't think Aramis is suggesting that a befriended animal would serve as a meat shield. But, the animal is ~ to a degree. The animal will attack any creature that would attack the caster - and that's before training.

After training, the caster can point and direct the animal attacks!

So, Aramis' point is worthy and well taken!

Aergraith wrote:(EDIT: ok, on the sleep spells weak gets hit first, so the horse is of no help. This is why knights should carry a bag full of hamsters. And the Riding Horse probably won't attack. Still a killer 1st level class. The Knight _may_ have prohibitions on cowardly ranged weapons, but they are a practical battlefield weapon.)

LOL!