How much utility do ability scores add?

[eunwoler]

And how much could it be said to influence a PC's power level generally? Could an increase in an ability score alone adjust a PC's tier ranking and if so, by how much?

For example, the fighter right now can sit at tier 4 to 5. If it had 2 more strength per level a la the War Hulk:

Strength checks are improved (OOC utility)
Strength related skills are improved (OOC utility)
Better melee damage across the board
Better combat maneuvers (combat utility)
You can carry and lug around alot of bigger things (OOC utility)

How much does this improve the fighter? I know the fighter's problem is not bigger numbers but its lack of versatility and options + out of combat use, do ability scores remedy this in any significant way?
Even though in essence these boosts technically add no new options but only bigger numbers, in a way doesn't it create more functional options? As for combat maneuvers etc, when CMD can get prohibitively high as to cull their effectiveness, boosts could return them to usability. And being able to manipulate much heavier stuff gives you more options with what to play around with in an environment - more boulders to throw, statues and pillars to topple onto enemies or make bridges with, walls to break down and sinkholes to plug.


Similar situation for other ability scores but I guess my personal interest on this topic is how ability scores could be played with to improve martials in particular. So less of the more obviously relevant spellcasting related ability scores and moreso whether Strength, Dexterity and Constitution boosts can significantly affect the overall power level of classes.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

It could drag a very low-tier character up a tier or so, depending on the exact class and what you do with it. A monk with high stats across the board could be considered to get a boost to nearer the top of its tier because monk is incredibly MAD. Having low scores can definitely ruin a mundane character's ability to do much of anything, potentially dropping its usefulness to little to nothing.

Most classes, the difference between all 12s and all 14s is pretty negligible, overall, although noncasters get a lot more out of high ability scores than casters do. Having all 18s on a barbarian, fighter, or monk will be a lot bigger of a deal than on a wizard or a druid. The reason for this is that all most noncasters have is numbers, and their numbers largely determine what they can do, so high or low numbers can make or break the character.

Numbers do affect casters, as failing a saving throw or having too few HP can do bad things to casters, too, at least at low levels. However, the difference between a 12 and a 14 on a caster's primary casting stat can mean the difference between only being able to cast level 2 spells and being able to cast level 4 spells. Granted, this only really applies when the caster's key ability score(s) are too low. Once you hit the minimum needed for casting your current level of spells, adding more doesn't do much...until you hit the next highest spell level, anyway. A little higher of DCs, which is good, and higher stats elsewhere. But casters can typically do with low ability scores, because they can bypass the numbers game altogether with spells, if they try.

Mundanes...not so much.

[Gnaeus]

For the most part, they can raise a T5 to a T4 with big enough boosts. The easiest way to T4 is to hit things adequately and stats do that. In some cases They may up a 4 to a 3. Particularly with mad classes that can’t otherwise get enough stats for their build or utility characters who are just a bit short in fighting.

[eunwoler]

It could drag a very low-tier character up a tier or so, depending on the exact class and what you do with it. A monk with high stats across the board could be considered to get a boost to nearer the top of its tier because monk is incredibly MAD. Having low scores can definitely ruin a mundane character's ability to do much of anything, potentially dropping its usefulness to little to nothing.

Most classes, the difference between all 12s and all 14s is pretty negligible, overall, although noncasters get a lot more out of high ability scores than casters do. Having all 18s on a barbarian, fighter, or monk will be a lot bigger of a deal than on a wizard or a druid. The reason for this is that all most noncasters have is numbers, and their numbers largely determine what they can do, so high or low numbers can make or break the character.

Numbers do affect casters, as failing a saving throw or having too few HP can do bad things to casters, too, at least at low levels. However, the difference between a 12 and a 14 on a caster's primary casting stat can mean the difference between only being able to cast level 2 spells and being able to cast level 4 spells. Granted, this only really applies when the caster's key ability score(s) are too low. Once you hit the minimum needed for casting your current level of spells, adding more doesn't do much...until you hit the next highest spell level, anyway. A little higher of DCs, which is good, and higher stats elsewhere. But casters can typically do with low ability scores, because they can bypass the numbers game altogether with spells, if they try.

Mundanes...not so much.


Yeah that makes sense. So low ability scores can cripple the tiering of mundanes because they can strip away their ability to even do the things they are supposed to well?


Sparser differences like from 12 to 14 aren't gamebreaking definitely. What about bigger differences though? I provided an example in the OP of 20 more strength for a melee class.


For the most part, they can raise a T5 to a T4 with big enough boosts. The easiest way to T4 is to hit things adequately and stats do that. In some cases They may up a 4 to a 3. Particularly with mad classes that can’t otherwise get enough stats for their build or utility characters who are just a bit short in fighting.

That seems fair. What about classes that are basically useful only for their existing DPR? Do big boons to STR, DEX, CON stats affect their utility in any major way?

[Endarire]

It's been said on this forum one of the best ways to balance characters in a party is to give them all base 18s.

[Kayblis]

Big numbers do jack to add utility. They add efficiency, which is a completely different matter. A Fighter or Barbarian with 50 STR still can't reliably hit an invisible foe or reach a flying one 60ft above. They still can't outmaneuver a faster opponent. They still can't hit a Rogue that's tumbling through their space. Sure, they can Jump a bit better, Swim better and Climb better. Those are all made mostly irrelevant by a Flight speed, which is an actual utility boost. Big stats don't add utility.

About Tiers, a character with unusually high stats can sometimes jump a tier up, solidly landing Fighter on the top end of Tier 4. He's still not close to what classes at Tier 3 can do, like the ToB classes that gain real utility alongside their efficiency boosts. To reproduce some stances' effects, like Hearing the Air, you'd need to beat Epic Checks for skills that are not even on your class list, and at that point it's not your class doing stuff to climb a tier with aid, it's just plain gigantic numbers that would do the exact same on any other character.

[eunwoler]

Big numbers do jack to add utility. They add efficiency, which is a completely different matter. A Fighter or Barbarian with 50 STR still can't reliably hit an invisible foe or reach a flying one 60ft above. They still can't outmaneuver a faster opponent. They still can't hit a Rogue that's tumbling through their space. Sure, they can Jump a bit better, Swim better and Climb better. Those are all made mostly irrelevant by a Flight speed, which is an actual utility boost. Big stats don't add utility.

About Tiers, a character with unusually high stats can sometimes jump a tier up, solidly landing Fighter on the top end of Tier 4. He's still not close to what classes at Tier 3 can do, like the ToB classes that gain real utility alongside their efficiency boosts. To reproduce some stances' effects, like Hearing the Air, you'd need to beat Epic Checks for skills that are not even on your class list, and at that point it's not your class doing stuff to climb a tier with aid, it's just plain gigantic numbers that would do the exact same on any other character.

Thats a fair point. How much of those issues in combat can be addressed by feats, weapon enchantments or different weapon choices? Ranged for dealing with flying enemies, seeking enchantment to reliably hit invisible targets etcetera.

Also how favorably would you say weapon enchantments compare to ability score boosts. E.g. how many enchantment bonuses or viceversa is +2 STR worth?

[daremetoidareyo]

Thats a fair point. How much of those issues in combat can be addressed by feats, weapon enchantments or different weapon choices? Ranged for dealing with flying enemies, seeking enchantment to reliably hit invisible targets etcetera.

Also how favorably would you say weapon enchantments compare to ability score boosts. E.g. how many enchantment bonuses or viceversa is +2 STR worth?

1000 gp. The cost of a +1 bonus

[MicHag]

1000 gp. The cost of a +1 bonus

That costs 2000 gp, when it's +1.
Or am i not understanding what you are saying?

But besides that, +2 STR does more. Carrying capacity, STR-checks, grapple checks, STR-skill checks.
But yeah, mostly attack and damage.

[eunwoler]

That costs 2000 gp, when it's +1.
Or am i not understanding what you are saying?

But besides that, +2 STR does more. Carrying capacity, STR-checks, grapple checks, STR-skill checks.
But yeah, mostly attack and damage.

Hmm... so lets say you're playing a martial, and you're offered the choice between a flat +2 to divvy up as you like between STR, DEX or CON, and a +1 enhancement to any weapon you like, and you'd opt for the STR right? Would +2 change your mind the otherway?

What about a +1 for both a weapon & an armor of your choosing? Just curious to see where the scale tips out.

[Gavinfoxx]

Eh, you need your first +1 to make your weapon magical to kill untold enemy types, at least.

[daremetoidareyo]

That costs 2000 gp, when it's +1.
Or am i not understanding what you are saying?

But besides that, +2 STR does more. Carrying capacity, STR-checks, grapple checks, STR-skill checks.
But yeah, mostly attack and damage.

I mean, you can get that +1 for 300gp with masterwork. And marginal untyped +1 for a handful of skill and ability checks probably doesn't crest a few 100 more gp. I mean, a master work tool gives you a +2 circumstance bonus to one of those checks for another extra 50-100gp each. I guess we would have to price out the additional ability damage soaking of a higher score too though.

Also, I forgot the cost of a magic item +1 and just guessed

[MaxiDuRaritry]

As far as pure utility goes, rather than offense, defense, or mobility? Assuming you're not talking casters (of course), no more than what you'd get for the boosts in skills, really. Great for rogues and factotums, FAR less so for pretty much everyone else.

[Elkad]

Non-primary scores are going to add more utility. I define utility as breadth, not vertical growth of the same things you can already do.
Int and Cha on the barb let him take social skills and move out of the combat-only role.

More strength doesn't help his utility a bit.

[Zanos]

Depends on the ability scores, I guess? Most of the utility you'll get from abilities is in the form of skill bonuses, so you should just look at what skills you'll be getting a bonus to. Int is a standout in that it adds more skillpoints, which is pretty much always going to add more utility even if they're spent on cross class ranks. Strength adds to your ability to smash objects, which can be nice for unconventional dungeoneering. Other than that, raw ability checks are pretty rare.

Sufficiently large numbers I suppose could add pretty incredible amounts to jump which could drastically improve mobility. If you can hit some of the epic skill DCS for tumble(air walk) or bluff(mind control), you could also get some value. Pretty high DCs, though.

[Gnaeus]

Thats a fair point. How much of those issues in combat can be addressed by feats, weapon enchantments or different weapon choices? Ranged for dealing with flying enemies, seeking enchantment to reliably hit invisible targets etcetera.

They can be. But there are multiple steps to get there. You have to be in a game where you are getting proper WBL. Where there is magic mart. And where your gear remains intact and in your possession. None of those things are guaranteed. And even if none of those apply, you are still behind an actual T3 class that uses its money for utility. A chargepounce barbarian can do enough damage to one shot any printed enemy that can be killed by damage. It’s broken, but it’s tier 4 broken.

[Endarire]

To add to the efficiency point, sometimes you don't care much for utility and instead want efficiency. You might want to be the Big Guy With The Sword™ who focuses on accuracy, damage, reach, and such, and your party may like you for it.

However, as stated elsewhere many, many times, being able to do a wide variety of things is separate from strictly having high ability scores or 'fight' numbers.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Sparser differences like from 12 to 14 aren't gamebreaking definitely. What about bigger differences though? I provided an example in the OP of 20 more strength for a melee class.You could think about it this way: For a mundane, the difference between a 12 and a 20 is +4 to most rolls, while the difference between a 12 and a 20 for a caster is the difference between 2nd level spells and 10th level spells, with each spell level being very nearly exponential.

[eunwoler]

Non-primary scores are going to add more utility. I define utility as breadth, not vertical growth of the same things you can already do.
Int and Cha on the barb let him take social skills and move out of the combat-only role.

More strength doesn't help his utility a bit.

Doesn't it? There are plenty of strong people stuff that the Barbarians numbers as is are insufficient for to pull off. Could being unrepentantly good at smashing and lifting stuff make it easier for Barbarian to have utility to contribute without resource expenditure so that casters don't have to burn spell slots to bypass?

Also I'd like to ask if you don't mind, which of the following is closest in power level to +2 to STR or DEX for a martial?

a) +1 weapon or armor enhancement

b) +2 weapon or armor enhancement

c) +1 weapon and armor enhancement

[Kayblis]

Doesn't it? There are plenty of strong people stuff that the Barbarians numbers as is are insufficient for to pull off. Could being unrepentantly good at smashing and lifting stuff make it easier for Barbarian to have utility to contribute without resource expenditure so that casters don't have to burn spell slots to bypass?

Also I'd like to ask if you don't mind, which of the following is closest in power level to +2 to STR or DEX for a martial?

a) +1 weapon or armor enhancement

b) +2 weapon or armor enhancement

c) +1 weapon and armor enhancement

C. It's generally better than the first one without the straight "double the main bonus from a stat boost" that is the second one.

You can get some extra "strong guy stuff" from a higher Str score to help the barbarian. It'll probably be the ability to smash thin walls down and maybe lift a heavy scenery piece and throw it around. The gain is marginal for the kind of boost that's still 'balanced' in-game. You'd need like a +20 Str on top of everything the Barbarian already has to be able to do these consistently, and at that point you can be sure that "utility" is the last of the player's concern, because he just got a tremendous power boost to smash face and will spend all his free time smashing face. Just giving a big bonus to a base stat doesn't magically turn your player into a creative thinker, and if he's playing straight Barbarian, he probably isn't into that kind of playstyle.

[Vaern]

I wouldn't say higher ability scores increase utility at all, with the exception of int and maybe charisma to some extent, depending on the table. Having a higher strength score will let you hit harder and more consistently, sure, and more con might let you take an extra hit or two, but they aren't letting you do anything that you couldn't do already. They don't give you more options or offer new ways to overcome a problem; they only make you better at doing what you could already do.
Intelligence is the major exception here because it gives bonus skill points on level up, which can let you learn and use skills that you otherwise wouldn't have access to. You can't use knowledge skills untrained, for example, but investing even a single point into a cross-class knowledge skill gives the potential of hitting that DC 15 or 20 that a DM might require for a skill challenge type of encounter.
Charisma may serve the same purpose by proxy if leadership is allowed at the table by means of keeping a follower or two on hand with skills that are otherwise unavailable to you.

[eunwoler]

I wouldn't say higher ability scores increase utility at all, with the exception of int and maybe charisma to some extent, depending on the table. Having a higher strength score will let you hit harder and more consistently, sure, and more con might let you take an extra hit or two, but they aren't letting you do anything that you couldn't do already. They don't give you more options or offer new ways to overcome a problem; they only make you better at doing what you could already do.
Intelligence is the major exception here because it gives bonus skill points on level up, which can let you learn and use skills that you otherwise wouldn't have access to. You can't use knowledge skills untrained, for example, but investing even a single point into a cross-class knowledge skill gives the potential of hitting that DC 15 or 20 that a DM might require for a skill challenge type of encounter.
Charisma may serve the same purpose by proxy if leadership is allowed at the table by means of keeping a follower or two on hand with skills that are otherwise unavailable to you.

What would you think of this fighter chassis?



Level + class features

1
Fighter Bonus Feat
2
Fighter Bonus Feat
3
Ability Boost
4
Fighter Bonus Feat
5
Ability Boost
6
Fighter Bonus Feat, Combat Mobility
7
Ability Boost
8
Fighter Bonus Feat
9
Ability Boost
10
Fighter Bonus Feat
11
Ability Boost
12
Fighter Bonus Feat
13
Ability Boost
14
Fighter Bonus Feat
15
Ability Boost
16
Fighter Bonus Feat
17
Ability Boost
18
Fighter Bonus Feat
19
Ability Boost
20
Fighter Bonus Feat

Ability Boost: +2 to split up amongst STR, DEX or CON. Alternatively, you gain +1 enhancement bonus
to a weapon and armor of your choice (cumulative).

Combat Mobility: You can take a 5-foot step for every attack made as a standard or full-round action. You can take a step before, between or after an attack.

Skill Ranks: 4 + INT
Craft, Listen, Spot and Tumble are now class skills.


Combat Expertise now grants you Improved Disarm, Improved Trip and Improved Feint. Power Attack now grants you Improved Bullrush, Improved Sunder and Improved Overrun.

[Endarire]

a simple way to conceptualize casters and non-casters:

-Non-casters tend to deal damage. Do more damage and you're a better non-caster.

-Casters tend to solve a variety of problems via their utility and not focus on dealing damage. (Some do, but we aren't focused on those.)

I've played Zelda 3 randomized, and getting weapon upgrades deals more damage, but that's it. Sometimes, I just want to deal lots of damage quickly without spending any special resources to save time. However, I still need lots of utility to beat the game. Greater utility means access to more places, meaning access to more treasure. Etc.

[Quertus]

Do you care about Tier, or balance? Because those are very different things.

Can you balance characters by adding stats? Sure. Can you change their Tier by changing their stats? Yes. How much?

If we take a Commoner (who stays at Tier 6, right?), and add +100 to, say,

Strength: that's bonus to hit & damage, and a few skills. That's probably Tier 3 combat right there, meaning that (aside from a +1 weapon to hit incorporeal targets) they can dedicate their WBL to improving their range (of options, and ranged weaponry), possibly hitting Tier 2 or 1 with smart WBL-mancy. [Tier 3 class, Tier 1-2 build]

Dexterity: that's AC, initiative, ranged (and finesse) attack bonus, reflex saves, and a few skills. Even cross-class ranks start looking pretty nice, as even a commoner can "out-Rogue" the Rogue. And going first is the win. Add in stealth and AC, and I think you've got a strong Tier 2 class. It takes more know-how, but, with WBL, this can become a Tier 1 build. [Tier 2 class, Tier 1 build]

Constitution: HP, fort saves, and holding your breath? I'ma go with… no? [Tier 6]

Intelligence: that's skill points, baby, and bonuses to skill checks. We can simultaneously out-sage the Wizard, and out-skill-monkey the Rogue. Definitely Tier 2 territory. Seems likely we could hit Tier 1 with WBL. [Tier 2 class, Tier 1 build]

Wisdom: will saves, a few key skills? Well, we'll notice everything… is that enough for Tier 4? [Tier 4]

Charisma: Diplomacer. 'nuff said. [Tier 2, Tier 1 with WBL]

All of the above: Tier 1. [Tier 1]

OTOH, if you drop a Tier 1 caster's casting stat down to 9? That's a Tier 6 Wizard you've got there.

[ExLibrisMortis]

Do you care about Tier, or balance? Because those are very different things.

Can you balance characters by adding stats? Sure. Can you change their Tier by changing their stats? Yes. How much?

If we take a Commoner (who stays at Tier 6, right?), and add +100 to, say,

Strength: that's bonus to hit & damage, and a few skills. That's probably Tier 3 combat right there, meaning that (aside from a +1 weapon to hit incorporeal targets) they can dedicate their WBL to improving their range (of options, and ranged weaponry), possibly hitting Tier 2 or 1 with smart WBL-mancy. [Tier 3 class, Tier 1-2 build]

Dexterity: that's AC, initiative, ranged (and finesse) attack bonus, reflex saves, and a few skills. Even cross-class ranks start looking pretty nice, as even a commoner can "out-Rogue" the Rogue. And going first is the win. Add in stealth and AC, and I think you've got a strong Tier 2 class. It takes more know-how, but, with WBL, this can become a Tier 1 build. [Tier 2 class, Tier 1 build]

Constitution: HP, fort saves, and holding your breath? I'ma go with… no? [Tier 6]

Intelligence: that's skill points, baby, and bonuses to skill checks. We can simultaneously out-sage the Wizard, and out-skill-monkey the Rogue. Definitely Tier 2 territory. Seems likely we could hit Tier 1 with WBL. [Tier 2 class, Tier 1 build]

Wisdom: will saves, a few key skills? Well, we'll notice everything… is that enough for Tier 4? [Tier 4]

Charisma: Diplomacer. 'nuff said. [Tier 2, Tier 1 with WBL]

All of the above: Tier 1. [Tier 1]

OTOH, if you drop a Tier 1 caster's casting stat down to 9? That's a Tier 6 Wizard you've got there.
Quertus, you don't seem to have a strong grasp of what tier 2 means. Very nearly by definition, +100 to a stat is not enough to break into tier 2. The reason is that t2 and up are defined by qualitatively different abilities. For example, fly is qualitatively different from +100 Jump or 200' speed--it lets you fly. Unless you're abusing RAW Diplomacy (e.g. making people fanatic as a standard action) or similar oddities, flat damage/AC/initiative/hp/skill bonuses aren't enough to break t2. A character with straight 120s for ability scores is a strong tier 3.

For example, your 130 Strength commoner has, at level 20 (PA, Shock Trooper, Leap Attack, a full attack of +70/+65 for 1d8+120 plus weapon enhancements and so on--average damage about 250 per full attack if both attacks hit (which they probably will). Leap Attack is there to work with that lovely +60 Jump from high Strength.
A barbarian 20 (PA, Pounce, Whirling Frenzy, Shock Trooper, Leap Attack) will have ~40 Strength, giving a full attack of about +40/+40/+35/+30/+25 for 2d6+82 plus weapon enhancement and so on--average damage about 270 per full attack if three out of five hit (which they probably will).
Even though the damage is close, it's clear that the barbarian is well ahead as a player character. Not only does it hit harder, the barbarian is more capable of moving and attacking (through Pounce), has better skills, hit points, AC, saves, and defensive abilities.
(N.B. The comparison does favour the barbarian, as commoners don't really have the base attack bonus to make use of a PA-focused build. But that's the point: commoners don't have the features to take advantage of any common damage build. No spells, no sneak attack, no maneuvers, no nothing.)

So basically, +100 Strength will take a commoner to tier 5, where it'll sit with charger fighters that don't have Pounce. Your argument probably works for rogues, who really can use that +100 Strength to redirect all their WBL-spent-on-combat (and some feats) into utility (UMD), but rogues are already tier 4. We might say that +100 to an ability score is about +1 tier, at best.

[Rynjin]

Doesn't it? There are plenty of strong people stuff that the Barbarians numbers as is are insufficient for to pull off. Could being unrepentantly good at smashing and lifting stuff make it easier for Barbarian to have utility to contribute without resource expenditure so that casters don't have to burn spell slots to bypass?

Also I'd like to ask if you don't mind, which of the following is closest in power level to +2 to STR or DEX for a martial?

a) +1 weapon or armor enhancement

b) +2 weapon or armor enhancement

c) +1 weapon and armor enhancement

Closest? A. but really, D.) None of the above.

None of the above options are equal to a bonus to Str or Dex, though the balance tips slightly if you're a pure Dex martial (either an archer or Dex to damage character).

Let's break down real quick what actual benefit each gives you.

+2 Str: +1 attack (melee only), +1 damage, +1 Climb/Swim, a bit of extra carry weight.
+2 Dex: +1 attack (ranged "only"), +1 Initiative, +1 Reflex saves, +1 a few decent skills, +1 AC.

+1 weapon: +1 attack, +1 damage, ability to hurt ghosts and such.
+2 weapon: +2 attack, +2 damage, ability to hurt ghosts and such.

+1 armor: +1 AC.

Of these, I can put them in order or general power:

+2 weapon
+1 weapon
+2 Dex
+2 armor
+2 Str
+1 armor

At least as I see it.

Why? The +1/2 weapon actually lets the character do something they could not already do.

This is the essence of the tier system in a nutshell. Versatility and utility > numbers almost every time.

[Quertus]

Quertus, you don't seem to have a strong grasp of what tier 2 means.

I mean, I hate the Tier list with a burning passion usually reserved for 4e, alignment, and railroading, so my entire post could be colored blue to taste, but let's look at the original JaronK Tier 2 definition:

"Tier 2: Has as much raw power as the Tier 1 classes, but can't pull off nearly as many tricks."

Where Tier 1 is defined as

"Tier 1: Capable of doing absolutely everything, often better than classes that specialize in that thing."

So, by definition, Tier 2 is absolutely best at something(s), often better than classes that specialize in that thing.


Very nearly by definition, +100 to a stat is not enough to break into tier 2.

Citation needed. I'm not reading that in any definitions.


The reason is that t2 and up are defined by qualitatively different abilities.

Citation needed. I'm not reading that in JaronK definitions.


For example, fly is qualitatively different from +100 Jump or 200' speed--it lets you fly.

OK… and?


Unless you're abusing RAW Diplomacy (e.g. making people fanatic as a standard action) or similar oddities

Well, sure. But with your "as many as will fit in every available 5' square within hearing range" minions singing your praises, aiding another in your Diplomacy, you start in on that at level 1. It's the "every leveled NPC in every town (or dungeon - you're not picky) that you travel to, including casters giving you Tongues, plus using all their spells on your behalf", that give you Tier 1 range.


, flat damage/AC/initiative/hp/skill bonuses aren't enough to break t2.

That sounds like "best at what they do" to me. Well, maybe just the "damage" (plus attack bonus) or "skills"; the others don't do much *by themselves*, IMO.


A character with straight 120s for ability scores is a strong tier 3.

Citation needed. But at least this could give the OP an answer to their question.


For example, your 130 Strength commoner has, at level 20 (PA, Shock Trooper, Leap Attack, a full attack of +70/+65 for 1d8+120 plus weapon enhancements and so on--average damage about 250 per full attack if both attacks hit (which they probably will). Leap Attack is there to work with that lovely +60 Jump from high Strength.
A barbarian 20 (PA, Pounce, Whirling Frenzy, Shock Trooper, Leap Attack) will have ~40 Strength, giving a full attack of about +40/+40/+35/+30/+25 for 2d6+82 plus weapon enhancement and so on--average damage about 270 per full attack if three out of five hit (which they probably will).
Even though the damage is close, it's clear that the barbarian is well ahead as a player character. Not only does it hit harder, the barbarian is more capable of moving and attacking (through Pounce), has better skills, hit points, AC, saves, and defensive abilities.
(N.B. The comparison does favour the barbarian, as commoners don't really have the base attack bonus to make use of a PA-focused build. But that's the point: commoners don't have the features to take advantage of any common damage build. No spells, no sneak attack, no maneuvers, no nothing.)

You seem to give forgotten that Tier is a measure of 1-20, not just 20. Please look at how those two compare at level 1, and try to tell me with a straight face that the Barbarian is stronger. At what level do they reach balance?

Also, contrary to forum optimization, not all Barbarians are born with Pounce - it is the Commoner who is "more capable of moving and attacking"; or, rather, less disadvantaged by not starting their turn within 5' of their target.

Also, the Commoner isn't a pants-on-head idiot - they're wielding 2 weapons when it's optimal to do so (like, say, at level 1… and I'm not convinced that it's entirely suboptimal at level 20).

I would love to see an expected DPS chart comparing those two classes from level 1-20.


So basically, +100 Strength will take a commoner to tier 5, where it'll sit with charger fighters that don't have Pounce. Your argument probably works for rogues, who really can use that +100 Strength to redirect all their WBL-spent-on-combat (and some feats) into utility (UMD), but rogues are already tier 4. We might say that +100 to an ability score is about +1 tier, at best.

The Commoner could redirect their wealth to UMD, too (or potions, oils, anklets of translocation, necklace of Emergency Healing, flying mounts, whatever).

[Gnaeus]

Both are incorrect, but Libris is closer.

A commoner with 100 str is T4. It is basic combat capable. It is not close to T3. The barbarian can be doing exponential notation damage and not be T3. It has no class ability that solves any problem but “hit it for damage”.

Libris is also correct. A commoner with all 120s is a T3. Based mostly on Int and con. It is still only basically combat capable. But it has 1/2 max ranks in every skill with huge bonuses in every skill. But it lacks every high tier ability. Action economy, movement, minionmancy, fighting things that can’t be hit with a weapon, AOE damage, healing, special defenses beyond saves and AC, divinations, etc.

[ExLibrisMortis]

I mean, I hate the Tier list with a burning passion usually reserved for 4e, alignment, and railroading, so my entire post could be colored blue to taste, but let's look at the original JaronK Tier 2 definition:

"Tier 2: Has as much raw power as the Tier 1 classes, but can't pull off nearly as many tricks."

Where Tier 1 is defined as

"Tier 1: Capable of doing absolutely everything, often better than classes that specialize in that thing."

So, by definition, Tier 2 is absolutely best at something(s), often better than classes that specialize in that thing.
When reading (or quoting) definitions, it's helpful to continue past the first sentence.

Tier 1: "These guys, if played with skill, can easily break a campaign and can be very hard to challenge without extreme DM fiat or plenty of house rules."
Tier 2: "Still potentially campaign smashers by using the right abilities [...] Still dangerous and easily world shattering, but not in quite so many ways."

In any case, an example of updated definitions can be found here (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?600635-Why-each-class-is-in-its-tier-2019-update!). Those don't have the "game-breaking" characteristic as defining t2 and t1, in part because a smoother scale was desired (those threads run on fractional tiers), and in part because certain low-tier classes do get access to game-breakers (an incarnate's or truenamer's gate, for example), so the division wasn't perfect. However, it remains true that the vast majority of t1/t2 classes have game-breakers, and the vast majority of game-breakers are possessed by t1/t2 classes, under either set of definitions.


Citation needed. I'm not reading that in any definitions.

Citation needed. I'm not reading that in JaronK definitions.
There is more to the tier system than the first line of the original definitions. The "commoner with +100 STR" is a common line of thought to investigate the tier system. Generally, the conclusion has been that "raw numbers" aren't that hard to challenge by the DM, and don't have that much potential to break a campaign, except where certain fixed DCs result in qualitatively different results (such as with RAW Diplomacy allowing you to solve all problems by turning enemies fanatically loyal to you).


Well, sure. But with your "as many as will fit in every available 5' square within hearing range" minions singing your praises, aiding another in your Diplomacy, you start in on that at level 1. It's the "every leveled NPC in every town (or dungeon - you're not picky) that you travel to, including casters giving you Tongues, plus using all their spells on your behalf", that give you Tier 1 range.
Even if your DM is running Diplomacy strictly RAW--and that's not likely, since Diplomacy fixes are very nearly as common as drown-healing fixes--you're still basically a one-level dip for a sorcerer (or a marshal, bard, hexblade, Intimidate barbarian...), so... pretty much strictly worse than any number of classes, except for level 1. As you say, tier is a measure of 1-20 (generally it's weighed towards level 3-15 or so, since classes are often without their abilities at very low levels (e.g. rangers and paladins), and people rarely play at high levels), so the commoner definitely isn't going to get a high tier because it has one good level right at the start.


You seem to give forgotten that Tier is a measure of 1-20, not just 20. Please look at how those two compare at level 1, and try to tell me with a straight face that the Barbarian is stronger. At what level do they reach balance?
Not forgotten, it's just not clear what you meant by "commoner with +100 STR", so I went for the more conservative approach and assumed both classes had all their abilities, which happens at level 20. If the commoner gets the full Strength dump at level 1, it effectively becomes a required one-level dip for all melee classes, which puts it in tier 5, like an extreme and (across multiple levels) inferior version of barbarian 1. See also: one paragraph up.


Also, contrary to forum optimization, not all Barbarians are born with Pounce - it is the Commoner who is "more capable of moving and attacking"; or, rather, less disadvantaged by not starting their turn within 5' of their target. Also, the Commoner isn't a pants-on-head idiot - they're wielding 2 weapons when it's optimal to do so (like, say, at level 1… and I'm not convinced that it's entirely suboptimal at level 20).
Sure, the commoner can add an off-hand IUS for another ~50 damage per full attack, but they can't use it while moving, since they lack Pounce, or even the ability to get Pounce. Meanwhile, the barbarian can add an off-hand IUS for another ~50 damage per attack, too (having much higher PA returns), and a barbarian can get IUS and TWF in-class, saving two feats (City Brawler barbarian). Overall, I don't think that adding TWF changes much.


I would love to see an expected DPS chart comparing those two classes from level 1-20.
It's a lot of work, but if you want to make a spreadsheet, we can fill in some numbers and look at the value of +100 Strength in terms of damage potential.


The Commoner could redirect their wealth to UMD, too (or potions, oils, anklets of translocation, necklace of Emergency Healing, flying mounts, whatever).
The commoner has a lot more weaknesses to cover than the rogue, even with +100 to an ability score. For one, the lack of in-class UMD must be addressed first. I don't think WBLmancy can be used to argue that the commoner gets that much more out of a +100 than other classes, or that commoners go up many tiers from a +100.

[Quertus]

Not forgotten, it's just not clear what you meant by "commoner with +100 STR", so I went for the more conservative approach and assumed both classes had all their abilities, which happens at level 20. If the commoner gets the full Strength dump at level 1, it effectively becomes a required one-level dip for all melee classes, which puts it in tier 5, like an extreme and (across multiple levels) inferior version of barbarian 1. See also: one paragraph up.

First things first: reading comprehension isn't my strong suit, but I *believe* you will find everyone else before my post was talking in terms of "Fighter (or Commoner or whatever) 1-20, with ~+2-+4 to one or more stats, vs other class 1-20 without those bonuses".

So, assuming I'm not just bonkers, I'll take exception (is that the right phrase?) to my +100 being treated differently.

It's "level 1-20 of each class, with the Commoner getting +100 to one or more stats"

Yes, I think that, in play, it would be much easier to *balance* with the party if you get those bonuses gradually, but that's not what we're evaluating: we're evaluating the "Cursed Commoner 1-20", who, like a Tainted Sorcerer, doesn't really have much option to Multiclass, and asking, "what Tier do these stat boosts make them?"


When reading (or quoting) definitions, it's helpful to continue past the first sentence.

Tier 1: "These guys, if played with skill, can easily break a campaign and can be very hard to challenge without extreme DM fiat or plenty of house rules."
Tier 2: "Still potentially campaign smashers by using the right abilities [...] Still dangerous and easily world shattering, but not in quite so many ways."

In any case, an example of updated definitions can be found here (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?600635-Why-each-class-is-in-its-tier-2019-update!). Those don't have the "game-breaking" characteristic as defining t2 and t1, in part because a smoother scale was desired (those threads run on fractional tiers), and in part because certain low-tier classes do get access to game-breakers (an incarnate's or truenamer's gate, for example), so the division wasn't perfect. However, it remains true that the vast majority of t1/t2 classes have game-breakers, and the vast majority of game-breakers are possessed by t1/t2 classes, under either set of definitions.

Thank your for pointing out that I have been ahead of my time in removing the "game-breaking" lines. :smallcool:

The new definitions… do not explicitly call out a spot for "very good at some thing(s)". Very good at most things is tier 2; strike that: Tier 3 is "very good at solving a couple of problems and competent at solving a few more". I can work with that.


The "commoner with +100 STR" is a common line of thought to investigate the tier system. Generally, the conclusion has been that "raw numbers" aren't that hard to challenge by the DM, and don't have that much potential to break a campaign, except where certain fixed DCs result in qualitatively different results (such as with RAW Diplomacy allowing you to solve all problems by turning enemies fanatically loyal to you).

100 points of damage results in the max-HP Ogre Skeleton (or even Zombie) being destroyed. The game is run in raw numbers.

+100 Strength makes you amazing at melee DPS for most levels (and still not bad, even at level 20), makes you great at intimidate (at some tables, at least - I don't think that's a default rule in RAW), gives you some good maneuverability options for jumping and swimming (AFB - does it also let you climb?), makes you great at carrying stuff, bashing down doors/walls, tripping, sundering… and makes you *much* less gear-dependent than most "Fighters" (you need a +1 sword to hit incorporeal targets - otherwise, you hit or exceed (mostly exceed) the expected offensive combat numbers, and the rest of your WBL is yours to spend on going higher tier). Sounds like the new definition of "Tier 3" to me; Tier 1-2 after gear.


Even if your DM is running Diplomacy strictly RAW.--

No GM, just Tier vs RAW. Right? How much of a nod does "Tier" usually give to "state of the practice"?


Sure, the commoner can add an off-hand IUS for another ~50 damage per full attack, but they can't use it while moving, since they lack Pounce, or even the ability to get Pounce. Meanwhile, the barbarian can add an off-hand IUS for another ~50 damage per attack, too (having much higher PA returns), and a barbarian can get IUS and TWF in-class, saving two feats (City Brawler barbarian). Overall, I don't think that adding TWF changes much.

I suspect it takes the Barbarian longer to catch up this way - and I'm guessing that the Barbarian is more "feat-starved" than the Commoner (although I could be mistaken about that).


It's a lot of work, but if you want to make a spreadsheet, we can fill in some numbers and look at the value of +100 Strength in terms of damage potential.

We must define "a lot of work" differently.

Fine. Let's see if my senile mind can remember this thread long enough to write the code. Anyone remember where the list of "expected monster AC by level" lives? And… generic gear by level? Or, better yet, where someone has already done this with a Barbarian (and I'll just add the "Commoner with a +1 sword" entries)?


The commoner has a lot more weaknesses to cover than the rogue, even with +100 to an ability score. For one, the lack of in-class UMD must be addressed first. I don't think WBLmancy can be used to argue that the commoner gets that much more out of a +100 than other classes, or that commoners go up many tiers from a +100.

Lost context…

OK. At "+100 Charisma", that hardly matters: take half a rank, call it a day, you're set through level 20.

But this was on "+100 Strength".

Yeah, you won't be able to reliably UMD as much as a Rogue (without spending more resources on it), particularly at higher level.

However, if you're under a "WBL is part of the mandate of heaven" GM, then you can waste scrolls during downtime, knowing that you're guaranteed to get your money back. So you still have the same *range* of downtime options. And more WBL to spend on it, since your total offensive budget is 2k for a +1 weapon (OK, and maybe you need to count, what, 10k for a Dragon egg to train as your mount, if you count "flying" under your "combat" budget).

It's not trivial, I'll grant you, but it still seems possible to reach Tier 1 versatility, even without infinite loops. (Granted, the new Tier 1 explicitly says "everything", so I'm glad I said "Tier 1-2 with gear").

[ExLibrisMortis]

We're evaluating the "Cursed Commoner 1-20", who, like a Tainted Sorcerer, doesn't really have much option to Multiclass, and asking, "what Tier do these stat boosts make them?
If we're evaluating a commoner 1-20 who gets +100 to an ability score at level 1, the result is this: you have the best dip ever, followed by 19 terrible levels. It's tier 5. If it's spread out, +5 Strength per level, you have a bad level 1 and never really get better. Still tier 5. If it's granted at level 1, but you're forced to take all 19 dead levels afterwards... well, standard class balance concerns stop making sense if you remove major aspects of the game (i.e. multiclassing) like that. You bitterly regret every time you have to level up, and people probably call it t6 out of spite, but it's still a stupid tier 5.

That last option is the sort of thing you'd optimize with negative levels (i.e. thought bottle > lose the commoner level > when you need power, touch thought bottle and regain commoner level > when power is no longer needed, repeat cycle), kind of like age cursing, but that only goes to show how stupid the concept is.


100 points of damage results in the max-HP Ogre Skeleton (or even Zombie) being destroyed. The game is run in raw numbers.
Or you could cast command undead, and not run the game in raw numbers. Much better idea, really.

A big part of the tier 5-4-3/tier 2-1 divide is that some classes have the ability to engage in a game in addition to the number game. This commoner can play the numbers game, perhaps, but they wouldn't know the other game was going on if they were a piece in it.


+100 Strength makes you amazing at melee DPS for most levels (and still not bad, even at level 20), makes you great at intimidate (at some tables, at least - I don't think that's a default rule in RAW), gives you some good maneuverability options for jumping and swimming (AFB - does it also let you climb?), makes you great at carrying stuff, bashing down doors/walls, tripping, sundering… and makes you *much* less gear-dependent than most "Fighters" (you need a +1 sword to hit incorporeal targets - otherwise, you hit or exceed (mostly exceed) the expected offensive combat numbers, and the rest of your WBL is yours to spend on going higher tier). Sounds like the new definition of "Tier 3" to me; Tier 1-2 after gear.
Your swimming, climbing, and jumping are still limited by your speed. Your DPS is still limited by your base attack and lack of class features. Strength does nothing for Intimidate (there is a feat that lets you Intimidate with Strength in Pathfinder, not in 3.5). And you don't spend WBL "on going higher tier". WBL is assumed to help everyone reasonably equally (because it's a class evaluation, not a WBL-spending contest), and in this case, any money you save on melee offence is going into additional defences to cover up that d4 hit die and all bad saves. It's not tier 3. It's tier 5.


No GM, just Tier vs RAW. Right? How much of a nod does "Tier" usually give to "state of the practice"?
The tier system was written up originally as DM aid, helping them to recognize problematic party compositions and ways to deal with that. I think it's safe to say that there will be a DM getting rid of obvious exploits, like drown healing, and yes, RAW Diplomacy. Still, it's true that certain classes go up or down tiers dramatically depending on DM judgement of a single ability. In this case, we might simply make separate rankings: Charisma commoner (RAW Diplomacy), probably at tier 3, and Charisma commoner (Diplomacy Houseruled), probably at tier 5.

The reason I don't rate the Diplomancer commoner higher than tier 3 is this: tier 3+ contains lots of classes with access to Enchantment spells, skill-boosting spells, and dispel magic. Even in the case of RAW Diplomacy, +100 Charisma is +50 to DC 160 check, and that usage is blocked by protection from evil. At tier 3+, you might be expected to reduce that DC with charm, bypass magical defences when using Diplomacy, or straight-up ignore those high skill DCs with dominate. Charisma commoners may have a ton of raw numbers, but they can't do any of that. Even in a RAW Diplomacy game, you won't want to be the commoner (except as one-level dip).


I suspect it takes the Barbarian longer to catch up this way - and I'm guessing that the Barbarian is more "feat-starved" than the Commoner (although I could be mistaken about that).
If the commoner gets their 100 Strength at level 1, the barbarian catches up at level 2, when they dip commoner 1. If it's spread out, +5 Strength per level, the barbarian is just ahead at every level. And the barbarian has more feats than the commoner, because it's actually got class features to trade in or compensate for bonus feats (like City Brawler).


Fine. Let's see if my senile mind can remember this thread long enough to write the code. Anyone remember where the list of "expected monster AC by level" lives? And… generic gear by level? Or, better yet, where someone has already done this with a Barbarian (and I'll just add the "Commoner with a +1 sword" entries)?
As far as I know, these calculators aren't floating around, exactly because it's a lot of work to enter all sorts of variants with different feats and different magic items at 20 different levels with all sorts of multiclass combinations and... you see where I'm going? It's hard to deal with the explosion of possibilities, even if you limit yourself to straight-classed barbarians.


It's not trivial, I'll grant you, but it still seems possible to reach Tier 1 versatility, even without infinite loops. (Granted, the new Tier 1 explicitly says "everything", so I'm glad I said "Tier 1-2 with gear").
One of the assumptions in the tier system is that you're evaluating the class, not the ability to pretend to be a wizard with scrolls. But okay, you're saying that with a permissive DM mitigating scroll costs, you could be powerful, and that's probably true. What exactly makes you better than a warlock or sorcerer with the same WBL? Nothing. Even if the Charisma commoner is better at using UMD than most, spellcasters (also artificers and warlocks in particular) are much better still, being able to actually craft scrolls, and UMD them with shapechange (lilitu form, if you're curious). Even if you're allowing UMD usage that cheaply, you're still strictly worse off going with the commoner, because other classes have UMD and abilities.

[Vaern]

What would you think of this fighter chassis?



Level + class features

1
Fighter Bonus Feat
2
Fighter Bonus Feat
3
Ability Boost
4
Fighter Bonus Feat
5
Ability Boost
6
Fighter Bonus Feat, Combat Mobility
7
Ability Boost
8
Fighter Bonus Feat
9
Ability Boost
10
Fighter Bonus Feat
11
Ability Boost
12
Fighter Bonus Feat
13
Ability Boost
14
Fighter Bonus Feat
15
Ability Boost
16
Fighter Bonus Feat
17
Ability Boost
18
Fighter Bonus Feat
19
Ability Boost
20
Fighter Bonus Feat

Ability Boost: +2 to split up amongst STR, DEX or CON. Alternatively, you gain +1 enhancement bonus
to a weapon and armor of your choice (cumulative).

Combat Mobility: You can take a 5-foot step for every attack made as a standard or full-round action. You can take a step before, between or after an attack.

Skill Ranks: 4 + INT
Craft, Listen, Spot and Tumble are now class skills.


Combat Expertise now grants you Improved Disarm, Improved Trip and Improved Feint. Power Attack now grants you Improved Bullrush, Improved Sunder and Improved Overrun.


The only major complaint I really have about giving fighters that many ability score boosts is that there's really nothing existing in official content that gives bonuses with the potential to be that large, with enhancements soft capped at +6 with the potential for epic items to break that barrier and inherent bonuses being solidly hard-capped at +5 even beyond epic levels. I like to balance homebrew shenanigans against stuff that's already out there and, while I don't think it would be terribly overpowering to give fighters a bunch of extra ability points to help them keep up with the typical blaster, it's still more power than any alternative that would otherwise be available to them.
As for minor complaints, other martial classes would also need a substantial buff to bring them up to a similar level. These ability boosts on the fighter could easily give them a higher passive str and con score than a raging barbarian's with no limitations or drawbacks, for example. If fighters are made stronger and more durable than a barbarian using his signature ability with a slew of bonus feats on top of all of that then there's not much of a point to playing a barbarian. Barbarians are meant to represent hulking slabs of meat who crush their targets with brute strength, while fighters are trained soldiers with training and expertise to guide their blade. The ability score boosts would make more sense on a barbarian, especially if they applied only while raging, and it might be more fitting to give the fighters an array of bonuses that apply when they're using a weapon that they have weapon focus or weapon specialization in. Direct attack and damage bonuses and the like, rather than jacking up their base stats straight-up.
As for combat mobility, it's easily more of a power boost than all of those ability score bonuses combined, especially in the hands of a two-handed fighting specialist. A high-level fighter could potentially move more than his actual speed in a round with just five-foot steps between attacks, if the battlefield happened to be set up properly for it. I'd limit it based on the fighter's dexterity bonus. It would encourage a bit more diversity in character builds, giving fighters more reason to choose that +dex option and wear something lighter than full plate to increase their mobility.
The option to add a +1 enhancement bonus to a weapon or armor also seems extremely vague. Is it a permanent enhancement bonus to a weapon you own when you choose the ability? Or can the effect be transfered to any weapon you happen to be holding? Is it actually made magical, or is it treated as +1 because of your proficiency with it? Can it break the normal maximum enhancement bonus limit of +5 for a non-epic item?

tl;dr
1) Not overpowered, but still stronger than anything you could do with official content
2) Buff other classes as well, but make sure features fit with the flavor of the class
3) Throttle back combat mobility a bit, maybe. It's probably not terribly abusable, but it's still pretty strong
4) Vague wording.

[Kayblis]

I'd like to chime in to state that WBL is not a class feature. If you say "this is tier 5 but it can become tier 1-2 with WBL", you don't know the first thing about what's being discussed. If you can 'become tier 2' with WBL, there are no classes below tier 2 as a starting point, so this alone proves you don't understand the tier system.

The Commoner with +100 Str would be low tier 4 at most. It's one giant boost to attack and damage and skills made irrelevant by a 3rd level spell. That's it. It's nothing impressive in itself if you have nothing to support it. If it's spread out as +5 Str per level, it's just bad at all levels. If it's +100 by level 1 and nothing else forever, it's such a bad experience from bad design that it doesn't even deserve a ranking, it's a joke.

The Commoner with all stats at 120 would be the top of tier 4, maaaaaaybe the lowest of tier 3. You can beat any check with a DC of 56 or lower with a nat 1, and you have max ranks in everyhing. You have some movement options, can beat non-epic checks for most skills, and can use some less known stuff like Iaijutsu Focus to get redundant effects like "more damage". You also pass all sane Knowledge checks, and may abuse subsystems that rely on skillchecks like Sacrifice rules. Same argument as above, if it's spread out as +5 each level it's not the worst but it's not good, and if it's +110 to everything by level 1 it's just a more offensive joke.

The funny thing is, if you actually give the +100 bonuses by level 1, you have that whacky experience in which the player will be doing everything in his power to not level up ever, because with every level up everyone gets stronger while he stays the same, effectively making him weaker as the game progresses. If you start by mid-high levels, his 'power' is more of a character quirk than actual power. That's why it's not really broken as other people have mentioned, it's tier 4 broken.

[Quertus]

Any correlation between "Tier" and "balance" is purely incidental. Tier is not just level 20. The question I am asking is, how long does +100 to stat(s) allow a Commoner to bat (far) above his chassis, and what Tier does that make them?


I'd like to chime in to state that WBL is not a class feature. If you say "this is tier 5 but it can become tier 1-2 with WBL", you don't know the first thing about what's being discussed. If you can 'become tier 2' with WBL, there are no classes below tier 2 as a starting point, so this alone proves you don't understand the tier system.

I've been attacking the Tier system since it was first introduced to me. I am well aware that the Tier system doesn't really include WBL - the particular failing of the Tier system that I am attacking here is that it doesn't account for, say, *how much gear* a Fighter or Barbarian needs to hit reasonable numbers, and how that gear could be spent to do *other things* by the "+100 Strength Commoner".


The Commoner with +100 Str would be low tier 4 at most. It's one giant boost to attack and damage and skills made irrelevant by a 3rd level spell. That's it. It's nothing impressive in itself if you have nothing to support it. If it's spread out as +5 Str per level, it's just bad at all levels. If it's +100 by level 1 and nothing else forever, it's such a bad experience from bad design that it doesn't even deserve a ranking, it's a joke.

+100 Strength at level 1. Of course it's a joke. But that's not the question - the question is, what Tier is it? By all means, explain how… what was my list?… "+100 Strength makes you amazing at melee DPS for most levels (and still not bad, even at level 20), makes you great at intimidate (at some tables, at least - I don't think that's a default rule in RAW), gives you some good maneuverability options for jumping and swimming (AFB - does it also let you climb?), makes you great at carrying stuff, bashing down doors/walls, tripping, sundering… and makes you *much* less gear-dependent than most "Fighters" (you need a +1 sword to hit incorporeal targets - otherwise, you hit or exceed (mostly exceed) the expected offensive combat numbers, and the rest of your WBL is yours to spend on going higher tier).". Please explain how that - even removing the back-ported PF feat - is not the new Tier 3, which, for reference, is defined as "very good at solving a couple of problems and competent at solving a few more". Hint: "someone else can do one of your minor tricks by expending their finite resources", aside from not being a strong argument to begin with, does not in any way change whether or not the class hits those metrics.


The Commoner with all stats at 120 would be the top of tier 4, maaaaaaybe the lowest of tier 3. You can beat any check with a DC of 56 or lower with a nat 1, and you have max ranks in everyhing. You have some movement options, can beat non-epic checks for most skills, and can use some less known stuff like Iaijutsu Focus to get redundant effects like "more damage". You also pass all sane Knowledge checks, and may abuse subsystems that rely on skillchecks like Sacrifice rules. Same argument as above, if it's spread out as +5 each level it's not the worst but it's not good, and if it's +110 to everything by level 1 it's just a more offensive joke.

Still "all at 1st level" (just like every other post before mine in this thread). Still a joke. And still asking what Tier it is.

I'm pretty sure it's "better at everything" for quite a few levels. But is it enough?

The point of a joke like this is to get you to challenge your assumptions, and to allow you to see the world as it truly is. Trust me, I'm a Malkavian. :smallwink:


The funny thing is, if you actually give the +100 bonuses by level 1, you have that whacky experience in which the player will be doing everything in his power to not level up ever, because with every level up everyone gets stronger while he stays the same, effectively making him weaker as the game progresses. If you start by mid-high levels, his 'power' is more of a character quirk than actual power. That's why it's not really broken as other people have mentioned, it's tier 4 broken.

I'm not really seeing how being 1st level is supposed to help him face the ancient red Dragon his party is fighting…

[Vaern]

I'm not really seeing how being 1st level is supposed to help him face the ancient red Dragon his party is fighting…
I don't think that was the point he was trying to make. If you start with that much strength then you're not going to scale in any meaningful way as you level up, so the player would want to stay at low levels where he would never have to consider the posibility of encountering such a powerful opponent to begin with. Every ability score increase and miscellaneous bonus he picks up along the way is just another drop in the bucket, rather than a significant increase to his character's power. If a commoner starts with +100 strength, the difference between 1 and 20 might be about the same as a wizard leveling from 7 to 8. Would you rather be a level 7 wizard punching kobolds in the back of the face and stomping rats in the tavern's cellar? or a level 8 wizard facing that ancient red dragon?

[Quertus]

I don't think that was the point he was trying to make. If you start with that much strength then you're not going to scale in any meaningful way as you level up, so the player would want to stay at low levels where he would never have to consider the posibility of encountering such a powerful opponent to begin with. Every ability score increase and miscellaneous bonus he picks up along the way is just another drop in the bucket, rather than a significant increase to his character's power. If a commoner starts with +100 strength, the difference between 1 and 20 might be about the same as a wizard leveling from 7 to 8. Would you rather be a level 7 wizard punching kobolds in the back of the face and stomping rats in the tavern's cellar? or a level 8 wizard facing that ancient red dragon?

Well, that certainly makes more sense than the crazy shenanigans I was envisioning.

As to your question ("Would you rather be a level 7 wizard punching kobolds in the back of the face and stomping rats in the tavern's cellar? or a level 8 wizard facing that ancient red dragon?”). Under the right GM? I'd play either. But *be*? Are they Tucker's kobolds? If so, I think I'd have better luck against the Dragon (and be a level higher, to boot).

[Lans]

A massive boost to numbers frees up the character to use his feats and WBL to cover versatility. A commoner with +100 is free to spend money that would go towards a better magical weapon can instead go towards a decanter of endless water or a robe of useful items. Instead of taking shock trooper it can take the 3 binding feats.

[Aharon]

Fundamentally, the game is a numbers game. At some point, bonuses to ability scores will effect the tier strongly.

Extreme example: let's say the stats-commoner gets +10 to each attribute at first level, +100 at 5th, +1000 at 10th, +10000 at 15th and +100000 at 20th.

I think this class could compete very well with Tier Ones at all levels.
I'd be curious to see a challenge the DM can pose that another Tier One character can solve, but this one can not.

[Gnaeus]

Fundamentally, the game is a numbers game. At some point, bonuses to ability scores will effect the tier strongly.

Extreme example: let's say the stats-commoner gets +10 to each attribute at first level, +100 at 5th, +1000 at 10th, +10000 at 15th and +100000 at 20th.

I think this class could compete very well with Tier Ones at all levels.
I'd be curious to see a challenge the DM can pose that another Tier One character can solve, but this one can not.

Fight 10 Medusas riding 10 basilisks. That was a Chesegrinder room I recall.

But anyway, it doesn’t really prove what you want it to. It is correct that stacking enough weak abilities creates what I call emergent abilities. Mettle, evasion, good saves, grace, swashbuckler luck, hexblade resistance are all Weak Tier 4-5 abilities. Stack them together and you get almost complete magic immunity. In your case, the character has a couple of emergent abilities. Always goes first. Kills what he hits. Damage immunity. Damage immunity is the big one, letting him solve the enemy army challenge by walking through it and killing 2 mooks/round until all enemies are dead. It’s not a thing that comes into play at +10 con or even +100 con. I agree that it is likely T1. Although curiously not necessarily high T1. A Dharculus Druid or anything that can safely spam SoDs can beat it. But that’s not a hard barrier to T1.

[Quertus]

Fight 10 Medusas riding 10 basilisks.

He can hit them from maximum range of a projectile weapon, far outside their danger zone. With his incredible spot and hide, he is never at risk of them closing range. And, if necessary, can jump to the moon or walk on clouds to evade them, if Diplomacy doesn't just make them his allies in the first place. Seems trivially easy to defeat.

[Gnaeus]

He opens a door and turns instantly to stone.

[Aharon]

He opens a door and turns instantly to stone.
a) that assumes he doesn't know what's behind the door
b) the medusas and basilisks are not immune against each others gaze attacks. Either they aren't active at the time our hero-peasant enters, and he can then close his eyes, or most of them are stone themselves...
c) I don't know how feats figure into tier discussions, but taking steadfast determination seems a no-brainer for this character.

[King of Nowhere]

having extra intelligence add utility, because it gives skill points. so, you may take diplomacy and have an alternate new way of doing things.
all the other stats don't really add utility. they add effectiveness, which is an entirely different concept.

at some point in my campaign all the players got a +6 to all stats as a plot reward (basically, they got suffused with concentrated divine essence, and became partially divine). they became much more powerful, the thing was easily worth a +2 level adjustment. but in terms of utility, they kept doing the same things.

[Sutr]

He opens a door and turns instantly to stone.

Why didn't he gather info before going into the dungeon and find out everything in it? Or why didn't he send in the troll he just talked into being his friend from opening the door for him? Why didn't his survival check notice the medusa riding basilisk tracks outside the door?

[Gnaeus]

Why didn't he gather info before going into the dungeon and find out everything in it? Or why didn't he send in the troll he just talked into being his friend from opening the door for him? Why didn't his survival check notice the medusa riding basilisk tracks outside the door?

Functionally, because a 5020 check is not actually better than a 50 check.

Gather information doesn’t tell you everything in a dungeon. At 50 or 5000. It only tells you what the commoners in the nearest town know. Which could be that people who enter the dungeon of doom never return. It isn’t clairvoyance. It isn’t contact other plane. It isn’t a commanded ghost who can walk in and tell you.

I assume normal use of diplomacy. Otherwise every marshal and bard is tier 1 with enslaved followers. Epic diplomacy DCs aren’t hard. Which is a bit less likely IME than wizards with 50 free bound outsiders. He has less minionmancy than a Wizard 1.

So he found footprints of a humanoids and reptiles. He can’t follow them. He doesn’t have track. He knows that humanoids and reptiles have passed that way. And he only knows that because he is walking around with his eyes open.


c) I don't know how feats figure into tier discussions, but taking steadfast determination seems a no-brainer for this character.

The problem is there are way more no brainer feats than he gets feats (7). That one is 2 (with its useless prerequisite).

[Aharon]

Functionally, because a 5020 check is not actually better than a 50 check.

Gather information doesn’t tell you everything in a dungeon. At 50 or 5000. It only tells you what the commoners in the nearest town know. Which could be that people who enter the dungeon of doom never return. It isn’t clairvoyance. It isn’t contact other plane. It isn’t a commanded ghost who can walk in and tell you.

I assume normal use of diplomacy. Otherwise every marshal and bard is tier 1 with enslaved followers. Epic diplomacy DCs aren’t hard. Which is a bit less likely IME than wizards with 50 free bound outsiders. He has less minionmancy than a Wizard 1.

So he found footprints of a humanoids and reptiles. He can’t follow them. He doesn’t have track. He knows that humanoids and reptiles have passed that way. And he only knows that because he is walking around with his eyes open.


The problem is there are way more no brainer feats than he gets feats (7). That one is 2 (with its useless prerequisite).

There are 3 items that grant track. Would you agree that since this character can benefit very well from stuff that enhances his skills, buying something like that would make sense?

@feats:
Maybe we could agree on a build? It's just seven feats, after all.
Steadfast determination+prereq, Darkstalker, four others - and those that come from equipment.

[Quertus]

He opens a door and turns instantly to stone.

Oh, they're behind a door? Well, then…

He barricades the door.

He shells the room from a distance, destroying the walls, leaving them no longer behind a door.

He collapses their ceiling, listening for when they stop breathing before excavating them.

He drops a mountain on them.

He digs down 200'+. Then he digs up (in a huge circle, engulfing the whole room/building) until gravity finds them.

He uses some of the 2.5 million gallons* of lava he's potentially carrying to flood the room.

This is still trivially solvable with those NI stats proposed by @Aharon. And he's kinda got the NI Wisdom to, you know, not actually open the door. :smallamused:

given his listen checks, he should hear and have counted the individual snakes on the Medusa's heads from miles away, and the tracks for basilisks (which he could spot from miles away) have 6 legs, right? I think his NI knowledge checks clue him in just fine.

Also, if they made said tracks - which you explicitly didn't dispute - then he could just spot *them* from miles away, with a little patience, when they leave their room to make those tracks.

(and, even if he does open the door, he wins initiative, and jumps to the moon / drops a mountain on them before they get to open their eyes… or, he simply loots their statues (if they're pants on heads idiots, which, at this point, we probably *should* assume that they were), and sells them, or "pays" to have them un-stoned so that he can Diplomacy them)

* Not a real estimate

[Lans]

I think he means that the commoner didn't know they were there before he oppened the door. With that high of bonus to skills, I would imagine some info could be gleened before hand.

What's the knowledge check to know what a Medusa's heart beat sounds like?

[Aeson]

There is also that the game isn't designed for things that have a +500 or thereabouts to their saving throws, and the save DC for a Medusa's petrifying gaze is 15 while the save DC for a basilisk's is only 13. The rules may say that a natural 1 is an automatic failure, but the rules were written under the assumption that save DCs and saving throws have fairly comparable magnitudes and if your GM is asking you to roll against any even vaguely-normal DCs when you have a +500 ability modifier to doing it then your GM is an ass.

Not, mind you, that there's any question in my mind about whether or not your GM is an ass when "you open a door and find yourself confronted by 20 medusas and 20 basilisks all trying to use Petrifying Gaze against you" is on the table and any means by which you might have gotten forewarning of this possibility has been ruled out, because "the locals only know that people don't come back from there," there's apparently no local cleric or wizard or sorcerer or whatever who you can convince to magically obtain information about the place using your +500 Charisma mod and all those Diplomacy ranks your +500 Intelligence mod brought you, there's no surprisingly-lifelike statues gripping old swords and clad in decaying armor in front of the door, there's no Listen check you can make to hear the basilisks and medusas making basilisk and medusa noises from the other side of the door, there's no Spot check you can make from the back end of nowhere to see some of the basilisks and medusas wandering around outside, there's no tracks or scat for you to see on the ground and then put all those skill points you get from your thousand or so Intelligence plus that +500 Wisdom modifier to good work and go "gee, there's a bunch of medusas and basilisks in the area; I should be careful, and probably go away and get some protection against petrification before continuing to explore this area," and so on. What do these things do all day to leave absolutely no detectable sign of their presence? Just sit motionless in the room staring at the door waiting for some hapless adventurer to come by and open it?

This is the sort of thing that kills even Tier 1 characters in anything vaguely resembling normal gameplay, and the GM who pulls it may as well have just said "rocks fall, everyone dies."

[Quertus]

I think he means that the commoner didn't know they were there before he oppened the door. With that high of bonus to skills, I would imagine some info could be gleened before hand.

What's the knowledge check to know what a Medusa's heart beat sounds like?

Which is pretty dumb of the Commoner, to be playing "beer and pretzels", "kick in the door" instead of "5d chess" - particularly in a "what Tier are you" analysis. (EDIT: in fact, a Wizard played that way is very clearly Tier 6, so I think we have our answer).

They can Gather Information (and I'll agree, this won't tell them much, other than "enemies").

They can notice and analyze the tracks (humanoids and 6-legged lizards - that's enough for "basilisks").

They can hear their opponents from miles away (and can, sure, get a count of 10 heartbeats - 5 large, 5 man-sized) (also, too much slithering (the Medusa's hair) for those heartbeats - likely narrowed the man-sized prints down to Medusa or Yuan-Ti - or just some pretty pet snakes… with no heartbeats… zombie snakes, maybe?)

Since their opponents make tracks, they can simply watch from miles away, and actually spot what makes those tracks (knowing *exactly* what's in the room at that point).

Or they can play "kick in the door", Commoner-style, by dropping a mountain on the room.

[Aharon]

Which is pretty dumb of the Commoner, to be playing "beer and pretzels", "kick in the door" instead of "5d chess" - particularly in a "what Tier are you" analysis. (EDIT: in fact, a Wizard played that way is very clearly Tier 6, so I think we have our answer).

They can Gather Information (and I'll agree, this won't tell them much, other than "enemies").

They can notice and analyze the tracks (humanoids and 6-legged lizards - that's enough for "basilisks").

They can hear their opponents from miles away (and can, sure, get a count of 10 heartbeats - 5 large, 5 man-sized) (also, too much slithering (the Medusa's hair) for those heartbeats - likely narrowed the man-sized prints down to Medusa or Yuan-Ti - or just some pretty pet snakes… with no heartbeats… zombie snakes, maybe?)

Since their opponents make tracks, they can simply watch from miles away, and actually spot what makes those tracks (knowing *exactly* what's in the room at that point).

Or they can play "kick in the door", Commoner-style, by dropping a mountain on the room.

Actually, Gather Information was updated in the rules compendium to allow for getting very specific, unknown information:



Gather Information (CHA)
With 1d4+1 hours, money for buying drinks and making friends, and a Gather Information check, you to learn about a topic you’re interested in. The higher your check result, the better the information. If you want to find out about something specific or secret, the DC is higher, as determined by the DM and the circumstances. You might draw attention to yourself if you repeatedly pursue a particular piece or type of information.



Information
DC
Examples

Public 10Major news, local government issues, local guild structure
Private15Gossip, private club, military figures
Exclusive20Scandals, invitation-only club, local criminals
Secret25Secrets, espionage group, criminal cartel
Unknown30Shadow government, underground cult
Specific+5A particular noble’s affairs; who robbed the bank



I think "What awaits me in the dungeon?" qualifies as "Unknown, specific", so you get that information when passing a DC 35 check.

[Quertus]

Actually, Gather Information was updated in the rules compendium to allow for getting very specific, unknown information:



I think "What awaits me in the dungeon?" qualifies as "Unknown, specific", so you get that information when passing a DC 35 check.

Huh. I guess, if we're playing by RAW Diplomacy, we should be playing by RAW Gather Information, as well.


There is also that the game isn't designed for things that have a +500 or thereabouts to their saving throws, and the save DC for a Medusa's petrifying gaze is 15 while the save DC for a basilisk's is only 13. The rules may say that a natural 1 is an automatic failure, but the rules were written under the assumption that save DCs and saving throws have fairly comparable magnitudes and if your GM is asking you to roll against any even vaguely-normal DCs when you have a +500 ability modifier to doing it then your GM is an ass.

I mean, I would still make people fail on a 1, but I openly admit to being a ****, so… shrug? It's RAW - find some way to *not* fail on a 1.


Not, mind you, that there's any question in my mind about whether or not your GM is an ass when "you open a door and find yourself confronted by 20 medusas and 20 basilisks all trying to use Petrifying Gaze against you"

It's only 10 of each.


is on the table and any means by which you might have gotten forewarning of this possibility has been ruled out, because "the locals only know that people don't come back from there," there's apparently no local cleric or wizard or sorcerer or whatever who you can convince to magically obtain information about the place using your +500 Charisma mod and all those Diplomacy ranks your +500 Intelligence mod brought you, there's no surprisingly-lifelike statues gripping old swords and clad in decaying armor in front of the door, there's no Listen check you can make to hear the basilisks and medusas making basilisk and medusa noises from the other side of the door, there's no Spot check you can make from the back end of nowhere to see some of the basilisks and medusas wandering around outside, there's no tracks or scat for you to see on the ground and then put all those skill points you get from your thousand or so Intelligence plus that +500 Wisdom modifier to good work and go "gee, there's a bunch of medusas and basilisks in the area; I should be careful, and probably go away and get some protection against petrification before continuing to explore this area," and so on. What do these things do all day to leave absolutely no detectable sign of their presence? Just sit motionless in the room staring at the door waiting for some hapless adventurer to come by and open it?

Clearly, you comprehend the *correct* use of Rule 0. Kudos!

Granted, I have no problem with the first two - or, rather, I had no problem with "you cannot Gather Information that the people don't have" before RAW said, "remember Bardic Knowledge? Yeah, Gather Information is equally silly.". And I still have no problem with "there are no casters in podunk ville".


This is the sort of thing that kills even Tier 1 characters in anything vaguely resembling normal gameplay, and the GM who pulls it may as well have just said "rocks fall, everyone dies."

It was listed as… something "cheese", IIRC (EDIT: "cheese grinder" seems the appropriate name) - I think that's the point.

[Sutr]

I knew I read that gather information had some stupid rules changes...

I also figured tracks give us numbers and legs, no resurrection from gather info, would leave us at petrification with an appropriate knowledge check.

[Gnaeus]

There are 3 items that grant track. Would you agree that since this character can benefit very well from stuff that enhances his skills, buying something like that would make sense?

@feats:
Maybe we could agree on a build? It's just seven feats, after all.
Steadfast determination+prereq, Darkstalker, four others - and those that come from equipment.
I agree it would make sense. I don’t agree that you get it. Tiers are judged in absense of specific gear. If you need specific stuff to function it isn’t a tier 1. You can usually assume generic magic weapon. Even Tier 3s are gear independent. Imagine you have a pile of crap generated by the DMG charts. Otherwise everyone with UMD is a T1.

As to all the rest of that, just nope. You don’t get to be a marvel hero just because your stats are a billion. You can’t win challenges by rule 0. You may have the carrying capacity to lift a mountain, but there’s no way a human can carry one. Or break one off. You could carry as much lava as you could fit in a backpack or your hands, but it won’t be lava for long, and you still have to be able to walk down a corridor. If you can find a rule that says the knowledge DC of a heartbeat, sure. Otherwise no. You can sunder the floor, but there’s no strength= burrowing rule. So I guess you can mine like anyone else with profession miner or knowledge engineering.

And no I dispute the gather information is a rules change so much as a dc clarification. The things it gave (like a secret lair or the actions of a noble) are all things that would be known by some people in town. As far as I can tell the “as far as there are no obvious reasons why the information would be withheld” (like because it is unknown) is still a rule unless specifically not.

I agree that all of those are things that a tier 1 martial should have, by the way. Crazy Hercules stuff like throwing mountains or rerouting rivers should be available at high strength. But it isn’t.

[Rynjin]

I agree with most of that, but by RAW I'm pretty sure you could still lift the mountain. You'd need to pass a Break DC of whatever number the mountain's base requires, and it would need to fit into your carry weight, but there's no rules that require you to have proper leverage to lift or carry something.

[Icewraith]

Remember, with arbitrarily large stat bonuses comes maximum cross-class skill ranks in every skill (you can find a trainer for in some cases) and... I’m assuming maximum ranks in every Craft and Profession skill you can think of, with leftover points dumped into every Language you can find. It’s still three skill points to buy a Language or Skill Trick, right?

I’d argue that with a theoretical +500 check knowledge (architecture and engineering), profession (miner), spot, search etc you can probably detect a flaw in any structure and break it with one punch (+500 damage sunder?). Most epic dcs are in the low single hundreds, with an arbitrary +20 or 80 or even doubling the dc if you’re in a rush.

100 stats is pretty impressive, but 1000 stats is... what do you fear? What can’t you do? How is it not T1?

Edit: NI stats commoner actually gets an interesting power boost at level 7, when he has 5 ranks in all cross-class skills. Leveling also gets him immunity to things like sleep and holy word style spells that care about the target’s hd. I think the real problem NI stats commoners have are Necromancers and acquired template monsters like vampires and were creatures.

[Rynjin]

100 stats is pretty impressive, but 1000 stats is... what do you fear? What can’t you do? How is it not T1?

Quick example that illustrates the point:you can't Plane Shift.

[Icewraith]

Quick example that illustrates the point:you can't Plane Shift.

Diplomance a Nightmare?

“Location of portal to planar trading hub” seems like something you could get with a +500 knowledge (the planes), history, or gather information check. Find the “really, really exotic mounts” vendor and give him some of your omega grade alcoholic beverage (craft(winemaking) or profession (brewer) +523 or more!) in exchange for a meet & greet with the future best friend forever of your choice.

[Rynjin]

Diplomance a Nightmare?

That's kind of the circular UMD argument in a nutshell.

The idea of the tier system is essentially "what can this character accomplish under their own power, without any sort of GM fiat pushing it along".

[Icewraith]

That's kind of the circular UMD argument in a nutshell.

The idea of the tier system is essentially "what can this character accomplish under their own power, without any sort of GM fiat pushing it along".

What gm fiat? Those are just skill checks! Yeah you can’t Plane Shift at will, it’s less convenient, but portals to the plane of X should be simple enough to locate with a high enough check, and transportation can be bought or bartered for, even without the extra step of acquiring your own personal fire breathing hellhorse and diplomancing it into My Little Pony: Friendship is Concealment.

Edit: you’re probably the only being in the multiverse that can always successfully navigate the Plane of Infinite Portals on the First Layer. +500 check!

[Aeson]

What gm fiat? Those are just skill checks! Yeah you can’t Plane Shift at will, it’s less convenient, but portals to the plane of X should be simple enough to locate with a high enough check, and transportation can be bought or bartered for, even without the extra step of acquiring your own personal fire breathing hellhorse and diplomancing it into My Little Pony: Friendship is Concealment.

Edit: you’re probably the only being in the multiverse that can always successfully navigate the Plane of Infinite Portals on the First Layer. +500 check!
I would add that "there are no portals to the plane of X" and "there are no spellcasters capable of sending you to the plane of X" is effectively GM fiat saying "you can't do that," and if "GM fiat says you cannot do that" is enough to keep a class out of Tier X then I would point out that it is also (technically) RAW-legal for the entire planet/plane you're on (or at least as much of it as you can reach in your lifetime and then some) to be dimensionally locked by some incredibly powerful deity or whatever whose caster level for the purpose of dispelling, suppressing, or otherwise overcoming the dimensional lock is, effectively, "screw you," because the GM has access to arbitrarily many and arbitrarily powerful NPCs, monsters, deities, et cetera whereas you the player do not.

If getting to another plane is something that you need to do to continue the adventure, then there's a portal or an item or something somewhere that you can find or a spellcaster that you can convince to get you there; it may take longer than getting there by personally casting Plane Shift, but you can still get there. If, on the other hand, getting to that plane is merely something that you want but do not need or have good reason to do as part of the adventure, then GM fiat can keep you from getting there regardless of whether or not you can, by RAW, cast a spell that could get you there; depending on the reason he or she gives for "you cannot go there," it might even be something that is (technically) RAW-legal - there's technically nothing in RAW says that there cannot have been a level 2128 wizard who cast Dimensional Lock on the planet a hundred years ago, after all.

A better argument for a class not having innate access to Plane Shift or similar keeping that class out of Tier X is that finding an interplanar portal or a spellcaster willing to Plane Shift you or whatever has a (potentially much) greater time cost than casting Plane Shift yourself, and thus there exists a class of problems which could be resolved by casting Plane Shift but cannot be resolved by means of interplanar travel that take longer to use. Of course, since it's the GM who controls the time constraint on the problem, this is still essentially a case of "GM says you can't do that," and since time does not necessarily flow at the same rate on all planes even personally being able to cast the spell does not necessarily guarantee that you have the time to resolve the problem successfully - maybe being a nanosecond late casting the spell to pursue the enemy on the plane you departed means you're six billion years too late to pursue them on the plane you followed them to. Sure, it's GM-fiat-says-you-can't, but so is "you don't have time to find a portal to another plane or a spellcaster you can convince to send you there."

[Aharon]

I agree it would make sense. I donÂ’t agree that you get it. Tiers are judged in absense of specific gear. If you need specific stuff to function it isnÂ’t a tier 1.
This isn't true. Artificer is completely gear dependent. Material components and Holy Symbols are assumed to be present. Also, WBL is a function of leveling up, and this character needs to spend A LOT less on the usual magic christmas tree. He doesn't need inherent bonuses to his main stat (+5 Tome for 137.500 gp), nor an enhancement bonus (+6 item for 36.000), nor a cloak of resistance (+5 for 25.000). This is an advantage of that specific class, and should be valued in. Also, generally, the best case is assumed. Wizards, Druids and Clerics could all be really bad if they chose sucky feats and spells (and indeed ARE - that's one of the reasons why the experience on many tables diverges so strongly from what this board knows!) - the assumption is that they have a competent player.



And no I dispute the gather information is a rules change so much as a dc clarification. The things it gave (like a secret lair or the actions of a noble) are all things that would be known by some people in town. As far as I can tell the “as far as there are no obvious reasons why the information would be withheld” (like because it is unknown) is still a rule unless specifically not.
It isn't. It's the complete rule in the Rules compendium, and it supersedes anything that came previously. It doesn't include anything on "People might not know this."




Portals vs. Plane Shift

Regarding the "Find a portal/Plane Shift" discussion: It's a DC 120 Survival check to know the direction to a location on the same plane by description only. I'd argue "The next portal to the plane of fire" is description only. Then, the character can walk. This underlies around as much DM fiat as Plane Shift, which includes the text "Focus: A small, forked metal rod. The size and metal type dictates to which plane of existence or alternate dimension the spell sends the affected creatures. Forked rods keyed to certain planes or dimensions may be difficult to come by, as decided by the DM."

[Icewraith]

This isn't true. Artificer is completely gear dependent. Material components and Holy Symbols are assumed to be present. Also, WBL is a function of leveling up, and this character needs to spend A LOT less on the usual magic christmas tree. He doesn't need inherent bonuses to his main stat (+5 Tome for 137.500 gp), nor an enhancement bonus (+6 item for 36.000), nor a cloak of resistance (+5 for 25.000). This is an advantage of that specific class, and should be valued in. Also, generally, the best case is assumed. Wizards, Druids and Clerics could all be really bad if they chose sucky feats and spells (and indeed ARE - that's one of the reasons why the experience on many tables diverges so strongly from what this board knows!) - the assumption is that they have a competent player.


It isn't. It's the complete rule in the Rules compendium, and it supersedes anything that came previously. It doesn't include anything on "People might not know this."

Regarding the "Find a portal/Plane Shift" discussion: It's a DC 120 Survival check to know the direction to a location on the same plane by description only. I'd argue "The next portal to the plane of fire" is description only. Then, the character can walk. This underlies around as much DM fiat as Plane Shift, which includes the text "Focus: A small, forked metal rod. The size and metal type dictates to which plane of existence or alternate dimension the spell sends the affected creatures. Forked rods keyed to certain planes or dimensions may be difficult to come by, as decided by the DM."

Why would you walk with a +500 ride check burning a hole in your pocket? Handle animal, too. And that hide check!

NI stats is really, really good.

[Aharon]

Why would you walk with a +500 ride check burning a hole in your pocket? Handle animal, too. And that hide check!

NI stats is really, really good.

1) because he can move reasonably fast himself (+10 ft. Quick Trait, +10 ft. from Dark Template via Collar of Umbral Metamorphosis, +30 ft. expeditious retreat in a Tooth of Dalver-Nahl, x2 Rapid Wrath, x2 Feathered Wings) -> 320 ft./round (since feet moved per round is a real-world value, such as weight or distance, normal rules of math apply, I think - otherwise, it would only be 240 ft./round).
2) because while he can hide his mount, he can't make it as well hidden as he himself is via Darkstalker.
3) Absurdly, neither ride nor handle animal allow you to make your mount faster, no matter your skill :smallyuk:

By the way, this also allows us to quantify the speed disadvantage vs. teleporting. 320ft/round is 64 miles per hour of hustle, at 24 hours of forced march that's 1.536 miles. The stats-commoner can reach any target a teleporting character of 20th level or lower can in 31.25 hours - without having the chance of a teleport mishap :smalltongue:
Against Greater Teleport, the comparison looks worse, obviously...

[Sutr]

If I may? Redirecting back to sane levels,(?) the original poster asked about +2 to strength per level for a fighter. This thread started after/during a discussion in the tier thread so may be a continuation of that discussion or it may not.

Assuming level ups get bonus skill points retroactively for ability increases, as I see this as providing some continued benefits

What tier 5 classes fail to jump a tier when given all 18's and instead of choosing a stat every 4 levels all go up in a game where 32 point by is used for tier 3 and 24 for tier 1. Are there any that jump to tier 3? Any classes it straight out breaks?

Same question for tier 4's I guess.

[Icewraith]

If I may? Redirecting back to sane levels,(?) the original poster asked about +2 to strength per level for a fighter. This thread started after/during a discussion in the tier thread so may be a continuation of that discussion or it may not.

Assuming level ups get bonus skill points retroactively for ability increases, as I see this as providing some continued benefits

What tier 5 classes fail to jump a tier when given all 18's and instead of choosing a stat every 4 levels all go up in a game where 32 point by is used for tier 3 and 24 for tier 1. Are there any that jump to tier 3? Any classes it straight out breaks?

Same question for tier 4's I guess.

Why would level ups retroactively get bonus skill points? Skill points don’t work like HP and con.

[Aharon]

If I may? Redirecting back to sane levels,(?) the original poster asked about +2 to strength per level for a fighter. This thread started after/during a discussion in the tier thread so may be a continuation of that discussion or it may not.

Assuming level ups get bonus skill points retroactively for ability increases, as I see this as providing some continued benefits

What tier 5 classes fail to jump a tier when given all 18's and instead of choosing a stat every 4 levels all go up in a game where 32 point by is used for tier 3 and 24 for tier 1. Are there any that jump to tier 3? Any classes it straight out breaks?

Same question for tier 4's I guess.

I should have made my methodology more clear. Some people in the thread were claiming no stat boosts at all could cause a tier change - I disagree.
I actually do think lower stat boosts than the ones I proposed would also change tiers of classes, but if people even disagree with extremely high numbers, there's no point yet discussing lower bounds.

I think both +2 per level and the system you propose are too low. Tier change happens in when a character can reliably hit high epic DC's for a lot of skills, in my opinion. At that point, skills grant a versatility similar to low level spells, but are available always, without preparation.
Added hp, saves, init, bab are also helpful - ideally at least in line with what a moderately optimized caster gets from buffs.

[Sutr]

I should have made my methodology more clear. Some people in the thread were claiming no stat boosts at all could cause a tier change - I disagree.
I actually do think lower stat boosts than the ones I proposed would also change tiers of classes, but if people even disagree with that, there's no point with discussing lower bounds.

I think both +2 per level and the system you propose are to low. Tier change happens when a character can reliably hit high epic DC's for a lot of skills, in my opinion. At that point, skills grant a versatility similar to low level spells, but are available always, without preparation.
Added hp, saves, init, bab are also helpful - ideally at least in line with what a moderately optimized caster gets from buffs.

I agree with you. We just have different goals. I've seen the debate I don't know how many times in the last 15-20 years and am uninterested in pretending that skill checks at +500 or so don't equate to a higher tier.

I don't see the point of arguing for optimized tier 1 though, it seems to always leads to a huge arms race. Most people don't play with tier 1 at full power anyway. I'm just trying to see if a hexblade with all 18's that scale to 23 at 20th level is enough that a warblade/duskblade won't completely overshadow it.

If your goal needs to hit epic DC's to cause the changes I suggest that the damage output of tier 5's has been fine before and perhaps a competence bonus to skills equal to one half level and a my stat adjustment. I'm going to have to math that with an incarnate when I have time.



Icewraith, its a uncommon houserule that makes my balancing of stats matter more, nothing more.

[eunwoler]

If I may? Redirecting back to sane levels,(?) the original poster asked about +2 to strength per level for a fighter. This thread started after/during a discussion in the tier thread so may be a continuation of that discussion or it may not.

Assuming level ups get bonus skill points retroactively for ability increases, as I see this as providing some continued benefits

What tier 5 classes fail to jump a tier when given all 18's and instead of choosing a stat every 4 levels all go up in a game where 32 point by is used for tier 3 and 24 for tier 1. Are there any that jump to tier 3? Any classes it straight out breaks?

Same question for tier 4's I guess.


Haha thank you for this. It was interesting to see the +5000 theorycrafting but yes definitely out of the scope of the original discussion which was really ultimately about figuring out whether reasonable additions of ability scores could be a decent easy fix for lower tier classes.

[eunwoler]

The only major complaint I really have about giving fighters that many ability score boosts is that there's really nothing existing in official content that gives bonuses with the potential to be that large, with enhancements soft capped at +6 with the potential for epic items to break that barrier and inherent bonuses being solidly hard-capped at +5 even beyond epic levels. I like to balance homebrew shenanigans against stuff that's already out there and, while I don't think it would be terribly overpowering to give fighters a bunch of extra ability points to help them keep up with the typical blaster, it's still more power than any alternative that would otherwise be available to them.
As for minor complaints, other martial classes would also need a substantial buff to bring them up to a similar level. These ability boosts on the fighter could easily give them a higher passive str and con score than a raging barbarian's with no limitations or drawbacks, for example. If fighters are made stronger and more durable than a barbarian using his signature ability with a slew of bonus feats on top of all of that then there's not much of a point to playing a barbarian. Barbarians are meant to represent hulking slabs of meat who crush their targets with brute strength, while fighters are trained soldiers with training and expertise to guide their blade. The ability score boosts would make more sense on a barbarian, especially if they applied only while raging, and it might be more fitting to give the fighters an array of bonuses that apply when they're using a weapon that they have weapon focus or weapon specialization in. Direct attack and damage bonuses and the like, rather than jacking up their base stats straight-up.
As for combat mobility, it's easily more of a power boost than all of those ability score bonuses combined, especially in the hands of a two-handed fighting specialist. A high-level fighter could potentially move more than his actual speed in a round with just five-foot steps between attacks, if the battlefield happened to be set up properly for it. I'd limit it based on the fighter's dexterity bonus. It would encourage a bit more diversity in character builds, giving fighters more reason to choose that +dex option and wear something lighter than full plate to increase their mobility.
The option to add a +1 enhancement bonus to a weapon or armor also seems extremely vague. Is it a permanent enhancement bonus to a weapon you own when you choose the ability? Or can the effect be transfered to any weapon you happen to be holding? Is it actually made magical, or is it treated as +1 because of your proficiency with it? Can it break the normal maximum enhancement bonus limit of +5 for a non-epic item?

tl;dr
1) Not overpowered, but still stronger than anything you could do with official content
2) Buff other classes as well, but make sure features fit with the flavor of the class
3) Throttle back combat mobility a bit, maybe. It's probably not terribly abusable, but it's still pretty strong
4) Vague wording.

Hmm that's fair. 4th point I have no contention I'll see how I can fix the wording. What way of enhancement do you think would be the most inline power wise? My original intention was not for all weapons or armors to now gain the bonus, but a specific weapon(s) and armor(s). I guess my vision would be you choose a specific weapon and armor you currently possess to gain the bonuses on top of any existing enhancement, and that during long rest periods you can redistribute the enhancements to a different weapon and/or armor. Also that you can split the enhancement between different objects. So you could have both a decently enhanced javelin and sword at once if so desired.

3rd point I see what you mean. And actually that sounds like a really great fix because it might encourage a more balanced distribution of stats if ability score boosts were a constant thing. Maybe something like you can take an extra 5 foot step per 5 dexmod? At 30 dex you'd have 2 more 5 foot steps per full attack than the current fighter which I don't think is too unreasonable.

2nd point well the fix was really just for fighter to be in line with tier 3s and usable with tier 2s+. So I don't mind if as written it overshadows other martials, would ability boosts as written for fighter here be better, worse or comparable on the Barbarian, Monk etcetera? Perhaps for monk the 3 offered choices would be Dexterity, Wisdom and Constitution instead.

1st point I'm happy with that. In combat or addressing problems that can be solved with combat I'd want it to be comparable to the effectiveness of caster save or dies