The tier system.

[rafaruggi]

Hi, guys.

I'm creating this topic because I've seen a lot of references to a "tier system", and I'd like to understand it better. Maybe it's common sense to more experienced D&D players, and if that's so I apologize for my ignorance.

Thank you! :)

[Gavinfoxx]

There are a few of them.

http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=399.0

Go here and look under 'Metagame Concepts', for the various versions.

[JaronK]

What specifically is your question about it? And have you read the initial post as well as the FAQ after that?

JaronK

[Karnith]

You will specifically probably find JaronK's Tier System for Classes (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=266559) and the Why each class is in its tier (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5256) threads helpful if you are new to the concept.

EDIT: Of course, the man himself could just show up and offer to answer your questions, which would probably also be helpful.

[rafaruggi]

I'm really sorry I haven't searched before asking. I'll take a look into those links and come back if any questions arise. Thank you for your quick answers!

[Sylthia]

It's okay, the search function is disabled, so it can be a bit hard to find things. You can try entering it into a search engine, but that doesn't always give you the results you're looking for.

[Gwazi Magnum]

It's all right, the links should answer the questions though. If not basically it's a player made system (So not WOTC) used to rank classes in terms of how useful, good and powerful they are.


It's okay, the search function is disabled, so it can be a bit hard to find things. You can try entering it into a search engine, but that doesn't always give you the results you're looking for.

I wish they'd turn it back on. Having it off is really annoying.

[iDesu]

I wish they'd turn it back on. Having it off is really annoying.

I've never been able to use the search function effectively. I found it easier to just search google with "site:Giantitp.com" added to the search terms.

[tiercel]

I wish they'd turn it back on. Having it off is really annoying.

You can still search the forums using Google if you use a search phrase like:


site:giantitp.com tier system

i.e. put the phrase "site:giantitp.com" (or whatever other site) in front of your usual search term.

As has been pointed out, it might not be exactly the same as a forum search but it will usually give you *some* results, especially for a major search term like "tiers" or "tier system" (and at least some of those results will likely have useful links themselves).

[Gwazi Magnum]

You can still search the forums using Google if you use a search phrase like:


site:giantitp.com tier system

i.e. put the phrase "site:giantitp.com" (or whatever other site) in front of your usual search term.

As has been pointed out, it might not be exactly the same as a forum search but it will usually give you *some* results, especially for a major search term like "tiers" or "tier system" (and at least some of those results will likely have useful links themselves).

Huh, I never knew that...

Thanks guys. :)

[Acanous]

So last Saturday, I'm sitting at my Sister's table with her friends, starting up the Reign of Winter adventure path. Some people have never played before, and I get the question "What can you tell me about the Classes?"
So I tell the person in question to google "Jaronk's Tier System", which one of my friends present hops on like a grenade. "No! They are newbies! Let them keep the wonderment and sense of new discovery!"

....Then one guy is like "Wow! I've gotta play a Monk, look at all this stuff they get!"

[Gwazi Magnum]

So last Saturday, I'm sitting at my Sister's table with her friends, starting up the Reign of Winter adventure path. Some people have never played before, and I get the question "What can you tell me about the Classes?"
So I tell the person in question to google "Jaronk's Tier System", which one of my friends present hops on like a grenade. "No! They are newbies! Let them keep the wonderment and sense of new discovery!"

....Then one guy is like "Wow! I've gotta play a Monk, look at all this stuff they get!"

*facepalm*

Should of showed them. Educating new players on how to be good at d&d is always a good thing. Make sure they don't break the game (and not how my group in 3.5 from school like to claim I break the game... by knowing what the hell I'm doing, but actually breaking the game).

[Sylthia]

*facepalm*

Should of showed them. Educating new players on how to be good at d&d is always a good thing. Make sure they don't break the game (and not how my DM's in 3.5 from school like to claim I break the game... by knowing what the hell I'm doing, but actually breaking the game).

I've found that the "better" classes can be a bit daunting for a new player do to the bookkeeping needed. It's often easier for a new player to try a fighter or a rogue first until they get a grasp on the rules, then they can play a more complicated class.

[huttj509]

I've found that the "better" classes can be a bit daunting for a new player do to the bookkeeping needed. It's often easier for a new player to try a fighter or a rogue first until they get a grasp on the rules, then they can play a more complicated class.

Depends a lot on how long you intend the character to stick around, and how readily you're willing to let the player do a revamp once they know better what they want.

One-Shot? Yeah, throw em at the simple and let em get down to playing.

Long term campaign based heavily in character arcs? NOT fun to feel 'stuck' with something you find boring because you didn't know better early on.

[137beth]

I've found that the "better" classes can be a bit daunting for a new player do to the bookkeeping needed. It's often easier for a new player to try a fighter or a rogue first until they get a grasp on the rules, then they can play a more complicated class.

I only partially agree. I've found that the best class for beginners is the sorcerer with build advice. If you give them general advice on spell selection, and point them towards some of the more powerful ones, then it's pretty good for them in-game. Fighters are also nice, but you need to give them more help making sure it doesn't do badly.

[eggynack]

I only partially agree. I've found that the best class for beginners is the sorcerer with build advice. If you give them general advice on spell selection, and point them towards some of the more powerful ones, then it's pretty good for them in-game. Fighters are also nice, but you need to give them more help making sure it doesn't do badly.
Fighters and sorcerers are actually a lot alike in this way. They both require a lot of investment into build optimization, but they require very little play optimization. I'd actually argue that a fighter is a lot easier for an experienced player to put together than a sorcerer. Sorcerers have to make sure that their spells have minimum overlap, maximum utility, and maximum spammability. Those are some pretty tricky requirements, and there are so damn many spells out there. Still, if you have a good list ready, it's not all that hard. It gets more tricky if you're trying to build towards some kind of character design, because that means your list can't be generic.

[Axinian]

....Then one guy is like "Wow! I've gotta play a Monk, look at all this stuff they get!"

You know, this is often cited as an attitude that newbies often have about the monk, and one of the reasons it's a trap.

That hasn't been my experience. I only started playing D&D a few years ago and I distinctly remember my opinion of the monk was "Wow, they probably have great AC, but the rest of their stuff looks really useless." I'm not sure how anyone, newbie or not could see something like slow fall and think it's useful. My reaction to slow fall was "...so it allows them to do something that any character can be reasonably expected to do?"

[Emperor Tippy]

Psion and Swordsage tend to be what I use to start new players on D&D.

You can actually credibly read all of the Psionic powers in an afternoon, most of the broken stuff requires a degree of system mastery that new players won't have, have them be an Elan and it's relatively easy to keep them alive at lower levels, they have enough options to get the feel for everything and will end up lightly touching on most of the rules in the game (while also being fairly easy for you to tailor to).

Swordsage is pretty hard to mess up and can be played as everything from straight fighter to monk to thief to basically anything else melee. Again its relatively quick to teach, relatively difficult to mess up, fun, has a good number of options, is overpowered for the vanilla challenges (less dying and more fun for new players generally), lets you teach them most of the melee system at one point or another, and gets them off on the right path of avoiding core melee.

[137beth]

Fighters and sorcerers are actually a lot alike in this way. They both require a lot of investment into build optimization, but they require very little play optimization. I'd actually argue that a fighter is a lot easier for an experienced player to put together than a sorcerer. Sorcerers have to make sure that their spells have minimum overlap, maximum utility, and maximum spammability. Those are some pretty tricky requirements, and there are so damn many spells out there. Still, if you have a good list ready, it's not all that hard. It gets more tricky if you're trying to build towards some kind of character design, because that means your list can't be generic.

I agree with pretty much all of this. On the other hand, if I have a new player in the same group as some more experienced players, I'd be more inclined to give the new player a sorcerer, since that way they can have a slightly higher base power level than the rest of the group (if the experienced players are tier 3-4).

[Togo]

Fighters and sorcerers are actually a lot alike in this way. They both require a lot of investment into build optimization, but they require very little play optimization. I'd actually argue that a fighter is a lot easier for an experienced player to put together than a sorcerer. Sorcerers have to make sure that their spells have minimum overlap, maximum utility, and maximum spammability. Those are some pretty tricky requirements, and there are so damn many spells out there. Still, if you have a good list ready, it's not all that hard. It gets more tricky if you're trying to build towards some kind of character design, because that means your list can't be generic.

The rules for combat aren't particularly straightforward for a new character, particularly when dealing with special moves. Spellcasting is easier to deal with, particularly if you just give them a few spells. I might start them on a barbarian, but not a fighter.

[Gwazi Magnum]

I've found that the "better" classes can be a bit daunting for a new player do to the bookkeeping needed. It's often easier for a new player to try a fighter or a rogue first until they get a grasp on the rules, then they can play a more complicated class.

It can be if the game is over whelming them.

But they should at least be aware of how powerful the classes are going into it. Plus as others seem to have already stated below, Sorcerer isn't so hard.

Also worth noting:

In my first d&d group where everyone (DM included) was a 1st timer, minus the Wizard player. And we had Druid and Cleric in the party as well, as well as a sorcerer (me). They all did extremely well as the classes.

There were just two rules we missed

1. Clerics and Druids were thought to be spontaneous for a time. How the more experienced player didn't tell us I don't know... But I've caught him wrong with things like how HD work before so he may of not known himself.

2. We thought bonus spells per day were equal to the casting score modifier, not noticing the chart.

Outside of those, they handled the classes very quickly. And the two exceptions above weren't from too complicated to follow, it was from simply having missed it while reading over the classes.

[Amphetryon]

The rules for combat aren't particularly straightforward for a new character, particularly when dealing with special moves. Spellcasting is easier to deal with, particularly if you just give them a few spells. I might start them on a barbarian, but not a fighter.

I see this recommendation a lot, and I'm sure it must work for some folks. In my experience, though, handing a brand-new-to-D&D 3.5-Player a Barbarian PC is a good way to get them confused. The different numbers to track when they're Raging or not can be intimidating, they often need frequent reminders on how their temporary HP actually work, and I've seen more than a few Players hoard their Rage/Day uses for fear of running out, leaving them with unused Rages at the end of the day and a generally unsatisfactory experience. Don't even ask about a newbie's reaction to the vagaries of D&D Math as it pertains to Rage + Power Attack + Leap Attack (Shock Trooper optional).

In my experience, a low-level Ranger provides a smoother introductory experience. They have things to do outside combat, they can fairly easily determine when/if their Favored Enemy bonuses apply, and as their system mastery grows, so does their list of options, from Spells to an Animal Companion, letting them dip into the waters of several subsystems as they get more comfortable.