Tier System

[vrigar]

Just went over the tier system again (wizard top, fighter bottom) and every time it looks like complete bull**** to me. Complete and utter bull****. In the example for the list in which the black dragon is involved the wizard can simply kill the dragon while the fighter would be struggling at best.
Really???
I get the other examples but this? At level 7 where with not too powerful feats and magical items the fighter can cause high end 2 digit damage in a single round and the wizard will barely be able to hurt the dragon.
According to the tier system you can't really have the classic group of wizard, cleric, fighter and rogue because pretty soon the fighter and rogue will become useless. Anyone who played a campaign or two knows that this is bull**** as well. Granted they are more versatile but the occasions in which they are outmatched are not all that rare.
Except for spell caster worship, is there something I'm missing?

[eggs]

I am not going to defend the tier system, but the Archivist/Artificer/Cleric/Wizards' class abilities are hundreds of pages long, and those abilities are available to all of them. If they know they're going to have a particular problem, odds are with enough splatbook-diving, they'll come up with an easy solution that the Monk & co. just don't have.

In the case of a dragon, the stock answer is Shivering touch, but other effects like Rays of Dizziness or Exhaustion can also shut the encounter down without a save.

[Tvtyrant]

Mate, I think you are putting more emotional energy into this than it deserves. It is a way of looking at a pen and paper RPG from a standpoint of power and versatility, it isn't meant to be an insult.

[ThiagoMartell]

Mate, I think you are putting more emotional energy into this than it deserves. It is a way of looking at a pen and paper RPG from a standpoint of power and versatility, it isn't meant to be an insult.

QFT.
Don't like the tier system? Don't use it.

[The-Mage-King]

QFT.
Don't like the tier system? Don't use it.

You can't not use it. It's a simple rating of maximum potential. Sure, you may not pay attention to it, but it's still there.



@OP: What you're missing is this.

The tier system isn't a rating of sheer damage dealing. It's about how many options each class has. The wizard has more options to deal with (note that it's not "kill") the dragon. The thing is, if they plan out a set up to deal with a dragon, and then need to deal with a mystery the next day, they can change their focus with 9 hours (8 for rest, 1 for spells).

The fighter, though? He can't. He's stuck being preped for dealing with the dragon, and doesn't even have the skill points to do anything other than stand around like Beef McHugechunk during the mystery, unless fighting occurs.


Furthermore, as I mentioned above, the tier system is potential, assuming equal optimization, not automatic strength. A poorly made and played (in mechanical terms) wizard can be far weaker than a well built and played (again, mechanically) fighter. The same is true of any class, though some have lower optimization floors than others.

[ThiagoMartell]

You can't not use it. It's a simple rating of maximum potential. Sure, you may not pay attention to it, but it's still there.

Why does it "being there" matter? There is a phone at my side. I'm not using it. There is a PSP behing my laptop. I'm not using it. There is a water bottle on the shelf above my head. I'm also not using it. All that stuff are "there".
If you don't use the tier system (as in, balance your games according to premises therein) it makes no difference, does it? It's still there, but you're not using it, so why should it bother you?

[The Random NPC]

Because it's a list, it isn't something you use, so much as it's something that's just there. Like a listing of yogurt flavors.

[DoughGuy]

Wizards arent about dealing damage though. Dealing damage is bad. Save or suck/lose spells are better. The wizard cant damage the dragon but it can lock thre dragon down in numerous ways.

It depends what level of optimisation you play at that determines whether clases become useless or not. At lower levels of optimisation it doesnt matter what teir everyone is. But at high end optimising you wont see anything below tier 3 really able to contribute.

The tiers are a useful tool, but not everyone needs or uses them.

[ThiagoMartell]

Because it's a list, it isn't something you use, so much as it's something that's just there. Like a listing of yogurt flavors.

The tier system is not just a list. It's a tool. Yes, it is something you use. That's whole point of it - being used.
Also, does a list of yogurt flavors bother you?

[The Random NPC]

No, I was merely attempting to explain his position.

[Ceaon]

... I get the other examples... At level 7... the wizard will barely be able to hurt the dragon... the fighter and rogue will become useless. Anyone who played a campaign or two knows that this is bull**** as well.

These snips to me show that, while you are quite able to grasp the full potential of lower-tier classes, you do not grasp the full potential of spell casters. (Quick example: Shivering Touch.)

Oddly, when casters are not played to their potential, balance is often at its best in D&D.

It is quite easy to build a useless low-tier class. It is also quite easy to build a useless high-tier class. It is however much harder to fully optimize a low-tier class, and it is extremely hard to fully optimize a high-tier class.

In short, the tier system list does not measure the power of characters, it measures the maximum power and versatility of classes.

Edit: It's a list, not a system, which means that it is always potentially there, even though you may not see it in your current game. The tool-part of it comes when you read all the secondary stuff JaronK wrote, but the list part is the essential part.

Edit 2: Regarding rogues and fighters becoming useless: if a DM builds his encounters to match a well-optimized high-tier character, then yes, low-tier characters are in over their heads. But, as you rightly claim, a DM can also build his encounters to match the low-tier characters, and in that case, they will not be useless, although potentially still outshone by higher-tier characters. The problem is that some low-tier characters have problems with dealing with by-the-book-appropriate-CR monsters, which for me is when a character feels "too weak".

[Killer Angel]

Why does it "being there" matter? There is a phone at my side. I'm not using it. There is a PSP behing my laptop. I'm not using it. There is a water bottle on the shelf above my head. I'm also not using it. All that stuff are "there".
If you don't use the tier system (as in, balance your games according to premises therein) it makes no difference, does it? It's still there, but you're not using it, so why should it bother you?

The phone is a PC class. If you're not using it, you're not playing.
The tier system tells you that a cell phone with a camera is more versatile than an old telephone tied to the wall.
It can be wrong to let your gamestyle be influenced by the TS, but facts are facts, and spells give you more versatility than sword and shield.
This is why "you may not pay attention to it, but it's still there".

That said, you can certainly choose to not use it as a guidance for the group's composition, and so on.

[Keneth]

Also, does a list of yogurt flavors bother you?

Yes, how dare they tell me which one is more healthy for me in the long run!

The tier "system" is fine, who or what can kill certain creatures at certain levels is mostly irrelevant in grand scope of things.

[Togo]

You're missing a few things, yes. The most obvious is that the Tier list does not reflect typical members of their class (is there such a thing in a diverse hobby?) but rather what the author believes ends up being the case after all classes are optimised to the hilt. The problem with such heavy optimisation is that it doesn't necessarily reflect what would be allowed in a particular game, assumes a fairly generous reading and application of the rules, and largely ignores practical difficulties that might reasonably crop up during an actual game. For people who run their games like this, and there are a few, it's fairly accurate. For people who don't, it's a fairly useful list of which classes may need attention to make sure they fit into a balanced game.

That said, I find it hard to disagree with much of what you say. Certainly I've never seen such problems cropping up in my own games, or those run by most people I know and/or play with. I can see how such a problem would arise though.

[Killer Angel]

You're missing a few things, yes. The most obvious is that the Tier list does not reflect typical members of their class (is there such a thing in a diverse hobby?) but rather what the author believes ends up being the case after all classes are optimised to the hilt. The problem with such heavy optimisation is that it doesn't necessarily reflect what would be allowed in a particular game,

Nope.
The tier system works assuming an equal level of optimization. Even a poor optimization. Because an unoptimized wizard with invisibility, fireball, fly and teleport, will be far more versatile than an unoptimized fighter with Weapon Specialization, a +2 sword and armor and no magic tools for flying.

[Dusk Eclipse]

Togo the tier system explicity mentions that it doesn't expect heavy optimization, it expects people are optimizing to the same degree be it low optimization (a full Bab class putting strength as hisnhighest stat, selecting oower attack, a spellcaster focusing on his casting stat, a skillmonkey focusing on skills which he will use regularly, etc. or high optimization with tricks like DMM, shock trooper, SA+Craven+ huge amount of hits, etc.

Besides it doesn't say A wizard will always tear up your game and dominate everything, it says a wizard can do that while a fighter can't.

[LordBlades]

Nope.
The tier system works assuming an equal level of optimization. Even a poor optimization. Because an unoptimized wizard with invisibility, fireball, fly and teleport, will be far more versatile than an unoptimized fighter with Weapon Specialization, a +2 sword and armor and no magic tools for flying.

+1. Why these things don't show up on many low powered games is because optimizing a caster is harder than optimizing a martial class. For starters, in order to get the full potential of a wizard or cleric you need to ignore what the book hints you should be doing (blasting and healing respectively) and that's not something most people would do.

[Serafina]

You're looking at the one situation the Fighter is good at (dealing damage).
You are ignoring all the other situations that will come up in a game.
And the Tier System is a definition of "how many situations can i effectively deal with", not "how much damage can i dish out".

Examples:

- what if you have to gather information to find out where the dragon has his hoard? The Wizard has a variety of tools for that (starting with Charm Person, and going into Divination), the Fighter has - well, Intimidation maybe.

- the dragons hoard is in difficult terrain - since its a black dragon, a swamp or underwater. The Wizard has spells for that, the Fighter has no way to deal with it outside of magic items (which everyone can use).

- obviously the hoard can have traps for defense. The Wizard can deal with them (detect them via divination, or Summon Monster I to trigger them). The Fighter can at best trigger them and hope he makes his save/has enough hitpoints.

- the dragon can fly. So can the Wizard beyond a certain level - the fighter can't without magic items (which again, everyone can use and the fighter is not better at it then everyone else). Worse yet the Wizards spells are inherently ranged, while the Fighters fighting most likely isn't.

- The Wizard can protect against the Dragons attacks better - protection against energy against the breath weapon, mirror image or blink against melee. The Fighter has AC and hitpoints, but thats it.

- The Wizard can simply summon a monster to serve as a meatshield and dish out damage.

- without metagaming, the Wizard has a very good chance to know the dragons capabilities (thanks to Knowledge (Arcane)), while the Fighters doesn't.


That's all just for dealing with your example - a black dragon. Even if the Fighter is better at actually killing that thing than the Wizard (which is questionable), he can't do anything else that involves dragon-hunting.

A Wizard with the right spellbook can deal with every single challenge (that is not overpowered for the level) you can throw at him.
A Fighter can deal with certain combat encounters, but nothing else.

[Dusk Eclipse]

As for killing the dragon I 'd say the Wizard can be much more efficient than the fighter.

He (the fighter) will likely trade tons of full attack against the Dragon endangering himself, hoping he can drop the beast before he is killed. The huge Ac of dragons prevent Power attacking effectively, a dragon will most likely have bigger reach than the fighter so charging is also risky, never mind other defences like magic the dragon has access to.

The wizard on the other hand can simply use Shivering Touch to paralize the dragon witn Dex damage and then coup d'grace him. Two to three rounds maximum (he can use spectral hand or reach spell or a familiar to deliver the Shivering touch from a safe distance). And if the dragon is protected by spell he alsonhas access to Dispel magic.

[Killer Angel]

Ah, yes, let's focus on the OP's examples...

At level 7 where with not too powerful feats and magical items the fighter can cause high end 2 digit damage in a single round and the wizard will barely be able to hurt the dragon.

Going in melee with a dragon, taking AoO and exchanging full routines with someone stronger than you, is usually a quick way to die.

Granted they are more versatile but the occasions in which they are outmatched are not all that rare.

"Argh! My 7th lev. wizard is outmatched! Dimension door... see you later."

We're not saying it cannot be difficult, but casters have many options.

[Togo]

Nope.
The tier system works assuming an equal level of optimization. Even a poor optimization. Because an unoptimized wizard with invisibility, fireball, fly and teleport, will be far more versatile than an unoptimized fighter with Weapon Specialization, a +2 sword and armor and no magic tools for flying.

I disagree with your assessment.

He may well be, but the wizard is not a Tier 1 character because he has invisibility, fireball, fly and teleport. He's a Tier 1 character because he can replace other character's roles in the party and can break the game in a number of ways.

I also don't agree that you've optimised those characters to the same extent, but that's a side point.

Why these things don't show up on many low powered games is because optimizing a caster is harder than optimizing a martial class.

hm... You're still confusing terms here. A low-op game is a game where characters are not optimised. This could be because people don't know how to optimise, as you are assuming, or it could be because optimisation options are either discouraged or simply unavailable. You seem to be equating low-op with ignorance, which suggests you don't really understand these styles of play.

You might equally well argue that the reason why the Tier system is so popular amongst high-op players is that keeping a game balanced is hard and requires understanding how the rules fit together. For those who can do it, there is a range of styles of play. For those who can't, high-op is really the only option, and Tiers represent an inescapable fact that dominate the game. I think both arguements are flawed, but each arguement is a mirror of the other. If you don't like one, you need to reconsider both.

[ThiagoMartell]

The phone is a PC class. If you're not using it, you're not playing.

This is objectively wrong. If you apply the statement to a player, there are plenty of classes he is not using it. If you apply the statement to a group, there are still plenty of classes the group is not using.

The tier system tells you that a cell phone with a camera is more versatile than an old telephone tied to the wall.
It can be wrong to let your gamestyle be influenced by the TS, but facts are facts, and spells give you more versatility than sword and shield.
This is why "you may not pay attention to it, but it's still there".

And why do you care about it, then?
There are tier lists for every fighting game out there. Most people that play fighting games... don't use them. And don't care about them. And don't even know they exist. Why is it any different with the tier system for D&D 3.5 classes? Why do we get someone every week enraged about how other people see class balance in 3.5?

That said, you can certainly choose to not use it as a guidance for the group's composition, and so on.

Which means not using it.

[ahenobarbi]

The wizard can do everything fighter can and better (and some stuff besides that). Wizard could kick dragons ass in melee better than fighter - cast solid fog to get some time for buffing, cast resist energy, polymorph into hydra, haste, mirror image and fly. And the wizard could still do a lot of other things after that (other than fighting).

[Togo]

The wizard on the other hand can simply use Shivering Touch to paralize the dragon witn Dex damage and then coup d'grace him. Two to three rounds maximum (he can use spectral hand or reach spell or a familiar to deliver the Shivering touch from a safe distance). And if the dragon is protected by spell he alsonhas access to Dispel magic.

As does the dragon?

Shivering touch, if available, is an excellent method for taking out very tough opponents, because it bypasses the dragon's usual defenses (high AC and hp). It doesn't mitigate the dragon's attacks in the same way as a fighter though, nor does it combine well with the rest of the party. You need to consider all the options when planning your tactics, and an approach that ignores the rest of the party, although effective from a personal point of view, may not be your best option. Same deal as save-or-die versus debuff.

Simply dealing hp damage is not always the best way for a single character to take out an opponent. It's a way that combines very nicely with the efforts of the rest of the party though. Getting an entire team of characters that can gang up doing attribute damage is harder, but effective if you can manage it.

[Keneth]

It doesn't mitigate the dragon's attacks in the same way as a fighter though, nor does it combine well with the rest of the party.

I'm pretty sure paralyzing the dragon for an extended period of time combines well with any type of party.

[Serafina]

Well, you could say that if the wizard does that he simply overshadows the party too much.
In which case the wizard simply enters GOD-mode and buffs the party instead - which is again yet something the Fighter simply can not do.

Indeed i can't think of a single thing that the Fighter does better than the Wizard other than having more HP and better fortitude-saves. Both of which aren't even "doing something" and are of no utility whatsoever to the party. Yes, that includes melee (polymorph and summons), not getting hit (there are several ways to buff AC, and miss chances are better anyway) and protecting others (battlefield control is superior to being a meatshield, summoning can replicate being a meatshield and gives better AoOs).
He can't necessarily do all of that at the same time - but for a Wizard switching out spells is a trivial affair.

[ThiagoMartell]

I'm pretty sure paralyzing the dragon for an extended period of time combines well with any type of party.

What Togo means is that Shivering Touch means the wizard wins the fight by himself. If you fight by hp damage, then everyone chips in, one way or another. It's a common problem with save-or-lose techniques or just-lose techniques - the other players feel useless.

[ahenobarbi]

What Togo means is that Shivering Touch means the wizard wins the fight by himself. If you fight by hp damage, then everyone chips in, one way or another. It's a common problem with save-or-lose techniques or just-lose techniques - the other players feel useless.

And that's one of reasons the tiers were described

[ThiagoMartell]

And that's one of reasons the tiers were described

Actually, the tiers do absolutely nothing to counter this problem. You have potentials save-or-lose vs hp damage in all tiers. In fact, in high tiers, you're going to potentially find a bunch of characters racing to see who will be the one to cast the just-lose spell to end the encounter.

[Killer Angel]

This is objectively wrong. If you apply the statement to a player, there are plenty of classes he is not using it. If you apply the statement to a group, there are still plenty of classes the group is not using.

Of course many kind of phones won't be used, but still are you using a phone? Yes. The tier system simply resumes how good is the phone you're using.

He may well be, but the wizard is not a Tier 1 character because he has invisibility, fireball, fly and teleport. He's a Tier 1 character because he can replace other character's roles in the party and can break the game in a number of ways.

If the adventure is settled for a group of characters made by a basic wizard, a sword and board fighter and a healer, run by a unimaginative DM, then a single teleport can bypass a whole piece of adventure. Aka T1.
Call it what you will, but it's undeniable.

I also don't agree that you've optimised those characters to the same extent, but that's a side point.

Well, it's an anecdote, but I've never saw (in our group) a wizard without a way of flying, neither without at least a "teleport-kind of" spell, but i've seen many fighter with boots of speed and no way of flying. And I'm talking bout different characters played by the same player, who favor playing melee types.

Actually, the tiers do absolutely nothing to counter this problem.

Well, of course. A car magazine can tell me what vehicle has better performances, but doesn't fix the problems the other cars have.