I've always been partial to playing the less popular classes in most RPGs -- or perhaps it would be more accurate to say that I prefer to come up with what I think might be a fun character concept (based on characterization, not mechanics) and find a way to make it work as opposed to trying to find the "best" race/class/stat combination to "beat" a game. Then again, I tend to play RPGs as a role-player, not as a powergamer, so this isn't entirely surprising.
For the BG series, I've actually had a lot of fun with the basic bard. It may not be the most effective character overall, but it is perfectly possible to play through the series on core rules as a bard and be successful -- it isn't even necessary to min/max the party composition and gear to do it. It just takes learning to deal with challenges with the tools you have, and for me that is far more fun than trying to figure out the easiest way to beat the game. I've also completed the series as a single class cleric of Lathander and as a single-class gnome illusionist. Had fun with them all, but I still found the bard to be the most fun simply because it was a challenge to find ways to make the bard an effective and useful member of the party.
I've been seriously tempted to try the next run as a monk, just for the change. I kind of dread the first few levels since I know they are going to be extremely difficult as a monk, but that's precisely the kind of thing I find challenging and fun.,
l0rdtr3k: as in any RPG there is the ultrapopular classes like fighter,paladin,mage,ranger etc.but there is the "forgotten" ones like monk and bard
I played BG1 as a bard and it was loads of fun,I found it more fun to play that a rogue or a fighter.
so I ask thee,which "forgotten"class do you like