Pathfinder Tier System

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Paladin got buffed significantly, but it doesn't get into T3 because it doesn't have the utility of a T3 class. It's quite good at what it does - killing evil stuff - and is better at other things than before, but you need more than 'not completely terrible at other things' to get into T3. Like the ranger, it's high T4.

Trip got nerfed, and it was only bread and butter in 3.5 if you didn't go charge or dungeoncrasher.

[SuperFerret]

By being high level. Really, at that point it's extremely hard to run out of useful spells. A more literal way to do it is to use echoing spell; it allows you to use the same spell once more in the day. Apply echoing spell again. Infinite spells.

Ah.

So glad I don't have to deal with that crap.

[Starbuck_II]

Hm, Beast Totem. Pounce at level 1 for 10 feet of movement is better than Pounce at level 10 for significant investment in rage powers you probably won't even fully utilize (weapon probably > claws), and you still have the whole instant death problem... but Pounce is Pounce. Low T4 it is.

True, the claws aren't very useful unless your using armor spikes or Bazebu Beard off hand weapons so hands are free to use claws.

But Pounce is neat (although they probably intended claws only but no limitation listed).

And Ranger is trapfinder (with right achetype) now so low Tier 3 easy.

[MeeposFire]

I wish they had not messed with many shot. It was nice being able to shoot a near full attack while on the run. Now it is just rapid shot all over again as if my archer characters needed more attacks on a full attack.

[Starbuck_II]

I wish they had not messed with many shot. It was nice being able to shoot a near full attack while on the run. Now it is just rapid shot all over again as if my archer characters needed more attacks on a full attack.

Yeah, but you can now combine Many Shot with Rapid Shot so it depends on needs.

[MeeposFire]

Yeah, but you can now combine Many Shot with Rapid Shot so it depends on needs.

But as I said I don't need another way of adding another extra attack on a full attack. I can already destroy on a full attack and I have so many attacks it already slows things down. many shot was useful because it could be used in situations that would not allow me to full attack such as when I have to move or when I am slowed. That extra versatility is now lost and it makes archers more dependent on full attacks than before and that is not a good thing.

[Big Fau]

Paizo wasn't trying to make balanced classes, they were trying to make classes without dead levels. Which they did very well. The issue with the fighter is that he cannot be balanced and Still Be A Fighter.

BS. They claimed early on that they were "fixing" the classes, that Pathfinder would be "more balanced" than 3.5.

It is, but marginally. They didn't shake up the tiers at all (save the Paladin, which is the only thing in the PF Core book that's actually fixed by comparison, and the Soulknife, which was done by Dreamscared Press and not Paizo). Their nerfs either didn't go far enough or were aimed at the wrong class (Archery got a nice shaft through the leg, Barbarian and Bard got their core mechanics shafted on release; mechanically you were better off converting manually than using what they gave you), they ignored several issues, and they nicked the surface of the spells while turning a blind eye to the rest of it (despite having ready access to information regarding those spells).

They also didn't resolve major issues with the CR system, but that's hardly their fault (WotC ****ed that up beyond salvaging).




You want proof Paizo doesn't know jack about balance? Improved Natural Attack and Dodge are considered overpowered for players. Both have been nerfed. The +2/+2 feats are STILL inferior to Skill Focus, and Skill Focus is still useless outside of prerequisites. And the Candle of Invocation got BETTER! How the hell is that even possible?!?!

[Shadow Lord]

BS. They claimed early on that they were "fixing" the classes, that Pathfinder would be "more balanced" than 3.5.

It is, but marginally. They didn't shake up the tiers at all (save the Paladin, which is the only thing in the PF Core book that's actually fixed by comparison, and the Soulknife, which was done by Dreamscared Press and not Paizo). Their nerfs either didn't go far enough or were aimed at the wrong class (Archery got a nice shaft through the leg, Barbarian and Bard got their core mechanics shafted on release; mechanically you were better off converting manually than using what they gave you), they ignored several issues, and they nicked the surface of the spells while turning a blind eye to the rest of it (despite having ready access to information regarding those spells).

They also didn't resolve major issues with the CR system, but that's hardly their fault (WotC ****ed that up beyond salvaging).




You want proof Paizo doesn't know jack about balance? Improved Natural Attack and Dodge are considered overpowered for players. Both have been nerfed. The +2/+2 feats are STILL inferior to Skill Focus, and Skill Focus is still useless outside of prerequisites. And the Candle of Invocation got BETTER! How the hell is that even possible?!?!

Really? Because it's not like you aren't limited to class skills anymore. It's not like you can actually build an Item Creation character who isn't like five levels below everyone else. And how is Candle of Invocation better? Explain that to me. Also: Why should feats that boost two skills be superior to one that boosts only one skill. I can admit that Pathfinder isn't perfect, but it's a helluva lot more balanced and fun than D&D 3.5, what with the more customizable options. Really, you come across as a rampant fan boy who has a grudge against Paizo.

[Hiro Protagonest]

Really? Because it's not like you aren't limited to class skills anymore. It's not like you can actually build an Item Creation character who isn't like five levels below everyone else. And how is Candle of Invocation better? Explain that to me. Also: Why should feats that boost two skills be superior to one that boosts only one skill. I can admit that Pathfinder isn't perfect, but it's a helluva lot more balanced and fun than D&D 3.5, what with the more customizable options. Really, you come across as a rampant fan boy who has a grudge against Paizo.

No, Paizo hasn't fixed anything. They made it so that dodge gave you a +1 dodge bonus to AC against everybody. They then thought it was overpowered and hit it really hard with the nerfbat. And that's just one thing.

Also, you come across as a rampant fanboy who refuses to see Pathfinder's flaws. You think that's a cheap argument? You used the exact same one.

[Shadow Lord]

No, Paizo hasn't fixed anything. They made it so that dodge gave you a +1 dodge bonus to AC against everybody. They then thought it was overpowered and hit it really hard with the nerfbat. And that's just one thing.

Also, you come across as a rampant fanboy who refuses to see Pathfinder's flaws. You think that's a cheap argument? You used the exact same one.

Yes, but I can admit that I'm a rampant fanboy. And I do know Pathfinder's flaws; it's just I try to overlook them.

Anyhoo, I believe we have collectively derailed the thread enough; let us please get back on topic with this:

Witches. Theyse some weird stuff, and I'm not sure they are Tier 1.

[Big Fau]

Really? Because it's not like you aren't limited to class skills anymore. It's not like you can actually build an Item Creation character who isn't like five levels below everyone else. And how is Candle of Invocation better? Explain that to me. Also: Why should feats that boost two skills be superior to one that boosts only one skill. I can admit that Pathfinder isn't perfect, but it's a helluva lot more balanced and fun than D&D 3.5, what with the more customizable options. Really, you come across as a rampant fan boy who has a grudge against Paizo.

I do have a grudge against them: For being banned from their forums despite trying to offer Beta playtesting results. Along with 15 other people I know. They really did ignore any advice that wasn't "I'm enjoying this, and think Class X is working just fine".

I just can't understand how people can work with a company that would ban people for trying to be constructive with their criticism. And before you say it: I was as civil there as I am when giving build advice here. They banned me for agreeing with another poster (Crusader of Logic if memory serves).


As for the Candle, crafting it no longer costs XP. That's called a buff, because they can now craft them endlessly. At least prior to that a caster was limited by XP. The fact that they never removed it from the rules entirely is a huge oversight on their part.

[Curious]

Yes, but I can admit that I'm a rampant fanboy. And I do know Pathfinder's flaws; it's just I try to overlook them.

Anyhoo, I believe we have collectively derailed the thread enough; let us please get back on topic with this:

Witches. Theyse some weird stuff, and I'm not sure they are Tier 1.

Oh, they're tier 1 all right. Ninth level spells, which they can learn like wizards, and Su abilities that never run out. Solid tier 1.

[Shadow Lord]

I do have a grudge against them: For being banned from their forums despite trying to offer Beta playtesting results. Along with 15 other people I know. They really did ignore any advice that wasn't "I'm enjoying this, and think Class X is working just fine".

I just can't understand how people can work with a company that would ban people for trying to be constructive with their criticism. And before you say it: I was as civil there as I am when giving build advice here. They banned me for agreeing with another poster (Crusader of Logic if memory serves).


As for the Candle, crafting it no longer costs XP. That's called a buff, because they can now craft them endlessly. At least prior to that a caster was limited by XP. The fact that they never removed it from the rules entirely is a huge oversight on their part.

Still, a single oversight isn't that much. And banning you could've been an accident. You can always ask them about that. Though, typically Companies never answer me when I ask why I got banned

[Hiro Protagonest]

Still, a single oversight isn't that much. And banning you could've been an accident. You can always ask them about that. Though, typically Companies never answer me when I ask why I got banned

Could've been an accident? Riiiight. He said he and the others who got banned all gave criticism instead of just praise.

Also, taking away XP costs for items makes wizards more powerful even without candle of invocation, and if they truly wanted to balance it, they would've looked for every trick, and it wouldn't be that hard either, seeing as how D&D 3.5 forums will be able to tell you what most of them are.

[Shadow Lord]

Stop crushing my Dreams T.T

[Big Fau]

Still, a single oversight isn't that much. And banning you could've been an accident. You can always ask them about that. Though, typically Companies never answer me when I ask why I got banned

A single oversight that can end a campaign as early as 5th level. 8th if you follow that "1/4 of your WBL" guideline in the DMG.


Edit:

He said he and the others who got banned all gave criticism instead of just praise.

No, the reason was for giving critique while simultaneously agreeing with CoL. He's hated over there.

[Darcand]

BS. They claimed early on that they were "fixing" the classes, that Pathfinder would be "more balanced" than 3.5.

It is, but marginally. They didn't shake up the tiers at all (save the Paladin, which is the only thing in the PF Core book that's actually fixed by comparison, and the Soulknife, which was done by Dreamscared Press and not Paizo). Their nerfs either didn't go far enough or were aimed at the wrong class (Archery got a nice shaft through the leg, Barbarian and Bard got their core mechanics shafted on release; mechanically you were better off converting manually than using what they gave you), they ignored several issues, and they nicked the surface of the spells while turning a blind eye to the rest of it (despite having ready access to information regarding those spells).

They also didn't resolve major issues with the CR system, but that's hardly their fault (WotC ****ed that up beyond salvaging).




You want proof Paizo doesn't know jack about balance? Improved Natural Attack and Dodge are considered overpowered for players. Both have been nerfed. The +2/+2 feats are STILL inferior to Skill Focus, and Skill Focus is still useless outside of prerequisites. And the Candle of Invocation got BETTER! How the hell is that even possible?!?!

Again, you can't "fix" this game's classes without taking them completely apart and rebuilding them as the same class with nine different kinds of fluff. They didn't set out to do that, they set out to create content that was more fun to play then what was previously published, while still being recognisable for an easy transitition.

Everything else is left up to the players to balance out themselves. Yes, you can still batman out a wizard, or end a campaign at level 5 with a candle, but doing so doesn't mean you win, all it means is that you've ruined the experiance for your friends.

[Sunken Valley]

So what would you say the tiers of the non 3.5 classes are?

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Again, you can't "fix" this game's classes without taking them completely apart and rebuilding them as the same class with nine different kinds of fluff. They didn't set out to do that, they set out to create content that was more fun to play then what was previously published, while still being recognisable for an easy transitition.

Everything else is left up to the players to balance out themselves. Yes, you can still batman out a wizard, or end a campaign at level 5 with a candle, but doing so doesn't mean you win, all it means is that you've ruined the experiance for your friends.

The candle of invocation is like a grenade in a toolbox. Sure, if the handyman fools around with it and blows himself up it's his fault, but what the hell is it doing there in the first place!?

[Gnaeus]

Paladin got buffed significantly, but it doesn't get into T3 because it doesn't have the utility of a T3 class. It's quite good at what it does - killing evil stuff - and is better at other things than before, but you need more than 'not completely terrible at other things' to get into T3. Like the ranger, it's high T4.
.

I agree with your ultimate conclusion, but saying that paladin got buffed considerably is questionable.

Paladin got buffed considerably over 3.5 CORE, where paladin was low tier 5.

Is a PF paladin better than a 3.5 paladin who casts his spells as swift actions with Battle Blessing, who uses his turn undead attempts for Travel Devotion, who has the huge list of Spell Compendium spells available, and picks the best ones (other than the ones that he memorizes) for wand use in a wand chamber in his weapon? Its hard to prove, but I wouldn't say so.

Oh, they're tier 1 all right. Ninth level spells, which they can learn like wizards, and Su abilities that never run out. Solid tier 1.

The thing that pushed them over the top was their support in later books. When Paizo showed that their spell list would expand at a rate similar to Wizards, they clearly became T1.

[Engine]

I agree with your ultimate conclusion, but saying that paladin got buffed considerably is questionable.

Paladin got buffed considerably over 3.5 CORE, where paladin was low tier 5.

Is a PF paladin better than a 3.5 paladin who casts his spells as swift actions with Battle Blessing, who uses his turn undead attempts for Travel Devotion, who has the huge list of Spell Compendium spells available, and picks the best ones (other than the ones that he memorizes) for wand use in a wand chamber in his weapon? Its hard to prove, but I wouldn't say so.

You're right, but you have to consider that Pathfinder doesn't have the same number of splatbooks 3.5 had. It's a bit unfair IMHO to compare those classes using the sheer number of option that 3.5 had.

[Gnaeus]

You're right, but you have to consider that Pathfinder doesn't have the same number of splatbooks 3.5 had. It's a bit unfair IMHO to compare those classes using the sheer number of option that 3.5 had.

I am not saying that Paizo is wrongbad for not having all those options. Fairness isn't really a consideration in a tier discussion. I am saying that the Tiers describe capabilities, not design intentions. Maybe the PF paladin will someday beat the 3.5 paladin. But I don't think it has happened yet.

[Blisstake]

The candle of invocation is like a grenade in a toolbox. Sure, if the handyman fools around with it and blows himself up it's his fault, but what the hell is it doing there in the first place!?

Considering it can be made at level 17th at minimum, it shouldn't be available in most games, and even then, maybe it is, but not for the alignment you want. It also takes 4 hours to use the gate effect, so it's no help in the middle of combat, and requires standard bargaining with the outsider (base of paying them 1,000 gold per hit dice per hour).

Unless you have a really lax DM, you're absolutely right in the sense that it shouldn't even be there.

Anyway, for the tiers itself, is the same definition of each tier being used as the infamous 3.5 tier list? If so, I don't think much changed since Pathfinder. Many classes are much better at what they do, but don't really do much differently (except for some casters who relied on particular spells that have been edited). Of course, I'm pretty sure that was Paizo's plan from the start - putting all of the classes on the same level using the 3.5 system is pretty much impossible.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

I agree with your ultimate conclusion, but saying that paladin got buffed considerably is questionable.

Paladin got buffed considerably over 3.5 CORE, where paladin was low tier 5.

Is a PF paladin better than a 3.5 paladin who casts his spells as swift actions with Battle Blessing, who uses his turn undead attempts for Travel Devotion, who has the huge list of Spell Compendium spells available, and picks the best ones (other than the ones that he memorizes) for wand use in a wand chamber in his weapon? Its hard to prove, but I wouldn't say so.

I was comparing core to core, considering people can and often do mix 3.5 splats with pathfinder. The paladin you mentioned is still going to be significantly improved if he gets CHA-based casting, encounter-long smiting, and other goodies (assuming DM allows channel energy/TU equivalence, which is pretty straightforward)... now that I think of it, that's starting to creep into T3.

[Big Fau]

Considering it can be made at level 17th at minimum, it shouldn't be available in most games, and even then, maybe it is, but not for the alignment you want. It also takes 4 hours to use the gate effect, so it's no help in the middle of combat, and requires standard bargaining with the outsider (base of paying them 1,000 gold per hit dice per hour).

What?

Each of these special tapers is dedicated to one of the nine alignments. Simply burning the candle generates a favorable aura for the individual so doing if the candle’s alignment matches that of the character. Characters of the same alignment as the burning candle add a +2 morale bonus on attack rolls, saving throws, and skill checks while within 30 feet of the flame.

A cleric whose alignment matches the candle’s operates as if two levels higher for purposes of determining spells per day if he burns the candle during or just prior to his spell preparation time. He can even cast spells normally unavailable to him, as if he were of that higher level, but only so long as the candle continues to burn. Except in special cases (see below), a candle burns for 4 hours.

In addition, burning a candle also allows the owner to cast a gate spell, the respondent being of the same alignment as the candle, but the taper is immediately consumed in the process. It is possible to extinguish the candle simply by blowing it out, so users often place it in a lantern to protect it from drafts and the like. Doing this doesn’t interfere with its magical properties.

It says nothing about taking 4 hours to use the Gate effect, just that it burns for 4 hours unless you use the Gate effect.

[Gnaeus]

I was comparing core to core, considering people can and often do mix 3.5 splats with pathfinder.

Some do, some don't. Some allow pieces. Core to core is fair for discussion, as long as it is clear that that is what you are comparing. Core + relevant splats for that system is also fair. By the time you are assuming PF +3.5 splats, you are really wandering into houserule territory. Heck, some play 3.5 + pathfinder splats.

The paladin you mentioned is still going to be significantly improved if he gets CHA-based casting, encounter-long smiting, and other goodies (assuming DM allows channel energy/TU equivalence, which is pretty straightforward)... now that I think of it, that's starting to creep into T3.

But that is no longer the Pathfinder tier. It is a combo system tier. I could just as well state that in my game, we play with 3.5 rules, but we use the PF paladin base class, which lots of people on this board have advocated as a 3.5 paladin fix (and as one of the most balanced things Paizo has done), and therefore my 3.5 paladin is tier 3. Yes, I suppose he is, but he really isn't 3.5 any more.

[Blisstake]

My mistake, I apologize. I misread it and thought it was the other way around.

Regardless, the spell Gate now requires that you either call a specific creature (which would also be limited by the alignment of the candle, and be unlikely you even know any planar entities), and bargain with them. If you don't know a specific creature and cannot bargain, they immediately are called back to their plane. I assume any being worth calling also has a way to return to to their home plane, so unless you've got a really clueless DM, it's not really that gamebreaking.

This seems a bit pointless though, since it was the same in 3.5, wasn't it? The only difference is that the candle should cost an extra 10,000 for the newly added component cost of gate when you ummon (a mistake on Paizo's part).

[NamelessNPC]

No, Paizo hasn't fixed anything. They made it so that dodge gave you a +1 dodge bonus to AC against everybody. They then thought it was overpowered and hit it really hard with the nerfbat. And that's just one thing.

Also, you come across as a rampant fanboy who refuses to see Pathfinder's flaws. You think that's a cheap argument? You used the exact same one.

Dodge (Combat)
Your training and reflexes allow you to react swiftly to avoid an opponents' attacks.
Prerequisite: Dex 13.
Benefit: You gain a +1 dodge bonus to your AC. A condition that makes you lose your Dex bonus to AC also makes you lose the benefits of this feat.

+1 Dodge AC, against everyone. I'm not trying to be a jerk, but please try to inform yourself before argueing so vehemently, so we can have a better discussion.


Also, because I think someone asked, the inquisitor is tier 3. It has really cool combat abilities, 6th level casting, 6+int skill ranks per level (with useful class skills), 2 good saves and Stalwart (which I think is the same you call Mettle)

[Psyren]

I'll be the first to admit that Pathfinder is unbalanced. It's practically the first thing Saph says in the PF Handbook - Pathfinder is NOT "3.5 fixed."

Why is that a problem? There is a perfectly balanced way to play D&D - it's called 4e, and I'm assuming that most of the people that frequent this forum aren't interested in that level of homogeneity.

It honestly doesn't matter if a class is unbalanced if the players don't abuse its potential. What matters is - can a class cope with the challenges it's expected to at each level in the game? I think that Pathfinder classes by and large meet this objective better than 3.5 classes do. Certainly a Pathfinder Paladin, Rogue, Ranger, Soulknife... even the Fighter and Monk, can account for themselves much better in the face of level-appropriate challenges than their 3.5 counterparts, and that is what matters.

3.5 had Fighters that could barely jump/swim, Soulknives and Monks that could barely fight, Rogues that were useless against many enemies without heavy splat support etc. Can the Wizard still blow them all away? Of course, but I still think Pathfinder has more for every class to do, which translates to more fun.

[SuperFerret]

No, Paizo hasn't fixed anything. They made it so that dodge gave you a +1 dodge bonus to AC against everybody. They then thought it was overpowered and hit it really hard with the nerfbat. And that's just one thing.

Errata, I'm guessing?