Community Tiering for all 3.5 Base Classes

[eggynack]

On the hot button topic in the meta thread contained in this thread, I voted this way on Beguiler: 3,X,4,5,6,2,1

One thing worth mentioning at the outset is that a lot of the weirdness I saw in your ranking came from the back end, where your notes below focus on the more important front end. 3,X,4 is, well, probably wrong, at least by my figuring (and I'll note why below), but it's in standard bounds. Following 4 up with 5 though, and then 6? Meaning you'd put beguiler in either of those tiers before even considering that they could be sorcerer level? That seems ridiculously far off.

They have a strong spell list, starting off incredible with Color Spray, Silent Image, and Sleep at first with Giltterdust and Mirror Image at second. But imo, it peters off as you level. You get good spells, like Freedom of Movement and Solid Fog as you go on, but in my opinion, your list isn't terribly synergistic: it's thematic.

I definitely don't think it peters out by that point, meaning 4th level spells. Let's do this directly. What 4th level spells are the sorcerer picking, and note that they only get one or two, that equal not only FoM and solid fog, but also greater invisibility, locate creature, greater mirror image, and, yes, charm monster? I really doubt polymorph manages on its own, and I similarly doubt there's a second spell that, along with polymorph, would beat all those spells. These aren't just good spells. They're diverse spells. They don't all get shut down by one defense. They don't even mostly get shut down by one defense. They offer a wide variety of possible problem solving tools, ones that seem more than equal to what the sorcerer is packing that level.

In a world that I believe to be internally consistent, Charm and Dominate aren't gamebreakers, though they can be good if the target isn't protected and you're very clever and can find ways to avoid backlash. This is also true of Image line and similar illusions. Requiring high player capability kind of keeps them out of a solid tier 2 where they can just press their Win button until their win button doesn't apply. Unlike a Sorcerer who requires thoughtful spell and feat selection and can build a very easy to employ win button, requiring minimal in-game skill.

Charm/dominate and image spells are indeed both great and high variance. However, if you read through my posts on the topic, I very rarely even directly discuss the charms, considering them instead a kind of amalgamated advantage over the sorcerer that lacks these options (at least in this sort of bulk sense), and only silent image of the image spells sees high billing, with the rest just being good but not amazing. Perhaps the beguiler needs these spells to be considered tier two, but I think that they can reach that tier while those spells are being pretty minimally considered. Charm/dominate only coming into play when you see a really good opening, images being used only when you come up with something, and even then usually with a rather straightforward application (like a wall, for example).

As a result, I don't think they fit what I think a T2 is, based alone off of the things the class has naturally. Though a skilled player, a lenient or poor DM, or a particular build could get them there, I don't think those things are aspects of the class itself. I think in the hands of a mediocre player, who takes a look at a handbook or two and then throws something together, it will play as a Tier 3.

So, with all the above in mind, I think you should consider the class as a really strong caster that happens to have some spells that can sometimes just not work, instead of as a class that has these few high variance options as their main output, and they happen to have a few side options if you come across undead. Read through the list in that context, and I think you'll find a class that, basically through list alone, outdoes the sorcerer for about the first half of the game, before petering out in the second half. Given that, consider that the beguiler averages out to roughly where the sorcerer is, if not exactly, and does so largely through spells that demand not of expert players or lenient DM's.

Consider then that this whole analysis, which already gets the two classes really close together, is ignoring all the ways a beguiler can gain in power out of league with the sorcerer. Not through rainbow servant, but through something as simple as arcane disciple, or one of those bloodline feats. In a world where the competition is starting their spells known list with only one spell, consider that some of these options can get you just the right spell at the level you need it, turning a critical level comparison around while giving big advantages at other levels. It's the kind of low cost maneuver that can turn a possibly sorcerer favorable overall class comparison into a definitely beguiler favorable comparison.

If anybody wants to disagree with my assessment that's your prerogative, but please don't be offended if I don't engage.

I'm not offended, but this kinda thing strikes me as possibly problematic for the overall thread. Like, here's this new big argument for beguiler supremacy, more or less personally directed, and if not even that has some potential to alter rankings, then a lot of this strikes me as a bit pointless, for the reasons I've noted.

My view is that the Beguiler is probably weaker by the strict "no feats, no prcs, class only, final destination" approach the Tier System proposes, but that those selfsame restrictions end up producing an overall unhelpful set of rankings. Once you account for the absurd value the Beguiler gets out of adding spells to their list, the gap between the Sorcerer closes almost entirely. Plus, once the lists are relatively close, the Beguiler's wider variety of spells ends up looking better than the small number of extra free picks the Sorcerer gets.

I do think the post-feats analysis favors the beguiler, but given my whole weighted balance argument above, I'm not wholly convinced the baseline comparison favors the sorcerer. At least it doesn't favor them much, or unequivocally. I mean, I've done all of this without even talking skills or class features or whatever.

planar binding is usable without magic circle or dimensional anchor.

Magic circle actually looks compulsory. "To create the trap, you must use a magic circle spell." So, actually casting planar binding seems tricky.

"Do it or I murder you" is a pretty effective negotiating tactic.

But I feel like a lot of responses to that are going to be leaving on the spot. Not the case for all of them, but it's a tool available to a lot of these creatures. And, of course, some are going to just fight you on principle. Again, assuming this is even a legal maneuver.

(which is easier to pick up, and comes free with the first level of Rainbow Servant), because it's only needed to stop things from escaping with planar travel which many monsters don't even have. You can also bootstrap it by grabbing something with Cleric casting.

Rainbow servant seems pretty far outside the bounds of discussion. And, of course, getting additional spells is a whole thread-issue unto itself. Not saying the dread necro shouldn't be considered in the context of spell addition, but the fact that this is out of the way seems relevant.

Anyways, again, I really don't think a couple of spells is sufficient. Even if planar binding is actually one of the dread necromancer's usable spells at the baseline (and I'm kinda doubtful, which is weird given that it's right there on the spell list, so I assume they thought you could cast it), we're still talking about an advantage that comes online rather far into the game, and one that isn't matched by other advantages later. It's not strictly a class that boils down to planar binding on a stick from that point forward, from an optimization perspective, but it's closer to that than I'm comfortable with on what we're considering for tier two.

I also don't think the Sorcerer is necessarily clearly better outside that, but that argument is pretty bad. If better classes push out worse ones, the Archivist would push the Wizard and Cleric out of Tier One because it can get all Wizard and all Cleric spells with appropriate shenanigans. The tiers are supposed to be absolute, not relative.

I agree that it's not a perfect metric, but it's one of the better metrics we have. It also seems relevant, meanwhile, that the apparently ranked tier three beguiler is probably better than the dread necromancer.

Edit:

Doesn't Shapechange alone push you into that Tier? And that's without DMM abuse.

No. Just to be clear on this one. Really high level options account for only a small percentage of the tier of a class. It's why healers aren't tier one or two, despite eventually getting gate. These classes are tier one or two within that very specific level range, but specific level tier is not class tier. Not saying your evaluation is wrong, cause I haven't really looked at this class, but this whole 9th-centric mode of analysis has always struck me as really problematic.

[stanprollyright]

Crusader: 4,3,5. Good at being invincible. Has to work really hard to be good at anything else. Even with Cha as a secondary stat you don't really have the skills to be a face. Least versatile of the ToB base classes.

Death Master: no experience with this class

Divine Mind: no experience with this class

Dragon Shaman: 4,5. Unfocused, has some decent abilities but no synergy. Like a Ranger: diffuse but doesn't shine anywhere. I rate it higher than 5 because it's way more versatile than a Fighter, a much bigger boon to a party than a Monk, and less MAD to boot. High 5, low 4.

Dragonfire Adept: no experience with this class. (Looks like a better version of Dragon Shaman; probably tier 3 or 4)

Dread Necromancer: 3,2,4. 9th level spells from a very limited list. Best at what it does, and what it does is powerful and useful in many ways.

[Cosi]

Charm/dominate and image spells are indeed both great and high variance.

Charm and dominate seem like poster children for "potential to break the campaign without DM intervention". If you pick up one minion every level, you're doubling your effective power, and getting only one minion assumes an incredibly unfavorable suite of encounters. Plus, the most common unfavorable encounters are mindless undead or constructs, which lose to silent image. Illusion and Enchantment can be shut down, but they cover each other's bases pretty well unless the DM is locking you down specifically, at which point the Beguiler is warping the game.

I do think the post-feats analysis favors the beguiler, but given my whole weighted balance argument above, I'm not wholly convinced the baseline comparison favors the sorcerer. At least it doesn't favor them much, or unequivocally. I mean, I've done all of this without even talking skills or class features or whatever.

Maybe. Looking pre-feats involves a much more complicated comparison when it comes to the cheese that people frequently use as a threshold for Tier Two.

Magic circle actually looks compulsory. "To create the trap, you must use a magic circle spell." So, actually casting planar binding seems tricky.

That's fair, though I would have sworn you could cast without the circle as a direct summon. That said, magic circle is kind of trivial to get (and can probably be reused).

Rainbow servant seems pretty far outside the bounds of discussion.

The capstone is debatable, but I'm talking about a one level dip to get the Good Domain. That seems much more reasonable.

And, of course, getting additional spells is a whole thread-issue unto itself. Not saying the dread necro shouldn't be considered in the context of spell addition, but the fact that this is out of the way seems relevant.

Getting extra spells is no different than getting Divine Metamagic or Natural Spell. It seems clear those are being considered, so at the very least we've got to be evaluating Arcane Disciple.

It's not strictly a class that boils down to planar binding on a stick from that point forward, from an optimization perspective, but it's closer to that than I'm comfortable with on what we're considering for tier two.

This is where I end up having problems with the Tiers. Yes, if you're just looking at the class you're kind of stuck on planar binding. But you're not just playing the class, you're playing a character who has Prestige Classes and feats that potentially give him extra spells. Evaluating the fixed list casters without list expansion is like evaluating the Wizard without allowing them to scribe spells into their spellbook from scrolls. Knowing all the spells on their list is one of their class features, and it should be evaluated even if it involves taking PrCs.

I agree that it's not a perfect metric, but it's one of the better metrics we have. It also seems relevant, meanwhile, that the apparently ranked tier three beguiler is probably better than the dread necromancer.

What should be done (and what Troacctid basically proposed) is to create a canonical minimum character for each Tier. So you figure out the worst Tier Two Sorcerer (or whatever other baseline you want), then when someone says that they think a class is Tier Two, they can put up a build to be compared to the minimum. Otherwise, you just get people talking past each other, like this thread.

[javcs]

The defining distinction, in my opinion, between the focused casters like Beguiler being T3 and Sorcerer/Favored Soul being T2 is this:
While the T2 caster won't be as good as the focused caster in that focused caster's area of focus, the T2 caster can choose anything to focus in, whereas the focused caster is always going to be focused on the same thing.
It's easy to build a Sorcerer to be an illusion/enchantment specialist. The Beguiler will be better at doing that, no question.
It's easy to build a Sorcerer to be a necromancy specialist. The Dread Necromancer will be better at being a necromancer, no question.
It's kind of hard to build a Beguiler to be a necromancer, or a Dread Necromancer to be an illusion/enchantment specialist. And the sorcerer doing either would be better.
By the point that a Beguiler can be built to be anywhere near as strong at any other focus as it is at its illusion/enchantment focus, you're not really a Beguiler anymore, and might as well be playing a different base class. And, of course, if you go Rainbow Servant, there's not really all that much difference anymore between a Rainbow Beguiler, Rainbow Necromancer(or should it be Dread Rainbow?) and a Rainbow Warsnake - they're all going to be looking at their spontaneous access to the entire cleric spell list a lot more than their original spell list.
Also, the T1/T2s generally have in-class access to near-universal "win buttons" like Wish or Miracle without requiring intermediaries.



This is, in part, a weakness of the Tier system. "Tier" has connotations that higher tiers (lower numbers) are automatically more powerful and "better" than lower ones, and while that is, in part true, power is not the only factor being taken into consideration. Equally important factors are "versatility once built" and "flexibility in determining build".
That's why Tiers 3 and 4 have multiple ways into them - power and proficiency at your schtick (whatever it is) and your level of versatility once built. T2 differentiates itself from T3-power largely due to T3-power being fixed on one thing based on class, while a T2 class has roughly similar power, but the focus of that power is not dependent on class choice.
Were we to start from scratch, I'd advise a different nomenclature be used for evaluating classes and grouping them based on those evaluations.




As for the current round's ratings:

Crusader - 3-4 - They're strong and reasonably versatile physical combatants, even though that's not a particularly strong niche, they also have a few other things they can manage. They, like the other ToB classes are very good at something that fades in value. Although, with access to White Raven, they can help a party break the action economy, even if they can't do it all by themselves.

Death Master - 3 - Limited list from the Core, and no list expansion/support elsewhere, but it's still a decent slice from Core options, even if there are some spells at weird levels. Plus the option to use Divine Metamagic. Big downside of automatically worshiping Orcus. Might be interesting to combine wholesale with the Dread Necromancer, especially the spell lists. You're better in a melee scrap than most arcane casters, with 3/4 BAB, d8 hit die, and light armor proficiency. The spell list might be worth a look for someone like the Artificer

Divine Mind - 5-4 - I'm not that familiar with this class, and it certainly looks like it started from a nice, or at least an interesting, concept, but that concept was poorly executed.

Dragon Shaman - 5-4 - If it's a 4, it's even lower than a T4 Adept. But if it's out of T5, it's because a free 1/week Commune doesn't belong in T5. Probably should have been rolled into Dragonfire Adept. Or maybe somebody should have reconsidered and come up with something else.

Dragonfire Adept - 4 - On the lower end of 4. Some of the Breath Effects are nice, as are some of the draconic invocations, but there aren't enough draconic invocations known. The breath weapon itself doesn't have a good progression. Should either have been rolled together with Dragon Shaman, or, and this is probably a better option, should have been a Warlock ACF package/Variant.

Dread Necromancer - 3 - They're T3, because as one of the focused casters, they are largely confined to their class's focus. Solid set of class abilities. Might be interesting to combine wholesale with the Death Master, especially the spell lists.

[Troacctid]

A fighter can choose anything to focus in. Are fighters better than beguilers too?

Having more build options isn't an advantage if none of them are better.

[eggynack]

Charm and dominate seem like poster children for "potential to break the campaign without DM intervention". If you pick up one minion every level, you're doubling your effective power, and getting only one minion assumes an incredibly unfavorable suite of encounters. Plus, the most common unfavorable encounters are mindless undead or constructs, which lose to silent image. Illusion and Enchantment can be shut down, but they cover each other's bases pretty well unless the DM is locking you down specifically, at which point the Beguiler is warping the game.

I think the argument against image spells was more about their intrinsic oddity and variance, assuming normal monsters, rather than particular unfavorable encounters. Either way, charm and dominate do seem, at least, like pretty effective minionmancy. Still, I kinda like doing the whole, "This argument maintains its truth value even in the face of your claimed unfavorable premises," thing. Working in unfavorable environments has its advantages.

Maybe. Looking pre-feats involves a much more complicated comparison when it comes to the cheese that people frequently use as a threshold for Tier Two.

Beguilers are decidedly somewhat practical in their nature. My thinking, though, is that if it's at all arguable, then all these other factors are a clear cut push over the top.

The capstone is debatable, but I'm talking about a one level dip to get the Good Domain. That seems much more reasonable.

It is a lot more reasonable, but it's still possibly outside the bounds of discussion. Obviously this isn't just a rainbow servant that happens to have levels in dread necromancer, which is always a concern, but considering classes that aren't the class being assessed when assessing the class in question seems plausibly classless.

Getting extra spells is no different than getting Divine Metamagic or Natural Spell. It seems clear those are being considered, so at the very least we've got to be evaluating Arcane Disciple.

It's accurate that those are probably going to see a lot of mention, and the classes will probably be considered in that context because it feels so much a part of them. It's a a problematic form of bias that more known classes are given more leeway by the fact that their trickery has descended from fantastic to mundane by dint of exposure. However, the fact remains that clerics and druids don't have to be considered in that environment.

This is where I end up having problems with the Tiers. Yes, if you're just looking at the class you're kind of stuck on planar binding. But you're not just playing the class, you're playing a character who has Prestige Classes and feats that potentially give him extra spells. Evaluating the fixed list casters without list expansion is like evaluating the Wizard without allowing them to scribe spells into their spellbook from scrolls. Knowing all the spells on their list is one of their class features, and it should be evaluated even if it involves taking PrCs.

It's certainly a problem. But, unless you want each class to have multiple separate tiers (which is entirely valid and has been done in various forms), you have to set some baseline standards. Sometimes that means a wide variety of books and all resources accounted for, sometimes it means the opposite, and sometimes you land somewhere in the middle. No matter which you choose, or even which several you choose, you're liable to lose a whole bunch of information somewhere.

What should be done (and what Troacctid basically proposed) is to create a canonical minimum character for each Tier. So you figure out the worst Tier Two Sorcerer (or whatever other baseline you want), then when someone says that they think a class is Tier Two, they can put up a build to be compared to the minimum. Otherwise, you just get people talking past each other, like this thread.

Yeah, that or something wholly average, I think.

The defining distinction, in my opinion, between the focused casters like Beguiler being T3 and Sorcerer/Favored Soul being T2 is this:
While the T2 caster won't be as good as the focused caster in that focused caster's area of focus, the T2 caster can choose anything to focus in, whereas the focused caster is always going to be focused on the same thing.
It's easy to build a Sorcerer to be an illusion/enchantment specialist. The Beguiler will be better at doing that, no question.
It's easy to build a Sorcerer to be a necromancy specialist. The Dread Necromancer will be better at being a necromancer, no question.
It's kind of hard to build a Beguiler to be a necromancer, or a Dread Necromancer to be an illusion/enchantment specialist. And the sorcerer doing either would be better.
By the point that a Beguiler can be built to be anywhere near as strong at any other focus as it is at its illusion/enchantment focus, you're not really a Beguiler anymore, and might as well be playing a different base class. And, of course, if you go Rainbow Servant, there's not really all that much difference anymore between a Rainbow Beguiler, Rainbow Necromancer(or should it be Dread Rainbow?) and a Rainbow Warsnake - they're all going to be looking at their spontaneous access to the entire cleric spell list a lot more than their original spell list.

I just don't see what difference this makes. Who cares if a sorcerer could theoretically do either illusion stuff or necromancy stuff? All that matters is the sheer weight of encounter solving capacity arbitrary instantiated sorcerers will have. Yes, beguilers have a predetermined set of abilities, but if that set of abilities is generally stronger than what you could get on any particular sorcerer, then the beguiler is the better class, whether the sorcerer is doing something the beguiler never could or not.

Also, the T1/T2s generally have in-class access to near-universal "win buttons" like Wish or Miracle without requiring intermediaries.

As I noted before, this is such a small slice of the tier pie. And beguilers can kinda access it, if that's what you want, without using anything outside of the class.

[Cosi]

I think the argument against image spells was more about their intrinsic oddity and variance, assuming normal monsters, rather than particular unfavorable encounters.

silent image's (potential) weakness is less about encounters, and more about how exactly the DM interprets the various rules regarding Illusions, particular disbelief. Favorable interpretations can turn it into AoE action denial, while unfavorable ones make it rather useless.

It's accurate that those are probably going to see a lot of mention, and the classes will probably be considered in that context because it feels so much a part of them. It's a a problematic form of bias that more known classes are given more leeway by the fact that their trickery has descended from fantastic to mundane by dint of exposure. However, the fact remains that clerics and druids don't have to be considered in that environment.

Realistically, there's no chance people aren't going to evaluate Divine Metamagic, so you should just lean into it.

It's certainly a problem. But, unless you want each class to have multiple separate tiers (which is entirely valid and has been done in various forms), you have to set some baseline standards. Sometimes that means a wide variety of books and all resources accounted for, sometimes it means the opposite, and sometimes you land somewhere in the middle. No matter which you choose, or even which several you choose, you're liable to lose a whole bunch of information somewhere.

This is true. I liked the suggestion of ranking build complexity instead of power. Pick some power target (I'm partial to the Same Game Test), the evaluate each class based on how hard it is to get to and play at that level. Then list the sources needed, and you have a ranking that seems a lot more useful.

Yeah, that or something wholly average, I think.

Realistically, whatever build you have as the standard is going to end up being a minimum, so it's better to just start there.

Who cares if a sorcerer could theoretically do either illusion stuff or necromancy stuff? All that matters is the sheer weight of encounter solving capacity arbitrary instantiated sorcerers will have.

Yes. Options you don't have are options you don't have. You don't get any concrete power from there being options you didn't take, so saying that Beguilers are worse than Sorcerers because there are more possible Beguilers is a bad argument. There's some value in being able to tailor options, but it's not like you can't do that with Arcane Disciple, and there's at least as much value in having a larger pile of base spells.

[eggynack]

silent image's (potential) weakness is less about encounters, and more about how exactly the DM interprets the various rules regarding Illusions, particular disbelief. Favorable interpretations can turn it into AoE action denial, while unfavorable ones make it rather useless.

Yeah, I think that's part of what Aegis was referring to, along with the role of player skill.

Realistically, there's no chance people aren't going to evaluate Divine Metamagic, so you should just lean into it.

I accidentally left off the end of that sentence. Was supposed to be, "Clerics and druids don't have to be considered in that environment to be tier one." To some extent, it's true that a system should at least conform to expectations, even if conforming strictly to reality is more or less impossible, and feats are probably an expected element of any system purporting to measure power level, but it seems somewhat important that this particular divergence from the apparent underlying rules of the tier system (or at least I think they're the rules at the moment, cause anything beyond ACF's has been weirdly unclear), doesn't actually change things overmuch.

Edit: Just reread the adding domains section of complete divine. Does domain adding actually work with beguilers and such? It looks like there's no use case for this particular method of casting, and the only section for spontaneous casters specifies a particular operation when you choose a known spell. Arcane disciple is formatted kinda weirdly, so it probably works, but the rainbow servant for domains thing might just not do anything.

[GrayDeath]

Crusader (ToB) T43 - The ToB Class I have the least experience with (none in playing it myself actually, and little in seeing it played). I`d go for a T4 in general (very hard to kill, excellent combattant) with T3 Potential especially with White Raven abuse. Overall though seems less flexible than the Rest of ToB.

Death Master (DrC) Too small list to go T1, but a strong T2.

Divine Mind (CPs) I have never ever seen this used. From a readover it looks like the Epitome of a bad T5.

Dragon Shaman (PH2) See above, a bit less useless, but even less focussed. T5

Dragonfire Adept (DrM) Like with the Warlock one can Argue T3 or 4 depending on the Focus and optimization. I`d have to go for T4 due to it having much less options/versatility (and everybody taking EB^^).

Dread Necromancer (HoH) I`d say T2. Due to Minionomancy being what it is.

[javcs]

A fighter can choose anything to focus in. Are fighters better than beguilers too?

Having more build options isn't an advantage if none of them are better.

Way to strawman. That is hardly what I was arguing. And Fighters can only choose combat stuff to focus in. A more appropriate analogy involving the Fighter would be to compare the Fighter with classes that only got a fixed and themed/style subset of Fighter bonus feats based on which class one selected. In that case, yes, the Fighter would rank higher than the classes that only got a fixed subset of Fighter bonus feats. IE, Fighter and Samurai.

I said that power, while not the only factor, was equally important a factor as versatility once built and flexibility in building. They are all important factors.



It's easy to make a Sorcerer a summoning/conjuration specialist. It's kind of hard to turn most of the fixed list casters into summoner/conjuration specialists.
The same goes for trying to be transmutation specialist.

And, I seem to recall stating that a Sorcerer (or other T2 caster) trying to focus on the same thing that one of the fixed list casters focus on as a class isn't going to be as good at that as the fixed list caster.



Any individual Sorcerer build may or may not be more powerful or better than a generic Beguiler build. That, however, is not the defining distinction between T2 and T3. At least, not the way I understand things.

T2 isn't automatically better than a T3 solely by virtue of being T2. "Better" is the wrong term to use, anyways.
A T2 can be built any way the player wants to build it, and can be used for a variety of caster concepts. A T3 fixed list caster's concept is forced by the class.

The T3 fixed list casters are T3-power, meaning T3 by virtue of their power.
The T2 and T3-power fixed list caster have fairly similar levels of power and versatility once built, when built for the same concept. However, the difference between a T2 and T3 is the T2 has flexibility in building, whereas the T3 does not. For that matter, there's not all that much difference in terms of power between a enchantment/illusion specialized Sorcerer(T2), a Beguiler(T3), and and enchantment/illusion specialized Wizard(T1).
T1 = high power, high versatility once built, high flexibility in building
T2 = high power, low-moderate versatility once built (can vary by build and spells known), high flexibility in building.
T3-power(=fixed list caster) = high power, low-moderate versatility once built (usually, depending on the class's spell list), low flexibility in building



As I have said, the Tier system is imperfect, and were we to start developing a new system to evaluate and group classes, I'd prefer a different nomenclature, with somewhat more granular grouping definitions.

[Jormengand]

Look, the beguiler didn't get into the tier you wanted it to. Therefore boo hoo the way this is set up is unfair, fine, whatever you say. The beguiler is no longer the point. Please follow thread procedure.

My votes for this round:

Crusader: 453 Here I see a class which is very good at combat, but not a great deal of anything that isn't combat. Sure, it can buff other people to hit more things, but it is essentially still equivalent to hitting things by proxy.

Death Master: 12 Undead companion? Check. Undead themed spells? Check. Turn into an undead? Check, if a bit too late. This is basically like the undead version of the druid. Good spells exist on the list too. My only reservation is the somewhat limited number of good spells, but you have enough to be getting on with.

Divine Mind: X45: Just reading through the auras, Corruption and Madness is an insanely powerful one with a decent wisdom score. At level 6, for example, you're likely to be forcing a DC 17 concentration check, which is something like 30% spell and power failure on your enemies, allowing you to steal an action per round from a group of casters just by existing. Other auras, however, are terrible, granting things such as bonuses to escape a grapple or good-aligned attacks, not to mention healing animals, plants and fey one hit point per hour (which I suppose is okay in a party of fey, if you really don't have any better ways to heal yourselves? It does get faster later on as well, but still).

Medium base attack and (admittedly horrendously limited) sixth-level manifesting has the potential for greatness, but really, how good this class is depends way too much on optimisation for me to be okay with it in one tier.

Dragon Shaman: 45: I feel that this class is a little undersold. It immediately-to-rapidly gains the ability to contribute in social situations (even if it's not the face - this is important, because it means that you can be useful in negotiations without spending a single skill point or trying to be the best in your party), the ability to heal people to half health without spending resources (and it later gets the ability to mimic neutralise poison and restoration, though that does cost resources). You can buff the party's damage, and that's after you've given them the initiative boost. It's also relatively trivial to apply abilities to your breath weapon which make it not just deal damage. In general, you are usually contibuting somehow, even if it's just by sitting there idly projecting an aura that makes other people more effective. It's not "Capable of doing one thing quite well, but often useless when encounters require other areas of expertise", but it is "capable of doing many things to a reasonable degree of competance without truly shining", and that gets it the T4 stamp from me.

Dragonfire Adept: 3: Honestly, it's a powerful invoker with other stuff added that makes it strong. Being able to tell the epic spell hellball to suck it at level 15 is also neat. It's about as good as it can be without me being able to see the kind of thing that makes it T2.

Dread Necromancer: 3: It's a fixed-list caster with spells that make it good at what it does and okay at some other things. Pretty much standard T3 material.

[Troacctid]

Look, the beguiler didn't get into the tier you wanted it to. Therefore boo hoo the way this is set up is unfair, fine, whatever you say. The beguiler is no longer the point. Please follow thread procedure.

It's still relevant to the Dread Necromancer. (And it will be relevant to the Sorcerer later too.)

[Jormengand]

It's still relevant to the Dread Necromancer. (And it will be relevant to the Sorcerer later too.)

Oh, sure, but most of the discussion here isn't about how we're going to tier the DN in terms of the beguiler, so much as wailing about the fact that the beguiler ended in a different tier from the one people thought it should be.

[Pleh]

I see some people saying crusader has little use beyond being another buff combat bruiser.

Actually, they have a set of party healing maneuvers that I did some math on and their healing power is on par with a cleric of the same level (at least, if the cleric isn't optimizing their healing, but then the full caster is focusing on one thing). But crusader's healing triggers off combat, so healing after combat may rely more on potions.

Main benefit is the crusader doesn't have to pick between healing his team or attacking the enemy. He more has to choose between healing or buffing his team while attacking the enemy.

[Jormengand]

I see some people saying crusader has little use beyond being another buff combat bruiser.

Actually, they have a set of party healing maneuvers that I did some math on and their healing power is on par with a cleric of the same level (at least, if the cleric isn't optimizing their healing, but then the full caster is focusing on one thing). But crusader's healing triggers off combat, so healing after combat may rely more on potions.

Main benefit is the crusader doesn't have to pick between healing his team or attacking the enemy. He more has to choose between healing or buffing his team while attacking the enemy.

Oh, sure, but that's still tantamount to "Make my numbers go up and other people's numbers go down in combat, therefore contributing to enemies dying and allies not dying", which is essentially only one thing.

[Pleh]

Oh, sure, but that's still tantamount to "Make my numbers go up and other people's numbers go down in combat, therefore contributing to enemies dying and allies not dying", which is essentially only one thing.

I agree. I was just concerned people were overlooking just how effective they can be at it, given that a lot of people seemed a little unsure about the class.

If I'm right, it probably shouldn't fall easily below T4. That would take a drastic misunderstanding of their abilities, imo.

[AvatarVecna]

Abstaining from "Crusader" and "Divine Mind" due to relative lack of familiarity with the ins and outs of the respective classes.

Spoiler: Death Master (2/1)

Show

On the one hand, a d8 HD, light armor proficiency, basically free Still Spell (and armor-casting), a built-in slow cohort progression, Rebuke Undead, and the lich template for free (eventually) does not make up for the versatility you give up for being a Death Master instead of a Wizard...but is that enough to deny this class T1? Ultimately, I think that between the casting mechanics and the actual spell list's power and versatility, this class is a super-solid T2, but at least IMO does not possess the versatility throughout its career to really be a T1 heavyweight. What really hurts the versatility here is the lack of summoning across the board: forget about Gate, this class doesn't have SM I or Mount, let alone Planar Binding (it also doesn't have Polymorph, which is generally a turning point for arcane casters). That means that it's only really breaking the game when it picks up Shapechange at 17th lvl, and a single 9th lvl spell does not a T1 make, even when that spell is shapechange. That said, necromancy based minionmancy isn't totally terrible, and the list is definitely really solid...it's just not full of enough game-breakers to get up to T1, at least not without some charop focused on getting them some top-tier spells throughout their career.

Spoiler: Dragon Shaman (5/4)

Show

An aura sub-system that lacks the power, versatility, and general usefulness of the Marshal's aura sub-system, a breath weapon that lacks the power, versatility, and frequency of a Dragonfire Adept's breath weapon (to an extreme degree), alignment restrictions, a fairly crappy skill list, minimum skill points per level, Immunity to a particular damage type instead of the ability to choose immunity to the type most appropriate to the adventure at hand, a 1/week Commune spell that comes online right before Mind Blank raises the bar for the information gathering game, and Ex slow flight 14 levels too late to be relevant. It's got a vaguely decent chassis for a warrior, but the combination of Medium BAB and no real offensive support for straightforward combat tells me they're supposed to be focused on something else...like the breath weapon that takes 1d4 rounds to recharge. needing high Con and Cha for save DCs isn't terrible, but it does mean there's MADness baked into the class. The closest comparison I can make is that it's like a Bard without the spellcasting, the pile of skill points, the tons of awesome skills to choose from, or the ability to buff their own to-hit, all in exchange for abilities that are easily reproduced with spells much earlier than this class gets them. I could maybe see somebody optimizing this enough to make it a competent enough combatant, but it's going in too many directions to be a T4 specialist, and I don't think it's good enough at the variety of things it tries to do to be a T4 generalist.

Spoiler: Dragonfire Adept (3/4)

Show

A T3 poster child, IMO. It's breath weapon is usable every round, is strong enough to be worth using against powerful solo bosses, is AoE enough to be useful against swarms of minions, and overall is versatile enough in both effect, damage type, and shape to allow the DFA to contribute whenever a fight is going down. But competent combat prowess and nothing else is why Barbarian is T4, so what makes the DFA better? Their invocations, which are numerous enough and varied enough to provide DFAs to optimize in a number of different directions, giving them options for contributing out of combat enough that they seem to be a solid T3.

Also, while I know it's been made apparent that feats should not be considered for the purposes of determining a classes tier, I can't help but mention the Metabreath feats from Draconomicon, not just because they grant the DFA even more flexibility and versatility in combat with their breath weapon, but because they give the DFA significant support outside of its book of origin, something few non-casters get to any significant degree. This can get down to a T4 if you focus them too much on boosting their breath weapon at the expense of any ability to contribute outside of combat, but I imagine most DFAs won't have that problem.

Spoiler: Dread Necromancer (3/2)

Show

The presence of actual class features and getting access to their entire list partially make up for their list being far less overall versatile than that of the Death Master (or the Beguiler, for that matter). The best argument for T2 is in abusing minionmancy enough that it can slow down the game, but even then, I don't think the class has enough versatility to deserve T2, even if they're technically breaking the game in a particular manner (for comparison: Pouncebarian, Hulking Hurler, and d2 Crusader break the damage game to various degrees, but I don't think anybody would say that this makes them T2).

[Grod_The_Giant]

For the Death Master to be tier 2, it needs to be capable of breaking the game/campaign in one way only. Death Masters are spellbook casters; if they have a varied list (which they do) but not enough power to destroy a campaign (which is the question) then they're T3.

[Jormengand]

For the Death Master to be tier 2, it needs to be capable of breaking the game/campaign in one way only. Death Masters are spellbook casters; if they have a varied list (which they do) but not enough power to destroy a campaign (which is the question) then they're T3.

It's entirely possible that the Death Master has so few good spells, but so very good spells, that they're T2 despite their casting method. A class that cast using a spellbook from the fourth-level spells Antiplant Shell, Blight, Cure Serious Wounds, Fire Trap, Inflict Critical Wounds, Poison, Repel Vermin and Shout, oh and by the way black tentacles, polymorph and summon monster V, then it could easily be Tier 2, for example.

[AnachroNinja]

Gotta say, the way people are ignoring arguments that would actually change the original tiers is pretty disheartening. A lot of people have actually somehow redefined tier 2 to somehow include versatility, seemingly specifically to exclude change. The way Beguiler panned out pretty much made me want to wash my hands of this process, especially since dread necromancer is going the same way. Points to eggynack and troacctid for trying though.

As for saying that argument needs to stop, as noted it has a huge effect on how later classes will be judged and honestly, you really should have just made a new thread for each round of classes so that debate could continue on past ones without interfering, maybe just had one central thread where you updated the rankings as you went. Just my thoughts anyway.

[Muggins]

It's entirely possible that the Death Master has so few good spells, but so very good spells, that they're T2 despite their casting method. A class that cast using a spellbook from the fourth-level spells Antiplant Shell, Blight, Cure Serious Wounds, Fire Trap, Inflict Critical Wounds, Poison, Repel Vermin and Shout, oh and by the way black tentacles, polymorph and summon monster V, then it could easily be Tier 2, for example.

While I disagree with the way that you've gone about arguing this - one can say much the same about the Beguiler and Dread Necromancer, and possibly the Warmage - but I agree with your conclusion. The Dread Master has so many good spells that I find the closest comparison to be a Wizard with 3/4 BAB and class features instead of bonus feats (they even get them at the same levels; 1, 5, 10, 15, and 20) and built-in DMM trickery. I definitely feel that they're Tier 2, if not Tier 1 itself.

Their spells include the following notables:

1. Grease, Obscuring Mist, Ray of Enfeeblement, Shield, Command, Identify.
2. Alter Self, Animate Dead, Fog Cloud, Ghoul Touch, Hold Person, Locate Object, Misdirection, Lesser Restoration, Shatter, Silence, Spectral Hand, Touch of Idiocy, Web.
3. Dispel Magic, Gaseous Form, Greater Magic Weapon, Greater Magic Fang, Protection from Energy, Slow, Stinking Cloud, Wind Wall.
4. Charm Monster, Arcane Eye, Death Ward, Detect Scrying, Dimension Door, Dimensional Anchor, Evard's Black Tentacles, Ice Storm, Phantasmal Killer, Scrying, Stoneskin, Solid Fog, Tongues, Wall of Ice.
5. Baleful Polymorph, Cloudkill, Greater Command, Create Undead, Dominate Person, Magic Jar, Slay Living, Unhallow, Wall of Stone.
6. Antilife Shell, Blade Barrier, Circle of Death, Greater Dispel Magic, Eyebite, Shadow Walk, Word of Recall.
7. Blasphemy, Destruction, Finger of Death, Mass Hold Person, Repulsion, Greater Scrying, True Seeing.
8. Antimagic Field, Clone, Create Greater Undead, Discern Location, Maze, Mind Blank, Trap the Soul.
9. Astral Projection, Dominate Monster, Etherealness, Foresight, Mass Hold Monster, Shapechange, Wail of the Banshee, Weird.

Minionmancy, Scry-and-Die, Battlefield Control, and Magic-Utility are all there, at practically every level. There are just too many spells here which are staples of high-level and high-OP play for me to consider this class anything less than Tier 2.

[Muggins]

Gotta say, the way people are ignoring arguments that would actually change the original tiers is pretty disheartening. A lot of people have actually somehow redefined tier 2 to somehow include versatility, seemingly specifically to exclude change. The way Beguiler panned out pretty much made me want to wash my hands of this process, especially since dread necromancer is going the same way. Points to eggynack and troacctid for trying though.

I'd just like to say that I'm in complete agreement here. Tier 2 is pretty much explicitly not about versatility, as that's the domain of Tier 1 classes like the Wizard and Cleric, because they get to choose day-by-day how they'd like to break the game. A Tier 2 class only ever gets to do that in one particular way, and I think both the Beguiler and Dread Necromancer fit into that category just as well as the sorcerer (Warmage I'm iffy on, but probably not).

The issue here, I think, is that people are being allowed to walk into the thread, dump their opinions, and then walk right out again without providing proper justification or engaging with others. Even the original Tier System, as flawed as some think it is, provided reasoning. We're trying to have a discussion here, and discussion is bred of criticism, feedback, and "argument;" there's absolutely nothing to be gained from trying to be "inclusive."

We should be trying to get well-reasoned arguments here, not subjective opinions.

As for saying that argument needs to stop, as noted it has a huge effect on how later classes will be judged and honestly, you really should have just made a new thread for each round of classes so that debate could continue on past ones without interfering, maybe just had one central thread where you updated the rankings as you went. Just my thoughts anyway.

I'd be up for keeping this thread around as a site for general, long-winded discussion about the methods we're using while setting up new threads for all future rounds (possibly including this one).

[BaronDoctor]

Gotta say, the way people are ignoring arguments that would actually change the original tiers is pretty disheartening. A lot of people have actually somehow redefined tier 2 to somehow include versatility, seemingly specifically to exclude change. The way Beguiler panned out pretty much made me want to wash my hands of this process, especially since dread necromancer is going the same way. Points to eggynack and troacctid for trying though.

As for saying that argument needs to stop, as noted it has a huge effect on how later classes will be judged and honestly, you really should have just made a new thread for each round of classes so that debate could continue on past ones without interfering, maybe just had one central thread where you updated the rankings as you went. Just my thoughts anyway.

You mean to tell me that the people who are so repelled by change that they're playing a game that's been getting no new content and more-or-less abandoned for ten years aren't likely to change their minds on what they believe to be the relative power of the classes? I'm shocked.

Of course the arguments are going to continue. A) because if the argument over which class has a certain degree of effectiveness can last for ten years, it can certainly last ten more days, and B) because precedent, as we have already seen, is a massively powerful bias to overcome.

Hasn't T2 always been "Carries Mjolnir, so it doesn't matter if this problem doesn't require a hammer, it can be solved by this hammer"? Isn't T3 "Carries a good size toolbox of hand tools and can handle fiddly work"? T1 "Has a golf bag filled with Mjolnir and Gungnir and Durandal and Forseti's axe, and a toolbox with a bunch of power tools for the fiddly work"?

[Muggins]

Hasn't T2 always been "Carries Mjolnir, so it doesn't matter if this problem doesn't require a hammer, it can be solved by this hammer"? Isn't T3 "Carries a good size toolbox of hand tools and can handle fiddly work"? T1 "Has a golf bag filled with Mjolnir and Gungnir and Durandal and Forseti's axe, and a toolbox with a bunch of power tools for the fiddly work"?

Nice metaphor. Almost wish it were shorter, so that I could sig it.

[eggynack]

I said that power, while not the only factor, was equally important a factor as versatility once built and flexibility in building. They are all important factors.

It's not, and they're not. Build versatility doesn't impact encounter solving capability much at all, and that's the primary measuring stick the tier system is working with. Yes, there's mention of, "No one build," in the tier system, but honestly, it's kinda meaningless except insofar as it acts as something of a descriptive, rather than prescriptive, element of the tier. Build versatility is the next best thing to meaningless. And, to be clear here, if this is indeed a thing we're supposed to seriously be measuring in this system, then the system is stupid and should be changed, at least in this particular arena. Because these elements have absolutely nothing to do with what the system is purporting to measure, and nothing to do with anything the system should be trying to measure. What do these facts actually mean to an actual game that you're actually playing?

The T2 and T3-power fixed list caster have fairly similar levels of power and versatility once built, when built for the same concept. However, the difference between a T2 and T3 is the T2 has flexibility in building, whereas the T3 does not.

So, if this is what you think about the class comparison, then it is my opinion that it is your opinion that they have the same tier.

Look, the beguiler didn't get into the tier you wanted it to. Therefore boo hoo the way this is set up is unfair, fine, whatever you say. The beguiler is no longer the point. Please follow thread procedure..

There's no need to be condescending. This thing I'm talking about is an actual issue, not just some pulled out of nowhere defense of the beguiler's position. And if someone, in this particular case javcs but also Aegis, is willing to lay more consideration to the issue than in the week gone by, then I'm going to participate in that. It's not like I was talking to these people before, and then I ran out of time because of a deadline. These conversations were simply not happening before, and they were conversations that really needed to happen.

[Grod_The_Giant]

T2 isn't automatically better than a T3 solely by virtue of being T2. "Better" is the wrong term to use, anyways.
A T2 can be built any way the player wants to build it, and can be used for a variety of caster concepts. A T3 fixed list caster's concept is forced by the class.
...However, the difference between a T2 and T3 is the T2 has flexibility in building, whereas the T3 does not.

This is incorrect, according to the standard definition of the tiers:

Tier 2: Has as much raw power as the Tier 1 classes, but can't pull off nearly as many tricks, and while the class itself is capable of anything, no one build can actually do nearly as much as the Tier 1 classes. Still potencially campaign smashers by using the right abilities, but at the same time are more predictable and can't always have the right tool for the job. If the Tier 1 classes are countries with 10,000 nuclear weapons in their arsenal, these guys are countries with 10 nukes. Still dangerous and world shattering, but not in quite so many ways. Note that the Tier 2 classes are often less flexible than Tier 3 classes... it's just that their incredible potential power overwhelms their lack in flexibility.

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. 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.

Emphasis mine. The difference has nothing to do with build flexibility, it has everything to do with power. Tier 1/2 and Tier 3/4 are very different beasts; the former are defined not just (perhaps not even) by versatility, but by power. The power to solve an encounter, an adventure, a campaign with a few basic spells. To take the game's basic assumptions and break them over their knee. They have spells that obviate entire classes, spells that render entire types of adventure null and void. From the humble Rope Trick to the god-powerful Shapechange, they warp the entire game around themselves. Tier 3/4 classes just... don't do that. The Bard or the Binder are fine, versatile characters, but they can't raise an army one day and divine the secrets of the multiverse the next.

[Lans]

Gotta say, the way people are ignoring arguments that would actually change the original tiers is pretty disheartening. A lot of people have actually somehow redefined tier 2 to somehow include versatility, seemingly specifically to exclude change. The way Beguiler panned out pretty much made me want to wash my hands of this process, especially since dread necromancer is going the same way. Points to eggynack and troacctid for trying though.

It might be better if the arguments for debatable classes got there own thread so the arguments can be focused on that with out people having to worry about 5 other classes at the same time.

T4 classes have to be good at something. They should be able to fill at least one role with competence (i.e. better in their specialty than what you would expect for a class that is not specialized in that role). T5 classes aren't good at anything—if they can fill a role, they cannot do it competently (i.e. not better in their specialty than what you would expect for a class that is not specialized in that role).

Divine Minds are T5 because they don't do anything with any reasonable amount of competence. They do actually do better with the Ectopic Ally ACF, which I think you could argue makes them good enough to hit T4, but it would be one of those ones with a split tier, T4 with it and T5 without it. (I believe that's how it's listed in the old thread.)

Meanwhile Divine Minds can't do anything.... or if you could have more than one of them, which you can't.

They can be pretty effective at beating face, comparable to a barbarian, as well as tanking for other classes. They can get pounce, metamorphisas, strength boosts and have the attack and justice auras which mitigate there mid-BAB. I don't think they are better than barbarians at most levels, but I think they close. Metamorphosis gives power and versatility by itself.

[Muggins]

They can be pretty effective at beating face, comparable to a barbarian, as well as tanking for other classes. They can get pounce, metamorphisas, strength boosts and have the attack and justice auras which mitigate there mid-BAB. I don't think they are better than barbarians at most levels, but I think they close. Metamorphosis gives power and versatility by itself.

Even if we consider that you seem to be comparing a high-level Divine Mind with a low-level Barbarian..

• You get "pounce" at level 8 via Hustle or Psionic Lion's Charge, which you can probably manifest about five times a day given your delayed power progression and low number of power points.
• Metamorphosis comes online at level 14, a whole three levels before full casters get their 9ths and utterly invalidate all other classes forever.
• The attack aura is a +1 bonus that increases by +1 every 5 levels, for a whopping total of +4 at level 15. Justice might not trigger, but let's assume it does and say that you're also getting it's +3 bonus to attacks. This puts your attack bonus at +18, which is just above a level 15 Barbarian who isn't raging.

It shouldn't take nearly a dozen levels for a class to begin to compare poorly to another. With the Astral Construct ACF, yes, I think Divine Minds can be Tier 4 - but without it, they're Tier 5 by a mile.

Edit: I think it's also important to mention that, like the Battle Dancer, doing damage isn't about being able to hit your target. You can't really justify taking power attack because of your 3/4ths BAB, you're MAD up the wazoo (strength for attacks, constitution for HP, wisdom for manifesting, charisma for divine grace), and you don't have any class features which add more than a fleeting +1 or +2 to your damage output. I'd wager that a fighter can do better damage and hit more reliably than the Divine Mind ever could.

Also, consider that your choice of mantle is restricted by deity. Going by Complete Psionic, there is one deity who offers the Freedom/Conflict, Natural World, and Justice mantles needed to produce the combination you've provided above, and that's Uthgar, who is restricted to the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting.

[Lans]

Even if we consider that you seem to be comparing a high-level Divine Mind with a low-level Barbarian..

.

I started my comparisons at level 1 where the barbarian gets rage only 1 a day, and the Divine Mind can use the Physical power mantle to get +2 strength for a round. Not as good as rage, but the barbarian can only rage 1 a day, and the Divine Mind can use this every encounter. With his aura he is behind a raging barbarian by +1 to hit and damage, but doesn't take -2 to AC. I figure a typical encounter lasts 3 rounds or less, and that there are about 4 encounters a day. The DM still gets a point of damage edge on the other rounds.

At 4th level the barbarian gets another rage and pulls a head pretty well.

At 5th the Divine Mind pulls a head with getting +1 damage from his aura, and access to adrenaline boost putting him ahead of the raging barbarian by 2 points of damage at the start of every encounter, behind by 1 to hit for 2 rounds per day, and by 2/2 for the remaining rage rounds. But the Divine mind is still ahead by 2 points of damage when the barbarian isn't raging.

6th-7th barbarian gets a second attack and is ahead.

[*]You get "pounce" at level 8 via Hustle or Psionic Lion's Charge, which you can probably manifest about five times a day given your delayed power progression and low number of power points.

Thats still 5 more times than the barbarian gets to pounce.

[*]Metamorphosis comes online at level 14, a whole three levels before full casters get their 9ths and utterly invalidate all other classes forever.

That's great, but it still puts him a head of a lot of noncasters like the barbarian.

[*]The attack aura is a +1 bonus that increases by +1 every 5 levels, for a whopping total of +4 at level 15. Justice might not trigger, but let's assume it does and say that you're also getting it's +3 bonus to attacks. This puts your attack bonus at +18, which is just above a level 15 Barbarian who isn't raging.[/list]

It puts his attack bonus at the level of a raging babarian, and the Divine mind still has adrenaline boost, his physical power mantle, weapon focus.

It shouldn't take nearly a dozen levels for a class to begin to compare poorly to another. With the Astral Construct ACF, yes, I think Divine Minds can be Tier 4 - but without it, they're Tier 5 by a mile

As I have shown, my comparisons started at level 1, with ACFs the Divine mind gets access to turning and adrenaline boost from level 1 instead of 5th. Which are significant boosts.

[Muggins]

I started my comparisons at level 1 where the barbarian gets rage only 1 a day, and the Divine Mind can use the Physical power mantle to get +2 strength for a round. Not as good as rage, but the barbarian can only rage 1 a day, and the Divine Mind can use this every encounter. With his aura he is behind a raging barbarian by +1 to hit and damage, but doesn't take -2 to AC. I figure a typical encounter lasts 3 rounds or less, and that there are about 4 encounters a day. The DM still gets a point of damage edge on the other rounds.

And the barbarian, who likely has a higher strength score (because he doesn't have to worry about wisdom and charisma) is more accurate and does better damage, especially since he can take power attack without worrying about missing.

At 4th level the barbarian gets another rage and pulls a head pretty well.

At 5th the Divine Mind pulls a head with getting +1 damage from his aura, and access to adrenaline boost putting him ahead of the raging barbarian by 2 points of damage at the start of every encounter, behind by 1 to hit for 2 rounds per day, and by 2/2 for the remaining rage rounds. But the Divine mind is still ahead by 2 points of damage when the barbarian isn't raging.

6th-7th barbarian gets a second attack and is ahead.

You seem to be ignoring Improved Uncanny Dodge, Trap Sense, Damage Reduction, and Rage progression (beyond uses/day) here. And, as noted above, the fact that he's probably got a Strength of 20 (with power attack) while you're balancing 16 Strength, 16 Wisdom, and 14 Charisma.

Thats still 5 more times than the barbarian gets to pounce..

Even if he's a Lion Totem barbarian, with pounce as a special ability? I know that we're being told not to consider ACFs and variants for the purposes of the Tier system, but 1) that's really dumb and not reflective of actual play, and 2) every mid- to high-op barbarian takes it.

That's great, but it still puts him a head of a lot of noncasters like the barbarian.

Sure.

It puts his attack bonus at the level of a raging babarian, and the Divine mind still has adrenaline boost, his physical power mantle, weapon focus.

And the barbarian still has Greater Rage, Power Attack, and a higher Strength score.

Further, what if you'd like to play a divine mind who isn't devoted to Uthgar or who can't worship him because they aren't playing a game set in the Forgotten Realms? He's the only deity who grants those four mantles, and you can't even get a fourth because Divine Minds cap out at 3.

As I have shown, my comparisons started at level 1, with ACFs the Divine mind gets access to turning and adrenaline boost from level 1 instead of 5th. Which are significant boosts.

If you want to bring Turning into this, sure; but what are you going to use them for? Most turning feats are pretty garbage and require a lot of daily uses, and you're going to need to pump up your charisma score even further to get the most out of it.

Further, I can't help but feel like you're underselling the barbarian in all this, especially considering the benefits he gets from ACFs.