3.5 Tier List

[Woodsman]

Any one know where it is?

Or could you please post it here?

[mikej]

the list can be found here (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?PHPSESSID=5a9e9b7f97a77cbd0921c697d4d5d5 53&topic=1002.0)

[sonofzeal]

Note that there are a few different listings circulating around, which vary on the exact measurements required and on the presumed optimization of the characters. If you assume that the player in question might not know his Cover from his Concealment (and most people I've played with don't), the order changes significantly.

[grautry]

I've heard that someone later compiled a Tier List where it was not the opinion of one person but rather people took a vote. However I've been unable to find such a list, does anyone know where I can find it?

[Kurald Galain]

I've heard that someone later compiled a Tier List where it was not the opinion of one person but rather people took a vote.

They did. This was the outcome.

{table]Class|Cnt.|Avg.|SD|Med.|Mode|Min/Max|Spread|Comment
wizard|42|9.67|0.45|10.00|10.00|9/10|1|<=== Supreme Tier
archivist|38|9.63|0.62|10.00|10.00|7/10|3
artificer|37|9.39|0.76|10.00|10.00|8/10|2
druid|41|9.38|0.65|9.50|10.00|8/10|2
cleric|42|9.16|0.76|9.00|9.00|7/10|3
psion|32|8.35|0.73|8.00|8.00|7/10|3
sorcerer|39|8.20|1.01|8.00|8.00|4/10|6
erudite|11|8.15|1.35|9.00|9.00|5/9|4

beguiler|34|7.79|0.73|8.00|8.00|6/9|3|<=== Strong Tier
wu jen|20|7.58|0.94|8.00|8.00|5/9|4
spirit shaman|21|7.29|1.95|7.00|9.00|3/10|7
favored soul|30|7.23|1.03|7.00|8.00|5/9|4
dread necromancer|30|7.10|1.16|7.00|7.00|3/10|7
ardent|12|7.07|1.31|7.00|6.00|5/9|4
warblade|35|6.88|0.90|7.00|7.00|4/8|4
crusader|37|6.62|1.12|7.00|7.00|4/8|4
swordsage|34|6.55|0.89|6.82|6.00|5/8|3
wilder|16|6.46|1.76|7.00|7.00|3/10|7
shugenja|19|6.44|1.26|7.00|7.00|4/8|4
dragonfire adept|23|6.29|0.92|6.00|7.00|4/8|4
duskblade|34|6.09|0.87|6.00|6.00|4/8|4
psychic warrior|32|6.02|1.18|6.00|6.00|3/8|5
warlock|38|6.00|0.90|6.00|6.00|4/8|4

factotum|31|5.98|1.02|6.00|6.00|4/8|4|<=== Average Tier
binder|28|5.96|1.37|6.00|6.00|3/8|5
totemist|14|5.64|1.28|5.50|5.00|3/7|4
rogue|39|5.62|1.27|5.00|5.00|3/8|5
bard|38|5.45|1.52|6.00|6.00|1/8|7
warmage|37|5.41|1.62|6.00|7.00|1/9|8
scout|36|5.27|1.03|5.00|6.00|3/7|4
shadowcaster|22|5.03|1.79|5.13|4.00|2/8|6
barbarian|39|4.99|1.16|5.00|5.00|2/8|6
ranger|39|4.94|1.07|5.00|5.00|2/7|5
incarnate|11|4.94|1.14|5.00|4.00|3/7|4
lurk|11|4.79|1.64|4.00|4.00|2/8|6
dragon shaman|26|4.61|1.44|5.00|5.00|2/7|5
knight|37|4.27|1.03|4.00|4.00|3/6|3
swashbuckler|37|4.24|1.36|4.00|5.00|1/7|6
paladin|40|4.22|1.15|4.00|5.00|1/6|5
soulborn|11|4.15|1.15|4.00|4.00|3/7|4

ninja|33|3.97|1.29|4.00|4.00|2/8|6|<=== Weak Tier
fighter|41|3.88|1.41|4.00|4.00|1/8|7
hexblade|36|3.81|1.33|3.50|3.00|2/7|5
divine mind|11|3.67|2.30|3.00|3.00|1/8|7
marshal|29|3.66|1.17|4.00|3.00|2/6|4
adept|5|3.60|1.52|3.00|3.00|2/6|4
monk|41|3.51|1.38|3.00|3.00|2/8|6
healer|29|3.21|2.06|3.00|2.00|1/9|8
spellthief|29|3.16|1.20|3.00|4.00|1/6|5
truenamer|18|2.66|1.68|2.93|3.00|0/6|6
expert|5|2.40|0.55|2.00|2.00|2/3|1
soulknife|25|2.35|1.22|2.00|2.00|0/5|5
samurai|37|1.69|0.66|2.00|2.00|1/3|2
warrior|6|1.67|0.82|1.50|1.00|1/3|2
aristocrat|5|1.40|0.55|1.00|1.00|1/2|1
commoner|5|0.60|0.55|1.00|1.00|0/1|1
[/table]

[Tempest Fennac]

How did Adepts get higher then Healers? I know Healers are poorly designed, but they at least get full spell progression.

[Bluebeard]

How did Adepts get higher then Healers? I know Healers are poorly designed, but they at least get full spell progression.
Until level 17, all Healers have is heal.
Adepts have real offensive, defensive and utility spells from level 1.
There are hoops to jump through to add actual spells to the Healer list.
But the vote is on the classes themselves.

And don't take any tier system seriously.
Everything is in the group and the players.

[Prime32]

How did Adepts get higher then Healers? I know Healers are poorly designed, but they at least get full spell progression.
Handle Animal as a class skill. :smallwink:
Plus adepts get a few save-or-die spells.

[arguskos]

How did Adepts get higher then Healers? I know Healers are poorly designed, but they at least get full spell progression.
Full spell progression of suck. Adepts get GOOD spells, while Healers don't get jack squat.

The Tier List is based on ability to solve situations. How many situations can the Adept spell list cover? And how about the Healer's spell list?

[Tempest Fennac]

I'd personally sooner be able to do one thing well rather then being able to do several things in a mediocre fashion, especially when Adepts hardly have any spellslots anyway. (I know Healers aren't even that good at healing, but wouldn't the Unicorn make up for their lack of versatility to a degree, especially if Natural Bond is used to boost it?)

[arguskos]

It's not looking at specific builds or personal preference. The fact of the matter is that an Adept, even with their lower number of spells per day, is simply more versatile than a Healer will EVER be. That's why they're ranked higher.

[grautry]

How did Adepts get higher then Healers? I know Healers are poorly designed, but they at least get full spell progression.

Adepts get polymorph? I'm unfamiliar with Healers so I can't really comment on them.

It's interesting that all ToB classes are right next to each other. Perhaps it's a sign that WotC got wiser and better at balance as they went along... But that's probably insane optimism.

The list looks like you can expect for it to look like really. So: versatile casters/limited casters(psionics included in that category)/ToB classes/funky classes/melee/NPC classes. There's a bit of a mix between funky and melee but it seems to hold true otherwise.

[Sinfire Titan]

The link in the second post is the most recent one, actually. BG is very active, and JaronK does try to keep the OP as recent as possible.

@Kurald Galain: That list saddens me. Totemists are shown to be weaker than a Swordsage, and the Swordsage is better than the rest of Tome of Battle? It should be the other way around, in actual practice. An optimized Warblade or Crusader can rape an optimized Swordsage, while an optimized Totemist is one of the scariest things this side of the King of Smack/Full Casters.

Also, the Soulborn should be equal to the Divine Mind. Both of them are crap. This is comming from the guy who wrote the Incarnum Handbook (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=551.0), so I do know what I'm talking about here.

[Kurald Galain]

An optimized Warblade or Crusader can rape an optimized Swordsage, while an optimized Totemist is one of the scariest things this side of the King of Smack/Full Casters.
I'd suggest that this list is about regular builds, not optimized builds. Also, this is about popular perception, not absolute fact (as if there was such a thing).

[sonofzeal]

Swordsages - I'd say they're roughly on par with the rest of ToB. If you're talking about "pure" Swordsages vs "pure" Warblades, the Warblade is likely to pack a heavier punch and be tougher, while the Swordsage is more flexible and adaptive, has more "utility" powers, and has much better options for stealth and mobility. It's a fair call either way, really. As for multiclassing, I'd say Swordsage is the better and more popular dip class, while Warblades with their higher BAB get easier PrC access. Again, fair call. I'm really not sure why you'd expect a huge imbalance.


Healers - they really really stink, but are playable with some basic houserules. Adepts have way more utility and offense, even though they're no powerhouses. That said, Healers lend themselves to interesting RPs, while Adepts are fundamentally boring unless you make them interesting.

[Renegade Paladin]

Handle Animal as a class skill. :smallwink:
Plus adepts get a few save-or-die spells.
Healers also get Handle Animal. :smalltongue:

[sonofzeal]

Healers also get Handle Animal. :smalltongue:

And Adepts get Scorching Ray, Lightning Bolt, Polymorph, and Baleful Polymorph. :smalltongue:

[Chronos]

Spellthieves should be higher than they are, at least above the Healer, Adept, and Monk. They're at least a competent skillmonkey (though admittedly the least of the skillmonkey classes), they get some spellcasting, and they have something that they alone can do. I'd probably put them up around the Ninja.

[magic9mushroom]

Is there a similar list for PrCs? Or is it too hard?

[Bluebeard]

Is there a similar list for PrCs? Or is it too hard?
Sure. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=107618) On the front page even.

Course, that one's even wonkier than the base class tier systems because it expects multiclassing and out-of-class synergies to be going on.

[Frosty]

Wait, how did the Truenamer beat out the Samurai and the soulknife?

[sonofzeal]

Sure. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=107618) On the front page even.

Course, that one's even wonkier than the base class tier systems because it expects multiclassing and out-of-class synergies to be going on.
Only when the PrC requires it. I try to keep thing as simple and straightforward as possible, and there's a strong emphasis on "logical" entry... and hey, there's a lot of debate about what that means for some, but that's okay. We do our best.

(and we're looking for volunteers on Burlew's own Dungeonscape PrCs.... :smallcool:)

[Bluebeard]

Wait, how did the Truenamer beat out the Samurai and the soulknife?
I could see it.

Samurai and Truenamer are NPC classes at any level.

Truenamer has a couple things going for it:
1. UMD
2. At high levels the class breaks down, but it at least has a short period of competence and versatility.


And zeal, I don't mean to bash on the effort you've put into all that.
I just think you're trying to take on a task that's too big and too subjective to believe.
A short list of "Something for nothing" caster PrCs, I could buy.
But I'd argue nearly everything else is a tradeoff too subjective to judge.

[Eloel]

Why is Warlock that deep down on the list? They're WAY above Dread Necromancer in power AND versatility. They even get to 'take 10' on UMD checks, priceless.

And why isn't Erudite at TOP of that list?

[monty]

Why is Warlock that deep down on the list? They're WAY above Dread Necromancer in power AND versatility. They even get to 'take 10' on UMD checks, priceless.

Dread Necromancer is a full caster with a decent spell list. It has plenty of versatility. And power? Put that warlock against several hundred HD of undead and a caster. I know who my money's on.

[Dixieboy]

the list can be found here (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?PHPSESSID=5a9e9b7f97a77cbd0921c697d4d5d5 53&topic=1002.0)
Fighter and paladin... tier 5?

Adepts are superior?

[mikej]

Fighter and paladin... tier 5?

Adepts are superior?

I didn't write the list, i just provided the link. you see my name anymore in that thread?

Also a little copy & paste wisdom from the last thread discussing this matter, which I added my opinion.


Also coming from a person that played YGO for 6 years, was very competitive in SSBM ( quit when brawl was released ), tier ranking discussion never are 100% agreed upon. Usually just endless thread pages of arguments, since nobody likes to see any "X' of thiers get a bad ranking.

[Dixieboy]

I did not read that, nor did i blame you, i was just confused.

[Frosty]

Technically, Adepts are more adaptive than Fighters and Paladins. Anyone who can cast Heal and Polymorph can't be called weak.

[Tempest Fennac]

I'm still not sold on the idea of Adepts being better then Healers. While they are more versatile, it takes them forever to get higher level spells and I still think their lack of spell slots is a huge issue unless you are able to ration their spells really carefully or you can rest a lot. (I tend to look at it as being about which class I'd sooner use in a full campaign.)

[quick_comment]

I'm still not sold on the idea of Adepts being better then Healers. While they are more versatile, it takes them forever to get higher level spells and I still think their lack of spell slots is a huge issue unless you are able to ration their spells really carefully or you can rest a lot. (I tend to look at it as being about which class I'd sooner use in a full campaign.)

How does the healer actually hurt people though?

For a war, the healer is great. He can keep your army nice and alive.

For a battle, the adept can polymorph himself into any sort of horrible creature and eat the healer alive.

[Bluebeard]

While they are more versatile, it takes them forever to get higher level spells and I still think their lack of spell slots is a huge issue unless you are able to ration their spells really carefully or you can rest a lot. (I tend to look at it as being about which class I'd sooner use in a full campaign.)
That's what most tier systems try to rank.

[Tempest Fennac]

In that case, it makes sense that Healers are lower, Bluebeard. Isn't the Unicorn Companion capable of dishing out some damage?

[JaxGaret]

Isn't the Unicorn Companion capable of dishing out some damage?

Not really. Note the whole "Can't call your companion for 30 days if it dies" clause.

Note that the Adept gets a Familiar, which can be at least as powerful as the Healer's Unicorn Companion.

Also, Adepts can easily gain entrance to the Hexer PrC (they have Lightning Bolt as a divine spell), which is quite strong.

[Tempest Fennac]

Don't a lot of DMs not bother with 3.0 PrCs, though. Also, if the familiar can be boosted, can't the Healer's companion be boosted using the same methods?

[Bluebeard]

Also, if the familiar can be boosted, can't the Healer's companion be boosted using the same methods?
It's hard to self-buff with Cure Light Wounds.

[Shadic]

Poor fighters. :( I like them, but they could really use to be better.

Stupid broken spell system in 3.5.

[Tempest Fennac]

I assumed feats were needed for buffing the familiar (I forgot about Polymorph). I tend to think the magic system in itself is fine apart from a few spells (eg: save-or-dies and Polymorph spring to mind). I think the main problem with Fighters is that WotC somehow overestimated the power of feats, which is why they lack other class features.

Ironically, I ended up modifying the Adept for PC use while coming up with some changes to the Healer to make it more useful a while back: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5284212#post5284212 and http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=97644 .

[Eldariel]

The Unicorn is more like animal companion/mount than Familiar. Familiars can acquire skill ranks (Hello, UMD!), deliver spells and with Spell Compendium, even cast them (though Imbue Familiar with Spell Ability isn't an Adept-spell; oh well, I just mentioned UMD, right?). Also, since Adept has access to Polymorph, Mirror Image, Stoneskin, et al. (do note Share Spells), the Familiar can be pretty kickass actually.

Oh yeah, and Healers actually have "inability to wear metal armor" as a class feature (right out of the book: "Her ethos requires a certain vulnerability that allows her to more fully sympathize with those in care".). While they're not proficient with it, Adepts don't really suffer of wearing a Full-Plate should they feel so inclined; all it means is penalty on attack rolls and...who cares? Also, 1-level Warrior-dip buys you heavy armor proficiency. And 1 level of Expert gets you UMD in class. Go, NPC classes!


Point being, Adepts are both, better able to protect themselves and better able to attack than Healers. It isn't so much that Adepts are awesome than Healers are horrible (until level 17 and Gate anyways). Level 20 Healer is actually quite something as they get free True Resurrections; else you'd need to abuse Shapechange or Dweomerkeeper or some such for it.

[magic9mushroom]

Why is Warlock that deep down on the list? They're WAY above Dread Necromancer in power AND versatility. They even get to 'take 10' on UMD checks, priceless.

And why isn't Erudite at TOP of that list?

Dread Necros are quite powerful. They get full casting, with the best casting mechanic in the game (spontaneous with entire list known), as well as very good class features, assuming you took Tomb-Tainted Soul (which you did, seeing as it's the Dread Necro's Natural Spell equivalent). They're also a one-stat class. Dread Necro is competitive with Sorcerers IMO.

Warlocks have a ridiculously limited spell selection, and while they may be better blasters don't have the amount of stuff a dread necro has. Or the ability to stop the insane hordes that a Dread Necro will usually have after level 8. Literally thousands of HD of undead are not impossible. And that's without the Shadow Apocalypse.

[Frosty]

I'm actually surprised that Dread Necromancers aren't above the Beguiler.

[monty]

I'm actually surprised that Dread Necromancers aren't above the Beguiler.

Beguilers have a lot more out-of-combat versatility than the DN, though, whose spell list is mostly limited to hurting people and making undead (also, beguilers have more skill points and Int-based casting).

[Mushroom Ninja]

Poor fighters. :( I like them, but they could really use to be better.


I used to feel sad about the powerlevel of fighters until I realized that I had been reading the entry wrong. There's a typo in the PHB that gives it 18 levels after level 2. Obviously WotC meant for the class to be a 2-level dip, but accidentally wrote it in as a 20 level class.

[monty]

I used to feel sad about the powerlevel of fighters until I realized that I had been reading the entry wrong. There's a typo in the PHB that gives it 18 levels after level 2. Obviously WotC meant for the class to be a 2-level dip, but accidentally wrote it in as a 20 level class.

Not true. I made a build with Fighter 4 once. :smalltongue:

Also, there was one of those gestalt build challenges a while back where I had Fighter 20 on one side. So it has its place, I guess.

[Eldariel]

I used to feel sad about the powerlevel of fighters until I realized that I had been reading the entry wrong. There's a typo in the PHB that gives it 18 levels after level 2. Obviously WotC meant for the class to be a 2-level dip, but accidentally wrote it in as a 20 level class.

Dungeonscape expanded it to 6 levels, y'know.

[Mushroom Ninja]

Dungeonscape expanded it to 6 levels, y'know.

Yup. I love dungeonscape for that (but mostly for the factotum).

[Zhalath]

Meh, tier lists. They always feel wrong to me, mostly because this is a game where things depend on how you play them. After all, how versatile is a wizard with no spells?

Plus, I can't help but feel the Tier 1 fluff is exaggerating. I've never seen any of those classes played like they own the universe like it depicts them, except for on this forum (you crazy Batman wizards!).

Also, I thought tier lists were for competitive multiplayer games, like fighting games or FPSes. Here, it just seems like an excuse to say "hah, you're playing Tier 6, while I'm Tier 1, so I'm better than you".

Beguiler>Dread Necromancer

Gosh, the CW Samurai is a sick abomination of nature, isn't it? When you sit beside the commoner and the aristocrat, you just lost.

[Eldariel]

Meh, tier lists. They always feel wrong to me, mostly because this is a game where things depend on how you play them. After all, how versatile is a wizard with no spells?

Plus, I can't help but feel the Tier 1 fluff is exaggerating. I've never seen any of those classes played like they own the universe like it depicts them, except for on this forum (you crazy Batman wizards!).

Also, I thought tier lists were for competitive multiplayer games, like fighting games or FPSes. Here, it just seems like an excuse to say "hah, you're playing Tier 6, while I'm Tier 1, so I'm better than you".

You really need to read the original post - there's a lot of good to gain through this and the whole system is built for player convenience rather than for E-P grpwomg. I could explain it all here, but I'm just going to direct you to the thread itself (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=1002.0) and just give you enough information to hopefully give you an incentive to read it:
The purpose of Tier classifications is to classify which classes, given the same degree of optimization, are on a given power level. This allows players to create parties from classes on any given tiers (everything within two tiers tends to be ok) thus ensuring that no player is going to make others useless, and more importantly, through acknowledging the power discrepancies inherent to the system, allows giving the weaker characters in a party of characters from varying tiers some leg-up so that they can match the competition.


And CW Samurai really shouldn't be on the same Tier as Warrior as it's simply the same class with added class features (however crappy), but Aristocrat is about appropriate as they have more starting money (the big one) and a decent skill list. Really, the reason the remaining classes aren't split up is because there's just no reason/need to make a separate tier for each of Aristocrat, CW Samurai, Warrior & Commoner - they're on the bottom, and their inner workings are really irrelevant.

[Bluebeard]

I don't mind tiers in some ways: The Big 5 [or 6] can do everything they want.
More limited casters like Psions, Sorcerers, Favored Souls and Spontaneous Specialists can do anything* they want.
(*notably distinct from the "Everything" in the Big 5 [or 6].
Classes like Bards, ToM classes and ToB-ers have distinct abilities that can't be replicated by others, even if they can't do anything.
Then there's the Fighter, Swashbuckler, Paladin etc. who have abilities but nothing distinct. Everything they can do can easily be replicated and outdone by another group.
And then there's classes that don't even have real abilities like the Samurai and NPC classes.
Seems intuitive.

The problem I have with all existing tiers is they don't account for roles. To use 4E terms, a group with a tier 1 Controller, a tier 4 Defender and a tier 3 Striker will be more or less balanced, but the same group with the addition of a tier 3 Controller will be unbalanced because one member is comparatively useless in his job.

I would argue a Wizard/Samurai/Ninja party is a well-balanced group, despite the Wizard being at the top of most lists and the Samurai being at the bottom.
In this situation, every character will have contributions to make in combat -- dealing the damage needed to finish fights after the Wizard sets the group up for success, using stealth skills because Invisibility isn't reliable.
The Wizard might be able to outdo other characters in their roles.
(I wouldn't even consider this likely -- the Wizard's buffs don't all have the "Self-Only" tag that the Cleric's do. They'll largely be better applied to the party stealth or melee specialists.)

I'd also say that a Wizard/Beguiler/Telepath/Dragon Adept party would be rather poorly balanced.
The overlap between the character abilities will put the Telepath and Dragon Adept in distinctly second-class positions within the group, despite having a much closer grouping in most tier systems than the previous group.

[Zhalath]

You really need to read the original post - there's a lot of good to gain through this and the whole system is built for player convenience rather than for E-P grpwomg. I could explain it all here, but I'm just going to direct you to the thread itself (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=1002.0) and just give you enough information to hopefully give you an incentive to read it:
The purpose of Tier classifications is to classify which classes, given the same degree of optimization, are on a given power level. This allows players to create parties from classes on any given tiers (everything within two tiers tends to be ok) thus ensuring that no player is going to make others useless, and more importantly, through acknowledging the power discrepancies inherent to the system, allows giving the weaker characters in a party of characters from varying tiers some leg-up so that they can match the competition.


And CW Samurai really shouldn't be on the same Tier as Warrior as it's simply the same class with added class features (however crappy), but Aristocrat is about appropriate as they have more starting money (the big one) and a decent skill list. Really, the reason the remaining classes aren't split up is because there's just no reason/need to make a separate tier for each of Aristocrat, CW Samurai, Warrior & Commoner - they're on the bottom, and their inner workings are really irrelevant.

It makes sense in that kind of light, though it still doesn't work right in my mind. My players go from Tier 2 to Tier 4, so I guess it's not as much of an issue in my party.

Heh, the Truenamer is so broken, it doesn't get a Tier. It's like Tier Infinite.

[Frosty]

Dungeonscape expanded it to 6 levels, y'know.

Doesn't some alternative class feature called Zhentarim or Zhenatrim fighter or something expand it to a 9-level class?

[Eldariel]

Doesn't some alternative class feature called Zhentarim or Zhenatrim fighter or something expand it to a 9-level class?

Sure, there're some worthwhile abilities you can get on 9 so an Intimidator Fighter might actually consider 9-10 levels. Zhentarim Fighter ACFs are from Heroes of Battle Web Enhancement, by the way. And there's Overpowering Attack at 16 and Weapon Supremacy on 18, but those just aren't as good as other class levels.

[Faulty]

I'm sort of interested in getting rid of the top tier.

[Frosty]

If you do, you must be careful as many, MANY spells are now out of reach sabe for usage of scrolls and wands. Without a Sorcerer or Wizard around, there are some schools of magics not well-represented even if you have a party of Healer, Warmage, Beguiler, and Dread Necromancer. They've got a decent amount covered, but you can no longer expect the party to be able to Fly at level 5 to get over obstacles.

[Riffington]

Also, Adepts can easily gain entrance to the Hexer PrC

If NPC classes are allowed to take PrCs, it changes things quite a lot.

[Tempest Fennac]

I'm assuming they are (I know Kubota in OotS had levels in a PrC which appears to by Spymaster, and he was only an Aristocrat).

[Faulty]

If you do, you must be careful as many, MANY spells are now out of reach sabe for usage of scrolls and wands. Without a Sorcerer or Wizard around, there are some schools of magics not well-represented even if you have a party of Healer, Warmage, Beguiler, and Dread Necromancer. They've got a decent amount covered, but you can no longer expect the party to be able to Fly at level 5 to get over obstacles.

Mainly the Big 5, is what I mean. I'm breaking up the Wizard into specialist Wizards (like the Beguiler, Warmage, etc); I might make the Favored Soul into the Cleric with a few edits; I'm going to make the Shapeshifting varient of Druid the only Druid; and there's no reason to have the Archivist around, or the Artificer outside of Eberron.