Community Tiering for all 3.5 Base Classes

[Lans]

I would just call it summon monster [x] where caster level = binder class level. Seems fair.

Thats still pretty good.

[Hurnn]

Bard: 3,4
Insanely versatile but slow starters.

Battle Dancer: 6/5
Super MAD, I am honestly not sure they are better than warriors, or experts.

Beguiler: 2,3
Changed my mind spell list is super solid even with out the mind effecting stuff.

Binder: 3,2,1
Very versatile and with planing can usually have the right tools for the job. Only 1 vestige gets them close to game breaking though and I don't think it does enough for tier 2.

Cleric: 1
CoDzilla. I don't think there is discussion needed here.

Commoner: 6
I don't think there is discussion needed here either.


I know I'm late on theses but here goes.

Adept: 4,5

Archivist: 1

Ardent: cant vote never used 3.x psionics

Aristocrat: 6,5
Better than warrior or commoner but not as good as fighter. I think its a bubble class, almost makes 5 but falls short.

Artificer: 1

Barbarian: 4
They do their thing and do it really well.

[noce]

The alternative vote system is resolved by the following method:

• Look at the first tier in each person's list. For each tier which got the fewest first-place votes, discount that tier.
• Look at the first tier in each person's list again, removing all the tiers which you discounted in the first round.
• Keep discounting tiers and looking at lists until only one tier is left.
• If at any point you try to discount tiers, but then there would be none left, instead check which one got the most first-place votes. If each one got the most, check which one got the most second-place votes, and so on.
• If there's still a tie, choose randomly.

I would like to point out that this voting system is not fair, and I will give examples to show this.

Spoiler: Example 1

Show

Suppose Alice and Bob are voting for choosing Cleric tier.
A thinks Cleric is low T1, while B thinks it's high T2.
Thus, A votes 123 and B votes 213.
As a consequence, the first preference is a tie between 1 and 2, and so is the second preference.
This voting system assigns Cleric to T3, while neither A nor B really wanted this outcome.

Spoiler: Example 2

Show

Suppose Alice, Bob, Carl and Daisy are voting for choosing Cleric tier.
A and B now both agree Cleric being in T1, while C and D think Cleric is T2.
If A and B both vote 123, and C and D vote 213, Cleric is again assigned to T3.

Now suppose D is clever, and tries to exploit the voting system, so she instead votes 231.
She thinks 213 is the right choice, but votes 231 in order to win.
Votes are: (123) (123) (213) (231).
As a result, the first preference results in a tie between T1 and T2, while the second preference is not a tie anymore and T2 wins, although unfairly.

However, as for Arrow's impossibility theorem, a fair rank-based voting system does not exist.

[Jormengand]

Well, by 'here' I meant 'in the world' not 'on GiantitP'.

I imagine that most people even in the developing world still have too many skills to be an int 10 commoner. Spot, listen, knowledge local, survival, boom, too many to be a human commoner (given that they're almost certainly maxed out to have a decent chance of making the checks they rely on to survive). Add in profession and craft, one of which most people will have at least, plus a few other skills that people have because they're humans and they go and learn things just naturally in life...

I would like to point out that this voting system is not fair, and I will give examples to show this.

Spoiler: Example 1

Show

Suppose Alice and Bob are voting for choosing Cleric tier.
A thinks Cleric is low T1, while B thinks it's high T2.
Thus, A votes 123 and B votes 213.
As a consequence, the first preference is a tie between 1 and 2, and so is the second preference.
This voting system assigns Cleric to T3, while neither A nor B really wanted this outcome.

Spoiler: Example 2

Show

Suppose Alice, Bob, Carl and Daisy are voting for choosing Cleric tier.
A and B now both agree Cleric being in T1, while C and D think Cleric is T2.
If A and B both vote 123, and C and D vote 213, Cleric is again assigned to T3.

Now suppose D is clever, and tries to exploit the voting system, so she instead votes 231.
She thinks 213 is the right choice, but votes 231 in order to win.
Votes are: (123) (123) (213) (231).
As a result, the first preference results in a tie between T1 and T2, while the second preference is not a tie anymore and T2 wins, although unfairly.

However, as for Arrow's impossibility theorem, a fair rank-based voting system does not exist.

In example 1, Tier 3 has already been eliminated. The cleric cannot be tier 3 if no-one voted for it in the first round. Nominations would be re-opened for a tie.

In the second case, if you don't want 1 to win, don't vote 1. You can just vote 2 and nothing else. I'm also banking on some combination of good will and sheer numbers making that kind of chicanery impossible anyway.

[Tiri]

I imagine that most people even in the developing world still have too many skills to be an int 10 commoner. Spot, listen, knowledge local, survival, boom, too many to be a human commoner (given that they're almost certainly maxed out to have a decent chance of making the checks they rely on to survive). Add in profession and craft, one of which most people will have at least, plus a few other skills that people have because they're humans and they go and learn things just naturally in life...

Well, I'm not saying that people only have commoner levels, but it's likely that that's how they start out. Even a baby has to have a level of something, and it's probably not Expert or Warrior.

[TheTeaMustFlow]

Bard : 3,4,2

Battle Dancer: 6,5,4

Beguiler: 3,2,4

Binder: 3,4,2

Cleric: 1

Commoner: 6

[Cosi]

It seems kinda hypocritical to be fully opposed to things that can loop infinitely but then be fine with exploding WBL to such an extent that can rather trivially get to any quantity of money you could plausibly desire. The parallel between wizard wish loops as compared to commoner wish loops, and wizard WBL breaking as opposed to commoner WBL breaking, seems like a clear one to me.

Uh, that's kind of my point? If you allow the game to break one way, why not allow an exactly equivalent way?

I'm not really talking about loops though. I'm talking about just, y'know, casting ice assassin. For value. You get what's still a sort of caster singularity, just because you can approximate any other spell effect, just as they can approximate any spell effect of yours.

And so can a dude using wish or planar binding abuse.

Feats and items (wbl) are part of a base class, in my mind. You haven't built a complete character without those things.

Multiclassing is where I draw the line. Dips and prcs are ways to optimize your build, not your class. Feats and items can easily optimize your class without just taking some other class.

Acfs are the fuzzy line.

Prestige classes aren't a helpful metric when determining class tier, because almost any class can go into Ur Priest. You need to stand on your own feet, not the shoulders of prestige classes.

Yeah, but people don't play a class. They play a build. So if you rank classes without considering PrCs, you get rankings that don't correspond to the playspace. How many 20th level Wizards (or Fighters, or pretty much any class other than Druid) do you think there are?

Well, I'm not saying that people only have commoner levels, but it's likely that that's how they start out. Even a baby has to have a level of something, and it's probably not Expert or Warrior.

Babies start out with humanoid HD, which is replaced with whatever class they end up, which is probably Expert given the improved education system in the post-industrial-revolution world.

[eggynack]

Uh, that's kind of my point? If you allow the game to break one way, why not allow an exactly equivalent way?

But I don't think we are allowing the game to break one way, is my problem with that. Ice assassin is obviously amazing, but the intent here is to use it in a relatively "normal" manner.

And so can a dude using wish or planar binding abuse.

Planar binding only really does so if you use it for wishes and such, and I was assuming we were specifically discounting that use. Wish more obviously does.

[Pleh]

Yeah, but people don't play a class. They play a build. So if you rank classes without considering PrCs, you get rankings that don't correspond to the playspace. How many 20th level Wizards (or Fighters, or pretty much any class other than Druid) do you think there are?

Yeah, but we're ranking classes, not Builds. There's really no good way to rank the classes based on their related Builds since any one class could have several Builds that are too different to compare to each other.

The information could be more accurate, but less useful due to being overly technical. Class ranking is, by its nature, a generalization and people referencing the list should be aware of its limitations.

What class rankings measures is the theoretical power of a class so as to inform the player/dm as to how to expect a class to perform on its own so they can plan and prepare whatever extra assistance it needs to succeed (or have a fair chance at succeeding).

It's not meant to say, "class x is y tier no matter how you use it in your build." It says, "a build with strong dependency on class x will typically reach tier y."

[LordOfCain]

Bard : 3
Battle Dancer: 5
Beguiler: 2
Binder: 3
Cleric: 1
Commoner: 6,1

[Tiri]

Babies start out with humanoid HD, which is replaced with whatever class they end up, which is probably Expert given the improved education system in the post-industrial-revolution world.

Not human babies. Humans are a creature with only 1 HD, which means that they will never actually have a type-based HD. At any point in a human's life, including the baby stage, they will possess at least one class level in either a PC or NPC class.

[Karl Aegis]

Not human babies. Humans are a creature with only 1 HD, which means that they will never actually have a type-based HD. At any point in a human's life, including the baby stage, they will possess at least one class level in either a PC or NPC class.

I feel like if Baby were a printed class it would be made by Paizo, which isn't allowed in this discussion.

[Troacctid]

Baby humans do not actually have any listed stats at all, so we don't know how they work.

[Pleh]

It wouldn't be hard to homebrew some reasonable stats.

Infant humans are by nature helpless, so they rely on their parents to protect them. They have a tiny size category and all the associated modifiers.

Their attributes likely start around 1 or 2 and grow rapidly towards 10 as they mature. They shouldn't have 0 in any stat unless they've been attacked by something. They are just so weak and confused as to be continuously helpless.

They have a special ability to scream when disturbed. It's actually real science that infants are natural diaphragmatic breathers, which allows them to scream all day without developing laryngitis (children learn to breathe with their chest around the age of 4 when their sense of fear begins to develop).

This scream ability is sonic, does not deal damage (not even nonlethal), but can disrupt concentration and make creatures with sensitive ears uncomfortable. Humans gain a massive racial bonus to listen checks to hear a baby crying and the infant's parent has the EX ability to sense the baby's distress even when they fail their listen check to hear the cry. The parent must still pass a wisdom check to sense the baby's cry without hearing it.

[AvatarVecna]

Nice try guys, but some dude already made the only baby stats you'll ever need!

[Pleh]

Nice try guys, but some dude already made the only baby stats you'll ever need!

To be fair, that's about the same as I said.

Except I added, "EX ability: Summon Angry Parent."

[VisitingDaGulag]

Bard : 3 poster child
Battle Dancer: 5 think monk
Beguiler: 3 no 3000 spells to chose from but still good.
Binder: 3 excluding that infinite summon monster ACF
Cleric: 1 duh
Commoner: 6 duh

[Lans]

Bard : 3
Battle Dancer: 5 I really wanted to put this at 6, but getting pounce, flight and water walking put it over the edge to me making it a low 5. A warrior is probably going to be better for half the levels, but the dancer has maneuverability going for it.
Beguiler: 3
Binder: 4 While the binder appears to be very versatile, his versatility very limited based on stats, equipment and the general weakness of Pacts outside of a few select choices. With Pact magic being so weak that a feat that lets him bind a higher level vestige at many levels not being mentioned as OP or broken.

Edit- The Binder might be an example of a class that changes tier as it levels up, because I do think when it gets the summoning vestige it jumps to tier 2. It may even jump to tier 3 when it gets the second vestige. I think Shadow casters, and Incarnates are in a similar boat.

Cleric: 1
Commoner: 6

Divine Mind Tier 4/5 compare it to the barbarian and he doesn't get overshadowed. Lets compare damage. At first level he is ahead of the barbarian by 1 point of damage except for when the barbarian is in rage, then he is behind 1 to hit and 2 on damage. Except if he takes the physical power mantle, then he can get +2 to strength for 1 round each combat, meaning he's behind by 1 point of damage. At 5th he can take adrenaline boost and get another +2 to strength meaning he is now 2 pts ahead on damage for the first round of combat against the barbarians rage, and is up on damage out side of rage by 2 points, and is only behind 1 point on the to hit vs the raging barbarian.

A few levels later the Divine Mind can get psionic lion's charge for multiple attacks on a charge making him a better charger than the barbarian. Now you might want to say what about lion's spirit ACF? Well, We agreed to not use ACFs in the tier discussions, and that the barbarian as stated in the players handbook is what we have to compare it to.

[Jormengand]

Okay, round's over folks. Let's hear it for the:

Crusader (ToB)
Death Master (DrC)
Divine Mind (CPs)
Dragon Shaman (PH2)
Dragonfire Adept (DrM)
Dread Necromancer (HoH)

Results of the previous round: Bard 3 Battle Dancer 5 Beguiler 3 Binder 3 Cleric 1 Commoner 6

[Doctor Despair]

I have little experience with these classes, but I look forward to seeing some debate over the first ToB class to come up :) Though Dragon Shaman will probly end up predictably low if I'm remembering the right class

[AvatarVecna]

Why is it Low? I thought dragons are powerful?

Dragons are powerful, yeah. Dragon Shaman is a class that's fairly...terrible. It's not the worst, it can be fairly solid, but it's not very good.

[Novolin]

But then why

[eggynack]

But then why

Because the abilities are mostly bad? The power of the class has almost nothing to do with the power of dragons.

[Inevitability]

But then why

Dragon shamans just aren't very versatile or powerful. They lack the BAB or weapons to be good melee characters, their breath weapon is very limited and honestly not that powerful, and the bonuses they give are somewhat useful at low levels, then get less and less interesting as other classes begin getting powers that far exceed it all.

[Novolin]

Because the abilities are mostly bad? The power of the class has almost nothing to do with the power of dragons.

What about wings and fire breath

[AvatarVecna]

What about wings and fire breath

The wings can be restricted, and come online 4 14 levels later than magic flight. The fire breath has decent damage, but fire is commonly resisted, you don't get the breath weapon often enough for it to be super-useful, and it can't really be changed after lvl 4. Compare it to Dragonfire Adept, which focuses on the breath weapon, and lets you choose between different breath weapon shapes, different damage types, lets you choose non-damaging effects, and gets other class features besides. Dragon Shaman moves in a bunch of different directions and ends up being mediocre at a bunch of things, rather than good or even decent at anything.

EDIT: Misread the class.

[Pleh]

Wings and fire breath are awesome.

But when you get these powers is important. Dragon Shaman gets access okay, but there's a number of other ways to get breath weapon. Some are definitively better ways to get that feature (or are just as good and get better stuff along with).

Getting the ability to fly at level 17 is kinda laughable.

[Pleh]

The wings can be restricted, and come online 14 levels later than magic flight.

Novolin, because a human wizard is flying without wings by level 6

[AvatarVecna]

really, why?

Dragon Shaman gets all-day, Ex) flight 60ft at lvl 19. Wizards could cast fly for the same fly speed 14 levels ago. Heck, if you're really optimizing, Artificers can be crafting magic items of Continuous Swift Flight from lvl 3 onward. Meanwhile, the kind of mobility boosts people are getting at lvl 19 are things like the "wish to be wherever you want" use of the Wish spell, or travelling between planes using the Gate spell, or using Shapechange to turn into a dragon that can fly faster than a Dragon Adept.

[eggynack]

really, why?

Why not? It doesn't matter at all whether a class' abilities are pulled from some strong monster or not. It doesn't matter whether those abilities have the surface level appearance of goodness. All that matters is what the abilities actually do, and, when you get those abilities. So, for example, flight. Flight is generally a pretty strong ability. It's taken from dragons, and when dragons do it they do pretty well with it. When you get flight at level 19 though, many many levels after you're expected to have it, and in a form that isn't even all that great, it's not even really having a measurable impact on the power level of a class. Similarly, a breath weapon. Breath weapons can be pretty strong, but the damage progression associated with the dragon shaman in particular means you're often going to prefer just stabbing your opponents in the face. Or you would, if you had any particular ability to do that. Ignore how dragony these abilities look. Consider the class features in a vacuum. Would you rather have the stuff this class is offering than the stuff classes of higher tiers are offering?

Anyways, I also don't have much opinion on any of these. Except dread necro, which seems like a clear 3. Honestly, the fact that beguilers are getting the same rank as before in this thread is starting to diminish my interest in the whole thing. I mean, what's even the point if there's gonna be this flood of 3's largely premised on the old tier system, ones that don't even significantly engage with the argument on that topic taking place. I feel like healer is gonna come around, and I'm going to be like, "This class is probably a tier three, tier four at worst," and I'm going to put together a really convincing argument about that, and it'll all be rendered pointless by a bunch of people calling it a five because they haven't thought overmuch about that tiering since it showed up in the original thread. Same kinda thing happened with the adept, actually. I was on the winning side of that one, but I wasn't necessarily winning the argument. Tier momentum simply accounts for a lot of the number this thread arrives at.