2017 CLASS "TIER" SURVEY. Everyone get in the pool!

[snafuy]

About 2 years ago, the (sub)classes in 5E's PHB were rated by various groups. Since then, I suspect some of the views have shifted, but more importantly, the total number of archetypes has almost exactly doubled thanks to DMG, SCAG, and now XGE. Time for everyone to take another look.

It's a long list, over 80 items. Pace yourself, and rate any that you know well, but feel free to skip ones you don't.

The first question is intended to be as objective as possible. Try to keep your emotions away from your perception of class effectiveness. Base your ratings on "crunch" (game mechanics & numbers), not lore, fluff, house rules, or setting-specific restrictions. Remember: BALANCED IS GOOD! Your total ratings above & below the middle should be roughly equal.

There's also a second question (optional) to express personal favoritism. It might be interesting to see where the two answers differ most.

Okay folks, allons-y! https://goo.gl/forms/WrAT2Qj89ited1rD3

p.s. Yes, yes, I know the older edition concept of "tier" no longer applies, because 5E's class balance is vastly better than 0123E. Nevertheless, differences exist, and people want to compare them.

[Talamare]

I don't even have Xanathar's yet

You should have sorted it by book, not by ... I don't know how you sorted this

[rbstr]

It's reverse alphabetical...

Anyway I really feel like an N/A or no opinion would be a good idea in this kind of survey. I'm sure plenty of people are much more familiar with certain classes than others and it might be a good idea to let them exclude themselves on some classes.

[Easy_Lee]

It's reverse alphabetical...

Anyway I really feel like an N/A or no opinion would be a good idea in this kind of survey. I'm sure plenty of people are much more familiar with certain classes than others and it might be a good idea to let them exclude themselves on some classes.

I believe you can leave options blank.

[snafuy]

In question 1, first group is post-PHB, second is PHB, third is UA.

Speaking of UA, many (most?) of the subclasses in XGE previously appeared in UA. Are they identical, or at least effectively the same (maybe with clearer wording)? If so, could someone gather a list of links to the PDFs, for folks who don't have XGE yet?

In any case, this survey will stay open at least 2 weeks (aka US Thanksgiving weekend) so folks will have time to read their books. You can wait, or you can rate the ones you know, grab the "save this link" at the end, and come back later to update your answers.

[UrielAwakened]

I actually hate middle grounds in likert scales.

You should generally force people to commit to a little above or a little below average in these sorts of things. Letting people give "no opinion" or middle ground opinions tends to lead to results gravitating there.

[2D8HP]

...differences exist, and people want to compare them.


Um.... IMNSHO, Fighters and Rogues (Swashbucklers, and Thieves) ROCK! Barbarians are okay, the Rangers "Natural Explorer" feature looks intriguing, as does the "fluff" of the "Ancients" Paladin, otherwise I really don't know or have much of an opinion on the classes beyond the one time that I rolled a high INT and another player insisted that I play a Wizard, after seeing how many mechanics and options they were to keep track of at first level! I ran and hid from that section of the PHB.

Worthwhile for me to take the quiz?

[Burnteyes]

I believe you can leave options blank.

Yes, supposedly you can leave them blank according to OP.

That said, as a former poll methodology person, few issues.

One -Most people haven't even seen the new book.

Two -Those that haven't seen it, largely haven't played it.

Three - If they have played it has been limited

Four - the selections don't allow for (They are okay, but I'm not certain on wherein the spectrum they fall or I think they are powerful, but don't have enough data to determine yet)

I'm not slamming on OP. However, it is way to early to get a informed poll on how powerful a Celestial Warlock is at this point as almost nobody has played it. As such, opinions are purely based on biased, uniformed supposition. "They class looks too strong". OP is asking for:


The first question is intended to be as objective as possible. Try to keep your emotions away from your perception of class effectiveness. Base your ratings on "crunch" (game mechanics & numbers), not lore, fluff, house rules, or setting-specific restrictions.

You can't provide that, on an informed basis, without experience.

Further, just because my opinion doesn't fall in line on the spectrum of the poll, doesn't mean I don't have an opinion.

[Burnteyes]

I actually hate middle grounds in likert scales.

You should generally force people to commit to a little above or a little below average in these sorts of things. Letting people give "no opinion" or middle ground opinions tends to lead to results gravitating there.

Actually, forcing people to commit often creates polls that people will not finish or end up skipping through. Frankly, most polls end up in the middle because, surprise, that is where most people fall on the spectrum.

Just because YOU hate it, doesn't make it an invalid methodology. In fact, quiet the opposite.

[the_brazenburn]

I actually hate middle grounds in likert scales.

You should generally force people to commit to a little above or a little below average in these sorts of things. Letting people give "no opinion" or middle ground opinions tends to lead to results gravitating there.

The ENTIRE POINT of such a survey is to have most, or at least the average, be at the middle!

[snafuy]

Are the UA drafts of these classes the same as the final printed ones? Or at least close enough (e.g. Forge Cleric)?

* War Magic Wizard: https://media.wizards.com/2017/dnd/d...zardVF2017.pdf
* Hexblade Warlock: https://media.wizards.com/2017/dnd/d...UAv2_i48nf.pdf
* Celestial (Light) Warlock, Shadow Sorcerer, Gloom (Deep) Stalker Ranger: https://media.wizards.com/2015/downl...Characters.pdf
* Storm Sorcerer, Swashbuckler Rogue: https://media.wizards.com/2015/downl...erborne_v3.pdf
* Divine (Favored) Soul Sorcerer: https://media.wizards.com/2017/dnd/d...rUA020617s.pdf
* Scout Rogue, Horizon Walker Texas Ranger: https://media.wizards.com/2016/dnd/d...e_0117JCMM.pdf
* Inquisitive Rogue: https://dnd.wizards.com/sites/defaul...Characters.pdf
* Monster Slayer Ranger, Redemption Paladin, Drunken Master Monk: https://media.wizards.com/2017/dnd/d...Subclasses.pdf
* Conquest Paladin: https://media.wizards.com/2016/dnd/d...20161219_1.pdf
* Kensei Monk: https://media.wizards.com/2016/dnd/d..._12_12WKWT.pdf
* Samurai, Cavalier (Knight) & Arcane Archer Fighter: https://media.wizards.com/2016/dnd/d..._12_12WKWT.pdf
* Shepherd & Dreams Druid: https://media.wizards.com/2016/dnd/d...72016_CAWS.pdf
* Grave Cleric: https://media.wizards.com/2016/dnd/d.../UA_Cleric.pdf
* Forge Cleric: https://media.wizards.com/2017/dnd/d...2017_Forge.pdf
* Whispers & Glamour Bard: https://media.wizards.com/2016/dnd/d...ds/UA_Bard.pdf
* Swords Bard: https://media.wizards.com/2015/downl..._Revisited.pdf
* Zealot, Storm Herald & Ancestral Guardian Barbarian: https://media.wizards.com/2016/dnd/d..._Barbarian.pdf

[Foxhound438]

I took your survey, but I think it's probably way way wAY WAY WAY too early to get an accurate feel for what stands where. Probably a very small minority of people have actually played any of these classes since the release was on friday, and of those who have they've played one session with one class, likely only experiencing one of that class's features.

[UrielAwakened]

Actually, forcing people to commit often creates polls that people will not finish or end up skipping through. Frankly, most polls end up in the middle because, surprise, that is where most people fall on the spectrum.

Just because YOU hate it, doesn't make it an invalid methodology. In fact, quiet the opposite.

Yeah that's not true. Most best-practice likert scales have no middle ground.

If something is truly average, about the same amount will choose "slightly above" and "slightly below" anyway.

Source: I'm an I/O psyche grad.

Better source: https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/197457/1/SMRrevised4.pdf

Tl;dr: There are empirical reasons to suggest that a middle ground is indistinguishable from "I don't know" not, "I think this is actually balanced." With this set-up you have no way of knowing if something is actually balanced or so boring that nobody plays it to see if it's balanced, which could also mean it's bad but not so noteworthy as to be infamous for being bad.

[Burnteyes]

Yeah that's not true. Most best-practice likert scales have no middle ground.

If something is truly average, about the same amount will choose "slightly above" and "slightly below" anyway.

Source: I'm an I/O psyche grad.

Better source: https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/197457/1/SMRrevised4.pdf

Tl;dr: There are empirical reasons to suggest that a middle ground is indistinguishable from "I don't know" not, "I think this is actually balanced." With this set-up you have no way of knowing if something is actually balanced or so boring that nobody plays it to see if it's balanced, which could also mean it's bad but not so noteworthy as to be infamous for being bad.

I too have a degree. Mine is in an area that looks close at methodology area of Social Sciences.

I fall into the Likert sucks anyway camp.

We could argue all day, hell, there are full classes and degrees on methodologies. I'll just leave you with this:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4833473/


In the end, it seems the most important thing to keep in mind, is that statistical analyses are not an end in themselves, but rather a means to an end. Statistics are a tool to enable investigators to think about the data, and ultimately, the population. Statistics are not a substitute for thinking about what data truly mean, and what data are showing about the population.

This is to say that very few have experienced the subject matter of the poll. As such, not having a "no-opinion" doesn't allow for realistic results unless they are counting the skipped question as a no-opinion result. This has a ton of issue as well.

This poll is sent out too early. The questions don't allow for no-opinion. The data set and participants methodology are very questionable.

I could go on, but my net is, whatever the results of this poll, they don't say anything about what average player thinks about the new rules. As such, I will remove myself from this thread.

[Kane0]

Um.... IMNSHO, Fighters and Rogues (Swashbucklers, and Thieves) ROCK! Barbarians are okay, the Rangers "Natural Explorer" feature looks intriguing, as does the "fluff" of the "Ancients" Paladin, otherwise I really don't know or have much of an opinion on the classes beyond the one time that I rolled a high INT and another player insisted that I play a Wizard, after seeing how many mechanics and options they were to keep track of at first level! I ran and hid from that section of the PHB.

Worthwhile for me to take the quiz?

Definitely, we wouldn't want an echo chamber.

[UrielAwakened]

I too have a degree. Mine is in an area that looks close at methodology area of Social Sciences.

I fall into the Likert sucks anyway camp.

We could argue all day, hell, there are full classes and degrees on methodologies. I'll just leave you with this:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4833473/



This is to say that very few have experienced the subject matter of the poll. As such, not having a "no-opinion" doesn't allow for realistic results unless they are counting the skipped question as a no-opinion result. This has a ton of issue as well.

This poll is sent out too early. The questions don't allow for no-opinion. The data set and participants methodology are very questionable.

I could go on, but my net is, whatever the results of this poll, they don't say anything about what average player thinks about the new rules. As such, I will remove myself from this thread.

No you're definitely right. In this case no results are going to be meaningful.

[Naanomi]

The disparity between balance and experience will be a tough one to parse... I played a Beastmaster 1-20 and loved the character; but definetly felt mechanically weaker than I needed to be... but being strong isn’t an important part of enjoyment for me so it didn’t impact me much. I’m not sure that comparing the data between the two scales will yield easily interpreted results

[Mortis_Elrod]

You missed wu-jen

[2D8HP]

....Okay folks, allons-y! https://goo.gl/forms/WrAT2Qj89ited1rD3.


Similar to my trying to read New York Times articles, clicking on that link "crashes" my phone.

Maybe I'll borrow another "device" later.

[EvilAnagram]

I don't even have Xanathar's yet

You should have sorted it by book, not by ... I don't know how you sorted this

To be fair, I trust your vote about as much as anyone who has the book. Hell, OP already admitted in another thread that there was little chance that this would accurately show class disparity. Apparently, the fact that it's little more than a popularity contest does not dissuade him.

[War_lord]

There's nothing wrong with a popularity contest. It's the pretending it's some kind of valid tier list that's the problem.

[EvilAnagram]

There's nothing wrong with a popularity contest. It's the pretending it's some kind of valid tier list that's the problem.

Yeah, that's what I meant. It's fine to look at what people like playing and see what we can say about the community from that. In fact, that 538 article was pretty interesting, despite some flaws in methodology.

Pretending that this is a tier list with some sort of validity, though? That's dishonest.

[snafuy]

1 week along, I think the bulk of the responses are already in. The data actually looks pretty clean. The averages so far are similar to the 2015 community tier survey, with some notable shifts. I think most people will find the results worth reading.

Google Forms offers a link where you can update your previous responses, but very few people ever use it. If you've been poring over your copy of XGE and want to re-vote, let me know the date & time (approximate) of each form submission and I'll remove the earlier one.

[Citan]

About 2 years ago, the (sub)classes in 5E's PHB were rated by various groups. Since then, I suspect some of the views have shifted, but more importantly, the total number of archetypes has almost exactly doubled thanks to DMG, SCAG, and now XGE. Time for everyone to take another look.

It's a long list, over 80 items. Pace yourself, and rate any that you know well, but feel free to skip ones you don't.

The first question is intended to be as objective as possible. Try to keep your emotions away from your perception of class effectiveness. Base your ratings on "crunch" (game mechanics & numbers), not lore, fluff, house rules, or setting-specific restrictions. Remember: BALANCED IS GOOD! Your total ratings above & below the middle should be roughly equal.

There's also a second question (optional) to express personal favoritism. It might be interesting to see where the two answers differ most.

Okay folks, allons-y! https://goo.gl/forms/WrAT2Qj89ited1rD3

p.s. Yes, yes, I know the older edition concept of "tier" no longer applies, because 5E's class balance is vastly better than 0123E. Nevertheless, differences exist, and people want to compare them.
Hi!
Thanks for proposing this, even if that kind of exercise necessarily requires oversimplification, it still birth interesting discussions...

To be honest though, I dropped somewhere half-way of the survey. It's just too long, and it's a bit boring to have archetypes split up with no apparent logic (besides, I guess, the history of survey's changes). Plus I never got a chance to look at Xanathar's real text yet. ;)

If it's not too much work for you, could you please take the time to...
- Reorder so that all archetypes of a same class follow each other?
- Add an answer "no opinion / not interested"?

Thanks for your past (and maybe future) work.

[snafuy]

If it's not too much work for you, could you please take the time to...
- Reorder so that all archetypes of a same class follow each other?
- Add an answer "no opinion / not interested"?
In retrospect, yeah, I should have put the first list in order by class rather than by source. Unfortunately, changing it now would be a mess. The two sets of data would be half overlapping and half not. I'd need to merge the answers by hand.

If you leave a rating blank, that means no opinion.