Translation from Chinese D&D Forum: Ranking of Classes Based on Combat Effectiveness

[rel]

Interesting! Thanks for the translation and commentary.

Not sure I agree with ignoring out of combat utility wen ranking the classes.

The idea of optimizing an entire party rather than a single character on its own is interesting.
I'd be curious to know what the list of required party roles are?

[ATHATH]

I like Trickery clerics too but I have to say that the party should already have plenty of access to Polymorph (since bards, sorcs, wizards, druids all get native access) and Mirror Image would definitely have a niche against tough enemies if not for the fact that Mirror Image even explicitly calls out that it does not work against creatures that don't rely on sight, making it strictly worse in effect than Blur (only advantage is that Mirror Image doesn't concentration). Enemies can either ignore Mirror Image outright (if they have blindsight, as e.g. Dragons do) or power through Mirror Image (if they have many attacks and low attack bonuses) or close their eyes while attacking and accept disadvantage in exchange for nullifying Mirror Image.

I used to like Mirror Image but honestly today, after leaning more about 5E, I probably wouldn't ever bother spending an action to cast it. _Maybe_ a bonus action on e.g. a Paladorc with Quickened Spell, in a tough fight against e.g. Giants, but not an action.

To be fair, not requiring concentration is a pretty big deal, especially for a buff spell.

Does Mirror Image make you and your Invoke Duplicity image easier to tell apart?

[Eldariel]

I like Trickery clerics too but I have to say that the party should already have plenty of access to Polymorph (since bards, sorcs, wizards, druids all get native access) and Mirror Image would definitely have a niche against tough enemies if not for the fact that Mirror Image even explicitly calls out that it does not work against creatures that don't rely on sight, making it strictly worse in effect than Blur (only advantage is that Mirror Image doesn't concentration). Enemies can either ignore Mirror Image outright (if they have blindsight, as e.g. Dragons do) or power through Mirror Image (if they have many attacks and low attack bonuses) or close their eyes while attacking and accept disadvantage in exchange for nullifying Mirror Image.

I used to like Mirror Image but honestly today, after leaning more about 5E, I probably wouldn't ever bother spending an action to cast it. _Maybe_ a bonus action on e.g. a Paladorc with Quickened Spell, in a tough fight against e.g. Giants, but not an action.

Certainly not an action but if you e.g. have a shot to buff before kicking in the door or see a Giant in the distance and run in or whatever, that's often a good time to drop it. I've seen my players use it to pretty decent effect. I think it's far better than Blur simply because it doesn't compete for Concentration and there are plenty of auxiliary sources of disadvantage for enemies (simplest being any kind of concealment + Alert). It's situational, but having it autoprepared allows you to make great use of it for when it does apply (when you fight a "big single hit" thing like Wraith or Remorhaz or Tyrannosaurus Polymorph or whatever; also worthwhile against pretty much anything if you can precast it).

As for Polymorph, yeah, there's a lot of redundancy but it's such a powerful and versatile spell that I don't think you'll ever have too much of it. If anything, I think one big strike against default Cleric is their inability to supercharge someone's HP with +150 "temporary HP" on level 7 (of course, it's also applicable as an offensive spell but much less reliable in that sense).

[MaxWilson]

Certainly not an action but if you e.g. have a shot to buff before kicking in the door or see a Giant in the distance and run in or whatever, that's often a good time to drop it. I've seen my players use it to pretty decent effect. I think it's far better than Blur simply because it doesn't compete for Concentration and there are plenty of auxiliary sources of disadvantage for enemies (simplest being any kind of concealment + Alert). It's situational, but having it autoprepared allows you to make great use of it for when it does apply (when you fight a "big single hit" thing like Wraith or Remorhaz or Tyrannosaurus Polymorph or whatever; also worthwhile against pretty much anything if you can precast it).

As for Polymorph, yeah, there's a lot of redundancy but it's such a powerful and versatile spell that I don't think you'll ever have too much of it. If anything, I think one big strike against default Cleric is their inability to supercharge someone's HP with +150 "temporary HP" on level 7 (of course, it's also applicable as an offensive spell but much less reliable in that sense).

Sure, good points. I think we basically agree on these points--I think I was mostly objecting to calling Mirror Image "the best defensive spell in the game." I'd call it a situationally-useful defensive spell at best, but having a situationally-useful spell autoprepared is definitely useful--I used to run Wild Sorcs with a randomly-rolled domain spell list, and even Jump turns out to be surprisingly useful when you have it autoprepared. (I remember it being useful for killing wall-crawling vampire spawns who otherwise would have been difficult to reach.)

IMO the title of "best defensive spell in the game" goes to... Holy Aura.

[Eldariel]

Sure, good points. I think we basically agree on these points--I think I was mostly objecting to calling Mirror Image "the best defensive spell in the game." I'd call it a situationally-useful defensive spell at best, but having a situationally-useful spell autoprepared is definitely useful--I used to run Wild Sorcs with a randomly-rolled domain spell list, and even Jump turns out to be surprisingly useful when you have it autoprepared. (I remember it being useful for killing wall-crawling vampire spawns who otherwise would have been difficult to reach.)

IMO the title of "best defensive spell in the game" goes to... Holy Aura.

I guess I threw "the best" in there since it's one of the few decent ones that doesn't cost Concentration making its use have far lower an opportunity cost than most of the defensive spells. Often you have offensive or utility things to be doing with your Concentration and burning it on a purely defensive effect is questionable (unless it affects the whole party and thus enemy doesn't get to choose just hitting someone else, and it applies to all relevant modes of attack; Holy Aura certainly fits the bill though as an 8th level spell, I'd rather it have been entirely Concentration-free).

[Merudo]

Sure, good points. I think we basically agree on these points--I think I was mostly objecting to calling Mirror Image "the best defensive spell in the game."

It's not even the best concentration-free defensive spell: foresight, heroes's feast, contingency, blink, aid, and shield are all arguably more useful.

[Hael]

It's not even the best concentration-free defensive spell: foresight, heroes's feast, contingency, blink, aid, and shield are all arguably more useful.

You could make a case that it is when you combine it with trickery domains feature. You’re essentially doubling its effectiveness.

Anyway, I just watched Treantmonks tier list for character classes (not restricted to combat perse, but it’s easy to tweak it for that purpose) and that one is much better, where at least you can make an honest debate about some of the more controversial picks.

[KorvinStarmast]

Besides, when you're silly Oath Of DPR Paladin goes to sleep, they'll get perma charmed by my GOO-lock. No save.

*giggle* (Create thrall?)

That was my take-away from this as well. I mean, tier lists are always kind of useless, especially ones with such a single-minded focus on combat power. So it was never likely to be all that persuasive.

Amen yet again.

Should I be revising this assumption, maybe?

No. It's a good assumption, and we do have a new thread on arriving at a framework for party composition optimization.

Does Mirror Image make you and your Invoke Duplicity image easier to tell apart?

There's a fine can of worms that you opened there. Here's one answer to that.

[MaxWilson]

I guess I threw "the best" in there since it's one of the few decent ones that doesn't cost Concentration making its use have far lower an opportunity cost than most of the defensive spells. Often you have offensive or utility things to be doing with your Concentration and burning it on a purely defensive effect is questionable (unless it affects the whole party and thus enemy doesn't get to choose just hitting someone else, and it applies to all relevant modes of attack; Holy Aura certainly fits the bill though as an 8th level spell, I'd rather it have been entirely Concentration-free).

As far as defense goes, I'd say Sanctuary is clearly better: no concentration cost, bonus action to cast vs. action, can protect against spells, can be cast on others, first-level slot vs. 2nd. "Lasts until you make an attack" vs. "lasts until you run out of images" is a wash but in all other aspects Sanctuary is objectively better. One of my favorite parts of Devotion paladins is that they always have Sanctuary prepped, and can do things like e.g. Action: Attack to (grapple + hopefully prone) a bad guy and then cast Sanctuary with their bonus action. (Requires Warcaster if you're holding a shield.)

Shield is arguably much better than even Sanctuary (reaction that works retroactively even AFTER you've been hit! and no concentration cost) but that's more subjective.

[Nhorianscum]

Tier 0 3 paladin oaths + lore is so weird to me.

Was an interesting read.

(I'd say it follows a mmolike buff-and-burst-party focus, but with a ton of just nuclear hot takes.
I just can't take any optimization-tier list that isn't taking the dive into the land of dipping super seriously though.)

[Christew]

"Lasts until you make an attack" vs. "lasts until you run out of images" is a wash but in all other aspects Sanctuary is objectively better. One of my favorite parts of Devotion paladins is that they always have Sanctuary prepped, and can do things like e.g. Action: Attack to (grapple + hopefully prone) a bad guy and then cast Sanctuary with their bonus action. (Requires Warcaster if you're holding a shield.)

Shield is arguably much better than even Sanctuary (reaction that works retroactively even AFTER you've been hit! and no concentration cost) but that's more subjective.

Purple text noted, but 'you definitely can't get off an attack under any circumstances with this buff on' and 'you can totally get an attack off as long as you aren't multiattacked into unconsciousness before your turn (which kind of applies to all buffs except Sanctuary) with this buff on' is a pretty broad spectrum.

As to the seeming thread hijack potential of talking about any 'best in the game' contest that necessitates comparing apples, oranges, and dragonfruit that ripens on the third Tuesday in May ... maybe we just don't this time?

Or better yet, new thread?

[Eldariel]

As far as defense goes, I'd say Sanctuary is clearly better: no concentration cost, bonus action to cast vs. action, can protect against spells, can be cast on others, first-level slot vs. 2nd. "Lasts until you make an attack" vs. "lasts until you run out of images" is a wash but in all other aspects Sanctuary is objectively better. One of my favorite parts of Devotion paladins is that they always have Sanctuary prepped, and can do things like e.g. Action: Attack to (grapple + hopefully prone) a bad guy and then cast Sanctuary with their bonus action. (Requires Warcaster if you're holding a shield.)

Shield is arguably much better than even Sanctuary (reaction that works retroactively even AFTER you've been hit! and no concentration cost) but that's more subjective.

That's certainly true. I guess I was thinking a more restricted set of "1 Action buffs that last for my turn" without really thinking through the list - it's certainly one of the better self-buff defensive spells on the Wizard list. My bad, I should be more careful about using superlatives without considering the options first.

[sandmote]

I'm mainly wondering about this bit from the echo knight:

Although the avatar can be displayed unlimited times, it is easy to be killed by AOE, which means that an extra bonus action is required to manifest another echo, which means losing out on damage.

What is the situation where two weapon fighting becomes such a strong choice for a fighter? They don't get Hex, Hunter's Mark, or Rage damage and unlike Sneak Attack (where it might be worth getting an extra chance to hit) Action Surge with a smaller weapon is a noticeable opportunity cost.

[Kane0]

They might be referring to other BA attacks, like CBE, GWM and PAM

[Dork_Forge]

I'm mainly wondering about this bit from the echo knight:

What is the situation where two weapon fighting becomes such a strong choice for a fighter? They don't get Hex, Hunter's Mark, or Rage damage and unlike Sneak Attack (where it might be worth getting an extra chance to hit) Action Surge with a smaller weapon is a noticeable opportunity cost.

It's always a decent to good option (especially in tier 1) and a Fighter can afford better than most to pick up the feat, but it can also mean missing out on a GWM bonus attack or a PAM attack etc.

[lsr]

This is a very interesting post and reading it provides some perspectives for people who mostly come to D&D not from earlier D&D editions but perhaps MMOs and board gaming (at least far as I understand, tabletop market has been fairly small in China in the past).

Right, tabletop market is small in China, and TRPG is even much smaller. But many active users at goddessfantasy and users who replied those threads have played earlier D&D editions and other TRPG for years. Many started from 3.0 or 3.5, as far as I know.
Also, it's different between talking and playing actual game. Many people will take a "weak class" for fun or personal preference. For example, I always take supporting character with special ability in D&D and other games.
As for this ranking, the author said:

Although this article is based on the value of combat power to rank various classes, my position is to oppose choosing a class solely based on the strength of the combat power. The purpose of learning is to broaden horizons, rather than have tunnel vision. I always think that only after knowing the characteristics and abilities of a class, knowing the advantages of the class comparing to “stronger classes,” can one achieve the role of the chosen class in the party. Not believing those "authorities" blindly, thinking critically, I always think these are the real fun of TRPG.

One main purpose is to show characteristics of (sub)class and encourage discussion.

- Is the ranking you posted well-regarded among the goddessfantasy forum?

The work is regarded but the ranking is controversial. The author said:

Thanks to my friends who have been arguing with me and enlightening me. Without your help, this rank cannot be done.

And there is argument under those threads.

It is obviously odd that saying about "Scout is better than Enchanter".

Exactly. So I think www .goddessfantasy.net/bbs/index.php?topic=51876.0 (3.5 class ranking) with detailed ranking of each role is much more useful.

I'm also seeing a fair bit of gish/spell melee favoritism here.

Belt of giant strength is counted in. It may be a reason.

I wanted to point out that the Chineese OP referenced Treantmonk by name. I suspect that is in reference to the "God wizard" guide(s). Do Chineese D&D players read a lot of English Language forums and guides?

Some people will read english guides, and many guides are translated into Chinese, for example: www .goddessfantasy.net/bbs/?topic=75962.0 (Treantmonk's wizard guide)

[Warlush]

*giggle* (Create thrall?)

Yeah I sold my soul and all I got was this crappy 14th level ability.

[sandmote]

They might be referring to other BA attacks, like CBE, GWM and PAM

It's always a decent to good option (especially in tier 1) and a Fighter can afford better than most to pick up the feat, but it can also mean missing out on a GWM bonus attack or a PAM attack etc.

Okay, that makes more sense. Although I'm still not sure how often the need to put up a new echo is going to interfere with the bonus action attack from GWM.

[Contrast]

Okay, that makes more sense. Although I'm still not sure how often the need to put up a new echo is going to interfere with the bonus action attack from GWM.

I've been playing an Echo Knight recently and I have to resummon it quite a lot. That said that's because enemies are attacking and killing it so its absorbing attacks that would otherwise be aimed at the party so I take this as a total win.

OP is correct that it suffers when AoEs are sloshing around but if you're consistently getting inavoidably AoE'd every turn (which is not really my experience of any combat ever) when you can always choose not to keep resummoning it that combat.

In two different campaigns I'm playing a Battlemaster with GWM (in a game with flanking no less) and an Echo Knight (with Sentinel) and honestly I've felt more useful/powerful as the Echo Knight which I think speaks volumes.

[KorvinStarmast]

Yeah I sold my soul and all I got was this crappy 14th level ability.

If you've got a "my guy" paladin in the group, that might be a way to have a wake up call for the player. Pick your spots, but some hilarity might ensue.

[Klorox]

I have to say, I’m surprised wizard isn’t #1.

That being said, bard and paladin are my other favorites.

[Klorox]

I also think it’s important to rank power by tier. For instance, wizards are typically weaker at lower levels but more powerful at higher levels.

I also wonder what any multiclassing rankings would be.

[Fable Wright]

Frankly, I'm just amazed at how low Shepherd Druid is. The thing can buff HP to ridiculous levels, and summons dealing magical B/P/S make them arguably the king of DPR, far and above any other class from level 5 onward. Not to mention Planar Binding and Conjure Fey; an Annis Hag can be simply spectacular, not to mention Korreds and Bheur Hags at higher levels. And this is on the level of Arcane Archer?

They're unquestionably the best summoner in the game. The mind boggles. I just have to wonder what summoning builds it's "weaker" than, when it's the king of Tier 2/3 summoning.

[Evaar]

Frankly, I'm just amazed at how low Shepherd Druid is.

I have to agree. I've been in a DotMM group getting into tier 3 and mostly filled with people pretty into game mechanics and optimization. The ability of the shepherd druid to fill the battlefield with sturdy summons has been absolutely invaluable. There have been so many encounters where we're vastly outnumbered, and without all of these pets around absorbing hits and surviving I think we would've had multiple TPKs so far.

Some of that you can just chalk up to the Druid spell list, but the extra resilience that comes from Shepherd has been extremely helpful. He's effectively able to reset the terms of most encounters , arguably even moreso than our Wizard.

[Eldariel]

I have to agree. I've been in a DotMM group getting into tier 3 and mostly filled with people pretty into game mechanics and optimization. The ability of the shepherd druid to fill the battlefield with sturdy summons has been absolutely invaluable. There have been so many encounters where we're vastly outnumbered, and without all of these pets around absorbing hits and surviving I think we would've had multiple TPKs so far.

Some of that you can just chalk up to the Druid spell list, but the extra resilience that comes from Shepherd has been extremely helpful. He's effectively able to reset the terms of most encounters , arguably even moreso than our Wizard.

Also, the fact that Shepherd gives summons magic weapons is tantamount to doubling their damage for most of the rest of the game. Which is pretty massive, since they still do a decent amount of damage.

[Knaight]

Remember back in the really early 3.5 days, 2004 or so, when everyone was convinced the Monk and Barbarian were really overpowered? Because I'm suddenly having flashbacks to WotC archives from that time, accessed in 2007 or so.

[AdAstra]

I have to agree. I've been in a DotMM group getting into tier 3 and mostly filled with people pretty into game mechanics and optimization. The ability of the shepherd druid to fill the battlefield with sturdy summons has been absolutely invaluable. There have been so many encounters where we're vastly outnumbered, and without all of these pets around absorbing hits and surviving I think we would've had multiple TPKs so far.

Some of that you can just chalk up to the Druid spell list, but the extra resilience that comes from Shepherd has been extremely helpful. He's effectively able to reset the terms of most encounters , arguably even moreso than our Wizard.

I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of Chinese DMs feature significant efforts to break people's concentration, such as massed ranged fire and more use of AOE spells. Even if you've picked up Resilient:Wisdom/Warcaster, you're not immune to DC10s until pretty late in the game, and a failed save to a Fireball can still be a significant threat after that. Thus classes that don't offer significant ways to protect yourself from such threats may lose a lot of value, and needing concentration for your offensive output is essentially a death sentence in such scenarios.

There are a lot of things I've noticed tabletop players take for granted when it comes to encounter design, even for so-called Combat as War players. Thinking of DnD combat from basically any non-TTRPG perspective, breaking caster concentration is up there with "kill healers, buffers, and debuffers first" in terms of obvious things you should try to do. Activating a powerful ability that can be disrupted by injuring/killing you, while also not having strong defenses, is the world's largest SHOOT ME sign in history.

[MaxWilson]

I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of Chinese DMs feature significant efforts to break people's concentration, such as massed ranged fire and more use of AOE spells. Even if you've picked up Resilient:Wisdom/Warcaster, you're not immune to DC10s until pretty late in the game, and a failed save to a Fireball can still be a significant threat after that.

Druids have Absorb Elements to reduce the concentration DC on an failed Fireball save back down to DC 10.

Dodging is already a pretty strong option for Shepherd Druids and it becomes even stronger if the DM is targeting you specifically to break your concentration. It even helps with Fireball saves, as does seeking cover.

[Valmark]

I honestly thought every DM aims to disrupt concentration with intelligent monsters, is that not the case? Assuming they get the chance anyway.

[Eldariel]

I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of Chinese DMs feature significant efforts to break people's concentration, such as massed ranged fire and more use of AOE spells. Even if you've picked up Resilient:Wisdom/Warcaster, you're not immune to DC10s until pretty late in the game, and a failed save to a Fireball can still be a significant threat after that. Thus classes that don't offer significant ways to protect yourself from such threats may lose a lot of value, and needing concentration for your offensive output is essentially a death sentence in such scenarios.

There are a lot of things I've noticed tabletop players take for granted when it comes to encounter design, even for so-called Combat as War players. Thinking of DnD combat from basically any non-TTRPG perspective, breaking caster concentration is up there with "kill healers, buffers, and debuffers first" in terms of obvious things you should try to do. Activating a powerful ability that can be disrupted by injuring/killing you, while also not having strong defenses, is the world's largest SHOOT ME sign in history.

It doesn't make a lot of difference in my experience. Concentration or no, intelligent enemies will always focus on the casters given the opportunity. Of course, against melee enemies, 8+ hardy things taking space does a decent wall impression, and the caster has no reason to remain within LoS/LoE after the bomb has been dropped. In short, yes, obviously they'll try to break Concentration but you have plenty of counterplay to that (the precise nature of which depends on the environment, which you can partially shape, and your summons/the party): that can't be the difference between the experience of the Chinese and westerners.

Never at least in my 5e campaigns have I had enemies actively attack anyone but the casters given the chance: almost every creature with humanoid+ intellect knows casters are more dangerous in the end. Similarly, I've generally always been bearing the brunt of the ranged attacks and spells whenever I play casters (of course, multiple casters in the party shares the burden). Luckily e.g. dungeon terrain has the option of simply going back around a corner, behind allies, into a brush or whatever to avoid ranged fire and targeted spells in one go. AOE is pesky but if you stand a decent distance from your frontline and in a fireball formation, enemies will have to give up a lot of value to Fireball/Breath/whatever you specifically and you do have Absorb Elements. And you can avoid most of the powers of a good portion of the monster manual by simply standing outside melee range/without a clear path of approach for the enemy, as many enemies are either completely impotent or at least comparatively anemic at range.