PDA

View Full Version : 3.P What Tier is a proper UMD Rogue?



Duncan_Ruadrik
2011-01-23, 12:08 AM
As it says. I am curious, because magic makes everything better, and UMD allows you to use magic items and spells you would otherwise have no access to.

So what would you say such a character is, tier wise? Assume that such a build is centered around UMD as opposed to UMD being a useful but peripheral skill.

Any suggestions on how you would build such a character is appreciated as well!

And yes, before someone says something about it, i could play a wizard. Thats not the point though. :smalltongue:

Greenish
2011-01-23, 12:10 AM
Some have argued that UMD tips rogues to tier 3. Wouldn't go higher than that, though.

AslanCross
2011-01-23, 12:13 AM
Yeah, and even then, the rogue's abilities are still highly dependent on wand and scroll picks.

dextercorvia
2011-01-23, 12:19 AM
WBL is a huge limiter here, and the tier system is supposed to take optimization into account. If you can truly break it out of it's mold somehow, then I would lean toward T3, but just played smartly is already expected.

Planar Touchstone: Catalogs of Enlightenment for the Magic Domain ability will cover most of what you want UMD for. (You can get it from a Cloistered Cleric dip instead, but that blurs the lines between Tiers.)

Psyren
2011-01-23, 12:37 AM
If you want "T4 UMD-master," I'd say Warlock does a much better job. Unlike rogues, they can craft literally any trinket they could possibly need by themselves, and also take 10 on their UMD checks in combat much earlier than rogues can. They can also cover certain abilities without needing UMD at all (e.g. flight and invisibility.) A melee warlock with Hellfire and Eldritch Glaive can do comparable damage to a rogue as well, with a better chance of hitting and not needing to catch the target off-guard or flank them first.

MeeposFire
2011-01-23, 01:09 AM
Upper tier 4. Using that skill was already used in its ranking. Heck warlocks are considered at tier 4 but have better UMD skill than a rogue.

Going up or down in tiers is kind of a misnomer anyway. The big point of tiers was rating the power level of classes between each other so all classes are assumed to have equal optimization. If you optimize the rogue more the other classes get optimized more and since going up in tiers does not mean much outside of comparing to other classes.

If you want to know if using UMD can make you a more powerful character then yes.

RogueX/chameleon10 plus other stuff is very nice. I prefer factotum to rogue but that class works well.

Gnaeus
2011-01-23, 08:04 AM
Upper tier 4. Using that skill was already used in its ranking.

Not really. JaronK pretty much assumes that all tiers are functioning without equipment, or with only minimal equipment (like maybe a magic weapon). In a game with normal>high WBL and magic marts all the UMD classes should probably be bumped up a tier. Beguiler, for example, is strictly better than sorcerer (more hp, more skills, class abilities, armored casting) if you start with the assumption that he can duplicate all the sorcerer's tricks through UMD'd staves, wands, scrolls and runestaves, and he can get those whenever he needs to.

Rogue also lives in tier 4 because Jaron assumes that the rogue cannot sneak attack many foes, which is also solvable within WBL at a magic mart.

Curmudgeon
2011-01-23, 08:42 AM
WBL is a huge limiter here, and the tier system is supposed to take optimization into account.
Wealth by Level is only an issue if you're creating a character above 1st level. Beyond that the DM is supposed to be using Treasure per Encounter (DMG page 51) as the way to give PCs access to loot. But it's entirely unreasonable to use WbL as a tool to force PCs to a certain total wealth. An Elf Rogue needs 4 hours of trance nightly. A spellcaster needs 8 hours of rest and 1 hour of spell preparation. The Rogue has 5 extra hours every day in which to go out and make extra income, and the skills to make that time profitable. When the Rogue acquires a Breath of the Waves graft, or uses UMD with a spell to remove fatigue, that boosts it to 9 extra hours daily in which to make more gp.

An extra 35-63 hours every week is enough for a whole second income, so Rogues should be well above spellcasters in terms of wealth. That helps Rogues to compete with those who get magic without paying for every spell they use, though of course it doesn't overcome the full spellcasting advantage. But because Rogues have many skills to select among, and don't have to pick those that help in generating extra income, JaronK isn't taking that likely (but not guaranteed) wealth discrepancy into account.

Havelock
2011-01-23, 08:47 AM
Rogue can do UMD, sure.

So can Beguiler and Bard, and those two gets better tricks.

The Bard character I have in backup for an ongoing campaign can pull a +6 to hit and damage through inspire courage at LvL11, considering the composition of the party, with three meele characters (one with an awful amount of attacks (low damage, but it adds up)) and a caster that likes to use touch spells, that alone is on par with what a Rogue can do that doesn't need UMD.

Then the Bard has alter self, and other buffs and debuffs. Bardic Knack/Jack of All Trades makes him beat the Rogue at being skill monkey, too.

A rogue needs to flank or deny dex to get sneak attack damage, he can improve his repertoire by truedeath crystals and such, penetrating strike. But to get him up on the level of Bard, you need to dip, I like Swordsage with shadow hand stances and manouvers, TWF, shadow blade, weapon finesse. You get swift action 1 round of greater invisibility, concentration check to make target flat footed, etc..DEX to damage, building an effective glass cannon, but you're more martial artist than rogue tho.

dextercorvia
2011-01-23, 08:48 AM
That really only works if your DM wants to run a whole set of sidequests for your character. I find that most DM's and other players don't want to sit through that.

If you are spending almost as much to end an encounter as you are earning from it, your wealth will grow much slower than your teammates. This is even true if you can get a second job, if you are item dependent for those jobs, too.

Curmudgeon
2011-01-23, 09:24 AM
That really only works if your DM wants to run a whole set of sidequests for your character. I find that most DM's and other players don't want to sit through that.
Most DMs and players don't want to sit through side quests for a Wizard to acquire a few dozen scrolls containing unique spells, or for a Cleric to find people who sell Nightsticks or relics. Yet it's the DM's job to resolve these individual desires, either through solo missions that don't require the other players to be present, handwaving these things into accomplishment ("roll percentile dice; that's how many gp you made last night"; "roll 1d4; a 1 means you found an itinerant vendor with the scroll/item you wanted"), or having most players be spectators for side quests.

Some DMs, and some players, really enjoy side quests. They get to change gears; or sit back, relax, and watch some involved role-play.

The alternative (a lazy DM saying no side quests) can encourage bad player behavior instead, such as twisting the rules to gain spell knowledge, or a Rogue to steal from party members. As a DM, I'd much rather take a little time for the Wizard to locate a scroll, or the Rogue to get a security specialist side job, than deliberately encourage rule-breaking or create inter-party strife.

grimbold
2011-01-23, 11:59 AM
Some have argued that UMD tips rogues to tier 3. Wouldn't go higher than that, though.
plus 1
rogues are always tier 3 for me

true_shinken
2011-01-23, 12:02 PM
If you want "T4 UMD-master," I'd say Warlock does a much better job. Unlike rogues, they can craft literally any trinket they could possibly need by themselves, and also take 10 on their UMD checks in combat much earlier than rogues can.
Rogues being even able to take skill mastery in UMD is debatable.

ericgrau
2011-01-23, 12:36 PM
The rogue is not much better than any class buying potions and wondrous items for twice the price of his scrolls. I think people forget that all classes get magic that way.

I had an idea for such a build before. It was going to be a nixie because they get +8 cha (+4 mod) for only 3 LA. You might find something even better in splats. The basic idea was to get level 1-2 scrolls from every class, not just wizard, to make him an obscenely versatile self proclaimed "magician". He'd be so-so in combat, probably ray of frost wanding single touch attack sneak attacks. Or in bard form doing even more tricks with bard spells. But he'd be ridiculously prepared for every single random utility situation. Sort of like what I do with my sorcerers anyway, but to the nth degree because he has 6 classes worth of spells and spends a bigger chunk of his wealth on them. For example he'd be the between combat healer with wands of cure light wounds.


Rogues being even able to take skill mastery in UMD is debatable.

Taking skill mastery on UMD is flat out disallowed in RAW. Skill mastery only works on skills for which you can take a 10 on when you're not threatened, so UMD doesn't qualify. The FAQ confirms this. It also mentions something similar for the warlock in that their ability to take 10 is really 2 abilities in one: that you can do it when threatened or distracted, and that you can do it at all.

woodenbandman
2011-01-23, 01:00 PM
Beguiler, for example, is strictly better than sorcerer (more hp, more skills, class abilities, armored casting) if you start with the assumption that he can duplicate all the sorcerer's tricks through UMD'd staves, wands, scrolls and runestaves, and he can get those whenever he needs to.

wut.

So being able to afford a staff of timestop is as good as getting timestop 5/day for free now?

EDIT: Further, +4 bonus for a +3 level adjustment is NEVER a good deal when you're only considering the bonus you get to your skill check. That's a net +1 bonus, at the cost of 3 HD. You'd be better off taking skill focus with your human bonus feat.

lesser_minion
2011-01-23, 01:38 PM
No, UMD is not a tier 3 ability. It's tier 4, because it lets the class do a variety of extra things, none of which it can really claim to be the 'best' at.

As for the "JaronK assumed that classes didn't have any equipment" theory, that's completely wrong. What he did was ignore the effect of things that appeared to be common to everyone, such as the ability to use potions.

He did not ignore the effect of Use Magic Device -- it is quite literally the sole reason the rogue isn't tier 5.


Rogues being even able to take skill mastery in UMD is debatable.

Unless you're feeling pedantic, it's illegal; if you are feeling pedantic, then it's legal for the rogue to take Skill Mastery in Use Magic Device, but it has no effect. The reason you can't take 10 with Use Magic Device is a special rule specific to that skill, not one of the 'normal' factors that Skill Mastery would permit the rogue to ignore.

Psyren
2011-01-23, 02:50 PM
Taking skill mastery on UMD is flat out disallowed in RAW. Skill mastery only works on skills for which you can take a 10 on when you're not threatened, so UMD doesn't qualify. The FAQ confirms this. It also mentions something similar for the warlock in that their ability to take 10 is really 2 abilities in one: that you can do it when threatened or distracted, and that you can do it at all.

In that case, add another notch to Warlock's belt :smallamused:

ericgrau
2011-01-23, 02:59 PM
wut.

So being able to afford a staff of timestop is as good as getting timestop 5/day for free now?

EDIT: Further, +4 bonus for a +3 level adjustment is NEVER a good deal when you're only considering the bonus you get to your skill check. That's a net +1 bonus, at the cost of 3 HD. You'd be better off taking skill focus with your human bonus feat.

Ya what this guy said. Being able to afford a staff of timestop is a feat in and of itself. And, like I said, if money is no object heck double/triple the price again and any class can use such an item. If staff use is really a big deal then any class could dip 1 level of wizard or sorcerer to get it. So now fighter 19 / sorcerer 1 is better than sorcerer 20 at spells? Uh...

dextercorvia
2011-01-23, 05:06 PM
Most DMs and players don't want to sit through side quests for a Wizard to acquire a few dozen scrolls containing unique spells, or for a Cleric to find people who sell Nightsticks or relics. Yet it's the DM's job to resolve these individual desires, either through solo missions that don't require the other players to be present, handwaving these things into accomplishment ("roll percentile dice; that's how many gp you made last night"; "roll 1d4; a 1 means you found an itinerant vendor with the scroll/item you wanted"), or having most players be spectators for side quests.

Some DMs, and some players, really enjoy side quests. They get to change gears; or sit back, relax, and watch some involved role-play.

The alternative (a lazy DM saying no side quests) can encourage bad player behavior instead, such as twisting the rules to gain spell knowledge, or a Rogue to steal from party members. As a DM, I'd much rather take a little time for the Wizard to locate a scroll, or the Rogue to get a security specialist side job, than deliberately encourage rule-breaking or create inter-party strife.

I'm not saying that there shouldn't ever be sidequests, but you were implying that a Rogue should be able to have one every time the rest of the part rests. That would get highly annoying to any group of players. I'm totally with you that while the wizard is researching a new spell, and the fighter is polishing his sword in the downtime that a Rogue should get to use some of his skills in a side job.

I still don't think that will make up the cost difference in using UMD to emulate a caster, which seems to be what the OP is suggesting.

ericgrau
2011-01-23, 05:14 PM
Scrolls are very common on the treasure tables and I can see shops selling a variety of low level ones. There's an Excel magic item shop generator in my sig if anyone wants to try it.

Gnaeus
2011-01-23, 07:35 PM
wut.

So being able to afford a staff of timestop is as good as getting timestop 5/day for free now?


Beguilers HAVE timestop. Every beguiler who reaches that level can cast timestop 5/day for free. (which is more than can be said for a sorcerer)

No. Having the same number of spells per day as a sorcerer with more spells known with better hp and actual class features is better than having less spells known. The ONLY reason that sorcs are T2, and Beguilers are tier 3, is that sorcerers have a better RANGE of spells available. If you start with the assumption that the Beguiler can match the sorcerers versatility by UMDing runestaves to let him cover the fort SOD's, teleport, SR: NO spells and the other things he lacks, the beguiler is flat out better. It is cheaper for the beguiler to do this than the sorc, since the beguiler starts out with a lot more spells known.



As for the "JaronK assumed that classes didn't have any equipment" theory, that's completely wrong. What he did was ignore the effect of things that appeared to be common to everyone, such as the ability to use potions.

False. There were big discussions about things like how difficult it was for rogues to sneak attack certain enemies. The pro rogue camp line stated "Rogue gets a wand of gravestrike in a wand chamber, or a weapon crystal". JaronK argued that that couldn't be reliably obtained in game, and that that was somehow a higher level of optimization to try to be able to hurt enemies that are a weakness in your class. The tier system as written assumes that classes are functioning on class abilities only, with minimal magic, or at the very most WBL without magic marts, where Melee cannot be guaranteed an item of fly, and rogues can't be guaranteed a selection of utility wands, and weapon crystals. It is a campaign assumption based on the types of games he plays in. If your campaign has different assumptions than his campaigns, you need to adjust tiers accordingly.

JaronK
2011-01-24, 03:59 PM
Not really. JaronK pretty much assumes that all tiers are functioning without equipment, or with only minimal equipment (like maybe a magic weapon).

What? No, I don't.


Rogue also lives in tier 4 because Jaron assumes that the rogue cannot sneak attack many foes, which is also solvable within WBL at a magic mart.

...not quite there, either.

What I did say is that the tiers are about what classes are before the DM tries to actively help or hinder individual classes. If a DM is actively dropping exactly the magic items you need all the time, that's actively helping. Likewise, if the DM denies the magic items you need, that's actively hindering. Certainly "without equipment, or with only minimal equipment" is not it at all.

What I said about wands of gravestrike is that they're unreliable at the lowest levels, that they take a standard action according to the DMG (and the Rules Compendium isn't clear as to whether it's restating half the DMG rules on activation, or overwriting the other half, plus the Rules Compendium isn't used in most games), that you have to have known in advance what sort of enemies you'd be fighting to have it worth getting such items at lower levels, and that you can't be guaranteed to have stuff like Wand Sheaths. Gear dependency is a weakness, as you might not get every piece of gear you wanted in every campaign. Artificers are high up there because they can turn any gear into whatever they needed, while a class that needs very specific gear to function well is ranked lower.

So what I was saying about stuff like gravestrike wands is that it requires the DM to be ruling very favorably towards you on a series of counts, and setting up the campaign to give you access to what you want. In other words, the DM has to cater to your needs, and that's T4 or below. Compare that to higher tier classes whose tricks work pretty darn well regardless of the campaign scenario... where more gear just means more stuff you get, without having to spend any of your WBL just to make up for automatic deficiencies your class gets. And let's face it, ALL classes are strong when the DM is giving you every possible favorable ruling.

JaronK

MeeposFire
2011-01-24, 04:21 PM
Plus I do not think grave strike and the like can cover all types of immunity to sneak attacks/critical hits. Fortification abilities, elemental type, and other abilities can still screw sneak attack.

I, Dashing Cube
2011-01-24, 04:29 PM
I would still place Rogues with UMD on tier 4, simply because if rogues use UMD, others that are simply better at it or are more versatile (Factotums, Beguilers) should do to, and those other classes are usually better at the rest of the game than the Rogue, and thus are tier 3.

Gnaeus
2011-01-24, 04:56 PM
What I did say is that the tiers are about what classes are before the DM tries to actively help or hinder individual classes. If a DM is actively dropping exactly the magic items you need all the time, that's actively helping. Likewise, if the DM denies the magic items you need, that's actively hindering. Certainly "without equipment, or with only minimal equipment" is not it at all.

Gear dependency is a weakness, as you might not get every piece of gear you wanted in every campaign. Artificers are high up there because they can turn any gear into whatever they needed, while a class that needs very specific gear to function well is ranked lower.


Those two statements pretty much contradict each other. Either you assume that classes have access to WBL in gear that they need, or you don't. You don't.

But what the bolded statement means, in effect, is exactly what I said. If you live in Magic Mart land (where you can get any gear you want within WBL), the Rogue (A class that needs very specific gear to function well) is ranked lower (than it should otherwise be ranked, presumably). This, as I said, is a campaign assumption. If JaronK's campaign assumptions are different than your campaign assumptions, the Tiers need to be adjusted.

Gametime
2011-01-24, 07:24 PM
I think, although I don't want to presume to speak for him, that JaronK is saying the tier system assumes parity in wealth but not necessarily special selection. Artificers need money, but they can make pretty much whatever they need out of cash and raw materials. Rogues can't; they need a shop selling what they want, or they need what they want to be lootable from enemies. Neither scenario is uncommon, but it's not true to say that the two classes are being held to different standards; the artificer is more capable of sustaining his desired acquisition of items without outside support.

JaronK
2011-01-24, 08:49 PM
Those two statements pretty much contradict each other. Either you assume that classes have access to WBL in gear that they need, or you don't. You don't.

I assume WBL, because that's RAW. I don't assume you always get whatever gear you wanted, because that's not. Some games will have complete free access to whatever you want all the time. Some will play by RAW, where you get random loot with the occasional thing thrown in that you really wanted, and can go back to town sometimes to sell (at half price) what you don't want and purchase what you do want (at full price, thus reducing your total wealth), assuming that thing is available (which is not always the case, see the rules on magic item availability in various sized towns). Some games have magic marts that are few and far between with far more random loot.

I assumed none of these, but since the tiers is about how well the class functions in different scenarios, you get downgraded for not being able to handle scenarios like "speed is of the essence and you must march into enemy lands where there will be little support, so there's no time to go shopping." Remember, any class can be awesome if the scenario is set up just for them. If you constantly fight single enemies who are chargeable, a Barbarian is absolutely amazing. If you're constantly stripped of gear and forced to fight bare handed, Monks kick butt. But everyone knows that when a DM is actively helping you, you're strong. The question is how you do when the DM isn't actively doing anything to you... and thus the scenarios are a bit more random. Can you handle whatever random plot element the DM might come up with? It's not like "cut off from support behind enemy lines" is a rare fantasy trope. Frodo wasn't in friendly lands all the time with a nice Magic Mart waiting for him, after all.

And do note that in magic mart land you're still selling your gear at half price to buy at full, so your wealth goes down. WBL is the wealth available to you... if you waste it, it doesn't instantly come back. It's far better to be a character who can use lots of stuff (like a charging Barbarian who just wants the best two handed reach weapon he can find) than one who can only use very specific things (like a machine gun Warblade who must use Aptitude Splitting Great Crossbows).

But here's the thing about UMD: it's only any good in any scenario if the absolute best thing you have access to is something you need UMD for (and that's rare). Consider the following possibilities. Possibility 1: full access to any loot you want. If there's anything better than what you can get via UMD, just get that instead and don't waste the skill ranks. Possibility 2: RAW access. The DM might hand you one thing you need once in a while, but that's rare, and if you didn't have UMD he'd have handed you something else... if that something else would have been better, you've lost out by having the skill. The chances of randomly getting an actually useful scroll are infinitesimal due to the fact that most scrolls suck (magic may have some of the most powerful stuff out there, but it also has some of the lamest. What if you get a scroll of Disguise Elf?). And if you get to go shopping just once in a while? Again, if there was anything better available, just take that.

Result: it's actually pretty rare that you need UMD, and very rare that it's a big power bump. The exception is classes that are specifically designed for it like Artificers and Warlocks, who have special powers that mean they can craft whatever they want when they need. That's a whole other thing, but not relevant here.

JaronK

Lans
2011-01-24, 10:51 PM
I didn't read JaronK's last post.

The 'proper' UMD Rogue is probably T2. It being a highly optimized T4 build raises it 2 tiers.

This is the same as a commoner that sold his soul, took wild cohort, chicken infested, handle animal, net, tangle foot bags, marbles, vermin bane candle and other choices being viable in a T4 party.

dextercorvia
2011-01-24, 11:28 PM
I didn't read JaronK's last post.

The 'proper' UMD Rogue is probably T2. It being a highly optimized T4 build raises it 2 tiers.

This is the same as a commoner that sold his soul, took wild cohort, chicken infested, handle animal, net, tangle foot bags, marbles, vermin bane candle and other choices being viable in a T4 party.

If by 'proper' UMD Rogue, you mean Beguiler with extra WBL, I probably agree with that first sentence.

MeeposFire
2011-01-24, 11:30 PM
I didn't read JaronK's last post.

The 'proper' UMD Rogue is probably T2. It being a highly optimized T4 build raises it 2 tiers.

This is the same as a commoner that sold his soul, took wild cohort, chicken infested, handle animal, net, tangle foot bags, marbles, vermin bane candle and other choices being viable in a T4 party.

Isn't it more accurate to say that it is a tier4 that acts like tier 2 rather than it is tier 2? As in optimization can raise the power level of a tier 4 class up to a tier two's power level but the class is still a tier 4 class. It would be like my town home is nicer than some houses but it is still a town home and in the case of places to live and classes I think there is nothing wrong with that. If you say it changes the actual tier the tiers lose their relevance.

All of this assumes that high optimization can bring a rogue up to tier 2 which I am not saying yes or no to.

quiet1mi
2011-01-24, 11:36 PM
Tier 3 is for people who can still contribute when their main role has been compromised... Flexibility is key...

Ie: A beguiler can still solid fog, haste the party, and slow the enemy against golems with truesight...

Can the rogue still contribute when he is cut off from UMD? Besides, Warlock keeps the rogue from reaching Tier 3 as warlock is better at UMD then the Rogue... If Rogue was Tier 3 then the warlock would have to be Tier 3 as well...

Curmudgeon
2011-01-25, 01:24 AM
Can the rogue still contribute when he is cut off from UMD?
It's a balancing act. The Rogue is traditionally great at skillmonkey jobs (find and disable traps, open locks, & c.). They can leverage that skill into magical utility with minimal skill investment (just Use Magic Device), but considerable financial investment.

The Rogue can also be better than average at fighting. There are various ways of optimizing a Rogue for combat, most of them centered around sneak attack. The Rogue can also leverage skills for combat capability with Knowledge Devotion. However, optimizing for Knowledge Devotion (which will give the Rogue a guaranteed +5 to hit and +5 to damage on every hit, against everything, by about level 14) requires investment in six skills to cover all creature types, which will cut into the skillmonkey jobs the Rogue can handle.

Duncan_Ruadrik
2011-01-25, 02:08 AM
If you assume that a rogue is cut off from UMD, and can't contribute, then:

Assume the wizard is cut off from his spell book or is in an AMF

Assume the fighter lost his weapon and armor

Assume that the bard is silenced

etc etc.

You cant say that 'if x class is cut off from a/their source of power they suck and are therefore useless". That really is a very specific situation that cannot possibly cover any and all eventualities.

To use in an evaluation of the "power level" of a given class and to not compare other classes to the same (very specific) standard/situation... is very unfair and biased.

MeeposFire
2011-01-25, 02:14 AM
He is not saying they have nothing he is saying he uses the standard wealth by level which allows only so much UMD based items. That is what gives the base ranking. If you start giving the rogue more stuff then other classes should be getting more stuff and it all becomes mostly a wash. That is why I think you could say that with a ton of stuff a rogue can feel like a tier 3 for instance in a standard game, but it is still a tier 4 class. It is just a tier 4 with a lot of stuff that they do not have on their own. Heck since we are giving more stuff out the warlock becomes more powerful than the rogue since it does even better than the rogue at UMD and it can make its own stuff.

JaronK
2011-01-25, 03:36 AM
If you assume that a rogue is cut off from UMD, and can't contribute, then:

Assume the wizard is cut off from his spell book or is in an AMF

Assume the fighter lost his weapon and armor

Assume that the bard is silenced

There's a big difference between "this is a fast paced campaign where you can't go to the store after spotting which enemies you're going to fight and thus get exactly the items you needed" and "lolz, I stole your spellbook." One is a pretty darn common campaign scenario. The other, unless the Wizard was being REALLY foolish, is the DM actively nerfing you. Being behind enemy lines for a given quest or even quest line is pretty stock standard. Having only the support of a smaller town, where the exact gear you want might not always be totally available, is also standard. If a class has serious difficulties in such scenarios, that's a weakness, showing a lack of flexibility when not in their element that's a hallmark of T4 and below.

JaronK

Gnaeus
2011-01-25, 08:59 AM
I assume WBL, because that's RAW. I don't assume you always get whatever gear you wanted, because that's not. Some games will have complete free access to whatever you want all the time. Some will play by RAW, where you get random loot with the occasional thing thrown in that you really wanted, and can go back to town sometimes to sell (at half price) what you don't want and purchase what you do want (at full price, thus reducing your total wealth), assuming that thing is available (which is not always the case, see the rules on magic item availability in various sized towns). Some games have magic marts that are few and far between with far more random loot.

I assumed none of these, but I downgraded certain classes as if certain assumptions were in place anyway.

Fixed that for you. When you downgrade classes that in your opinion require certain gear to function at a certain level of effectiveness, THAT IS EXACTLY THE SAME as saying Rogue is tier 3, but tier 4 without chosen equipment or Rogue is tier 4, but tier 3 with chosen equipment.


Remember, any class can be awesome if the scenario is set up just for them.

Magic Mart land is not necessarily, or even usually, a DM stacking the deck in favor of a particular class or classes. It is just as likely (or more) to be an assumption of how the world works, or simple laziness. While our experiences disagree, and neither one of us has the data to say anything about how a majority of games work, certainly many games allow easy access to chosen equipment.


And do note that in magic mart land you're still selling your gear at half price to buy at full, so your wealth goes down

Some people have, on occasion, earned rewards in the form of coins. Coins are small round pieces of metal that you can exchange for things without having to sell the coins at half price. In many (maybe most, maybe not, can't say) D&D campaigns, a significant % of wealth comes in the form of valuables which can be exchanged for gear at full price. In many (maybe most, maybe not, can't say) campaigns, another big chunk of gear comes from magic items that are only shop fodder, (we killed the 4 assassins, and found 4 short swords +1, and 4 leather armors +1. Keep one sword, sell the rest!). Yes, an Artificer can do more with that stuff, but that is a strength of Artificer, not a weakness of all other classes. Point being, it is entirely likely that in many (maybe most, maybe not, can't say) campaigns PCs can pick most of the gear they are using, without having to pay .

Psyren
2011-01-25, 09:49 AM
Magic Mart land is not necessarily, or even usually, a DM stacking the deck in favor of a particular class or classes. It is just as likely (or more) to be an assumption of how the world works, or simple laziness. While our experiences disagree, and neither one of us has the data to say anything about how a majority of games work, certainly many games allow easy access to chosen equipment.


Yet some classes are strong whether that access is given or not. A Sorcerer or Psion will utterly decimate a Warlock or Rogue, whether they can purchase any item they could ever want, have no choice over what items their WBL gets them, or anywhere in between. That is what the tier system represents. And this comparison is not just true of combat either.



Some people have, on occasion, earned rewards in the form of coins. Coins are small round pieces of metal that you can exchange for things without having to sell the coins at half price.

You're ladling on the snark here, but at the same time betraying a significant lack of understanding of D&D.

Do you walk around with your entire paycheck in bills in your pocket? I doubt it, and the world we live in is far more civilized than Faerun, Eberron, Greyhawk, or god forbid Athas. The majority of D&D settings are barbaric places full of bandits, predators and wilderness, with small islands of civilization amidst the sea of danger. Thus the need for the barely-sane types we term adventurers. It is much better to carry a wand that can be used to keep you alive, than to carry that wand's value in sovereigns clinking in your money pouch while you walk. Unless you're a Final Fantasy Samurai, coins have absolutely no worth in terms of helping you survive.

Unless you only raid dragon's lairs, most NPCs simply aren't that liquid; if they are, they're fools, and likely won't live long enough for your PC to be able to loot them anyway.

Flawless
2011-01-25, 10:42 AM
@Gnaeus:
As far as I understand the tier system, it's not ranking classes in term of a specific campaign style, but in gernal (taking all common campaign styles into account).

So it makes no sense to say that class X is tier Y under these circumstances. Class X is always the same tier, but certain circumstances (such as any magic items available) favor it more than other classes.

Gnaeus
2011-01-25, 11:07 AM
Yet some classes are strong whether that access is given or not. A Sorcerer or Psion will utterly decimate a Warlock or Rogue, whether they can purchase any item they could ever want, have no choice over what items their WBL gets them, or anywhere in between. That is what the tier system represents. And this comparison is not just true of combat either.

Of course. It was someone else who said that rogues became T2, not me. I just said that the tier system uses campaign assumptions, based on JaronK's experiences. To the degree that his campaign assumptions do not fit your game, the Tier system is off. Some classes are more benefited by free selection than others. Those classes will fare better in certain game worlds.



You're ladling on the snark here, but at the same time betraying a significant lack of understanding of D&D.

Do you walk around with your entire paycheck in bills in your pocket? ..... if they are, they're fools, and likely won't live long enough for your PC to be able to loot them anyway.

On the contrary, I think that you are confusing your understanding of how worlds actually work with how D&D is often played. Whether it is in coin, gems, or placeholder items like the 10 MW swords that you just took off the hobgoblin leaders bodyguards, a lot of received wealth is essentially fungible, just placeholders for x amount of gp. A discussion of how economics actually works isn't relevant, when your party finishes the adventure, puts the sellable loot in a pile, calculates out its value, and everyone comes away with x/4 gp worth that they can use to buy stuff with in town. In most of the games I have played in, that is either completely handwaved (DM:"you get 95% of the resale value of those goods") or at most the object of an opposed diplomacy check. Then, depending on how magic martish the world is, the next 10 minutes are math, followed by "I am buying XYZ" or "Can I find XYZ?".

I am not saying that games should run that way. I am not saying that all games run that way. I am saying that many, perhaps most games DO run that way. I am not disputing the validity of the tier system, which is generally very good at what it does. But by lowering the rating of gear dependent classes, whether he likes it or not, whether he admits it or not, JaronK is making assumptions about how the game works. Those assumptions are no doubt 100% valid in his game, or many games, but to the degree that his assumptions are not applicable to YOUR SPECIFIC game, the tiers are off. For example:



What I said about wands of gravestrike is that they're unreliable at the lowest levels, that they take a standard action according to the DMG (and the Rules Compendium isn't clear as to whether it's restating half the DMG rules on activation, or overwriting the other half, plus the Rules Compendium isn't used in most games), that you have to have known in advance what sort of enemies you'd be fighting to have it worth getting such items at lower levels, and that you can't be guaranteed to have stuff like Wand Sheaths.

So what I was saying about stuff like gravestrike wands is that it requires the DM to be ruling very favorably towards you on a series of counts, and setting up the campaign to give you access to what you want.


Well, in my game, wand sheaths are used, and wands use the actual, RAW rules per the Rules Compendium. That wasn't a favorable ruling to help rogues, that was just how that rule is interpreted in my playgroup. JaronK's assumptions about which rules are used are, in my groups case, false. Everything that flows from those assumptions is likewise false. Does that mean that a rogue is therefore T3 in my group? Maybe, I dunno. It is certainly stronger than it would otherwise be.

Havelock
2011-01-25, 12:07 PM
UMD doesn't exactly compensate for spellcasting, it simply gives access to relatively weak magic compared to how big part of WBL it'll be worth spending on UMD-able stuff.

While it gives the Rogue access to things like wands, it gives the bard and the beguiler access to runestaffs and therefore the nicest wiz/sor spells. Druid and Cleric spells, too, should the DM allow it.

A sorc can use the same money on runestaffs to expand his repertoire to stay ahead of the runestaff spamming Beguiler. Or something else, if it gives more bang for the buck.

Antimagic field does work wonders against spellcasters, sure. Pity that you also need to be a spellcaster yourself to cast it, and getting away from the effect yourself doesn't work, unless you're a dragon or something that can wreck havoc without your spells, archmages gets the freebie area in the middle, of course.

A bard without a way to get off a joyful noise effect doesn't have the appropriate book to draw upon, or is underoptimized.

Rogue? Glass Cannons are Glass Cannons, corpses are corpes. Rogues doesn't win battles, it's buffing, battle control and debuffs that wins battles, and Rogues have precious little they can do in that department.

FMArthur
2011-01-25, 12:16 PM
If WBL wasn't limited, UMD specialists would be potentially more powerful than full casters. A Rogue with at least one copy of every spell's scroll could be played as a Spontaneous Wizard, couldn't it? That's probably within WBL actually.

dextercorvia
2011-01-25, 01:20 PM
If WBL wasn't limited, UMD specialists would be potentially more powerful than full casters. A Rogue with at least one copy of every spell's scroll could be played as a Spontaneous Wizard, couldn't it? That's probably within WBL actually.

Except that you have to rule out any spell that depends on Saving Throw, and many that depend on CL.

Also, assuming equivalent wealth, UMD is not more powerful than Casting. 24 ninth level scrolls (all of them from the PHB), cost ~81,000 + XP costs. For 81,000, a Wizard can get a ninth level Pearl of Power, letting them cast an extra ninth level spell per day indefinitely. Sure the Rogue could Nova, but a Wizard is getting his first 4-5 highest level spells per day for "free".

Lans
2011-01-25, 02:28 PM
Isn't it more accurate to say that it is a tier4 that acts like tier 2 rather than it is tier 2? As in optimization can raise the power level of a tier 4 class up to a tier two's power level but the class is still a tier 4 class. It would be like my town home is nicer than some houses but it is still a town home and in the case of places to live and classes I think there is nothing wrong with that. If you say it changes the actual tier the tiers lose their relevance.

All of this assumes that high optimization can bring a rogue up to tier 2 which I am not saying yes or no to.

No, this is a ranking of a specific build as opposed to a ranking of the class.
Like saying blaster sorcerors are T3 or SotAO Paladins riding a wombat are T4.
Or Truenamer with gate is T2, which is both a build and an extreme level limit.