Community Tiering for all 3.5 Base Classes

[Troacctid]

But people are still going to vote however they vote. What are you going to do, tell them, "No, you voted based on the wrong paradigms, your vote doesn't count"? At that point you might as well just make your own tier list.

[eggynack]

Jormengand, it has been years since anyone had any chance of convincing this forum against relative tiering. You can ask people to ignore the previous vote results, but they will continue to compare to those classes because they are reference points that people have in common.

You are right that it would be ideal if people voted as if each vote were the 1st vote, but that is not going to happen. This forum does not do such things well. However on the off chance I am wrong and it is merely improbable, I encourage you to continue pushing for every vote is the 1st vote mentality.

I'm still doing relative tiering. I'm just doing it against my own tiers. Beguiler is tier two, because sorcerer is tier two, so the favored soul, which seems reasonably close to the favored soul, is also tier two. Works pretty well, I think.

[Jormengand]

But people are still going to vote however they vote. What are you going to do, tell them, "No, you voted based on the wrong paradigms, your vote doesn't count"? At that point you might as well just make your own tier list.

I'm aware that I can't force you to vote based on your actual opinion of the classes. I can only provide a framework: you have to bring your own honesty.

[GilesTheCleric]

One thing that's worth note here is that the favored soul obviously isn't always going to have all these spells at a particular level. They're never as far off as a sorcerer is by percentage, but it's a meaningful difference. I'm not sure what your exact ordering is. It's an especially important thing cause my current mode of comparison is kinda on a spell level by spell level basis, evaluating by the region before you get a whole new level of spells on the assumption that the highest spell level is most important by a good margin. Anyways, this looks really useful as a thinkin' tool.

My brain is a bit fried right now (I'm almost done with Initiate spells! After that it's "locked" spells, and then I'm done with the whole section. Whew.) so I don't have the mindspace to figure out what order you should pick all of these up in. Y'all are smart and can figure out what order you would use.

Kinda confused by protection here, cause it's a first level spell. Not precisely sure how dark way does BFC. It's thin, so can't creatures usually go over or under it? Not sure what the rules for that are. I get it in a general sense, but it's a weird one in that role.

Oops, I must have c+p'd it into the wrong slot when I was doing the "swap these spells on levelup" editing. Go ahead and pick some other spell for that slot. Dark Way is a Wall of Force if you lay it on its side -- it "can be at any angle".

I don't like dominate vermin or control sand. The former is really short in duration for minionmancy, and the latter, as noted, is obviously sand specific for a spontaneous caster.

Dominate Vermin works exactly the same as any form of undead control -- locate and harvest a whole bunch on your prep day, stuff them into extradimensional storage (or in a demiplane/ behind a Ring Gate/ etc), and release when you need them. I understand if it's not your jam, but there's some pretty nifty vermin hiding amongst the books. I really like the Astral Kraken PlH 109 (SoD cocoon), Century Worm FF 31 (40HD+), Dire Maggot LM 95 (imp reach, paralysis poison), Leechwalker MM2 135 (con drain), and Megapede MM2 148 as good higher-level options. Of course, Clerics can make better use of them, but the FS can get nearly as much use.

Not sure where breath is, but I assume it's roughly similar to other spells of its form (particularly looking at Cosi's discussion of it)

SK. It's Stinking Cloud for a fixed 10 rounds, and in a cone shape.

though I'm not sure where elemental guardian is. Doesn't matter overmuch.

I'll just post the info for it since it doesn't seem to be available. It's basically a SM X.

Spoiler: Elemental Guardian Drag347 71

Show

Casting: 10 min
Duration: 1 day/ CL

Summon a lesser elemental weird.

Lesser Elemental Weird:
Med elemental (subtype)
AC 18
8 HD
Burrow 90', Fly 90' (perfect), or swim 90'
Slam dmg+elemental dmg
Grp +7
SA: Constrict, Elemental Blast, Elemental Command, Improved Grab, Suffocate
SQ: Elemental Glide, Elemental Invisibility, Elemental Immunities

pick one of water/ fire/ air/ earth; by GM permission, other types might exist (paraelementals, etc)

[eggynack]

My brain is a bit fried right now (I'm almost done with Initiate spells! After that it's "locked" spells, and then I'm done with the whole section. Whew.) so I don't have the mindspace to figure out what order you should pick all of these up in. Y'all are smart and can figure out what order you would use.

I think I had a sufficiently reasonable order working through these.

Dark Way is a Wall of Force if you lay it on its side -- it "can be at any angle".

Ah. Seems neat. Has a kinda web thing going on.

Dominate Vermin works exactly the same as any form of undead control -- locate and harvest a whole bunch on your prep day, stuff them into extradimensional storage (or in a demiplane/ behind a Ring Gate/ etc), and release when you need them. I understand if it's not your jam, but there's some pretty nifty vermin hiding amongst the books. I really like the Astral Kraken PlH 109 (SoD cocoon), Century Worm FF 31 (40HD+), Dire Maggot LM 95 (imp reach, paralysis poison), Leechwalker MM2 135 (con drain), and Megapede MM2 148 as good higher-level options. Of course, Clerics can make better use of them, but the FS can get nearly as much use.

Undead are a lot easier to make be there, and command undead has a really good duration even if control doesn't. Minutes/level strikes me as a problem, because you're keeping this creature around in a completely undominated state, even if you can dominate it after it leaves the bag. Also, I think every extradimensional space aside from a handy haversack kills the vermin pretty fast from suffocation, and haversacks are kinda small for this. I suppose the portable hole, and by extension the enveloping pit, have workarounds for that one. Anyway, I could plausibly be underestimating the plan, but there's a lot of weirdness to it.

SK. It's Stinking Cloud for a fixed 10 rounds, and in a cone shape.

Surprised I couldn't find that one. Seems good.

I'll just post the info for it since it doesn't seem to be available. It's basically a SM X.

Knew I should've checked my 1st-4th list in addition to the 5th-9th list, druid-wise. It's a pretty good spell either way.

[GilesTheCleric]

Undead are a lot easier to make be there, and command undead has a really good duration even if control doesn't. Minutes/level strikes me as a problem, because you're keeping this creature around in a completely undominated state, even if you can dominate it after it leaves the bag. Also, I think every extradimensional space aside from a handy haversack kills the vermin pretty fast from suffocation, and haversacks are kinda small for this. I suppose the portable hole, and by extension the enveloping pit, have workarounds for that one. Anyway, I could plausibly be underestimating the plan, but there's a lot of weirdness to it.

That's fair. Most vermin are pretty unintelligent (int -- in most cases), so I don't see much problem in sending them into a room and then just closing the door. A lot of Cleric spells are pretty reactionary, so I've had to lean on a more "horizontal solution"-type mindset where I look for combos and indirect means of solving challenges to get the most out of the spell list as I've gone through. Expending all that effort is easier for Clerics, of course, but an FS can make up for it in WBL -- I do apologise for bringing items into it, but I do think that extradimensional storage is pretty standard on most characters, so I don't see anything wrong with assuming it.

[Zanos]

Remember folks, when people don't agree with you, attack them relentlessly. When that doesn't work, attack the format relentlessly.

Druid: 12
I don't have much to say about the Druid that hasn't already been said. It's a viable melee combatant and full spellcaster with a pet that's also a viable melee combatant from first level. Completely replaces it's physical stats by sitting in wildshape all day. The only way to make a bad druid is to actively play it's class features against eachother, like making a scimitar throwing druid that never uses wildshape or spells. That was the playtest druid. Thanks WotC. Druid is totally balanced if you completely ignore it's class features.

Duskblade (PH2): 43
The duskblade tops out at 5th level spells. It's a melee combatant, so it can't afford to pump intelligence crazy high, and many of its ranks are going into tax skills like concentration. I don't think it hits tier 3 because it's spell list is weak and can't afford many of the skills on it's list that are already mediocre. There's a couple utility spells at low levels like swift invisiblity, but the list seems almost like it was specifically crafted to leave out any spells that would be useful if you didn't need something dead.

Expert: 56
Combat isn't the only thing, but it is a major part of the game, and the Expert struggles with it. You can do pretty much anything on the skill side, though, which does mean you can contribute meaningful to a variety of situations.

Expert (UA): 5
Bonus feats, even the unique replacements, are not enough to raise it's tier over the NPC expert.

Factotum (Dgs): 3
Factotums are kind of hard to build correctly because there's so many things they could do that it's pretty easy to end up with one that can't do anything well. Certainly not a class for a beginner, but a properly built when can contribute pretty solidly to pretty much any scenario.

Favoured Soul (CDv): 2
Limited spells freely picked off a tier 1 spell list makes a tier 2.

[eggynack]

Remember folks, when people don't agree with you, attack them relentless. When that doesn't work, attack the format relentlessly.

I didn't attack people that disagreed with me about the beguiler's tier. I patiently discussed the topic with anyone that was open to it over what must be weeks at this point. The only person who's been attacking, it seems, has been Jormengand, who acted in a very condescending way towards the entire discussion. And, at this point, the people do agree with me. Whether you'd call it attacking or not, it worked just fine. If I take issue with the format, it's because it utterly fails to represent anything meaningful by apparently not even allow those that voted within the time limit to change their minds. The majority of people in both truly relevant groups, those who voted then and those who are voting now, seem to agree that tier two is wrong.

And, if I'm relentless, it is in large part because I thought that we were trying to apply the truest possible tiers to classes, and I think that is a worthwhile pursuit. A well built tier list, even one that operates along only one axis, could be a valuable thing, and correcting the errors of the old tier list has some value of its own. Is that not what we're doing? Is this just a silly voting game, on par with voting on who the coolest superhero is? If it is that, I'd like to know. Though there is another reason I am relentless, and it's because I think I have a damn good case, and leading people to what I believe to be truth is a damn good cause. Even if this tier system is rendered meaningless by pointless adherence to procedure, I will therefore continue to have these discussions, because they are a valuable thing all their own.

[Jormengand]

The only person who's been attacking, it seems, has been Jormengand, who acted in a very condescending way towards the entire discussion.

In fairness, it's very hard not to be condescending towards a group of people who were essentially attacking me, questioning my motives, and then asking me to give them special privileges. But I guess none of that is aggressive.

If you want to continue these discussions, this is not the thread. The procedure is not changing. Get that idea in your head, because I'm sick of all the flak I'm getting for trying to run what is ultimately a fair vote.

To be clear: the thread procedure is not changing and attempting to wear me down until I agree with you will not work.

[Gnaeus]

To be clear: the thread procedure is not changing and attempting to wear me down until I agree with you will not work.

Then to be clear. You can run your thread however you like. But your end result will be so warped by this stance as to be meaningless, it will prove nothing, not even what the forum concensus is, and I for one will laugh if you try to use it as evidence in any other thread.

So go ahead for another thousand posts. I hope you derive significant enjoyment from it because that is all you will be getting. I'll leave Cosi and Eggynack to it because they are saying everything I would have said if I were to continue following.

[Aimeryan]

As I said before, because of the closed round voting and the accepting of non-discussion votes the whole list is pointless. You might as well just redirect to JaronK's list. Especially now that Jormendgand has said the tiering is final - and no well-reasoned position is going to move him.

I'm only here, now, because the discussion on the classes is informative and interesting. I wouldn't be surprised if that dries up though as people become despondent as to the whole point of this thread.

[Zanos]

You're free to change your votes before the round ends, as I understand.

[eggynack]

In fairness, it's very hard not to be condescending towards a group of people who were essentially attacking me, questioning my motives, and then asking me to give them special privileges. But I guess none of that is aggressive.

No one had done anything even remotely close to attacking you when you said, "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." I don't even think people have been significantly attacking you since. I did note later that you never really justified your beguiler tier, making you a part of the problem you were (and are) ignoring, but I don't think that's really attacking you or questioning your motives. It's just true. Unless, that is, you think that a single sentence which I refuted over the course of four paragraphs, which was followed by absolutely no discussion on your part of any kind, doesn't fall into the issue I was discussing immediately of people giving rather unsupported votes.

I don't even really know what all this aggression you keep pointing to is. If you actually look, the vast majority of beguiler discussion has been just that. Long form tier arguments that take place entirely within the bounds of the game system. And I am not seeking special privileges. I think that if any class' original pool of voters winds up, through any means, at a tier besides the one listed, that tier should be changed.

If you want to continue these discussions, this is not the thread. The procedure is not changing. Get that idea in your head, because I'm sick of all the flak I'm getting for trying to run what is ultimately a fair vote.

This is the thread for community provided tiering of base classes. That, no more and no less, is what I've been discussing. And, while the vote is indeed technically fair, fair doesn't mean good. Fair doesn't mean that you're arriving at the most accurate possible answer. I'd much rather a tier system be good than "fair", because the latter is fundamentally meaningless to the actual day to day value of such a system.

To be clear: the thread procedure is not changing and attempting to wear me down until I agree with you will not work.

Well, then your tier list will just keep getting more and more clearly inaccurate as I convince more and more people. You will wind up with a first post claiming that the community thinks that beguilers are tier three, followed by the community as a whole, including a majority of people that voted, decrying that very notion. Up to you, I suppose.

Also, I gotta say, the part of our discussion that doesn't involve you has mostly been about favored souls and experts. You could always get involved in that instead of talking about thread procedure, and thus support the thread procedure by act instead of claim. And, hell, you could also actually talk to me about beguilers (and dread necromancers, but beguilers are probably better). It'd be infinitely more productive than what you're doing now, and it'd support the notion that the tier you personally selected, rather than the tier that was ultimately assigned to the class, was the correct one. Right now, all you have is the position that makes sense in your head. Do you not wish to test that position in the cleansing truth-flames of passionate discourse?

Edit:

You're free to change your votes before the round ends, as I understand.

Sure, but there's not much reason to deny vote changing after the round ends. This isn't a real world vote, where the end result means some sort of enactment of something. The tiers here could theoretically keep changing forever if we wanted them to, constantly becoming more accurate through reasoned debate, and there would be no bridge not getting built because of said debate. Only reason we wouldn't do that is because Jormengand, and probably just about anyone else, wouldn't want to have to update this forever. But, as long as we're keeping some variety of tiering open, vote changing should be allowed. The re-vote on controversial classes at the end makes sense too, though it's slightly less trivially true that that mechanism should be added.

[Zanos]

What did you actually expect when you read the original post? That votes by Playgrounders not apart of some pre-approved brain trust would be thrown out? Nobody complained until the system produces a result they didn't agree with, and at this point it just seems disingenuous.

A popular vote also actually is marginally useful, since it tells you what tier a class is most likely to considered by a dm or group "in the wild."

Edit:
Sure, but there's not much reason to deny vote changing after the round ends. This isn't a real world vote, where the end result means some sort of enactment of something. The tiers here could theoretically keep changing forever if we wanted them to, constantly becoming more accurate through reasoned debate, and there would be no bridge not getting built because of said debate. Only reason we wouldn't do that is because Jormengand, and probably just about anyone else, wouldn't want to have to update this forever. But, as long as we're keeping some variety of tiering open, vote changing should be allowed. The re-vote on controversial classes at the end makes sense too, though it's slightly less trivially true that that mechanism should be added.

It would necessitate that Jormengand re announce the current count everytime someone changes their mind, recount the vote, and, if by PM, would be hidden from scrutiny.

[eggynack]

What did you actually expect when you read the original post? That votes by Playgrounders not apart of some pre-approved brain trust would be thrown out? Nobody complained until the system produces a result they didn't agree with, and at this point it just seems disingenuous.

I expected that the tier system would strive towards accuracy as much as possible. That doesn't mean denying votes to people who lack cache. It could theoretically mean denying votes who never engage at all with the tier discussion, but that's likely too subjective to implement, and some sort of objective class-post-count would discount votes for classes not really being discussed. It definitely means allowing people to change their vote. As for not complaining, the lack of discussion of the beguiler was something bothering me before the results came in. In fact, as I noted in my first post about this, it started bothering me after the adept results came in, despite the fact that I was on the side of the result that came in. I started talking about it at that point because it was so egregious. Practically no one discussing the class thought it was tier three. As for it seeming disingenuous at this point, how is that possible? My point is far better supported now than it was initially, given how many people have changed their minds. Before that, it was really just theoretical that some discussion on this would be all that's necessary to alter a tier opinion. I was frustrated, but retiering at that moment wouldn't necessarily be correct.

Edit:

It would necessitate that Jormengand re announce the current count everytime someone changes their mind, recount the vote, and, if by PM, would be hidden from scrutiny.

Not really. People don't change their minds all that often. This could be trivially done if Jormengand were to list the vote totals, because then we could alert them if the results have been altered by way of mind changing, and we could even directly cite the votes in question if searching through the thread to verify is too problematic. Even under the current system, we can determine the old vote totals ourselves, and do the above on that basis. Could be a bit error prone if there are indeed a bunch of PM votes, but Jormengand could just tell us how much those votes swing the result. If that's going on, we're obviously putting our trust in them on this matter anyway.

[Aimeryan]

What did you actually expect when you read the original post? That votes by Playgrounders not apart of some pre-approved brain trust would be thrown out? Nobody complained until the system produces a result they didn't agree with, and at this point it just seems disingenuous.

Why would people discuss and ask for a change before the issue became noticeable? Sure, someone might have been able to see it coming, but lack of doing so does not (and did not) mean the issue does not exist.

It seems disingenuous to me that when it becomes obvious that opinions have changed, because the original voters have since notified the thread that they have changed their vote, to then say "tough luck". Why is it tough luck? Lazy? Don't want to accept a change? We aren't using some paper-based system where recounting the votes would be particularly difficult and/or costly - in fact, the votes have already been recounted by people.

Keeping to a rigid structure, when that structure is not tried and tested, is not a good idea. Be flexible, and make a good tier list.

EDIT: If Jormendgand does not want to be in a position of recounting it is entirely feasible to pass that responsibility to someone else who is willing to do so. He need not feel that he has to manage everything by himself - it is Community Tiering, afterall.

[GilesTheCleric]

I guess I had better vote before things change over.

Favored Soul: 2, X I think I've discussed plenty on the last two pages and here why FS is solidly T2, before even thinking about feats or items.

However, I accept that the Cleric list contains a whole lot of mostly-useless tat, such that a player selecting spells randomly would likely end up with a terrible character (my estimates put "niche" spells at about 60% of the entire cleric list, and another ~20% being best on scrolls, which is not compatible with the FS). The FS, like most reduced-list spontaneous casters, can suffer pretty heavily from poor build choices and low player skill -- with only a pittance of in-class spell swaps, the FS depends primarily on a GM allowing for retraining rules in order to fix a bad build.

[Zanos]

As for it seeming disingenuous at this point, how is that possible?

I admit I haven't scrutinized all the early posts in this thread to see when who disputed what, but in general attacking a system as being flawed only after it hasn't given you, specifically, what you want doesn't exactly reek of something done in good faith. It says to me that the person attacking the system is doing it not because they believe the system itself is actually poorly constructed, but rather because they would prefer to replace it with a system that agreed with them.

Majority rules with closed polling after X time is a pretty "tried and tested" system, and was stated as what was going to be used in the OP. If you honestly expected impassioned civil debate where people overwhelming change their minds to agree with you, democratic vote is not the greatest process. But what it does say is whether or not I'm likely to be able to play a Beguiler if I show up to a group that bans tier 2s.

[Aimeryan]

From what I have been reading, those that have been discussing Favoured Soul think it is in the same tier as Beguiler. That doesn't mean they don't think it is Tier 2, just that the Tier list says Beguiler is Tier 3...

I admit I haven't scrutinized all the early posts in this thread to see when who disputed what, but in general attacking a system as being flawed only after it hasn't given you, specifically, what you want doesn't exactly reek of something done in good faith. It says to me that the person attacking the system is doing it not because they believe the system itself is actually poorly constructed, but rather because they would prefer to replace it with a system that agreed with them.

It says to me that people were not all-knowing and didn't see the problem until it cropped up. I see no malice, no undesirable motive behind this. Simply it comes down to this; if something changes do we put our fingers in our ears and chant "la la la la" or do we listen up and take action?

Majority rules with closed polling after X time is a pretty "tried and tested" system, and was stated as what was going to be used in the OP. If you honestly expected impassioned civil debate where people overwhelming change their minds to agree with you, democratic vote is not the greatest process.

It is not a tried and tested system in a community tiering thread; it is a system that matches practicality to the reality that it was designed in - that of pen and paper voting systems. That reality is not this reality. This reality is one where people can discuss matters with each other and can show support for a change of opinion, and the accounting of that is practical and non-costly.

[GilesTheCleric]

But what it does say is whether or not I'm likely to be able to play a Beguiler if I show up to a group that bans tier 2s.

I think this is exactly the problem with allowing this assessment to not be as precise as it could be. Those of us "in the know" can game the system if we know where it's innaccurate. Why don't we just make it accurate so that there's no surprises for people who expected an honest, best effort from this work?

[Zanos]

I think this is exactly the problem with allowing this assessment to not be as precise as it could be. Those of us "in the know" can game the system if we know where it's innaccurate. Why don't we just make it accurate so that there's no surprises for people who expected an honest, best effort from this work?

I wasn't suggesting an attempt to game people, as I actually do think that Beguiler is tier 3 and I'd rather not reopen that debate.

Only that a census of how likely class A is to be considered tier X by a random group is useful in it's own right.

Even with that said, existing tier lists aren't really all that inaccurate. People have been yelling at eachother about them for years, and most people aren't going to change their minds at this point. Internet debates are typically about as productive as people slinging mud at eachother until somebody gets tired, which is likely why this topic was structured as a poll to begin with.

[Aimeryan]

I wasn't suggesting an attempt to game people, as I actually do think that Beguiler is tier 3 and I'd rather not reopen that debate.

Only that a census of how likely class A is to be considered tier X by a random group is useful in it's own right.

Even with that said, existing tier lists aren't really all that inaccurate. People have been yelling at eachother about them for years, and most people aren't going to change their minds at this point. Internet debates are typically about as productive as people slinging mud at eachother until somebody gets tired, which is likely why this topic was structured as a poll to begin with.

They why have this thread in the first place? The whole point of this thread is reopen opinions on existing thoughts. Why are you here?

If you do actually support the debating of the tiers, why limit it to a specific timeframe? I like the whole "this week lets talk about XYZ" structure; it gives a starting point and a focus. However, when XYZ involves ABC, and when ABC is still being discussed in a useful fashion, why limit discussion and accounting for of ABC?

Sure, closed voting makes things easier, but the work need not all fall on Jormendgand.

[Zanos]

I don't want to reopen it because it was already discussed in this thread. If the discussion hasn't resolved itself within a week, I think it's fair to say it's devolved to the point where neither party is making any headway.

[Aimeryan]

I don't want to reopen it because it was already discussed in this thread. If the discussion hasn't resolved itself within a week, I think it's fair to say it's devolved to the point where neither party is making any headway.

And you would be wrong in that by the opinion of the many participants of this here thread - discussion not only did not devolve, it flourished.

[Zanos]

And you would be wrong in that by the opinion of the many participants of this here thread - discussion not only did not devolve, it flourished.

I'd certainly say it devolved, considering we're now having a meta conversation about that conversation while the participants bicker with the organizer.

[GilesTheCleric]

I wasn't suggesting an attempt to game people, as I actually do think that Beguiler is tier 3 and I'd rather not reopen that debate.

I can respect that. I guess I was just confused at what you meant by your original statement. My apologies.

[Aimeryan]

I'd certainly say it devolved, considering we're now having a meta conversation about that conversation while the participants bicker with the organizer.

Are we discussing different discussions? The discussion on the Beguiler and how it compares and rates in the tiering system flourished after that one week cutoff. The discussion about accounting for the change of votes devolved, if you count not being open to discussion at all - and would have done so in any time frame you specify.

[eggynack]

I admit I haven't scrutinized all the early posts in this thread to see when who disputed what, but in general attacking a system as being flawed only after it hasn't given you, specifically, what you want doesn't exactly reek of something done in good faith. It says to me that the person attacking the system is doing it not because they believe the system itself is actually poorly constructed, but rather because they would prefer to replace it with a system that agreed with them.

Why would it be clear cut, in a way I can meaningfully point to, if what I'd consider a wrong result doesn't occur. If nothing but good results came from this system, then it's probably doing something right. And, maybe even more important, people aren't going to take too much issue with a class whose original tiering was mostly uncontroversial. No one will get up in arms after druids land in tier one after people mostly don't talk about it at all. Also, and here's a really important one, the beguiler tiering happened really early. We didn't have that many opportunities to have things to complain about. I guess we could've started this up after the adept got tier five? It was just such a murky debate, mired in the comparison of incomparables and the subjective value of cool abilities when compared to the frequency of their use. Beguilers were the first true lightning rod. Why wouldn't that be where complaint started?

But, you aren't entirely wrong. Not all of my position on this is based on a problem with the system. But that's not me being disingenuous. Aside from when Jormengand calls my discussion pointless and restates that they're following this arbitrary procedure, I don't talk about the system overmuch. The vast majority of the time, my argument that beguilers should be tier two is based on the simple fact that I think they're tier two. I have a case, and I defend as best I can against anyone who wants to challenge it. It's only all the way out here, nearer to the end of the thread than most of the discussion, that the silliest process oriented problem took center stage at all. That problem being that I could apparently convince everyone in the playground that the beguiler is tier two, and it wouldn't mean anything to Jormengand or their list. Which I find frustrating, of course, but I also find it wrong in a more general sense. I wouldn't want such a thing to happen to an arguing opponent. If someone's able to convert my position's supporters from all around me, then they deserve that win.

Majority rules with closed polling after X time is a pretty "tried and tested" system, and was stated as what was going to be used in the OP. If you honestly expected impassioned civil debate where people overwhelming change their minds to agree with you, democratic vote is not the greatest process. But what it does say is whether or not I'm likely to be able to play a Beguiler if I show up to a group that bans tier 2s.

I don't think the problem was entirely the process, actually. As I noted in my post way back when, I think a bunch of people have their opinion on what tier a thing should be determined in large part by what tier the thing already was. I've gotta think it's true of others, because it's true of myself. Unless I've had a specific argument on the topic, maybe even a few of them, I'm more or less going to default to what the tier system says.

I wasn't suggesting an attempt to game people, as I actually do think that Beguiler is tier 3 and I'd rather not reopen that debate.

Maybe you should. If you think you're right, then why not, as I said before, test your claim in the flames of argument? It has, oddly, been awhile since we've had the actual beguiler argument, rather than one of these offshoots of it. You need someone there who's willing to discuss it, after all.

Even with that said, existing tier lists aren't really all that inaccurate. People have been yelling at eachother about them for years, and most people aren't going to change their minds at this point. Internet debates are typically about as productive as people slinging mud at eachother until somebody gets tired, which is likely why this topic was structured as a poll to begin with.

But we did it though. Tiers are more or less cemented in everyone's minds, and inarguably rational debate convinced people that their initial thoughts on the topic weren't accurate. We had an internet debate, and it was somehow productive. Weird, but true. That a community tier system wouldn't register that insane fact is almost as bad as the fact that it's not registering the increase in accuracy.

I don't want to reopen it because it was already discussed in this thread. If the discussion hasn't resolved itself within a week, I think it's fair to say it's devolved to the point where neither party is making any headway.

That's not really what happened here though. The beguiler discussion didn't devolve within a week, because it wasn't that much of a presence within that week. After the week ended, far from devolving, the argument started to evolve, growing in complexity, detail, and convincingness as time passed. My best arguments in favor of the position happened after that deadline, and significant interest and engagement only happened beyond that point too. If you don't want to reopen it because it was already discussed, then I think you should want to reopen it, because it wasn't discussed all that long, all that well, or with all that much participation/engagement.

And, again, I must point out that it's objectively evident that it hadn't devolved to the point where neither party was making headway. Because I obviously was making headway. Any argument that relies on the notion that no one could plausibly be convinced in this arena, or past the deadline, seems patently and provably false on that basis.

I'd certainly say it devolved, considering we're now having a meta conversation about that conversation while the participants bicker with the organizer.

That's partially happening because Jormengand keeps reasserting this process oriented argument, and also partially because you claimed they were being attacked for some reason. Before that, we were having a super detailed and interesting discussion of the tiering of favored souls. Spent frigging hours analyzing that massive spell list. It's all been super on topic and junk.

[Jormengand]

What did you actually expect when you read the original post? That votes by Playgrounders not apart of some pre-approved brain trust would be thrown out? Nobody complained until the system produces a result they didn't agree with, and at this point it just seems disingenuous.

All of my this.

Also, everyone referring to me as "He" can take a walk.

To be absolutely, positively, 100% clear: This is a thread for voting on which class is in which tier, in accordance with the rules given in the opening post. If someone had requested that the system be altered before it had given them a result which they, personally, didn't like, then I might have had more truck with it; that opportunity is and remains closed to you. This thread is not about discussing its own procedure. If you wish to create a separate thread in which you whine about my efforts to keep this thread consistent, then - mods willing - you can go and do that. This thread is not a thread to discuss discussions about how the discussions about the procedure of the dicussions about the voting of the thread are progressing - at this rate, we won't actually get any votes in at all because you'll have scared off anyone who could possibly have been willing to contribute.

In other words, please discontinue this line of discussion. Thank you.

Zanos, though I agree with your points, I'd ask you and others in support of me to disengage from the argument in the hopes that those who are basically destroying the thread with self-abnegating discussion realise that they're basically just screaming at the wind.

[Cosi]

FWIW, I didn't post in this thread until the Beguiler discussion, so it seems kind of stupid to say that I was passively accepting the rules until they went a direction I didn't like. I think that allowing people to vote without argument is bad for discussion, particularly when those votes happen before the discussion. Personally, I would have each week's votes be on the classes discussed in the previous week (so right now voting would be on Crusader - Dread Necromancer). As is, any persuasion that does occur is likely to happen after voting closes (as it did with the Beguiler). I'd also require you to have a sentence worth of description for your votes, which is basically trivial if you've been paying any attention at all because you can just copy the first sentence of any post that agrees with you. If you can't do that, I am totally comfortable not counting your vote.

Of course, I wouldn't use JaronK's tiers because they rank things people don't care about, and I'd rank in order of Core -> Completes -> Other Sources rather than just alphabetically.

I think you've accidentally looked at the wrong version of the spell. SC updates it to be +4 on your next init check, and it's 10min/CL duration, so easily castable before combat.

Okay. That version seems reasonable. That said, what kind of idiot designer writes a spell with the exact same name with a similar effect? You couldn't call it omen or portent or something that wasn't already a Cleric spell that buffed initiative? At least general of undeath just changed the numbers around.

No, it's not much better than just Diplomacy. I value it highly because it's a first level SoD, and as soon as you have 2nd level spells, you can instantly use it in conjunction with Guidance of the Avatar or Divine Insight, which you were going to learn anyway.

The thing is, I don't think that anyone is going to let you cast a spell on them that they don't know the identity of in a world with dominate person, slay living, and polymorph any object unless they are already on your side to the point that killing them is a bad plan.

Imagine that in the actual world someone sprinkled an unknown powder into something you were going to drink. How much would you have to trust that person to still drink it? That's even an imperfect analogy, because the real world has stuff like the rule of law that makes murdering or drugging random people less likely than it is in D&Dland.

Exactly, which is why I'm trying to enforce a single standard: for the purposes of this thread, each vote should be independent of the votes which came before it and each class should be voted into what the voters think is the correct absolute tier, not the correct relative tier.

How can you tell what the correct tier - absolute or relative - is without comparison to other classes? JaronK's tiers don't have any empirical standards for placement, so either you compare to other stuff or you rely on a priori arguments, which don't have a great track record as far as "producing truth" goes.

Blasphemy is really good, and the beguiler spells really mostly aren't, so FS has a clear advantage.

blasphemy specifically is kind of a turd because it hits people who are good (your friends) and not people who are evil (your enemies). holy word is better but incompatible with undead creation (IIRC, Favored Souls might not have the alignment restrictions). You're kind of stuck between a rock and a hard place.

It's true that the Beguiler list is kind of weak at this point, but you get Advanced Learning which you probably spend on either simulacrum or greater shadow conjuration, either of which is kind of nuts.

In fairness, it's very hard not to be condescending towards a group of people who were essentially attacking me, questioning my motives, and then asking me to give them special privileges. But I guess none of that is aggressive.

No one is asking for special privileges. I don't think anyone who wants a Beguiler re-vote would be opposed to a re-vote for any other class. You think people got the Ardent wrong? Go ahead and re-vote the Ardent. Or the Commoner. Or the Druid. Or whatever.