Legendary games legendary classes vs the other non legendary ones

[VladtheLad]

So legendary games has published a bunch of class fixes??? for certain classes.
Here I am refering to Legendary Barbarian/Cavalier/Fighter/Ranger/Rogue/Samurai and comparing them to Brawlers/Paladins/Monks/Slayers.
Are the legendary classes simply better than even the very powerful Pathfinder Paladin?
I think the pathfinder paladin is as strong as it can get without including extra options in for it in and outside of combat and increasing its tier ( I don't agree with tiers but i know this forum has a kind of consensus on them so I am using the terminology) or put in another way there is no point in having bigger numbers than those paladin has just a higher flexibility.
Do the legendary classes mentioned break these limits? I personally wouldn't like that.
Or maybe they reach this power level while having more in game choices?

I say the Paladin is good but the unchained monk, or well build "normal" monks, brawlers and slayers are more than viable in a pathfinder game.

I understand there are Legendary brawlers/monks and paladins supplements but those are not class rebuilds and as far as I remeber they didn't make a big difference in their respective classes power level.

[Thealtruistorc]

Barbarians and Paladins are considered top tier Paizo martials (which is to say around tier 4). The Legendary Barbarian is mostly just some minor tweaks and I wouldn't consider it substantially stronger than either of these classes.

Cavalier, Fighter with all improvements, Ranger, Rogue, Swashbuckler, Gunslinger, and Samurai are all big improvements over their Paizo counterparts, and I would say that Samurai and Ranger (the best of the bunch in my view) are on par with Barbarian and Paladin as some of the best martials (they might eclipse the Paizo classes due to sheer versatility, although I can't say for certain).

[VladtheLad]

Thanks for answering!


Barbarians and Paladins are considered top tier Paizo martials (which is to say around tier 4). The Legendary Barbarian is mostly just some minor tweaks and I wouldn't consider it substantially stronger than either of these classes.

True dat, though I think the barbarian requires a specific build (pounce+superstitious) to be top tier I think while the paladin just has to pick magic weapon instead of mount.
What you say makes sense for the legendary barbarian, I remember he can eventually pick many types of rage but can only be under the effects of only one? This the short of design I would like.


Cavalier, Fighter with all improvements, Ranger, Rogue, Swashbuckler, Gunslinger, and Samurai are all big improvements over their Paizo counterparts, and I would say that Samurai and Ranger (the best of the bunch in my view) are on par with Barbarian and Paladin as some of the best martials (they might eclipse the Paizo classes due to sheer versatility, although I can't say for certain).

I remember the Cavalier being pretty impressive, though I have had a complete read only of the fighter and rogue.

[JMS]

I like the Rogue, Swash does not do enough compared to the others, Fighter, Ranger, Gunslinger, Caviler, and Samurai are all very, very good, with Ranger, Caviler, and Samurai being potentially over-packed.