Which Dungeons & Dragons class do you feel needs the most adjusting? This could either be to improve them to be worthwhile or to tone them down for balance. This is primarily for 5E since it is the current edition. The other editions have already had this discussed pretty thoroughly.
Edited: Kyrroeth on 27th Feb, 2017 - 6:46pm
Depends on how you're looking at it.
Talking 5E, a level 20 Circle of the Moon Druid is badly overpowered. Their capstone ability effectively gives them the ability to just slap a hundred or so HP on themselves every single round without expending anything or even taking up their main action, making it even more difficult to take them down than a raging barbarian. Toss in ninth level spellcasting while in a variety of beastly forms… At level 2 and 3, maybe 4, they're also a little too powerful due to having strong combat forms before martial classes really come into their own. Thing is though, it is only at low and high levels that they can be considered OP. For the vast majority of a level 1-20 game, they're only a little above average.
On the low end, we have the Beastmaster Ranger, and the Four Elements monk. One for having extreme difficulties simply using the animal companion for its purpose, and the other for abilities that merely mimic weak spells at the expense of being able to afford the basic monk stuff.
I should also mention the Berzerker Barbarian. They're power in a box, but they also gain a level of exhaustion every time they frenzy. Exhaustion is tough to get rid of, and the penalties as more levels of it are attained quickly go from annoying to debilitating. I feel it would be more appropriate to have a very substantial penalty that is removed on a short rest.
Edited: daishain on 27th Feb, 2017 - 7:14pm
That's great to hear then. You made a very good point about the balance of classes depends upon what levels are being discussed. I don't know what levels they consider for tier guides etc but it seems to me they should focus on levels 1-10 or 1-15. The levels beyond 15 are really not that important to most games. How many campaigns even get to level 10, much less 20? I've never played in a campaign that reached the highest level available. Something always happens to derail the campaign before that. I assume that applies to most other gamers as well.
Indeed, a lot of theory crafters pride themselves on making killer level 20 builds. But a lot of those builds, at level 5 or 10, are only mediocre.
In regards to another edition, 3.5e had a lot of poorly designed classes. Quite a few kings of OPness. Probably the single worst of them would be the spell to power Erudite. It is a psionic class that is not only capable of learning most psionic powers, but of converting arcane spells into psionic powers and learning those as well. Absolutely massive amounts of versatility and power.
So basically, if the player is determined enough to collect all the spells+powers he can, you've got someone out there that can cast nearly every single spell/power in the game, drawn from some of the strongest lists available, are doing so more efficiently than their closest counterparts, (Wizards) and to add insult to injury, have fewer weaknesses than said wizards. (Just to name a few, they don't need no stinking book, and could prance around in heavy armor if they wanted without risking spells fizzling on them.)
Then there is the Thrallherd. It is a PrC rather than a class, but it grants the player a big army of mind controlled minions, including two personal cohorts only a few levels below the player. Best bit is that as you lose people in your army, people just wander away from their lives in nearby lands in order to replace them.