Tiers

[Gorilla2038]

So, ive looked around a little bit, and Im having a bit of problem finding real info on the 'Class Tiers' that everyone else seems to know so well. So simply, who made them, what are they, and what classes fall into what?

My main problem is the ones that i see being put forward as horrible (Paladin, Knight, Monk) i have some problems with(for example, i think Knight is a great class, combining Test of Mettle and Bulwark of Defense means that two weopen rogues are just tasty kill counts).

Can someone point me to a guide or something?

[Pharaoh's Fist]

The tier system for classes, and explanations of why each class is in its tier. (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5070.0)

Edit: You have been ninja'd, fool!

[Gpope]

My main problem is the ones that i see being put forward as horrible (Paladin, Knight, Monk) i have some problems with(for example, i think Knight is a great class, combining Test of Mettle and Bulwark of Defense means that two weopen rogues are just tasty kill counts).

Here's an umbrella kid, you're gonna need it.

Anyhow, there's a discussion on it here. (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=1002.0).

[IthilanorStPete]

The canonical thread is here (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=1002.0).

[sonofzeal]

Obligatory link-pimp for the PrC Tier Project (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5198.0)

[Gorilla2038]

Thanks Folks! I think i understand the basis of my confusion: we play in very unoptimized game, and i think that helps reduce the difference between the classes.

[sonofzeal]

Thanks Folks! I think i understand the basis of my confusion: we play in very unoptimized game, and i think that helps reduce the difference between the classes.
This is true. It also depends on how DMs are playing, as well; if your DM is playing to each character's strengths, that can also help even the field. Also, a lot of the top classes are the most optimization-dependent (especially Wizard, though notably not Druid which is pretty much always right up there), and can be some of the weakest if played poorly.

Still, things further down the list are pretty solidly non-functional in most games.

[Grynning]

So, ive looked around a little bit, and Im having a bit of problem finding real info on the 'Class Tiers' that everyone else seems to know so well. So simply, who made them, what are they, and what classes fall into what?

My main problem is the ones that i see being put forward as horrible (Paladin, Knight, Monk) i have some problems with(for example, i think Knight is a great class, combining Test of Mettle and Bulwark of Defense means that two weopen rogues are just tasty kill counts).

Can someone point me to a guide or something?

Make sure you read the entire section below the list, which explains why a class may seem too low compared to your individual experience. The tier system is a tool for DM's to help balance their games; it's not a "zomg my class is better than yours" type of thing.

Edit: Ninja'ed by the OP himself. Oh well :smalltongue:

[Draz74]

My main problem is the ones that i see being put forward as horrible (Paladin, Knight, Monk)
If your group plays unoptimized in general, this surprises me, as lack of optimization makes the Monk hurt even more. Oh well, I guess your DM is good at customizing encounters to let the Monk shine.

People forget that Tier 4 classes really don't "suck" unless they're getting compared to optimized Tier 1-2 co-workers in their party. So that explains why you feel the Knight and Paladin are slighted.


i have some problems with(for example, i think Knight is a great class, combining Test of Mettle and Bulwark of Defense means that two weopen rogues are just tasty kill counts).

Well, that doesn't really violate anything from the Tiers system, since Rogues aren't considered higher-Tier than Knights. (Both classes are in the upper Tier 4 range.)

[Jerthanis]

(especially Wizard, though notably not Druid which is pretty much always right up there)

I don't buy it. I've played and seen played friggin awful Druids. It takes as much min/maxing and attention to detail with a Druid as a Cleric at least, if not closer to a Wizard's level before they're as dominating as the tier system suggests they are.

If you don't know which animals are statistically the best, your summons and wildshapes will just take up time and spell slots without contributing anything. Your spellcasting is awful for a full caster, gaining staples late or not at all, and few win-button spells outside the Spell Compendium.

Clerics are the real pick-up-and-play demigods of the trio. I remember from my first days playing 3.0 in 2000 saying, "Wow, if Clerics just cast their spells on themselves they'd be better than a Fighter. If only our teenage minds could stay focused enough to get a campaign past 3rd level and we could see this in action."

[Sstoopidtallkid]

I don't buy it. I've played and seen played friggin awful Druids. It takes as much min/maxing and attention to detail with a Druid as a Cleric at least, if not closer to a Wizard's level before they're as dominating as the tier system suggests they are.

If you don't know which animals are statistically the best, your summons and wildshapes will just take up time and spell slots without contributing anything. All you need to know about animals are "Tigers and Bears are dangerous". Wildshaping into a bear is always a good option, though things like lions are a reasonable second choice.

Leopards and Crocodiles are deadly at 4th level(and an inexperienced Druid may take Croc at 1st since I doubt he'd know about the errata), and really, how much knowledge does that take? Even not picking one of those 2 best ACs at 4th level, you're basically going to have stuff like a Wolverine, Dire Badger, Black Bear or Dire Bat. The only one's I'd categorize as weak are the Ape, Monitor Lizard, and the snakes. 4 out of the list isn't bad at all.

[olentu]

I don't buy it. I've played and seen played friggin awful Druids. It takes as much min/maxing and attention to detail with a Druid as a Cleric at least, if not closer to a Wizard's level before they're as dominating as the tier system suggests they are.

If you don't know which animals are statistically the best, your summons and wildshapes will just take up time and spell slots without contributing anything. Your spellcasting is awful for a full caster, gaining staples late or not at all, and few win-button spells outside the Spell Compendium.

Clerics are the real pick-up-and-play demigods of the trio. I remember from my first days playing 3.0 in 2000 saying, "Wow, if Clerics just cast their spells on themselves they'd be better than a Fighter. If only our teenage minds could stay focused enough to get a campaign past 3rd level and we could see this in action."

I had found casting 3.0 harm on myself to be a bad idea. Though I got past third level.

[jmbrown]

Tiers are only particularly poignant if you're playing by RAW and characters have access to everything they want exactly when they want it most... which I've never seen ever. The tier system is best used IMO as a way to create encounters. Use it to determine which character could possibly overcome a challenge simply (higher tiers) and who would be struggling to keep up with everyone else.

It's a good way to play the balancing act. I end up giving lower tier classes better treasure to make up for the fact they're standing around twiddling their thumbs at higher levels.

[Doc Roc]

Tiers are only particularly poignant if you're playing by RAW and characters have access to everything they want exactly when they want it most... which I've never seen ever. The tier system is best used IMO as a way to create encounters. Use it to determine which character could possibly overcome a challenge simply (higher tiers) and who would be struggling to keep up with everyone else.

It's a good way to play the balancing act. I end up giving lower tier classes better treasure to make up for the fact they're standing around twiddling their thumbs at higher levels.

Yeah that's actually not true. I'll roll a wizard, and you can pick my inventory, you roll a fighter, and I'll pick yours. We'll run ToS rules, which are... fairly restrictive. Obviously, this does rely on you not filling my inventory with devouring bags. I will, in turn, give you a fairly moderate or possibly exceptional load-out.

We'll see how that goes. Alternatively, we could (and should) use a neutral third party, like.... a GM.

[Sstoopidtallkid]

Tiers are only particularly poignant if you're playing by RAW and characters have access to everything they want exactly when they want it most... which I've never seen ever. The tier system is best used IMO as a way to create encounters. Use it to determine which character could possibly overcome a challenge simply (higher tiers) and who would be struggling to keep up with everyone else.

It's a good way to play the balancing act. I end up giving lower tier classes better treasure to make up for the fact they're standing around twiddling their thumbs at higher levels.A Druid wants...a +X Wis item. And the same cloak of resistance everyone else wants. And basically, everything else is just whatever. There are no vital items. VoP is recommended against least for them for a reason. Whereas a Wizard will want his spellbook, a +int item, and...that's it. A Fighter needs a magic weapon, magic armor, +Str item, method of flight, and many other items, just to be weaker but still relevant.

Now, it's generally considered a good idea to know before building the char if the world is low magic or whatever"(so you can take collegiate wizard instead of cooperative spell), but since that's something the character would know anyways, I generally don't have any issues getting that info from the GM.

Keep in mind that Doc Roc just took down a level 20 fighter, with level 20 WBL, using a level 13 wizard with level 13 WBL(which, IIRC, is something like 1/7th as much). Items aren't everything.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Yeah that's actually not true. I'll roll a wizard, and you can pick my inventory, you roll a fighter, and I'll pick yours. We'll run ToS rules, which are... fairly restrictive. Obviously, this does rely on you not filling my inventory with devouring bags. I will, in turn, give you a fairly moderate or possibly exceptional load-out.

We'll see how that goes. Alternatively, we could (and should) use a neutral third party, like.... a GM.

I can run it sometime next week. SRD content only. ToS rules apply.

Since the point of equipment was brought up, suppose we make this... interesting.

You have to roll on the percentage charts for your loot. Keep rolling until you reach your WBL limit. You don't get the item that pops you over, you just have to stop, even if that item was stupidly expensive and you've got plenty of gold left to play with. NO item creation feats.

How does that sound?

[Sstoopidtallkid]

I can run it sometime next week. SRD content only. ToS rules apply.

Since the point of equipment was brought up, suppose we make this... interesting.

You have to roll on the percentage charts for your loot. Keep rolling until you reach your WBL limit. You don't get the item that pops you over, you just have to stop, even if that item was stupidly expensive and you've got plenty of gold left to play with. NO item creation feats.

How does that sound?I think the no item creation feats thing is a bit arbitrary. That's one of many ways to get around the DM trying to nerf you through loot, and the option should be explored.

Also, are they allowed to sell gear for either cash or material components(pearls etc)? And what about being allowed to set aside , say, 2K for vital things. It's not quite fair to roll randomly, then say it's balanced because the fighter ended up going in unarmed with 3 suits of armor and the wizard had no spell component pouch. A masterwork sword and a 5 gp pouch of everything should be assumed.

[Killer Angel]

I don't buy it. I've played and seen played friggin awful Druids. It takes as much min/maxing and attention to detail with a Druid as a Cleric at least, if not closer to a Wizard's level before they're as dominating as the tier system suggests they are.


Tier's system don't take in account specific type of optimization or unoptimization.
For example, the Rogue class itself is Tier 4, but certain builds can reach Tier 3 or (maybe) even Tier 2, with the right feats (to sneak attack almost everything) and wise use of UMD.
While you can optimize a Rogue to be better than the Factotum (tier 3), but the classification doesn't take this into account.

In the same way, you can "build" a druid badly, decreasing his effective tier, but this don't negate the class superior strenght.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

I think the no item creation feats thing is a bit arbitrary. That's one of many ways to get around the DM trying to nerf you through loot, and the option should be explored. Item creation feats favor the Wizard, who can get them, over Fighter, who cannot. In this instance, it is a balance issue.


Also, are they allowed to sell gear for either cash or material components(pearls etc)? And what about being allowed to set aside , say, 2K for vital things. It's not quite fair to roll randomly, then say it's balanced because the fighter ended up going in unarmed with 3 suits of armor and the wizard had no spell component pouch. A masterwork sword and a 5 gp pouch of everything should be assumed.

This was the system I was planning on using for magic item creation. I was going to allow mundane items and costly spell components and spell pouches to be purchased before you start rolling for your magic items.

[Gnaeus]

A couple other things to consider.

The tiers dont reflect very low level play well. Melee runs better there.

While as mentioned, the tiers are effected by optimization, they are also effected by playstyle. A druid is a higher tier FOR ME than a wizard, because I am familiar with them and like the way they play.

Some of the tier assumptions may not fit your campaign. Rogues, for example, easily shift into tier 3 in campaigns where most enemies are vulnerable to sneak attack, or where they have full access to magic marts for umd. Those aren't JaronK's assumptions.

[sonofzeal]

I don't buy it. I've played and seen played friggin awful Druids. It takes as much min/maxing and attention to detail with a Druid as a Cleric at least, if not closer to a Wizard's level before they're as dominating as the tier system suggests they are.

If you don't know which animals are statistically the best, your summons and wildshapes will just take up time and spell slots without contributing anything. Your spellcasting is awful for a full caster, gaining staples late or not at all, and few win-button spells outside the Spell Compendium.

Clerics are the real pick-up-and-play demigods of the trio. I remember from my first days playing 3.0 in 2000 saying, "Wow, if Clerics just cast their spells on themselves they'd be better than a Fighter. If only our teenage minds could stay focused enough to get a campaign past 3rd level and we could see this in action."
Well, many people over-exaggerate the point, but it's still true that Druids are far easier to make effective. Choose a good combat animal companion (pretty obvious), choose a good combat Wild Shape (pretty obvious), and have fun with your many Conj / Trans spells (and we know how well those work for Wizards). Ideally you want some method of keeping gear in Wildshape (Wildling Clasps, or just take it off and put it back on). Oh, and Natural Spell, that's a given. That's, er, about it. Unless you fall into the "Elven Druid" trap, and forget to max your Con as well as your Wis, there really isn't that much more to worry about. It's possible to mess up, and I've seen a lot of Elven Druids who don't really have a survival plan in combat beyond "yaarg I r something big and scary" (except with poor AC/hp), but any Druid can be made effective fairly easily.

Easier than Clerics, really. Clerics suffer from the problem of "okay okay just give me a sec to get this last buff on... alright I'm ready please tell me there's someone left for me to smite". Conventional wisdom (right or wrong) suggests that a normal fight lasts maybe 4 rounds. Conventional wisdom (right or wrong) also suggests that mid level Clerics need Divine Power and Righteous Might before they're really "better than Fighters". Some simple arithmetic then tells us that they're missing out on fully half the fight, and generally the most important half too.

There's ways to overcome that, but Druids don't have to. Their pet is out 24/7, and their Wildshape can be up long before combat at most levels. Whether or not they can equal a fully buffed Cleric in combat, they can certainly have an easier time contributing (and dominating) most encounters.

[Doc Roc]

Just let me know. I'm very reachable.

[Mando Knight]

A Druid wants...a +X Wis item. And the same cloak of resistance everyone else wants. And basically, everything else is just whatever. There are no vital items. VoP is recommended against least for them for a reason.

Basically, though if for some reason he starts fighting hordes of melee monsters that can't be SoD'd away he should look into wildshape-compatible armor and a Con-boosting item for HP. Neither are essential, though, if the party can compensate for anti-tanks...

[Akal Saris]

Yeah that's actually not true. I'll roll a wizard, and you can pick my inventory, you roll a fighter, and I'll pick yours. We'll run ToS rules, which are... fairly restrictive. Obviously, this does rely on you not filling my inventory with devouring bags. I will, in turn, give you a fairly moderate or possibly exceptional load-out.

We'll see how that goes. Alternatively, we could (and should) use a neutral third party, like.... a GM.

Doc, what did I miss? How was his statement not true? Here's what I'm seeing:

Jimbrown: Tiers are best used as a balancing act, and as a DM, I give low tier classes more treasure to compensate for sucking at higher levels.
Doc Roc: Not true! My wizard can beat your fighter 1v1, even if the fighter has good equipment and the wizard has crud.

First off, the tiers aren't designed as a pvp ruleset, they are to determine how well a class can fill various party roles in a typical D&D game. So a 13 wizard can beat a 20 fighter 1v1, but how well can the wizard fill the tank and damage role from 1st-20th? (Sadly enough, the answer is probably 'decently well' after 7th level or so) You're looking at this from a 1v1 angle, instead of from a 'How well does this class do whatever it's supposed to do' angle.

Second, it's obvious that jimbrown recognizes the disparity in power, but he's doing his best to fix it in his games. As a DM, I do the same thing, even if I generally don't balance with treasure so much as design encounters so that the tank isn't marginalized by terrain or immune foes. But having better gear than your level can undoubtedly help any class perform better in play.

[CockroachTeaParty]

What tier do the Magic of Incarnum classes fall into?

I'd wager Totemist is tier 3/4, Incarnate Tier 4, and Soulborn Tier 6 (or maybe low low tier 5).

[Draz74]

What tier do the Magic of Incarnum classes fall into?

I'd wager Totemist is tier 3/4, Incarnate Tier 4, and Soulborn Tier 6 (or maybe low low tier 5).

Totemist is definitely 3. Incarnate ... I think 4 is a good call, but a few people will argue 3. Soulborn ... definitely 5.

[Tyndmyr]

Restricting wealth harms the top classes least. Why? Because those classes get the most power from their class abilities. The less power given out by itemization, the more overall power is determined by class power.

Unless the fighter can find a way to fly, he is horrifically screwed against even a naked caster.

Unless a fighter can find a way to get magical buffs(mind blank, see invisibility, etc), he has absolutely no counter against a variety of basic wizard tactics. The wizard still has tons of spells to counter melee.

I eagerly look forward to seeing wizzie vs fighter with random gear.

[awa]

completely random gear in my opinion wont prove anything but i still want to see how it turns out.

[sofawall]

My sister's first character is a druid. She has yet to open anything other than core. Nobody helped her make choices, just told her what choices she had.

Currently most versatile member of the party, and second strongest is raw battle-prowess (#1 would be me, with my barbarian).

[Doc Roc]

Doc, what did I miss? How was his statement not true? Here's what I'm seeing:

Jimbrown: Tiers are best used as a balancing act, and as a DM, I give low tier classes more treasure to compensate for sucking at higher levels.
Doc Roc: Not true! My wizard can beat your fighter 1v1, even if the fighter has good equipment and the wizard has crud.

First off, the tiers aren't designed as a pvp ruleset, they are to determine how well a class can fill various party roles in a typical D&D game. So a 13 wizard can beat a 20 fighter 1v1, but how well can the wizard fill the tank and damage role from 1st-20th? (Sadly enough, the answer is probably 'decently well' after 7th level or so) You're looking at this from a 1v1 angle, instead of from a 'How well does this class do whatever it's supposed to do' angle.

Second, it's obvious that jimbrown recognizes the disparity in power, but he's doing his best to fix it in his games. As a DM, I do the same thing, even if I generally don't balance with treasure so much as design encounters so that the tank isn't marginalized by terrain or immune foes. But having better gear than your level can undoubtedly help any class perform better in play.

"Tiers are only particularly poignant if you're playing by RAW and characters have access to everything they want exactly when they want it most... which I've never seen ever."

I don't think that's terribly relevant, is what I mean. Second, I don't think Moar Lewt makes the problems go away. I'll let him have 3x my wealth, and he can pick his own gear. I'll get one of you to set my gear up for me, and I'll build a character. I don't know if I'll win, but I suspect it will be painfully close.

If it helps, imagine that I'm a monster with class levels, which, given this schema is basically what I'll be from a wealth perspective.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Restricting wealth harms the top classes least. Why? Because those classes get the most power from their class abilities. The less power given out by itemization, the more overall power is determined by class power.

Unless the fighter can find a way to fly, he is horrifically screwed against even a naked caster.

Unless a fighter can find a way to get magical buffs(mind blank, see invisibility, etc), he has absolutely no counter against a variety of basic wizard tactics. The wizard still has tons of spells to counter melee.

I eagerly look forward to seeing wizzie vs fighter with random gear.

Hey, it was the guy supporting the *FIGHTER* who was complaining about no one ever getting exactly the right kind of gear for every situation. I was just giving him an opportunity to see how fighters and wizards work out when that *isn't* true...

[Doc Roc]

Hey, it was the guy supporting the *FIGHTER* who was complaining about no one ever getting exactly the right kind of gear for every situation. I was just giving him an opportunity to see how fighters and wizards work out when that *isn't* true...

:: malign grin :: I'm with Shneekey here.

[Akal Saris]

"Tiers are only particularly poignant if you're playing by RAW and characters have access to everything they want exactly when they want it most... which I've never seen ever."

I don't think that's terribly relevant, is what I mean. Second, I don't think Moar Lewt makes the problems go away. I'll let him have 3x my wealth, and he can pick his own gear. I'll get one of you to set my gear up for me, and I'll build a character. I don't know if I'll win, but I suspect it will be painfully close.

If it helps, imagine that I'm a monster with class levels, which, given this schema is basically what I'll be from a wealth perspective.

Fair enough regarding the "Playing as RAW" comment, and ironic since JaronK designed the tiers with the idea that a character only had core and 2-3 other "essential" books. What books that entails was essentially up to him, but that's another story.

Either way, how does beating jimbrown 1v1 prove your point? All it proves is that a wizard can solve everything with the right spells and 20g for a book and spell component pouch. And we already knew that. I've seen enough ftr vs. wizard threads to believe that a level 2 wizard could beat a level 18 fighter by blinking at him menacingly and casting Unseen Servant creatively.

A more relevant challenge would be to prove that a level 5 fighter with triple loot still can't tank or deal damage adequately compared to a level 5 warblade or crusader using standard loot, because that's what is really at stake here. And honestly, I'm not convinced that the loot will necessarily bridge the gap even then - but it certainly will make things more even between the two.

Seriously, I'm not arguing with you over whether a fighter needs more gear than a caster, or in comic book terms, that a naked Superman can beat Lex Luthor. That's not really what's at stake here. A better question is whether Aquaman in Iron Man's suit and armed with a laser gun is closer in effectiveness to Batman than if he's just regular old Aquaman.

[Doc Roc]

I'd be delighted to run that level five warblade too. I much prefer ToB to casters. :)

[Starbuck_II]

Seriously, I'm not arguing with you over whether a fighter needs more gear than a caster, or in comic book terms, that a naked Superman can beat Lex Luthor. That's not really what's at stake here. A better question is whether Aquaman in Iron Man's suit and armed with a laser gun is closer in effectiveness to Batman than if he's just regular old Aquaman.

Super Friends Aquaman or current Aquaman?
Current one can control Cthulhu (since he is a water creature). He has super strength and inspires like a Bard.

[PhoenixRivers]

Yeah that's actually not true. I'll roll a wizard, and you can pick my inventory, you roll a fighter, and I'll pick yours. We'll run ToS rules, which are... fairly restrictive. Obviously, this does rely on you not filling my inventory with devouring bags. I will, in turn, give you a fairly moderate or possibly exceptional load-out.

We'll see how that goes. Alternatively, we could (and should) use a neutral third party, like.... a GM.

I can do all of that, if you like. Tell me your character's theme, and I'll provide some items which fit the theme, and some by random generation, to represent a more organic adventure.

[ocdscale]

Super Friends Aquaman or current Aquaman?
Current one can control Cthulhu (since he is a water creature). He has super strength and inspires like a Bard.

I'm not sure that under RAW Cthulhu has the [water] or [aquatic] type. He resides in the water for sure, but that seems to be more of a tangential circumstance, like a grizzly bear frozen in ice.

[Gpope]

My sister's first character is a druid. She has yet to open anything other than core. Nobody helped her make choices, just told her what choices she had.

Currently most versatile member of the party, and second strongest is raw battle-prowess (#1 would be me, with my barbarian).

This happened to me in the first 3.5e campaign I played. My fellow party members were a warmage, a knight, and a rogue, so we had a fairly basic Tank, Blaster, Skillmonkey, Healbot setup. Except as Healbot I could also tank, blast, and run recon. It got to be kind of awkward for me at times

[Mando Knight]

My sister's first character is a druid. She has yet to open anything other than core. Nobody helped her make choices, just told her what choices she had.

That's because the basics of Druid optimization is rather straightforward, IMO:
Animal Companion: Badger, or wolf? Hmm...
Wild Shape: Become a bear or tiger and maul my enemies? Cool!
Natural Spell: Use my spells while I'm a tiger? Great idea!

And that's without spell selection or going outside the SRD. Wildshape Ranger is a slightly more melee-oriented version, but lacks the spells and potentially competent animal companion that the Druid has.

[Akal Saris]

Super Friends Aquaman or current Aquaman?
Current one can control Cthulhu (since he is a water creature). He has super strength and inspires like a Bard.

Holy Captain Nemo, Batman!


I'd be delighted to run that level five warblade too. I much prefer ToB to casters. :)

Feel free to do so! I'm sure somebody around here would be willing to take you up on it :)

[Mando Knight]

Super Friends Aquaman or current Aquaman?
Current one can control Cthulhu (since he is a water creature). He has super strength and inspires like a Bard.

Also makes friends with Batman's leukocytes. And punishes Black Manta by reading from his memoirs.

ISN'T HE BRILLIANT, OLD CHUM?!

[Doc Roc]

So, to summarise:

Current challenges:
-RP Reverse-pick: Opposing party or neutral third party picks the gear on behalf of the opposing party.
-O Organic: A neutral third party lays out gear.
-xY Wealth times Y: A multiplier applied to wealth
-

Wizard -RP versus Fighter -RP
Wizard -RP versus Fighter -O -x3
Wizard -x(.5) -RP versus Fighter -O

Warblade -O versus Fighter -x2 -O

Levels 5, 10, 13.