Why each class is in its tier: 2019 update!

[eggynack]

Going through your guide, you call out:
L8: Nilshai: Extra standard action/round --- excellent combat form for dispensing spells.
L8: Dharculus: Ethereal plane based --- excellent stealth.
L9: Will'O Wisp: Immunity to Magic, Natural Invisibility --- excellent immunities.

Polymorph grants Thoon Elder Brain Dual actions, 12-headed hydra attacks, Wartroll's dazing blow, or the plant type's basket of immunities. Polymorph Any Object broadens the set of forms substantially at level 15.

And, when Shapechange hits it obsoletes everything else.

Overall, I'd give an edge to Enhanced Aberration Wildshape although it's fairly close.

Druid also gets thoon elder brain. Also probably plant immunities? A number of plant forms list the traits as extraordinary special qualities, depending on the book. MM II ones do so, for example. Hydra and wartroll are alright, but I'm inclined to think that boosting casting is the superior approach. Wild shape also gets a bunch of other stuff as well. Wacky vision modes, weird immunities, zombie creation for some reason, other even weirder forms of minion generation (including the ridiculous deepspawn whose capacity to create NPCs you've eaten I'm revising to blue), regen/fast healing, and a bunch of other stuff too.

[Luccan]

Looking at the list as it currently stands... It's almost weird, really, how if you don't have spell (powers, maneuvers) of some sort, you are at best T4. I think the Binder and Totemist are the only exceptions?

It's not that weird. Non-magical abilities get the short end of the stick in 3.5. And some classes with magic don't get enough to rise above T4.

[rrwoods]

Hey this is super awesome, thanks to all the organizers over the years for holding these discussions and to Troacctid for pulling the info together here!

Suggestion: Put “NPC” in front of the NPC classes to further distinguish them from the Generic counterparts.

[rrwoods]

A GM should adjust the game in such a way everyone has fun. Regardless who has the strongest character.

And the tier list, by giving the DM a rough overview of how powerful the base classes are relative to one another, is a tool the DM can use to assess what types of challenges are appropriate for the party the players have assembled.

[Luccan]

I don't think I would join a game where the DM expects the characters to be optimized or of a certain tier. By far most people I play with never go online to read up on the game. Nor do they own any books. A GM should adjust the game in such a way everyone has fun. Regardless who has the strongest character.

You should play how you want. Though, if you've never had a problem with class disparity that just means your players are probably making suboptimal choices all the time and playing down the tiers incidentally rather than purposefully. Which is fine. The purpose of Tiering is to provide for a multitude of power levels consciously, from "we all need to rely on each other to defeat this dragon" to "the four of us should go fight the lords of the Nine Hells".

However, if you don't know about the difference in power level and versatility between a fighter and a cleric, then you can run into situations where you can't GM correct to make the fighter feel useful because the cleric can summon angels and rain down holy fire, while the fighter still needs to take a full round to get to the enemy. Make it easy for the fighter to take care of and the cleric needs to spend even fewer resources dealing with it just as fast. Not to mention the fighter can't do much outside combat, while many other classes have skills or abilities that let them surpass the fighter easily in that regard. If your players aren't making spell or tactical choices that create this problem, that's fine. But if they do it can be very difficult to near impossible to challenge all players in a way that feels fun for everyone. Hence the Tier list can be useful to ensure everyone has some idea of how much is too much for one character to be able to do on their own.

[Rhyltran]

However, if you don't know about the difference in power level and versatility between a fighter and a cleric, then you can run into situations where you can't GM correct to make the fighter feel useful because the cleric can summon angels and rain down holy fire, while the fighter still needs to take a full round to get to the enemy. Make it easy for the fighter to take care of and the cleric needs to spend even fewer resources dealing with it just as fast. Not to mention the fighter can't do much outside combat, while many other classes have skills or abilities that let them surpass the fighter easily in that regard. If your players aren't making spell or tactical choices that create this problem, that's fine. But if they do it can be very difficult to near impossible to challenge all players in a way that feels fun for everyone. Hence the Tier list can be useful to ensure everyone has some idea of how much is too much for one character to be able to do on their own.

Your points of the fighter is spot on but is also why I never understood how there's some people who believe the Fighter is Tier 4 vs a Monk being Tier 5. A monk is so much easier to build than a fighter and doesn't need obscure resources to be powerful. Out of the gate the monk is going to end his career with 2d10 attacks. Improved Natural attack turns that into 4d8. That's not an obscure feat by any means. Monks have good saves, decent AC, and while they have lower BAB it isn't even close to insurmountable with even the simplest bit of optimization. Between feats like carmendine, kung fu genius, and others you can easily make them less MAD. Superior unarmed strikes can get them higher damage earlier in the campaign and on top of that they have very useful feats from tumble, to move silently, and hide. Combined with their higher movement speed they easily become fast moving scouts. Throw dark stalker into the feat pile for maximum result. Again, none of this is hard to build. We're literally talking the simplest optimization. I have always felt that while base monk isn't a "Good" class that it's weird that people think it's below Fighter while constantly talking about how Fighters have no roles outside combat.

A monk can at least be a scout, physical attacker, and even somewhat of a disabler if needed to be. I'd personally rather have a monk in the party over a Fighter tbh. Usually when people defend Fighter they use Prestige classes and ACF which the Tier System doesn't typically take into account. If you did take it into account Monk has Wild Shape Monk, Rage Monk, Invisible Fist, and more. Not trying to pick an argument with you I quoted you merely because your thoughts on Fighter are the same as mine but it leaves me scratching my head why people think the Monk is lower. Easier to build, easier ways to increase damage potential, more roles outside combat, and more skill points. The only thing Fighter has is intimidate. Monk has spot, listen, hide, move silently, sense motive, and diplomacy for useful out of combat skills.

[Lans]

Meh, Lightning Gauntlets and Dissolving Spittle use two of the least resisted energy types, so it's not nearly as glaring a weakness as, say, sneak attack being useless every third encounter. And you can also have minions with your necrocarnum zombie and/or soulspark familiar, neither of which cares about your BAB at all. Or, if you're going the UMD route, you might have wands to fall back on when your primary attack is ineffective. Or heck, maybe you're using weapons after all and you still don't care about BAB because you can just use one or more of your soulmelds to boost your attack and make up for it—with Incarnate Weapon, for example, you only have +1 BAB at 3rd level, but you're swinging a +3 weapon where the martial character is lucky to have a masterwork one, and you still have two other soulmelds and a crown bind. I call that a net win.

I have no problem with the Incarnate at low levels, but once you start getting further out it drops off. Look at level 6, where your now behind on an extra attack. Ill go over things more when I have more time

[Troacctid]

The problem with incarnate, 3.75 for my vote by the way, is that you lose the versatility you had in the beginning at higher levels. Its great from levels 1-6, but after that you start getting more and more wealth and its hard to stay flexible with that wealth. The more Soulmelds you have the harder it is to change which melds you have shaped without affecting your primary thing. The more you work with the party the more they expect you to have a certain role.

This is way worse when you try to use the avatars, besides good, as they almost require a certain weapon enhancement at later levels.

I have no problem with the Incarnate at low levels, but once you start getting further out it drops off. Look at level 6, where your now behind on an extra attack. Ill go over things more when I have more time

At higher levels, you get the ability to swap out soulmelds in the middle of the day, which is a big deal, and you also just have more soulmelds at a time, so you can do more things at once or do your main thing better. So I definitely disagree. You're also unlocking new high-level abilities via chakra binds; at 9th level, for example, some good ones include telepathy, mind-reading, flight, and, if you take a feat for an off-list meld, the ability to become ethereal at will.

[Mordante]

You should play how you want. Though, if you've never had a problem with class disparity that just means your players are probably making suboptimal choices all the time and playing down the tiers incidentally rather than purposefully. Which is fine. The purpose of Tiering is to provide for a multitude of power levels consciously, from "we all need to rely on each other to defeat this dragon" to "the four of us should go fight the lords of the Nine Hells".

However, if you don't know about the difference in power level and versatility between a fighter and a cleric, then you can run into situations where you can't GM correct to make the fighter feel useful because the cleric can summon angels and rain down holy fire, while the fighter still needs to take a full round to get to the enemy. Make it easy for the fighter to take care of and the cleric needs to spend even fewer resources dealing with it just as fast. Not to mention the fighter can't do much outside combat, while many other classes have skills or abilities that let them surpass the fighter easily in that regard. If your players aren't making spell or tactical choices that create this problem, that's fine. But if they do it can be very difficult to near impossible to challenge all players in a way that feels fun for everyone. Hence the Tier list can be useful to ensure everyone has some idea of how much is too much for one character to be able to do on their own.

It could because the groups I play with are special. I don’t know. But we can have an entire 3 hour session without or very little dice rolling.

I DM a party now. My first time DMing. Yesterday’s we had our first combat since about at least half a year. The cleric/palordin not really sure was tanking and self healing while the Duskblade, Shadow dancer and alchemist were doing the damage. The Illusionist was hiding. She had no offensive spells ready. The enemy was not susceptible to mind tricks.

Most problems are solved by group discussions and not much by dice rolling.

[Gnaeus]

It could because the groups I play with are special. I don’t know. But we can have an entire 3 hour session without or very little dice rolling.

I DM a party now. My first time DMing. Yesterday’s we had our first combat since about at least half a year. The cleric/palordin not really sure was tanking and self healing while the Duskblade, Shadow dancer and alchemist were doing the damage. The Illusionist was hiding. She had no offensive spells ready. The enemy was not susceptible to mind tricks.

Most problems are solved by group discussions and not much by dice rolling.

1. D&D is a system that really lends itself to combat in a lot of ways. When we talk about power we are assuming regular combat, because that’s what virtually every published adventure, and novel assume, and if we weren’t we would all be playing FATE. The tier system assumes a generally normal play environment. The farther you get from that the more off it will be.

2. If you are in a group that never fights, the power imbalance is even greater. Duskblade is really bad outside combat. An illusionist could absolutely be a power player in a no combat game, as the only one in the party who can access a lot of game changing powers. The fact that he has played 6 months without combat, and therefore carries non-combat spells, shouldn’t surprise anyone. What the Tiers express is that if you quit and I took over and started running 5 combats a day, a tier 1 caster like an illusionist can go from zero to hero in 9 hours, maybe a bit more if he needs to buy some spells.

[Efrate]

A monk is a lot harder to build than a fighter. You have 3/4 bab, and are super MAD, d8 HD and no armor. If you swap wis to not you get a few more skills, but still need 3 other stats, and you know dump wis and cha which hurts your face potential. You need damage or you are not a contributing member, so you need strength. You are frontline with no armor so you need dex, and con because you will be taking quite a few more hits. You can scout with your speed and dex, but if you dump wis because you go int, then your perception skills suffer.

A fighter picks a weapon and power attack and just goes. He has good ac and hp, and can at least afford to spend the feats making a combat maneuver style worthwhile though getting 13 int for combat expertise hurts a bit. If nothing else his move attack turn is just better than yours. He will hit more often and harder and be able to take a hit in return. A fighter can be built just like the npcs in the dmg with weapon focus and spec lines and outdamage a similarly built monk. Acfs make each a good deal better but you need to dive pretty deep to get a monk up and running.

How many different sources you tap for carmandine monk, alternate bonus feats, imp natural attack, etc? A fighter is a lot easier and though it does not do it's job very well it does it better than a monk, just with phb, and maybe 1 more book.

[Chaos Jackal]

Your points of the fighter is spot on but is also why I never understood how there's some people who believe the Fighter is Tier 4 vs a Monk being Tier 5. A monk is so much easier to build than a fighter and doesn't need obscure resources to be powerful. Out of the gate the monk is going to end his career with 2d10 attacks. Improved Natural attack turns that into 4d8. That's not an obscure feat by any means. Monks have good saves, decent AC, and while they have lower BAB it isn't even close to insurmountable with even the simplest bit of optimization. Between feats like carmendine, kung fu genius, and others you can easily make them less MAD. Superior unarmed strikes can get them higher damage earlier in the campaign and on top of that they have very useful feats from tumble, to move silently, and hide. Combined with their higher movement speed they easily become fast moving scouts. Throw dark stalker into the feat pile for maximum result. Again, none of this is hard to build. We're literally talking the simplest optimization. I have always felt that while base monk isn't a "Good" class that it's weird that people think it's below Fighter while constantly talking about how Fighters have no roles outside combat.

A monk can at least be a scout, physical attacker, and even somewhat of a disabler if needed to be. I'd personally rather have a monk in the party over a Fighter tbh. Usually when people defend Fighter they use Prestige classes and ACF which the Tier System doesn't typically take into account. If you did take it into account Monk has Wild Shape Monk, Rage Monk, Invisible Fist, and more. Not trying to pick an argument with you I quoted you merely because your thoughts on Fighter are the same as mine but it leaves me scratching my head why people think the Monk is lower. Easier to build, easier ways to increase damage potential, more roles outside combat, and more skill points. The only thing Fighter has is intimidate. Monk has spot, listen, hide, move silently, sense motive, and diplomacy for useful out of combat skills.

It's not like fighters are harder to build than monks. Pick ACFs like Dungeoncrasher or Zhentarim, or, even outside of ACFs, stuff like the maneuver feat chains. You have enough stuff from easily accessible sources to build an one (or two) trick pony, pretty much what every fighter ends up being, without much chance of error. Hell, I don't have much experience with 3.5 but in my very first game (core only), where I did play a fighter, I went straight tripper plus the usual WF and WS and whatnot, without really knowing much about the game.

Monks, on the other hand, gain fewer feats (of which they have to spend at least a few not on improving unarmed strikes, basically their core gameplay, but on actually making them functional first), don't have as obvious tricks as fighters when building, and the stuff they're supposed to do is severely crippled by their lack of everything, really. Good saves, AC from two sources, good skills, 2d10 damage, but so MAD they can't really take advantage of these, because you can't utilize that skill list if you don't have Int, you can't gain much of an AC if you don't drop your damage for more Dex and Wis (and your AC will typically still compare very unfavorably to magic armor), your 2d10s (which take an eternity to scale there) won't matter because you can't take a full attack and when you do you'll miss like half the attacks because your BAB is lacking and you couldn't decide how to distribute your stats, you can't scout because you have a d8 HD, you couldn't afford Con and you either don't have enough ranks on Hide/Move Silently, or you don't have enough on Spot/Listen, and you can't easily specialize because you never seem to have enough feats available.

Anecdotal evidence does not a statement make, but just as a personal example, the only monks I've ever seen who were half-functional were NPC bosses (my DM loves monks) who managed to be something of a threat by being 4 levels stronger with their stats buffed to extremes (talking minimum 16 on Int and Cha, the rest between 18 and 24 without items), and who still were more of an issue because they were placed at the end of adventuring days (so resources and hp pools are running low) and bad rolls (sometimes the d20 needs to remember it's not a d6) rather than their six-attack routines of which on average less than half could go through the defenses of a lv8 party.

In a way, monks being easy to build is more about them having a ton of issues regardless of optimization, meaning that even if you mess up and someone else doesn't, ultimately the difference won't be very noticeable.

It's often said that feats are no replacement for class features, and that throwing feats at something won't kill it, but imagine for a second that each monk feature was available as a feat. Would you pick any of them on a fighter? Spell Resistance maybe? What else? Evasion? Anything else? No? Because I really wouldn't touch anything else with a 15-ft spiked chain.

On a different matter, I'd like to vote 5.7 for Expert. Yeah, they're probably better than aristocrats. Which means nothing really, because everyone agrees aristocrats suck. Skills are OK, but they won't do much by themselves, even if the skill in question is Iaijutsu Focus.

[Gnaeus]

I think the implied statement was that fighters are easier to build TO BE EFFECTIVE than monks. Not that it’s difficult to make a monk character sheet, it requires comparatively more work to make a monk combat viable, and combat is about all monks do well.

It’s also T5 because, in the same sense, it’s pretty easy to make high tier characters who are better at monking than monks are.

[Rhyltran]

It's not like fighters are harder to build than monks. Pick ACFs like Dungeoncrasher or Zhentarim, or, even outside of ACFs, stuff like the maneuver feat chains. You have enough stuff from easily accessible sources to build an one (or two) trick pony, pretty much what every fighter ends up being, without much chance of error. Hell, I don't have much experience with 3.5 but in my very first game (core only), where I did play a fighter, I went straight tripper plus the usual WF and WS and whatnot, without really knowing much about the game.

Monks, on the other hand, gain fewer feats, don't have as obvious tricks as fighters when building, and the stuff they're supposed to do are severely crippled by their lack of everything, really. Good saves, AC from two sources, good skills, 2d10 damage, but so MAD they can't really take advantage of these, because you can't utilize that skill list if you don't have Int, you can't gain much of an AC if you don't drop your damage for more Dex and Wis (and your AC will typically still compare very unfavorably to magic armor), your 2d10s won't matter because you can't take a full attack and when you do you'll miss like half the attacks because your BAB is lacking and you couldn't decide how to distribute your stats, you can't scout because you have a d8 HD, you couldn't afford Con and you either don't have enough ranks on Hide/Move Silently, or you don't have enough on Spot/Listen.

Oh sure Zhentarim and Dungeon Crasher are great but my point still stands that monk ACF like Wild Shape, invisible Fist, etc are more than adequate. If you take Kung fu Genius you can easily have the skill points needed to have enough in move silently/hide to be more than adequate with spot/listen. Having enough accuracy to hit is easily achieved within the reals of WBL. Again that 2d10 becomes 4d8 with just the addition of improved natural attack. I was merely pointing out some of the bare bones optimization. As for flurry of blows? You can trade it away for additional features, take travel devotion, or get pounce through any other means. The fact is a monk out of the box with just a smidgen of optimization is still going to be able to "Do decent damage", "Combat Maneuvers" and "have roles outside doing damage." The fighter out of the box is going to have "Do damage." and maybe "combat maneuvers" Note that travel devotion works more often for the monk due to much faster movement speed given that the monk is going to have a 90 speed by the end of the game.

A monk can be a tripper, a damage dealer, and scout quite easily and again.. with very little optimization. You get 4 skill points per level. Kung Fu Genius/Carmendine means you can put those points in int rather than relying on wisdom. Higher than average Int means you can also have a decent Spot, Listen, Hide, Move Silently, Sense Motive, and tumble if you were so inclined. Don't forget if you stick to straight monk you'll eventually lose your flurry of blows penalty entirely. There's plenty of means to increase your attack so "Accuracy" is never really a problem.

I mean, I'd rather not build up an entire character as an example. I disagree that having d8 hit dice makes the monk a poor scout by that same logic a rogue is a poor scout as well. They have d6 hit dice. As a monk you can dunk charisma. Dex isn't too important and doesn't have to be too high. Wisdom isn't that important especially if you get kung fu genius/carmendine. You can ignore wisdom for the most part and focus on intelligence. This means more skills which means more things to do outside of combat. You can pump strength to get the most out of strength. Take a race that gives you bonus str, dex, con, or int and you're golden.

Once again, I am not seeing how they are behind the fighter which is where this comparison is geared towards. Now for both Fighter and Monk if we add in ACF I could make an argument for them being up there in tier 4 possibly even Tier 3. Wild Shape Monk is already listed as tier 3. An invisible fist chaos monk and you improve many of the monk's short comings with their class features. Someone in this thread, other than me, already pointed out that most Monks even with some knowledge of the internet are unlikely to be "Monks right out of the book" and will likely have additional ACF. Fighter included.

I think the implied statement was that fighters are easier to build TO BE EFFECTIVE than monks..

Disagree with that statement as well. Carmendine, Improved Natural Attack, travel devotion and the rest of the feats can be random. Again, not high levels of optimization here. Three feats that greatly improve the monk's versatility and damage potential. Start with 18-20 Strength depending on race and have far more skill points in more useful skills than said fighter. You can build classes to out monk a monk. This is true. You can also easily build classes that can outfighter a fighter.

I would argue this is just as easy.

[AnimeTheCat]

It’s also T5 because, in the same sense, it’s pretty easy to make high tier characters who are better at monking than monks are.

I think a good starting point to fix this is to give monks light armor proficiency and let them keep wis to AC, and give them a way to make their martial arts more effective, like something that encompasses all the maneuvers and stances of the martial arts. That would be a good start to raising the floor of the monk. /s

[Rhyltran]

I think a good starting point to fix this is to give monks light armor proficiency and let them keep wis to AC, and give them a way to make their martial arts more effective, like something that encompasses all the maneuvers and stances of the martial arts. That would be a good start to raising the floor of the monk. /s

Honestly the best way to fix monk is just port the pathfinder version over to 3.5

[Efrate]

Unchained monk is great. I rate them very highly. Native access to pounce if at limited range to start, full BaB, d10 hd, some great ki powers and style strikes. It does what it says. You want to be the kung fu guy who goes ham on people? All day as a unchained monk. You have a bunch of debuffs as well you can use as needed.

[Rhyltran]

Unchained monk is great. I rate them very highly. Native access to pounce if at limited range to start, full BaB, d10 hd, some great ki powers and style strikes. It does what it says. You want to be the kung fu guy who goes ham on people? All day as a unchained monk. You have a bunch of debuffs as well you can use as needed.

Yup exactly. :P Sohei for Tier 4 imo. Incarnate 3.5 and Urban Druid 1. I don't think I've voted in those categories yet.

[Cygnia]

I'm just happy to see Healers get a little bit more love.

Do agree with Marshals being T4. I'm playing one now and I'm enjoying her a lot.

[AnimeTheCat]

Honestly the best way to fix monk is just port the pathfinder version over to 3.5

It was a sarcastic plug at people who say, "you wanna play a monk, play an unarmed swordsage" in pretty much every monk thread. I used the "/s" but i think that may mean something different here as opposed to reddit.

[Sutr]

One of the things I'm wondering about is if we were to revote assuming that the minimum op was that you read a guide and traded out bad class features and took the dead levels. I doubt some classes would change, but this has some bearing on the monk debate going on above. Basically if every class got a matrix monk writeup, http://minmaxforum.com/index.php?topic=11530, what would the tier be. Also assuming that sources were open.

Troacctid, I'm aware of what can be done with incarnate binds. It drops off and has a big gap from 7-11 without gaining an attack and not being able to invest another point of essentia.

[Anthrowhale]

Druid also gets thoon elder brain. Also probably plant immunities? A number of plant forms list the traits as extraordinary special qualities, depending on the book. MM II ones do so, for example. Hydra and wartroll are alright, but I'm inclined to think that boosting casting is the superior approach. Wild shape also gets a bunch of other stuff as well. Wacky vision modes, weird immunities, zombie creation for some reason, other even weirder forms of minion generation (including the ridiculous deepspawn whose capacity to create NPCs you've eaten I'm revising to blue), regen/fast healing, and a bunch of other stuff too.

Clerics are pretty good at picking up immunities through other means, so I'm less concerned about that. The wacky vision modes are interesting but also more necessary for Druids---Clerics tend to have more divinations, again partially remedying this. Zombies and low level NPCs are a fun concept as fodder, but I'm not sure how much they really matter in practice.

War Troll is pretty good in combination with a standard cleric buffing routines. You get to keep your equipment, which matters increasingly with level. High strength + high natural armor + high con + energy immunity spell + high wisdom + dazing blow means you can tank away. You can also access outsider forms via Holy Transformation + Polymorph, for things like the Kelvezu (Dex 31, Sneak Attack+8d6, Poison that works with weapons, natural armor+15, fly 60'(good)) or Horned Devil.

Overall, enhanced aberation wildshape still seems marginally better to me, with significant caveats.

We also haven't really discussed the strengths of a Cleric. A Druid is hard-pressed to match the sheer lethality of Sense Weakness + Surge of Fortune + a Vorpal weapon---that flat out kills a Great Wyrm Prismatic Dragon and it comes online at level 12 when you can afford the weapon. Similarly, a cleric can use Surge of Fortune + Divine Insight + Guidance of the Avatar to make any skill check of 55 or less. Surge of Fortune also applies to spell penetration so you can plow through enemy spell resistance when needed.

[Lans]

At higher levels, you get the ability to swap out soulmelds in the middle of the day, which is a big deal, and you also just have more soulmelds at a time, so you can do more things at once or do your main thing better. So I definitely disagree. You're also unlocking new high-level abilities via chakra binds; at 9th level, for example, some good ones include telepathy, mind-reading, flight, and, if you take a feat for an off-list meld, the ability to become ethereal at will.

From what I 've seens they need to be pretty focused to be effective at doing a main role about as well as a T5 character. Due to equipment, feat and stat choices. If it needs to do stealth it will be like 5 points less than a stealthy characters skill check. With melee, and ranged combat being in the same boat.


Do you think its solidly tier 3 or lower tier 3? Because if you are on the lower tier 3 I don't think its worth arguing the difference between my just under low tier 3

[Lucas Yew]

Huh, nice to see a proper community-effort 3.Xe class tier sorting...

[pabelfly]

Going to put in a vote that I think a Truenamer is a Tier 4 class, rather than a Tier 5. They have a few areas that they excel at, even at low optimization:
- being the party knowledge bank
- dealing consistent (albeit weak) damage against enemies, regardless of enemy type, immunities, and/or spell resistance
- buffing allies
- debuffing enemies (many of their utterances have no saves)

Seems to me to fit the Tier 4 definition of being "very good at solving a few problems".

[Dimers]

From what I 've seen they need to be pretty focused to be effective at doing a main role about as well as a T5 character. Due to equipment, feat and stat choices. If it needs to do stealth it will be like 5 points less than a stealthy characters skill check. With melee, and ranged combat being in the same boat.

That hasn't been my experience. I've seen incarnates mostly ahead of a T5 in the T5's specialty area, plus a couple little side dishes at a time. With stealth, for example, the incarnate can have a couple points' better checks than a rogue while still having a touch-attack weapon or a special movement mode.

But I haven't seen any evidence that they break out of T4. They can do a lot of things kinda okay or one thing fairly well once you factor in static choices like feats, skill ranks/tricks, and equipment. Switching melds in the middle of the day is good for flexibility, but you can't change your static choices too, so what you're flexing tends to be small. Moreso because you can't alter chakra binds and your binds (and therefore melds) are effectively restricted by magic item choices.

Say you're 6th level, you encounter a social situation, and you think you're done with combat for the day. So you reshape your dissolving spittle into a silvertongue mask. Awesome, now you can invest three essentia to get +8 to two social skills, which may or may not complement what you've put into in Charisma and skill ranks. Even without much investment, that's as good a skill check as a dedicated T4 or T5 would get. But you can't bind the silvertongue mask to use its Suggestion effect, your Intimidate and Sense Motive don't change, you can't use Diplomacy faster than normal, and if things do go south then you've lost a major weapon. (Plus, people may react poorly to you spending six seconds moving blue stuff around your body before you start talking, but whatever.) Overall problem-solving ability: still notably less than a bard.

[AnimeTheCat]

From what I 've seens they need to be pretty focused to be effective at doing a main role about as well as a T5 character. Due to equipment, feat and stat choices. If it needs to do stealth it will be like 5 points less than a stealthy characters skill check. With melee, and ranged combat being in the same boat.


Do you think its solidly tier 3 or lower tier 3? Because if you are on the lower tier 3 I don't think its worth arguing the difference between my just under low tier 3

I don't think that Equipment, feat selection, or stat choice need to be focused at all really. Rather, they need to be focused, but not on doing a specific task (like power attack>improved bull rush>etc... or clerics pushing for DMM early). What Incarnate feat selection should focus on is maximizing their essentia pool, capacity, and their soulmeld versatility. My go-to picks for feats don't even leave the Magic of Incarnum book for Incarnates. Expanded Soulmeld Capacity (multiple times even), Cobalt Charge (useful if I decide to be Melee, gives me more essentia if I don't), Midnight Dodge (useful for melee, gives me essentia if I'm not), Split Chakra (solves the magic item/soulmeld bind issue, only a problem starting at mid-levels), Shape Soulmeld (to get off-list soulmelds), and Bonus Essentia. This lets you be the pinch hitter all the time, keep as many soulmelds maxed as possible, and lets you be good a many things at once rather than having to single something out. If you really want to you can pick up Point Blank Shot and Precise shot if you plan to do ranged combat, but it's really not necessary because once you can bind Sighting Gloves, you get it for free.

Stat choices are easy, follow the normal guidelines for picking stats. You feel like you want to do ranged, pick a high Con (because it's your "casting stat") and pick a good Dex, don't slip in to negatives elsewhere (or do... it doesn't really matter). Melee, high con, good strength/dex. That's about it. You don't "need" high int, you're not going to rely on skill ranks. You don't need a high wisdom, though just like with any character it helps with saves (you do get a good will save). If you want to focus on debuffing with your soulmeld's abilities (it is a thing you can do), then get that high wisdom and be more like a spellcaster, it's really not a big deal.

Equipment is also pretty easy because you are equipment. DM no dropping the items you want and you need some miss chance - Fellmist robe (added benefit, when paired with Shape Soulmeld: Kruthik Claws you have poor man's HIPS because you're always under concealment and you can heavily bolster your Hide skill). Use that same combination (fellmist robe/kruthik claws) and you can regularly target and enemy's Flat Footed AC. Facing enemies with big crit ranges, shape Adamant Pauldrons before anybody can get the Fortification armor enchantment and laugh when the rogue wasn't able to sneak attack you (bonus here, this can make you all but invincible at low levels with the DR from invested essentia. With your high Con score, you're probably a pretty tank character. Even at mid levels, DR is still sough after and what's the likelihood that you're being targeted by good/evil/lawful/chaotic attacks/damage?). Say you're done with the dungeon and you want to do some stuff in town, don't worry you can always shape Silvertongue Mask (throat) and Truthseeker Goggles (brow) and be appropriately "facey" for any social encounter. The best news with all of this is that you can do multiples of it at the same time without hindering yourself too heavily (if at all), and you can refine it as you adventure. You get plenty of soulmelds and you don't need all of them to be dedicated to any one schtick. Shape something for combat (probably Dissolving spittle or lightning gauntlets, but possibly Incarnate weapon if you want), shape something for non-combat (whatever role you fill; face, trapper, scout, etc), and then cover your weaknesses as best you can from there.

No, you can't do it all, but this isn't a case for Tier 1, this is a case for Tier 3 ( very good at solving a couple of problems and competent at solving a few more). I don't see how this isn't T3 when you look at that definition and then at the bredth of soulmelds available to the Incarnate. You can be a ranged damage dealer, a face, a scout with only 3 of your soulmelds, so from 4 and beyond you can just keep adding things that you can do. You will be very good at solving a couple of problems (let's say traps and dealing damage) and competent at solving a few more (whatever else you want to shape for the day, or in later levels even if you didn't shape it at the beginning of the day). I don't think that the Incarnate is a versatile as a bard, but it certainly isn't far behind it. The bard has control and party support ahead of the Incarnate, but the Incarnate has damage and day-to-day versatility head and shoulders above the bard which I think puts it, at the very lease, on par with the Totemist, if not possibly ahead. The class fits very solidly in the definition of "very good at solving a couple of problems and competent at solving a few more". It fits so well, I think it could easily be the poster child of that definition. I stand by my original ranking for it.

That hasn't been my experience. I've seen incarnates mostly ahead of a T5 in the T5's specialty area, plus a couple little side dishes at a time. With stealth, for example, the incarnate can have a couple points' better checks than a rogue while still having a touch-attack weapon or a special movement mode.

But I haven't seen any evidence that they break out of T4. They can do a lot of things kinda okay or one thing fairly well once you factor in static choices like feats, skill ranks/tricks, and equipment. Switching melds in the middle of the day is good for flexibility, but you can't change your static choices too, so what you're flexing tends to be small. Moreso because you can't alter chakra binds and your binds (and therefore melds) are effectively restricted by magic item choices.

Say you're 6th level, you encounter a social situation, and you think you're done with combat for the day. So you reshape your dissolving spittle into a silvertongue mask. Awesome, now you can invest three essentia to get +8 to two social skills, which may or may not complement what you've put into in Charisma and skill ranks. Even without much investment, that's as good a skill check as a dedicated T4 or T5 would get. But you can't bind the silvertongue mask to use its Suggestion effect, your Intimidate and Sense Motive don't change, you can't use Diplomacy faster than normal, and if things do go south then you've lost a major weapon. (Plus, people may react poorly to you spending six seconds moving blue stuff around your body before you start talking, but whatever.) Overall problem-solving ability: still notably less than a bard.

How does a Totemist break out of Tier 4 then? Totemists get fewer bonuses and have lower versatility outside of combat, not to mention less essentia and lower essentia capacity (except the totem bind). They are only able to rebind the totem soulmeld, not reshape any soulmeld, and that's a big blow to versatility. Besides that, you don't need to factor in any feats, skill ranks/trick, or equipment to have a generally effective Incarnate. They stand quite well in nearly every situation (with even just a cursory level of preparation) and can handle nearly any challenge sent their way (again with just the slightest bit of prep work that I would expect of any player). On top of being able to do that without feats or skill ranks, they have the oh s*** button of reshaping a soulmeld. Also, binds aren't restricted by magic item choices because the feat Split Chakra exists and you can take it as many times as you need (because you don't need other feats to be competent at any challenge).

That level 6 Incarnate shouldn't be reshaping their throat soulmeld if that is their primary means of damage, they should be unshaping their feet, shoulders, hands, brow, arms, etc soulmeld and reshaping their brow soulmeld if they want to get those benefits. It's no fault of the class if the player chooses to leave themselves unprepared for an ambush, that was a poor tactical choice. Besides, at level 6 you've got 4 soulmelds, so what are your other soulmelds? were you not able to shape it at the start of the day? There's also been some discussion about what happens when a character with a Meldshaping Class takes the Shape Soulmeld feat. It's not spelled out anywhere, and a particularly restrictive reading would indicate that a non-meldshaper can never shape the soulmeld they've acquired (unless they later gain a meldshaping class level) while a relatively permissive reading would indicated that a character with a meldshaper class level would be able to shape that specific soulmeld in addition to the soulmelds they get by way of class levels. Ultimately, that's neither here nor there because it only has a limited impact on the discussion. With 4 soulmelds, you should be prepared for combat as well as at least 2 other tasks (if you get shape soulmeld with a permissive reading that's a third task). The Incarnate's Rapid Meldshaping ability is much less of deliberate thing, and more of an oh s*** button. If you're settling in for social encounters, there's a pretty good chance you'll be able to postpone them to the next day when you can shape silvertongue mask, truthseeker goggles, and Planar Ward, plus most likely lightning gauntlets for some combat ability, or whatever and if you get in an oh s*** situation us your first full-round action to get dissolving spittle or lightning gauntlets (or just use a crossbow for that encoutner). You'll be invincible to mind control, you'll have top marks in all of the social skills and you've still got that additional soulmeld that you can pick for whatever.

[Anthrowhale]

I'd also like to discuss the spellthief a bit as it looks underrated.

1) Even though the spells are limited, the spell list (any s/w abjuration, divination, enchantment, illusion, or transmutation) is quite good. They also have full caster level via master spellthief unlike the other L4 casters (i.e. Ranger, Paladin).

2) In a party with other cooperating spellcasters, they can get out the most important second spell that party spellcasters wish they could cast that round. The best second spell is pretty good---that's something like a free metamagic Quicken Spell or Twin Spell (or better) for the party most rounds of combat. It's even better in some ways since the "second spell" might go off before the spellcaster even has a chance to act when the Spellthief's initiative wins.

3) In a party with other cooperating spellcasters, they are a universal familiar since they can easily benefit from every personal range spell. There are many great personal range spells. This is something like a ring of spell storing (which is incredibly expensive), except that it's easier to use in combat and not nerfed to minimum caster level. This enables new (or at least otherwise difficult) combos. For example, a spellthief can easily combine Improvisation, Divine Insight, and Guidance of the Avatar, Surge of Fortune and solid native skills to make DC 90 skill checks. Or consider Hunter's Eye + (lesser) infernal/holy transformation + Polymorph[Kelvezu] + Spellthief sneak attack + Craven for 21d6+20 (~=93.5) sneak attack damage salted with persistent grave/golem/vine strike, divine power, persistent wraithstrike, or Righteous Might+Heroics[Adaptable Flanker] to make this hit reliably.

Tier 4 seems appropriate for the spellthief in isolation. In a cooperating party with tier 1/tier 2 spellcasters it seems quite capable of contributing in nearly every situation. My impression is that people discount (2) and (3) because it's borrowed power, but that seems disingenous from the viewpoint of either planning party challenges are choosing party composition. A pure spellthief in a party of pure T1 casters can be quite a bit of fun and effectively contribute as a full member. In this situation, the 'tier' of a spellthief is perhaps a half tier less than the maximum tier in a cooperating party with a minimum of tier 4.

[zfs]

Yup exactly. :P Sohei for Tier 4 imo. Incarnate 3.5 and Urban Druid 1. I don't think I've voted in those categories yet.

Hooray, my Sohei evangelism was not for naught.

[Buufreak]

I too am having trouble understanding how totemist is the highest melder. I'm currently building and playing one, and besides tearing things apart and being good at a bunch of physical skills, I'm not really seeing it. Yes, it picks up a handful of special attacks (lines, gaze, I think even poison breath) but is that enough to go from 4 -> 3?