Tiers of ACG Classes

[the_archduke]

So with 10 new base classes, where does everyone fit in the Tier system? I get a Tier 3-4 vibe all around, but Arcanist and Shaman are... 2? Are any of them lower?

[Kudaku]

Arcanist is definitely tier 1. I'd say the Skald, Warpriest, Hunter, and the Investigator are tier 3, while the bloodrager, brawler, slayer, and swashbuckler stacking in around tier 4.

Shaman I really don't know enough to place, but I'm guessing somewhere between tier 1 and 2.

[caimbuel]

Arcanist T1
Bloodrager T4ish
Brawler T5
Hunter T4
Investigator T4 maybe a tad higher
Shaman T2 or 3 spell list is somewhat limited
Skald T4ish
Slayer T5
Swashbuckler T6
Warpriest T5

Others may disagree, but thats my take

[PsyBomb]

Brawler is solidly T4. While all it can do is combat, it can customize itself as a Move action (at most) to face specific threats.

Shaman... T2, I think. Although they have a limited spell list, that list has a bunch of the standard game-breakers in it, plus wide-ranging class features for general utility.

[Ilorin Lorati]

I'd say Shaman is at least a good tier 2 just on virtue of wandering spirit and being able to know any given sorcerer/wizard spell on a day to day basis through the lore sprit and a headband of intellect.

[Craft (Cheese)]

My ratings:

Tier 1: Arcanist, Shaman
Tier 2: (None)
Tier 3: Hunter, Skald, Warpriest
Tier 4: Investigator, Bloodrager
Tier 5: Brawler, Slayer, Swashbuckler

[caimbuel]

I'd say Shaman is at least a good tier 2 just on virtue of wandering spirit and being able to know any given sorcerer/wizard spell on a day to day basis through the lore sprit and a headband of intellect.

Getting CHA spells from sorc wiz is not enough for me to believe tier 2 is warranted, and most of the hexes I don't find powerful enough to make much of a difference. The spirits seem to be watered down oracle mysteries due to you getting 2 of them.

As far as the brawler, if getting the right feats is so important, why is a fighter considered to be so weak but has the most feats? So they change their feats, and what, move and 1 attack, stand and full attack, or get the new feat to pounce and full attack, every stinking round, no matter what, because wait, its all they have.

[Ssalarn]

Arcanist T1
Bloodrager T4ish
Brawler T5
Hunter T4
Investigator T4 maybe a tad higher
Shaman T2 or 3 spell list is somewhat limited
Skald T4ish
Slayer T5
Swashbuckler T6
Warpriest T5

Others may disagree, but thats my take

Hunter is Tier 3 easy. Melee combat monster with 6+Int skills and 6th level casting with some early access? Yes please.

Warpriest is also closer to the Tier 3 or 4 area, but not as solidly T3 as the Hunter due to his need to burn resources so hard to maintain effectiveness in combat.
Skald should also be Tier 3, thanks in no small part to Spell Kenning, aka "the utility button".

The rest of those are pretty accurate.

[Tanuki Tales]

Swashbuckler T6


I'm sorry, but what makes it even comparable to the Commoner?

[Craft (Cheese)]

I'm sorry, but what makes it even comparable to the Commoner?

I think they're comparing it more to the CW Samurai or the Truenamer: While I don't think it's quite that bad, I can see where they're coming from.

[Ilorin Lorati]

Getting CHA spells from sorc wiz is not enough for me to believe tier 2 is warranted, and most of the hexes I don't find powerful enough to make much of a difference. The spirits seem to be watered down oracle mysteries due to you getting 2 of them.

The saves are still based on Wisdom, and at late levels, as mentioned previously, the headband is not in any real way expensive.

[squiggit]

T1: Arcanist
T2: Shaman
T3: Hunter, Investigator, Skald
T4: Bloodrager, Warpriest
T5: Brawler, Slayer, Swashbuckler

[the_archduke]

So is Arcanist just Wizard++? You are a sorceror who gets to swap his spells known out every day?

[avr]

So is Arcanist just Wizard++? You are a sorceror who gets to swap his spells known out every day?
No, it's for slack Wizard players. Nearly as powerful, much easier to max out.

[Azurefenrir]

The quick study exploit also ensures that you can trade a spell out with a single full round action for one point from your pool. It's so powerful that even if you do take the sorc bloodline (not recommended) or wizard specialization (very recommended) archetypes, you should always reserve a 1st or 3rd level feat for Extra Arcane Exploit: Quick Study.

You can also get Craft Wonderous Item or a metamagic in place of an exploit. Come 11th level, they can take Greater Metamagic Knowledge and get a floating metamagic feat that they can change every day.

Arcanist's strength isn't just the spell mechanic - arcane exploit is very powerful class feature, not to mention that they can just take an Archetype and grab a wizard's school specialization along with all the benefits in case if their prepared spells isn't enough.

[Sir Chuckles]

Is Swashbuckler really that derp'd?
Shame, it's my second favorite kind of character, behind Gish-Swashbuckler.

[squiggit]

Is Swashbuckler really that derp'd?
Shame, it's my second favorite kind of character, behind Gish-Swashbuckler.

It's not a complete wreck, but it suffers from a lot of issues. Tons of stuff runs off swift/immediate actions. So if you throw cha to saves you can't parry, dodge or activate your big damage move, etc. Theoretically it's sorta cool to make choices like that... in practice it just causes a mess because all of those moves are critical to your functionality.
You're running one hand with no offhand, a pretty crummy style. Precise strike helps, but doesn't entirely solve the problem.
Despite being billed as darting in and out of the fray, your mobility isn't particularly good. You aren't very tanky either and you have a ton of trouble dealing with groups of enemies (your dodge provokes AoOs and you can only parry once a round).
You're not very durable. You shouldn't expect to be given the class' billing, but still. D10 and buckler helps here at least.
You aren't very good at much else either. Now, naturally you probably aren't expecting this when you pick the class, but the point stands that you don't have a lot of utility, aren't a very good skillmonkey and have about as much narrative power as your parent classes.

Again, you don't expect to be a leader or controller or meatshield when you roll up a swashbuckler, but it does exacerbate things a bit when the class isn't particularly amazing at its core niche while also not having versatility.

Now compound the fact that it isn't great with some of the stuff that players are finding insulting to their sensibilities (Battleaxes more finessable than daggers or rapiers? You got it. Charmed life passive? Broken. But hey won't you love what I have in store for oracles) and the class sours pretty hard for a lot of people.

[Psyren]

Investigator would be a contender for T3 even without 6 levels of extracts, which it gets.

Bloodrager I am actually tempted to put in T3 - they seem like Barbarian+.

[ibtfu]

So is Arcanist just Wizard++? You are a sorceror who gets to swap his spells known out every day?

Nah, the Wizard can take the exploiter archetype and cherry pick Arcanist abilities. :smallsigh:

[Barstro]

I'd say Shaman is at least a good tier 2 just on virtue of wandering spirit and being able to know any given sorcerer/wizard spell on a day to day basis through the lore sprit and a headband of intellect.

I'd say that makes it a tier 1.

But, what would their tier be if you couldn't choose Lore or Heavens? I thought the class was rather wanting until I saw that at level 20 they get any spell (I expect that to be errata'd somehow) and Wis to all saves by using Lore and Heavens. Get rid of those two Spirits, and the class strikes me as being much lower.

[Psyren]

So is Arcanist just Wizard++? You are a sorceror who gets to swap his spells known out every day?

You are on the slow track and thus have fewer spells/day than even a generalist. You also don't get school powers or arcane discoveries. So no, I wouldn't call them "wizard++" even if Exploiter did not exist.

[Mithril Leaf]

Investigator would be a contender for T3 even without 6 levels of extracts, which it gets.

Bloodrager I am actually tempted to put in T3 - they seem like Barbarian+.

I'd personally say the Investigator is a weak to middling tier 4 without the pseudocasting, but agree it reaches tier 3 with it. It seems like a generally weaker Factotum, which to me was the epitome of Tier 3.

[Psyren]

Even without the extracts, it still gets studied strike, inspiration, poison, rogue talents, alchemist discoveries (including combat-enhancing mutagens) and even its own talents. Thus it meets the definition of T3 - good at one thing (basically, everything outside of combat) and still useful when that one thing isn't appropriate (when a fight starts, there is a lot they can do even without extracts.)

[Craft (Cheese)]

Bloodrager I am actually tempted to put in T3 - they seem like Barbarian+.

The bloodrager has three main problems going for it.

- The 4-level spell progression really, *really* hurts. Especially for a class that's supposed to be using its spells in combat: Unless you put a lot of investment into your spells they're never going to be relevant for the level when you get them, and even then you'll be strictly worse at gishing than, say, a Magus.

- Without an archetype (Metamagic Rager) you have a serious action economy problem: You have no way to cast a spell and attack in the same round. And due to the aforementioned problem, your spells are usually not going to be worth the standard action to cast most of the time. And the problem with metamagic rager is that it's extremely expensive: 10 rounds of rage to quicken a 1st-level spell.

- Bloodline powers... kinda suck. Don't get me wrong, there's a few gems (like Abnormal Reach, Demonic Bulk, and Greater Arcane Bloodrage) but within any given bloodline you'll generally only have 1 or 2 bloodline powers that you'll actually be using. Compare to Rage Powers where you get to pick and choose which you get, and there's enough good ones that every single rage power is a huge boost to your character's effectiveness. The good news is Primalist lets you trade your sucky bloodline powers (except the one at 1st level) for sweet, sweet rage powers (and it lets you take Extra Rage Power to get more!). Also, all the best bloodline abilities are available as rage powers anyway.

All of this adds up to Barbarian-; Worse if you don't go with the mandatory archetypes.

[stack]

This ability does not count as the rage power class feature for determining feat prerequisites and other requirements.

This line makes me sad, no extra rage power feat for the primalist.

[Craft (Cheese)]

This ability does not count as the rage power class feature for determining feat prerequisites and other requirements.

This line makes me sad, no extra rage power feat for the primalist.

That's... disappointing. Oh well, another houserule for the pile:

- Primalist Bloodragers can take Extra Rage Power, and other options that require the Rage Power class feature.

[StreamOfTheSky]

My ratings:

Tier 1: Arcanist, Shaman
Tier 2: (None)
Tier 3: Hunter, Skald, Warpriest
Tier 4: Investigator, Bloodrager
Tier 5: Brawler, Slayer, Swashbuckler

I haven't looked thoroughly into the classes, but this looks pretty accurate from what I've seen.

Brawler makes me really sad, it should be the best at maneuvers but I see the whole "well Lore Warden Fighter's broken, so it's not a fair comparison" statement on their forums held true to the final printing*. As for the spontaneous feat....if only it were TRUE martial versatility. Something that let you ignore *all* pre-requisites other than level (character-, class-, caster-, etc...), BAB, and skill ranks. Since so many martial feats in PF are ginormous trees of suck. It looks like the "gain even more feats, and use them to qualify for the one you actually wanted!" was a half-assed way to get around the actual problem.

* Yes, I know. In reality, casters and eidolons are better than either at them. I meant, best among the under-classes.

[Psyren]

The bloodrager has three main problems going for it.

- The 4-level spell progression really, *really* hurts. Especially for a class that's supposed to be using its spells in combat: Unless you put a lot of investment into your spells they're never going to be relevant for the level when you get them, and even then you'll be strictly worse at gishing than, say, a Magus.

- Without an archetype (Metamagic Rager) you have a serious action economy problem: You have no way to cast a spell and attack in the same round. And due to the aforementioned problem, your spells are usually not going to be worth the standard action to cast most of the time. And the problem with metamagic rager is that it's extremely expensive: 10 rounds of rage to quicken a 1st-level spell.

- Bloodline powers... kinda suck. Don't get me wrong, there's a few gems (like Abnormal Reach, Demonic Bulk, and Greater Arcane Bloodrage) but within any given bloodline you'll generally only have 1 or 2 bloodline powers that you'll actually be using. Compare to Rage Powers where you get to pick and choose which you get, and there's enough good ones that every single rage power is a huge boost to your character's effectiveness. The good news is Primalist lets you trade your sucky bloodline powers (except the one at 1st level) for sweet, sweet rage powers (and it lets you take Extra Rage Power to get more!). Also, all the best bloodline abilities are available as rage powers anyway.

All of this adds up to Barbarian-; Worse if you don't go with the mandatory archetypes.

Okay, I wanted to dispute this because you're badly selling the Bloodrager short. Did you even go through the spell list before making this judgment? Because I have, and there are plenty of gems here.

I'll start by saying that yes, you're correct that the nature of bloodlines means that it's more difficult for a bloodrager to cherry-pick good stuff than it is for a barbarian to do with rage powers. But even without the bloodlines, or the archetypes, or any other class features except spells and basic chassis, the Bloodrager blows the Barbarian out of the water, rage powers and all. Here's the breakdown:

1st-level spells (ECL 4): The standout staples here are enlarge person, shield, true strike, protection from X, mudball, and frostbite. Stone Shield and windy escape give you great uses for your immediate/swift early on as well, and both stay relevant (if somewhat situational) all the way up as you level. For new ACG spells, the standouts are long arm (which stacks with Enlarge Person or any shapeshifting you do, because it's not a polymorph effect), and blade lash - a 20 ft. trip attempt that uses all of your modifiers and gets a +10 untyped bonus on top of that. Not many CR-appropriate monsters will be able to stand up to that, even stable ones like centaurs. All of these are useful at level 4 and beyond. (Situational runners-up: feather fall, expeditious retreat, and mount just in case.)

2nd-level spells (ECL 7): Not as many good choices here (though that's okay since there are plenty to take from the previous level.) The big one combat-wise is likely going to be mirror image for its ~75% miss chance, since even though you get it later than other casters it continues to scale based on CL rather than progression. Bullet shield is also nice and lasts over an hour per casting when you get it. Contrary to the name it also works on arrows and even rays or other spell-based attack rolls, and it continues to scale as well. (Runner-ups here: resist energy, false life, delay pain, certain grip, see invisibility.) The only new spell worth mentioning is extreme flexibility, however, and it's not great.

3rd-level spells (ECL 10): We're entering mid-levels and there are some nice toys here. Now you can start shapeshifting - both to reconnoiter/travel (beast shape I) or simply to kick ass (monstrous physique I.) MP is unique among the polymorph spells in that it does NOT absorb your gear, so you lose nothing by, say, turning into a Gargoyle or Popobala and fighting in midair with your greatsword or spiked chain, while also gaining a free bite (and even wing attacks in the case of the latter.) Or, if you're human/HE, you can paragon surge instead and grab that one situational combat or other technique you need. Undead Anatomy I also retains your equipment, if you feel like scaring people, but I prefer MP. Other goodies include the inability to be flanked (countless eyes), a nigh-indestructible flanking buddy of your own (twilight knife), the ability to run through enemies without provoking (burst of speed), and the ability to block arrows/swarms with wind wall. Rounding out the list of good are staples like haste, phantom steed, greater magic weapon, protection from energy, fly, and ray of exhaustion. Finally, there is a new spell on their list at this level which is quite nice - Greater Thunderstomp, which lets you trip everyone in a 60ft. line, and says that you CAN use your CL and casting stat to calculate CMB - not that you HAVE to (as with spells like black tentacles.) So, simply stick with your BAB and Str to calculate the trip as normal and watch the bowling pins come tumbling down. (Strike!)

4th-level spells (ECL 13): If the previous level of spells didn't emasculate the barbarian enough, we've got some real treats here. The big dog in the room is Monstrous Physique II, which gets us reach and pounce thanks to the Tikbalang, and also gets us a free bite and 4 free hoof attacks to boot - and you still get to use your normal weapon(s) on top of all that. But the truly nasty form is the Doppelganger. Proficiency with all exotic weapons - check. Proficiency with all armor and shields - check. Able to use every wand, staff and scroll in the entire game without rolling - check, check and double check. Show me the barbarian that can do that. There's also Beast Shape II if you need a tiny animal form to escape a situation. Other toys include elemental body I for earth glide/perfect flight/water breathing, enervation for an all purpose saveless debuff on anyone you plan to fight, shocking image/fire shield/vitriolic shield for free damage on anyone who attacks you, hellmouth lash for 15ft. AoOs, ghost wolf for a phantom steed that doubles as a flanking buddy, and calcific touch for a no-save debuff you can apply while fighting a tough foe.

So there is plenty of good on the list, that no barbarian can hope to match. And to the action economy point, lesser rods will cover 75% of their spells because the spell levels are so low. A couple of lesser quicken rods and lesser extend rods and you are good to go - no archetype needed. They can even make the rods themselves if necessary.

Ergo, I stand by my rating of T3 for the Bloodrager. And if they are in fact T4, they are higher in that bracket than the Barbarian is.

[CaptainPlatypus]

A refresher on what the tier list means, courtesy of JaronK at Brilliant Gameologists (and elsewhere), have the original source (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?PHPSESSID=bc18425e5fa73d30e4a9a54889edf4 4e&topic=5293):

So translating to pre-ACG pathfinder, we have a tier 1 of wizard/cleric/druid, a tier 2 of sorcerer/oracle, an agreeably stuffed tier 3 (bard ranger alchemist inquisitor magus summoner witch), and "the rest," who I'm willing to lump into tier 4 together - in pathfinder, nobody's really 3.5e-monk levels of optimization-dependent. So that's the schema I'm trying to fit the new classes into.

Arcanist: Tier 1, no question. Others have described it as 95% of a wizard's power/flexibility with 5% of the effort and I can't disagree.
Bloodrager: Tier 4. It's a decently powerful combat specialist that doesn't do much out of combat. Pathfinder has a lot of those.
Brawler: Tier 4. See above.
Hunter: Very solid tier 3. Great in combat, great out of combat, but not quite at "end encounters in a single round on a regular basis without heavy optimization" levels of power.
Investigator: Tier 3. Not as scary as an alchemist, but even more versatile. Good stuff.
Shaman: Tier 3, but very easy to move up to a tier 2 with optimization, especially if you believe in wandering lore spirit shenanigans.
Skald: Tier 3. A bard, but better. Cool.
Slayer: Tier 3. Low end of it, but there's a reason I said this tier was "agreeably stuffed" in pathfinder. Great in combat and great skillmonkey out of it. You're no shaman, but you do a lot of things well, and you never have nothing to do.
Swashbuckler: Tier 4, and towards the bottom. I know the monk got buffed hard in pathfinder, but you still shouldn't make it look scary and flexible.
Warpriest: Tier 3. Swift action spells are awesome, and you've got a great list to draw them from, but I'm still a lot more worried by a full caster when it comes to "make my encounter go away without trying."

And honestly, this right here is why I love pathfinder - it's a lot more consistent than 3.5e ever was, in terms of power level. Sure, you've still got wizards and clerics and druids making the tier list look top-heavy, but the vast majority of the content (including eight of the ten classes in this book) is from high tier 3 to mid tier 4. Though that being my preferred power level makes me biased as all hell.

[ibtfu]

This is slightly off-topic, but where do early-entry PRCs rank in the tiers?


Tier 1?: Trickster Cleric 1/Wizard 2-3/Mystic Theurge 10
Tier 2?: Fighter 1/Wizard (Scryer) 1/Eldritch Knight 10
Arcane Trickster?

[Psyren]

Bloodrager: Tier 4. It's a decently powerful combat specialist that doesn't do much out of combat. Pathfinder has a lot of those.

As I showed above, they can do quite a lot outside of combat. I consider them nearly on par with Gifted Blade Soulknives.


This is slightly off-topic, but where do early-entry PRCs rank in the tiers?


Tier 1?: Trickster Cleric 1/Wizard 2-3/Mystic Theurge 10
Tier 2?: Fighter 1/Wizard (Scryer) 1/Eldritch Knight 10
Arcane Trickster?

Prestige classes are rated with +X, -X or 0, where "X" is how much of an adjustment they make to your entering class. For instance, if you enter EK with Wizard/Fighter, the end result is going to be much different than if you entered it with Magus, and in the latter case it certainly won't be T1.

Early entry EK (and regular EK for that matter, since it makes little difference - either way you're dipping a level if fighter) I put at +0; it just doesn't add anything meaningful to the wizard, fighter or anything else, but it doesn't actively hurt them either.

Mystic Theurge on the other hand - without early entry it is -1, because it makes both of your base class(es) weaker. With early entry it is +0, because you're only giving up a little advancement in one of your classes to gain more versatility from the other, and when you return to your primary class at the end of it things won't be appreciably different than staying single-classed.

Though it's worth noting that in Pathfinder, because you're giving up class features with every PrC, you might apply a global -1 across the board to all PrCs mentally as a baseline, instead of 0, adjusting the above ratings accordingly.

[Segev]

Okay. So the Arcanist is a Sorcerer with a Wizard's spellbook and the ability to prepare his Spells Known each day. Sure, this means the Wizard is still better under high-op conditions, and the trade-off with the Arcanist's more forgiving spontaneous spell slots is probably acceptable to make them competitors.

But is there a reason to play Sorcerer at all with Arcanist out there? It may not quite be "wizard++," but what makes it anything but "sorcerer++?" Or, conversely, what prevents Sorcerer from being "Arcanist--?"

(Before, Sorc was weaker than Wiz, but the spontaneous casting schtick still was a stand-out ability.)

[Psyren]

The sorcerer's first strength relative to the arcanist is ammunition. If longevity doesn't matter in your games, then yes, the arcanist will likely be "sorcerer+."

The second is that, of the three, sorcerers are still the only "spontaneous caster" - arcanists have a unique preparation mechanic that mimics spontaneity, but they are still technically prepared casters. So abilities that care about spontaneous casting will still be easier for sorcerers to acquire. (Most of these are in 3.5 of course, but we may get more.)

Third is that arcanists are incapable of getting a full bloodline unless you allow archetypes - and if you do, then the sorcerer is capable of getting bloodlines that no one else can access. Even an arcanist cannot gain the special bloodlines from wildblooded or crossblooded.

[Segev]

Are the sorc-only bloodlines really stand-out enough to allow you to play something truly unique compared to what you could do with the Arcanist?

And I'm not sure I buy the line that the Arcanist is not technically a spontaneous caster. He spontaneously casts spells from his prepared daily list. If anything, he's BOTH kinds.

I suppose Sorc still is a Cha-caster, though for nearly all purposes, that's actually a disadvantage compared to being an Int-caster. Good catch on spells/day, though; I'd missed that the Arcanist only got up to as many as the Wizard in spell slots, not as many as the Sorcerer. So if you're running endurance-tests where the fighter's one solid advantage (not running out of useful actions) might even have a chance of showing up, the sorcerer will hang in longer than the Arcanist.

I am glad I was missing something, thanks for pointing it out.

[Psyren]

Are the sorc-only bloodlines really stand-out enough to allow you to play something truly unique compared to what you could do with the Arcanist?

Sure. For example, Empyreal changes your casting stat to Wis and goes great with wis-based classes for a Sir Wisdom the SAD-type build; Only the sorcerer can do that (with arcane magic anyway.) Crossblooded gets you two arcana, which is handy for a number of builds, like the PF version of the mailman.



And I'm not sure I buy the line that the Arcanist is not technically a spontaneous caster. He spontaneously casts spells from his prepared daily list. If anything, he's BOTH kinds.

No, he simply prepares spells that aren't expended when cast. He's still a prepared caster. You could theoretically prepare the same spell multiple times and reduce your potential. It's actually a pretty brilliant way of approximating spontaneous casting in everything but name.

He can apply metamagic spontaneously, but the spellcasting itself is still prepared.



I suppose Sorc still is a Cha-caster, though for nearly all purposes, that's actually a disadvantage compared to being an Int-caster. Good catch on spells/day, though; I'd missed that the Arcanist only got up to as many as the Wizard in spell slots, not as many as the Sorcerer. So if you're running endurance-tests where the fighter's one solid advantage (not running out of useful actions) might even have a chance of showing up, the sorcerer will hang in longer than the Arcanist.

I am glad I was missing something, thanks for pointing it out.

That's another thing Wildblooded lets you do, switch to Int. So you end up with the Arcanist's superior casting stat and a lot more spells/day.

The Arcanist has the wizard's base spells/day and it follows the sorcerer's delayed progression - so it actually ends up with fewer spells/day overall than even a generalist wizard.

[ibtfu]

Prestige classes are rated with +X, -X or 0, where "X" is how much of an adjustment they make to your entering class. For instance, if you enter EK with Wizard/Fighter, the end result is going to be much different than if you entered it with Magus, and in the latter case it certainly won't be T1.

Early entry EK (and regular EK for that matter, since it makes little difference - either way you're dipping a level if fighter) I put at +0; it just doesn't add anything meaningful to the wizard, fighter or anything else, but it doesn't actively hurt them either.

Early entry makes a difference until level 16. Actually this is a problem with the tiers--they vary across experience levels.

Well, not to start an argument but EK adds wizard casting, school abilities and wand usage to a fighter. An E12 Fighter 1/Wizard 1/Eldritch Knight 10 is probably tier 2 while an E12 Fighter is tier 4. At E6, it's closer but the optimized E6 Eldritch Knight can cast blur, blindness, still-spelled vanish etc. in full plate as well as acting in the surprise round and getting +4 initiative from familiar.

Edit: Forgot E6 EK can only cast 2nd level spells! No suggestion, displacement or still spell mirror image until E7.

[Psyren]

Comparing EK to fighter strikes me as pointless. Of course it's stronger than fighter, but determining a PrC's worth should be based on what it does to your stronger class, not your weaker one.


Early entry makes a difference until level 16.

No, not really. A Wizard 1/Fighter 1/EK 10 is not any stronger than a Wizard 12. In fact he is decidedly weaker in many ways. He is better at melee, sure, but that's like being the best fencer at the gun range - it's not really necessary or relevant.

A Wiz 3/Cleric 1/MT 10, or Wiz 1/Cleric 3/MT 10 or however you do it is going to have a lot more spells to throw out, but early entry doesn't solve you being MAD, and you will go to bed with most of those spells unused in the vast majority of campaigns.

[Segev]

Hm, and the Arcanist seems to have some minor MAD, with Exploits using Cha. This also makes the Exploiter wizard less potent.

[Larkas]

A refresher on what the tier list means, courtesy of JaronK at Brilliant Gameologists (and elsewhere), have the original source (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?PHPSESSID=bc18425e5fa73d30e4a9a54889edf4 4e&topic=5293):

So translating to pre-ACG pathfinder, we have a tier 1 of wizard/cleric/druid, a tier 2 of sorcerer/oracle, an agreeably stuffed tier 3 (bard ranger alchemist inquisitor magus summoner witch), and "the rest," who I'm willing to lump into tier 4 together - in pathfinder, nobody's really 3.5e-monk levels of optimization-dependent. So that's the schema I'm trying to fit the new classes into.

Arcanist: Tier 1, no question. Others have described it as 95% of a wizard's power/flexibility with 5% of the effort and I can't disagree.
Bloodrager: Tier 4. It's a decently powerful combat specialist that doesn't do much out of combat. Pathfinder has a lot of those.
Brawler: Tier 4. See above.
Hunter: Very solid tier 3. Great in combat, great out of combat, but not quite at "end encounters in a single round on a regular basis without heavy optimization" levels of power.
Investigator: Tier 3. Not as scary as an alchemist, but even more versatile. Good stuff.
Shaman: Tier 3, but very easy to move up to a tier 2 with optimization, especially if you believe in wandering lore spirit shenanigans.
Skald: Tier 3. A bard, but better. Cool.
Slayer: Tier 3. Low end of it, but there's a reason I said this tier was "agreeably stuffed" in pathfinder. Great in combat and great skillmonkey out of it. You're no shaman, but you do a lot of things well, and you never have nothing to do.
Swashbuckler: Tier 4, and towards the bottom. I know the monk got buffed hard in pathfinder, but you still shouldn't make it look scary and flexible.
Warpriest: Tier 3. Swift action spells are awesome, and you've got a great list to draw them from, but I'm still a lot more worried by a full caster when it comes to "make my encounter go away without trying."

And honestly, this right here is why I love pathfinder - it's a lot more consistent than 3.5e ever was, in terms of power level. Sure, you've still got wizards and clerics and druids making the tier list look top-heavy, but the vast majority of the content (including eight of the ten classes in this book) is from high tier 3 to mid tier 4. Though that being my preferred power level makes me biased as all hell.

I agree with most of this (though I'd peg Shaman decidedly at T2/1), but I'm curious. Why do you peg ranger at T3?

[Snowbluff]

Hm, and the Arcanist seems to have some minor MAD, with Exploits using Cha. This also makes the Exploiter wizard less potent.

Barely. All of the bad exploits use Cha. The good ones do not.

[Ssalarn]

I agree with most of this (though I'd peg Shaman decidedly at T2/1), but I'm curious. Why do you peg ranger at T3?

I've always seen PF Ranger as Tier 3. Great in combat, 6+Int skills, Favored Enemy and Terrain both have out of combat uses and the Ranger spell list includes options for making those available pretty much anywhere against pretty much anything. They've also got a smattering of buffing and control options which helps widen their versatility even more.

[Segev]

Barely. All of the bad exploits use Cha. The good ones do not.

Is this coincidence or causal?

[Barstro]

I agree with most of this (though I'd peg Shaman decidedly at T2/1), but I'm curious. Why do you peg ranger at T3?

The Shaman at T3 is probably due to the fact that he feels Witch is T3. I'd say Witch at worst is T2.

[Psyren]

Is this coincidence or causal?

It's the usual problem with trying to make casters MAD - one of the only levers you have from a attribute perspective are save DCs. So the exploits with a save DC use Cha. But the best exploits are like the best spells - no saving throw, either due to acting on the arcanist himself or targeting something that doesn't interact with saving throws (e.g. counterspelling.)

[Snowbluff]

Mhm. The other problem would be generating an effect that doesn't overlap with their present abilities, which is spellcasting. So what happens is that you get abilities that improve that which is already incredibly strong, like the counterspelling ability.

[Segev]

Looking through the exploits, I don't think I like that choice of word for it, either. The fluff doesn't match what they do. They feel like generic Supernatural or Spell-like abilities, not "exploited loopholes in the rules of magic." While I won't make any claim of it being good, balanced mechanical design, the Incantatrix's metamagic chicanery is more in line with an "exploit loopholes in magic" sort of flavor, to me.

The counterspelling is about the only one that really sounds like an "exploit" in "magic's laws" at all.

[Psyren]

For the ones that are simply "I fire a bolt of acid" I agree with you. But they have a great deal more rule-breaking than just being able to violate the counterspell rules. For example, they can cannibalize magic items - usually, putting energy on a stick is a one-way street. Or they can swap out their spells prepared even during combat, unlike a wizard who is basically stuck or has to rely on much more limited methods like Mage's Lucubration. Or they can 5-foot step, teleport away and then keep moving once they get there. Or spontaneously adding metamagic without increasing the casting time. Or hack a spell's duration, or suppress an existing spell by looking at it, or hack the propeties of magic armor/weapons/shields...

[Segev]

Ah, okay. That's what I get for skimming; that does sound more like it.

[CaptainPlatypus]

As I showed above, [bloodragers] can do quite a lot outside of combat. I consider them nearly on par with Gifted Blade Soulknives.

Crap, you're right. Somehow I missed your post. I'd put them pretty low in T3, but Monstrous Physique and Beast Shape alone get 'em there. Thanks for the correction.


I agree with most of this (though I'd peg Shaman decidedly at T2/1), but I'm curious. Why do you peg ranger at T3?
The ranger's scary in combat and has lots of versatility out of it (skillmonkey duties, good spell list, animal companion). It's definitely towards the lower end of tier 3, but like the bloodrager (thanks again to Psyren), it squeaks in. (nearly) every Pathfinder class is good at its primary job description, so you pretty much need to be a one-trick pony (monk, fighter) to be T4 by 3.5e standards.

As for the shaman, I was going to say that an unoptimized shaman isn't as scary as an unoptimized sorcerer, but then I realized that that wasn't the right way to think of it. The shaman's playing in the same ballpark as the sorcerer, even if his winrate isn't as high. Point ceded. I should probably let the witch in too, on the same grounds. They don't get many of the sorcerer's best tricks, but they get a lot more different tricks, and getting an extra level of spells a level earlier should count for something. So that leaves, what, summoners as the dividing line? I'm not even sure which side of it they belong on now. I think how sparse T2 was in 3.5e is getting to me.

[Psyren]

Crap, you're right. Somehow I missed your post. I'd put them pretty low in T3, but Monstrous Physique and Beast Shape alone get 'em there. Thanks for the correction.

In addition, they're the first full BAB base class with 20/20 caster level. I hope that trend continues in Pathfinder Unleashed, paladins and rangers need the love.

[CaptainPlatypus]

In addition, they're the first full BAB base class with 20/20 caster level. I hope that trend continues in Pathfinder Unleashed, paladins and rangers need the love.

It's a nice precedent to have set. I'd be satisfied just to have Pathfinder Unleashed decently proofed before they publish it, though. :smallannoyed:

[3WhiteFox3]

It's a nice precedent to have set. I'd be satisfied just to have Pathfinder Unleashed decently proofed before they publish it, though. :smallannoyed:

Here here.

Seriously though, I hope they learned from this book and won't put as big a time crunch in PU.

[Mithril Leaf]

They don't get many of the sorcerer's best tricks, but they get a lot more different tricks, and getting an extra level of spells a level earlier should count for something. So that leaves, what, summoners as the dividing line? I'm not even sure which side of it they belong on now. I think how sparse T2 was in 3.5e is getting to me.

I'd personally say that Standard Summoners are high tier 3, while Master Summoners break up into tier 2, due to the ability to spam Summon Monster.

[Ssalarn]

Here here.

Seriously though, I hope they learned from this book and won't put as big a time crunch in PU.

They had a few things working against them with the ACG, primary amongst them being the GenCon deadline, the loss of one of the designer who wrote literally half of the classes in the book, and needing to run a second playtest because the first one ended up leading to a much larger list of changes than they'd anticipated. I don't think Unchained will be in a position where any of those things are factors, so I'm optimistic.


I'd personally say that Standard Summoners are high tier 3, while Master Summoners break up into tier 2, due to the ability to spam Summon Monster.

I've always felt like Summoners were solidly in Tier 2. They're full casters disguised as 3/4 casters with some of the best spells in the game available at levels no one else can use them (which also makes them able to craft items no one else can craft), a highly mutable war machine that can be instantly adapted to any situation via Evolution Surge, and their incredibly potent summon monster SLA, which is a boost in both total casting capacity and action economy. A Summoner without an Eidolon is still (at least) on par with a Sorcerer specializing in conjuration; with the Eidolon he can effectively cover pretty much any role in the game with a high degree of facility. His only real limitation is the action economy hit from needing to dismiss his eidolon to utilize summon monster, though there's ways around that.

[Psyren]

They had a few things working against them with the ACG, primary amongst them being the GenCon deadline, the loss of one of the designer who wrote literally half of the classes in the book, and needing to run a second playtest because the first one ended up leading to a much larger list of changes than they'd anticipated. I don't think Unchained will be in a position where any of those things are factors, so I'm optimistic.

I agree with most of this, but given what we got to look at for the first playtest I think they should just plan on having two from now on. The first iteration of the classes were nearly unplayable compared to the finished product, buggy though it is.

Agreed on Summoners being T2.

[Beowulf DW]

Agreed on Summoners being T2.

They're definitely T2. Only a cursory look at the class would place them at T3.

Shaman is at least T2, possibly low T1. It's casting alone would earn it that. Add in the hexes, spirit magic and spirit animal, and we have a very formidable divine class that can't fall, meaning that your DM can't try to screw you over if you do something he/she doesn't like.

[DungeonDelver]

I agree with a lot of these assessments. I've been building a Slayer and was shocked to find one of the best chassis I've ever seen on a 3.P class. Two good saves, d10 HD, 6 skill points, full BAB, even medium armor proficiency without anything keeping you from using it.

Other than spellcasting, it can do any of the mundane roles. It fights well, it can be the trapmonkey, it can be the party face, it can scout. It's sneak attack progression is weaker, but it's easy to maneuver into a flanking position and eventually get 4 of those per round, or eight if you went TWF.

Versatile, effective, really just only missing spells.

[grarrrg]

I've been building a Slayer and was shocked to find one of the best chassis I've ever seen on a 3.P class. Two good saves, d10 HD, 6 skill points, full BAB, even medium armor proficiency without anything keeping you from using it.

:smallconfused:
The Ranger (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/ranger) says "Hi"

[CaptainPlatypus]

I agree with most of this, but given what we got to look at for the first playtest I think they should just plan on having two from now on. The first iteration of the classes were nearly unplayable compared to the finished product, buggy though it is.

Agreed on Summoners being T2.

Yeah, I'd have to agree with letting witches and summoners up to T2, now that I'm not indulging my "it doesn't have the color spray-type spells on its list" prejudices. Woo! Go pathfinder.

[Squirrel_Dude]

:smallconfused:
The Ranger (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/ranger) says "Hi"And he also comes with spells.

[ColossusCrusher]

I was wondering what people think of the Stygian Slayer archetype. They lose medium armor and a few talents but gain Invisibility once per four levels, Gaseous Form+Fog Cloud for minutes=level and the ability to use spell trigger and spell completion items for darkness, forced quiet, modify memory, nondetection, obscuring mist, phantom steed, shadow walk, and any Wizard spell from 0-4th in the Illusion school. Seems like it adds quite a lot of flexibility to the class.

[CaptainPlatypus]

I was wondering what people think of the Stygian Slayer archetype. They lose medium armor and a few talents but gain Invisibility once per four levels, Gaseous Form+Fog Cloud for minutes=level and the ability to use spell trigger and spell completion items for darkness, forced quiet, modify memory, nondetection, obscuring mist, phantom steed, shadow walk, and any Wizard spell from 0-4th in the Illusion school. Seems like it adds quite a lot of flexibility to the class.

Probably a fair enough trade for what you give up. I think it'd be much stronger in a solo adventure than in a standard party game, where, after all, the party wizard can just cast invisibility/etc for you when it's scouting/assassination time. In a standard four-party lineup that includes a support caster, you're probably slightly better off as a standard slayer.

EDIT: Also, due to an egregiously awful editing error, the stygian slayer RAW is not proficient with any weapons.

[ColossusCrusher]

Oh wow you're right. That's a hilariously bad editing mistake.

[Beowulf DW]

Yeah, I'd have to agree with letting witches and summoners up to T2, now that I'm not indulging my "it doesn't have the color spray-type spells on its list" prejudices. Woo! Go pathfinder.

Witches are definitely low tier 1 at the least.

[grarrrg]

I was wondering what people think of the Stygian Slayer archetype.

It's got a much better name than some of the other Slayer archetypes.

Cleaner (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/hybrid-classes/slayer/archetypes/paizo---slayer-archetypes/cleaner)
*in gruff, tough-guy voice* "Did somebody call for a maid?"

Deliverer (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/hybrid-classes/slayer/archetypes/paizo---slayer-archetypes/deliverer)
Because "Fed-Ex guy" was already taken?

[squiggit]

You're kidding, right? Cleaner is awesome, and combined with the Mastermind Investigator you're well on your way to forming the Pathfinder Mafia.

[grarrrg]

You're kidding, right? Cleaner is awesome, and combined with the Mastermind Investigator you're well on your way to forming the Pathfinder Mafia.

Going by just the name with minimal context, it seems out of place with the whole "swords & fantasy" theme.

It's still loads better than "Deliver-er-er" though. That still fails pretty hard even WITH context.

[Psyren]

Cleaner (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/hybrid-classes/slayer/archetypes/paizo---slayer-archetypes/cleaner)
*in gruff, tough-guy voice* "Did somebody call for a maid?"

You never saw The Professional? Tell me you saw that movie :smallconfused:

[Kudaku]

Or Pulp Fiction, or Leon...

[deuxhero]

Leon is the same movie as The Professional. It had a different title in different markets.

[grarrrg]

You never saw The Professional? Tell me you saw that movie :smallconfused:

Oh, I know darn well what a "cleaner" is.

The point is that I don't think my medieval swords and dragons and wizards fantasy game needs an archetype dedicated to 'cleaning' up evidence of my murder-hobo's last escapade.
And when put next to the other archetype names, "cleaner" doesn't really sound all that grand.
"Bounty Hunter"
"Cutthroat"
"Grave Warden"
"Jim, the cleaner, that guy we call when we're done doing the important stuff"

[DungeonDelver]

I do agree that the idea of the Cleaner doesn't fit a medieval fantasy game, but I'm okay with it existing because I can ignore it if I don't want to use it in my game.

[squiggit]

Eh. Golarion is such a kitchen sink I don't see why we're drawing the line at pathfinder mafiosos when there's so much... everything else.

[Drelua]

Eh. Golarion is such a kitchen sink I don't see why we're drawing the line at pathfinder mafiosos when there's so much... everything else.

Yeah, especially since that particular line has already been crossed. Golarion basically has the mafia, they're even a faction in the Pathfinder Society. Compared to the giant robots from outer space with lasers and machine guns, the mafia's nothing. Why, just this week my monk fought a cyborg that was hiding in a space shuttle.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Deliverer (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/hybrid-classes/slayer/archetypes/paizo---slayer-archetypes/deliverer)
Because "Fed-Ex guy" was already taken?

"The Transporter" would've been super bad ass, but perhaps they were worried about getting sued.