History YMMV / DungeonsAndDragonsThirdEdition

** For that matter, Prestige Classes generally are a source of more controversy than one would expect, especially since the mechanic's been largely abandoned by all modern successor-states to 3.X as of the second edition of ''{{TabletopGame/Pathfinder}}''. Fans of the mechanic see it as an example of all that was great about Third Edition and its derivatives, rewarding imaginative and creative use of the mechanics and careful character building with tremendous arrays of interesting outcomes and immense variety, and offered interesting choices at every level that more-linear improvement tracks did not. Critics argue that it represents all that was ''worst'' about Third Edition, a punishing road-block to new players that required building for from the first moment of character creation for maximum effectiveness, limiting rather than expanding on player creativity, and that, in a demonstration of one of the biggest criticisms of Third Edition, [[ComplacentGamingSyndrome most of them weren't any good anyway, and fans have rose-tinted glasses about the handful of actually effective and/or poorly-designed and overpowered options they ever actually used]]. The major third party opinion is that Prestige Classes work better in video game adaptations, where players are managing entire parties of characters and advancement is accelerated over a comparatively short timeframe, and convention or short campaigns involving pre-built characters, which focus less on the advancement aspect and more on the character building aspect, and less well in long-running tabletop campaigns where a single level of advancement could take months of play. A common argument against Prestige Classes is that the first edition of ''Pathfinder'' did implement them, but it also featured an "Archetype" system of alternate class features[[note]]which existed in 3.5 but never as extensively as in ''Pathfinder''[[/note]], and players abandoned Prestige Classes en masse the second there was a viable alternative. (Fans argue that this is because ''Pathfinder'' Prestige Classes were [[CripplingOverspecialization overspecialized and underpowered]], more about realizing weird and esoteric setting concepts than actually being fun to play, although the core book featured several that were taken straight from Third Edition and none of them were particularly popular.) There's also an argument to be made that the popularity of Prestige Classes was more a function of bland base classes full of EmptyLevels than their own merits, and that the base classes getting improved with actual class features did more to eat Prestige classes' lunch than any of the alternative systems ever did.

** For that matter, Prestige Classes generally are a source of more controversy than one would expect, especially since the mechanic's been largely abandoned by all modern successor-states to 3.X as of the second edition of ''{{TabletopGame/Pathfinder}}''. Fans of the mechanic see it as an example of all that was great about Third Edition and its derivatives, rewarding imaginative and creative use of the mechanics and careful character building with tremendous arrays of interesting outcomes and immense variety, and offered interesting choices at every level that more-linear improvement tracks did not. Critics argue that it represents all that was ''worst'' about Third Edition, a punishing road-block to new players that required building for from the first moment of character creation for maximum effectiveness, limiting rather than expanding on player creativity, and that, in a demonstration of one of the biggest criticisms of Third Edition, [[ComplacentGamingSyndrome most of them weren't any good anyway, and fans have rose-tinted glasses about the handful of actually effective and/or poorly-designed and overpowered options they ever actually used]]. A common argument against Prestige Classes is that the first edition of ''Pathfinder'' did implement them, but it also featured an "Archetype" system of alternate class features[[note]]which existed in 3.5 but never as extensively as in ''Pathfinder''[[/note]], and players abandoned Prestige Classes en masse the second there was a viable alternative. (Fans argue that this is because ''Pathfinder'' Prestige Classes were [[CripplingOverspecialization overspecialized and underpowered]], more about realizing weird and esoteric setting concepts than actually being fun to play.) There's also an argument to be made that the popularity of Prestige Classes was more a function of bland base classes full of EmptyLevels than their own merits, and that the base classes getting improved with actual class features did more to eat Prestige classes' lunch than any of the alternative systems ever did.

* ComplacentGamingSyndrome: A few Feats are considered required picks for certain classes.

* BaseBreakingCharacter:
** The three martial adepts, all of which have this going on. Fans love them for their combat effectiveness, its playstyle, versatility, and being melee classes that can actually hold their own a little compared to casters. Detractors hate them for their CharlesAtlasSuperpower traits feeling "silly" or "anime", their effective obsoleting of prior classes, their adoption of a system reminiscent of casting, and somewhat weak lore. They're undeniably better than their predecessors, but the division is whether that makes them well-balanced class because the originals were kind of garbage, or overpowered classes due to this being textbook PowerCreep.

** Truenamers also get a ''lot'' of flack for getting ''[[GameBreakingBug weaker as they level up]]'' as they need to meet an already hard check with a requirement that goes up by 2 each level, but you only get + 1 to make the check a level. Even if one does spec hard enough into the class to let it pass those checks, its abilities are so weak and limited that it still struggles to contribute beyond the most basic level.
** ''Complete Warrior'' Samurai deserves special mention. In the original outline of the various Tiers, CW Samurai is so low that it is actually ranked lower than Expert, an NPC-only class with versatile skill selection and ''no class features''. There is literally nothing that a Samurai can do that a Fighter (already considered one of the lowest tiered classes) cannot do better ''while simultaneously doing many other things better than the Samurai''. Its primary combat abilities are a rather weak Smite and receiving the Improved and Greater Two-weapon fighting feats for free five levels after someone building their character around such a style could, and having a weak crowd control ability via an AreaOfEffect Intimidate skill check. Though the Intimidate feature can actually be specced into somewhat to enable some rather powerful lockdown, even that is easily duplicated by other classes -- yes, even the ''Fighter'', with certain alternate class features. The best suggestion for playing a CW Samurai given by many is to get enough levels so that you can trade 10 levels in and become an Ex-Samurai 1/Ronin 10. Or better yet, don't play a Samurai at all.

** Fighters. The preponderance of EmptyLevels, generic fluff, lack of real features, and [[DumbMuscle general incapability outside of combat]] give the Fighter something of a poor reputation among casual players and optimizers alike. Generally, fighters can still work as pure combat characters, especially if more sourcebooks are in play, but they lack the abilities to function well outside of their focus, and their abilities are fairly easy for other classes to copy. Some sourcebooks give them actual unique features, which helps a little, but still leaves them as a rather unfortunate baseline for melee characters.

** Soulknife is a melee-focused class based on conjuring up a LaserBlade of mental energy... but unfortunately, said blade doesn't do a whole lot of damage, and though it gains weapon enhancements over time, said enhancements are behind wealth-by-level, making them typically worth less than the magic weapons everyone else is using. Aside from that, it also suffers from a similar issue to the Monk of lacking a clear role; half its features seem to want it to be a frontline fighter with high HP and a grab bag of combat tricks while the other half push it towards a stealthy assassin with a ChargedAttack, but it doesn't have the attack bonus or AC to work as the former or the infiltration skills to work as the latter. On top of all that, its gimmick is outdone by an alternate class feature for the Psychic Warrior.

** Various Alternate Class Features both improved the fighter's overall power and gave it actual, unique skills. The two most beloved are the Dungeoncrasher and the [[TerrorHero Zhentarim Soldier]] — particularly since they can be used in tandem. Before those came along, a character with more than four levels in fighter was considered a {{Scrub}}; after that, ninth-level fighters aren't uncommon.

** Fighters in 3.5, primarily. The preponderance of EmptyLevels, generic fluff, lack of real features, and [[DumbMuscle general incapability outside of combat]] give the Fighter something of a poor reputation among casual players and optimizers alike. One fan called it "a class two levels long for thugs."
** 3.5 Monks are noted for getting many abilities that are either done better with spells or gotten much quicker by other classes (over 20 levels they get the ability to reduce fall damage; that's a first level spell for a caster or 2000 gold for everyone else) and they don't synergize at all (Monks have one ability that makes them move fast, and another that requires them to stand still). In theory, it's meant as a [[FragileSpeedster high-mobility class]] with access to a lot of combat tricks; in practice, you have a class that doesn't hit hard, doesn't take hits well, and struggles to use those same combat tricks, leaving it too passive and nonthreatening to contribute in combat. It gets to the point that when asked to optimize a Monk, most suggestions are to play another class.

* ComplacentGamingSyndrome: A few Feats were considered required picks for certain classes.

** Master Spellthief is such a feat for the Spellthief class; besides being extremely useful if you're multiclassed with other arcane classes, it's recommended even for a straight Spellthief since it grants a caster level equal to class level, instead of half if baseline.

** Swordsages get the most maneuvers known and readied of the three Martial Adept classes, but have the worst recovery (spend a full-round action to recover a single maneuver, making it highly likely that you only play every other turn for the rest of this combat). Adaptive Style is supposed to let Adepts swap their readied maneuvers in the middle of a fight, but every Swordsage winds up taking it because it incidentally refreshes ''all': your maneuvers as a full-round action.

** ''Complete Warrior'' Samurai deserves special mention. In the original outline of the various Tiers, CW Samurai is so low that it is actually ranked lower than Expert, an NPC-only class with versatile skill selection and ''no class features''. There is literally nothing that a Samurai can do that a Fighter (already considered one of the lowest tiered classes) cannot do better ''while simultaneously doing many other things better than the Samurai''. Its primary combat abilities are a rather weak Smite and receiving the Improved and Greater Two-weapon fighting feats for free five levels after someone building their character around such a style could, and having a weak crowd control ability via an AreaOfEffect Intimidate skill check. Though the Intimidate feature can actually be specced into somewhat to enable some rather powerful lockdown, even that is easily duplicated by other classes--yes, even the ''Fighter'', with certain alternate class features. The best suggestion for playing a CW Samurai given by many is to get enough levels so that you can trade 10 levels in and become an Ex-Samurai 1/Ronin 10. Or better yet, don't play a Samurai at all.
** Most of the Far-East themed classes from the ''Complete'' series are this way. Shugenja had ''incredibly'' limited spell selection to the point that the player chose very little of his character's core abilities. The fact that they were Divine casters (and thus able to cast in armor) was negated by their lack of armor proficiency and by having the worst Base Attack Bonus in the game (for comparison, most Divine casters get the medium Base Attack and medium or heavy armor proficiency). Wu Jen had weaker casting than wizards, and their "Spell Secret" class feature left them BlessedWithSuck as it gave them free metamagic feats at the cost of crippling RP restrictions (each one came with a "taboo" that shut off the character's spell casting for the day if violated. And the metamagic feats weren't even the good ones!), meaning it holds the dubious honor of being the only class where Prestiging out is the only way to ''avoid crippling drawbacks.'' That said, they at least benefit from the natural casting bias in the game, which can't be said for Ninja--Ninjas are effectively just Rogues but worse, mixing in the worst traits of the Monk and nerfing two of the best parts of the Rogue in its skill points and sneak attack while providing ''ki'' abilities that are a lot less effective than relatively common magic items.

** Dragon Shamans are a classic MasterOfNone. Their intended job is as a tanky support character with a bunch of auras that buff the rest of the party and a grab bag of dragon-related tricks. In practice, the auras aren't very strong, it doesn't do support even half as well as a cleric, its melee combat prowess is mediocre, and even its dragon-related tricks are surprisingly lame. It's especially unfortunate in light of the Dragonfire Adept, which went for the same idea of "class with dragonlike abilities" but went whole-hog with them and came out looking considerably better.

* AlternateCharacterInterpretation: [[invoked]][[https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?443306-quot-Pelor-the-Burning-Hate-quot-from-Wizards-forum "Pelor, the Burning Hate"]]. Pelor, the God of the Sun in the default ''TabletopGame/{{Greyhawk}}'' setting, is canonically NeutralGood, but there are actually a surprising number of indicators to the contrary, especially in 3E texts. The example cleric Jozan, who follows Pelor, is shown casting ''symbol of pain'' in the 3E ''Player's Handbook'', which has the Evil descriptor and therefore is supposed to be impossible for an NG deity to grant and for an NG spellcaster to cast. The post goes on to discuss the Malconvoker PrestigeClass in ''Complete Scoundrel'', whose examplar is ''also'' a cleric of Pelor who acts ''very'' un-NG, and notes that consorting with fiends is also said to be an act of evil in the ''Book of Vile Darkness''. Ultimately, the post concludes that Pelor is ''actually'' a VillainWithGoodPublicity: a Lawful-leaning NeutralEvil deity of burning pain and agony masquerading as an NG god of the sun and healing.

* AlternateCharacterInterpretation: [[invoked]][[https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?443306-quot-Pelor-the-Burning-Hate-quot-from-Wizards-forum "Pelor, the Burning Hate"]]. Pelor, the God of the Sun in the default ''TabletopGame/{{Greyhawk}}'' setting, is canonically NeutralGood, but there are actually a surprising number of indicators to the contrary, especially in 3E texts. The example cleric Jozan, who follows Pelor, is shown casting ''symbol of pain'' in the 3E ''Player's Handbook'', which has the Evil descriptor and therefore is supposed to be impossible for an NG deity to grant and for an NG spellcaster to cast. The post goes on to discuss the Malconvoker PrestigeClass in ''Complete Scoundrel'', whose examplar is ''also'' a cleric of Pelor who acts ''very'' un-NG, and notes that consorting with fiends is also said to be an act of evil in the ''Book of Vile Darkness''. Ultimately, the post concludes that Pelor is ''actually'' a VillainWithGoodPublicity: a Lawful-leaning NeutralEvil deity of burning pain and agony.