Help me out here (Pathfinder balance)

[Bearpunch]

I am getting pathfinder very soon, and I hear it has similar issues with class balance as 3.5 (which I have never played, started with 4e, but I have been wanting to get into 3.5), and I just want to know that if I have an unoptimized group of mostly newbies and the party consists of tier 1 and tier 3-4 characters, how badly will the lower guys be outshined? Is it something that I will have to fix, or is it neglible if no one is really optimized?

[Bhaakon]

What levels are we talking about, and which tier 1 classes specifically?

[Bearpunch]

1 and up. I probably won't be going to super high levels, so lets say 10 max. As far as the classes, lets say:

Druid
Cleric
Fighter
Rogue
And... monk :D

[kenjigoku]

Tier 3 characters should be able to have fun even with a Tier 1, assuming not optimized. Tier 4's will feel kinda crappy since the Tier 1 can do what they do but better and the Tier 3's may be able to do what they do and possibly better.

If your group looks like

Wizard
Fighter
Paladin
Rogue
Ranger

I wouldn't worry too much. Otherwise, its all about how you run it.

EDIT:



1 and up. I probably won't be going to super high levels, so lets say 10 max. As far as the classes, lets say:

Druid
Cleric
Fighter
Rogue
And... monk :D


That is two tier 1's. Pathfinder nerfed the druid, and clerics need to be optimized to be broken. Fighter is okay, but nothing to write home about. May want to give him a few more skill points like 4+INT so he can feel somewhat useful. Monk as always is terrible without massive optimization. The monk WILL feel overwhelmed by level 10 unless you help him out. Steer him towards a Monk's Belt for sure.

Also remember the Druid's Animal Companion can pretty much double as a fighter. If I were DMing this game and using STRICT pathfinder gear rules. I would skew the magic items towards this priority Monk > Fighter > Rogue > Cleric > Druid.

Also remember that casters break the action economy, especially the druid, he is basically playing two characters. Make sure that each turn the other players get is worth the "two" turns the druid is getting. Mobility is key for melee classes but make sure that the fighter, rogue, and monk all have ranged equipment.

If you feel the Monk is falling being feel free to invent magic items that may "grant" feats like Zen Archery to help the monks utility.

Good luck

EDIT: Again

By level 10 most of the classes are somewhat balanced-ish. If it goes beyond that then the Tier's start to matter more. The above still holds.

[Bearpunch]

What if somebody had their heart set on Monk or Barbarian or Samurai?

[Curious]

What if somebody had their heart set on Monk or Barbarian or Samurai?

Monk is easy, get him to play this:


Hungry Ghost (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/monk/archetypes/paizo---monk-archetypes/hungry-ghost-monk), Qinggong (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/monk/archetypes/paizo---monk-archetypes/qinggong-monk) monk. Trade Tongue of the Sun and Moon (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/monk#TOC-Tongue-of-the-Sun-and-Moon-Ex-) for Cold Ice Strike (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/c/cold-ice-strike), trade High Jump (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/monk#TOC-High-Jump-Ex-) for Gaseous Form (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/g/gaseous-form), take the Dimensional feats on the PFSRD up to Dimensional Dervish (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/dimensional-dervish), grab the Spider Step (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/spider-step) and Cloud Step (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/cloud-step) feats, get a keen guided (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/magic-weapons/magic-weapons-non-core/weapon-property---guided) weapon. Pick up a few style feats, such as Dragon (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/dragon-style-combat) or Crane (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/crane-wing-combat) style.

Guided adds Wis to damage and to hit in place of Str, Dimensional Dervish allows you to move + full attack, Spider Step allows you to run across water or up walls, cloud Step allows you to run across the air, Gaseous Form lets you go through walls, Cold Ice Strike is a swift action 15d6 attack, Hungry Ghost allows you to regain ki on a crit or kill. Be human.

[kenjigoku]

Monk is easy, get him to play this:

See but now you have gone and took a bunch of new players and tossed them into the terrible world of 3.x optimization.

Read my above post, it should help prevent the issue of your players needing to become 3.x Private Investigators to play the game and have some fun.

[Bearpunch]

That sounds preeeeetty nice. So I am assuming that could play alongside wizard moderately well?

[kenjigoku]

That sounds preeeeetty nice. So I am assuming that could play alongside wizard moderately well?

Yes and no. For HP damage the Monk wins. Assuming the wizard is allowed similar optimization save-or-dies and save-or-sucks come into play. Your wizard can easy shut down a combat with a few well placed spells and a good roll or two.

Where is the wizard coming in though? You mentioned a Druid and Cleric :P

[Bearpunch]

Yeah, I heard the Druid was nerfed, but I thought I read somewhere it was tier 2 or 3 now, I don't know where. The cleric I am not too worried about, because the only guy that plays a cleric generally understands party balance.

I don't really WANT anyone to play monk because I played two sessions of 3.5 and my friend played a monk, and he did a total of like 25 damage.

But how about Barbarians? Are they better than monks? Because I love the concept of Barbarians.


I know this is kind of bad DMing, but I was thinking of banning Wizards for the first few sessions until I get my bearings, considering I have only Dmed 4e and All Flesh Must Be Eaten. Not to mention I have heard some terrible horror stories about Wizards. Am I just freaking out or are they fine lowly optimized?

[kenjigoku]

I know this is kind of bad DMing, but I was thinking of banning Wizards for the first few sessions until I get my bearings, considering I have only Dmed 4e and All Flesh Must Be Eaten. Not to mention I have heard some terrible horror stories about Wizards. Am I just freaking out or are they fine lowly optimized?

It is a game, if you feel you can't handle a wizard let your friend know and ban it. 4th ed is nothing like 3.x so be prepared fir anything. Low optimization means more party death, but hey death scare is where the fun is.

Let him play a Monk. Make sure you look up how to gear one and give it to him. I have a monk in a level 16+ game and he is JUST FINE with a bunch of T1's. He is by far the worst, but when needed he can bring some game.

If you feel your player can handle a monk, suggest the barbarian though IMO its not much better. The end result with physical damage is its limited and so are the number of attacks you get. Either way it will be underwhelming.

Any low optimized party is fun if everyone plays trying to have fun and overcome challenges.

Good luck :)

[Curious]

Yeah, I heard the Druid was nerfed, but I thought I read somewhere it was tier 2 or 3 now, I don't know where. The cleric I am not too worried about, because the only guy that plays a cleric generally understands party balance.

I don't really WANT anyone to play monk because I played two sessions of 3.5 and my friend played a monk, and he did a total of like 25 damage.

But how about Barbarians? Are they better than monks? Because I love the concept of Barbarians.


I know this is kind of bad DMing, but I was thinking of banning Wizards for the first few sessions until I get my bearings, considering I have only Dmed 4e and All Flesh Must Be Eaten. Not to mention I have heard some terrible horror stories about Wizards. Am I just freaking out or are they fine lowly optimized?

Druids are still tier 1, they are just a bit less powerful.

If your group is low-op, there probably won't be a problem. Even if the wizard does turn out to be some kind of master optimizer, as long as he uses his power to buff and batman around everything should be fine.

[Bearpunch]

Thanks guys, I think I will prevent Wizards JUST until I read all of their spells and see how to wrap around the possible immense power. Im so used to and comfy with 4e that I think I might be overwhelmed at first. But I will keep all of your advices in mind, and I will try to balance the party as best as I can, I feel better about it now. Thanks.

[kenjigoku]

At level 10 wizards are stuck with 5-th level spells. There is nothing too dangerous at that level and its tough to pull of any nasty tricks.

Your welcome and have fun.

[Big Fau]

In all honesty, the tiers are irrelevant unless we know what level of system mastery your fellow players are at. If everyone in the group leans towards the lower end of system mastery, tiers should not mean anything unless something drastic happens. If someone in your group is on the other end of the spectrum from the rest of the group, the tiers will matter and it can cause disruption.

3.X's character tiers are not an accurate measure of power, they are a measure of potential. While it's true that high-tier classes are powerful, that power is meaningless unless the potential is played to the level desired.

So unless someone in your group has a habit of outshining everyone regardless of what class he is playing, you really shouldn't have a problem.


At level 10 wizards are stuck with 5-th level spells. There is nothing too dangerous at that level and its tough to pull of any nasty tricks.

This, however, is a blatant lie. At 9th level, Wizards gain access to Scry-and-Die tactics. No campaign is safe from that character as long as the plot relies on an objective within 900+ miles of the Wizard and is not properly shielded. This is not counting the numerous encounter-ending abilities and plot havoc the class is capable of (such as 60% of the Divinations school). This remains largely true even in Pathfinder, as spells were not given proper nerfing towards the 5th+ levels.

Again, potential power comes into play. None of that matters unless the player knows how to pull it off.

[JadePhoenix]

This, however, is a blatant lie. At 9th level, Wizards gain access to Scry-and-Die tactics. No campaign is safe from that character as long as the plot relies on an objective within 900+ miles of the Wizard and is not properly shielded. This is not counting the numerous encounter-ending abilities and plot havoc the class is capable of (such as 60% of the Divinations school). This remains largely true even in Pathfinder, as spells were not given proper nerfing towards the 5th+ levels.

I really can't agree with this point of view.
At 9th level, all reasonable targets should be properly protected against divination and teleportation.
Also, there are plenty of stories apart from "get to X to kill Y".
Investigation stories get really interesting once you get divinations into it. It's like CSI with sword & sorcery!
Escort missions are also interesting. Protect the prince from the assassionation attempt, while travelling through the Forest of Trolls.
Also, put them on a timer. When you only get a few hours to do stuff, divininations are not an option and you can never have too much teleports.

The problem arises when people design adventures for 10th level characters as if they were beefed up 1st level characters. Well, people... they are not. :smallcool:

[Blisstake]

I pretty much agree with Big Fau here: the tiers are far more relevant at higher levels of play.

I have one group of players that is usually unoptimized, and they've never really had problems with class balance using core classes with the exception of the druid. It's slightly worse in PF, but I would recommend suggesting that whoever is playing a druid selects a Domain for "Nature's Bond" rater than an animal companion, just to save you and possibly your players a massive headache.

[Infernalbargain]

Yeah, try to push the Druid to pick a domain over a companion and try to push the monk to like a barbarian. Beyond that, at low-op you should be fine.

[Lycar]

I am getting pathfinder very soon, and I hear it has similar issues with class balance as 3.5 (which I have never played, started with 4e, but I have been wanting to get into 3.5), and I just want to know that if I have an unoptimized group of mostly newbies and the party consists of tier 1 and tier 3-4 characters, how badly will the lower guys be outshined? Is it something that I will have to fix, or is it neglible if no one is really optimized?

From what I can tell so far, Melee and Magic are still playing two different games in PF, although the divide got a bit smaller. Also, melee classes are more balanced with each other. Barbarians and Rogues get neat abilities as compared to 3.x and Fighters... well, in PF both the Advanced Players Guide as well as Ultimate Combat add a number of archetyües (alternate class versions) and feats that can really make or break a Fighter, depending on what he wants to focus at.

If the Rogue goes for massive damage via Sneak Attack, maybe the Fighter may want to look into combat maneuvers such as Drag or Reposition (check the SRD, these are from the APG) to set up flanks for the Rogue, especially since tumbling no longer is a failsafe way to maneuver across the battlefield.

[navar100]

If you're really, really bothered by the druid having an animal companion, then house rule the druid must take the domain option.

[Mr. Zolrane]

For the monk, the Weapon Adept archetype is quite nice if you use the Seven-Branched Sword. The only drawback of any real consequence is that you get evasion later and don't get improved evasion at all. With the free Weapon Specialization, your 7B Sword will be superior to your unarmed damage until 16th Level (base minimum 3 vs 2 and base average 7.5 vs 7; very minor differences but they're there, and they're even greater at lower levels).

[Kenneth]

I am getting pathfinder very soon, and I hear it has similar issues with class balance as 3.5 (which I have never played, started with 4e, but I have been wanting to get into 3.5), and I just want to know that if I have an unoptimized group of mostly newbies and the party consists of tier 1 and tier 3-4 characters, how badly will the lower guys be outshined? Is it something that I will have to fix, or is it neglible if no one is really optimized?

It depends on how much you group optimizes. ive foudn that in a real life table setting. (this is all in my experiences) that the majority of peopel don't care nor do they follow this 'tier' business JaronK made up. while the 'tiers' themselves have soem truth to them. it actually doens'y mean if you are a monk you are going to suck next to the cleric and wizard. it just means that when it comes down to option you DON'T have as many as the cleric or wizard. while there are going to be some GiTPers that have this weird love of the 'tier' system. most people can (nad have for decades) played with them even being a thing. if you are afraid of 'tioer's messing up game and making the game unfun to play for other player.s I sorry to be a bit brunt here, but maybe any of teh d20 rulesets based games are just not for you.

IF you play games liek me where nul-optimization is in place, then the game will be a fun time for all players and every sort of concept you can think of.

[navar100]

It depends on how much you group optimizes. ive foudn that in a real life table setting. (this is all in my experiences) that the majority of peopel don't care nor do they follow this 'tier' business JaronK made up. while the 'tiers' themselves have soem truth to them. it actually doens'y mean if you are a monk you are going to suck next to the cleric and wizard. it just means that when it comes down to option you DON'T have as many as the cleric or wizard. while there are going to be some GiTPers that have this weird love of the 'tier' system. most people can (nad have for decades) played with them even being a thing. if you are afraid of 'tioer's messing up game and making the game unfun to play for other player.s I sorry to be a bit brunt here, but maybe any of teh d20 rulesets based games are just not for you.

IF you play games liek me where nul-optimization is in place, then the game will be a fun time for all players and every sort of concept you can think of.

Indeed. Once people realize what a false god the Tier system is, they can go back to enjoying their games like they used to before it was created. The Tier system never was a means to direct you how to play the game. You don't commit some grievous sin by ignoring it. All it tells you is that the higher the tier you go, the more flexibility a character has to be able to do stuff. Be mindful of it if you must, but don't be a slave to it. If you resent being mindful and absolutely refuse to ignore the tier system, then admit to yourself 3E/Pathfinder is just not for you already and go play something else.

[Gavinfoxx]

Uhm. You all do know that the tier system does hold optimization levels constant? And it's meant to be a useful tool for GM's to predict possible utility and game breaking capability of class features?

[Curious]

Uhm. You all do know that the tier system does hold optimization levels constant? And it's meant to be a useful tool for GM's to predict possible utility and game breaking capability of class features?

No one ever does. :smallsigh:

[Gavinfoxx]

Also, it can make for fun games! "You all are Tier 5 or Nerfed Tier 4 Kobolds. The Monster Manual Kobolds, if you are very very nice I'll maybe give you access to the more awesome kobold stuff from elsewhere. Figure out a way to survive!"

[Curious]

Also, it can make for fun games! "You all are Tier 5 or Nerfed Tier 4 Kobolds. The Monster Manual Kobolds, if you are very very nice I'll maybe give you access to the more awesome kobold stuff from elsewhere. Figure out a way to survive!"

Actually, I remember an awesome campaign journal from somewhere that followed a tier 6 Goblin through the Underdark (Can't remember if he was an expert or a warrior), dodging trolls and fighting duergar. I wish I could find that again.

[Kenneth]

Indeed. Once people realize what a false god the Tier system is, they can go back to enjoying their games like they used to before it was created. The Tier system never was a means to direct you how to play the game. You don't commit some grievous sin by ignoring it. All it tells you is that the higher the tier you go, the more flexibility a character has to be able to do stuff. Be mindful of it if you must, but don't be a slave to it. If you resent being mindful and absolutely refuse to ignore the tier system, then admit to yourself 3E/Pathfinder is just not for you already and go play something else.

I seriously just think i feel in love with navar... if only he had said something along the lines of 'Kenneth is right here' or 'Indeed Kenneht hit the nail on the head' then id know for sure.

[SowZ]

Another bone you can throw is to give casters 25 Point Buy and others 32. This helps with balance only a little in that it doesn't weaken the casters but it does strengthen the martial classes some. Also, don't roll for HP. Give everyone max HP or average HP. Always hated that and it sucks when the Fighter has less HP than a d8 class like the Cleric or Druid.

Further, if the monk uses weapons give him masterwork weapons to start with. It doesn't help much and everyone will get them soon enough, but it should be a little nice level one to actually get your whole strength mod as a bonus to hit starting out.

I second getting the druid not to have an animal companion. As long as the wizard doesn't know how to exploit spells I think that will be fine. First time I played there was a Barbarian, a Rogue, a Psionic Warrior, a Ranger, and I was a Sorcerer. Granted, we were in two 'tiers' of each other, but it didn't really come into play much. We all had our moments to shine and had weaknesses to exploit. Some were stronger than the others. But we were all having so much fun we didn't pay much attention. And if the wizard comes up with clever solutions with his spells? Cool. Maybe the rogue will do the same next session. Whatever.

You should all have lots of fun with Pathfinder and you don't have as much of a problem with dead levels.

[navar100]

As I mentioned in another thread of similar topic, if you are enraged by 3E magic and combat Pathfinder does nothing to satiate your anger. 4E is waiting for you. However, Pathfinder did not ignore the complaints. It made its changes I think are overall better.

Magic:

Save or die is mostly gone. Phantasmal Killer is still there but save or die is now save or take 10 damage per caster level. That's still potent against the lower HD classes but hearty warriors can withstand a bad luck saving throw despite it being fortitude.

Troubling lower level spells got nerfed but not to uselessness. Ray Of Enfeeblement now has a fortitude save for half. Glitterdust allows a save each round to end the blindness. Grease no longer causes flat-footedness.

Spells that used to provide immunity to something now instead provide a bonus to your saving throw for them. There still might be an immunity here and there but not much.

Sorcerers get bloodlines, increasing their power from 3E due to more spells known and class features. This is actually a good thing because it means a sorcerer has to give up substantial stuff to want to go into a prestige class. The class encourages you to stay in sorcerer for 20 levels.

Clerics lose heavy armor. Divine Power does not stack with Divine Favor since both now give luck bonuses, and doesn't increase strength or BAB, though does allow an extra attack on a full attack. Domain abilities are now useful whatever the domain. Channeling Energy allows healing at a range and less need for Cure Wounds. Turn Undead is a feat. That means if the campaign is not heavy in undead, clerics don't lose a class feature. However, if undead is prevalent enough to warrant the feat, it actually works. It is no longer based on undead HD so it doesn't have diminished returns as you increase in level. Clerics are a wash in terms of power increase/nerf from 3E.

Combat:

Warrior classes got a lot of love.

Paladin wins the trophy with more versatile Lay On Hands and Smite Evil no longer being a one trick one round wonder. When you smite, you SMITE! In addition, you can have a bonded weapon instead of a bonded animal so you don't lose a class feature when adventuring in mountains, swamps, and dungeons.

Fighters effectively get a feat every level. They can swap out feats that become obsolete. They don't lose speed for wearing heavy armor and can use more of their Dexterity modifier for AC. Fighters have the best AC. They get built in bonuses to hit and damage for weapon groups, so weapon specialization isn't necessary but nice to have anyway if you want it. They get a little boost to save vs fear. Fighters have real class features, more than just feats.

Polymorphing/Wildshape is nerfed. You now get fixed enhancement to ability score and specific extra abilities. If you are a druid who wants to fight while wildshaped, you cannot dump Strength and Dexterity. They matter.

General:

Multiclassing and Prestige Classes are fine, but you are encouraged to stay single class. There are no dead levels for any class, though personal opinion second level sorcerer comes really close. All classes are worth playing to 20th level. You get a preferred class bonus of extra skill points or hit points. Splat books offer archetypes allowing for alternative class features, some of which simulate 3E prestige classes so less are "needed". I will agree allowing human sorcerers extra spells known every level instead of a skill point or hit points as an alternate favored class feature is probably too much. Pathfinder is not perfect.

If there is anything in Pathfinder that causes irritation it will be in the feats. Many 3E feats were changed. Power Attack is a controversy. It's now a set penalty for a set bonus. I think it's an ok change. Two-handed weapons still get the larger damage bonus at a -1/+3 exchange rate, good for them, but now one-handed weapons get the -1/+2 exchange rate, so it's worth taking. With some useful shield feats, sword and shield style is a good option; two-handed weapons no longer dominate fighting, which I find a good thing. Two-weapon style probably still favors sneak attack, but I don't think it's so bad without it if you like the concept.

Another main contusion is some styles like tripping got broken up. You need two feats in Pathfinder to do what one feat did in 3E. It's a design choice Pathfinder took. If this bothers you enough, no harm is done using the original 3E feats.