2017 Class Rank Survey: results are in!

[snafuy]

2017 D&D 5E CLASS RANK SURVEY

There's been only a single vote in the past three days, so I'm calling it done. Thank you to the nearly 200 participants.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQK9WoCYz5l0IWv6a9kDJmy4X5-zQYd631t1CFxGA_68OKeKxKyM3prgvHqx1k7acRdTKO0ZR6XXL Op/pubhtml

I hope data nerds appreciate the graphs, especially the Power vs Enjoy bubble chart.


A+: outstanding far beyond the rest, with over 75% S or A votes. They deserve nerfs.
Hexblade Warlock, Divination Wizard, Lore Bard, Moon Druid

A: still well ahead of the B classes, but only half as much as A+.
Totem Barbarian, Vengeance Paladin, Abjuration Wizard, Divine Soul Sorcerer (also UA Revised Ranger and Mystic)

B+: the line separating B & B+ is fuzzy.
Life Cleric, Ancients Paladin, Tempest Cleric, Swashbuckler Rogue, Arcana Cleric, Zealot Barbarian, Oathbreaker Paladin, Battlemaster Fighter, Shadow Sorcerer, Gloom Stalker Ranger, Forge Cleric, Ancestral Guardian Barbarian

B: most classes are in the middle, where they should be.
Bladesinger Wizard, Fiend Warlock, Shepherd Druid, Devotion Paladin, Open Hand Monk, Conquest Paladin, Swords Bard, Evocation Wizard, Illusion Wizard, Light Cleric, Cavalier Fighter, Death Cleric, Draconic Sorcerer, Celestial Warlock, Arcane Trickster Rogue, Grave Cleric, Horizon Walker Ranger, War Cleric, Glamour Bard, Knowledge Cleric, Scout Rogue, Conjuration Wizard, Dreams Druid, Necromancy Wizard, Eldritch Knight Fighter, Nature Cleric, Kensei Monk, Shadow Monk, Enchantment Wizard, Valor Bard, Monster Slayer Ranger, Land Druid, Samurai Fighter, Drunken Master Monk, Thief Rogue, Whispers Bard, Assassin Rogue, Hunter Ranger, Arch Fey Warlock, War Magic Wizard, Great Old One Warlock, Long Death Monk, Crown Paladin, Storm Sorcerer

B-: just barely escaped median C.
Transmutation Wizard, Inquisitive Rogue

C+: just barely fell short of B-.
Redemption Paladin, Sun Soul Monk, Champion Fighter, Mastermind Rogue, Storm Herald Barbarian, Arcane Archer Fighter

C: clearly mediocre at best.
Trickery Cleric, Battlerager Barbarian, Undying Warlock, Berserker Barbarian (also UA Artificer)

C-: over 75% C or D votes.
Wild Magic Sorcerer, Purple Dragon Knight Fighter

D: overwhelming agreement that Mark Singer, Aang, & Korra deserve so much better.
Beastmaster Ranger, Four Elements Monk


COMMENTARY

The 1st survey question offered five ranking options (plus blank for no opinion):

S (+2): Superior, Overpowered, Deserves a Nerf
A (+1): Above Average, Mighty
B (+0): Balanced, Good, Just Right
C (-1): So-So, Passable, Niche
D (-2): Defective, Inferior, Deserves a Buff


I used slightly different wording than in the race survey (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vRUKfrFDawzHcYGZde_rada9MuIes4CVp4yCVjfC3HCSbTOOZ lRCCGpbMzzYc5zwRWwIGeNuMGDC5Sj/pubhtml). With the phrase "Deserves a Nerf" appended to the S description, its vote frequency fell dramatically. No published class reached even 30% S votes. I think a lot of people like "overpowered" things, but they don't like the implication that overpowered is bad. (Yes, it is a bad thing.)

Nevertheless, the final tally was balanced almost perfectly. Out of more than 10000 individual votes cast, the total deviated from zero by only a handful of points.

The voting was pretty consistent for most classes, even the Xanathar ones. Tempest Cleric and Fiend Warlock share the Best Consensus trophy; their votes were over 95% B & A, with no Ds.

At the other end of the spectrum, Artificer and Mystic from Unearthed Arcana were a mess. All of those archetypes (and only those) had statistical variance scores higher than 1. But the votes for UA Revised Ranger didn't suffer from this problem. Why the difference?

Compared to the 2015 survey (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?453283-Community-made-Tier-list), these ratings show a lot of downward movement. Most of the previous A ranks have been demoted: Land Druid, Valor Bard, lots of Cleric & Wizard options. Transmutation Wizard suffered the biggest drop, from solid A down to B-. Many Bs became Cs, and the bottom Cs became Ds.

Swimming against that tide, Totem Barbarian moved upward from A- to surpass everyone except the A+ group. Is this due to Elk & Tiger totems from Sword Coast, or a high reassessment of the PHB options?

IMO, every archetype from B- rank on down should be given buffs (or at least nice ribbons).


SUBJECTIVE RATINGS

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQK9WoCYz5l0IWv6a9kDJmy4X5-zQYd631t1CFxGA_68OKeKxKyM3prgvHqx1k7acRdTKO0ZR6XXL Op/pubhtml?gid=1854970113
and
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQK9WoCYz5l0IWv6a9kDJmy4X5-zQYd631t1CFxGA_68OKeKxKyM3prgvHqx1k7acRdTKO0ZR6XXL Op/pubhtml?gid=1830653425

The 2nd survey question offered four options (plus Not Interested / no opinion, equivalent to blank).

Played & Liked (+1)
Want to Play (+0.2, because wanting isn't the same as doing)
Never / Hated (-0.5, since at least the desire & action match)
Tried & Disliked (-1, actual experience is worth more)

I then compressed to a relative scale with the highest total set to 100%.

Battlemaster Fighter, Totem Barbarian, and Lore Bard were the clear favorites.

The Xanathar classes tend to have lower totals, since fewer people have played them yet, but not by as much as I expected.

Tempest Cleric wins the Miss Congeniality trophy, as the only class with no negative votes at all.

Looking only at official published classes, there's an unmistakably strong relationship between power and happy gameplay. Nearly all of the well-liked classes ranked B+ or higher, while Elements Monk, Beastmaster, and PDK ruled the bottom of both lists.

The UA Mystic classes were glaring exceptions, all with high power but low preference. On the other hand, the UA Revised Ranger is beloved, in 5th place overall. Why the difference?

I think the world would be a better place if more people preferred fairness, shunning brokenly overpowered choices just as much as brokenly weak ones. Instead we're about to see vast numbers of Hexladins, Hexbards, and other Hex-dip multis.

[2D8HP]

Seeing all that makes me more interested in trying an "Ancients" Paladin.

Thanks for the work (I didn't participate in the survey due to not being able to click on the bubbles with my phone)

[LordofGoats]

I'm genuinely surprised Berserker Barbarian got up to C. At least 4-elemental Monks and Beastmaster Rangers have their abilities at all times without imposing a penalty that can kill you.

[Marcloure]

So, you play Tempest Cleric, you like it, uh?

[Twizzly513]

You have achieved graph nirvana.

Much of the data was what I expected (namely way of the four elements, beastmaster, champion, and trickery cleric), but some of it surprised me. I was particularly surprised by the dislike of the Wild Magic Sorcerers. Those seem to be the most common, I never would have thought they were so unsatisfying. Knowing that sorcerer was voted the most unsatisfying class, though, I suppose I should have been able to reach that conclusion.

[Ogre Mage]

Great job with this data! I remember a survey similar to this one was done about 1.5 years ago. The Divination Wizard, Lore Bard and Moon Druid were in the "S" tier then too. Now Hexblade has joined them.

The Wild Magic Sorcerer, Beastmaster Ranger and Four Elements Monk were at the bottom in that survey too.

Interestingly, my favorite class in Xanthar's, the Divine Soul, is ranked second best behind the Hexblade among the Xanthar's Guide classes.

[snafuy]

I'm genuinely surprised Berserker Barbarian got up to C. At least 4-elemental Monks and Beastmaster Rangers have their abilities at all times without imposing a penalty that can kill you.
Yeah, I don't get that either. A substantial number of voters felt that Berserker is at least average.


So, you play Tempest Cleric, you like it, uh?
Yes, seems that way. All other classes in PHB & SCAG had at least one person who didn't enjoy playing them. (A few DMG & XGE classes also didn't, but they have fewer total players).

[History_buff]

Apparently people only play Moon Druids at 2nd and 10th and 20th levels. Yes, Moon Druid is very overpowered at 2nd level, however once hitting level 4 or 5 there's a drop off. Sixth is good because Moon gets CR 2 forms, but let's face it compared to a martial class it can't compare head to head comparatively which is good. That's how it should be.

Elemental forms are very nice and very adaptable to the situation at hand. However they're not OP and they start dropping off as you get into higher level play as well.

Basically Moon Druid modus operandi is to be a capable spell caster that is capable of fighting in melee in short bursts. They're durable. They're versatile but outside level 20 when it does become kind of OP due to unlimited shifting and levels 2 and 3 when brown bear outfights the fighter there's nothing particularly overpowered about Moon Druid.

[TheUser]

I'm extremely surprised the Necromancer Wizard didn't do better in power rankings (this is the one subclass my home group DM will never let me touch again), but then again, I assume most people haven't tried to play them into high tier 2 or even low tier 3 (where they become bonkers). Even before that, healing with spells that kill is fairly strong, especially spells which deal damage on other creature's turns.

The overall satisfaction the battlemaster brings leads me to believe that removal of maneuvers as baseline to the fighter class was a massive mistake on WotC's part. Having played a battlemaster myself I can honestly say they live up to the hype, especially being able to turn misses into hits with precision attack.

I'd be interested in knowing how these results shift in 6 months when we get some real XGTE play testing under our belts.

[Ravinsild]

I like the Hexblade because I like gish. I've liked Hexblade always. Sucks it's too strong and will probably get nerfed.

[Talamare]

Yeah, I don't get that either. A substantial number of voters felt that Berserker is at least average.


Yes, seems that way. All other classes in PHB & SCAG had at least one person who didn't enjoy playing them. (A few DMG & XGE classes also didn't, but they have fewer total players).

Probably since a Barbarian without a Subclass is actually still incredibly strong
While a Ranger without a Subclass... kinda of isn't

Not to mention it's a lot of perception thing

People constantly repeat that BM Ranger and Avatar Monk is garbage, but they keep forgetting to repeat that Berserk Barbarian is garbage too.

[Foxhound438]

I'm extremely surprised the Necromancer Wizard didn't do better in power rankings (this is the one subclass my home group DM will never let me touch again), but then again, I assume most people haven't tried to play them into high tier 2 or even low tier 3 (where they become bonkers). Even before that, healing with spells that kill is fairly strong, especially spells which deal damage on other creature's turns.

The overall satisfaction the battlemaster brings leads me to believe that removal of maneuvers as baseline to the fighter class was a massive mistake on WotC's part. Having played a battlemaster myself I can honestly say they live up to the hype, especially being able to turn misses into hits with precision attack.

I'd be interested in knowing how these results shift in 6 months when we get some real XGTE play testing under our belts.

I feel like even 6 months out it will still be pretty early to tell. Most people only get in 1 to 2 campaigns at most within 6 months- I'm in one that's been going for close to a year now and we aren't even close to done- so at the very most everyone will have seen somewhere from 7 to 10 of these classes in action, and only at select levels... And that's assuming everyone totally foregoes base classes for the next 6 months.

As for the results, it doesn't surprise me that hexblade is marked as "OP". However, I think that's not because of its power. it's pure hype. Give it a year or two, and people shaking in their boots to play this will come to realize that fighters are still better at both melee and ranged DPS, and wizards are still better at casting, and hexblade will be put into the B+ bin as another "does two jobs while not being objectively terrible" option. The only thing "OP" about hexblade is the potential for dipping, but really that doesn't make hexblade strong, it makes other classes better.

[Matheau]

I'm genuinely surprised Berserker Barbarian got up to C. At least 4-elemental Monks and Beastmaster Rangers have their abilities at all times without imposing a penalty that can kill you.

It doesn't seem that surprising to me. Four-Elemental Monk and Beastmaster Ranger have such questionable benefits that, the vast majority of the time, using your action to use your specialization isn't a good use of your action or resources. Berserker Barbarian, no matter how much you want to argue about Frenzy and Intimidating Presence, make you better at being a Barbarian due to Mindless Rage and Retaliation. The argument against Berserker is other specializations are better, not that using your specialization is worse than doing things the base class allows.

[Naanomi]

Much of the data was what I expected (namely way of the four elements, beastmaster, champion, and trickery cleric), but some of it surprised me. I was particularly surprised by the dislike of the Wild Magic Sorcerers. Those seem to be the most common, I never would have thought they were so unsatisfying. Knowing that sorcerer was voted the most unsatisfying class, though, I suppose I should have been able to reach that conclusion.
Biggest problem: GM determines at a whim how often your core class abilities work. Some people also get worked up over the chance of self-sabotage... but the GM dependency is a much bigger factor for me

[leugren]

It doesn't seem that surprising to me. Four-Elemental Monk and Beastmaster Ranger have such questionable benefits that, the vast majority of the time, using your action to use your specialization isn't a good use of your action or resources. Berserker Barbarian, no matter how much you want to argue about Frenzy and Intimidating Presence, make you better at being a Barbarian due to Mindless Rage and Retaliation. The argument against Berserker is other specializations are better, not that using your specialization is worse than doing things the base class allows.

Quoted for truth. Frenzy lets you wreck face for an entire encounter once per day (you very rarely use it more than once per day). Bonus action damage is higher than Polearm Master and more reliable than Great Weapon Master for that encounter. The penalties don't mean squat if you reserve it for the final boss fight each day. I'm convinced that, if they just changed Frenzy to a once-per-long-rest ability, the masses would heap it with praise, but the people who actually play a Berserker wouldn't even notice the difference, since that's how they're using the power anyway. I've played a Berserker from levels 1 through 15, and I can count on two fingers the number of times that I've actually been inconvenienced by the Frenzy penalty.

Also, having just come out, the Hexblade is at the height of it's hype cycle. After people have been playing it for awhile, I expect it to settle down to a much more reasonable position. I don't think it's an "S".

[LordofGoats]

It doesn't seem that surprising to me. Four-Elemental Monk and Beastmaster Ranger have such questionable benefits that, the vast majority of the time, using your action to use your specialization isn't a good use of your action or resources. Berserker Barbarian, no matter how much you want to argue about Frenzy and Intimidating Presence, make you better at being a Barbarian due to Mindless Rage and Retaliation. The argument against Berserker is other specializations are better, not that using your specialization is worse than doing things the base class allows.


This is true. I just think the subclass is too high risk to use the abilities more than in the final battle of an adventure, unless you have a high level cleric who has made peace in life that he is going to waste a lot of spell slots so you can frenzy. The vast majority of the time the Berserker will just use normal base class abilities the same as a Beastmaster or 4 elements Monk.

[borg286]

Can someone explain why the div wizard got so high? Is it because of the 2nd level bonus? Special benefits/combos with certain spells?

[TheUser]

This is true. I just think the subclass is too high risk to use the abilities more than in the final battle of an adventure, unless you have a high level cleric who has made peace in life that he is going to waste a lot of spell slots so you can frenzy. The vast majority of the time the Berserker will just use normal base class abilities the same as a Beastmaster or 4 elements Monk.

Being immune to Charm and Fear is no joke; Their level 6 feature is pretty rad. They also kick ass in AL because you get a long rest between sessions.

[snafuy]

Can someone explain why the div wizard got so high? Is it because of the 2nd level bonus?
Yes, it's all about Portent.

https://www.google.com/search?q=d%26d+5e+does+portent

[Gtdead]

The power rankings are so messed up it's not even funny.

It seems to me that a lot of people voted according to trends (some of them outdated) and gave an average rating to the unpopular subclasses because they didn't know what to do with them.

Its extremely irritating to see that divination wizard is considered OP just because of portent, a luck based ability, while everyone else is crammed into B tier, same tier as monk.

Moon druid OP? Come on. Most erratic power curve in the game and he hardly is the strongest lvl 20 caster.

Good job on collecting the data, but ultimately, I think they are useless for power ranks.

[Battlebooze]

Lol, Lore Bard A+.

Apparently a lot of people think players having tons of fun with a character makes that Class OP. Lore Bard should be the bar for having fun in D&D.

STOP HAVING FUN WITH THAT CLASS! D&D ISN'T ABOUT HAVING FUN!

Snort.

[Battlebooze]

2017 D&D 5E CLASS RANK SURVEY
I think the world would be a better place if more people preferred fairness, shunning brokenly overpowered choices just as much as brokenly weak ones. Instead we're about to see vast numbers of Hexladins, Hexbards, and other Hex-dip multis.

I too think the world would be a better place if GM's shunned overpowered monsters and threats, as much as weak and broken ones.

[Battlebooze]

Despite my snark at the results, good job collecting the data!

[snafuy]

I too think the world would be a better place if GM's shunned overpowered monsters and threats, as much as weak and broken ones.
LOL. My campaign is only in mid single digit levels, and all of the PCs are B rank or lower, but I've had to scale up most encounters, sometimes by double, in order to give them a challenge at all. No idea what I'd need to do for an optimized party.

[Galactkaktus]

Quoted for truth. Frenzy lets you wreck face for an entire encounter once per day (you very rarely use it more than once per day). Bonus action damage is higher than Polearm Master and more reliable than Great Weapon Master for that encounter. The penalties don't mean squat if you reserve it for the final boss fight each day. I'm convinced that, if they just changed Frenzy to a once-per-long-rest ability, the masses would heap it with praise, but the people who actually play a Berserker wouldn't even notice the difference, since that's how they're using the power anyway. I've played a Berserker from levels 1 through 15, and I can count on two fingers the number of times that I've actually been inconvenienced by the Frenzy penalty.


The funny thing is that it would probably be weaker and not stronger if it was once per long rest without the exhaustion penalty. You play it as a once per day thing but there is the option to use it more if it's needed.

[Battlebooze]

LOL. My campaign is only in mid single digit levels, and all of the PCs are B rank or lower, but I've had to scale up most encounters, sometimes by double, in order to give them a challenge at all. No idea what I'd need to do for an optimized party.

:) I wouldn't blame the classes as much as the players. Smart players can take terrible classes and turn them into monsters.

[Finieous]

Berserker Barbarian, no matter how much you want to argue about Frenzy and Intimidating Presence, make you better at being a Barbarian due to Mindless Rage and Retaliation. The argument against Berserker is other specializations are better, not that using your specialization is worse than doing things the base class allows.

Agreed, but I also think bear totem is massively overrated (at least in vanilla campaigns). It mitigates a rather small fraction of damage taken, and I say that as someone who played one to 13th level.

Frenzy barb is solid and more fun to play.

[Battlebooze]

Agreed, but I also think bear totem is massively overrated (at least in vanilla campaigns). It mitigates a rather small fraction of damage taken, and I say that as someone who played one to 13th level.

Frenzy barb is solid and more fun to play.


If Frenzy barb is better than the A Totem barbarian, that makes them OP!

Just kidding. :D

[Easy_Lee]

:) I wouldn't blame the classes as much as the players. Smart players can take terrible classes and turn them into monsters.

Especially if they coordinate with each other. Team a land druid with a hunter ranger and suddenly two average characters (according to votes) outperform your Hexblades and Totem Barbarians. There's also a big difference between campaigns. Sun Soul monks are pretty good when you're fighting vampires and other undead. And that's to say nothing of DM style or (often accidental) house rules.

That's the trouble with rankings like this: it's of little use to consider options in a vacuum without taking other players or the campaign into consideration.

[mephnick]

Apparently people only play Moon Druids at 2nd and 10th and 20th levels.

Pretty much. I've DM'd for a few of them and yeah, they're hard to kill, but they don't do much else unless they stay out of beast form...and then they're easy to kill.

So tough to kill, but fairly ineffective, or effective but just a regular caster. OMG SO POWER

And that's why Land Druids are better and people are stupid.

[Stormjack]

Thanks for compiling this and for the great charts. Have you considered doing a similar survey for common multi-class combinations?

[FoxDropz]

Hey, I got a few questions:

Could anybody explain me whats the Regraded tab for?

Is there a more recent Survey than this one or is this the latest? Or maybe another tier list?

[Daithi]

Nice job Snafuy!

There are a couple I'd adjust by a + or - here or there, but I think the rankings are all pretty much how I'd rank them (I missed the poll). I'd probably rank Necromancer as an A with the added spells XGtE provided, but that's just quibbling. Nice job.

[Angelalex242]

Vengeance Paladin beats Ancients?

By what logic? Ancients is totally better!

[Contrast]

Hey, I got a few questions:

Could anybody explain me whats the Regraded tab for?

Is there a more recent Survey than this one or is this the latest? Or maybe another tier list?

Says right there in the tab:


These are my personal views of the ratings, adjusted with more weight on levels 3-10 where most D&D is played.

Also, FYI this forum has a rule against resurrecting old posts I believe.

[FoxDropz]

Says right there in the tab:



Also, FYI this forum has a rule against resurrecting old posts I believe.

Oh thanks, I missed that tab description!
Sorry for bringing it back :smalleek:

[Citan]

2017 D&D 5E CLASS RANK SURVEY

There's been only a single vote in the past three days, so I'm calling it done. Thank you to the nearly 200 participants.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQK9WoCYz5l0IWv6a9kDJmy4X5-zQYd631t1CFxGA_68OKeKxKyM3prgvHqx1k7acRdTKO0ZR6XXL Op/pubhtml

I hope data nerds appreciate the graphs, especially the Power vs Enjoy bubble chart.


A+: outstanding far beyond the rest, with over 75% S or A votes. They deserve nerfs.
Hexblade Warlock, Divination Wizard, Lore Bard, Moon Druid

A: still well ahead of the B classes, but only half as much as A+.
Totem Barbarian, Vengeance Paladin, Abjuration Wizard, Divine Soul Sorcerer (also UA Revised Ranger and Mystic)

B+: the line separating B & B+ is fuzzy.
Life Cleric, Ancients Paladin, Tempest Cleric, Swashbuckler Rogue, Arcana Cleric, Zealot Barbarian, Oathbreaker Paladin, Battlemaster Fighter, Shadow Sorcerer, Gloom Stalker Ranger, Forge Cleric, Ancestral Guardian Barbarian

B: most classes are in the middle, where they should be.
Bladesinger Wizard, Fiend Warlock, Shepherd Druid, Devotion Paladin, Open Hand Monk, Conquest Paladin, Swords Bard, Evocation Wizard, Illusion Wizard, Light Cleric, Cavalier Fighter, Death Cleric, Draconic Sorcerer, Celestial Warlock, Arcane Trickster Rogue, Grave Cleric, Horizon Walker Ranger, War Cleric, Glamour Bard, Knowledge Cleric, Scout Rogue, Conjuration Wizard, Dreams Druid, Necromancy Wizard, Eldritch Knight Fighter, Nature Cleric, Kensei Monk, Shadow Monk, Enchantment Wizard, Valor Bard, Monster Slayer Ranger, Land Druid, Samurai Fighter, Drunken Master Monk, Thief Rogue, Whispers Bard, Assassin Rogue, Hunter Ranger, Arch Fey Warlock, War Magic Wizard, Great Old One Warlock, Long Death Monk, Crown Paladin, Storm Sorcerer

B-: just barely escaped median C.
Transmutation Wizard, Inquisitive Rogue

C+: just barely fell short of B-.
Redemption Paladin, Sun Soul Monk, Champion Fighter, Mastermind Rogue, Storm Herald Barbarian, Arcane Archer Fighter

C: clearly mediocre at best.
Trickery Cleric, Battlerager Barbarian, Undying Warlock, Berserker Barbarian (also UA Artificer)

C-: over 75% C or D votes.
Wild Magic Sorcerer, Purple Dragon Knight Fighter

D: overwhelming agreement that Mark Singer, Aang, & Korra deserve so much better.
Beastmaster Ranger, Four Elements Monk


COMMENTARY

The 1st survey question offered five ranking options (plus blank for no opinion):

S (+2): Superior, Overpowered, Deserves a Nerf
A (+1): Above Average, Mighty
B (+0): Balanced, Good, Just Right
C (-1): So-So, Passable, Niche
D (-2): Defective, Inferior, Deserves a Buff


I used slightly different wording than in the race survey (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vRUKfrFDawzHcYGZde_rada9MuIes4CVp4yCVjfC3HCSbTOOZ lRCCGpbMzzYc5zwRWwIGeNuMGDC5Sj/pubhtml). With the phrase "Deserves a Nerf" appended to the S description, its vote frequency fell dramatically. No published class reached even 30% S votes. I think a lot of people like "overpowered" things, but they don't like the implication that overpowered is bad. (Yes, it is a bad thing.)

Nevertheless, the final tally was balanced almost perfectly. Out of more than 10000 individual votes cast, the total deviated from zero by only a handful of points.

The voting was pretty consistent for most classes, even the Xanathar ones. Tempest Cleric and Fiend Warlock share the Best Consensus trophy; their votes were over 95% B & A, with no Ds.

At the other end of the spectrum, Artificer and Mystic from Unearthed Arcana were a mess. All of those archetypes (and only those) had statistical variance scores higher than 1. But the votes for UA Revised Ranger didn't suffer from this problem. Why the difference?

Compared to the 2015 survey (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?453283-Community-made-Tier-list), these ratings show a lot of downward movement. Most of the previous A ranks have been demoted: Land Druid, Valor Bard, lots of Cleric & Wizard options. Transmutation Wizard suffered the biggest drop, from solid A down to B-. Many Bs became Cs, and the bottom Cs became Ds.

Swimming against that tide, Totem Barbarian moved upward from A- to surpass everyone except the A+ group. Is this due to Elk & Tiger totems from Sword Coast, or a high reassessment of the PHB options?

IMO, every archetype from B- rank on down should be given buffs (or at least nice ribbons).


SUBJECTIVE RATINGS

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQK9WoCYz5l0IWv6a9kDJmy4X5-zQYd631t1CFxGA_68OKeKxKyM3prgvHqx1k7acRdTKO0ZR6XXL Op/pubhtml?gid=1854970113
and
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQK9WoCYz5l0IWv6a9kDJmy4X5-zQYd631t1CFxGA_68OKeKxKyM3prgvHqx1k7acRdTKO0ZR6XXL Op/pubhtml?gid=1830653425

The 2nd survey question offered four options (plus Not Interested / no opinion, equivalent to blank).

Played & Liked (+1)
Want to Play (+0.2, because wanting isn't the same as doing)
Never / Hated (-0.5, since at least the desire & action match)
Tried & Disliked (-1, actual experience is worth more)

I then compressed to a relative scale with the highest total set to 100%.

Battlemaster Fighter, Totem Barbarian, and Lore Bard were the clear favorites.

The Xanathar classes tend to have lower totals, since fewer people have played them yet, but not by as much as I expected.

Tempest Cleric wins the Miss Congeniality trophy, as the only class with no negative votes at all.

Looking only at official published classes, there's an unmistakably strong relationship between power and happy gameplay. Nearly all of the well-liked classes ranked B+ or higher, while Elements Monk, Beastmaster, and PDK ruled the bottom of both lists.

The UA Mystic classes were glaring exceptions, all with high power but low preference. On the other hand, the UA Revised Ranger is beloved, in 5th place overall. Why the difference?

I think the world would be a better place if more people preferred fairness, shunning brokenly overpowered choices just as much as brokenly weak ones. Instead we're about to see vast numbers of Hexladins, Hexbards, and other Hex-dip multis.
Hi OP.
Thanks for providing the survey, although, I couldn't vote in it so obviously the results are worthless. :smallbiggrin:

Seriously though...

The power rankings are so messed up it's not even funny.

It seems to me that a lot of people voted according to trends (some of them outdated) and gave an average rating to the unpopular subclasses because they didn't know what to do with them.

Its extremely irritating to see that divination wizard is considered OP just because of portent, a luck based ability, while everyone else is crammed into B tier, same tier as monk.

Moon druid OP? Come on. Most erratic power curve in the game and he hardly is the strongest lvl 20 caster.

Good job on collecting the data, but ultimately, I think they are useless for power ranks.
I really get the same impression.

I mean, it seems that OP clearly stated he was looking for subjective feedback in the first place, so it was expected to see more popular builds get to the top and often shunted ones being relegated back...
Since people browsing here looking for ideas of classes to play, will be often influenced by the hive mind into not even trying those classes with bad rep...

But beyond that, I daresay there is a two-fold methodology problem, especially since OP is, in spite of asking for subjective feedback, trying to set up an objective metric ("power").

1. Unless I'm mistaken, there was no information/distinction on power rankings depending on the level of play. And while you can say that "a class change its way of playing" and it holds true for all classes, it's "much more truer" for some compared to others...
For example, while a Cleric will mostly play more or less the same all the way, just relying more and more on divination, a Wizard specializing on one of its forte, which is über-oreparation, may spend more and more time making traps, designing safes, so investing much more "in the downtime". More or less the same with Druid although in a different way. ;)
A Barbarian will mostly play always the same, even if he gets some features to expand a bit his options: he was sturdy and going into melee at level 1, he will do mostly the same at level 11 and at level 20.
However, a Fighter may diverge from his initial way of play ("just hit things in melee or at range") because all these extra feats allowed him to expand in other ways, like specializing in versatility (Dual Wielder + Sharpshooter + Ritual Caster), becoming the hell of casters (Mobile + Mage Slayer + Sentinel) or playing as a spyface (Observant + Inspiring Leader + Actor).
Same with Monk, simply with the fact that just his class features make him more and more resilient as he levels up, making him evolve from "glass-stunner" to "all-around resilient frontliner".
Even just Bard's Magic Secrets (without Lore) could be enough to make him get completely new tools compared to what he used so far. But those come into 2nd half of play.

2. Some subclasses really change the potential of a character, but only at higher level. Or to say in other words, the class/archetype has a steeper learning curve often because of resource management.
For example, the Beastmaster, whose beast requires much micro-management at low levels because low life, but ends as a very potent ally.
Or the 4E Monk, which becomes a much more than respectable archetype once he gets 3rd level spells, and a great asset in any party at his highest tier.
Even the Frenzy Barbarian is arguably on par with Totem at 14th level, between the high probability of having a pal that can voids exhaustion through spells, and the "auto-attack when damaged" as a reaction which means Barb can very reliably get yet another attack off-turn without any need for PAM/Sentinel investment.
Even the Open Hand Monk, which has very (to my taste anyways) uninteresting features at level 6 and 11, would totally get one of the top 5 places at level 17 because Quivering Palm.
Similar would be the Assassin, which most people find lvl 9 and 13 useless because much like Wizard's preparation they need to be played and invested in during the downtime... But just the level 17 ability should make powerplayers rejoiced (double damage on Constitution fail, even if Constitution is usually a decent save, is still a great damage boost).
There is also the case of Moon Druid, which is very oversold (speaking only of beast forms) between level 2 and 10, but would get top place at level 20. Or Wizard for that matter (all three last levels are incredibly powerful and appealing).

>>> For the ranking to really be worth something significant, in my opinion, it should at least distinguish the "most usual play" (lvl 1-9), the higher play (lvl 10-16) and the powerplay (lvl 17-20).
Or, don't use "power ranks" (which hints at being objective, which is contrary to the chosen methodology), just "enjoyment" (which, being subjective at core, can cope with lack of detail and refinement).

(But honestly, even then, I think this kind of ranking is still of limited value because it is about individual characters, whereas the best plays usually come from smart collaboration to cover for each other's weakness while enhancing other's strengths).

[Jerrykhor]

If A+ tier is fine, does that mean every one else need buffs?

[Unoriginal]

Thread necromancy aside, this survey doesn't prove anything about the classes, nor does it demonstrate anything except opinions based on subjective perception.

[2D8HP]

Hi OP.
Thanks for providing the survey, although, I couldn't vote in it so obviously the results are worthless. :smallbiggrin:

Seriously though....


Seriously though, while the results are interesting, since I couldn't get the survey when it was active to accept any of my choices (my phone seems to block a lot of these), if I'm not alone and others experience this technical glitch, I question how thorough the survey was.

[Citan]

Thread necromancy aside, this survey doesn't prove anything about the classes, nor does it demonstrate anything except opinions based on subjective perception.
Argh, didn't realize it was a thread necroed by someone... It's just so easy to miss when a few post-necro posts have been published already... :/

[the_brazenburn]

Thread necromancy aside, this survey doesn't prove anything about the classes, nor does it demonstrate anything except opinions based on subjective perception.

Oh, what the hell. It's a useful resource for players and DMs alike, and people necromance threads all the time here.

And opinions are supposed to be the entire point. Some people prefer certain styles of play, which causes them to rank things higher than others. But overall, it evens out to a decent approximation of a power scale.

[KorvinStarmast]

Vengeance Paladin beats Ancients? By what logic? Ancients is totally better! Depends on what you like in your Paladin. Against a single hard to kill boss, Vengeance has a marking feature and smites that can make for a party victory due to snowball of damage. I agree that Ancients has some great class features that help the party.
Oh, what the hell. It's a useful resource for players and DMs alike, not really useful. See critiques above regarding the problem with subjective assessments.

[the_brazenburn]

not really useful. See critiques above regarding the problem with subjective assessments.

Useful enough, if you regard it as a subjective resource. It usually evens out in the end, though.

But I do see people's points. I'd use it, but not as a definitive resource.

[FoxDropz]

Maybe is not super accurate but its good for beginners that dont have a clue about classes

[MrStabby]

Yeah, subjective is not the same as useless.

I think that there might be a bit of bias here in a few areas. I would posit the hexblade is one - great generally, superb with abundant short rests. Being released more recently than others it is likely that those playing the class have a pretty good idea about the frequency of short rests in their campaign and therefore if they play one then they are more likely to have more short rests hence more power than the average person would see.

The only thing I am really surprised at is the Conquest paladin being so low. Their channel divinity abilities seem really, really powerful: a mass fear effect recovered on a short rest? No concentration needed? No risk of friendly fire? +10 to hit is less good but given that you can drop a LOAD of damage into that one hit it is a nice way to be certain of finishing of a really dangerous monster.

Everything else seems roughly what I would expect - some disagreements but the rest are pretty minor. I also prefer the land druid to the moon druid but at the levels that most people actually seem to play moon druid is probably more powerful, the distinction is probably as much due to the frequency with which people play different levels as it is due to any "error" on the part of those voting. There is also the matter of scale and style - land druids are maybe a little more powerful over a number of mid range levels but on those levels where the moon druid is more powerful, they are much more powerful.

[Kyrinthic]

I think some of the oddness you see is based on a level of groupthink that occurs in a forum. Certain classes are seen as bad, so they are voted bad. I like that the second question weighted actual play of a class, but it isnt factored into the main results.

As for the frenzy barbarian, I was actually surprised when a player played one in a regular game, they really aren't that bad. Barbarian without archetype is a solid class in the first place, and the frenzy barb getting immunity to the number 1 way to take a barb out of a fight is strong. They only get to frenzy 1/day basically, but it means they can go into the boss fight with a noticeable damage boost, lots of classes get 1/day powerful abilities, this one lets you push more with a cost. At higher levels, players can use greater resto to give additional uses as well. Its not nearly as bad in play as it looks on paper. Honestly feels like it should sneak into a B- objectively speaking.

I was a little surprised about the wild sorcerer, though. Its a useable archetype, at will advantage is useful, but I guess too random for many. There is certainly some DM variation on how often you can use your abilities that can make the class much worse depending on the DM.

Overall its a wonderful bit of data, and fun to look at and see what others think, but not anything that will change my choices any.

[Unoriginal]

It's a useful resource for players and DMs alike

It's really not.



and people necromance threads all the time here.

Yes, I know. I wish they didn't.


But overall, it evens out to a decent approximation of a power scale.

Nope, not at all.

It's at best a popularity scale. Which is fine in itself, if it's not presented as anything else.


And opinions are supposed to be the entire point. Some people prefer certain styles of play, which causes them to rank things higher than others.

On this I agree, but then it's important that people know those results are just this: opinions.



Maybe is not super accurate but its good for beginners that dont have a clue about classes


It's really not. It'd just give those beginners wrong impressions by presenting other people's own impressions in their specific circumstances as generic.


I think some of the oddness you see is based on a level of groupthink that occurs in a forum. Certain classes are seen as bad, so they are voted bad. I like that the second question weighted actual play of a class, but it isnt factored into the main results.


Basically this. The same way that several people were surprised how many players choose Human for their PCs.

[2D8HP]

I find it interesting that classes rated B+, B, and C+ are the ones I'm most interested in playing, but while I can see myself playing a C rated class, I doubt I'll ever play any of the A+ or A classes.

What does that mean?

[Citan]

I find it interesting that classes rated B+, B, and C+ are the ones I'm most interested in playing, but while I can see myself playing a C rated class, I doubt I'll ever play any of the A+ or A classes.

What does that mean?
A. You really like going against the crowd because it helps you feel different and possibly superior. So obviously you wouldn't pick generally acclaimed (and thus wildly popular) classes. On the contrary, the less people play a class, the more you appreciate it.

B. You never had yet a chance to play in campaigns in which those "A+" classes would be close enough for the perfect pick to motivate you, and you are otherwise not attracted to their mechanics because those just don't fit the kind of play and challenges you enjoy. So it's just a matter of mostly coincidence, but as the years passes, you will get a chance to enjoy them without forcing yourself to do so.

C. You never cared about what others think and you learned to use your own brain well enough to correctly play, thus appreciate, any kind of mechanics so any class. The fact you're feeling as such right now is just some evanescent reaction to the strong judgements made on the classes, but in the end you'll be the one who has 'played them all'...

D. You like challenge, so the more people say badly of something, the more you want to try it yourself either to prove them wrong or prove yourself strong (enough to succeed in spite of an obvious 'handicap'). So because you're a (more than?) regular on those forums, you've been subtly influenced into always getting on the train of those underestimated classes.

E. Other?

F. 42 (because that always just works).

Choose your pick! :smallbiggrin:

[2D8HP]

E. Other?


I'm guessing maybe "E"?

I'm intimidated by complex mechanics, so my first class was the Champion Fighter, and I'm currently playing one (highest level played 11th).

I've also played a Barbarian (first level),

a Thief Rogue (third level), and a

Swashbuckler Rogue (5th level),

I'm intrigued by the Ancients Paladin, Eldrich Knight Fighter, Gloom Stalker Ranger, and the Scout Rogue, but especially the Paladin and Ranger classes intimidate me with their myriad options and resources to keep track of.

I've looked carefully at the Battlemaster Fighter, and the Wizard, but both look like way too much for me to keep track of effectively, so I'm doubtful of ever playing them.

[Citan]

I'm guessing maybe "E"?

I'm intimidated by complex mechanics, so my first class was the Champion Fighter, and I'm currently playing one (highest level played 11th).

I've also played a Barbarian (first level),

a Thief Rogue (third level), and a

Swashbuckler Rogue (5th level),

I'm intrigued by the Ancients Paladin, Eldrich Knight Fighter, Gloom Stalker Ranger, and the Scout Rogue, but especially the Paladin and Ranger classes intimidate me with their myriad options and resources to keep track of.

I've looked carefully at the Battlemaster Fighter, and the Wizard, but both look like way too much for me to keep track of effectively, so I'm doubtful of ever playing them.
Hmm... :)

Seems to me that in spite of your understandable feeling of annoyance with resource management all of these should be fine...
- Paladin: you don't want to manage prepared spells? Just use everything on smites ;)
- Warlock: 2 slots per short rest, easy enough to track
- Sorcerer: few spells known so only slots to track, you could also pick "plug&play" metamagics like Empowered or Subtle...

[2D8HP]

Hmm... :)

Seems to me that...


Thanks for the tips!


:smile:

[Angelalex242]

Depends on what you like in your Paladin. Against a single hard to kill boss, Vengeance has a marking feature and smites that can make for a party victory due to snowball of damage. I agree that Ancients has some great class features that help the party. not really useful. See critiques above regarding the problem with subjective assessments.

Ancients is definitely more of a team player. Particularly my version, where I have them set up to tank. My personal opinion is that teams win battles, not Lone Rangers. Avenger is a lone ranger. Ancients is there for the team (and has 90 percent of the damage of the Avenger anyway)

[Beechgnome]

Thanks for the tips!


:smile:


I am similar in that I have had great fun playing a suboptimal choice like an Orc Purple Dragon Knight. I figure it is simply because even the bad choices in 5e are not so bad. The gap between A+ and the bottom is not the chasm some make it out to be.

[randomodo]

Biggest problem: GM determines at a whim how often your core class abilities work. Some people also get worked up over the chance of self-sabotage... but the GM dependency is a much bigger factor for me

I'm playing a wild sorcerer now, and enjoying it, but I also had a talk with my GM first about exactly how often we would roll for surge. (His policy: roll d20 every time I cast a non-cantrip; surge on a 1. Surge automatically on first spell after using Tides of Chaos). Otherwise I'd be playing a tabaxi monk...

[Red Bear]

does the order the classes are listed mean something? it's not alphabetical...

[HolyAvenger7]

I find it interesting that classes rated B+, B, and C+ are the ones I'm most interested in playing, but while I can see myself playing a C rated class, I doubt I'll ever play any of the A+ or A classes.

What does that mean?

You enjoy a challenge?

[mephnick]

Oh man I looked through these again. Battlerager gets ranked lower than Storm Herald? That's ridiculous. My boy BR gets so little love.

[Contrast]

Oh man I looked through these again. Battlerager gets ranked lower than Storm Herald? That's ridiculous. My boy BR gets so little love.

I always really wanted to like battlerager (dwarven barbarian? What's not to like!) but for a sub-class whose main schtick revolves around their armour it always just felt a little disappointing that it was 14+dex with disadvantage on stealth (plus you likely won't find a magical set).

The mechanical abilities are broadly fine, I always just thought the fluff was a little off as well. Most class specialisations tell you something about the person who takes them whereas all battlerager tells you is 'I like wearing spiky armour'.

[mephnick]

I always really wanted to like battlerager (dwarven barbarian? What's not to like!) but for a sub-class whose main schtick revolves around their armour it always just felt a little disappointing that it was 14+dex with disadvantage on stealth (plus you likely won't find a magical set).
'.

Eh, I have a theory (one of my probably terrible theories) that AC is meaningless for a Barbarian. A real man is Reckless Attacking every turn so I'm getting hit anyway, who cares if they beat a 16 or a 17? Take the hit, halve the damage and get on with it. The BR's temp HP makes this even better.

[Naanomi]

Battleragers have a notable overcompetion for their bonus action as well

[The Jack]

Open hand monk>All other monks, and I don't think that's an unpopular thought. Surprised most of them are all in the same category.

[Sception]

Open hand monk>All other monks, and I don't think that's an unpopular thought. Surprised most of them are all in the same category.

I was under the impression that drunk monk was at least on par with open hand, but that's only from second hand buzz so could be wrong.

a lot of these rankings feel pretty subjective, and there's a much wider variance within classes than is in most cases probably warranted. Yeah, it's more noticeable when subclasses are better or worse than other subclasses of the same class, but even a trickery cleric is still a cleric and does most of the things clerics do. In a ranking 'of clerics' it deserves to be as low as it is, but in a ranking of all subclasses it probably doesn't.

Likewise a hexblade is very noticeably better than other *blade boon* warlocks, but that doesn't make it one of the strongest subclasses in the game, because it's still a warlock, and still a blade warlock at that, highly dependent on short rests, unable to reliably cast more than a single leveled spell per combat for most of their career in typical games. Hexblade looks wrong more because of how bad blade boon is by default, how dipable it is, and how it gives its improved blade features even to regular non blade blaster locks, than for a typical hexblades actual power level in game. And pretty much all of those problems are the fault of the designers trying to make hexblade both its own patron and a fix to blade boon at the same time, which ends up giving them an improved version of a third level warlock feature at first level, just based on when warlock patron features show up.

Take the extra proficiencies and cha to melee attacks out of hexblade patron, and put them into blade boon where they should have been from the start, and maybe make curse damage scale with class rather than character level. None of that really qualifies as a 'nerf' to hexblade, since your typical hexblade would be unchanged for levels 3+, but then hexblade would no longer look unreasonable next to other patrons, would be no more dippable than other patrons, and would no longer be considered overpowered.

Cases like hexblade are why I'm hesitant of calls to 'nerf' this or that subclass. Especially subclasses that only look overpowered because the designers were using them to try and patch game mechanics or class features that were too weak to start.

[strangebloke]

Eh, I have a theory (one of my probably terrible theories) that AC is meaningless for a Barbarian. A real man is Reckless Attacking every turn so I'm getting hit anyway, who cares if they beat a 16 or a 17? Take the hit, halve the damage and get on with it. The BR's temp HP makes this even better.
The lower your effective AC is, the less gaining or losing AC helps you. You can clearly see this by looking at a guy with 10 AC vs. a guy with 5. An enemy with a +4 to attack will hit guy 75% of the time, and guy 2 95% of the time. So the enemy is dealing like 30% more damage. Significant, but look at a guy with 20 AC vs a guy with 15. The enemy deals twice as much damage to the guy with 15 AC.

Advantage on attacks is functionally a +4. So, relatively speaking, a guy with 15 AC who is recklessly attacking actually has an AC of 11. So yeah, I basically agree with you, although at low levels, it isn't always a good idea to reckless attack... and sometimes you have a different source of advantage.

Open hand monk>All other monks, and I don't think that's an unpopular thought. Surprised most of them are all in the same category.

This isn't really true. All monks are monks, and get nearly all of their power from the base class. Drunk monk basically gets mobility for free, which puts them an ASI ahead of the Open hand monk (as a skirmisher, he will want Mobility as well). Kensei gets +2 AC, which allows them to actually stand in melee from early levels. Long Death monk gets buckets of tHP, and is a god against lots of low-level mooks. 4e, sun, and shadow are weaker, but they've all got their niche.

Basically:
Open Hand:skirmisher, single-target lockdown
Kensei: Melee, striker, more flexible due to ranged options.
Drunken: Skirmisher, striker
Death: Melee, AOE lockdown

[Unoriginal]

a lot of these rankings feel pretty subjective

Those rankings are purely subjective. They're basically, like someone else put it, a popularity contest based on how people felt at the time.

[2D8HP]

Those rankings are purely subjective. They're basically, like someone else put it, a popularity contest based on how people felt at the time.


And were able to click on those bubbles (I couldn't with my phone).

[mephnick]

Battleragers have a notable overcompetion for their bonus action as well

So do Storm Heralds since their lame Storm Aura activates on a BA.

[Naanomi]

So do Storm Heralds since their lame Storm Aura activates on a BA.
But at least activates automatically on raging