I don't really know any other place to ask, so I have a

>>52285183
>Martial class
>Broken

Pftahahah

>>52285183
There's an Amazon kit in the Complete Fighter's Handbook but it has none of those things you mentioned
If the player can't front up with an actual book/pdf and point to the rules in question, then you should tell them to fuck off

>>52285217
I've pushed the GM on it and he says it's real. But I also know he's the type of guy to lie about it and allow something retarded broken in because he doesn't know what balance is.

We were specifically playing AD&D to mitigate the Min/Maxing so it's a little frustrating when you make a character that's all fluff and someone makes one that fills 2 roles effortlessly.

>>52285253
Sounds like you got a dick on your hands anon, and not in the good way
Seriously if they can't cite chapter and verse and prove it on paper then it's bullshit
Kits were often dodgy/unbalancing enough without someone inventing superpowered ones

>>52285291
My hands are kind of tied since the DM gets shitty whenever anything remotely involving stats or class comes up. We get deducted xp for accidentally mentioning our stats so there's no way I'm getting any information that way.
We play other games and I'm better at Min/Maxing so I'll probably just be a dick in one of them in compensation.
I consider my group to be pretty good, this has just been bothering me for a while.

>>52285183
>not playing PHB-only classes with 3d6 in order

you were asking for it...

>>52285449
Half the table flat out refused to touch wizard. So we didn't really have a choice.

>>52285461
Why wizard? Generalist wiz in that edition is easily the most powerful class.

>>52285486
Because they're faggots who don't like have 4 hp at level one and knowing one spell.

>>52285499
Why are they playing ad&d then lol

>>52285461

well there's always specialist wizards, and multiclass (assuming you roll high enough).

Granted, AD&D follows the linear warriors, quadratic wizards trope to the letter, and all characters, including 18 con fighters are mighty squishy at level 1.

And i'll agree, that it's no fun when your character, through no fault of your own, gets instagibbed simply because the goblin archer way in the back decided to target you, despite the fighters doing their job right.

One way to ungimp wizards at low level, is to give them better access to scrolls.

>>52285196
that's not how martial classes are balanced( taking the term very loosely).

A high level spellcaster is a one-man army.
A high level warrior, is an actual army.

>>52285183
>One of the members of my group is playing a class called "Amazon Huntress" this class apparently gets full warrior THAC0, rogue skills D8 hit die and levels at rogue speed.
>Frankly this seems horrifically broken and sounds a little too good to be true.
If she only gets a couple of skills and has severely-limited armor (like leather, maybe), she might still balance out okay. I'm a bit skeptical of the rogue-speed leveling though.

I tried googling "AD&D 'amazon huntress'" and all I found was this: http://quibish.blogspot.com/2014/05/ll-custom-class-amazon-huntress.html , which is a homebrew class, isn't for AD&D, and doesn't use a thief XP progression.

>>52285563

...because you can just Not Play Wizard and solve your problem that way effortlessly?

>>52285183
That sounds not real but if it IS real, I'd expect it's a kit out of Warriors and Rogues of the Realm, or possibly The Complete Ranger's Handbook

>>52285183
>I don't really know any other place to ask
>>>/tg/osrg/

>Is this a real class?
It's as real as any other kit the referee approves of,
>Or just something the player has made up?
but it doesn't cmne from any published material.
And it was probably made up by the referee, not the player.

>>52285196
Even towards high levels, casters are balls in OSR.

>>52285499
>4 hp
Fuck, that's a lucky roll for HP at level1 for a wizard

>>52285331
>We get deducted xp for accidentally mentioning our stats
>I consider my group to be pretty good

Wow.

>>52285331
>deducted xp for accidentally mentioning our stats
That is unbelievable. Being being ignorant of game balance is a common GM sin, but that's insane.

It sounds like that class is stupid overpowered and whether it's in a book or not is irrelevant. All you can do is talk with your group and say that you don't think the class is fair compared to others. From what you've been saying I'm gonna bet that you'll basically be told to fuck yourself though. I've been in the same position before where a character in the group was so fucking broken that everyone else was useless (the magic that is Pathfinder) and they just thought I was an asshole for being frustrated by it. I eventually left because I couldn't stand the people so it just depends if you enjoy the people playing it enough to overlook the problems with the game itself.

For the record, the Amazon kit for Warriors is a Fighter with a restricted starting gear list (Spears, bows, axes, primitive armor, you get the idea), free non-weapon proficiencies to ride horses and train them, and a special ability that lets them take advantage of men underestimating them (Exactly once, because only an idiot would underestimate them twice after getting stabbed or watching someone else get stabbed).
There's also an Amazon Priestess kit for Priests, with a similar array of proficiencies.

Kits rarely change much mechanically about a class.

>>52291198
And also an Amazon Sorceress, with pretty much the same changes.