PF Class Tiers

[Xander96]

I've been hearing a lot about this tier system regarding the classes. Is there a sticky of this post somewhere for reference? I'd be interested to read about this.

[Tebryn]

It's a trap. A trap that exists mostly on the internet where the game is removed from the human element which invalidates the vast majority of anything regarding the Teir System. It's good on paper but not in practical application. Do not buy into it and enjoy the game.

[NinjaStylerobot]

Seriously man, dont venture into the void of piontless bland statistics that apperantly make it impossible for you to play anything that doesn't do 50% more damage because BLABLABLABLABLA.

Yes its true that spellcasters are more powerfull. Just trust your gut.

[Helldog]

http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=1389.msg12201#msg12201
That's the only PF tier system that I know.

As for the posts above: Tier system just educates the DM about simple facts. What the DM will do with this knowledge is up to him. If he doesn't need it, good for him. If he's asking about it (like the OP) then you should explain and not say "It's useless because I say so".

[Tebryn]

Yes its true that spellcasters are more powerfull. Just trust your gut.

This isn't really even true. Spellcasters have the ability to be more powerful. Spellcasters are not more powerful right out the box than any other class. It's about the player, not the class. The Tier System isn't even a play model to begin. It's a guide on high optimized play where classes fall. People need to stop using it as some method that the game is always played at.

[Ceaon]

IMHO, ignorance isn't better than knowledge, even though the knowledge may not be perfect.

Check these threads and decide for yourself what to make of it.

http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=13392.0
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=207227
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=194880

Edit:
People need to stop using it as some method that the game is always played at.
This I can agree more with than your previous post! Even though the tier system hopes to measure versatility regardless of optimization, differences between classes become way more pronounced at higher levels and higher levels of optimization.

[Mr. Zolrane]

It's a trap. A trap that exists mostly on the internet where the game is removed from the human element which invalidates the vast majority of anything regarding the Teir System. It's good on paper but not in practical application. Do not buy into it and enjoy the game.

I go back and forth on this point. I wouldn't go as far as to say it's a trap to be avoided at all costs, but the human element does change things, mainly based on how good of an optimizer the humans in question are and how willing the optimizers are to use their powers for evil.

To answer the OP's question, in short this (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5293), made by our very own JaronK.

TL; DR version, it's a mapping out of the stratification of the classes in 3.5. When applied to Pathfinder it's generally more speculative as there is no official list to my knowledge and things have indeed changed (mostly for the better IMO, but that's another thread) and the people referring to it may or may not fully grasp JaronK's guidelines for classification.

Long story short, while again, I wouldn't go nearly as far as Tebryn does in opposition to it, I find a kernel of truth in his statement: don't let it get in the way of enjoying a low-tier class: they can and should be enjoyed. I'm playing a monk right now. A Pathfinder monk, mind you, which is far better than its 3.5 counterpart, but still generally agreed upon to be no better than a solid Tier 4 if built halfway-intelligently. And guess what? He's a blast to play, despite being in a party with a bard, a rogue a magus and an alchemist; all higher-tier classes.

^EDIT: Ninja'd :P

[Doc Roc]

::sighs::

If you are a GM, the Tier system is something you must know, because it will affect what kind of monsters you bring to bear. A Hezrou is simply deadly to many parties, for example, and you need to know about the tier system to really understand why.

The Tier System is an intellectual model. A spinning orrery, in a sense, a predictive mechanism. Except instead of displaying the arc of motion, it portrays an image of all the motions. The fact that you look down at your anecdotal example, where your beloved human factors didn't do all the things that human factors live to do?

And you don't see a perfect mapping to this smoothed and amalgamated image of potential movement?

That does not invalidate it.

[Helldog]

http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=13392.0
I've linked to the more recent version. Here: http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=1389.msg12201#msg12201


This isn't really even true. Spellcasters have the ability to be more powerful. Spellcasters are not more powerful right out the box than any other class. It's about the player, not the class. The Tier System isn't even a play model to begin. It's a guide on high optimized play where classes fall. People need to stop using it as some method that the game is always played at.
People don't use it as a method. And it isn't even supposed to be used as a method.

[D@rK-SePHiRoTH-]

Actually the tier system values the amount of effective solutions to problems given by classes

Briefly, a Wizard has a spell for everything. He can use his magic for movements, exploration, sneak, skills, social interaction, combat.
A Fighter is only able to contribute in the combat area, and his abilities are not outshining what a wizard can do with his spells if he so wants (the wizard gets in fact more powerful)
The wizard if willing can make a good fighter, while the fighter will never be able to do what wizards do.

This is what the tier system is about.

[Doc Roc]

People don't use it as a method. And it isn't even supposed to be used as a method.

Dear Helldog,
I write to you now to notify you of approbation. The Royal Order of Brosaic Brahs sees fit to recognize you, and thus elevate you within its peerage. We here by judge it your right to use the title Brötunn, denoting your giant competence.

Cordially
Jake K.

[Laniius]

This (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?PHPSESSID=ltpp94cetunksh62ctu6l1k5t1&topic=5293) is the tier system for 3.5. It scans pretty closeley to that for pathfinder. Here's (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=214108) one attempt.

Here' s (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=4938.0) some more information.

With that, tiers are guidelines and theories. Depending on how your games play, it may very well be different. For instance, mine are very combat heavy. Those with full BAB come up a little bit, and things like rogues and such go down a little, in my games.

Here's what the guy who (assumably with help) came up with the idea of the tier system had to say

==
Q: So what exactly is this system measuring? Raw Power? Then why is the Barbarian lower than the Duskblade, when the Barbarian clearly does more damage?

A: The Tier System is not specifically ranking Power or Versitility (though those are what ends up being the big factors). It's ranking the ability of a class to achieve what you want in any given situation. Highly versitile classes will be more likely to efficiently apply what power they have to the situation, while very powerful classes will be able to REALLY help in specific situations. Classes that are both versitile and powerful will very easily get what they want by being very likely to have a very powerful solution to the current problem. This is what matters most for balance.
==

and here's an example of his sample situations.

==
Situation 1: A Black Dragon has been plaguing an area, and he lives in a trap filled cave. Deal with him.

Situation 2: You have been tasked by a nearby country with making contact with the leader of the underground slave resistance of an evil tyranical city state, and get him to trust you.

Situation 3: A huge army of Orcs is approaching the city, and should be here in a week or so. Help the city prepare for war.
==


It isn't (or wasn't supposed to be) about what classes are "better" or "more fun"; it was about what classes had more options to bring to the table. It also assumes low-to-average optimization; with great optimization some classes shine, and some are very hard to mess up.

Another thing is that the spellcasting classes, at least the prepared ones in ongoing games, started powerful and get more powerful the more books are published. So too does every other character with more options for gear and feats, but feats are permanent (in most cases) and the casters can (usually) take advantage of gear too. Prepared casters can change their spells memorized on a daily or more basis, clerics and druids automatically have access to their entire spell list, and for other prepared casters new spells are only some gold and time away. Even sponataneous casters have the ability to switch out their spells known as they level.

One small fix that I might consider implementing would be to allow people to swap out feats as they level; you run into a problem with this in that the best feats have prereq's in most cases. Spells don't, except for level and stat.

Anyway...

Though it's important to remember that it's a game. More importantly, it's not (usually) a PvP game. If your character concept works better with a monk than a wizard or even a fighter, go with it, and don't worry. Just be aware that sometimes you may feel like you aren't contributing much.

[Hiro Protagonest]

Must. Restrain. From. Referencing. Stormwind. And Oberoni as well.

This isn't really even true. Spellcasters have the ability to be more powerful. Spellcasters are not more powerful right out the box than any other class. It's about the player, not the class. The Tier System isn't even a play model to begin. It's a guide on high optimized play where classes fall. People need to stop using it as some method that the game is always played at.

What's better at level 10, a sword n' board fighter attacking for 1d8+8 damage or so from strength and weapon, or a wizard dealing 10d6, 5d6 minimum, damage to a bunch of enemies with a Fireball?

Let's assume evoker (ban enchantment and necromancy) and high int. That's five Fireballs, or, since you're thinking you probably won't need that many, three Fireballs (or Lightning Bolts if the DM has been throwing fire-resistant monsters), a Displacement for the fighter (he needs a crutch) or maybe the rogue, and a Fly. Your second level spell slots are two blurs, two Invisibilities, and a couple of Scorching Rays that still deal more damage per round than the fighter does.

And that's without your 4th and 5th level spell slots.

[Helldog]

Dear Helldog,
I write to you now to notify you of approbation. The Royal Order of Brosaic Brahs sees fit to recognize you, and thus elevate you within its peerage. We here by judge it your right to use the title Brötunn, denoting your giant competence.

Cordially
Jake K.
Thank you... I guess? :smallconfused:

[Doc Roc]

Thank you... I guess? :smallconfused:

You are welcome, we are honored.

[Helldog]

You wouldn't mind if I sig it, would you? (although I already did...)

[NinjaStylerobot]

What's better at level 10, a sword n' board fighter attacking for 1d8+8 damage or so from strength and weapon, or a wizard dealing 10d6, 5d6 minimum, damage to a bunch of enemies with a Fireball?


The guy who is having fun because he doesn't care?

[Helldog]

The guy who is having fun because he doesn't care?
What if he cares and doesn't have fun because of it?

[NinjaStylerobot]

What if he cares and doesn't have fun because of it?

Mkay. That just does not happen to be me or my gaming group.

Ignorance is bliss when thinking about stuff like optimization.

[Helldog]

Mkay. That just does not happen to be me or my gaming group.

Ignorance is bliss when thinking about stuff like optimization.
Remember, not everyone plays the way you do. Wasn't that kinda your argument in that debate with Polarity/Gimp/IP Proofing?

[Blisstake]

::sighs::

If you are a GM, the Tier system is something you must know, because it will affect what kind of monsters you bring to bear. A Hezrou is simply deadly to many parties, for example, and you need to know about the tier system to really understand why.

I disagree with you, if only because you say it's necesary for a GM to know. This is absolutely not true for certain gaming groups, depending on both the optimization levels of the PCs and how the DM plays their opponents. I've been gaming for years, including before the tier system was widely known to me. While I understand how the system works, and why particular classes belong where they are, I don't believe understanding it made me any better of a GM for my particular game session.

Let's use an example. Say the party all has high saves, energy protection and good SR, and the DM puts them against a high level wizard. Does that mean a wizard will still be effective against them? Well the answer is I have no idea; it completely depends on the gaming group. The tier system would dictate that the opponent would be an effective challenge regardless of their strengths due to the fact that wizards are versatile enough that they have plenty of tools to use when save-or-dies or blasting won't work. However, just because a wizard can do something, does not mean that she will. The DM could have her prepare only meta-magic enhanced fireballs for all I know, and be a complete cakewalk, or she can summon hordes of enemies, trap the characters in forcecages and avoid their attacks with displacement, stoneskin, flight, and contingent dimension doors adn be impossible for them to face.

The most important thing about DMs balancing enemies against the party is knowing what their parties strengths and weaknesses are, and setting according challenges against them. What's important for this to work is understanding the character's potential rather than the potential of each class. In higher level play, as the two being to approach becoming the same thing, then it definitely becomes necesary for the DM to have a good understanding of the tier system. But until then, I think they're far better using common sense to understand the potential of the individual characters rather than what the class is capable of.

[nyarlathotep]

Mkay. That just does not happen to be me or my gaming group.

Ignorance is bliss when thinking about stuff like optimization.

If you don't care about the rules or effectiveness why are you playing 3.5 D&D? Why aren't you just freeform roleplaying or if you much have some rules RISUS or 4th edition D&D?


I disagree with you, if only because you say it's necesary for a GM to know. This is absolutely not true for certain gaming groups, depending on both the optimization levels of the PCs and how the DM plays their opponents. I've been gaming for years, including before the tier system was widely known to me. While I understand how the system works, and why particular classes belong where they are, I don't believe understanding it made me any better of a GM for my particular game session.


You don't need to know the tier system proper but you should know a lot of the underlying principles. So you should know why incorporeal monsters are hard for a full martial team, why enemies with ability damage are difficult to beat without a cleric or resistances, so forth and so on. You need to be able to gauge what sort of scenarios your players can deal with and why they can or cannot deal with them so that you can make accommodations.

[Helldog]

Tier system is helpful. Nuff said.

[Big Fau]

The guy who is having fun because he doesn't care?

It's OK to have fun, but it's important to understand the strengths and weaknesses of the system. The Tier System highlights several strengths and weaknesses of each class, but it does not go into depth for most of those classes. The system as written by JaronK is largely incomplete (it doesn't list every class, it just lists sample classes that fall into each tier).

For a more in-depth look, one would need to read up on the "Why Tier Xs are in Tier X" threads. They haven't been updated in forever, but they do exist.

[Engine]

The tier system would dictate that the opponent would be an effective challenge regardless of their strengths due to the fact that wizards are versatile enough that they have plenty of tools to use when save-or-dies or blasting won't work. However, just because a wizard can do something, does not mean that she will.

I would say that you didn't understand the Tier System quite well, at least in my opinion. As I see it, the Tier System do not dictate that a Wizard is an effective challenge regardless of the party's strength. It says that a Wizard is a highly versatile class that could do a lot of things.


Tier 1: Capable of doing absolutely everything, often better than classes that specialize in that thing. Often capable of solving encounters with a single mechanical ability and little thought from the player. Has world changing powers at high levels. These guys, if played well, can break a campaign and can be very hard to challenge without extreme DM fiat, especially if Tier 3s and below are in the party.

I read "capable" and "can" not "will". A Tier 1 class is highly versatile. That's what the Tier System says, not that a Tier 1 class is always an effective challenge. It requires a good player (or a good DM) to be exceptionally powerful, the Tier System just says that the potential to be a campaign breaking class is there and a DM should be aware of that.

[Benly]

The tier system is a tool to let a DM or player spot possible problem spots before they arise. I don't know of anyone who says you should only play tier 1 or 2 classes - most players seem to think tier 3 is the most fun overall. All it really comes down to is "there is a significant mechanical gap between these two classes, if you have them in the same party you need to be prepared to deal with the possible consequences of that gap." No more, no less.

When people say "we should houserule to bring the monk up to Tier 3", it's not saying that people who play monks are doing badwrongfun, it's because bringing monks up to tier 3 makes it easier to deal with that gap without having situations where a player who wanted to be a kung fu badass spends the entire session whiffing his attacks and goes home unsatisfied at the end of the night.

[Mystify]

The tiers exist, whether or not you look at the tier system. Its not creating anything, its analyzing the system, and can give a warning that something may become problematic. I have seen groups where the tiers where unmatched, and it became a real issue. We had never even heard of the tier system, but we could notice the difference in the sessions.
Understanding it can also help a group with a wider variety of optimizations work together. If the optimizers are playing wizards and the people who throw things together are playing scouts and fighters, the disparity is colossal. When you do it in reverse, the party operates at a more similar level.
Similarly, simply mixing a wizard and cleric in with a group of tier 4s does not meant they will dominate. It means they have the potential to. If the players use the tier 1s in a certain manner, they can coexist happily. The wizard in the last campaign I ran didn't overshadow the rest of the party, but he was played very casually and did not meet most of the potential for a wizard. The main thing he cared about was continuous flight, which tells you alot about his level of optimization. We also had a person who heavily optimized their cleric... for healing. A healbot, no matter how well optimized, will not overshadow the rest of the party, nor make anyone feel left out.
In yet another group I played with, I decided to be a druid, and kinda casually dominated everything.
Just because classes have the potential to be in a certain tier does not mean that they will be played to that potential. But that potential does exist, whether or not you read the tier system, and if you don't pay attention to it then it can catch you blindsided. Know your players, know their playstyles and levels of optimization, and you can tell if their tier will fit in with the rest of the party.

[Blisstake]

You don't need to know the tier system proper but you should know a lot of the underlying principles. So you should know why incorporeal monsters are hard for a full martial team, why enemies with ability damage are difficult to beat without a cleric or resistances, so forth and so on. You need to be able to gauge what sort of scenarios your players can deal with and why they can or cannot deal with them so that you can make accommodations.

Yep! That's a good way of putting it, and what I was trying to get at :smalltongue:


I would say that you didn't understand the Tier System quite well, at least in my opinion. As I see it, the Tier System do not dictate that a Wizard is an effective challenge regardless of the party's strength. It says that a Wizard is a highly versatile class that could do a lot of things.

Yes, I am well aware of this, bt I responding directly to a claim that understanding the Tier system was necesary for the sake of creating effective challenges for the party, which is why it was prevalent in my argument. I understand exactly what the Tier List measures, but I believe that versatility isn't an indication of power if it isn't used (which sometimes is the case).

[Engine]

Yes, I am well aware of this, bt I responding directly to a claim that understanding the Tier system was necesary for the sake of creating effective challenges for the party, which is why it was prevalent in my argument. I understand exactly what the Tier List measures, but I believe that versatility isn't an indication of power if it isn't used (which sometimes is the case).

Well, I would say that understanding that a Wizard has the potential to be way more powerful than a Fighter is necessary to create effective challenges. You could call it "common sense", the Tier System is just "common sense" in an organized and understandable fashion.

[Hiro Protagonest]

The guy who is having fun because he doesn't care?

Well, since it's a blaster wizard, the fighter can't expect any buffs from him. If the wizard was an experienced player that knew the tier system, he would know well enough to play GOD and turn the fighter into Beowulf and the enemy into a redshirt rather than just blast and have the fighter say "aww, you didn't leave any for me!".

The best the fighter can expect is continuous heals and buffs from the cleric. But then while the fighter has fun, the cleric has turned into the "I heal the fighter... again". And that leads to the dread of having to play the healer role.

[Blisstake]

Well, I would say that understanding that a Wizard has the potential to be way more powerful than a Fighter is necessary to create effective challenges. You could call it "common sense", the Tier System is just "common sense" in an organized and understandable fashion.

That is true to a degree, as the tier system's truth revolves around each class being played to their advantages, which isn't always the case in actual game play. For example, if I have a cleric whose player I know will not be using the class to its full advantage, I won't revolve my encounters around the party having a cleric using its full potential.

[Engine]

That is true to a degree, as the tier system's truth revolves around each class being played to their advantages, which isn't always the case in actual game play. For example, if I have a cleric whose player I know will not be using the class to its full advantage, I won't revolve my encounters around the party having a cleric using its full potential.

"Actual gameplay" is really vague, for a reason: every group out there has its "actual gameplay", the Tier System couldn't take in account all of them. Maybe I'm a bit repetitive here, but I would say that the Tier System doesn't say that if you see a Cleric in your party you should automatically throw at her more powerful enemies.

It just says that in a given group, with a Fighter and a Cleric, you could (could, not will) see more tricks from the Cleric than from the Fighter depending on the skill of the players. And even if the Fighter's player is truly skilled, the character would be limited in what she could do, mechanically speaking; while the Cleric's player would have at her disposal a vast array of powers to choose.

[TuggyNE]

Yeah, the tier system basically gives an average* value for various classes, but doesn't really cover the ceilings and floors for each (except in the long descriptions of each class's rating).


*Where "average" means "mathematical mode" or so.

[Blisstake]

"Actual gameplay" is really vague, for a reason: every group out there has its "actual gameplay", the Tier System couldn't take in account all of them.

This is precisely the point I'm trying to make


Maybe I'm a bit repetitive here, but I would say that the Tier System doesn't say that if you see a Cleric in your party you should automatically throw at her more powerful enemies.

No, the tier list doesn't say anything by itself. While a DM should know the basics of which classes can do what, it doesn't become necesary to have a complete understanding of each class' place on the tier list, but should instead know what their party members should be able to face based on experiences with the same group.

[NinjaStylerobot]

Remember, not everyone plays the way you do. Wasn't that kinda your argument in that debate with Polarity/Gimp/IP Proofing?

True. Im in the wrong here. But I just cannot see myself opening a can of worms that will simply make my own play experience worse for no reason at all.

[Engine]

No, the tier list doesn't say anything by itself. While a DM should know the basics of which classes can do what, it doesn't become necesary to have a complete understanding of each class' place on the tier list, but should instead know what their party members should be able to face based on experiences with the same group.

That's excatly what the Tier System does, in my opinion. It gives you in a simple fashion a rough knowledge of the class' potential (your "which classes do what"). And by the way no one has said that the DM should use the Tier System neglecting the actual gamplay of her group: the Tier System is a guideline, just that: you could use to have a better understanding, that's all.

[Blisstake]

And by the same token, I'm not trying to insinuate that the list is worthless. I think it's an incredibly useful tool, but I believe it isn't mandatory for all DMs to read if they understand the capabilities of their players (which usually involves some sort of crossover, yes)

[Helldog]

True. Im in the wrong here. But I just cannot see myself opening a can of worms that will simply make my own play experience worse for no reason at all.
How would it make your play experience worse if you don't care about it? :smallconfused:


And by the same token, I'm not trying to insinuate that the list is worthless. I think it's an incredibly useful tool, but I believe it isn't mandatory for all DMs to read if they understand the capabilities of their players (which usually involves some sort of crossover, yes)
The DM sooner or later will learn those things through his own mistakes. But thanks to the Tier System he can avoid that and have truly fun games from the start.

[jmelesky]

Yeah, the tier system basically gives an average* value for various classes, but doesn't really cover the ceilings and floors for each (except in the long descriptions of each class's rating).

I think it's more about ceilings than averages: there are only so many CoDzillas encountered in the wild, after all. But i agree with your general point.

[Psyren]

Ignorance is bliss when thinking about stuff like optimization.

The problem is that a ton of monsters are themselves optimized out of the box, by which I mean they are way more difficult than their CR should indicate. Doc Roc's Hezrou is a perfect example, and it's right there in core waiting for an unsuspecting DM to pull it out of a hat.


And by the same token, I'm not trying to insinuate that the list is worthless. I think it's an incredibly useful tool, but I believe it isn't mandatory for all DMs to read if they understand the capabilities of their players (which usually involves some sort of crossover, yes)

I agree, it's not a mandatory read. But Helldog is right too - Whether by sitting down to read it, or through trial and error (mostly error) you're going to learn it one way or the other. So if people on the forums recommend it, it's only to save the DM headaches down the road.


And hell, the Giant's on board (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0764.html) with the system too. What more could anyone ask for?

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Several have been linked, but here's my take on the PF tiers, roughly going from high in the tier to low:

T1
Wizard, Cleric, Druid, Witch
T2
Sorcerer, Psion, Oracle, Summoner
T3
Wilder, Psychic Warrior, Bard, Alchemist, Inquisitor, Magus
T4
Paladin, Soulknife, Ranger, Rogue, Ninja, Barbarian, Monk
T5
Fighter, Adept, Cavalier, Expert
T6
Warrior, Aristocrat, Commoner

Monk is T4 due to archetypes. Paladin's beefed up chassis brings him up to T4 as well. Fighter is right on the edge of T4 and T5; Witch and Sorcerer are on the respective fringes of T1 and T2 (the latter thanks to human bonus spells known). Wasn't really sure where to place Wilder or Soulknife.

IMO the tier system is often misinterpreted (willingly or not); at low-enough overall optimization levels the Tier System equivalently says "what level of optimization relative to the group do I need to meaningfully contribute to the team's overall objectives?"

Case 1: A Sorcerer doesn't have to optimize that much to contribute. He just picks a few nice sounding buffs and blasts and he can easily do his thing without overshadowing anyone; best yet, in PF human sorcerers have so many spells known that he can afford to pick a few stinkers/situational spells for the giggles.
Case 2: A Barbarian has to put in a little work filling the gaps in his defenses (namely saves and survivability due to Rage mechanics) along with making sure he can pull off his shtick (beast rage powers for pounce, or at least something to make up for that). Note that he'll probably be a relative "combat monster" in this case, which somewhat makes up for his lack of contribution in other areas.
Case 3: The Adept needs to make sure his spell list rocks the house to keep up. He gets no class features other than 5/9ths casting, and many lower level power spells were nerfed in PF.

Of course, at higher levels of optimization, perhaps the Barbarian just can't keep up no matter how optimized he is. But if the group is at that level of optimization, they already know the system pretty well (or at least they read guides written by people who know the system pretty well, lol).

[DrDeth]

Yes, the Tier system is important to know. For example, we have a big Monday game. The main party has a Warblade(3), a Cleric with many PrCs(1), a Druid(1), a Sorc(2), and a Scout(4). We kick butt.

For a change of pace, when everyone isn’t there, we have another, lower level group. A Beguiler(3), a Dread Necromancer(3),a tripping Fighter (4?), Spirit Shaman/combat medic (3?) and a Dragon Disciple (3?). The DM was constantly kicking our butts, with way overpowered combats. He couldn’t figure it out, the ECL comparison was about the same, same players, etc. Until I pointed out the HUGE Tier difference. Now he’s scaled things back, we’re now just challenged, not whupped.

[Engine]

And by the same token, I'm not trying to insinuate that the list is worthless. I think it's an incredibly useful tool, but I believe it isn't mandatory for all DMs to read if they understand the capabilities of their players (which usually involves some sort of crossover, yes)

We're talking about two different things here. Every DM should be aware of their player's capabilities. I'm just try to say that a good DM should be also aware of the classes' capabilities, and the Tier System does a good job for that.
Of course no reading is mandatory except the core manuals, but, hey! The reading of the Tier System is useful, why one should not read it if she has the time?:smallwink:


I agree, it's not a mandatory read. But Helldog is right too - Whether by sitting down to read it, or through trial and error (mostly error) you're going to learn it one way or the other. So if people on the forums recommend it, it's only to save the DM headaches down the road.

I totally agree: I link it to all my DMs.

[DDogwood]

Ignorance is bliss when thinking about stuff like optimization.

Tell that to my friend who created a Bard 2/Rogue 2/Druid 2 in a level 6 game, thinking that she would be comparable in power to a level 6 Wizard and a level 6 Cleric.

[Tebryn]

Must. Restrain. From. Referencing. Stormwind. And Oberoni as well.

It'd be wise not to because as far as I know I've not fallen into either.



What's better at level 10, a sword n' board fighter attacking for 1d8+8 damage or so from strength and weapon, or a wizard dealing 10d6, 5d6 minimum, damage to a bunch of enemies with a Fireball?

Better in what way and for who? In what situation? Better for me? Better for you? The question doesn't matter because it presupposes that damage is the only thing in the game that matters. The rest matters even less so.

[Doc Roc]

It'd be wise not to because as far as I know I've not fallen into either.




Better in what way and for who? In what situation? Better for me? Better for you? The question doesn't matter because it presupposes that damage is the only thing in the game that matters. The rest matters even less so.

In a good game, it would cost you nothing in a narrative sense to be good at what you want to do. In D&D, this is not so. The Tier System documents it. It is of worth.

[Xander96]

So how were these categorized into tiers? What's factored in? What separates a Cleric from an Oracle, for example?

[NinjaStylerobot]

Tell that to my friend who created a Bard 2/Rogue 2/Druid 2 in a level 6 game, thinking that she would be comparable in power to a level 6 Wizard and a level 6 Cleric.

Mkay. Multi-classing into 3 classes with no stacking abilities will end up with a weak character. Fortunatly I know that. Its the very basics of optimization and thats all I need.

[Big Fau]

So how were these categorized into tiers? What's factored in? What separates a Cleric from an Oracle, for example?

As far as I am aware, there wasn't a real formula. JaronK mostly took a cursory glance at each class and asked himself "How many abilities does this class have that can provide a solution to situations A, B, and C, and how readily can they access those abilities?".


The rest of it was based on common optimization tactics, as he specifically mentioned that the system assumes a baseline amount of it (although he never said how much or how little).

[Engine]

What separates a Cleric from an Oracle, for example?

Spells known (same for Wizard and Sorcerer).
A Cleric knows her entire spell list, while an Oracle has to choose a list of spells known. In the end a Cleric has more potential because she could change her memorized spells every day to best suit a situation, while an Oracle is stuck with her spells known.

[Psyren]

Furthermore, Clerics can spontaneously heal without burning spells known on situational cure spells, and can also heal with Channel Energy. Oracles need to either burn spells known or a Mystery to do the same.

[Novawurmson]

I would also like to point out that purpose of the tier system is not to say "wizzards r teh bestest lolz," but to help DMs understand the inherently unbalanced nature of what each class is able to accomplish, with the hope of building parties where each member is able to contribute meaningfully to each encounter.

Some people want to DM (or play) games where the players are basically demigods with world-changing powers; tiers 1 and 2 are great for this. Some people want to play epic heroes capable of handling many difficult challenges beyond the power of a normal human being; tiers 3 and 4 are great for this. Some people want a game where the players have to struggle and work against the basic limitations of what a human is and is not able to do; tiers 5 and 6 fit this style of play well.

So let's say you want to play a holy warrior, calling the power of the gods to enhance his fighting abilities. In a tier one party, play a DMM Cleric; in a tier 3 party, play a Crusader; in a tier 5 party, play a Paladin. One is not "better" than the others, per se, just better balanced for the situation.

[DrDeth]

Several have been linked, but here's my take on the PF tiers, roughly going from high in the tier to low:

T1
Wizard, Cleric, Druid, Witch
T2
Sorcerer, Psion, Oracle, Summoner
T3
Wilder, Psychic Warrior, Bard, Alchemist, Inquisitor, Magus
T4
Paladin, Soulknife, Ranger, Rogue, Ninja, Barbarian, Monk
ol).

AFAIK, there are no Psionic classes in PF?

[Novawurmson]

AFAIK, there are no Psionic classes in PF?

There are the excellent Dreamscarred Press third party classes available for free on the SRD.

[Helldog]

AFAIK, there are no Psionic classes in PF?
Not official Paizo ones, but Dreamscarred Press has the stamp of approval from Paizo.

[Xander96]

The paladin's ability to increase his saves, cast spells, & increase his ab based upon his Cha ability mod alone is pretty powerful to me.

IMHO, they seem like they should fit in the Tier 3 category as opposed to the tier 4. They are the caster's bane imo

[Hiro Protagonest]

The paladin's ability to increase his saves, cast spells, & increase his ab based upon his Cha ability mod alone is pretty powerful to me.

IMHO, they seem like they should fit in the Tier 3 category as opposed to the tier 4. They are the caster's bane imo

They had that in 3.5. It was called the Serenity feat, except it was based off a more important stat (wisdom). And for a human paladin, that's the equivalent of a racial feature (well, okay, not really, you couldn't get it until you had Divine Grace. But you could pick up another first level feat instead, so it evens out).

As for "caster's bane" they still take at least half damage from Fireball, and Scorching Ray doesn't target a save. Meanwhile, the wizard is in the air, since he probably knew that he would fight soon and cast Fly, as opposed to the paladin just charging at him out of the blue. Druids are even worse, sure, PF nerfed Wild Shape, but combine Wild Shape with animal companion and you've got two animals mauling the paladin. Clerics just cast Divine Favor and Shield of Faith.

As for tier 3, they're good at fighting and healing. That's it. The 3.5 crusader is high tier 4 (Seraphi convinced me on this one, but I still believe the warblade's tier 3), and slightly better than the PF paladin, and the warblade's low tier 3, and more mobile than the PF paladin (yes, I know, flying mount, but it takes feats to make that work) while also better at combat.

[Cieyrin]

Several have been linked, but here's my take on the PF tiers, roughly going from high in the tier to low:

T1
Wizard, Cleric, Druid, Witch
T2
Sorcerer, Psion, Oracle, Summoner
T3
Wilder, Psychic Warrior, Bard, Alchemist, Inquisitor, Magus
T4
Paladin, Soulknife, Ranger, Rogue, Ninja, Barbarian, Monk
T5
Fighter, Adept, Cavalier, Expert
T6
Warrior, Aristocrat, Commoner

There's a distinct lack of Gunslinger and Samurai, which I'd place both at T5. I don't know enough about Cavaliers and Samurai to say much about where they sit in the tier but Gunslinger sits fairly high in their tier like Fighter does.

As for Soulknife and Wilder, I think you pegged them at the right tiers, though a Student Wilder can really push their way into T2.

[MukkTB]

The Tier system doesn't indicate the distance between the optimization floor and ceiling of a class. The Tier system is also designed to measure character builds, not play styles.

So its easily possible at low optimization to get a wizard who is weaker than a fighter, especially at low levels. The Wizard has an abyssal floor and a huge ceiling. The fighter has an abyssal floor and a lowish ceiling.

But if you understand that. And you don't think TO is the only legitimate play style, the Tier system works just fine.

[Psyren]

AFAIK, there are no Psionic classes in PF?

Fo shizzle mah nizzle: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/psionics-unleashed/classes/

[Blisstake]

Disclaimer: They're third party.

[Prime32]

Disclaimer: They're third party.Disclaimer2: They have the original XPH writers where Complete Psionic did not. :smalltongue:

[Blisstake]

That... doesn't change the fact that it counts as Third Party. :smallconfused:

[Psyren]

Yep, it's technically third party - though in the internet age, where an entire forum can comb through open-source material for balance issues, that term doesn't carry nearly as much negative connotation as it used to.

[Wings of Peace]

The rest of it was based on common optimization tactics, as he specifically mentioned that the system assumes a baseline amount of it (although he never said how much or how little).

This is a common misconception unless I'm mistaken. The tier system doesn't assume optimization, it assumes an equal skill level among all players present (which includes but is not limited to optimization).

[qcbtnsrm]

Yep, it's technically third party - though in the internet age, where an entire forum can comb through open-source material for balance issues, that term doesn't carry nearly as much negative connotation as it used to.
Maybe in your neck of the woods. But every group I know uses core, expanded core (Core+APG+UC+UM), or 3.P (Paizo+WotC). Not a single group I know of allows any Dreamscarred Press material in their Pathfinder games. And I think it is more than a bit disingenuous for folks to keep referring to it as if it were official Pathfinder material. It isn't.

I'm happy you enjoy them. But it is frustrating to have psionics regularly popping up in Pathfinder threads, when they aren't actually in Pathfinder. And in my experience aren't allowed in the vast majority of games. It would be like if you were bringing up Dreamscarred Press' "Nexus" character class from their d20 book "Tome of Channeling" in all the 3.5 threads.

[Mystify]

Maybe in your neck of the woods. But every group I know uses core, expanded core (Core+APG+UC+UM), or 3.P (Paizo+WotC). Not a single group I know of allows any Dreamscarred Press material in their Pathfinder games. And I think it is more than a bit disingenuous for folks to keep referring to it as if it were official Pathfinder material. It isn't.

I'm happy you enjoy them. But it is frustrating to have psionics regularly popping up in Pathfinder threads, when they aren't actually in Pathfinder. And in my experience aren't allowed in the vast majority of games. It would be like if you were bringing up Dreamscarred Press' "Nexus" character class from their d20 book "Tome of Channeling" in all the 3.5 threads.

"anything on the PFSRD" is another common criteria, and the content generally fits that description.

[DrDeth]

Maybe in your neck of the woods. But every group I know uses core, expanded core (Core+APG+UC+UM), or 3.P (Paizo+WotC). Not a single group I know of allows any Dreamscarred Press material in their Pathfinder games. And I think it is more than a bit disingenuous for folks to keep referring to it as if it were official Pathfinder material. It isn't.

I'm happy you enjoy them. But it is frustrating to have psionics regularly popping up in Pathfinder threads, when they aren't actually in Pathfinder. And in my experience aren't allowed in the vast majority of games. It would be like if you were bringing up Dreamscarred Press' "Nexus" character class from their d20 book "Tome of Channeling" in all the 3.5 threads.

Right, I agree. In fact my DM is letting the UM and UC books in a little bit at a time.

I know folks like psionics, and that's great. But Psionics aren't PF.

And on the actual PF SRD site, there ain't no psionics.

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/

[navar100]

Furthermore, Clerics can spontaneously heal without burning spells known on situational cure spells, and can also heal with Channel Energy. Oracles need to either burn spells known or a Mystery to do the same.

Oracles get their choice of all Cure spells or all Inflict spells in addition to spells known and their Mystery spells.

Only Life Mystery allows for channeling. An Oracle who chooses another Mystery has decided he doesn't want to focus on healing, so not being able to channel is moot.

[Mystify]

Oracles get their choice of all Cure spells or all Inflict spells in addition to spells known and their Mystery spells.

Only Life Mystery allows for channeling. An Oracle who chooses another Mystery has decided he doesn't want to focus on healing, so not being able to channel is moot.

And oracles that do take the life mystery make awesome healers that will blow clerics out of the water in that regard.

[Blisstake]

Yep, it's technically third party - though in the internet age, where an entire forum can comb through open-source material for balance issues, that term doesn't carry nearly as much negative connotation as it used to.

And some groups still don't like third party. So I add a disclaimer. Not saying it's bad or good, it simply is.

[Big Fau]

And some groups still don't like third party. So I add a disclaimer. Not saying it's bad or good, it simply is.

Then why are said groups playing Pathfinder, a system that is little more than 3rd party support for 3.5?

[Blisstake]

Because it's still a separate system regardless of how you want to think of it.

That really isn't a discussion for this thread.

[Doc Roc]

Because it's still a separate system regardless of how you want to think of it.

That really isn't a discussion for this thread.

A system by the publishers of Dragon Magazine, home to some of the worst 3rd party material around. You're right, that's a discussion for another thread that I never want to be involved in.

[Blisstake]

(Removed. Realized I'm not following my own advice)

[Coidzor]

It seems you can't have a Pathfinder thread here without every other post becoming an insult to Paizo Publishing.

Read more threads then.

[Blisstake]

Fair enough, I'll delete the post. I'm being rather condescending. I apologize.

[Doc Roc]

Fair enough, I'll delete the post. I'm being rather condescending. I apologize.

I also apologize. I'm being unfair, particularly since I'm very fond of Pathfinder outside of its core book and bestiary.

[Laniius]

Maybe in your neck of the woods. But every group I know uses core, expanded core (Core+APG+UC+UM), or 3.P (Paizo+WotC). Not a single group I know of allows any Dreamscarred Press material in their Pathfinder games. And I think it is more than a bit disingenuous for folks to keep referring to it as if it were official Pathfinder material. It isn't.

I'm happy you enjoy them. But it is frustrating to have psionics regularly popping up in Pathfinder threads, when they aren't actually in Pathfinder. And in my experience aren't allowed in the vast majority of games. It would be like if you were bringing up Dreamscarred Press' "Nexus" character class from their d20 book "Tome of Channeling" in all the 3.5 threads.

Well, if anyone in your group likes psionics at all, it's the only source of psionics in Pathfinder; the guys behind Pathfinder have almost flat-out said that they will not be bringing psionics over as they don't like the system. I don't know about any other Dreamscarred Press stuff, but as it stands now their take on psionics is about as close as you're going to get to first-party psionics for Pathfinder.