tier question re:6/9 casting

[Hurnn]

My question is: Is 6/9 casting of of one of the big three spell lists enough to make any chassis tier 3? Is bard progression good enough, or would it need to be expanded in such a way that it would gain 1st level spells at 1st and then a new level of spells every 3 levels there after?

[bekeleven]

In other words:

If we take the worst of the "main" spell lists - probably druid, although maybe cleric - with the bard progression, and we staple it to a commoner chassis, what's the tier?

Definitely in the 3-4 range, and on the lower end if you pull out the nerf bat on top, like by making it a split-ability caster, or if you restrict it to one of the divine lists but give it ASF.

If you don't do either of those things and give it basically any chassis or class feature, it hits 3. A Cleric with the bard casting progression, for instance, is tier 3. A wizard would be tier 3, especially if it has splatbook access. A druid with bard casting is high 3, maybe 2, since it still has its companion and wild shape.

[RandomPeasant]

Honestly, probably not. Going from Wizard or Cleric casting to Bard casting is a bit like taking a level of Commoner every third level, and that's a pretty terrible idea. The Bard also gets some spells at earlier levels to make up for its bad casting, and there are a number of Bard-specific feats or PrCs that are quite powerful. I don't think Bard casting off the T1 lists is good enough to make you T3, though as noted Wild Shape + Animal Companion is at least arguably T3 on its own, so if the Druid keeps those they probably get there.

[LunaticChaos]

It is worth noting that the tier lists exist in a vacuum, assuming that the game will be run exactly according to the rules and intent of the creators. And not only that, but under perfect conditions.

But in that vacuum exactly as intended format. If you're not casting 9th level spells by level 17, you're not tier 1, and if you aren't doing it by level 18 you're not tier 2. If you don't have the ability to potentially cast any divine/arcane spell then you're not Tier 1.

If you're not in that vacuum, the answer is a bit more complicated. You're certainly at a disadvantage without those last three spell levels and flexibility, but not necessarily an insurmountable one.

As far as trying to raise a class to tier 3, well giving it 6/9 of druid/cleric/wizard would make it somewhere in tier 3 or maybe top of tier 4. But it won't be able to exceed that, and it could easily be outperformed by other members of tier 3.

[Gnaeus]

Bear in mind that this is pretty much exactly what pathfinder did. With a whole bunch of different thematic lists, including the cleric and Druid lists, and then added some relevant powers like melee, AC or skills. Every single one of them winds up T3, except chained summoner which was often called T2 due to accelerated access to conjuration.

For reference:
Alchemist, Magus, Investigator, Inquisitor, Warpriest, Mesmerist, Occultist, Spiritualist, Hunter, Omdura, Summoner, Vigilante (some archetypes)

[RandomPeasant]

But in that vacuum exactly as intended format. If you're not casting 9th level spells by level 17, you're not tier 1, and if you aren't doing it by level 18 you're not tier 2. If you don't have the ability to potentially cast any divine/arcane spell then you're not Tier 1.

None of that is true. In a vacuum, the tiers are just "which percentile of power are you at". It happens that casting progression is a pretty strong predictor of that, but that's a contingent reality of how published classes work. If, for example, the Sorcerer had enough spells known at each level for the loss of strategic flexibility to be worth it, it could easily be T1 without changing any of the fundamentals of the class.

[Dimers]

The bard's number of spells known is an awfully tight restriction, and so its max spells per day. With those restrictions in place, I'd say a commoner chassis straddles the T3/T4 line but would be rough to actually try to play. Personally, I can't optimize enough to make that play like a T3 oughta. Give the chassis more hit points, better saves, better skills, a class feature here and there, and yes, you'd be looking at T3 -- able to contribute meaningfully in all scenarios. Bards have a lot more going for them than spells (and published support).

[PoeticallyPsyco]

I'd call it T4. Bards get some significant perks to balance their reduced casting (music, great skills, medium BAB, better proficiencies, and still get some spells at the same time as Wizards/Sorcerers). A hypothetical 6/9 casting commoner would have none of those, and I think that's more than enough to drop it down a tier.

[Ramza00]

Which version of Bard Spellcasting are we using?

3.5 at HD10 has 4/4/4/2 Spells Known
PF. at HD10 has 5/5/4/2 Spells Known, plus Bardic Performances where you trade out a spell or feat for another Magic like effect, and Favored Class Benefits where you can get even more spells or bardic performances. Thus at HD10 we get an additional 3/3/1/0 spellcasting via FCB and 3 more Cantrips. Thus 4/4/1/0 extra spells known for a Pathfinder Bard and this is before the breadth of usefulness Bardic Performances can be while powered off a different resource which is not spellcasting.


My arguement is Pathfinder Bard is a solid tier 3 while 3.5 Bard require more system mastery and book knowledge to be either a weak tier 3 else it is a strong tier 4. Now Bard Prestige Classes of 3.5 changes this entirely.


Now your question was not this.

It was Druid, Wizard, Cleric getting those Bardic like Spells but I think this demonstrates a 6th level spellcaster is not just the Save DC / and Spells Effects it is throwing out to be Tier 3, but also enough Spells Known to have a breadth of options to tackle threats. That is what is the difference between Tier 3 and 4 after all. Same amount of 4th level spells per JaronK’s definition but enough 1st to 3rd level spells known, plus class abilities to mean you are not hosed if the thing you are doing is not your 1 true thing.

Likewise a 3.5 Bard with Druid Casting, 2+ Skills, No Class Abilities, Bad BAB, d4 hit points, and only 1 good save is tier 4 due to the limits in spells known.

[RandomPeasant]

I don't think it's the limits to spells known that make you T4. Without any kind of early access to spells and without any kind of class features to make up the gap, casting 6th level spells at 18th level just doesn't cut it. A class that cast like a Cleric from the Cleric list with the Bard's spell progression would not make T3 (at least, not as a caster, maybe you can do something with DMM Gish-ing).


I'd call it T4. Bards get some significant perks to balance their reduced casting (music, great skills, medium BAB, better proficiencies, and still get some spells at the same time as Wizards/Sorcerers). A hypothetical 6/9 casting commoner would have none of those, and I think that's more than enough to drop it down a tier.

There's also a substantial amount of splatbook content out there that's just raw powerups for Bards. If you want to build a martial Bard, DFI and Song of the White Raven are a huge advantage for you. If you want to build a caster Bard, you can take Sublime Chord and get (close to) the same casting progression as a Wizard already. The RAW Core Bard is honestly not very good outside of specifically Diplomancy, but in a rare turn of events, the designers seem to have understood this and written a bunch of content that powers up Bards.

[Gnaeus]

I don’t think the bard’s accelerated spell access is that big an issue, nor do I think the 6 v 9 issue at 18 is all that problematic. Tier 1 lists are way more flexible than the bard list. And Duskblade is T3 with only 5th level spells and a very limited list. And high levels are the least important in tier ranking.

The problem with the bard spell progression esp in 3.5 is actually going to be spells per day. Spells known wise, a bard 10 is only one level behind the Sorcerer 10. He’s basically got the same (actually slightly better) spells known as a Sorcerer 9, and no one would say a sorcerer 9 can’t be generally effective in a 10th level party. If his 4th level spells are Polymorph and D Door or animate dead, he will be useful in almost every encounter.

His problem is more like the Adept problem. 1 4th level spell per day at 10th. 3 3rd level. That’s painfully low.

His best bet is barely to play that game at all. He has access to T1 minionmancy. So, Animate Dead. Planar ally/binding. Awaken. Liveoak. He’s one of the strongest T3s, given time to recruit pets.

[Rebel7284]

Yes, the Wizard list is powerful and wide enough that giving access to a delayed version of it would automatically put a commoner into tier 3.
The same is probably true of the Cleric as well.
The Druid has enough gaping holes in their list, that those MIGHT be in tier 4, especially without the rest of druid class features.

[Morphic tide]

Hmm… I'd say 2/3rds Sorcerer or Druid casting on Commoner would be t4 as you'd need to practice extremely high-optimization spell selection to properly work in the first place, and this floor condition is a big trouble.

Wizard casting with some rather specific features to cut some bulk slot wasters could shake out as t2, but on its own would be t3 in optimization terms thanks to the spell book mechanic.

Alll-splatbook Cleric if we include Domains should easily secure t3 and have a sizable shot at t2 specifically because they can actually overhaul the chassis in a number of ways.

[Hurnn]

Ok if we throw out commoner as a base line and give that casting to: fighter, expert, aristocrat, or paladin. Would they approach the T3 threshold?

[Morphic tide]

Paladin with Wizard list at 2/3rds is a no-brainer t3 even with MAD just switching Wis for Int since they'll have Lay on Hands to be a halfwit at the one thing Wizards actually have some difficulty with while making combat extremely slot efficient with chassis and class features.

Expert can legitimately fill a good breadth of gaps with the vast skill capability, sort of acting like a budget Beguiler in this case. Aristocrat would be a good chassis for the Cleric list, being as how it has the proficiencies.

And then we have Fighter. The class good only for fighting. The class actually kinda scary at fighting with any real build competence, but truly and totally hopeless at anything else and absent vital tools to reach the fight or internal answers to durability issues. Give Cleric or Wizard spells, and laugh as you violently obliterate basically every fight in existence.

[RandomPeasant]

And Duskblade is T3 with only 5th level spells and a very limited list.

The Duskblade's list is limited, but it does have pretty much exactly the spells you'd want as a Duskblade (at least, from Core and the PHBII), plus the Duskblade gets some very powerful class features. Though for all that, he's still near the bottom of T3.


His problem is more like the Adept problem. 1 4th level spell per day at 10th. 3 3rd level. ThatÂ’s painfully low.

I mean, that's really the same problem. He has access to too few spells for them to be as low level as they are, and spells that are too low level to have as few spell slots as they do. A hypothetical class that got 0 2nd level spell slots at 3rd and a first at 5th and so on, but otherwise cast like a Wizard would be T2 (with people arguing for T1). It's not an either-or thing.


His best bet is barely to play that game at all. He has access to T1 minionmancy. So, Animate Dead. Planar ally/binding. Awaken. Liveoak. HeÂ’s one of the strongest T3s, given time to recruit pets.

Except not really, because he gets those spells hideously late. If we don't care that he only has 6ths at 18th, we can't justifiably care about his having planar ally, planar binding, or liveoak, as he doesn't get any of those until 16th level. Even lesser planar binding doesn't show up until 13th level, at which point you have to abuse it really hard to make 6 HD creatures worth caring about (awaken is similar, though even less reliable). You get animate dead, but you get it at about the same time as the Adept does (Adept gets it at 8th, Cleric-Bard gets it at 7th, Wizard-Bard gets it at 10th). So the only thing you're getting at a time where it's relevant is lesser planar ally, and that's hardly enough to hang a character on.


Yes, the Wizard list is powerful and wide enough that giving access to a delayed version of it would automatically put a commoner into tier 3.

The Wizard list is powerful because of when you get it. evard's black tentacles is a great BFC spell at 7th level. It is not a great BFC spell at 10th level, let alone at 12th level. The only thing that the Wizard-Bard does that's impressive by T3 standards is there sheer range of utility spells they have access to.


Wizard casting with some rather specific features to cut some bulk slot wasters could shake out as t2, but on its own would be t3 in optimization terms thanks to the spell book mechanic.

The spellbook is honestly the reason for almost none of the Wizard's power level. The Wizard is good because Wizard spells and the Wizard progression are good. The Sorcerer is quite close to the Wizard, and that's with the half-level gap and all the other indignities piled upon it. Having the ability to shuffle your abilities around every day on its own doesn't make you a Wizard, it makes you an Incarnate or a Binder, and those classes aren't T2.


Alll-splatbook Cleric if we include Domains should easily secure t3 and have a sizable shot at t2 specifically because they can actually overhaul the chassis in a number of ways.

The class chassis is not the difference between T3 and T2. Especially not when you have so few spells per day that a meaningful buff routine means you're not casting any offensive spells. It might be the difference between T3 and T4, but again you have to lean heavily on your utility options because you're not close to what a Warblade can do in straight combat.


Ok if we throw out commoner as a base line and give that casting to: fighter, expert, aristocrat, or paladin. Would they approach the T3 threshold?

I mean, the Fighter and the Paladin are already T4, it'd hardly be surprising if giving them a big additional power source made them T3.

[Gnaeus]

The Duskblade's list is limited, but it does lack pretty much exactly the spells you'd want as a Duskblade (at least, from Core and the PHBII), plus the Duskblade gets some very bad class features. Though for all that, he's still near the bottom of T3.

Fixed that for you. Duskblade has 0 class abilities not focused directly on combat. With a spell list that is 98% combat. He lacks the best combat spells altogether.

At level 10, when the wizard/bard is casting polymorph, the Duskblade has the same 3 3rd level spells/day from a vastly worse list. At least the T1/bard can go get some wands with his WBL. The Duskblade barely has anything worth wands. Maybe see invisibility or Swift fly.



Except not really, because he gets those spells hideously late. If we don't care that he only has 6ths at 18th, we can't justifiably care about his having planar ally, planar binding, or liveoak, as he doesn't get any of those until 16th level. Even lesser planar binding doesn't show up until 13th level, at which point you have to abuse it really hard to make 6 HD creatures worth caring about (awaken is similar, though even less reliable). You get animate dead, but you get it at about the same time as the Adept does (Adept gets it at 8th, Cleric-Bard gets it at 7th, Wizard-Bard gets it at 10th). So the only thing you're getting at a time where it's relevant is lesser planar ally, and that's hardly enough to hang a character on

This is, quite simply, entirely wrong. First, this concept that things aren’t relevant because you didn’t get it when the fastest class gets it is indescribably bad. Like the cleric/bard gets animate dead before the sorcerer does. So sorcerer can’t use animate dead and it’s worthless? Hardly. Polymorph alone is better than the entire Duskblade spell list combined. It is better than the wildshape ranger’s signature ability at every level you can access it. It’s better than anything any T4 can do at that level. (And I only qualify that because the Hexblade gets polymorph at 14, and it’s still a good spell then). Honestly, the best power a Duskblade 13 gets is the power to buy a wand of Polymorph and give it to the rogue or wizard to use on him. Even stuck to the wand CL it’s still better than his list.

So you get planar binding at 13. So what can lpb do at 13. You can scout (accuser devils have 15 stealth, teleport at will, message to report back).
You can party buff (hound archons have permanent protector from evil, aid at will aura of menace)
You have some very nice mount options, like nightmare for permanent flight. You can AOE panic that doesn’t hit your party (shadow mastiff). Which of those can a Duskblade do at 13? None. The Duskblade can dispel magic and d door, that’s the extent of its top level non-direct attack options. And the bard/wizard can actually dispel magic better than the Duskblade, with a pet that can dispel as an at-will. And we have 104 HD of animated cannon fodder. And enough slots to throw a Polymorph into every fight.

At this point I’m basically comparing a bard/wizard with 5 spells (animate dead, polymorph, magic circle, lesser planar binding, command undead.) versus a Duskblade with his entire list. We still have every other broken trick a wizard 9 can do that no T3 can duplicate. We could take assume supernatural ability and do any broken thing any monster under 15 HD could do.



The class chassis is not the difference between T3 and T2. Especially not when you have so few spells per day that a meaningful buff routine means you're not casting any offensive spells. It might be the difference between T3 and T4, but again you have to lean heavily on your utility options because you're not close to what a Warblade can do in straight combat.

Everything you say here is worse for Duskblade than bard/cleric or wizard. The Duskblade has less high level slots, and will use some of those duplicating better fighters, like Greater Magic Weapon and Keen edge. The bard/cleric or wizard should have enough low level spells to be casting from behind his wall of HDx4 (8 for the wizard) undead. Whether a Duskblade or Warblade can even outperform skeletons of their HDx4 or 8 is going to be based a lot on what exact combat roll you expect them to play and what kinds of corpses you have had access to.

[Psyren]

With just the list and nothing else - I'd say probably T4.

The PF classes that do this, e.g. Inquisitor, Warpriest, Occultist, Magus, Hunter, Psychic Investigator etc - get to T3 by combining the 6/9 casting with other benefits. 3/4 BAB, proficiencies, action economy manipulation like Spell Combat and Fervor etc.

[RandomPeasant]

Yeah, if you look at the 6/9 casters that are good, they're not Commoners. They have other abilities, and those abilities are usually pretty good. The Alchemist, for example, can be built as a decent combat character without touching his spellcasting at all.


Fixed that for you. Duskblade has 0 class abilities not focused directly on combat. With a spell list that is 98% combat. He lacks the best combat spells altogether.

Yes, the Duskblade is heavily focused on combat. So are most classes at T3 or below. That doesn't make his class features bad. His class features are actually very good. At 5th level, the Duskblade gets the ability to Quicken a spell for free. At 5th level, the Wizard gets a bonus feat. One of these things is better than the other, and it's not the one the Wizard gets. Full Attack Arcane Channeling is similarly completely nuts, it's just that the Duskblade doesn't get to stick shivering touch or slay living or harm in there.


This is, quite simply, entirely wrong. First, this concept that things aren’t relevant because you didn’t get it when the fastest class gets it is indescribably bad. Like the cleric/bard gets animate dead before the sorcerer does. So sorcerer can’t use animate dead and it’s worthless?

animate dead is, in fact, very bad for the Sorcerer. You don't get a top-level offensive spell, and in exchange you get minions that are as good as an Adept gets. If you want an army of the dead, you go Cleric (because that gets you your army early) or Dread Necromancer (because that gets you an army that is bigger and better than other people's). You do not go Sorcerer, and having access to animate dead is not remotely the reason the Sorcerer is good.


Polymorph alone is better than the entire Duskblade spell list combined.

If you have to go to the single most powerful spell of its level on your list to prove that you're better than the second-worst class in T3, you're not in T3. Comparative optimization is a thing, and if your plan is "use polymorph real good", you are signing on for a very high level of it.


Everything you say here is worse for Duskblade than bard/cleric or wizard.

I'm confused how you think that's relevant to the argument you're responding to. The Duskblade is not in T2. There is nothing you could reasonably describe as a "chassis upgrade" that would put it in T2.


The bard/cleric or wizard should have enough low level spells to be casting from behind his wall of HDx4 (8 for the wizard) undead.

I mean, that seems a lot worse than the Warlock doing the same thing from behind his wall of undead, with invocations that are as good as the Bard-Wizard's underleveled spells and at-will. Oh, and when he wants to do cheese, he can do cheese at the same level as an actual Wizard because he gets Imbue Item. Wizard 13/Commoner 7 is not a T3 character, and neither is the Bard-Wizard.

[Telonius]

Tier 3: Capable of doing one thing quite well, while still being useful when that one thing is inappropriate, or capable of doing all things, but not as well as classes that specialize in that area. Occasionally has a mechanical ability that can solve an encounter, but this is relatively rare and easy to deal with. Can be game breaking only with specific intent to do so. Challenging such a character takes some thought from the DM, but isn't too difficult. Will outshine any Tier 5s in the party much of the time.

So, does stapling the Cleric, Wizard, or Druid list (with Bard progression) onto a Commoner chassis achieve this? I think it would depend a bit on spell selection. If you're really doing it like a Bard (spontaneously casting from a set list of spells), it's going to be harder. The Big 3 are the Big 3 because they can do anything, rest, then prepare different spells. Casting spontaneously from a set list, like a Bard does, cuts down the versatility a lot.

As already mentioned, Bard is Tier 3 as-is, both in the original estimation and in the re-tiering project. Spell progression, plus a bunch of interesting and useful abilities, and skill points to monkey around with, are what puts it there. If your base chassis doesn't give you something like that initially, the result is not going to be Tier 3. How powerful the stapled-together class is going to be, will really be determined by what the original class gives you, which list you're picking from, and how well they synergize.

For example, Commoner is going to give you nothing, so no Tier 3. Barbarian is already solidly in Tier 4, so you'd think that adding casting would be helpful. But it synergizes terribly; unless you pull some Rage Mage stuff, you can't cast while raging. So it doesn't really add all that much to the character. Something like Monk? Totally different situation. A Tier-5 pile of silly abilities, but casting could tie it together better and bump it up a tier or two.

[Lans]

@Telonious that isn't necessarily true, it could still come in as a tier 3, just lower in that bracket

[RandomPeasant]

Barbarian is already solidly in Tier 4, so you'd think that adding casting would be helpful. But it synergizes terribly; unless you pull some Rage Mage stuff, you can't cast while raging.

You don't need to cast while raging for it to synergize. Giving the Barbarian meaningful downtime and utility options already helps it a lot, and you can get further with various medium and long duration buffs. The Bard-Cleric (if it gets DMM still) is probably the closest Bard-X to T3 status, and it's about on par with the Barbarian in combat. Within JaronK's system, getting 6/9 casting would move a class from T4 to T3 almost by definition, though it's shakier in the re-tiering which (AIUI) was a more straightforward "how good is this class" ranking.

[Lans]

I'm going with low tier 3 or high 4

[Gnaeus]

it's just that the Duskblade doesn't get to stick shivering touch or slay living or harm in there

Good point. You know who DOES get shivering touch? And also Ray of Stupidity? Spectral hand? Yep all there. Duskblade lacks the best spells for his job. Bard/wizard gets them all. Bard/cleric gets most.



You do not go Sorcerer, and having access to animate dead is not remotely the reason the Sorcerer is good

Again getting something later doesn’t mean it’s bad. It isn’t THE reason sorcerer is good. It is A reason sorcerer is good, especially in contrast to entire classes worse than one spell


polymorph[/I] real good", you are signing on for a very high level of it.

Uh, that’s exactly what it means. I have one spell that exceeds the combined total powers of the bottom limit, + all my other spells, clearly means I am above the bottom limit.

And polymorph is great at any op level. I turn the fighter into a troll is better than Duskblades best spell. As is I turn the fighter into a griffon and he flies us over obstacle. The fact that he can dumpster dive and play with stuff like assume SU only widens the gap between him and low tiers. Polymorph isn’t high op because it’s overpowered. It’s a core spell with some very low op but strong uses. Meaning stuff that doesn’t require any system mastery other than realizing that turning people into stuff is hella useful. Polymorph can be high op because it becomes more overpowered with system mastery.

And again, I’m one shotting dragons and hydras. I have access to every broke T1 thing. Is Shivering touch more powerful at 5 when cleric or wiz gets it than at 7? Sure. Is it still overwhelmingly powerful at 7? Yes. Because again, when the first class gets something is not a good indication of when it stops being useful. Especially when judging against classes that don’t get that thing at all.



Everything you say here is worse for Duskblade than bard/cleric or wizard..


I'm confused how you think that's relevant to the argument you're responding to. The Duskblade is not in T2. There is nothing you could reasonably describe as a "chassis upgrade" that would put it in T2.

I’m not saying Duskblade is worse than wizard. I’m saying it is worse in this context than cleric or wizard with bard spell progression. You know, the thing we are discussing



I mean, that seems a lot worse than the Warlock doing the same thing.

So if I’m worse than the top T3s, and better than the bottom T3s, I guess I’m in T3.

Also, tiering is done across the optimization range. You don’t get to say Polymorph and Shivering touch are high op, they don’t count. You are limited to saying “this is at an optimization level at which a fighter is a chain tripper or ubercharger,”. Or “this isn’t a good indication of their strength in my game but it would be in Tippy’s game”. Bearing in mind that the bottom of T3 classes just don’t have innate access to those powerful tricks at all. Duskblade still tops out with the same best spells in high op play. So a 10th level Duskblade, at equivalent optimization with a wizard with bard progression who picks the best core spells and picked polymorph, can do what? A 7th level Duskblade, with a wide variety of sources and a guide, can compete with spectral hand/shivering touch with what combo?

Also, assuming it has full caster level, the cleric or wizard with bard progression would be quite a bit stronger than wiz 13/commoner 7. Earlier access to most feats, better spell penetration, lots of stuff.

[RandomPeasant]

Good point. You know who DOES get shivering touch? And also Ray of Stupidity? Spectral hand? Yep all there. Duskblade lacks the best spells for his job. Bard/wizard gets them all. Bard/cleric gets most.

But they don't get Greater Arcane Channeling. Setting aside the ability to punch way above your weight class, a 7th level character spending their one top level spell and one of their three next-level spells to probably win an encounter isn't impressive. Like, great, you one-shot the Dragon. We have three other encounters today, and you have two 2nd level spells level. What exactly are you doing that's better than a Duskblade?


Again getting something later doesn’t mean it’s bad. It isn’t THE reason sorcerer is good. It is A reason sorcerer is good, especially in contrast to entire classes worse than one spell

The Sorcerer is literally worse at using animate dead than the Adept is. They get it at the same level, and unlike the Sorcerer, the Adept can still use their spell slots for combat spells on days when the party is adventuring. If we're talking about an Eberron Adept, it's better twice over because the Adept can pick up desecrate. The way the Sorcerer works makes animate dead a very bad spell for them. That's okay, because the Sorcerer is good at using other spells.


Uh, that’s exactly what it means. I have one spell that exceeds the combined total powers of the bottom limit, + all my other spells, clearly means I am above the bottom limit.

No, it doesn't, because that's not how comparative optimization works. What about those Bard-Wizards who prepare ice storm instead? They're part of the calculation too, and the fall well below even an unoptimized Duskblade. And I'm not totally convinced you actually are better than a Duskblade at most levels, because A) I've never bothered to look into what an optimized Duskblade can do and B) you get all of one casting of polymorph per day at 10th level, so what are you doing for the first nine levels (which, by your own admission, should weigh higher in our analysis), or in the other encounters of a workday until you get more castings?


I’m not saying Duskblade is worse than wizard. I’m saying it is worse in this context than cleric or wizard with bard spell progression. You know, the thing we are discussing

You missed the thing I was responding to, which was the person claiming that the Bard-Wizard gets into T2 somehow.

[Gnaeus]

But they don't get Greater Arcane Channeling. Setting aside the ability to punch way above your weight class, a 7th level character spending their one top level spell and one of their three next-level spells to probably win an encounter isn't impressive. Like, great, you one-shot the Dragon. We have three other encounters today, and you have two 2nd level spells level. What exactly are you doing that's better than a Duskblade?

But spending a top level spell to one shot a boss is very impressive. You don’t get to say “other than the fact that you can one shot bosses of much higher CR and I can’t”. Especially since your only argument on why Duskblade is better is its supposed combat superiority. I mean we’re level 7 right? So one of my answers has to be “I have a wand of the op thing I can do and you can’t”. And another is “I just pulled my entire weight for the day in one encounter, so I could cast trash buffs in 3 other fights, and actually have out of combat utility you lack.



The Sorcerer is literally worse at using animate dead than the Adept is. They get it at the same level, and unlike the Sorcerer, the Adept can still use their spell slots for combat spells on days when the party is adventuring. If we're talking about an Eberron Adept, it's better twice over because the Adept can pick up desecrate. The way the Sorcerer works makes animate dead a very bad spell for them. That's okay, because the Sorcerer is good at using other spells.

But better than the ranger is. Or the fighter or the Barbarian or the rogue. If at level 8 I can have 72 HD of giant skeletons, what the adept can do isnt very relevant. More relevant is that my 10 troll skeletons are better as a group at blocking, taking damage or doing damage than any 8th level fighter type, including the T3s. And I don’t even expend a spell slot for them, other than a command undead every few days mostly downtime. Yeah, adept does it too, which is part of why adept is T4 despite a vastly worse list and slower access to most things.

This also ignores the out of combat utility of those spells. Like using tireless undead to run a mill, or build a wall, or pull oars in a ship, or animating the horses in your caravan after they die so they can still pull those wagons.

Edit: also, while Adept has desecrate, sorcerer gets command undead, which basically removes the HD controlled cap. So saying adept is better isn’t really true. Because 4x HD with desecrate is way worse than 6 or 8x HD, especially when those undead can be stolen from other casters, or better yet in conjunction with a party cleric who can desecrate then release control.



You missed the thing I was responding to, which was the person claiming that the Bard-Wizard gets into T2 somehow.

Then you should have quoted them, not me.




No, it doesn't, because that's not how comparative optimization works. What about those Bard-Wizards who prepare ice storm instead? They're part of the calculation too, and the fall well below even an unoptimized Duskblade. And I'm not totally convinced you actually are better than a Duskblade at most levels, because A) I've never bothered to look into what an optimized Duskblade can do and B) you get all of one casting of polymorph per day at 10th level, so what are you doing for the first nine levels (which, by your own admission, should weigh higher in our analysis), or in the other encounters of a workday until you get more castings?

Tiering relates to comparative optimization only insofar that you compare like to like across the range of levels. The bard-wizard with ice storm gets compared with the fighter who is TWF and took toughness. The one with Polymorph is compared with the two handed fighter with power attack. The one with assume supernatural ability is compared with a chain tripper or charger. And at every level comes out vastly better.

Roughly speaking:
Bottom low op (player isn’t even trying. Maybe stormwinding, or just picking stuff at random. Fighter has skill focus. Wizard has 12 int, or useless spells).
High Low op (player will examine easily available options and pick things that sound cool, but minimal work or game mastery. Fighter is TWF, or split focus. Wizard takes fireball or ice storm. Note that fighter could take power attack or wizard take Polymorph here, but not because they understand. Just because they sound like a good thing)
Low Mid op(player understands D&D and will pick low hanging fruit. Polymorph is a definite unless banned. Fighter is power attacking away.)
High Mid Op (player is planning. The fighter has a build. The sorcerer has plotted out his spells for a variety of abilities at different levels. Everyone but the Druid has a PRC. Wizard is using Polymorph to access odd stuff, maybe guides)
High op (players are using counterintuitive and/or whole greater than parts planning. Definitely checking guides. Stuff like taking an outsider race so you can game Alter Self, dipping binder to ignore ability loss from hellfire warlock, Polymorph + assume Supernatural into something broken, if the fighter hasn’t just given up and rerolled a Warblade he now has 7 classes and a bought off template and does stupid damage. Sorcerer is a dragonwrought lore drake)

Most T3s tend to, just because, have high floors low ceilings. Duskblade or warblade > delayed casting wizard at bottom low op. They just can’t be built that badly. Top of low op is a crapshoot. Did the delayed casting T1 get lucky and get good stuff? The Duskblade probably has trash feats but he can still fight ok, especially given his likely competition. By mid op he is done. The difference between his best spell and his worst isn’t much. He has no class abilities that compete for power or flexibility with better T1 spells. And the bard-wizard at mid op is using the better spells. The farther up we go, the worse the Duskblade or Warblade looks.

Also, you are misquoting me. Tiering focuses on mid levels. Least important is 15+. Followed by 1-5. most important is midrange. So 10 is workable. But we know what the strong combos are. This isn’t your first day on the forum. At level 4 we could have alter self into an outsider and Ray of stupidity. By 7 we could be abusing shivering touch, snowsight and obscuring snow. At 13 as mentioned we are in the planar binding game. But unlike the Warblade or Duskblade we could also have low level utility spells. Or scrolls. Or wands. Honestly if we had a wand of scorching Ray that we used in every combat except when we one shot every animal and most bosses we would outperform Duskblade.

[RandomPeasant]

But spending a top level spell to one shot a boss is very impressive.

An actual boss is going to have defenses against shivering touch. The random CR 7 Dragon your 7th level party fights is just a monster, no different from the Hill Giant or Goblin Warlock you could have fought instead.


And another is “I just pulled my entire weight for the day in one encounter, so I could cast trash buffs in 3 other fights, and actually have out of combat utility you lack.

But what about the days when the party just doesn't encounter a monster that shivering touch one-shots? Now you do nothing, because your best spell is worthless and your remaining spells are 2nd level. What happens when the adventure is on the Elemental Plane of Air, and the encounters are "a Huge Air Elemental", "two Djinn", "an Elder Arrowhawk", and "a bunch of Harpy archers" (who are ECL 6 to balance out the Arrowhawk)?


while Adept has desecrate, sorcerer gets command undead, which basically removes the HD controlled cap. So saying adept is better isnÂ’t really true.

I said the Adept is better at using animate dead. If you'd like to make an argument about that instead of animate dead, feel free to do that. I would point out that while the cap on command undead is theoretically very high, most of that cap comes from things that are basically DM pity, or which your character isn't really doing. You taking a zombie of the Cleric's hands says more about the Cleric than it does you.


Then you should have quoted them, not me.

Yes, clearly, when you made a point in "response" to something that had absolutely nothing to do with that point, I should have gone back to the earlier point I had already discussed rather than asking you why you thought your response was relevant. That is how conversations work, and you are definitely in the right here.


The one with Polymorph is compared with the two handed fighter with power attack. The one with assume supernatural ability is compared with a chain tripper or charger. And at every level comes out vastly better.

"Assume Supernatural Ability" and "Ubercharger" are not the same level of optimization. Ubercharger is on par with polymorph, Assume Supernatural Ability is comparable to buying polymorph any object.


Honestly if we had a wand of scorching Ray that we used in every combat except when we one shot every animal and most bosses we would outperform Duskblade.

At this point it sounds to me like your conclusion is more "the Duskblade doesn't belong in T3" than "the Bard-Wizard belongs in T3". A Rogue can use a Wand of scorching ray as well as the Bard-Wizard can (better, actually, because he will sometimes get Sneak Attack), and he's T4.

[Morphic tide]

An actual boss is going to have defenses against shivering touch. The random CR 7 Dragon your 7th level party fights is just a monster, no different from the Hill Giant or Goblin Warlock you could have fought instead.
Not all bosses are actually going to be written with comprehensive defenses against the various ridiculous cheese spells, because there are a remarkable number of them. Just because something doesn't shut off every hard save-or-lose doesn't make it cease being a "real" boss. That is a narrative distinction far more than a mechanical one. And Shivering Touch is literally infamous for screwing over Dragons regardless of level, it's going to brick the CR 10 Dragon almost exactly as reliably as the CR 7 one from the same 7th-level caster.


But what about the days when the party just doesn't encounter a monster that shivering touch one-shots?
...Once you get to Maximizing it this list is so narrow that such happening is ridiculously obviously the DM screwing with you, and even at 7th level this list is comprised primarily of Incorporeal creatures with significant Dexterity bonuses and dedicated anti-casters. It's kind of Shivering Touch's thing that what it isn't a disgustingly reliable no-save-just-lose effect against it's still so crippling as to make very little difference. Shivering Touch is counterplayed with strategies that are ridiculously easily party-killing or hard countered by Special Quality, not shrugged off.

[Gnaeus]

An actual boss is going to have defenses against shivering touch. The random CR 7 Dragon your 7th level party fights is just a monster, no different from the Hill Giant or Goblin Warlock you could have fought instead.

He might. He might not. If it isn’t routinely useful, one of us can get it in a wand or scroll and use something else when it auto wins.



But what about the days when the party just doesn't encounter a monster that shivering touch one-shots? Now you do nothing, because your best spell is worthless and your remaining spells are 2nd level. What happens when the adventure is on the Elemental Plane of Air, and the encounters are "a Huge Air Elemental", "two Djinn", "an Elder Arrowhawk", and "a bunch of Harpy archers" (who are ECL 6 to balance out the Arrowhawk)?

Well for one thing, if I’m alter selfed into a dwarf ancestor none of those things but the arrow hawk are likely to hurt me. So I read a resist energy scroll and shoot at them until they leave? Or an invisibility scroll and then buffs. Putting that on the plane of air is clever (the Elemental and djinn can counter). But on fire or earth obscuring snow would effectively blind all of them and force them into 5 foot away melee, which will make the encounter much easier for my group. I have another third level spell. I don’t have to rely on shivering touch if I don’t want to. Why did I pick it for plane of air day? What’s in my party? I have buffs. What’s a Warblade going to do? Spam WRT on someone with a useful ability I guess. What’s a Duskblade doing to do? He potentially has 4 more castings of scorching Ray than I do (after alter self) but really we’re both pulling out wands. Except again I have a lot more options there too. Like that scroll of resist energy I might reasonably pack for a trip to an elemental plane that he can’t use. So in what is pretty much the worst case scenario he’s competitive with the bottom T3s.



I said the Adept is better at using animate dead. If you'd like to make an argument about that instead of animate dead, feel free to do that

Animate dead is a more powerful spell with control undead. Just like planar binding is better if you have magic circle.



Yes, clearly, when you made a point in "response" to something that had absolutely nothing to do with that point, I should have gone back to the earlier point I had already discussed rather than asking you why you thought your response was relevant. That is how conversations work, and you are definitely in the right here

I’m glad we settled that and I accept your apology.



"Assume Supernatural Ability" and "Ubercharger" are not the same level of optimization. Ubercharger is on par with polymorph, Assume Supernatural Ability is comparable to buying polymorph any object.

No. Polymorph and PAO are both at the boundary between low and mid op. They are easy, core spells that could be taken by any well meaning player and will be taken by anyone who knows the rules. They require minimum game knowledge for baseline effectiveness and no planning beyond the moment you are looking at the spell list. They are at exactly the same optimization level as power attack. Something that sounds good and in fact is. The fact that they are more powerful than power attack is simply a factor of how much better spells are than feats. The same player who is likely to pick power attack is likely to pick Polymorph. Using PAO twice to make effects permanent is higher op if allowed.
Assume SU is high op because 1. It requires game knowledge to even know it exists. 2. It requires game knowledge to realize how strong it is. It isn’t obvious. 3. It requires game knowledge to actually make it good. You have to know a lot of monsters and a lot of powers to immediately realize which powers aren’t things a wizard can just duplicate, versus which are strong. It’s very high op. I mean I couldn’t use it well without going to a guide or spending hours skimming manuals.

An ubercharger is a player who has read a guide. He has taken feats that sound bad (shock trooper, bull rush) to get to an end goal. He has planned a build with parts that synergize far beyond his own level. He is at the bleeding edge of high op, just using a low tier base. My 13 year old could pick up a book and realize Polymorph is good and take it. It wouldn’t take her long to ask “can I turn him into a giant?” She isn’t at an optimization level where she will have the fighter turned into a girallon but she doesn’t need to be for the spell to be good. She could never look at 10 books and make a charger. That requires optimization.



At this point it sounds to me like your conclusion is more "the Duskblade doesn't belong in T3" than "the Bard-Wizard belongs in T3". A Rogue can use a Wand of scorching ray as well as the Bard-Wizard can (better, actually, because he will sometimes get Sneak Attack), and he's T4.

1. The rogue can maybe use the wand. At level 7, UMD is 10 without investment. By the time he is reliably doing it at low op without spending resources we are entering high level play.
2. When we look at Tiers, we are generally assuming limited gear availability. In a campaign where you can’t buy a wand of scorching Ray or shivering touch, the delayed wizard can make one. He has the tools (full CL, good spell list) to make stuff to fix his problem if he can’t just buy it. In a campaign with random drops or an AP, it is likely that wands and scrolls from the sor wiz list will occur and some of them will be good. The Duskblade list is so small that he can’t rely on random drops, other than having a magic weapon for example. But he could also, if things were tragic enough, take item creation feats and make wands for example, or cooperate with other party casters, although he won’t be as good at it as the delayed T1, who is himself worse than a high level warlock. And all are above the Warblade, who gets what he gets and begs for magic mart or for the DM to drop a spiked chain +3. So Duskblade >fighter because the fighter can’t rely on having flight and the Duskblade isn’t completely hosed by those harpies you cited.

One T3 hallmark is solving problems in combat with unreliable gear. The lower your tier, the more specific stuff you need. The lower your tier, the less your ability to make the stuff you need. The Bard-Wizard has Native access to lots of problem solving tools, can use gear from a top level list, so a wide chance of random drop, and can solve his own problems in a campaign where shops aren’t available or are highly restricted. Does he want craft wands? No. Or ar least not unless he is cooperating with other casters. But it’s there if he needs it.

And again, he’s better across the range. Worst case, party has rando junk. Fighter is boned. Duskblade is somewhat boned. Bard-wizard pays a feat tax. Best case, the doors of the kingdom are thrown wide. Fighter has expensive potions of fly and is saving up to buy someone a wand of Polymorph. Duskblade has wands of combat spells, preferably ones he doesn’t know or of his highest level spells, and can spam if he needs. Bard-wizard has wands of all kinds of useful junk, from shivering touch/Ray of stupidity he wants situationally but regularly, to wands of resist energy or invisibility or haste that are just kind of useful and not too level dependent, to scrolls of stuff you won’t need often.

[RandomPeasant]

And Shivering Touch is literally infamous for screwing over Dragons regardless of level, it's going to brick the CR 10 Dragon almost exactly as reliably as the CR 7 one from the same 7th-level caster.

I have no real interest in rehashing the shivering touch discussion that happened literally last week, but suffice it to say there are ways to counter it, especially at the level range where the Bard-Wizard gets it. The problem with shivering touch is that it warps the game, not that it's unbeatable.


Well for one thing, if IÂ’m alter selfed into a dwarf ancestor none of those things but the arrow hawk are likely to hurt me.

Again, what about the Bard-Wizards who are not using the best-possible spells in the best-possible ways? There is a build of Warmage that gets into T2 (if you count Rainbow Servant, there's a build that gets into T1). That doesn't make the Warmage T2, because the average Warmage is worse than that.

Suppose, for a moment, our Bard-Wizard casts merely spells that are very good. Spells like sleep or stinking cloud or web. The sorts of spells that a moderately optimized Wizard or Sorcerer uses, and is comfortably T1 or T2 using. How does that compare to the Duskblade?

At very low levels, the Duskblade seems pretty clearly ahead. She gets color spray as a 1st level spell (and has more 1st level spells by 3rd level than the Bard-Wizard will have for the entire game), so at 1st level while the Bard-Wizard tries to make use of cantrips, she gets to choose between being as good as a real Wizard and being a passable frontliner.

As the game goes on, the Bard-Wizard does catch up, but the limited and low-level spell slots really screw him over. At 4th level, getting 2nd level spells lets him cast a spell every combat, but the Duskblade can probably cast a spell every combat round, on top of doing standard melee damage. It's not until 10th level that the Bard-Wizard is consistently a spell level ahead of the Duskblade.

As far as silver bullets go, while the Bard-Wizard can prepare things like ray of stupidity or command undead, they're much less effective in their hands than they are in the hands of a normal Wizard because the Bard-Wizard doesn't get very many spell slots. If a 7th level Wizard prepares ray of stupidity in hopes of mise-ing an encounter with an animal, that's a quarter of her third-highest level of spells. If the Bard-Wizard does the same, that's a 3rd of his second-highest level of spells. Schrodinger's Bard-Wizard looks pretty impressive, but if you rely on specialized tools when your resources are that limited, you're going to come up lacking disturbingly often.

That comparison looks a lot less rosy for the Bard-Wizard than "what if the Bard-Wizard uses every trick in the T1 playbook". And it's not even entirely fair, because I genuinely have no idea what an optimized Duskblade looks like.


Why did I pick it for plane of air day?

How did you know today was going to be Plane of Air day? Maybe you thought today was going to be "big elemental day" and assumed it would be an Earth Elemental you could kill with shivering touch. You're not always going to have perfect information, and the limited spells kick you again here, because they make it much harder to use divinations to figure out what you need to be doing.


WhatÂ’s in my party? I have buffs. WhatÂ’s a Warblade going to do? Spam WRT on someone with a useful ability I guess. WhatÂ’s a Duskblade doing to do? He potentially has 4 more castings of scorching Ray than I do (after alter self) but really weÂ’re both pulling out wands.

Well, they can melee the Djinn and Air Elementals, because neither has meaningful ranged offensive abilities. Having extra castings of scorching ray is pretty relevant against the low-HP Harpies. If either of them has some form of flight (plausible but not certain at 7th level), they probably do better in any of the encounters than you do.


Animate dead is a more powerful spell with control undead. Just like planar binding is better if you have magic circle.

Using control undead to expand your control pool is not better than getting to cast offensive spells.


No. Polymorph and PAO are both at the boundary between low and mid op. They are easy, core spells that could be taken by any well meaning player and will be taken by anyone who knows the rules.

Could you tell me the rules for polymorph? Remember to include any errata, relevant FAQ rulings, and any changes that happen as a result of the rules in the PHBII or Rules Compendium. If you can explain how the restrictions and allowances from alter self carry over as well, that would be great.

That might have gone over your head, as you apparently don't understand sarcasm, but polymorph is anything but a simple spell. It is quite possibly the single most complicated spell in the game, and has received functional changes from at least five different sources (and that's not counting even more dubiously-authoritative sources, like a Rules of the Game article I can no longer even find).


An ubercharger is a player who has read a guide.

Someone wrote that guide. The ubercharger is not really complicated. It's just the observation that A) multiplying numbers makes them really big and B) who cares if your AC is low if the other guy is dead. We're not talking about some kind of complicated SLA body outside body combo here.


The rogue can maybe use the wand. At level 7, UMD is 10 without investment. By the time he is reliably doing it at low op without spending resources we are entering high level play.

Again, the idea that "do more than just put ranks in a skill" and "cast polymorph" are the same level of optimization is just not credible. A 7th level Rogue can easily get the magic +19 UMD he needs to consistently activate a wand. Look at all the stuff people do to get low-level Artificers to work, then realize you have six more levels of resources to play with.


When we look at Tiers, we are generally assuming limited gear availability.

Oh, I thought we were looking mostly at naked fights in AMFs, so I have the Monk in T1. My bad, I guess we only make the assumptions that help classes you like.

[Gnaeus]

I have no real interest in rehashing the shivering touch discussion that happened literally last week, but suffice it to say there are ways to counter it, especially at the level range where the Bard-Wizard gets it. The problem with shivering touch is that it warps the game, not that it's unbeatable.

It doesn’t need to be unbeatable to be better than anything on your list. Polymorph isn’t unbeatable. Planar binding isn’t unbeatable, just better than low T3s can match.



Again, what about the Bard-Wizards who are not using the best-possible spells in the best-possible ways? There is a build of Warmage that gets into T2 (if you count Rainbow Servant, there's a build that gets into T1). That doesn't make the Warmage T2, because the average Warmage is worse than that

But the average bard wizard can absolutely be using Polymorph. It’s a core spell.



Suppose, for a moment, our Bard-Wizard casts merely spells that are very good. Spells like sleep or stinking cloud or web. The sorts of spells that a moderately optimized Wizard or Sorcerer uses, and is comfortably T1 or T2 using. How does that compare to the Duskblade?
We have less daily staying power versus indescribably better minionmancy and utility. We put out less damage but can access lots of combat/non combat powers like invisibility and suggestion. And again Polymorph is well on the table for a moderately optimized wizard.



At very low levels, the Duskblade seems pretty clearly ahead. She gets color spray as a 1st level spell (and has more 1st level spells by 3rd level than the Bard-Wizard will have for the entire game), so at 1st level while the Bard-Wizard tries to make use of cantrips, she gets to choose between being as good as a real Wizard and being a passable frontliner.

You also beat the actual wizard at level 1.



As the game goes on, the Bard-Wizard does catch up, but the limited and low-level spell slots really screw him over. At 4th level, getting 2nd level spells lets him cast a spell every combat, but the Duskblade can probably cast a spell every combat round, on top of doing standard melee damage. It's not until 10th level that the Bard-Wizard is consistently a spell level ahead of the Duskblade.

At 4th level alter self probably lasts the entire dungeon. At mid op it’s just +6ish ac, coupled with mage armor. Command undead and Ray of stupidity are 300 GP of our scrolls, waiting to be game changers. Otherwise, agreed, we are sad in a dungeon crawl, probably using a trash wand.

But wait, we need a horse to carry loot? Mount. Charm person to hit up the drunk guard for information. Identify for loot. Your utility casting is nonexistent, and I can fake combat casting easier than you can fake utility.



As far as silver bullets go, while the Bard-Wizard can prepare things like ray of stupidity or command undead, they're much less effective in their hands than they are in the hands of a normal Wizard because the Bard-Wizard doesn't get very many spell slots. If a 7th level Wizard prepares ray of stupidity in hopes of mise-ing an encounter with an animal, that's a quarter of her third-highest level of spells. If the Bard-Wizard does the same, that's a 3rd of his second-highest level of spells. Schrodinger's Bard-Wizard looks pretty impressive, but if you rely on specialized tools when your resources are that limited, you're going to come up lacking disturbingly often

I’ll be honest. I’m not entirely sure what it means to be a wizard with the bard progression. Is it basically a sorcerer with the bard spells known list? If yes, you take it as a spell known and only use it on days when you want. If no, and it is actually a wizard just using the bard spells per day, then we functionally have all the broken spells on access when they are good, not when they aren’t. So when we plan to wander the wilderness we take Ray of stupidity and when we are exploring a crypt we take another alter self instead like a wizard would do. And we get a 150 GP scroll in case there is a dire bear in the crypt somehow. Or in case we miss. Command undead is another fantastic scroll. It’s good when it’s good, non level dependent, and once our pet is snagged we can prep it every few days while we buy another emergency use scroll.



That comparison looks a lot less rosy for the Bard-Wizard than "what if the Bard-Wizard uses every trick in the T1 playbook". And it's not even entirely fair, because I genuinely have no idea what an optimized Duskblade looks like.

It’s a lot like an unoptimized Duskblade with better combat feats. The good part of a tiny list of interchangeable attack spells is you can’t do too badly. The bad part is you can’t do too well either.



Well, they can melee the Djinn and Air Elementals, because neither has meaningful ranged offensive abilities. Having extra castings of scorching ray is pretty relevant against the low-HP Harpies. If either of them has some form of flight (plausible but not certain at 7th level), they probably do better in any of the encounters than you do

The elemental can kill them from out of pole arm range. If they can have flight, I can have a wand. Actually, the most effective cooperation would be a wand of fly I could use on them. Shame a Duskblade can’t do that.



Could you tell me the rules for polymorph? Remember to include any errata, relevant FAQ rulings, and any changes that happen as a result of the rules in the PHBII or Rules Compendium. If you can explain how the restrictions and allowances from alter self carry over as well, that would be great.

That might have gone over your head, as you apparently don't understand sarcasm, but polymorph is anything but a simple spell. It is quite possibly the single most complicated spell in the game, and has received functional changes from at least five different sources (and that's not counting even more dubiously-authoritative sources, like a Rules of the Game article I can no longer even find)

How it works.
My thirteen year old daughter takes Polymorph at 7.
She says DM, can I change him into a giant? DM says yes. If the DM knows the errata, he uses it. If he doesnt, he doesn’t. None of that junk is needed to make the spell work unless you are fighting online about how the RAW functions.

Done



Someone wrote that guide. The ubercharger is not really complicated. It's just the observation that A) multiplying numbers makes them really big and B) who cares if your AC is low if the other guy is dead. We're not talking about some kind of complicated SLA body outside body combo here.

The opposite of low op thinking is “I’m going to read a guide and take a bunch of feats so in 5 levels I can do this one thing well.



Again, the idea that "do more than just put ranks in a skill" and "cast polymorph" are the same level of optimization is just not credible. A 7th level Rogue can easily get the magic +19 UMD he needs to consistently activate a wand. Look at all the stuff people do to get low-level Artificers to work, then realize you have six more levels of resources to play with

That’s true. Polymorph is lower op than just putting ranks in a skill. Polymorph requires one good decision at any point after it becomes available using only the resources immediately referred to (1 spell known, interchangeable with other spells known). Indistinguishable from power attack.

UMD requires expenditure over a bunch of levels. At low levels it may not even be very good. It probably requires pre game planning in the sense that you want to buff a non primary stat (Cha). Then you are spending other resources (gold, feats). Probably reviewing multiple sources for a +19 at 7. So you are absolutely right, It isn’t credible that UMD is as low op as Polymorph.



Oh, I thought we were looking mostly at naked fights in AMFs, so I have the Monk in T1. My bad, I guess we only make the assumptions that help classes you like.

That could be what you thought. I accept your apology.

[Quentinas]

I think Random Peasant with Bard -Wizard says a bard that can learn spells from the wizard spel llist , but is still limited in the amount of spell known he has and spell per day of a bard. So a Bard- Wizard probably he could be specialized in something (depending on his spell list) but for that some encounter will be beated quite easily by said bard while other will be more difficult, and not each bard will have the same usefulness as not each bard will choose the same spells so we could say that the Bard-Wizard have a wider range of possible build, some optimized some not, while a Duskblade is a smaller range, with still some optimized build (probably using arcane disciple or something else) but still nearly anyone is able to do enough damage in melee (with a duskblade it's quite difficult not being a good melee) .

But we are not analizing bard versus duskblade (they are in the same tier list at the end) , let's suppose something like swashbuckler + wizard list (but with spell slot limited like a bard let's says for now like a wizard as a way to prepare) against a duskblade . I choose the swashbuckler as it's a low tier class without anything unique or not so much while it could still synergize with the wizard (as each one want some intelligence). I think that the Duskblade would be something higher but not so much (mainly because he is innately able to channel in melee and it's not so feat starved as other gish as it's main trick is provided by the class)

If you want to compare two spontaneous caster I propose the battledancer (the only melee class that has a somewhat synergy with charisma) and the duskblade again , but it's more difficult probably to choose who is better

[RandomPeasant]

We have less daily staying power versus indescribably better minionmancy and utility.

Utility I'll give you. I think if you want to make the argument that the Bard-Wizard belongs in T3, that's what you need to focus on. But you haven't made that argument, you've just repeatedly compared high-OP Bard-Wizards to unoptimized T3s, which you seem to consider to be worse than what T4 classes can do. That's just not a persuasive argument.


If no, and it is actually a wizard just using the bard spells per day, then we functionally have all the broken spells on access when they are good, not when they arenÂ’t.

Only if you're Schrodinger's Bard-Wizard. It's true that a Wizard doesn't need to prepare spells that he thinks will be garbage that day, but that doesn't mean he'll always have the broken spells he needs. Sometimes you'll hear "there is a great beast terrorizing the village" and prepare ray of stupidity to cheese the animal, only for it to turn out to be a mid-INT Magical Beat, an Aberration, a Vermin, or even a lycanthrope. The Wizard certainly gets some value from hyper-specialized silver bullets, but it's a lot less than some people seem to think. The big advantage is in downtime utility spells, because it's really, really obvious when you'll want those rather than combat spells, and if you do prepare the wrong ones the time constraints are generally forgiving enough that you can swap things around and still get the job done. Silver bullets are better for spontaneous casters, because you're not out anything if they aren't useful. It's just that Sorcerers get so few spells known that they generally don't get through all the general-case utility they want.


Actually, the most effective cooperation would be a wand of fly I could use on them. Shame a Duskblade canÂ’t do that.

But you using a wand of fly on yourself doesn't solve the problem either. So should we be measuring the difference between a grounded Duskblade and a flying Duskblade as your contribution, or the difference between a flying you and a flying Duskblade as the Duskblade's contribution?


The opposite of low op thinking is “I’m going to read a guide and take a bunch of feats so in 5 levels I can do this one thing well.

You do know that if you restate your original argument, the response doesn't go away, right? "Ubercharger" is not some exotic application of the rules (unlike, it should be noted, the applications of polymorph that are actually abusively powerful). It's just taking a bunch of feats that make you better at Power Attack, then being better at Power Attack. Unlike polymorph, it doesn't even require you to go digging through monster books and thinking about how to maximize what polymorph does and doesn't replace.


I think Random Peasant with Bard -Wizard says a bard that can learn spells from the wizard spel llist , but is still limited in the amount of spell known he has and spell per day of a bard.

I was assuming, as OP described, someone with Bard spells per day who otherwise cast like a Wizard and has no class features. Gnaeus just seems to be unable to understand that "using the literal most powerful spell of a level in the most powerful way it can be used" is higher optimization than "making a skill bonus large". Frankly, between that and repeatedly pretending he doesn't understand sarcasm to avoid engaging with arguments, I probably won't respond to his next post unless he tightens things up.

[Lans]

I misunderstood, I thought it was bards spell per day with a cleric or wizard's casting mechanic.

[noob]

My question is: Is 6/9 casting of of one of the big three spell lists enough to make any chassis tier 3? Is bard progression good enough, or would it need to be expanded in such a way that it would gain 1st level spells at 1st and then a new level of spells every 3 levels there after?

The healer is tier 4 despite getting ninth level spells.
What matters is not just the level of the spells: it is also the specific spells you get.

[Gnaeus]

The healer is tier 4 despite getting ninth level spells.
What matters is not just the level of the spells: it is also the specific spells you get.



Tier 3
Wilder: Tier 3
Shugenja: Tier 3
Trickster Spellthief: Tier 3
Bard: Tier 3
Jester: Tier 3
Totemist: Tier 3
Swordsage: Tier 3
Warlock: Tier 3
Crusader: Tier 3
Binder: Tier 3
Psychic Warrior: Tier 3
Warmage: Tier 3
Warblade: Tier 3
Dragonfire Adept: Tier 3
Healer: Tier 3
Wild Shape Ranger: Tier 3
Duskblade: Tier 3
Factotum: Tier 3
Lurk: Tier 4
Psychic Rogue: Tier 3

Nope. Tier 3.

Utility I'll give you. I think if you want to make the argument that the Bard-Wizard belongs in T3, that's what you need to focus on. But you haven't made that argument, you've just repeatedly compared high-OP Bard-Wizards to unoptimized T3s, which you seem to consider to be worse than what T4 classes can do. That's just not a persuasive argument

It’s not utility or combat, it’s both. Yes, the bard-wizard could be weaker in combat than Duskblade and still be T3. But that isn’t really relevant. In fact, it at least has combat parity with the Duskblade. There are clearly situations in which it is better, including ones as easy as “here’s you, me, and my dozen giant skeletons” or “this happens to be a fight where this 150 GP scroll I made let’s me flat win.” There’s no way to argue comparative utility. Duskblade has virtually none. The entire argument is “bard-wizard” has all the wizard tricks available and you have none.



Only if you're Schrodinger's Bard-Wizard. It's true that a Wizard doesn't need to prepare spells that he thinks will be garbage that day, but that doesn't mean he'll always have the broken spells he needs. Sometimes you'll hear "there is a great beast terrorizing the village" and prepare ray of stupidity to cheese the animal, only for it to turn out to be a mid-INT Magical Beat, an Aberration, a Vermin, or even a lycanthrope. The Wizard certainly gets some value from hyper-specialized silver bullets, but it's a lot less than some people seem to think.

Scrolls and wands are still a thing, and if I can’t buy them, I can make them. You can call that a utility trait or a combat one but really it’s both.



You do know that if you restate your original argument, the response doesn't go away, right? "Ubercharger" is not some exotic application of the rules (unlike, it should be noted, the applications of polymorph that are actually abusively powerful). It's just taking a bunch of feats that make you better at Power Attack, then being better at Power Attack.

1. Back at you. With the difference that my argument was correct to begin with.

2. Polymorph is abusively powerful. That doesn’t correlate to any optimization point. Wizard is more powerful than fighter. That doesn’t mean wizard is high op. Optimization and power are not directly related. Optimization is applied game mastery. That’s all. Polymorph can be used in high optimization ways, or low optimization ones. If you have to plan for something for multiple levels, or read a guide to make it work, it’s high op. You could make a high op soulknife that sucks in play compared with a low op wizard using only core spells. Again, the only, only, only determination on how high op something is is how much work you have to go through to plausibly write it on your character sheet. If I make a baker with +60 cooking he is both high op and at the same time probably useless in any adventure. Alter self is low op. Being an outsider so you can alter self into a dwarf ancestor for +20 AC at level 3 is high op.



I was assuming, as OP described, someone with Bard spells per day who otherwise cast like a Wizard and has no class features. Gnaeus just seems to be unable to understand that "using the literal most powerful spell of a level in the most powerful way it can be used" is higher optimization than "making a skill bonus large". Frankly, between that and repeatedly pretending he doesn't understand sarcasm to avoid engaging with arguments, I probably won't respond to his next post unless he tightens things up.

Peasant doesn’t seem to understand that being powerful doesn’t correlate to being high op, beyond the absolute minimum level at which optimization is taking things that don’t obviously suck. Optimization refers to the difficulty in finding and getting your end result. If there were a core fighter feat that gave +1000 hp, +20 to all saves +20 to hit and were labeled “awesomest fighter feat ever”, taking it wouldn’t make a fighter high op. It would just mean he is taking obviously low hanging fruit that happens to be great. Now if “awesomest fighter feat ever” was instead titled “toilet cleaning 101”, was sitting at the bottom of “book of useless stuff not relevant to your campaign”, and it required the fighter to plan to get it 5 levels in advance because of prerequisites, including being a race in another obscure book, that would be high op. Taking Polymorph on a cleric is high op. It requires realizing not only that Polymorph is powerful but that it is worth jumping through hoops for, and then figuring out how to do that.

As to sarcasm, your basic understanding of tiers and optimization are so poor it just doesn’t work for you. When every argument you make is on that level you can’t blame people for not understanding when you are making bad arguments for exaggerated effect. They look just like your other arguments.

To simplify the earlier scale for you:
Low op: I picked this off the first list I saw because it sounded cool. Maybe I saw someone do it in a movie. I just like to roll dice/this is my first time/my friends made me come but I won’t suck on purpose.

Mid op: I read half a dozen books, narrowed my options to the 5 that worked with my character, and picked a good one. All my feats and spells are individually good picks.

High op: I planned options that were individually sub par because in combination several levels later they got me to a good place. I have a build that things work towards.

[noob]

Nope. Tier 3.


Tier 3 in the new tier ranking is due to abusing sanctified spells I believe.


Healer (MH, 8): While oft maligned for its spell list with very little besides inferior-to-cleric healing, along with a massive bump from gate at the top of the list, the healer actually has a surprising amount of useful stuff. The companion, especially in its higher level incarnations, offers a whole bunch of magical utility, and sanctified spells from the book of exalted deeds and champions of valor alike grant a pretty smooth casting progression across a variety of niches.

This is what eggyknack told while asking for a retiering

Heck in the discussions about retiering some people talked about using prcs


Healer is deeply gimped by the spell list. It's a chassis to add high level spells known via dipping domain granting prestige classes or sanctified spells. With that, probably Tier 3.5, noticeably worse than a Warmage.
and at least one person said that it should be tier 4 without sanctified spells and tier 3 with


Healer: Another vote here for the side-discussion of "there's nothing wrong with making healers spontaneous set-list casters". I'm more just somewhat weirded out by dealing with a full spellcasting class with such a limited list, that I tend to stay away from them - but they don't suck at what they do, so vanilla healer is T4. Sanctified spells offer enough versatility (and a bit of a power boost) to bump that up to T3. As that's not a separate class variant or ACF, I don't think they need to be judged separately, so I'll vote healers in T3, since that's a resource that's very easily available even with a "low" level of optimization.

old tier in jaronk tier list


Tier 5: Capable of doing only one thing, and not necessarily all that well, or so unfocused that they have trouble mastering anything, and in many types of encounters the character cannot contribute. In some cases, can do one thing very well, but that one thing is very often not needed. Has trouble shining in any encounter unless the rest of the party is weak in that situation and the encounter matches their strengths. DMs may have to work to avoid the player feeling that their character is worthless unless the entire party is Tier 4 and below. Characters in this tier will often feel like one trick ponies if they do well, or just feel like they have no tricks at all if they build the class poorly.

Examples: Fighter, Monk, CA Ninja, Healer, Swashbuckler, Rokugan Ninja, Soulknife, Expert, OA Samurai, Paladin, Knight
In Jaronk tier list healer was tier 5(I said 4 by error but I knew it was low tier back then)

Basically if you are using prcs and/or sanctified spells healer is tier 3 but it is when you are using it in a quite high op way relatively to the standard use of base classes which is just taking 20 levels in it and not reading other manuals.

So since you made a tirade about how high op efficiency was distinct from standard efficiency then you would probably understand that outside of that theoretical discussion about using sanctified spells and prcs and other spell list adders that the healer is not tier 3.

[RandomPeasant]

There are clearly situations in which it is better, including ones as easy as “here’s you, me, and my dozen giant skeletons” or “this happens to be a fight where this 150 GP scroll I made let’s me flat win.”

And there are scenarios where the Duskblade is better. In fact, by refusing to step away from "the Bard-Wizard prepares exactly polymorph and uses it optimally", you have implicitly conceded that every other Bard-Wizard is worse in combat than the Duskblade. So, sure, you win at the high end. But the high end isn't the only end. The whole point of the tiers is that you compare at all the points. And at the overwhelming majority of points, the Duskblade is not just better in combat, he's so far ahead it's not even close. Like, to get people to care about one spell per day you had to go all the way to shivering touch. What happens when someone prepares, I don't know, fireball?


Again, the only, only, only determination on how high op something is is how much work you have to go through to plausibly write it on your character sheet.

Hogwash. The rules of the abilities you are using also matters. It's true that Red Wizard isn't any higher optimization than Eye of Gruumsh, despite the former being dramatically better in practice. But that doesn't mean that all PrCs are the same level of optimization. The Rainbow Servant, for example, isn't something you just write on your character sheet. You have to resolve the text/table debate and the "does a Warmage get all Cleric spells" debate. That makes it higher optimization than Wild Soul or Purple Dragon Knight, regardless of the raw power level available to those options. Things that are more obnoxious to use are also higher optimization. Sacred Geometry is higher optimization than Divine Metamagic not because it's better, but because breaking out the dice and doing a bunch of math at the table takes a bunch of time and effort. Pretty much every tactic you've proposed the Bard-Wizard use falls under one of those umbrellas.


To simplify the earlier scale for you:

I understand the way you are wrong. You don't need to restate it in more words, you can just stop being wrong. There is an actual argument for your position. You could make that argument and maybe persuade people. But the internet tough-guy act where you pretend that arguments like "you can't just change the field of analysis to suit your preferred side" are incomprehensible to you just makes it look like you don't think your position is defensible and would rather just talk down to people and hope you intimidate them until they forget you're not actually right.

[Efrate]

6/9 wizard, assuming spells known and added like a wizard, is going to be t3 or t2. With limited slots or whatever some spells like the planar binding line, polymorph, most shadow spells are so good and versatile that it will outdo what anyone t4, maybe tier 3 or lower, possibly even some t2s, could do over the course of a campaign. Its bad in meat grinder 10 encounters a day or the like, but in a "normal" campaign it will offer so much more.

6/9 cleric, assuming full list access changeable by day, is t3. There is a ton of a good stuff on the list, and despite lack of domains and turning to fuel DMM it has the flexibility to be very good. You can still convert downtime to power, just slower. You have a tool for everything even if some come online later, you at least have it, or can get it tomorrow.

6/9 druid, assuming full list access chanegable by day, is t3, but lower than the cleric. Druid has the weakest list of the big three, but there are some gems in there even at slower progression. eggy would have a better understanding being the druid guru, but druid has enough tools to make things work, especially if you adventure mostly in the wilderness. A stone axe is not as good as a steel one but its good enough to chop wood especially if the other option is minecraft punching trees.

Spells are > all as far as problem solving goes, nothing else comes close. Any list gets you into the useful in all situations to some degree which is what I see as t3. You may not always have the best answer but you can at least pull your weight enough that no one feels bad bringing you along.

[Doctor Despair]

6/9 wizard, assuming spells known and added like a wizard, is going to be t3 or t2. With limited slots or whatever some spells like the planar binding line, polymorph, most shadow spells are so good and versatile that it will outdo what anyone t4, maybe tier 3 or lower, possibly even some t2s, could do over the course of a campaign. Its bad in meat grinder 10 encounters a day or the like, but in a "normal" campaign it will offer so much more.

6/9 cleric, assuming full list access changeable by day, is t3. There is a ton of a good stuff on the list, and despite lack of domains and turning to fuel DMM it has the flexibility to be very good. You can still convert downtime to power, just slower. You have a tool for everything even if some come online later, you at least have it, or can get it tomorrow.

6/9 druid, assuming full list access chanegable by day, is t3, but lower than the cleric. Druid has the weakest list of the big three, but there are some gems in there even at slower progression. eggy would have a better understanding being the druid guru, but druid has enough tools to make things work, especially if you adventure mostly in the wilderness. A stone axe is not as good as a steel one but its good enough to chop wood especially if the other option is minecraft punching trees.

Spells are > all as far as problem solving goes, nothing else comes close. Any list gets you into the useful in all situations to some degree which is what I see as t3. You may not always have the best answer but you can at least pull your weight enough that no one feels bad bringing you along.

You think the limited wizard list is arguably fringe T2, but limited druid with animal companion/wildshape or limited clerics with domains/DMM aren't?

[RandomPeasant]

6/9 wizard, assuming spells known and added like a wizard, is going to be t3 or t2. With limited slots or whatever some spells like the planar binding line, polymorph, most shadow spells are so good and versatile that it will outdo what anyone t4, maybe tier 3 or lower, possibly even some t2s, could do over the course of a campaign. Its bad in meat grinder 10 encounters a day or the like, but in a "normal" campaign it will offer so much more.

Okay, that's just ridiculous. What T2 is getting outdone by "I can cast polymorph once per day at 10th level"? It's already shaky when we're just talking about the Duskblade, there's absolutely no way that's better than the Sorcerer, or even a modestly optimized Warmage. Look at the Bard spell progression. Think about what that means for when you get spells. Take planar binding, for example. You don't get it at 11th level, where opening a random MM and pointing to a random 12 HD outsider gets you something that's plausibly better than a Fighter. You get it at 16th level. At that point, you have to either bind a bunch of creatures or dumpster-dive for something specific, either of which represents a big increase in the already high optimization level of the spell.


You think the limited wizard list is arguably fringe T2, but limited druid with animal companion/wildshape or limited clerics with domains/DMM aren't?

I believe as the problem is stated, you don't get Wild Shape or other class features. If you look at what Efrate is saying, that certainly seems to be their assumption.

[Hurnn]

So clearly I was possibly too vague in the outline of my initial question.

Lets assume Bard progression on spells per day, spell book style spells knows for wizard spells, full list availability for cleric/druid lists.

Commoner is out of the discussion for base chassis. How about 3 classes that don't cast currently: Aristocrat, Expert, and Fighter; and one class that does: Paladin replacing their current casting with 6/9 casting.

Casting stat: Intelligence for Expert, Intelligence or Wisdom for Fighter, Charisma or Wisdom for Paladin (though shifting it to charisma would make paladin far less MAD which would probably be a good thing), and any of the 3 for Aristocrat.

[RandomPeasant]

Like I said earlier, if you give it to any T4, it makes it to T3. A Fighter or Paladin can already do okay in encounters where they aren't roadblocked somehow, so the spellcasting needs to do a lot less to make the character work. Not only is the under-leveled spellcasting a lot less miserable when it only needs to cover for the situations where your swording falls short instead of every encounter, there are plenty of spells out there that make for effective force-multipliers on what a Fighter or Paladin wants to be doing. And with the reduction in difficulty needed to contribute in combat comes a corresponding increase in the relevance of the utility magic.

The Expert maybe makes it if you take exactly UMD + Diplomacy + Iajutsu Focus and use them to the maximum possible degree, but that's a bad argument for the same reason that "what about polymorph" is a bad argument. Generally speaking, the Expert gives you utility through skills, and that's just not the weak spot for the character.

The Aristocrat is like the Expert, except it gets an even narrower range of skills. Still T4.

[bekeleven]

So clearly I was possibly too vague in the outline of my initial question.

Lets assume Bard progression on spells per day, spell book style spells knows for wizard spells, full list availability for cleric/druid lists.

Commoner is out of the discussion for base chassis. How about 3 classes that don't cast currently: Aristocrat, Expert, and Fighter; and one class that does: Paladin replacing their current casting with 6/9 casting.

Casting stat: Intelligence for Expert, Intelligence or Wisdom for Fighter, Charisma or Wisdom for Paladin (though shifting it to charisma would make paladin far less MAD which would probably be a good thing), and any of the 3 for Aristocrat.

Stapling 6th level spells to any of those will make them tier 3 (NPC classes) to high tier 3 (Fighter). It's possible that a properly optimized Paladin would hit tier2 for weird reasons; it depends on how the spells interact with things like Battle Blessing.

[Lans]

A 6/9 wizard is going to have spells that just shut down certain encounters. A boss encounter of a half dragon giant in full plate is shut down by grease if the dm didn't bother moving skills around. Epic golemns are stopped by silent image as much as 1/2 cr skeletons are. Command undead can be used to control a Cr8 beat stick from core, or maybe more if you go outside.

[Lans]

I had the idea of collegiate wizard with uncanny forethought. With your delayed casting this gives you extreme flexibility with about a this of your slots

[Lans]

As far as optimization is concerned -Even understanding how polymorph and planar binding works and when to use them is at least mid op. Summon Monster and Alterself are low op.

Hitting benchmarks and just jacking up one trick is low op, whether it's UMD or truenaming or tripping.

If your class choices is limited to just skills or a narrow selection of feats then optimizing those choices is going to be lower op than a class that has those plus spells.

The whole point of the tiers is that you compare at all the points. And at the overwhelming majority of points, the Duskblade is not just better in combat, he's so far ahead it's not even close. Like, to get people to care about one spell per day you had to go all the way to shivering touch. What happens when someone prepares, I don't know, fireball?



Suppose, for a moment, our Bard-Wizard casts merely spells that are very good. Spells like sleep or stinking cloud or web. The sorts of spells that a moderately optimized Wizard or Sorcerer uses, and is comfortably T1 or T2 using. How does that compare to the Duskblade

By the time the bard wizard gets to 2nd level spells he would compare pretty well, the Duskblade would still have the advantage vs most single encounters, but stinking cloud, web and fireball can wreck some encounters. The wizard also has double the spells known before any other spells get added letting it take whatever the Duskblade takes and covering other areas.

The scenario that gave casting of 1st level spells at level 1 and the next level every 3 levels would compare a little better.


To add to the discussion what if a character could cast wiz orcleric or Druid etc on a Duskblade progression?