[PF] Accurate Tier List?

[Chained Birds]

I was looking around some forums, and came across a /tg/ discussion on 4chan that lead to a posting of what they believed is an accurate Tier list for Pathfinder (Post Advanced Class Guide).

I was curious what GitP thought of this list. Any oddities or changes?

Tier 1:
Wizard, Druid, Cleric, Witch, Sorcerer (Razmiran Priest/False Priest), Sorcerer (Paragon Surge), Oracle (Paragon Surge), Arcanist, Shaman
Tier 2:
Oracle, Sorcerer, Summoner, Magus (Hexcrafter), Bard (Magician + Paragon Surge)
Tier 3:
Alchemist, Bard, Inquisitor, Magus, Investigator, Warpriest, Paladin (Sacred Servant), Skald, Hunter (potentially)
Tier 4:
Barbarian, Paladin, Ranger, Ninja, Adept, Brawler, Slayer, Rogue, Gunslinger, Swashbuckler, Fighter, Bloodrager
>Tier 5:
Cavalier, Samurai, Monk, Expert
>Tier 6:
Aristocrat, Warrior, Commoner

[grarrrg]

Close enough.
Can't comment on the newer ones that are still in Playtest though.

Summoners are arguably high Tier 3. While they do get a few higher level spells discounted, they are sorely lacking in variety, and have fewer spell slots than a dedicated caster.
I'd just call them Tier 2.5 and be done with it.

I don't know how they think Bard can get up to Tier 2.
Paragon Surge will still only let him grab Bard spells.
And while Magician can steal from the Summoner's list, you're still only getting one 6th level spell, and one 5th level spell at best.

Same with Magus, Hexcrafter can help your versatility, and give you more "all day" options, but won't do too much for your raw power.


Just noticed that Antipaladin is missing. Given that it's mainly an alignment swap of Paladin, it would be in the same Tier.

[Squirrel_Dude]

No major problems. Just a few quick notes:

- Summoner is hard to place. The run from Tiers 1 to 3 depending on how you build them, what archetypes (master summoner for 5+Cha mod gates/day) you take.
- The list is missing the psionics.
- Rogue (and probably ninja, too) are both tier 5. They can't really claim to do one thing better than any other class at this point in the game.
- The playtested stuff is still too hard to place as major rewrites for some of the classes (investigator losing sneak attack for example)
- Quiggong Monk probably moves that class up a tier or two.

[Craft (Cheese)]

My guess? They use Paragon Surge with Eldritch Heritage (Arcane). Still can't get spells above 6th level on a bard this way, and magician bards are not much better better at doing this than regular bards.

Anyway, my changes:

Razmiran Priest Sorcerer is Tier 2.
Hexcrafter Magus, Summoner, and Magician Bard are Tier 3.
Sacred Servant Paladin is Tier 4.
Adept, Rogue, Fighter, and Swashbuckler are Tier 5.
Expert is Tier 6.

[Benthesquid]

No major problems. Just a few quick notes:
- The list is missing the psionics.

Psionics are third party. They're very well done and well regarded third party, but they're not Paizo products, so it makes a certain amount of sense to leave them off the list.

[Squirrel_Dude]

Psionics are third party. They're very well done and well regarded third party, but they're not Paizo products, so it makes a certain amount of sense to leave them off the list.*shrug* I'm aware they're third party, but DSP is pretty highly regarded and psionics are pretty cool so I don't mind them (or PoW classes when done) or the occultist showing up on these kinds of lists.

[grarrrg]

My guess? They use Paragon Surge with Eldritch Heritage (Arcane). Still can't get spells above 6th level on a bard this way, and magician bards are not much better better at doing this than regular bards.

Decent point, but having access to only 6th level Wizard spells improves versatility, but 6th level Wizard spells aren't very "Tier 2" worthy.

The Magician perk is both better and worse. Yes you can grab 'discount' spells off the Summoner list (or 'discounts' from the Magus list, or "divine only" from the Witch list). Downside is that you only get a couple, and they are set in stone.


Fighter... Tier 5.
Don't forget the Gunslinger. It goes where the Fighter goes. I don't have a firm opinion on whether they should be 4's or 5's, but they're similar enough that they should be in the same tier.
Gunslinger is more of a one-trick pony than the Fighter in combat, and only gains 2 skills/level outside combat.
That and you tend to be somewhat at the mercy of the DM regarding availability of (better) guns.

[Squirrel_Dude]

Don't forget the Gunslinger. It goes where the Fighter goes. I don't have a firm opinion on whether they should be 4's or 5's, but they're similar enough that they should be in the same tier.
Gunslinger is more of a one-trick pony than the Fighter in combat, and only gains 2 skills/level outside combat.
That and you tend to be somewhat at the mercy of the DM regarding availability of (better) guns.Meh, gunslingers are slightly better than fighters, IMO. They get full BAB and are dex focused so they can enter melee if they want by taking weapon finesse. The reliance on better weapons is true but somewhat overrated with the musketmaster and pistolero archetypes + alchemical cartridges making reloading faster anyway, and range not being too much of an issue in a dungeon.

Also they get 4+int skills/level and have 2 good saves (Fort+Ref) instead of one, along with wisdom ability score synergy.

[Zombulian]

No major problems. Just a few quick notes:

- Summoner is hard to place. The run from Tiers 1 to 3 depending on how you build them, what archetypes (master summoner for 5+Cha mod gates/day) you take.

Would just like to point out that a badly built Wizard in 3.5 can still be pretty freaking terrible. I don't think Tiers do anything but take potential power.

[Just to Browse]

Summoner might as well be tier 1. Their placement can be scattered just like any other caster, but if they take good spells the way a wizard does, and use their eidolon properly, they're bringing just as much utility and raw power.

I think the alchemist can go up a notch, but that's based on a couple instances of play and no theorycraft so I don't know valid it is.

The T4 placements bother me, because they have the most noticeable disparities. Ninja is a better version of the rogue, flat-out, and rogue can bring a whole lot more to the table than the fighter. The fighter and brawler are also noticeably better than the slayer because of the vast number of fighter bonus feats available... however knocking anybody up or down from the T4 list seems even more of an egregious offense. Maaaaaaaaaybe put ninja in T3 and Slayer in T5, but I dunno.

I'm also tempted to say the expert and warrior should share the same tier space, but I suppose UMD abuse can bring the expert up a notch.

[andreww]

If he Summoner is Tier 1 then the non paragon surge Sorcerer and Oracle are as well given they get more spells and a wider range of higher level spell slots.

Personally I peg the Human FCB using Sorcerer and Human/Half Elf FCB using Oracle at Tier 1. You obviously don't have the same vast range of options as a Wizard or Cleric but a Human Arcane Sorcerer with a spells known list of 9|8/8/6/7/6/7/6/8/3 can be prepared for pretty much anything they might conceivably come across.

[Craft (Cheese)]

Don't forget the Gunslinger. It goes where the Fighter goes. I don't have a firm opinion on whether they should be 4's or 5's, but they're similar enough that they should be in the same tier.
Gunslinger is more of a one-trick pony than the Fighter in combat, and only gains 2 skills/level outside combat.
That and you tend to be somewhat at the mercy of the DM regarding availability of (better) guns.

The definition of T4 is "They can excel at one thing, but when doing that one thing isn't necessary they're as useful as a sack of rotten potatoes." The definition of T5 is "Meant to do 1 thing well, but doesn't even do that thing all that well and struggles to perform properly."

Gunslingers are really good at ranged combat: Full BAB, and all of their attacks target touch AC. They don't have much out of combat utility, but they can shred things from a distance with ease. That's Tier 4.

The Fighter got bigger numbers through weapon/armor training, but honestly I don't think they're any better off in PF than they were in 3.5 (and actually quite a bit worse since Zhentarim and Dungeoncrasher are gone): +5 untyped bonuses look great, but lose a lot of their luster when you work through the bestiary and you realize that just about every monster got considerable buffs to its AC and to-hit numbers, mostly due to natural armor and hit die inflation. Considering this, and the nerfs to several combat feats, in some fights against even-CR monsters, the Fighter actually got quite a bit worse. It struggles to do its job unless well-optimized, and just gets blown out of the water by other classes that do the same thing (Barbarian). That's Tier 5, far as I'm concerned.

[andreww]

On Paragon Surge everyone gets to play with it. Sorcerers and Oracles obviously use Expanded Arcana, Oracles get the arcane list with Improved Eldritch Heritage and prepared casters get to play using Preferred Spell.

Paragon Surge abuse should be its own separate Tier 0 category with Oracle Paragon Surge Abusers in a Tier 0 on crack category.

[Squirrel_Dude]

Would just like to point out that a badly built Wizard in 3.5 can still be pretty freaking terrible. I don't think Tiers do anything but take potential power.I'm not talking about making poor use of their abilities (taking blasting spells as opposed to buffs with a wizard, for example), but what abilities you actually get with your archetype.

For example, Synthesists are pretty much the definition of tier 3 or four (they're weird, and I don't know enough about the math to declare one way or the other), but boy are master summoners silly with 5+Cha mod gates/day, and being able to summon creatures as SLAs even with your eidolon out.

[Spore]

On Paragon Surge everyone gets to play with it. Sorcerers and Oracles obviously use Expanded Arcana, Oracles get the arcane list with Improved Eldritch Heritage and prepared casters get to play using Preferred Spell.

Paragon Surge abuse should be its own separate Tier 0 category with Oracle Paragon Surge Abusers in a Tier 0 on crack category.

I am sorry but Paragon Surge to get expanded Arcana is blatant "bug" abusing for me.

[andreww]

I am not sure it is. I posted a specific question in, I think, the ask James Jacobs stuff thread highlighting the issue and asking if it was intended. It has been ignored for about 18 months. They definitely know what it does but have chosen to do nothing about it.

[Psyren]

*shrug* I'm aware they're third party, but DSP is pretty highly regarded and psionics are pretty cool so I don't mind them (or PoW classes when done) or the occultist showing up on these kinds of lists.

Nothing's stopping us from ranking them ourselves :smallsmile:

{Specific archetype}

Tier 1: None
Tier 2: Psion, Tactician, {Student Wilder}, {Artificer Wilder}
Tier 3: Vitalist, {Gifted Blade Soulknife}, Wilder (others), Marksman, Cryptic, Psychic Warrior, {Nightmare Constructor Dread}
Tier 4: Soulknife (others), Dread (others), Aegis
Tier 5: None

[Urpriest]

- Rogue (and probably ninja, too) are both tier 5. They can't really claim to do one thing better than any other class at this point in the game.

Tier 4 isn't just good at one thing. It can instead be versatility enough to contribute in most encounters, but rarely in an encounter-ending or level-appropriate way. Classically, Rogues and Warlocks are Tier 4 for this reason: not because they do one thing very well (neither does in 3.5, and the tier system IIRC was written before hellfire warlock and melee warlocks were well known, so Warlocks aren't in Tier 4 for damage) but because they do a number of things (skills and damage for the Rogue, debuff, utility and damage for the Warlock) without doing any of them well enough to come up to Tier 3 standards.

[NamelessNPC]

the system is not, supposedly, about individual builds or excessive optimizaton. I don't think the builds with paragon surge belong in the list as separate items, just like there are no mentions of wizards with 12 int being tier 5.

[Ilorin Lorati]

the system is not, supposedly, about individual builds or excessive optimizaton. I don't think the builds with paragon surge belong in the list as separate items, just like there are no mentions of wizards with 12 int being tier 5.

JaronK's list included classes in multiple places based on what was allowed and not (Read: Binder with summoning, Erudite with STP), I don't see this as any different.

[NamelessNPC]

yeah, I know, but jaronk is inot infallible, he's just a guy. including individual builds while defining the system as "not about individual builds" seems silly. also, where's the limit? should spellslinger be blessed with its own entry, on account of not being tier 1? what about the ranger archetype with more spells (something skirmisher) or the viking? it's a slippery slope that ende with infinite builds listed. the pf tier system in the opening post has more specific builds than the 3.5 one, with a third of the amount of classes

[Urpriest]

yeah, I know, but jaronk is inot infallible, he's just a guy. including individual builds while defining the system as "not about individual builds" seems silly. also, where's the limit? should spellslinger be blessed with its own entry, on account of not being tier 1? what about the ranger archetype with more spells (something skirmisher) or the viking? it's a slippery slope that ende with infinite builds listed. the pf tier system in the opening post has more specific builds than the 3.5 one, with a third of the amount of classes

There are two things you have to keep in mind, here. The first thing is that Tiers are pretty thoroughly qualitative, blurring a bit into quantitative questions in the low Tiers. The second is that Tiers are observed divisions of classes, rather than an arbitrary scale. The point of looking at the occasional Archetype or ACF is to notice that, if you thought of the class as fixed to that Archetype or ACF then it picks up many of the qualitative traits of a different Tier than if that Archetype or ACF were omitted. This doesn't happen that frequently, because Tiers are qualitative, so when it does it's noteworthy. It's worthwhile to point out cases like that for future Tier scholars.

[grarrrg]

including individual builds while defining the system as "not about individual builds" seems silly.
...the pf tier system in the opening post has more specific builds than the 3.5 one, with a third of the amount of classes

In my opinion (and it seems a fair number of other people) the only "special cases" that should be on the Tier list are Paragon Surge Oracles and Sorcerers.

None of the other "optionals" in the original post really warrant a full Tier bump.


just like there are no mentions of wizards with 12 int being tier 5

The Tier system assumes general competence. Anyone can make ANY class suck horribly, we have to assume that the class is played reasonably competently.

[Craft (Cheese)]

Nothing's stopping us from ranking them ourselves :smallsmile:

...

I'd say the other Dread varieties are Tier 3 as well: There's a surprising amount of variety on the Dread power list. And if the power list isn't enough for them to qualify as Tier 3, then Nightmare Constructor doesn't qualify either. I'm not sure about the placement of the Marksman, Tactician, and Aegis either, but I'm not familiar enough with those classes to be able to make a decisive judgement.

[Psyren]

I'd say the other Dread varieties are Tier 3 as well: There's a surprising amount of variety on the Dread power list.

The Dread list really doesn't impress me. It's the Psywar list, only severely watered down (no inertial armor, no vigor, no expansion, no hustle, no physical acceleration etc.) and then seeded with a smattering of debuffs and direct attacks that are all mind-affecting and have saving throws. It seems to want to be a gish (proficiencies, short-range auras etc) but lacks the best gish powers, and it wants to be a full caster but lacks the variety and power level to pull that off either.

The Shadow Twin is cool on paper (I've long maintained you could build a fixed PF Dvati from this) but suffers from the same problems as you (lukewarm gish and caster.) Even worse, it transmits negative effects to you, utterly defeating the purpose for having a proxy tank like that. If it fails a fort save and ends up poisoned or paralyzed you will too. By RAW, you might even end up grappled or pinned if it does.

I see no reason not to put them in T4 - capable of doing a variety things, but weak at all of them.



And if the power list isn't enough for them to qualify as Tier 3, then Nightmare Constructor doesn't qualify either.

Disagree here - NC gets a full-strength eidolon in addition to all of its powers, that can be commanded mentally, is immune to mind-affecting and can't be banished. To me, that's definitely enough to raise it a notch. Now you can at least build them like a Summoner, dumping your physical stats and sending your Horror in to do battle for you. Further, the Horror can be tweaked to address individual non-combat obstacles, such as helping you swim, climb or fly.

[NamelessNPC]

In my opinion (and it seems a fair number of other people) the only "special cases" that should be on the Tier list are Paragon Surge Oracles and Sorcerers.

None of the other "optionals" in the original post really warrant a full Tier bump.




The Tier system assumes general competence. Anyone can make ANY class suck horribly, we have to assume that the class is played reasonably competently.


I know it should only reflect general competence. Precisely because I undestand that I said what I said. In case it wasn't clear my opinion was that, if we are making a point of mentioning "Bard (Magician + Paragon Surge)" as one of the classes (one that is not only really specific, involving an archetype, a race and a feat; but also more than moderate optimization) then why not include the 12 int wizard. It's as far from the norm in the optimization axis as the half elf magician bard with paragon surge.

[SowZ]

Would just like to point out that a badly built Wizard in 3.5 can still be pretty freaking terrible. I don't think Tiers do anything but take potential power.

Tiers work assuming similar optimization levels in a party. A badly built wizard shouldn't be put up against a well built fighter, but an elven fighter who evenly splits his feats between dual wielding long swords and his longbow. In which case even a bad wizard is stronger and more versatility.

At average OP, the fighter probably grabs a tactical feat or two and might even weapon focus his great sword. He may outshine a terrible wizard, but will pale compared to a decently built wizard. And at high op, the fighter can deal hundreds or thousands of damage. The wizard rewrites reality.

[Squirrel_Dude]

In my opinion (and it seems a fair number of other people) the only "special cases" that should be on the Tier list are Paragon Surge Oracles and Sorcerers.For the most part I agree. Sorcerers go to tier 1 and Oracles to tier 0 Because two whole spell lists + all the key martial proficiencies and two good saves and blah blah blah.

However, I would submit that Pathfinder lends itself much more greatly to the segmenting of classes into multiple tiers than 3.5 did. While 3.5 allowed for alternate class features, these features could be picked and chosen individually and were thus much more highly tied to the strength of a person's build.

In Pathfinder, with Archetypes, classes can take on entirely new roles or sets of power wholesale, and those decisions are made at level 1 and are permanent. In some cases (oh hai Alchemist) it's more like picking from a set of completely different classes.

Although I don't agree with the classes being so highly segmented, I don't think it's something that can really be avoided.

*Random note*
Remember that paragon surge can be taken by humans, aasimar, and I think half-orcs in addition to half-elves because of the racial heritage feat and other chicanery. It's probably more than moderate op, so it's not super relevant, but Paragon surge is pretty easy to get into.

[grarrrg]

I know it should only reflect general competence. Precisely because I undestand that I said what I said. In case it wasn't clear my opinion was that, if we are making a point of mentioning "Bard (Magician + Paragon Surge)" as one of the classes (one that is not only really specific, involving an archetype, a race and a feat; but also more than moderate optimization) then why not include the 12 int wizard. It's as far from the norm in the optimization axis as the half elf magician bard with paragon surge.

My point was that the whole Magician + Paragon Surge thing really isn't great enough to warrant mentioning at all. Sure, it's a bump in power over a 'normal' Bard, but it isn't strong enough to jump the gap up to Tier 2.

(To me) There are only 3 cases (currently) where an "optional" feature should matter at all.
Oracle or Sorc with Paragon Surge. Even if the rest of your build is 'average' access/use of this spell can easily take care of the one thing preventing either class from reaching Tier 1 (which is access to your entire spell list).
This is especially notable with the Oracle, as one can gain moments notice access to the entirety of BOTH the Oracle AND Wizard spell lists.

The other case is the Synthesist Summoner which, depending on where you rank the Summoner to begin with, might actually drop it a Tier due to loss of Action Economy.

[T.G. Oskar]

My guess? They use Paragon Surge with Eldritch Heritage (Arcane). Still can't get spells above 6th level on a bard this way, and magician bards are not much better better at doing this than regular bards.

Anyway, my changes:

[...]

Sacred Servant Paladin is Tier 4.

[...]

Forgive me for my ignorance, not being a fan of Pathfinder, but why would the Sacred Servant archetype of the Paladin wouldn't be any better than the base version, when it's both a definite improvement (the real loss is basically halving your uses of "the ability that's supposed to be Smite Evil"; forgive me for that but I refuse to call that ability "Smite", even if it's strictly better) and its top ability is quite powerful (Celestial Companion)?

Sure, you do lose some extra things (the Aura of Resolve and fixing your Divine Bond to your Holy Symbol), but the exchanges are strictly better:

You gain access to a whole new domain, plus extra domain slots. Sure, it's only 1 spell and up to 4th level, but the right domain can really boost your power. Not only that, if I read it right, you also gain its granted power, except three levels lower than a Cleric would. Considering how domains are much, much better in PF...
Losing your immunity to all charms and compulsions is really nothing compared to what you get (the effects of Lesser Planar Ally, improving with levels). This alone is the most powerful effect, particularly as you can waive the cost of the service based on the task. Getting the benefit of a hound archon, couatl, half-celestial unicorn or planetar without cost grants a great level of flexibility. The limiting factor is the "reasonable task" corollary, but requesting a spare hand against the forces of evil is both reasonable and ambiguous enough to merit the 1 day/CL duration, and thus get a powerful companion at your service, particularly one that gets 8th level Cleric spells...
The Divine Bond effect makes your positive energy manipulation and spellcasting ability much, much better. Just the extra uses per day of Lay on Hands work wonders.

I presume that the reason why you're setting them at Tier 4 is because, while they're more powerful than before, they still don't surpass the threshold of versatility that a Tier 3 can achieve. I'd say that, even if it's 1/week, the mere possibility of casting Planar Ally and the choice of domain allow for it. Barring the two losses, the Paladin gains a lot and loses virtually nothing. Given that Planar Ally is virtually unchanged from its 3.5 incarnation, and Planar Ally is a pretty powerful spell on its own (only surpassed, naturally, by the Gate spell) and, above all, flexible, it helps boost the versatility of the Paladin. The domain is a fixed choice and thus a variable defined by the optimization potential of the character, but the optimization floor is pretty low because of the alignment restriction (being Lawful Good, you may only choose a domain from deities that are LG, NG or LN, so there's a whole bunch of domains that you can't choose; this limits the potential of the ability, but also simplifies it, so the net change is close to zero, but still meaningful).

So, after explaining why I eyeball Sacred Servant as a (low) tier 3 archetype/class combination, why do you keep it in Tier 4, where the base Paladin resides? That pretty much implies Sacred Servant has no reason to exist on its own (the whole reason why it's separate from the other archetypes of the Paladin), and thus you might as well say "remove Paladin (Sacred Servant) from Tier 3", as it has the same effect (it automatically lumps it with all other archetypes, ergo it becomes Tier 4 by default).

[Craft (Cheese)]

Forgive me for my ignorance, not being a fan of Pathfinder, but why would the Sacred Servant archetype of the Paladin wouldn't be any better than the base version, when it's both a definite improvement (the real loss is basically halving your uses of "the ability that's supposed to be Smite Evil"; forgive me for that but I refuse to call that ability "Smite", even if it's strictly better) and its top ability is quite powerful (Celestial Companion)?

You're still stuck with Paladin's slow casting from a crap list. The domain helps a little but not enough to bump it to T3. Planar Ally 1/week is nice but ultimately too dependent upon your DM: They get to decide what's "reasonable".

Also, by the way, after reading your comment on domains, I went through and checked every single LN, LG, and NG deity printed for PF: You can get every single domain except Void (only Black Butterfly, Groetus, and the Outer Gods have the Void domain, and they're all Chaotic) on a sacred servant, depending on which deity you choose. It's not possible with only the core deities, but there's dozens and dozens of minor deities and demigods.

Technically, you could worship an LG Mythic Mortal who took the Divine Source powers and chose Void as one of her domains.


The Dread list really doesn't impress me. It's the Psywar list, only severely watered down (no inertial armor, no vigor, no expansion, no hustle, no physical acceleration etc.) and then seeded with a smattering of debuffs and direct attacks that are all mind-affecting and have saving throws. It seems to want to be a gish (proficiencies, short-range auras etc) but lacks the best gish powers, and it wants to be a full caster but lacks the variety and power level to pull that off either.

The Shadow Twin is cool on paper (I've long maintained you could build a fixed PF Dvati from this) but suffers from the same problems as you (lukewarm gish and caster.) Even worse, it transmits negative effects to you, utterly defeating the purpose for having a proxy tank like that. If it fails a fort save and ends up poisoned or paralyzed you will too. By RAW, you might even end up grappled or pinned if it does.

I see no reason not to put them in T4 - capable of doing a variety things, but weak at all of them.

That's fair: We just have different lines as to what's T3 and what isn't. I'd argue it's got at least as much flexibility and power (if built right) as, say, a Swordsage. Then again, Swordsage is often argued to be T4 as well.

[The Insanity]

http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=1389.msg12201#msg12201

[Psyren]

I'm sorry but I agree with Oskar, Sacred Servant is T3.

Planar Ally: Yeah your DM gets to choose what you get, but unless he's out to screw you over you should get your choice (or something close enough) from within the HD limits of the spell and your alignment/deity's allowance. DM choice is not reason enough to discount these great spells, which will generally work as intended in practice; strictly speaking, Miracle is DM choice too (yes or no) yet it's still considered one of the most powerful spells in CharOp simply because an active jerk of a DM is not a meaningful assumption for the game. The 1/week limitation doesn't matter either, since (1) you can get its help for up to 8 days when you gain the ability anyway and (2) the fee is waived. Charm immunity is nice but with your saving throws they shouldn't be too much of a problem anyway.

Domain: Lots of these are really good, particularly for a martial class. Exploration and Tactics are excellent choices for instance.

The best part of the planar ally is that you can get a mount back if you really need one easily that way, and more importantly can gain celestial backup even in situations where a mount is impractical, like in a dungeon or city. And you aren't pigeonholed into one companion either, such as having a shark when the campaign shifts from aquatic to desert.



That's fair: We just have different lines as to what's T3 and what isn't.

We certainly seem to, yeah.