Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 104
  1. - Top - End - #1
    Orc in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Gender
    Male

    Default pathfinder tiers

    has anyone classified the pathfinder classes into tiers?

  2. - Top - End - #2
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    RedWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2011

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    I would imagine that most of the classes stay in the same tier. The spellcasters lose some of the more broken spells but they still keep enough good ones not to drop a tier. The additions of bloodlines to sorcerer are nice but not enough to raise them to tier 1. Eschew materials for free doesn't substantially raise their power.

    Barbarians can't rage for quite as long but they have more freedom to spread the rage out. They also get rage powers, some of them are nice but not super powerful. None of that is really enough for them to change tiers.

    Bards don't get anything new that compares to the power of full spellcasting. They stay in the same tier.

    Fighters might get them enough to move them up a tier from a core fighter but probably not higher than a dungeoncrasher fighter.

    Monks get a slightly better progression with flurry of misses, a couple of extra bonus feats. Combat maneuver training would be helpful with some builds but they probably stay in tier 5.

    Paladins get a caster level of paladin level - 3 instead of paladin level / 2 and an expanded spell list. Combined with the other features that may be enough to move them up to tier 4.

    Rangers get slightly improved spellcasting, improved evasion and slightly better tracking. Probably not enough to move up from tier 4.

    Rogues get some extra special abilities and a save-or-die capstone ability once/day/sneak attack target. Might move up to tier 3 if it was played well.

  3. - Top - End - #3
    Banned
     
    GnomePirate

    Join Date
    Mar 2011

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    Rangers also improved how favored enemy works then adds "favored terrain" which will at least give them free initiative bonuses.

  4. - Top - End - #4
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    RedWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2011

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    Quote Originally Posted by Cartigan View Post
    Rangers also improved how favored enemy works then adds "favored terrain" which will at least give them free initiative bonuses.
    The only difference I see with favored enemy is that the bonus applies to attack rolls as well as damage. That and the initiative are both a small power boost but neither adds the kind of versatility that going from tier 4 to tier 3 requires.

  5. - Top - End - #5
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Daemon

    Join Date
    Dec 2010

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    Rogue's and paladins also both benefit mightily from the change in certain rules, specifically smite evil and sneak attack immunities. Very few creatures are now immune to SA's, so the rogues become more capable of contributing to combat. Smite evil, on the other hand, has become a holy nuclear weapon in the paladin's arsenal, allowing them to utterly stomp any evil creature they come across. LoH also heals status affects now. I would make the argument that both of them move up to tier 3.
    Fighters also get actual class features now, so they probably move up a tier as well, especially with the APG arcehtypes.
    Last edited by Curious; 2011-04-12 at 01:46 PM.

  6. - Top - End - #6
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Firechanter's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2011

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    Also, Fighters still can only fight somewhat better, and gain NOTHING outside of combat, keeping them just as unattractive as they have been all throughout 3rd ed. Still crappy skill points, still crappy skill lists, still no options of contributing to any adventuring effort outside of combat whatsoever.
    Last edited by Firechanter; 2011-04-12 at 01:47 PM.
    So you know, university Physics D&D 3.5 Optimization is essentially three seven years of this discussion among like-minded enthusiasts. Done with supercomputers, access to the textsplatbook collections of five continents and thirty languages with thousands of classes, prestige classes, feats and spells.
    On four hours sleep a night.
    With no sex.
    You're not going to find the loophole these guys missed.

  7. - Top - End - #7
    Banned
     
    GnomePirate

    Join Date
    Mar 2011

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    Quote Originally Posted by Firechanter View Post
    Also, Fighters still can only fight somewhat better, and gain NOTHING outside of combat, keeping them just as unattractive as they have been all throughout 3rd ed. Still crappy skill points, still crappy skill lists, still no options of contributing to any adventuring effort outside of combat whatsoever.
    Of course, this ignores how the skill system was changed in Pathfinder.

  8. - Top - End - #8
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Lateral's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Boston, The World
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    Yeah, even with their changes I don't think paladins get a tier boost all the way to 3. Four, yeah- you can easily coast to tier 4 on combat alone- but tier 3 requires an amount of versatility that it still lacks.

  9. - Top - End - #9
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Daemon

    Join Date
    Dec 2010

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    Quote Originally Posted by Cartigan View Post
    Of course, this ignores how the skill system was changed in Pathfinder.
    It's true. If the fighter want's skills, he can use his favored class bonus to gain a rank every level, and if he is a human as well, he's suddenly getting 4+ skill ranks a level. Coupled with the skill condensation, this means that even a fighter can get at least a few essential skills.

  10. - Top - End - #10
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Reverent-One's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2008

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    Quote Originally Posted by Firechanter View Post
    Also, Fighters still can only fight somewhat better, and gain NOTHING outside of combat, keeping them just as unattractive as they have been all throughout 3rd ed. Still crappy skill points, still crappy skill lists, still no options of contributing to any adventuring effort outside of combat whatsoever.
    Their skill list has still expanded somewhat (though it could stand to be expanded even more), giving them a couple of Knowledge skills that could be useful in exploring and Survival, which gives them the capability to navigate for the party and track (as a "Track" feat is no longer required for tracking beyond a DC 10). That's more than 0 ways to contribute outside of combat.
    Last edited by Reverent-One; 2011-04-12 at 02:03 PM.
    Thanks to Elrond for the Vash avatar.

  11. - Top - End - #11
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Lateral's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Boston, The World
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    More than zero, but not enough. Never enough.

  12. - Top - End - #12
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Kobold

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Euphonistan
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    Also many of those classes still lack ways to contribute outside of full attack actions. Remember in terms of in combat that was the biggest boost from TOB. You can spend a major feat tax in vital strike but even then it is not that great and due to other PF changes they ruined some possible synergies such as changing spring attack so that it is no longer an attack action (if it was like 3.5 spring attack you could use vital strike with spring attack).

    Fighters I think move up a tier since the standard fighter was really close to being tier 4 anyway. The difference between barbarians and fighters are 2 skill points (and some list access) and one alternate class feature that grants pounce.

    Rogues probably moved up since they were close anyway. Still they could really use a way to improve their standard actions.

    Monks are hard to say but I find it extremely disappointing that they did not change flurry to an attack action. That would have been huge. Considering that they have some nerfs and some boosts they probably stay put (and flurry is still not that good).

  13. - Top - End - #13
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Daemon

    Join Date
    Dec 2010

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    Monks got nerfs? I would like to see this. As far as I can tell, they got nothing but better- not that it helps much.

  14. - Top - End - #14
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Kobold

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Euphonistan
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    Flurry has a stealth nerf in it. It says that you are using two weapon fighting which means you lose out on combing flurry with two weapons like you did in 3.5. While it was not common to make it work well you could combine the two if you could find a way to improve your accuracy through various means.

    For instance at best you are getting +18/+18/+13/+13/+8/+8/+3

    The original monk had +15/+15/+15/+10/+5. If you gave them the full BAB part it would have been +20/+20/+20/+15/+10/+5 and you could add two weapon fighting if you wanted to and bring it to +18/+18/+18/+18/+13/+8/+3. Remember you want more higher bonus attacks not more lower bonus attacks. That would have been a buff. Making it two weapon fighting is a slight nerf. Not a lot but it is annoying.

    They also should have made it a full BAB class all the time. Flurry being full BAB and the rest of the time not is just dumb.

    EDIT: Also they lost access to improved natural attack and the use of secondary natural weapons in the same round as when they flurry. That is a number of more nerfs. So I take it back they don't go up a tier in my opinion. Which is too bad I really want them to.
    Last edited by MeeposFire; 2011-04-12 at 03:49 PM.

  15. - Top - End - #15
    Orc in the Playground
     
    RedSorcererGirl

    Join Date
    Mar 2011

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    Quote Originally Posted by TheCoelacanth View Post
    I would imagine that most of the classes stay in the same tier. The spellcasters lose some of the more broken spells but they still keep enough good ones not to drop a tier. The additions of bloodlines to sorcerer are nice but not enough to raise them to tier 1. Eschew materials for free doesn't substantially raise their power.
    Human sorcerer with favored class picking up the spells is pretty borderline to teir 1. At 20th level counting bloodline and favored class their list looks like
    12/8/8/7/7/7/6/6/7/4
    which is nearly double the spells compared to 3.5 in addition to UMD being a class skill keyed off their casting that. A level 1 sorc will have a +9 to UMD with effectively 0 effort (20 stat, +1 rank, + 3 class). Also an important note is that they no longer have an additional feat tax to make quicken work.

  16. - Top - End - #16
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Lateral's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Boston, The World
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    I don't know about borderline-tier 1. They may have a reasonably large list, but that's child's play to a wizard. Or cleric. Or druid.

  17. - Top - End - #17
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    RedWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2011

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    Quote Originally Posted by Infernalbargain View Post
    Human sorcerer with favored class picking up the spells is pretty borderline to teir 1. At 20th level counting bloodline and favored class their list looks like
    12/8/8/7/7/7/6/6/7/4
    which is nearly double the spells compared to 3.5 in addition to UMD being a class skill keyed off their casting that. A level 1 sorc will have a +9 to UMD with effectively 0 effort (20 stat, +1 rank, + 3 class). Also an important note is that they no longer have an additional feat tax to make quicken work.
    They're still lacking the versatility of a tier 1. That's still only 4 level 9 spells, half as many as a wizard gets for free, plus a wizard can add spells in addition to those. UMD doesn't really help since a sorcerer could already use arcane scrolls and wands without it. The ability to quicken spells is a boost in power but doesn't address the lack of versatility (relative to tier 1).

  18. - Top - End - #18
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Kobold

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Euphonistan
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    There is nothing wrong being in tier 2 anyway. In fact for the purpose that the tiers serve tier two is better than tier one in that you can interact better with more tiers. Tier two can interact well with tier ones and every tier that tier one plays nicely with plus one tier lower.

  19. - Top - End - #19
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    DruidGuy

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    Quote Originally Posted by MeeposFire View Post
    Rogues probably moved up since they were close anyway. Still they could really use a way to improve their standard actions.
    This, I think, is one of those areas where optimization levels makes a HUGE difference. Rogues gained extra HP, free feats, and the ability to sneak attack most enemies. In my game, that makes them T3.

    On the other hand, a lot of the high optimization tricks that rogues used to get full sneak attacks with huge damage got nerfed hard. I'm looking at the changes to the Ring of Blinking, Grease, and Flask-thrower rogues. If you are in a game where rogues need full attacks with sneak attack dice to compete with other high op characters, rogues may actually have lost ground.

    With regards to paladins, are we talking 3.5 core v. PF, 3.5 with all splats v. PF with access to 3.5 splats, or 3.5 with all splats v. PF only? Paladins got a lot of love in later 3.5 sources, like battle blessing and a greatly expanded spell list. A PF paladin who can use 3.5 books is definitely a strong T4 in my opinion.
    Last edited by Gnaeus; 2011-04-12 at 03:48 PM.

  20. - Top - End - #20
    Orc in the Playground
     
    RedSorcererGirl

    Join Date
    Mar 2011

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateral View Post
    I don't know about borderline-tier 1. They may have a reasonably large list, but that's child's play to a wizard. Or cleric. Or druid.
    Cleric or druid I have to concede on list size. However, I'd don't know where people get the idea that wizards are going to have every spell on hand. Simple scribing every spell from core and APG costs you 125k and requires 22 spellbooks. So having all spells would eat 1/6 of your WBL and require a strength of 15 to carry unencumbered (12 if you use 43 traveller's spellbooks). That's when your GM is being generous and is letting the local level 20 wizard copy his entire spellbook and would take 467 days. If you had to go find scrolls of everything because your GM isn't mr. yes-to-everything, then that's 437k which is over half of your WBL (for simplicity I excluded the fact that scroll cost includes material cost which would likely put it at least at 475k). Now let's be honest, most wizards are going to actually only have at most like 1/4 of the spell list in their books because of scribing time and money and the fact that there are a number of spells just aren't that good (how many wizards are going to need gentle repose?).
    Giving a wizard 1/4 of their list gives them:
    All/15/16/15/13/14/13/12/10/8
    12/8/8/7/7/7/6/6/7/4
    Suddenly doesn't look as shadowed as
    9/5/5/4/4/4/3/3/3/3 did back in 3.5.
    Now I will admit that the wizard has edge on sorcerer in situations where a specialty situation comes up just once in a campaign (water-breathing) because they can just go get the spell after a day but quite frankly the sorcerer has enough to cover his bases now. Outside of intentional GM hostility, a well built sorcerer going to be able to handle whatever you throw at him.

  21. - Top - End - #21
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Kobold

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Euphonistan
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    Quote Originally Posted by Gnaeus View Post
    This, I think, is one of those areas where optimization levels makes a HUGE difference. Rogues gained extra HP, free feats, and the ability to sneak attack most enemies. In my game, that makes them T3.

    On the other hand, a lot of the high optimization tricks that rogues used to get full sneak attacks with huge damage got nerfed hard. I'm looking at the changes to the Ring of Blinking, Grease, and Flask-thrower rogues. If you are in a game where rogues need full attacks with sneak attack dice to compete with other high op characters, rogues may actually have lost ground.

    With regards to paladins, are we talking 3.5 core v. PF, 3.5 with all splats v. PF with access to 3.5 splats, or 3.5 with all splats v. PF only? Paladins got a lot of love in later 3.5 sources, like battle blessing and a greatly expanded spell list. A PF paladin who can use 3.5 books is definitely a strong T4 in my opinion.
    Honestly this is one area where I think PF really dropped the ball. TOB and the multishot line of feats showed the way to making things work better for full attack based characters and they ignored it and produced classes that have the same basic problem as the classes made at the start of 3.0. It is so aggravating.

    I had thought that same question in regards to how we are comparing things. I assumed we have access to all splats since I also assume we still compare these classes to 3.5 only classes like TOB.

    Also I added even more ways monks were nerfed. Can you believe it they decided to nerf monks? Was it necessary? I mean if you took the PF monk, kept 3.5 flurry, made the flurry an attack action, allowed them to use imp. natural attack and let you use natural attacks like they did in 3.5, and just gave them full BAB would they really be too powerful? I don't seeing it being better than tier 3. If it got up to tier three that would be just right in my opinion (tiers 2-4 are where I like things and tier 3 is my golden tier when I think about tiers).

  22. - Top - End - #22
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    RedWizardGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2011

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    Quote Originally Posted by Infernalbargain View Post
    Simple scribing every spell from core and APG costs you 125k and requires 22 spellbooks. So having all spells would eat 1/6 of your WBL and require a strength of 15 to carry unencumbered (12 if you use 43 traveller's spellbooks). That's when your GM is being generous and is letting the local level 20 wizard copy his entire spellbook and would take 467 days. If you had to go find scrolls of everything because your GM isn't mr. yes-to-everything, then that's 437k which is over half of your WBL (for simplicity I excluded the fact that scroll cost includes material cost which would likely put it at least at 475k).
    A blessed book costs 12500 gp, has 1000 pages, weighs 1 pound and doesn't cost money to copy spells into. You could fit almost the entire list into two of those.

    Now let's be honest, most wizards are going to actually only have at most like 1/4 of the spell list in their books because of scribing time and money and the fact that there are a number of spells just aren't that good (how many wizards are going to need gentle repose?).
    Giving a wizard 1/4 of their list gives them:
    All/15/16/15/13/14/13/12/10/8
    12/8/8/7/7/7/6/6/7/4
    Suddenly doesn't look as shadowed as
    9/5/5/4/4/4/3/3/3/3 did back in 3.5.
    The wizard still has roughly twice as many spells of every level except cantrips.

    Outside of intentional GM hostility, a well built sorcerer going to be able to handle whatever you throw at him.
    That's what makes it tier 2. They'll be able to handle almost anything but they might have to settle for a less than optimal spell. The tier 1 classes, given time, all have the potential to get any spell on their list. With some foresight, possibly from divination spells, they can be prepared for any situation. A sorcerer has to make do with the spells they know.

  23. - Top - End - #23
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Doc Roc's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    Let's clarify something:
    Being Tier One Is Not Necessarily Good.
    Tier Two is a lot more fun, in my opinion and experience.
    Last edited by Doc Roc; 2011-04-12 at 04:39 PM.
    Lagren: I took Livers Need Not Apply, only reflavoured.
    DocRoc: to?
    Lagren: So whenever Harry wisecracks, he regains HP.

  24. - Top - End - #24
    Troll in the Playground
     
    WhiteWizardGirl

    Join Date
    Mar 2009

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    Given the way that the tier system is set up, the difference between tier 2 and tier 1 is simply that tier 1 has theoretical access to their entire spell list. Tier 2 is equally powerful (generally), but simply are "locked in" to one certain set of gamebreaking tricks as opposed to having access to multiples depending on the day or target.
    BEEP.

  25. - Top - End - #25
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Broken Damaged Worthless

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    Quote Originally Posted by Doc Roc View Post
    Let's clarify something:
    Being Tier One Is Not Necessarily Good.
    Tier Two is a lot more fun, in my opinion and experience.
    I love you, unnecessary capitalization and all.

    Also, on the topic of PF, we should really be asking "where are the new classes on the Tier list?" To that end, here's my ballparks:
    -Oracle and Witch are both Tier 1 or 2, easy. Full casters with abilities that matter. Go figure.
    -Summoner is probably Tier 3, for the same reason that a Druid sans Wild Shape would be Tier 3-ish and that the Wildshape Ranger is Tier 3.
    -Inquisitor is also probably Tier 3, maybe Tier 4. A useful spell list, but not that great, a moderately good combatant, and the teamwork feat sub-theme thing it has going on is kinda nice. A deep skill list is another bonus.
    -Alchemist is tough to classify. The extract list is pretty underwhelming, bombs are pretty meh, and mutagens are also kinda meh. The idea seems to be to make a gish out of the box, but I don't feel like it does a great job. Still, a reasonably deep skill list and lots of options likely put the Alchemist in Tier 3, though Tier 4 would be reasonable as well.
    -Finally, the Cavalier. I don't feel like the Cavalier is diverse enough to really justify being placed any higher than Tier 4, and could honestly see it as Tier 5 (though that's a bit harsh IMO).

    We range from Tiers 1 to 4 (5 if you feel mean-spirited towards the Cavalier) here. I think that's pretty reasonable.

    All that I say applies only to myself. You author your own actions and choices. I cannot and will not be responsible for you, nor are you for me, regardless of situation or circumstance.

  26. - Top - End - #26
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Doc Roc's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    Okay, say anything else you want about PF and Paizo. Summoner is really cool, and really well executed. Could have been better, you find yourself with boring standard actions a lot, but...

    Still. It's darn cool.
    Lagren: I took Livers Need Not Apply, only reflavoured.
    DocRoc: to?
    Lagren: So whenever Harry wisecracks, he regains HP.

  27. - Top - End - #27
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Lateral's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Boston, The World
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    Quote Originally Posted by Doc Roc View Post
    Let's clarify something:
    Being Tier One Is Not Necessarily Good.
    Tier Two is a lot more fun, in my opinion and experience.
    THIS VERY MUCH SO.

    ...Also, Tier 1 has all this bookkeeping that I can't really handle. I've never really played a Wizard (Clerics and Druids don't have spellbooks so it's easier, but it's still irritating,) but I've had fun with Sorcerers, Beguilers and Psions- all tier 2 or 3 casterfesters.
    Last edited by Lateral; 2011-04-12 at 05:13 PM.

  28. - Top - End - #28
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Broken Damaged Worthless

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    Quote Originally Posted by Doc Roc View Post
    Okay, say anything else you want about PF and Paizo. Summoner is really cool, and really well executed. Could have been better, you find yourself with boring standard actions a lot, but...

    Still. It's darn cool.
    It's pretty decent, yeah. A solid class and a solid concept. Not complaining about it in the slightest.

    Is something similar slated for Legend, out of curiosity?

    All that I say applies only to myself. You author your own actions and choices. I cannot and will not be responsible for you, nor are you for me, regardless of situation or circumstance.

  29. - Top - End - #29
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Doc Roc's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    Quote Originally Posted by arguskos View Post
    It's pretty decent, yeah. A solid class and a solid concept. Not complaining about it in the slightest.

    Is something similar slated for Legend, out of curiosity?
    We can do it in Legend, and it may show up, but it won't be first party. I'm not out to steal Paizo's lunch. :)
    Despite their somewhat curious treatment of certain elements of the optimization community, I'm not convinced they threw the first stone there. A lot of the people involved were pretty famously trolltastic, and could have handled the situation with wildly more aplomb. But then, they were denizens, and even I tend to regard that culture with the same dispassion you'd expect from someone vivisecting a snail. Paizo is mostly good people, who want desperately to make things that are good and fun.

    There's plenty of wilds to explore, and so much to build. Room enough for us both.
    Last edited by Doc Roc; 2011-04-12 at 05:08 PM.
    Lagren: I took Livers Need Not Apply, only reflavoured.
    DocRoc: to?
    Lagren: So whenever Harry wisecracks, he regains HP.

  30. - Top - End - #30
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Kobold

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Euphonistan
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: pathfinder tiers

    Oracle is probably tier 2. Spontaneous casting and cleric list.

    Witch is harder to judge. You will need somebody to decide based fully on the spell list. There are some nice spells on it but by RAW since it is a custom list it will not have the support that the oracle gets for instance which can hurt a lot. It could have the dread necromancer "problem" (spell list too restricted to get into the higher tiers).

    Inquisitor seems like to me a combo of ranger and paladin but it does not seem that good to me. I would think tier 4.

    I agree with you on the summoner and alchemist. Probably closer to tier 4 on the alchemist but I am not entirely sure.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •