D&D 3.5 tiers

A while ago someone posted a link to a guide on D&D 3.5 class tiers, how the tier system works and ways to balance classes. It included a suggestion I really liked, in which classes below tier 2 are played as gestalt characters.

I've been trying to find the thread it was posted in, but can't seem to find it. Could anyone give me the link?

Any help would be greatly appreciated :smallsmile:

Tier System for Classes
Tier System for PrCs
Why each class is in it's tier.

Exactly what I was looking for, plus some other cool helpful stuff. Cheers buddy :smallbiggrin:

Has anyone posted the Tier system on these forums? I can't click on the links for the tier system on other websites.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kansaschaser

Has anyone posted the Tier system on these forums? I can't click on the links for the tier system on other websites.

---

With respect to JaronK, who's around here, I'll give you a repost:

Spoiler

Show

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JaronK

The following is a repost of something I made over on the WotC forums. I'm not exactly sure which forum to put it on, as it's intended for a variety of purposes. It's here mostly because I'd like to get some feedback from knowledgeable minds, but it's also a useful tool, much like a handbook, and available for use.

My general philosophy is that the only balance that really matters in D&D is the interclass balance between the various PCs in a group. If the group as a whole is very powerful and flexible, the DM can simply up the challenge level and complexity of the encounters. If it's weak and inflexible, the DM can lower the challenge level and complexity. Serious issues arise when the party is composed of some members which are extremely powerful and others which are extremely weak, leading to a situation where the DM has two choices: either make the game too easy for the strong members, or too hard for the weak members. Neither is desireable. Thus, this system is created for the following purposes:

1) To provide a ranking system so that DMs know roughly the power of the PCs in their group

2) To provide players with knowledge of where their group stands, power wise, so that they can better build characters that fit with their group.

3) To help DMs who plan to use house rules to balance games by showing them where the classes stand before applying said house rules (how many times have we seen DMs pumping up Sorcerers or weakening Monks?).

4) To help DMs judge what should be allowed and what shouldn't in their games. It may sound cheesy when the Fighter player wants to be a Half Minotaur Water Orc, but if the rest of his party is Druid, Cloistered Cleric, Archivist, and Artificer, then maybe you should allow that to balance things out. However, if the player is asking to be allowed to be a Venerable White Dragonspawn Dragonwrought Kobold Sorcerer and the rest of the party is a Monk, a Fighter, and a Rogue, maybe you shouldn't let that fly.

5) To help homebrewers judge the power and balance of their new classes. Pick a Tier you think your class should be in, and when you've made your class compare it to the rest of the Tier. Generally, I like Tier 3 as a balance point, but I know many people prefer Tier 4. If it's stronger than Tier 1, you definitely blew it.

Psionic classes are mostly absent simply because I don't have enough experience with them. Other absent classes are generally missing because I don't know them well enough to comment, though if I've heard a lot about them they're listed in itallics. Note that "useless" here means "the class isn't particularly useful for dealing with situation X" not "it's totally impossible with enough splat books to make a build that involves that class deal with situation X." "Capable of doing one thing" means that any given build does one thing, not that the class itself is incapable of being built in different ways. Also, "encounters" here refers to appropriate encounters... obviously, anyone can solve an encounter with purely mechanical abilities if they're level 20 and it's CR 1.

Also note that with enough optimization, it's generally possible to go up a tier, and if played poorly you can easily drop a few tiers, but this is a general averaging, assuming that everyone in the party is playing with roughly the same skill and optimization level. As a rule, parties function best when everyone in the party is within 2 Tiers of each other (so a party that's all Tier 2-4 is generally fine, and so is a party that's all Tier 3-5, but a party that has Tier 1 and Tier 5s in it may have issues).

The Tier System

Tier 1: Capable of doing absolutely everything, often better than classes that specialize in that thing. Often capable of solving encounters with a single mechanical ability and little thought from the player. Has world changing powers at high levels. These guys, if played well, can break a campaign and can be very hard to challenge without extreme DM fiat, especially if Tier 3s and below are in the party.

Examples: Wizard, Cleric, Druid, Archivist, Artificer, Erudite

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.

Examples: Sorcerer, Favored Soul, Psion, Binder (with access to online vestiges)

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.

Examples: Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Crusader, Bard, Swordsage, Binder (without access to the summon monster vestige), Wildshape Varient Ranger, Duskblade, Factotum, Warblade, Psionic Warrior

Tier 4: Capable of doing one thing quite well, but often useless when encounters require other areas of expertise, or capable of doing many things to a reasonable degree of competance without truly shining. Rarely has any abilities that can outright handle an encounter unless that encounter plays directly to the class's main strength. DMs may sometimes need to work to make sure Tier 4s can contribue to an encounter, as their abilities may sometimes leave them useless. Won't outshine anyone except Tier 6s except in specific circumstances that play to their strengths. Cannot compete effectively with Tier 1s that are played well.

Examples: Rogue, Barbarian, Warlock, Warmage, Scout, Ranger, Hexblade, Adept, Spellthief, Marshal, Fighter (Dungeoncrasher Variant)

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

Examples: Fighter, Monk, CA Ninja, Healer, Swashbuckler, Rokugan Ninja, Soulknife, Expert, OA Samurai, Paladin, Knight

Tier 6: Not even capable of shining in their own area of expertise. DMs will need to work hard to make encounters that this sort of character can contribute in with their mechanical abilities. Will often feel worthless unless the character is seriously powergamed beyond belief, and even then won't be terribly impressive. Needs to fight enemies of lower than normal CR. Class is often completely unsynergized or with almost no abilities of merit. Avoid allowing PCs to play these characters.

Examples: CW Samurai, Aristocrat, Warrior, Commoner

And then there's the Truenamer, which is just broken (as in, the class was improperly made and doesn't function appropriately).

Now, obviously these rankings only apply when mechanical abilities are being used... in a more social oriented game where talking is the main way of solving things (without using diplomacy checks), any character can shine. However, when the mechanical abilities of the classes in question are being used, it's a bad idea to have parties with more than two tiers of difference.

It is interesting to note the disparity between the core classes... one of the reasons core has so many problems. If two players want to play a nature oriented shapeshifter and a general sword weilder, you're stuck with two very different tiered guys in the party (Fighter and Druid). Outside of core, it's possible to do it while staying on close Tiers... Wild Shape Variant Ranger and Warblade, for example.

Note that a few classes are right on the border line between tiers. Duskblade is very low in Tier 3, and Hexblade is low in Tier 4. Fighter is high in Tier 5, and CW Samurai is high in Tier 6 (obviously, since it's pretty much strictly better than the same tier Warrior).

JaronK

---

Jaron, please don't defenestrate me. :smallredface:

Ok, so the tier system is just a list of examples? I thought it would go through every class and prestiege class and give it a tier number. Thanks though. :smallsmile:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kansaschaser

Has anyone posted the Tier system on these forums? I can't click on the links for the tier system on other websites.

---

In their entirety? I don't think so. Would be rather rude, too, seeing as JaronK posts here.
EDIT: Heh. :smallbiggrin:

In his defense for not doing it... maintaining large info-posts becomes twice the bother if it's posted cross-forum. And it's usually not a trivial effort to begin with. =/

EDIT2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kansaschaser

Ok, so the tier system is just a list of examples? I thought it would go through every class and prestiege class and give it a tier number. Thanks though. :smallsmile:

---

Most of the base classes are there already.

The more obscure base classes might be a good future addition, though...

PrCs are more difficult. Their power level is sometimes described in terms of how strongly they affect the power level of the base class used to enter, which doesn't really lend itself well to a "tier" system...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kansaschaser

Ok, so the tier system is just a list of examples? I thought it would go through every class and prestiege class and give it a tier number. Thanks though. :smallsmile:

---

It... pretty much DOES every base class, save the unique Oriental Adventures and Dragon Compendium ones, which are easy enough to slot in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ernir

In their entirety? I don't think so. Would be rather rude, too, seeing as JaronK posts here.

---

Yeah, I feel sorta bad, but I also dislike denying a guy information.

Jaron, if you want me to take it down, just PM me and I'll do it instantly. Don't want to infringe on your e-rights or anything, man. :smallsmile:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arguskos

It... pretty much DOES every base class, save the unique Oriental Adventures and Dragon Compendium ones, which are easy enough to slot in.

---

Its missing meldshapers, Dragonfire Adept, Dragon Shaman, and.....that's about it for 'standard' D&D that I can think of.

For the OP,

Totemist and Incarnate are probably tier 3, Dragonfire Adept and Dragon Shaman are probably tier 4, and Soulborn is probably tier 5.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Godskook

Its missing meldshapers, Dragonfire Adept, Dragon Shaman, and.....that's about it for 'standard' D&D that I can think of.

For the OP,

Totemist and Incarnate are probably tier 3, Dragonfire Adept and Dragon Shaman are probably tier 4, and Soulborn is probably tier 5.

---

Right, good catch.

Might as well do the OA and DC classes:
Samurai: Tier 4ish, probably.
Shaman: If cleric is T1, so is Shaman.
Sohei: Tier 4 or 5, IIRC.

Battle Dancer: Tier 4-5.
Death Master: Tier 2 or 3, probably 2 due to a better spell list than the DNecro.
Jester: Same as Bard, wherever he falls, I forget.
Mountebank: Tier 5-6. Seriously, crap.
Savant: Tier 4-5.
Sha'ir: Big debate. Possibility to get any spell ever, but funky wording makes it hard to understand clearly. Anywhere from 1-3, probably on the lower end of that.
Urban Druid: It's a druid, but urban. Tier 1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Godskook

Its missing meldshapers, Dragonfire Adept, Dragon Shaman, and.....that's about it for 'standard' D&D that I can think of.

For the OP,

Totemist and Incarnate are probably tier 3, Dragonfire Adept and Dragon Shaman are probably tier 4, and Soulborn is probably tier 5.

---

Calling Dragon Shaman t4 is quite a stretch.

[Edit]: And OA samurai doesn't really warrant tier 4. Good Will save and better skills don't really make up for the very narrow list of bonus feats and total lack of real class features it 'enjoys'. Ancestral Daisho is basically just a predetermined feat with less options than the actual feat (Ancestral Weapon).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greenish

Calling Dragon Shaman t4 is quite a stretch.

---

Same tier as Marshal, but I was guessing. Also, he has one of the *RARE* infinite healing(though only to half-health) abilities that is in-class for a base class. As an aura. Gotta be worth something, considering he can heal and fight at the same time(Something only crusaders get in-class otherwise). If its tier 5, its a high tier 5.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Godskook

Same tier as Marshal, but I was guessing.

---

I believe firmly that Marshals shouldn't be tier 4, either. :smallamused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Godskook

Also, he has one of the *RARE* infinite healing(though only to half-health) abilities that is in-class for a base class. As an aura. Gotta be worth something, considering he can heal and fight at the same time(Something only crusaders get in-class otherwise).

---

In-combat healing is notably inefficient, even when it's faster than a small Fast Healing. Besides, their fighting prowess is limited to a mediocre breath weapon every d4 rounds, and simple weapons & medium BAB the rest of the time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Godskook

If its tier 5, its a high tier 5.

---

Hmm, perhaps.

I don't think infinite effects (such as healing) warrant an increase in tier - if they did, then the warlock would be ranked a lot higher. Tiers are primarily about versatility, not about raw power.

I was suprised they weren't in the sticky.
I just assumed that they would be given all the discussion they have provoked.
(Actually thats probably not quite the criteria it sounds like, or the sticky would be full of Monk stuff :smallbiggrin:)

I have no problem with people re-posting it as long as they're not trying to claim it's their own work or something. It's easier to just have it in one place and have it linked from elsewhere. Though as a note, that was the old one that was linked... here's the slightly more up to date one: http://brilliantgameologists.com/boa...p?topic=5293.0

With that said, I do enjoy a good defenestration.

Anyway, I don't rank classes I'm unfamiliar with, so there's a lot that aren't on there. I figured there's enough of a guideline anyway, so it's not too hard to figure out where other classes go. Though I've got some updating to do, and some folks have actually put in some very good information on other classes. I keep meaning to make updates, but then I get distracted...

JaronK

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JaronK

Anyway, I don't rank classes I'm unfamiliar with, so there's a lot that aren't on there. I figured there's enough of a guideline anyway, so it's not too hard to figure out where other classes go. Though I've got some updating to do, and some folks have actually put in some very good information on other classes. I keep meaning to make updates, but then I get distracted...

---

I think adding the missing classes and significant ACFs (like Mystic Ranger) would be awesome. You could also make an extended 'why is each class on it's tier', with thoughts for each class (maybe using the three example situations you point out in the thread). I believe most of the community here would be willing to help with that (I would, at least).

I just wanted to point out that The Giant subscribes to the tier system too. (panel 5)
Make of that what you will.

Also, there are some psionic classes missing so I will fill that gap as I am wont to do. I'll try to classify them here, with some brief reasoning.

Base Ardents: T3 (Mantles have weak power choices and many have gaps at certain levels.)
Mind's Eye Ardents: T2 (Mantle gaps can be filled, poor powers swapped out... plus, Dominant Ideal[!])
Base Lurk: Mid-T4 (decent amount of power but unfocused. Lacks the damage potential of a Psywar, the skillmonkey potential of a Psyrogue or the casting potential of a Wilder.)
Mind's Eye Lurk: High T4 (New augment lists help it specialize, but it still falls short at combat, skillmonkeying, tracking etc.)
Psychic Rogue: T3 (Excels at skillmonkey role, remains useful when role is not needed e.g. combat.)
Divine Mind: T5 (Suffers from many of the same problems as the paladin, and no mount to boot.)

Feel free to amend the above, as the tier system is a community project after all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by true_shinken

I think adding the missing classes and significant ACFs (like Mystic Ranger) would be awesome. You could also make an extended 'why is each class on it's tier', with thoughts for each class (maybe using the three example situations you point out in the thread). I believe most of the community here would be willing to help with that (I would, at least).

---

I don't like bringing other people into something that major (and it would be major) because I get distracted and then stop posting and then I feel like I've let them down. So, I just don't (it's the same reason I don't do PbP anymore). But I do read what people say on the topic.

But with that said, a bunch of people actually did make a bunch of threads just like what you're describing, and they were pretty darn good. They were titled things like "why Tier 5s are in tier 5" and went through every tier. There was some fine work in there.

JaronK

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JaronK

I have no problem with people re-posting it as long as they're not trying to claim it's their own work or something. It's easier to just have it in one place and have it linked from elsewhere. Though as a note, that was the old one that was linked... here's the slightly more up to date one: http://brilliantgameologists.com/boa...p?topic=5293.0

---

Ah, lovely to know. I'll hold onto that link for the future. Also, good to know I won't be-

Quote:

---

With that said, I do enjoy a good defenestration.

---

:smalleek: Woah now, let's not do anything crazy here... put that sphere down, if you'd be so kind. :smalltongue:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by true_shinken

I think adding the missing classes and significant ACFs (like Mystic Ranger) would be awesome.

---

I still don't understand how that ACF comes up all the time, when dragon mag material is normally considered anathema around these parts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pechvarry

I still don't understand how that ACF comes up all the time, when dragon mag material is normally considered anathema around these parts.

---

Well, the search for a +1 BAB/full casting/6 skills per level class has been going on since time immemorial, and finally the Mystic Ranger delivered it to us for levels 1-10 :smalltongue:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greenish

In-combat healing is notably inefficient in the action economy, even when it's faster than a small Fast Healing.

---

I finished your sentence for you. An aura, being passive, ignores the "in-combat healing is inefficient" diatribe. Its like a weaker version of persisted lesser vigor.

And the breath weapon isn't "mediocre" as PC breath weapons go. 10d6 is about as good as you're getting without fivefold, and it is the most powerful one that can take metabreath feats by RAI(that I'm aware of).

To get tier 5, you need to either:

A)Be wholly focused on one thing, to the point that what you're capable of doing might often be uncalled for(Read: Fighter, Healer)

B)"So unfocused that they have trouble mastering anything"

They're very explicitly not A, since they've got healing, support, some face-monkey(6/10 of them get bluff as a class skill), can get decent listen/spot checks(aura), alternate movement modes at level 3, wings at level 19, immunity to an element of damage(which can be useful).

And for the "mastering anything" qualification, I suppose that depends on how valuable a clinging lingering entangling maximized 10d6 breath weapon is, 1/encounter, or 2/encounter with Dragonborn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kurald Galain

I don't think infinite effects (such as healing) warrant an increase in tier - if they did, then the warlock would be ranked a lot higher. Tiers are primarily about versatility, not about raw power.

---

That depends entirely on the tier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Godskook

I finished your sentence for you. An aura, being passive, ignores the "in-combat healing is inefficient" diatribe. Its like a weaker version of persisted lesser vigor.

---

Which is fine for topping people off (oh wait, the aura doesn't do that), but for keeping people in the fight it's rather minor. A Dragon Shaman doesn't need actions for the aura, true, but then again it would have actions to spend since it's only real offense, nay, only real combat option, comes online only every 1d4 rounds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Godskook

And the breath weapon isn't "mediocre" as PC breath weapons go. 10d6 is about as good as you're getting without fivefold, and it is the most powerful one that can take metabreath feats by RAI(that I'm aware of).

---

Without metabreaths, it's rather incidental for something that can only be used once or twice a combat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Godskook

To get tier 5, you need to either:

A)Be wholly focused on one thing, to the point that what you're capable of doing might often be uncalled for(Read: Fighter, Healer)

B)"So unfocused that they have trouble mastering anything"

They're very explicitly not A, since they've got healing, support, some face-monkey(6/10 of them get bluff as a class skill), can get decent listen/spot checks(aura), alternate movement modes at level 3, wings at level 19, immunity to an element of damage.

---

They got healing that's mostly irrelevant in combat, and can't top people off between combats, their "support" is limited to standing there and providing a single, very minor buff, they get one relevant skill for face (and it's not diplomacy), poor skill points, and their detection abilities are on the level of a fighter (cross class skills, no skillpoints, no wisdom synergy) +5 at level 20. Permanent spider climb can be handy, but really, that's not much.

I'm sorry, but I'm just not seeing it. They're much like monk, in that they have some nifty tools, but none of them are that relevant.

Fast Healing up to half isn't what I'd call "in combat healing." That's just not going to be enough to matter.

JaronK

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JaronK

Fast Healing up to half isn't what I'd call "in combat healing." That's just not going to be enough to matter.

JaronK

---

Chief would like a word with you. Passive auto-stabilization is a big enough feature to warrant mentioning. Its not 'great', but its solid for a tier 4 or 5 class.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Godskook

Chief would like a word with you. Passive auto-stabilization is a big enough feature to warrant mentioning. Its not 'great', but its solid for a tier 4 or 5 class.

---

If you're still "in combat" you can still be CDG'ed and that ability won't matter. If the danger is past, you're not in combat.

What Psy said. Also, Chief was 3rd level. 3rd. Level.

My point, which was admittedly very unstated, was if there were a Dragon Shaman in Chief's party, then no combat actions(standard/move) would've been needed to stabilize him. A significant improvement on the method they used, which was to roll heal checks, and would've still been competitive with actually casting CLWs or Lay on hands on him instead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lateral

What Psy said. Also, Chief was 3rd level. 3rd. Level.

---

Erm, so what? Tiers don't exactly care about level.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Godskook

My point, which was admittedly very unstated, was if there were a Dragon Shaman in Chief's party, then no combat actions(standard/move) would've been needed to stabilize him. A significant improvement on the method they used, which was to roll heal checks, and would've still been competitive with actually casting CLWs or Lay on hands on him instead.

---

Except if there was a Dragon Shaman in the party it likely would have been Chief. Especially given Chief's original class-picking criteria of the guy who stands back and doesn't do anything but still gets bothered by everyone.

In fantasy, the tribe shaman tends to be the advisor rather than the actual leader.

Honestly though, I would roll Dragon Shaman and DFA into one class; same with Knight and Paladin. Has anyone done that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psyren

In fantasy, the tribe shaman tends to be the advisor rather than the actual leader.

Honestly though, I would roll Dragon Shaman and DFA into one class; same with Knight and Paladin. Has anyone done that?

---

Folding Knight and Marshall seems reasonable. Paladin is a different concept.

I don't know that it's relevant to the divine mind, but a lot of us consider the paladin tier four.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Incanur

I don't know that it's relevant to the divine mind, but a lot of us consider the paladin tier four.

---

Opinions vary, but I think that's a fairly generous ranking. Paladin is useful for 2 - 5 levels, but rarely taken beyond that if options are available, in my experience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amphetryon

Opinions vary, but I think that's a fairly generous ranking. Paladin is useful for 2 - 5 levels, but rarely taken beyond that if options are available, in my experience.

---

Generous application of feats (Sword of the Arcane Order, Battle Blessing) and ACFs (Charging Smite) can yield a pretty sound tier 4; it can be optimized for charge damage pretty easily, free quickens on your Paladin spells is always good, and you get a variety of low-level utilities from Arcane Order. Paladin spell progression means you get them far too late for them to be a major power at the level, but it's a huge step better than not having them.

The alternate mounts in the DMG also increase the paladin's effectiveness when usable. Level 6 gives you a dire wolf or unicorn, 7 gives you a rhino, and 8 unlocks the dire lion. Each special mount gets +2 HD and +4 natural armor to begin with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Incanur

I don't know that it's relevant to the divine mind, but a lot of us consider the paladin tier four.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JaronK

As such, if I did this right most people should think their favorite class is a little too low, whether that class is Fighter or Monk or Rogue or whatever else

---

I know that was my reaction to seeing Paladin in tier 5.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Godskook

Passive auto-stabilization is a big enough feature to warrant mentioning.

---

The Dragon Shaman's healing ability doesn't auto-stabilize. It explicitly states that it works like natural healing. And natural healing is listed as not being able to stabilize. :(

Even if the GM ruled that the healing from the dragon shaman's ability didn't stabilize, it would still be +1 hp every round, which is enough to prevent them from bleeding to death.

Also, that ruling would be highly suspect anyway:

Quote:

---

A creature with fast healing has the extraordinary ability to regain hit points at an exceptional rate. Except for what is noted here, fast healing is like natural healing.

At the beginning of each of the creature’s turns, it heals a certain number of hit points (defined in its description).

---

Since there is no exception made for when bleeding out, that works even at negative HP... so fast healing does, in fact, auto-stabilize.

Still, bleeding to death like that is very low levels only. Pretty soon that 10 hp cushion really doesn't matter much at all. And at the levels where it really does, only going to half HP means you don't get very much at all most of the time.

JaronK

In my experience, downed opponents get ignored, so that 10 hp cushion isn't so much a cushion as it is a 'somebody get to him before he bleeds to death' timer.

That being said, I still think the dragon shaman healing ability is kinda meh. I've never had any interest in playing one. If I want to play a character with dragon based magical powers, I play a sorceror (doesn't even need any reflavoring).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skjaldbakka

Since there is no exception made for when bleeding out, that works even at negative HP... so fast healing does, in fact, auto-stabilize.

---

Uh, let's be careful with our terminology here. I think we are actually in agreement, but using "auto-stabilize" mis-characterizes it.

If I get the gist of what you're saying, it's this: since the unconscious person "bleeds out" at a rate of 1 HP per round, and since the Dragon Shaman's healing aura will heal 1 HP a round, it's essentially like stabilizing. They'll lose a point and gain a point every round, so it's a wash.

Yeah?

If that's what you mean, then we are in agreement. Having said that, I'd never call that auto-stabilization, as that implies very different math. If we told people to treat it as if the character did stabilize, then they would not do the "lose one point, gain one point, it's a wash" thing. Instead, they'd say, "OK, stabilized on round 1 of being in the aura, so they will stop losing points each round. For every subsequent round, they'll gain 1 HP, and be conscious quickly."

It's just my opinion, but "It's a wash, so they stay at exactly the negative number of hit points they have" is very different from "I'm getting more HP every round, and might even be up in time to help finish this battle."

That difference was big enough for one of my players to drop his Dragon Shaman and roll up a new character. I didn't blame him.

I've thought about house-ruling it the way that Lesser Vigor works -- the text for that spell also calls it fast-healing (I think) but makes an exception, stating that it does stabilize. Having that spell as part of the official rules makes it easier (for me) to house rule that way for the Dragon Shaman. But it is a house rule, even if no DMs realize it.

That's what he described in the first paragraph, but not the one you quoted.

In the one you quoted, he was describing it as being an over-write effect(-1 for non-stabilized, and then overwritten as +1 for Fast Healing, so in the end, +1, not +0).

Troll Patrol: This thread was well past the expiration date when it was granted undeath. The discussion that's sprung up since then has no bearing on the original question either. I'm putting this thread back in the ground. However, if someone would like to start a new thread to continue this discussion of the Tier system, they may.