Tier 3-4 Skill-monkey party

[Willie the Duck]

My group (a bunch of people who have been playing non-D&D rpgs for the past 7-8 years) is trying to make a semi-balanced (mostly tiers 3-4, although higher tiers overclocked and lower tiers deliberately played unoptimized might be allowed) party in a very skill heavy campaign. Rogues and Scouts and Factota (my character) are obvious choices. But what classes fill out the rest of the party roles? Cloistered Cleric? Beguiler? What about for the party tank character, any skillful choices?

Looking to get about 6-7 characters for 5-6 players. Advice would be appreciated!

[Nifft]

My group (a bunch of people who have been playing non-D&D rpgs for the past 7-8 years) is trying to make a semi-balanced (mostly tiers 3-4, although higher tiers overclocked and lower tiers deliberately played unoptimized might be allowed) party in a very skill heavy campaign. Rogues and Scouts and Factota (my character) are obvious choices. But what classes fill out the rest of the party roles? Cloistered Cleric? Beguiler? What about for the party tank character, any skillful choices?

Looking to get about 6-7 characters for 5-6 players. Advice would be appreciated! Beguiler is T3 or T2, so might be appropriate, depending on how you read it.

Bards are an obvious good choice.

Psychic Rogue (from the web article) seems reasonable.

Swordsage (6+Int) and Warblade (4+Int with major Int synergy) are both solid, and even Crusader (4+Int with major Cha synergy) has decent skill points and a decent skill list.

Wildshape Ranger is T3 with 6+Int skills and a decent list. Throw on some additional ACFs and it's even better.

I've got a soft spot for Binder 5 / Chameleon 10, which is NOT initially high-skill, but which is very flexible and fun -- and does get skill-boosters later.

Totemist is T3, with only (4+Int) skill points but a decent selection of stealth and perception boosters. There's also Totemist 2 / Incarnate 1 / _____ 2 / Chameleon 10 for an absurd selection of skill-boosters -- you may want Rogue or Bard as your _____ in this case.



Cloistered Cleric is emphatically T1, and probably stronger than Cleric which was already high T1; on the other side, Factotum seems to play like a T5 whenever I've seen it used outside of Gestalt. (Inside a Gestalt it might be better.) Neither of those classes seem to be within your tier target range.

[Willie the Duck]

Cloistered Cleric is emphatically T1, and probably stronger than Cleric which was already high T1; on the other side, Factotum seems to play like a T5 whenever I've seen it used outside of Gestalt. (Inside a Gestalt it might be better.) Neither of those classes seem to be within your tier target range.

No one seems to agree on what tier a Factotum is. Suffice to say, it would have to be well-optimized. The cloistered cleric I agree with. It would have to be actively nerfed-probably through multiclassing or choosing PrCs without spell progression (or their own spell progression, etc.).

[Arkain]

Marshal. No spellcasting, so much less powerful than, say, a beguiler would be, but a good teamplayer who can help out nicely with skills.

[Cosi]

Much like the Totemist, the Incarnate is able to get very large skill bonuses. However, unlike the Totemist, the Incarnate doesn't really get much else.

The Unearthed Arcana Expert would be kind of interesting as an option for this, if your DM was willing to allow it to take the associated feats. Super flexible, though probably not very powerful.

IIRC the Trickster Spelltheif gets Bard casting, but it's "steal spells" shtick might be weak if you expect not to encounter full casters.


I've got a soft spot for Binder 5 / Chameleon 10, which is NOT initially high-skill, but which is very flexible and fun -- and does get skill-boosters later.

You do need to be a little careful with this though. Chameleon's "any spell from any list" shtick can be very powerful if you pick spells off of accelerated lists (e.g. you can get planar binding before Wizards do). If you don't do that, it's probably nothing to be worried about, but the potential is there.

[Kelb_Panthera]

I'm rather fond of incarnate for a skill monkey type. It's pretty different from most others in how it works but as long as you take expanded soulmeld capacity and pick up an incarnum focus item for whichever chakra holds your favorite meld you'll do near as well as any rogue at the actual skill checks. Better if you actually invest ranks.

Here's a short-hand for types:

Good: defensive
Lawful: accuracy
Evil: damage
Chaos: don't pick chaos

[Sleven]

First of all, the "tier list" most people refer to is wildly inaccurate. The creator and contributors vastly underestimated the advantage classes like Paladin and Ranger have over all other martial and skill classes simply because they have spellcasting.

In fact, the only thing a tier list should be based on is spellcasting and/or similar mechanics. Assuming no optimization, something as simple as:

1: Prepared casters (e.g. archivist, wizard, druid, cleric)
2: Spontaneous casters (e.g. sorcerer, psion, mystic, favored soul)
3: Focused and/or spontaneous casters (e.g. beguiler, dread necromancer, bard, martial adepts)
4: Partial casters and/or [most] alternative systems (e.g. paladin, ranger, spellthief, artificer)
5 & below: noncasters and skill monkeys (e.g. monk, rogue, barbarian, fighter)

Using a spellcasting based tier list the factotum would fall under tier 4 or "partial casters".

If I had to make a call based on the vibe I'm getting from your post, I would suggest a party with mostly tier 4 classes like: factotum, adept, (warblade, crusader, swordsage), paladin, ranger, healer (if you ignore gate's calling ability), psychic warrior, hexblade, duskblade, lurk, psychic rogue, etc.

Classes like: binder, totemist, incarnate, shadowcaster, etc. are probably within the power level you're after, but aren't really friendly to new players as they require a greater amount of optimization and foresight to not feel overshadowed by the likes of an adept or martial initiator.

The only problem you might run into is someone playing factotum or psychic rogue completely overshadowing a party member who's just a plain old rogue. Same goes for ranger and scout, etc.

EDIT: Actually, I'm not sure why I put martial adepts in tier 3, they probably belong under tier 4 since their maneuvers aren't really on par with what focused spontaneous casters can do... but they are sort of "focused" casters when it comes to combat encounters/killing things. And I did specify "no optimization" for the basis of each tier... Hmmm. Oh well.

[Willie the Duck]

First of all, the "tier list" most people refer to is wildly inaccurate. The creator and contributors vastly underestimated the advantage classes like Paladin and Ranger have over all other martial and skill classes simply because they have spellcasting.
In fact, the only thing a tier list should be based on is spellcasting and/or similar mechanics. Assuming no optimization, something as simple as:
<ex.>


Yes and no (for this group). This group is very much not 'by the book.' There are multiple reasons:
1) We just got done with a Mad Max-style campaign and everyone is tired of constant combat
2) The group, when it played 3e, was that stereotypical 'played 3e like it was 2e' group that apparently much of the 3e design team was, such that the caster-martial imbalance exists at all.
3) Conversely, the DM is prone not to make balanced encounters or have the expected # of combats per day, so spellcasters will probably get to recharge more often than someone trying to set up a rules-based challenge would have.
4) The DM basically doesn't kill PCs excepting in cases of redonkulous stupidity, or dramatic moments with the player's blessing.
5) Everyone is making characters based on what type of personality/backstory/forward-going story they are interested in.
6) Min-maxing of the type where you dip into 2-3 multiclasses and or PrCs to cherry pick the right perks and the like is not going to happen.

Mind you, there are two of us who are veterans of the more rules-following D20 playstyle, and are aware of the caster-martial imbalance, and the like, and everyone's agreed not to feed the power-seeking side of the game.

My point is: within this group, merely having spellcasting is going to be 1) slightly better because the DM won't police vs. 5 minute workday, but 2) not as OP as normal, because people won't be trying to min-max it.


If I had to make a call based on the vibe I'm getting from your post, I would suggest a party with mostly tier 4 classes like: factotum, adept, (warblade, crusader, swordsage), paladin, ranger, healer (if you ignore gate's calling ability), psychic warrior, hexblade, duskblade, lurk, psychic rogue, etc.

I know no one will take an adept ('That's an NPC class!'). Probably same for healer ('Oh good, so be everyone else's HP battery?'). All the psychics are possible. I know someone will want to take some kind of 'spellcaster,' and I think I'm going to have to find a way to suggest taking beguiler, warmage, or something and hamstring it down to the same level as others.


Classes like: binder, totemist, incarnate, shadowcaster, etc. are probably within the power level you're after, but aren't really friendly to new players as they require a greater amount of optimization and foresight to not feel overshadowed by the likes of an adept or martial initiator.

I think they are sufficiently divorced from everyone's expectation for a 'D&D' game that it likely won't come up. The real fear is that someone will want to play a 'druid' or 'mage' and stumble into a high-OP character. The real problem I think is that--while I think everyone believes me and that one other guy that spellcasters are runaway in 3e, they didn't really experience it that last time they played. Most of the gaming was levels 1-10, the wizards were fireball wizards, the clerics heal-batteries (magic items were mostly dungeon-discovered so wands of CLW did not abound), no one made a natural spell bear-army druids, and by the time it got to high levels, it was mostly roleplay, social skills, what our airships or armies or the like did.

[Eldariel]

Healer with Sanctified Spells is actually pretty fun (something you could advertise to any prospective player) and Adept is a lot of fun in parties without real full casters as it's more in line with the level of spells that should be cast alongside equal level martials; you have to actually use your spells well to pull your weight and you don't need to worry about being overpowered (aside from Animate Dead, which can do nasty stuff of course; but it comes so late that you don't really need to worry).

[Nifft]

Healer with Sanctified Spells is actually pretty fun (something you could advertise to any prospective player) and Adept is a lot of fun in parties without real full casters as it's more in line with the level of spells that should be cast alongside equal level martials; you have to actually use your spells well to pull your weight and you don't need to worry about being overpowered (aside from Animate Dead, which can do nasty stuff of course; but it comes so late that you don't really need to worry).

In addition to Sanctified Spells, you might consider something like Initiate of Obad-Hai (from Dragon Mag) which allows any prepared Divine spell to be sacrificed to cast a level-appropriate Summon Nature's Ally spell.

That's a great boost to a Healer, and a decent step up for an Adept -- though looking at it, an Adept's power might be better at crafting items, since their daily spells are so pathetic but their list isn't that bad.

[Willie the Duck]

In addition to Sanctified Spells, you might consider something like Initiate of Obad-Hai (from Dragon Mag) which allows any prepared Divine spell to be sacrificed to cast a level-appropriate Summon Nature's Ally spell.

That's a great boost to a Healer, and a decent step up for an Adept -- though looking at it, an Adept's power might be better at crafting items, since their daily spells are so pathetic but their list isn't that bad.

Great ideas (for a different party). I might even be able to get something like that in. I suspect, however, that maybe an alternative form of healing might occur, and then we won't need either. But I am unsure.

[SLOTHRPG95]

Adept is a lot of fun in parties without real full casters as it's more in line with the level of spells that should be cast alongside equal level martials; you have to actually use your spells well to pull your weight and you don't need to worry about being overpowered (aside from Animate Dead, which can do nasty stuff of course; but it comes so late that you don't really need to worry).


looking at it, an Adept's power might be better at crafting items, since their daily spells are so pathetic but their list isn't that bad.

Yeah in a party where there's no PC-class full casters, an Adept doesn't do horribly. A Bard is probably more powerful as a caster (and in every other way), but then again a Bard can't craft wands of Lightning Bolt or eventually learn Raise Dead. Probably the best way to play an Adept in such a party is to not rely too heavily on the day's spell slots (since you get so few), but instead become a mini-Artificer.

[Eldariel]

In addition to Sanctified Spells, you might consider something like Initiate of Obad-Hai (from Dragon Mag) which allows any prepared Divine spell to be sacrificed to cast a level-appropriate Summon Nature's Ally spell.

That's a great boost to a Healer, and a decent step up for an Adept -- though looking at it, an Adept's power might be better at crafting items, since their daily spells are so pathetic but their list isn't that bad.

Adept dailies aren't THAT bad; with maxed casting stat (+2 racial or age really helps) you're looking at +2 max level slots from relatively early on making the apparent 3/1 into a 5/3. They have reliably enough decent spells for a full day of encounters when they hit 3rd level spells (ECL 8).

[thorr-kan]

In addition to Sanctified Spells, you might consider something like Initiate of Obad-Hai (from Dragon Mag) which allows any prepared Divine spell to be sacrificed to cast a level-appropriate Summon Nature's Ally spell.

That's a great boost to a Healer, and a decent step up for an Adept -- though looking at it, an Adept's power might be better at crafting items, since their daily spells are so pathetic but their list isn't that bad.
Would either Healer or Adept qualify for initiate feats? They cast from their own lists, not from the cleric lists. So initiate feats would seem to be off the table.

ETA: Wait; you mean the Core Initiate feats from Dragon 342, p48, right? *Those* only require casting divine spells. That would be a nice upgrade for an adept.

[thorr-kan]

Adept dailies aren't THAT bad; with maxed casting stat (+2 racial or age really helps) you're looking at +2 max level slots from relatively early on making the apparent 3/1 into a 5/3. They have reliably enough decent spells for a full day of encounters when they hit 3rd level spells (ECL 8).
There's actually a bit of support for the adept: more spells, alternate class features, alternate spell lists, core initiate feats discussed above, minor familiar shenanigans...

In a low powered party, an adept could be a lot of fun!

Adept Alternate Class Features:

Familiar – Dragon 280, p60 - Alternative starting familiars. (3.0ED)

Familiar – Dragon 323, p88 - Specialist familiars. (3.5ED)

Familiar – Dragon 341, p96 - Specialist familiars. (3.5ED)

Familiar - Dragon 348, p88 - Unfamiliar territory: focus caster; (arcane reabsorbtion isn't valid as it specifically calls out arcane spells). (3.5ED)

Goblin of Grodd - Into the Dragon's Lair, p86 – An adept of Grodd can rebuke or command shadows as a cleric of the same level. (3.0ED)

Goblin of Grodd - Into the Dragon's Lair, p90-91 – Alternate spell list. (3.0ED)

Kobold - Races of the Dragon, p48 - Alternate spell list: Swap animal trance and daylight with lesser restoration and create food & water, respectively. (3.5ED)


Additional Spells - Additional Spells - (CC-Complete Champion)
2 - Bewildering Substitution - CC, p116
2 - Bewildering Visions - CC, p116
2 - Interfaith Blessing - CC, p123
4 - Lesser Spell Turning - Mintiper's Chapbook Part 10 (http://archive.wizards.com/dnd/article.asp?x=dnd/mc/mc20020130a)
5 - Bewildering Mischance - CC, p116
More Spells for Adepts sidebar - Masters of the Wild, p81 - Additional spells from Defenders of the Faith, Masters of the Wild, Tome and Blood. (3.0ED)
Lords of Madness, and many online adept spell lists:
2 - invoke the cerulean sign - LOM - "its magic is nearly universal and can be mastered by all spellcasting classes"

More Spells for Adepts sidebar, Masters of the Wild, p81 (DotF-Defenders of the Faith, MotW-Masters of the Wild, TaB-Tome and Blood):
0 - dawn (MotW) - SpC, p59
1 - hawkeye (MotW) - SpC, p110
1 - lesser cold orb (TaB) - SpC, p151, (orb of cold, lesser)
1 - scarecrow (MotW) -
2 - choke (TaB) -
2 - decomposition (MotW) - SpC, p61
2 - owl's wisdom (TaB) - PH, p259
3 - beastmask (DotF) -
3 - embrace the wild (MotW) - SpC, p79
3 - enhance familiar (TaB) - SpC, p82
4 - false bravado (MotW) -
4 - languor (MotW) - SpC, p130
4 - weather eye (DotF) - SpC, p238
5 - big sky (MotW) -
5 - ghostform (TaB) - SpC, p103

Any prepared spellcaster who meets the alignment requirements:
sanctified spells - BoED
corrupt spells - BoVD, HH

Religious Adept – Eberron Campaign Setting, p256 – Add ability to choose a domain from the god worshipped; add domain spells to spell list and gain domain power, treating adept level as cleric level. (3.5ED)

Religious Urban Adept – Sharn: City of Towers, p167 – Alternate spell list, add ability to choose a domain from the god worshipped; add domain spells to spell list and gain domain power, treating adept level as cleric level. (3.5ED)

Urban Adept – Sharn: City of Towers, p167 – Alternate spell list. (3.5ED)

[thorr-kan]

Dragging myself back on subject, in a skill-monkey party, monk or ninja might actually work.

[Eldariel]

Complete Champion has a few more spells as well, and this article (http://archive.wizards.com/dnd/article.asp?x=dnd/mc/mc20020130a) adds Lesser Spell Turning. I'm almost certain you're aware of these but as you didn't list them, I'm mentioning it for completeness's sake. And yeah, Religious Adept is very nice indeed, essentially getting 5 new spells. Adept actually fits quite the curious point being a divine class that gets a familiar. You innately lack access to Imbue with Spell Ability, but it can be accessed through Magic-domain. That would be nice with the familiar, though of course you should just go Improved and get it to UMD stuff for you like any good caster (while sharing Polymorph onto it and using those tasty Outsider forms; Arrow Demon familiar can actually be quite the beating for instance, even with your poor BAB).

[Sleven]

-snip-
5) Everyone is making characters based on what type of personality/backstory/forward-going story they are interested in.
-snip-
everyone's agreed not to feed the power-seeking side of the game.

My point is: within this group, merely having spellcasting is going to be 1) slightly better because the DM won't police vs. 5 minute workday, but 2) not as OP as normal, because people won't be trying to min-max it.

This makes me think you're concerned about "balance" when you shouldn't be.

Honestly, if your group is roleplay focused, what classes you play aren't going to matter. I find that roleplay focused groups put the story and character development before "I must win every social, combat, etc. encounter because I'm a wizard and I can do that". If you feel like this is the case, then I strongly recommend opening up all classes and sources and reflavoring anything to the story and/or characters you're trying to create. This is how I DM (when I choose to). Not everyone likes my games. I'm okay with that.


I know no one will take an adept ('That's an NPC class!'). Probably same for healer ('Oh good, so be everyone else's HP battery?'). All the psychics are possible. I know someone will want to take some kind of 'spellcaster,'

The point is, characterization should take precedence over what the actual class is. Healers can be a strong roleplay personality, as can adepts. Don't look at the class names or what book, section, etc. they're in; look at what they can actually do and ask whether or not it fits their character's personality/fantasy/archtype/abilities/etc.


they didn't really experience it that last time they played. Most of the gaming was levels 1-10, the wizards were fireball wizards, the clerics heal-batteries (magic items were mostly dungeon-discovered so wands of CLW did not abound), no one made a natural spell bear-army druids, and by the time it got to high levels, it was mostly roleplay, social skills, what our airships or armies or the like did.

If you think this game is going to play out in a similar fashion, then the classes won't matter. Play what you want and have fun. :smallsmile:

[Nifft]

Adept dailies aren't THAT bad; with maxed casting stat (+2 racial or age really helps) you're looking at +2 max level slots from relatively early on making the apparent 3/1 into a 5/3. They have reliably enough decent spells for a full day of encounters when they hit 3rd level spells (ECL 8). I think you're talking about having a 20 Wisdom at level 1. It's hard to say because you seem to be giving bonus Orisons, which I think is incorrect. But maybe you're doing something different. You're claiming something, but what you're claiming is rather hard to guess.


ETA: Wait; you mean the Core Initiate feats from Dragon 342, p48, right? *Those* only require casting divine spells. That would be a nice upgrade for an adept. Yep, that's right.

They're not entirely consistent with the hardbacks, but the hardbacks aren't internally consistent about [Initiate] feats anyway, so it's not that big a departure.


There's actually a bit of support for the adept: more spells, alternate class features, alternate spell lists, core initiate feats discussed above, minor familiar shenanigans...(snip ACFs) They do get some support, but even so their spells per day limit is really harsh.

You're right that they're better than they look on the SRD, but even with all that they're still not very good compared to PC classes like Bard or Wildshape Mystic Ranger.

[Willie the Duck]

This makes me think you're concerned about "balance" when you shouldn't be.
Honestly, if your group is roleplay focused, what classes you play aren't going to matter. I find that roleplay focused groups put the story and character development before "I must win every social, combat, etc. encounter because I'm a wizard and I can do that". If you feel like this is the case, then I strongly recommend opening up all classes and sources and reflavoring anything to the story and/or characters you're trying to create. This is how I DM (when I choose to). Not everyone likes my games. I'm okay with that.
...
If you think this game is going to play out in a similar fashion, then the classes won't matter. Play what you want and have fun. :smallsmile:

I appreciate the sentiment of that. However, I still want to know what best to suggest if people ask me.

[thorr-kan]

Complete Champion has a few more spells as well, and this article (http://archive.wizards.com/dnd/article.asp?x=dnd/mc/mc20020130a) adds Lesser Spell Turning. I'm almost certain you're aware of these but as you didn't list them, I'm mentioning it for completeness's sake. And yeah, Religious Adept is very nice indeed, essentially getting 5 new spells. Adept actually fits quite the curious point being a divine class that gets a familiar. You innately lack access to Imbue with Spell Ability, but it can be accessed through Magic-domain. That would be nice with the familiar, though of course you should just go Improved and get it to UMD stuff for you like any good caster (while sharing Polymorph onto it and using those tasty Outsider forms; Arrow Demon familiar can actually be quite the beating for instance, even with your poor BAB).
Those are on my list. Why aren't they on THIS my list? That's not right...

Thanks for pointing that out to me. Original post has been updated.

[Luccan]

Given the low-tier, spellthief might be fun. So long as they have something to siphon spells off of.

[Nifft]

Given the low-tier, spellthief might be fun. So long as they have something to siphon spells off of.

Therein lies the rub.

If you're facing a string of encounters each with one or more same-level full-casters, and your PCs are low-tier, those encounters will tend to wreck the PCs.

If you're NOT facing a string of encounters each with one or more same-level full-caster, then what are you stealing?

Spellthief is not well-designed on the meta-level (nor on the regular play level either, it's just not that great overall).

[Willie the Duck]

Spell thief seems to dependent upon a very specific enemy type to work in the scenarios I expect. But it is an interesting class.

[Cosi]

Spelltheif can do some funky stuff. Here's a thread (http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=7958) with some discussion of possible exploits. Overall though, it's kind of anemic at best and close to useless without casters to steal off of. As I mentioned, Trickster Spellthief mitigates this by having better casting (IIRC Bard level).


1: Prepared casters (e.g. archivist, wizard, druid, cleric)
2: Spontaneous casters (e.g. sorcerer, psion, mystic, favored soul)
3: Focused and/or spontaneous casters (e.g. beguiler, dread necromancer, bard, martial adepts)
4: Partial casters and/or [most] alternative systems (e.g. paladin, ranger, spellthief, artificer)
5 & below: noncasters and skill monkeys (e.g. monk, rogue, barbarian, fighter)

UMD is better than 4/9 casting, and probably around as good as 6/9 casting. Also you're screwing up the fixed list casters again, and probably giving too much credit to the Archivist. Overall, I don't think this system really fixes the problems the Tiers had.

[liquidformat]

I am throwing my hat in behind the bard. There are a huge number of acfs that can make them varied, things like divine bard and take the role of party cleric light or snow flake war dance and be front linerish. If you want to go 'god' style caster but not be super powered bard/dread witch with inspire awe and Melodic Casting is a great option that isn't super op if you don't follow it up with sublime chord. Ranger or paladin can play the role of your party healer with a couple of wands, ranger seconds as scout and front linerish; whereas, paladin will happily function as your tank healer. Crusader is another great tank, and hexblade and duskblade both are great classes inside the zone you are shooting for.

Over all I would go with bard over beguiler as the power level is a bit lower and you won't specifically have to try and adjust it down.

Bard, ranger, and paladin can all function as healbot while still having a main focus in other areas so they will play better than adept or healer.

crusader, paladin, and duskblade will all play well as tanks and still be able to play around with different roles. Monk or monk/swordsage could also swing tank type role and contribute in other places.

If you are going with wizard/sorcerer/beguiler/dread nec and other tier 1 and 2 casters going into gish prcs with bad spell progression is also a decent idea. most of the tier 1 and 2 classes are weak below level 10 and if you are taking half spell progression prcs from 5-20 power creep isn't much of an issue. The problem arises when you are trying to hit spell levels 7-9 with 16+ bab. If someone is wanting to play a druid maybe suggest taking prcs like nature's warrior and warshaper that will drop their spell casting but not add crazy options unlike mast of many forms.

[ericgrau]

Varying a skillmonkey party too greatly isn't always the best idea. For example if you can all take a 10 on your hide and move silently checks you can bypass large areas. Assuming the DM doesn't get heavy handed on making you roll anyway or making certain challenges immune to skills. Unfortunately this is a common DM "solution" to auto-passed skills, so be aware of him before you try this and get your entire party build trashed.

[Sleven]

UMD is better than 4/9 casting, and probably around as good as 6/9 casting.

No it's not. Anyone can UMD at the cost of 0-1 feat and UMD doesn't even become consistent until mid-late levels. Partial casters have a list to scroll and wand off of for the entire game and can still UMD if they want.


Also you're screwing up the fixed list casters again, and probably giving too much credit to the Archivist.

I'd really love to see your case for why archivists should be tier 2 or lower.

As for fixed list casters, I would have no problem merging tiers 2 and 3 assuming optimization was in play. The only problem is, once you start assuming optimization, where do you stop? At a certain point tier 2 & 3 become better than tier 1, at another point there's no discernible difference between any caster capable of hitting 9th level slots, etc. Until there's just 1 tier: TO tier. Because even commoners can pun-pun.


Overall, I don't think this system really fixes the problems the Tiers had.

Sure it does. Spellcasting and similar systems are the only things significant enough to create a meaningful power difference.

[Cosi]

I'd really love to see your case for why archivists should be tier 2 or lower.

The Archivist is basically "beg your DM to not be a nerfed Cleric". Yes, it can in theory grab basically all the spells in the game. But really, who cares? That's not better than planar binding. And if it doesn't get to do that, it's a Cleric that doesn't learn all their spells. If you have a permissive DM, you get a trick that doesn't actually make you win the game (compare the Beguiler's substitute domain + Prestige Domain shuffle or the Wizard's Spontaneous Divination + Versatile Spellcaster). If you have a restrictive DM, you suck a lot. Probably worse than the Favored Soul, which is already a pretty bad class because "a small number of Cleric spells known, and no turning or domains" isn't a great package.


As for fixed list casters, I would have no problem merging tiers 2 and 3 assuming optimization was in play.

If you're discounting UMD because feats, the Beguiler and Dread Necromancer are definitely better than the Sorcerer, because Apprentice lets them swap their two worst spells each level into whatever they want. That destroys any advantage the Sorcerer gets from their list. Also, they're clearly better than the Bards and Warblades of the world in any case.


Sure it does. Spellcasting and similar systems are the only things significant enough to create a meaningful power difference.

That's not really true. The Rogue is clearly better than the Fighter, and neither of them are casters. The Healer is a caster, and is basically meaningless modulo Sanctified Spells.

[Sleven]

The Archivist is basically "beg your DM to not be a nerfed Cleric". Yes, it can in theory grab basically all the spells in the game. But really, who cares? That's not better than planar binding. And if it doesn't get to do that, it's a Cleric that doesn't learn all their spells. If you have a permissive DM, you get a trick that doesn't actually make you win the game (compare the Beguiler's substitute domain + Prestige Domain shuffle or the Wizard's Spontaneous Divination + Versatile Spellcaster). If you have a restrictive DM, you suck a lot. Probably worse than the Favored Soul, which is already a pretty bad class because "a small number of Cleric spells known, and no turning or domains" isn't a great package.

At any table where an archivist would have to beg their DM to not be worse than a cleric, a wizard would have the same problem. Why are you not recommending they also be tier 2 or lower?

I don't think anyone would play archivist at such a table without subverting such a resource constraint, which they're more than capable of doing. Same goes for wizard, which is why it's not worth having that discussion.


If you're discounting UMD because feats, the Beguiler and Dread Necromancer are definitely better than the Sorcerer, because Apprentice lets them swap their two worst spells each level into whatever they want. That destroys any advantage the Sorcerer gets from their list.

If you don't see the difference between using Apprentice (Spellcaster) to get UMD as a class skill and using Apprentice (Spellcaster) to grab any spells you want off any class' list, we're never going to agree. Most DMs flat out won't let you do the latter, and it's dishonest to claim otherwise.

I'm not sure if you're aware of how dishonest you're being with yourself. You talk about using Apprentice (Spellcaster) as a great boon for one class (the beguiler) while completely disregarding it as an option for another (archivist). Why?

If you really want to get into op-fu nonsense reasons why certain classes suck, clerics and druids are the worst prepared casters because they don't actually know any of their spells. That alone bars them from higher optimization tricks that expand spell lists indefinitely and with infinite capacity. If we want to go there, the spontaneous divine caster variant of cleric and druid are better than their vanilla counterparts. I mean, since we're in op-fu land, psions, archivists, and wizards are the best classes ever, right? Oh wait, in op-fu land charisma is a better stat because it has far more support, and skill points don't matter. I guess wilders, dread necromancers, and sorcerers are the best now. Especially since their spell/power list has whatever the hell I want on it.


Also, they're clearly better than the Bards and Warblades of the world in any case.

You really don't know squat about bards. If you want to use the "one feat" argument, all they need is one feat to cast an unlimited number of spells per day. As a bonus they have charisma as a casting stat and can change their spell list up on the fly. Sounds a lot better than what that puny beguiler can do.

I already admitted martial adepts are only anywhere near t3 in combat encounter focused games without optimization and rules wankery on the level you're discussing.


That's not really true. The Rogue is clearly better than the Fighter, and neither of them are casters. The Healer is a caster, and is basically meaningless modulo Sanctified Spells.

The difference between rogue and fighter is not meaningful enough to warrant a new tier.
+
Healer can't be garbage since we're playing "apprentice does exactly what I want it to at every table". At that table healer has whatever spells they want to, because fair is fair and I can optimize to do the same with the healer via whatever route I decide.

[Cosi]

At any table where an archivist would have to beg their DM to not be worse than a cleric, a wizard would have the same problem. Why are you not recommending they also be tier 2 or lower?

The Wizard spell list is designed to function if you only know a small number of spells. Getting color spray four times a day is an entirely serviceable (arguably, overpowered) character at 1st level. You can't really say the same of Cleric spells, by design.


If you don't see the difference between using Apprentice (Spellcaster) to get UMD as a class skill and using Apprentice (Spellcaster) to grab any spells you want off any class' list, we're never going to agree. Most DMs flat out won't let you do the latter, and it's dishonest to claim otherwise.

Most DMs won't let you do anything that results in an appreciable imbalance between characters. If we're talking about a Tier list at all, it is presumably intended either to help DMs make decisions, or to judge classes in a vacuum. In either case, we default to RAW Apprentice (Spellcaster), which does in fact allow you to swap one spell you know for another at every class level.


I'm not sure if you're aware of how dishonest you're being with yourself. You talk about using Apprentice (Spellcaster) as a great boon for one class (the beguiler) while completely disregarding it as an option for another (archivist). Why?

Apprentice (Spellcaster) doesn't net you spells known. It is only good for classes like the Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, and Warmage that have large numbers of relatively low value spells that they would happy trade away. This, incidentally, is why the Tiers undervalue those classes. They have unique mechanics, so the tools used to optimize them are different from the tools used to optimize other classes. Rainbow Servant is crap for a Wizard or Sorcerer, but the best PrC in the game for a Warmage. If the Archivist wants to trade his numerically limited number of spells per level for more obscure spells, he can do that, but that gain is going to be fairly marginal. Also, it will probably end up with him looking even more like a bad Wizard or Cleric.


You really don't know squat about bards. If you want to use the "one feat" argument, all they need is one feat to cast an unlimited number of spells per day.

This argument, and you, would be infinitely more credible if you had named the feat. You know, like I did when talking up Apprentice. Show your work. I'm willing to bet this doesn't actually function the way you think it does, or shows up at some ridiculously high level or something. Or maybe it's just this board's bizarre belief that you don't actually need to demonstrate any evidence for optimization claims you make.


As a bonus they have charisma as a casting stat and can change their spell list up on the fly. Sounds a lot better than what that puny beguiler can do.

Starting at 6th level, the Beguiler has access to every single spell on any domain list with 10 minutes notice (substitute domain lets you shuffle a Prestige Domain from Rainbow Servant or Divine Oracle, and you don't pay any penalty for switching gods). From there you can layer any of the class-agnostic infinite spell tricks, like Primal Scholar. Eventually you can swap your domains around as a standard action (arcane fusion, possibly with Sanctum Spell to put substitute domain in the 1st level slot).


rules wankery on the level you're discussing.

Rules Wankery: trading spells known for other spells known.
Not Rules Wankery: asserting that because divine bards exist anywhere at all, you can learn Bard spells as an Archivist.

What's the difference here? Both are strict RAW, both result in substantial increases in power, and Apprentice has the benefit of being entirely self contained -- you don't have to rely on finding scrolls.


Healer can't be garbage since we're playing "apprentice does exactly what I want it to at every table".

No, Apprentice does what it says it does. You know, like literally every ability in the game. And it doesn't do anything terribly useful for Healers, because the exact thing that makes them eligble for Sanctified Spells (the fact that they prepare spells) denies them access to the good version of Apprentice (which requires that you are a spontaneous caster). Seriously, the feat only does good things for three classes, and only because of some fairly specific mechanical interactions.

[Luccan]

I thought the cool thing about archivists was that they got all divine spells. Only cleric on level up, but literally any divine class scroll can be used for their prayerbooks. Even in a game where your DM isn't giving you every cleric spell, if you can pick up the right scrolls I think you're an easy tier 2

[Sleven]

[Nonsense failing to address my main point]

You're so aware of bard's place on the tier list yet aren't familiar with Lyric Spell or the fact that there are multiple creatures that can use bardic music as many times per day as they want? If you wanted to sound intelligent, you would have been better off not addressing this point, like you did with the most salient one from my previous post. Which, btw, pretty much sums up why it's not worth responding to most of the rest of this. You aren't addressing the root of problem: anyone with enough RAW nouse can wank whatever spells they want on to any spell list they want or just get access to any spell list they want. This isn't unique or new, but you don't seem to want to address this point. How is it any better for a beguiler, warmage, or dread necro to wank spells that don't belong on their list than for any other class to do it? Hell, you're already reaching so far as to claim switching which deity you worship every 10 minutes is a valid tactic in an actual game. It's laughable. As in, I'm currently laughing.

EDIT: -too mean-

[Cosi]

I thought the cool thing about archivists was that they got all divine spells. Only cleric on level up, but literally any divine class scroll can be used for their prayerbooks. Even in a game where your DM isn't giving you every cleric spell, if you can pick up the right scrolls I think you're an easy tier 2

Possibly. But honestly, the difference between "two Cleric spells per level" and "all Cleric spells" is way bigger than the difference between "all Cleric spells" and "all divine spells". You hit diminishing returns pretty quickly, and you would absolutely rather have a build like Spontaneous Divination + Versatile Spellcaster Wizard or substitute domain + Prestige Domain Beguiler that gets a slightly smaller number of spells, but casts spontaneously. Because that's a way better deal.

Basically, if the Archivist doesn't do any weird optimization, he's a Cleric who pays for spell knowledge. If he does he's spending his time and resources optimizing for spell knowledge rather than far more direct sources of power available to other characters. I don't think the class is useless, but I definitely don't think it belongs on the same level as the Wizard, Cleric, and Druid.


You're so aware of bard's place on the tier list yet aren't familiar with Lyric Spell or the fact that there are multiple creatures that can use bardic music as many times per day as they want?

Oh, good, another person who thinks that when they make a broken polymorph build, it's the fault of things that aren't polymorph. This is the kind of reasoning that leads to Jormengand ranting about the superiority of Truenamers because you could get polymorphed into a Garbler and do some degenerate things. Or maybe it's not. Because you haven't bothered to actually explain the obscure trick on which your argument rests (I say this, because I've seen and participated in multiple discussions of Bards on multiple forums and never once seen "unlimted spells via Lyric Spell" floated as a reason it's better than the Beguiler). What creature? How are you gaining its abilities? Why should we assume creatures with at-will Bardic Music have an infinite number of discrete uses instead of being able to use any Bardic Music ability at will? If you had something that worked, shouldn't you be happy to show me up by posting enough for me to check your claim?

If not, I'm just going to assert that there's a single feat that makes Barbarians win everything forever. The fact that you haven't heard of this feat implies deep moral failing on your part, and clearly demonstrates that you don't understand the Barbarian well enough to make claims about its ranking in any kind of organized fashion.


anyone with enough RAW nouse can wank whatever spells they want on to any spell list they want or just get access to any spell list they want. This isn't unique or new, but you don't seem to want to address this point.

I did address that point. By pointing out that the assertion that plundering spells off the Divine Bard list (or whatever other Archivist trick) was totally legitimate but taking Apprentice (Spelllcaster) was not is absurd. One is basically a gotcha you pulled on your DM for forgetting to specify his class list properly, the other is a feat you personally took.


How is it any better for a beguiler, warmage, or dread necro to wank spells that don't belong on their list than for any other class to do it?

So to be clear, when the Archivist plunders half Sorcerer/Wizard list on the back of the Divine Magican ACF, that's totally legit, but when the Beguiler spends a feat to get two spells of each level from that list in exchange for two of their native spells, that's wank?

See, this is the exact problem that JaronK had. You've drawn the line for what counts as class power in a way that excludes the power of any class you don't like. Except instead of pretending you're only doing class features, you're just ignoring anything you don't like because it's "wank". A term which, of course, you have entirely refused to define.


Hell, you're already reaching so far as to claim switching which deity you worship every 10 minutes is a valid tactic in an actual game. It's laughable. As in, I'm currently laughing.

It's just as valid as your Lyric Spell plan. Probably more so, because I'm quite confident you're opting for ad hominems and gotchas in favor of an actual build because you know your strategy has massive holes in it. FFS, you can't even manage to dig up arguments people have made this month on this forum on this topic to make the case that Apprentice (Spellcaster) doesn't work before you declare anything that might invalidate your analysis "wanking". You're not an optimizer, you're an optimization fanboy.

[Sleven]

You're not an optimizer, you're an optimization fanboy.

Ouch, I'm hurt so much. My reputation as an optimizer has been brought into question. What will I do if I'm not known as t3h b35t opt1m1z3r ev4r?!?!? Oh wait, I don't care.


FFS, you can't even manage to dig up arguments people have made this month on this forum on this topic to make the case that Apprentice (Spellcaster) doesn't work before you declare anything that might invalidate your analysis "wanking".

Nah, who needs to use the search function for that.

Here's a better use of the search function for stuff "this month"; they all have something in common, they involve someone responding to you:


Yes, you are.
Guy calls you an idiot. Point-blank and savage-like.


[Post where some person mocks you from the same thread]
Self explanatory.


Thats not ever TO. Assuming that everytime you get the ability to chose a new spell it may be from any list unless its specified that it has to be from your classes spell list isn't going to fly at any table.
More people who understand that there's no such thing as a 100% rules wank table.


BTW, I do keep noticing how your responses continue to get more and more selective as to the cases you are trying to refute. It's a rapid retreat to the keep.
Perhaps the best quote from this thread, since the person seems to have the impression you were doing the same thing in that thread that you are in this one.


I'm just going to go back to blocking you.
...

Damn, I didn't even have to go past the first page in these two threads. So thanks for recommending I use the search function to look for your old threads. It was really helpful in understanding why you're incapable of participating in discourse.

But I mean... if I wanted to go to the second page:


This is actually a laughably poor example
It's not just me who's laughing.

TLDR; today I learned a valuable lesson: people often disagree with you, find you to be arrogant and/or uninformed, make a point of putting you on their ignore list, etc. Yet, clearly, you're not the problem. Okay, buddy ;)

[Cosi]

Okay, so you admit you can't defend your points about the Bard? Because that's what I'm taking from your post. That and a bunch of personal attacks I'm pretty sure violate the forum rules three or four different ways. And a total lack of understanding of what constitutes argument or evidence. Because there were arguments in those threads. Like Troacctid's claim that "a spell" defaulted to your list. It was a bad argument, because it made Expanded Learning not do anything, but it was an argument. Nothing in that post is.