Dungeon Fantasy 1-2 -- Ranking of PC Templates Chosen by Your Players

[Stripe]

Just curios, using the templates from Dungeon Fantasy 1, what PC templates are most popular in your Dungeon Fantasy games?

In order of most common (1) to least common (11), how would you rank the following templates from 1 to 11?

Barbarian
Bard
Cleric
Druid
Holy Warrior
Knight
Martial Artist
Scout
Swashbuckler
Thief
Wizard

I've yet to GM an actual Dungeon Fantasy game and am curious what templates are most popular and which are least popular.

Here's a wild guess about what I would expect knowing my own players, who like hitting things with swords most:

Barbarian       1
Bard            11
Cleric          9
Druid           10
Holy Warrior    3
Knight          2
Martial Artist  4
Scout           5
Swashbuckler    6
Thief           7
Wizard          8

Thanks!

[mlangsdorf]

By actual numbers of designs played, from the DF games I've run:

Barbarian - 2.5
Bard - 1
Cleric - 2
Druid - 1
Holy Warrior - 3
Knight - 2.5
Martial Artist - 2
Scout - 4
Swashbuckler - 3
Thief - 3.5
Wizard - 3.5
(Necromancer - 1)

The halves indicate a lensed character: we've had Scout/Barbarian, Barbarian/Thief, Mage/Scout, and a couple others.

Although Thief has been a popular choice, Thief designs tend to get retired quickly. I think only one person has repeatedly played a Thief, whereas one of the Thiefs got retired after 1 session.

So ranking, based on all that:

Barbarian - 4
Bard - 10
Cleric - 8
Druid - 11
Holy Warrior - 5
Knight - 6
Martial Artist - 9
Scout - 2
Swashbuckler - 3
Thief - 7
Wizard - 1

Stripe, if your players enjoy hitting things with swords, I'm surprised that the swashbuckler isn't a more popular choice.

[umbros]

Number of appearances:

Barbarian 1
Bard 0
Cleric 0
Druid 1
Holy Warrior 0
Knight 1
Martial Artist
Scout 2
Swashbuckler 0
Thief 0
Wizard 3

So ranked thus:

1. Wizard
2. Scout
3. Barbarian, Druid, and Knight.
4. Bard, Cleric, Holy Warrior, Swashbuckler and Thief.

[Kuroshima]

In my game, I've had, so far:

1 Swashbuckler
1 Cleric
1 Evil Cleric
1 Scout/Mystic Knight
1 Mystic Knight
1 Thief
1 Barbarian

[Kromm]

Based on frequency counts in the three long-running fantasy campaigns that inspired these template designs from me:

1. Swashbuckler & Wizard (tie)
3. Barbarian
4. Cleric & Knight (tie)
6. Druid, Martial Artist, Scout, & Thief (tie)
Artificer, Assassin, & Necromancer would go here
10. Bard & Holy Warrior (tie)
Justiciar & Scholar would go here
Shaman would go here

I've never had anybody want to play a demonologist, elementalist, innkeeper, or ninja.

I'd say that the "typical" four-member party has consisted of a cleric and a wizard for mystical support, plus two of barbarian, knight, or swashbuckler for muscle. When I've had six starting out, I could count on two of cleric, druid, or wizard for spells; two of barbarian, knight, or swashbuckler for muscle; and two of martial artist, scout, or thief for stealth. All the rest have been uncommon, seen solely in huge parties – although I hasten to add that I've had enough artificers, assassins, holy warriors, and necromancers that I wouldn't deem them rare.

[Gnome]

Let's see...in three DF campaigns I've had:
0 Barbarians
0 Bards
2 Clerics
0 Druids
2 Holy/Unholy Warrior
3 Knights
1 Martial Artist
1 Scout
1 Swashbuckler
0 Thieves
3 Wizards

So the ranking is:
Knight/Wizard - 1
Cleric/Holy Warrior - 2
Martial Artist/Scout/Swashbucker - 3
the rest - 4

Basically, my players are true munchkins. Knights do the most damage, Wizards are the most all-around versatile in and out of combat, and healers are essential. Having a stealthy guy or some non-combat skills can be useful, but in a hack-and-slash world, the Thief and his ilk are weak, along with all Artificers, Scholars, Shamans, etc. Barbarians are just crappier Knights, and Swashbucklers don't deal enough damage to defeat the most powerful enemies (especially if they don't have eyes/brains).

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by mlangsdorf

Although Thief has been a popular choice, Thief designs tend to get retired quickly. I think only one person has repeatedly played a Thief, whereas one of the Thiefs got retired after 1 session.

Why is that? I'm curious because some of my favorite characters of past campaigns have been thieves (profession, not template, as I've never played DF).

I've only run one short campaign, with a Demonologist, a Swashbuckler, and an Assassin (and an NPC alchemist to provide some measure of healing capability).

[mlangsdorf]

Originally Posted by RyanW

Why is that? I'm curious because some of my favorite characters of past campaigns have been thieves (profession, not template, as I've never played DF).

I think a lot of it is my fault, since I don't put in enough traps and locks. But even so, the Scout handles the sneaky trap-finder roll nearly as well as the Thief and the wizard will steal niche to open locks unless pushed away. So the out-of-combat role tends to get stolen, and the in-combat role is backstab once and then be a weak swashbuckler.

So after a few sessions, it seems like the thief players are just a little dissatisfied, and feel like they would be happier either as a Scout or a Swashbuckler or something.

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by mlangsdorf

I think a lot of it is my fault, since I don't put in enough traps and locks. But even so, the Scout handles the sneaky trap-finder roll nearly as well as the Thief and the wizard will steal niche to open locks unless pushed away. So the out-of-combat role tends to get stolen, and the in-combat role is backstab once and then be a weak swashbuckler.

So after a few sessions, it seems like the thief players are just a little dissatisfied, and feel like they would be happier either as a Scout or a Swashbuckler or something.

Okay, that makes sense. The campaigns I played thieves in (non-DF, remember) tended to lack easy magical alternatives. Either no magic, no PC magic, or magic so costly/slow that it was primarily used for things mundane skills couldn't do. Plus, some of the groups I've played with would otherwise tend toward having an all-fighter party. One GM had to learn "the other half" of the system when I played a character with significant non-combat abilities.

[simply Nathan]

No experience with DF outside of reading the rules, but my experience with the genre (usually played in a heavily house-ruled d20) as a whole gives roughly these results:

Barbarian - 1
Bard - 2
Cleric - 8
Druid - 0
Holy Warrior/Paladin - 6
Knight/Fighter - 12
Martial Artist/Monk - 2
Scout/Ranger - 4
Swashbuckler - 0
Thief/Rogue - 2
Wizard/Sorcerer - 3

I only played the wizard one time because I was allowed to take healing spells (this being GURPS). Now that I look at it, I'm surprised there were as many wizards and rogues as there were, instead of more fighters. Paladins and Rangers are what I played most, so that I could fight quite well and still heal a little, but every game we had a Cleric except when we did GURPS and I played a wizard with heals.