Question about tiers: can obscene wealth improve a character's tier through items?

[sengmeng]

Thread title kind of says it all, but specifically if you were a rogue with a maxed out Use Magic Device skill and a Bag of Holding full of every scroll, could you reasonably call yourself a higher tier?

[tyckspoon]

Thread title kind of says it all, but specifically if you were a rogue with a maxed out Use Magic Device skill and a Bag of Holding full of every scroll, could you reasonably call yourself a higher tier?

At that point you're a Wizard with an awkward means of casting your spells and bad caster level, which is compensated for by the fact that you're basically a spontaneous caster with a spell list of Everything. So, yes - there is a sort of optimization singularity that occurs when you can apply enough resources to a problem that kind of destroys class identities. Any class can do anything at that point, they just get there in somewhat different ways.

[Alabenson]

No, because a class' tier is a factor of the general potential of the class itself and not the abilities of any individual member. Now, this doesn't mean that a rogue with infinite wealth could UMD himself into being able to contribute on the same level as a wizard or other 'Tier-1' class, but he'd still be doing so as a Tier-4.

[sengmeng]

No, because a class' tier is a factor of the general potential of the class itself and not the abilities of any individual member. Now, this doesn't mean that a rogue with infinite wealth could UMD himself into being able to contribute on the same level as a wizard or other 'Tier-1' class, but he'd still be doing so as a Tier-4.

What if obscene wealth or discounted items is part of the class's features, sort of like the artificer? Does the artificer's crafting not contribute to his position on the tier chart?

[Karl Aegis]

Your caster level and save dcs would be bad. Not much point in using most of those spells if you can't penetrate spell resistance or everything passes their saves. But, no, your tier doesn't change if your environment changes. That really isn't the point of tiers.

[ExLibrisMortis]

The tier of a class doesn't change with WBL. The tier of a character, however, is based on the specific build, and does change with WBL (and playstyle--buying a string of castles may take a ton of cash, but it's not going to take you into a higher tier, except out of t6).

[Alabenson]

What if obscene wealth or discounted items is part of the class's features, sort of like the artificer? Does the artificer's crafting not contribute to his position on the tier chart?

An artificer's crafting certainly helps, but a large portion also comes from his infusions enabling him adapt to an extraordinary number of circumstances and his class features allowing to mimic the tricks of DMM clerics and the incantrix.
More importantly, an artificer's crafting allows him to get more mileage out of the same quantity of wealth than a member of a different class. If you want to compare an over WBL'd rogue to a wizard, for tier purposes you would need a similarly overly WBL'd wizard.

[sengmeng]

The tier of a class doesn't change with WBL. The tier of a character, however, is based on the specific build, and does change with WBL (and playstyle--buying a string of castles may take a ton of cash, but it's not going to take you into a higher tier, except out of t6).

Ok, this answer makes the most sense, and it addresses the way a sorcerer could drastically reduce their ability to contribute if they made very poor spell selection choices. I guess I'm really looking at it from the DM's perspective; you can say that doesn't change their tier because that's not what tiers are/how tiers work, but some extremely high-end, well-chosen gear can significantly change what a DM has to do to challenge that character, and that is usually the type of guidance the tier system is for, as far as I know.

[Gnaeus]

Ok, this answer makes the most sense, and it addresses the way a sorcerer could drastically reduce their ability to contribute if they made very poor spell selection choices. I guess I'm really looking at it from the DM's perspective; you can say that doesn't change their tier because that's not what tiers are/how tiers work, but some extremely high-end, well-chosen gear can significantly change what a DM has to do to challenge that character, and that is usually the type of guidance the tier system is for, as far as I know.

I agree with ExLibrisMortis and you. But to break that down:

Tier 5 is non-functional. All you need to do with WBL is to make a class that fights as well as a fighter or Barbarian or sneaks as well as a rogue. That’s pretty easy. You can get to 4 just by adding numbers.

Tier 4 is limited in scope or effectiveness. In most cases you need to shore up class weaknesses against things like flight, invisibility, incorporeal, DR, or other common problems. That’s harder. You can get to 3 with WBL, yes, but it requires specifically targeted purchases with system mastery or specifically dropped loot. You could probably triple WBL in the form of random drops and not get to 3. Functionally, most T4 skillmonkeys play T3 IF they can confidently rely on spending their wealth as desired with enough sources and system mastery.

Tier 3 needs power tricks. You pretty much need spells off Tier 1 lists. Reliable timely access to things like Polymorph, summon monster and planar binding on a T3 chassis is probably good enough.

T2 needs open access to a list. You would need either huge WBL to duplicate large numbers of spells or something that lets you rewrite your character on the fly.

[Goaty14]

T2 needs open access to a list. You would need either huge WBL to duplicate large numbers of spells or something that lets you rewrite your character on the fly.

Wow, didn't know that the sorcerer could change his spells known on a daily basis!

I'm afraid you mean T1, not T2.

[KillianHawkeye]

The tier of a class doesn't change with WBL. The tier of a character, however, is based on the specific build, and does change with WBL (and playstyle--buying a string of castles may take a ton of cash, but it's not going to take you into a higher tier, except out of t6).

There's really not such a thing as character tiers. That's basically a nonsensical phrase. There are simply too many possible characters for such a rating system to exist.

[Kelb_Panthera]

You can, with enough wealth, make an NPC expert and a well played wizard largely indistinguishable. There is quite literally nothing that a spellcaster can do that isn't available to someone with enough cash. The catch, of course, is that the amount of cash to do so is absurd. You're talking about something like the WBL of a character on roughly the same level as the gods (that's between 40 & 60 or so, btw) for an upper-mid level expert to match an equal level wizard.

The real question is, "Can effective use of WBL push a character of a given class up one or more tiers?" I'm firmly of the belief that not only is the answer to that question "yes" but that it gives lower tier classes more upward mobility than it does to higher tier ones and not just because they have further to go in the first place.

The artificer gives the quintessential example. Sans gear, an artificer falls somewhere between mid T3 and low T2 depending on how skilled the player is. Its unparalleled use of WBL, even in the hands of someone who doesn't know how to optimize wealth, brings it unquestionably up to T1. Simply having the ability to natively access any spell it could need, given a couple of days warning, and the ability to have an array of wands/staves to hand push it right past a sorcerer played to the same level of skill.

The effect is generally less pronounced in other cases but the net effect is still there.

[sengmeng]

Wow, didn't know that the sorcerer could change his spells known on a daily basis!

I'm afraid you mean T1, not T2.

I'm afraid you need to read the entire discussion; Gnaeus was saying what each tier would need to move up to the next tier, so what he's naming are things they don't have his class features.

[ExLibrisMortis]

There's really not such a thing as character tiers. That's basically a nonsensical phrase. There are simply too many possible characters for such a rating system to exist.

Not a separate one, no, but the original system works fine. The character--the specific build as implemented in the game world--is rated against the same six tiers we use to rate classes. It's what lets you rate Rainbow Warsnakes and Ur-Priests, as well as evoker 4/fighter 4s without spellbook (banned conjuration/transmutation). If you will: pretend that that character, with all its little details, feats spent, items worn, etcetera, is a class (with zero build flexibility, but that's okay for the rating). Compare it to an existing class (e.g. Rainbow Warsnake to favoured soul, cleric), and pick a tier. It's that simple.

[Mordaedil]

There's really not such a thing as character tiers. That's basically a nonsensical phrase. There are simply too many possible characters for such a rating system to exist.

It also becomes a matter of too many factors to count and becomes useless by virtue. There is also no frame of reference besides in your own party to what tier you are, but it then can change from week to week.

Doesn't stop certain people on these forums or others from insisting it is the only useful metric though, which is kinda sad.

[ExLibrisMortis]

There is also no frame of reference besides in your own party to what tier you are, but it then can change from week to week.

That's just a misunderstanding on your part. The tier system is a meta-analysis to be used in discussions beyond the scope of a single game, like this thread. Within a single party, the general tier system isn't needed, as you can do a more detailed analysis specific to the group in question. The point of the tier system is to abstract from that, and condense the many ways a party can be imbalanced into a simple metric.

Doesn't stop certain people on these forums or others from insisting it is the only useful metric though, which is kinda sad.

Since nobody does that, I don't see why you'd say that. People talk about alternate tier systems all the time; JaronK's is just the most lasting, and offers very decent accuracy (for the level of abstraction that we're discussing, such as the role of WBL across the entire game) for relatively little work (as opposed to, say, the niche ranking system).

[Mordaedil]

That's just a misunderstanding on your part. The tier system is a meta-analysis to be used in discussions beyond the scope of a single game, like this thread. Within a single party, the general tier system isn't needed, as you can do a more detailed analysis specific to the group in question. The point of the tier system is to abstract from that, and condense the many ways a party can be imbalanced into a simple metric.

Yeah, that's why class tiers work, but character tiers don't work yes.

Since nobody does that, I don't see why you'd say that. People talk about alternate tier systems all the time; JaronK's is just the most lasting, and offers very decent accuracy (for the level of abstraction that we're discussing, such as the role of WBL across the entire game) for relatively little work (as opposed to, say, the niche ranking system).

I wasn't aiming that particular comment towards anyone specific in this thread, but I've read threads on these forums where they try to make more accurate tier systems that don't really work, because they overthink their systems and make them far too specific to be very useful. JaronK's system holds because it understands what it needs to achieve and overextend or overspecialize what it needs to implicate.

At least, that is how I figure from observing things here for some time.

[Peat]

This feels pretty semantic. I understood what this meant:

The tier of a class doesn't change with WBL. The tier of a character, however, is based on the specific build, and does change with WBL (and playstyle--buying a string of castles may take a ton of cash, but it's not going to take you into a higher tier, except out of t6).

And its the best answer here. Maybe it would be better if reworded to not talk about tiers, but the core sentiment is completely accurate.

[Acanous]

Short answer: if as a DM you are allowing your party to access both infinite wealth tricks and an open magic mart where anything is available if you have the cash, you are dealing with a T1 game.

Expanded answer: once you open up “anything” as buyable and have an endless purse, individual class features really stop mattering as much- all that counts is then action economy and preparation. You’ll see the gulf in system knowledge between your players practically immediately, although if those players are cooperative you’ll probably end up with Team Solar. Controlling wealth and access to items is part of a DM’s job, and the tier system always assumes the DM is following the rules outlined in the DMG. If you were to house rule that rogues have infinite wealth as a class feature of course it would up the tier, you’re house ruling for exactly that purpose.

Anyway, find a way to blow up the infinite wealth McGuffin they’re using, or buckle up for a high op game

[ExLibrisMortis]

This feels pretty semantic. [...]

And its the best answer here.

It is! It's a meta-meta discussion; a discussion about how the metagame should be discussed. We are so advanced on this forum . And thanks .

Yeah, that's why class tiers work, but character tiers don't work yes.

Well, characters can be moved between games, games can be compared to other games, and you can have meta discussions about how the comparison should go... that's what tiers are for. Character tiers are useless less useful if you're discussing a single game, but once you have two different games, you want to characterize the situation in the same terms.

[...] I've read threads on these forums where they try to make more accurate tier systems that don't really work, because they overthink their systems and make them far too specific to be very useful. JaronK's system holds because it understands what it needs to achieve and overextend or overspecialize what it needs to implicate.

I do agree with that, though I'm not 100% sure what that last bit means .

[Buufreak]

You can become tier-like, as in you can have enough items to pretend to be a specified tier, but no your actual tier doesn't change. This has actually been discussed at length in threads involving he who we don't name as he attempted to argue killing wizards and taking their things let him circumvent WBL. But I digress, even a commoner can pretend to be a wizard with enough cash.

[Karl Aegis]

Not a separate one, no, but the original system works fine. The character--the specific build as implemented in the game world--is rated against the same six tiers we use to rate classes. It's what lets you rate Rainbow Warsnakes and Ur-Priests, as well as evoker 4/fighter 4s without spellbook (banned conjuration/transmutation). If you will: pretend that that character, with all its little details, feats spent, items worn, etcetera, is a class (with zero build flexibility, but that's okay for the rating). Compare it to an existing class (e.g. Rainbow Warsnake to favoured soul, cleric), and pick a tier. It's that simple.

The original system states if you're truly leveraging the abilities of the class, the class abilities, the tier of your character is the class highest on the list. There is no dart throwing at the tier list and hoping you get it right. It's best wins.

[King of Nowhere]

I run a high magic campaign with a lot of whealt, and everyone's much more powerful, but lower tiers benefitted most. So, while the concept of "tier" doesn't apply well to single characters, adding whealt certainly can help reduce the gap in power and solve problems you wouldn't be able to solve otherwise

[Fouredged Sword]

Another point is that you are not getting that tier 1 copying gear such as multiple 9th level scrolls without a tier 1 caster supplying them.

It would be more accurate to say a tier 1 caster with infinate time and money can turn any character into a tier 1 caster.

Infinate money itself is not enough. You need a market to buy from and that requires a tier 1 (or lots of diverse tier 2) caster to supply it.

Tier 1 can make more tier 1. Tier 5 cannot independently bootstrap without tier 1 assistance somewhere.

It's like saying a commoner is tier 1 because you use the hireling rules to hire 20th level wizards. Yes it's raw. Yes it is also rules lawyery stupid. If you are tier 1 because of a wizard the wizard class is what is tier 1, not you.

[Lans]

Infinate money itself is not enough. You need a market to buy from and that requires a tier 1 (or lots of diverse tier 2) caster to supply it.
.

Does it? I think between domain adepts, magewrights, divine minds, and warlocks you can do pretty good. I actually just remembered the warlocks, otherwise I would of led with that.

[icefractal]

Besides, by that logic any kind of minion-mancy doesn't count toward the power of a class, since it's not you that's powerful, it's the creatures that you're making Ice Assassins of.

Although that said, you do have to draw a line somewhere. When NI tricks come into play, the tiers become fairly meaningless, because everybody gains access to arbitrarily high amounts of power.

[Bucky]

Actual unlimited scrolls with no restrictions can put a character all the way into tier 0 - TO monster. They have spontaneous access to all the spell lists with 'free' metamagic and unlimited spell slots. They can pull out basic tricks like persistomancy and nested time stops pretty easily.

The fallback plan is spamming xp-free wishes.

[ZamielVanWeber]

Another point is that you are not getting that tier 1 copying gear such as multiple 9th level scrolls without a tier 1 caster supplying them.

Not actually. One experience free wish is all I need to start the magic item gain train. I use the exp wish to wish for a ING of three wishes with 3 stones or a luck blade with 3 charges (magic item creation is included in the safe list) and now you are good to go with your three experience free wishes.