Power's Tier List for Pathfinder

[Power]

Eh fine, took it off the low Tier 2. Most people will play him with a martial bent which means suboptimal int and with the slow hex access unlikely to invest into misfortune cackle. But the fact that it's a martial class doesn't mean he can't misfortune cackle, slumber, ice tomb, etc.

Also, Prehensile Hair is also useful for metamagic rods, mithral shields, an additional natural attack (why not?), or threatening nearby enemies (and if Prehensile Hair is your only natural attack, those AoOs with your hair count as primary attacks with 1-1/2 bonus). I know you prefer Prehensile Tail racials for rods, but Prehensile Hair works too.

It's especially egregious if you continue to insist that Summoner is *also* "low" tier 2.  You think Summoner, including Master Summoner, and Hexcrafter are remotely comparable?  I can't even take that seriously.

Master Summoner is different from regular Summoner. But the other Summoners are a low Tier 2. They don't have the same spell access and the Sorcerer still outperforms them except in the number of Summon Monsters per day.

[Power]

Hm, been speculating about whether the Paragon Surge Summoner might go up to tier 1.

EDIT: Going to leave the answer as "no" since his spell list is still too limited for that.

[Power]

Switched the Summoner from low Tier 2 to regular Tier 2 courtesy of his high amounts of top level Summon Monster per day. Also, removed the Zen Archer Monk from Tier 4.

[Ed-Zero]

How is druid Tier 1? Wildshaping got nerfed hard in PF...

[StreamOfTheSky]

How is druid Tier 1? Wildshaping got nerfed hard in PF...

Wildshape got nerfed, but it's still a good buff.  Druids are just MAD instead of SAD now.  And they get wildshape and natural spell a level earlier and size large 2 levels early, to be fair.  Some 3E druids actually had to start at level 1, you know...

Druid's still a prepared caster that knows his entire list and uses the best mental stat for casting.  It does still have by far the weakest spell list of the core-4 primary casters and SNA gotten badly beaten w/ the nerf stick, too.  (Animal Companion is also severely crunched).  So I think you could say they're low tier 1.  But they're still definitely tier 1.  They did get some fringe benefits, though.  Like, the ability to have a lot of "primary" natural weapons in PF.

[Power]

The Druid can also take a domain in for more spells (in fact, taking the Feather subdomain and grabbing the Boon Companion feat is often a better option than just taking an animal bond). There are also archetypes for the Druid that expand domain and spell selection.

[TiaC]

My suggestions for DSP Psionics:

T1: Wilder or Psion using augmented PsyRef

T2:Psion, Educated Wilder W/human favored class, Human Vitalist?, Tactician?

T3: Wilder, Gifted blade, Psychic Warrior, Vitalist, Dread(Nightmare constructor moves dread from low tier 3 to high tier 3)

T4: Soulknife, Cryptic, Aegis, Marksman

[PsyBomb]

Not sure if Vitalist belongs in T2, even if Human. They aren't going to go out and have game-warping power, but they are nearly incomparably good at what they do when properly optimized for it. Otherwise I agree, though the Aegis is very high on T4.

[TiaC]

Really? I've never been that impressed by them. How do you figure?

You're probably right on the Vitalist, they're missing most of the top tier powers.

[PsyBomb]

Really? I've never been that impressed by them. How do you figure?

You're probably right on the Vitalist, they're missing most of the top tier powers.

Aegis has easy (EASY) access to buttloads of Strength increases and size increases with it, including Powerful Build from level 1 and flight immediately on level 5. Playing in a game right now where one at level 4 is dealing 3d6+18 on a swing. They're also versatile bunch, given the variety of Astral Suits and customization they can come up with, and if you have at least 14 Int then Reconfigure and Augment Suit become very strong utility.

Among other things, the Harness Power Stone line lets you cast any power you find a Stone for 4th level and lower, up to 21st manifester level effectively. UPD with Power Stone Repository at max turns you into a full caster that just needs to reload every so often, and you get Master Craftsman for free at 5.

Trust me, it's good.

[Power]

[redacted]

[TiaC]

This seems to be a non-sequiter. Did you mean to post in another thread?

[Power]

Er yes, 'fraid so. Been long enough I don't remember which thread I meant to post that in. Dammit.

[Frogman55]

Am I correct in thinking that the tiers are primarily about flexibility and effectiveness in different roles rather than about raw power?

A high tier would be easier for a player to constantly feel like they could contribute, while a low tier would often feel like a dead weight at the table?

Is there any thinking about making a distinction between standard pathfinder tiers and Pathfinder Society (organized play) tiers? I ask because everyone I know who does play pathfinder does it because organized play fits their schedule and style better than an actual homebrew game. At the same time, Paizo is aggressive about trying to weed out various options deemed overpowered (or possibly just too complicated. Or evil. Or other various reasons) for their organized games. Additionally, organized play tops out at level 12, rather than 20. The game-breaking options available to a level 12 wizard, as compared to a magus or rogue are different than the comparison at level 20. Does this affect any of the tiers?

[Power]

It's about both. Flexibility alone won't get you above Tier 3. And without raw power, the Barbarian would probably drop down to Tier 5, maybe even 6. I edited the tiers to provide description of tier levels.

Tier lists assume a reasonable degree of competence where you know how to make good use of your class. This is without any serious optimization or resorting to game-breaking intent. A number of classes can go up a tier depending on how they're optimized. For instance, a Diplomancer Bard can easily be Tier 2. A UMD Paladin can also be Tier 2 with the right items. Anyone can be a Tier 1 with a Craft Wondrous Item feat and Candles of Invocation, but this would definitely be game-breaking intent.

I moved Skald down from Tier 2 to a high Tier 3 because he's still not getting nukes like the other classes do, even with his outrageous versatility using Spell Kenning, Craft Scroll, and UMD.

Organized play does not affect tiers.

[Frogman55]

It's about both. Flexibility alone won't get you above Tier 3. And without raw power, the Barbarian would probably drop down to Tier 5, maybe even 6. I edited the tiers to provide description of tier levels.

Tier lists assume a reasonable degree of competence where you know how to make good use of your class. This is without any serious optimization or resorting to game-breaking intent. A number of classes can go up a Tier depending on how they're optimized. For instance, a Diplomancer Bard can easily be Tier 2. A UMD Paladin can also be Tier 2 with the right items. Anyone can be a Tier 1 with a Craft Wondrous Item feat and Candles of Invocation, but this would definitely be game-breaking intent.

This makes sense.

Organized play does not affect tiers.

I suppose the lower cap wouldn't really affect things. There are a few 'win' buttons available at the lower levels, at least for the full casters.

I can't help but feel like some considerations may change things. Complete lack of crafting abilities and the prohibitions on overpowered* feats/archetypes/etc., not to mention limited time-constraints both in character during most missions as well as out of character at the table may limit certain things. In addition, wouldn't the constrained nature of the scenarios (in that GMs cannot counter-escalate in tactics, nor make better choices (I've never seen a PFS cleric with Freedom of Movement, for example)) help too?

I guess my problem and doubts might be more a result of the 'reasonable degree of competence' than anything else. I've yet to see a Bard contribute meaningfully to a session beyond a knowledge check or two. But in much the same thread, I've seen more clerics and wizards without something helpful to do than I've seen rogues and core monks fail. Of course, I'm generally aware when a cleric or wizard fails that bad it's probably the result of a player's poor build or preparation. I suppose it's reasonable to think that poor play is the problem with those bards, too.

But the other side of the token is those effective rogues and monks, too. Maybe PFS scenarios are just too easy.


*overpowered according to designers with remarkably poor understanding of their own game.

[Power]

I can't help but feel like some considerations may change things. Complete lack of crafting abilities and the prohibitions on overpowered* feats/archetypes/etc., not to mention limited time-constraints both in character during most missions as well as out of character at the table may limit certain things. In addition, wouldn't the constrained nature of the scenarios (in that GMs cannot counter-escalate in tactics, nor make better choices (I've never seen a PFS cleric with Freedom of Movement, for example)) help too?

The only crazy archetypes it gets under control are Pack Lord Druid and Master Summoner. Lack of item creation feats mostly means players won't break WBL in half, but I suspect there are other ways to do that in PFS anyway.

I guess my problem and doubts might be more a result of the 'reasonable degree of competence' than anything else. I've yet to see a Bard contribute meaningfully to a session beyond a knowledge check or two. But in much the same thread, I've seen more clerics and wizards without something helpful to do than I've seen rogues and core monks fail. Of course, I'm generally aware when a cleric or wizard fails that bad it's probably the result of a player's poor build or preparation. I suppose it's reasonable to think that poor play is the problem with those bards, too.

In PFS I imagine most Bard players really don't know how to play Bards and do horrid "spread yourself thin" builds or "oh no I'm a non-combat class I didn't get anything combat relevant." Here's a PFS build challenge for using the Bard class: Get 18 str - 14 dex - 14 con - 7 int - 7 wis - 11 cha (at level 4 put your +1 ability score into Cha so you can cast 2nd level spells) and go Dual Talent Human for +2 Strength and +2 Dex (so 20 str, 16 dex total), and put your favored class bonuses into hp. Now go support build on him. Watch what happens. You can easily do better than this.

But the other side of the token is those effective rogues and monks, too. Maybe PFS scenarios are just too easy.

I believe they are. They decided to nerf Crane Wing because PFS couldn't deal with it.

[Frogman55]

In PFS I imagine most Bard players really don't know how to play Bards and do horrid "spread yourself thin" builds or "oh no I'm a non-combat class I didn't get anything combat relevant." Here's a PFS build challenge for using the Bard class: Get 18 str - 14 dex - 14 con - 7 int - 7 wis - 11 cha (at level 4 put your +1 ability score into Cha so you can cast 2nd level spells) and go Dual Talent Human for +2 Strength and +2 Dex (so 20 str, 16 dex total), and put your favored class bonuses into hp. Now go support build on him. Watch what happens. You can easily do better than this.

I might just have to.

I wonder how much of the distaste that many players have with optimization isn't about the high-powered characters so much as its about the fact that a low-cha bard can be better than a high cha one. (or how a low cha/dex swashbuckler is better than one that maxes them). People don't hate it because they're being outshined, but hate it because they're having their pre-conceptions overturned (or their character description fluff overturned, which is what I think Paizo really, really hates).

But the other side of the token is those effective rogues and monks, too. Maybe PFS scenarios are just too easy.

I believe they are. They decided to nerf Crane Wing because PFS couldn't deal with it.

I'm curious whats going to happen as the scenarios continue. Seasons 4 still isn't that powerful, but it's markedly more difficult than season 1 - 3, and season 5 appears to have gotten even more difficult.

Regardless, thanks for the feedback, Power. I think the discussion has turned far enough that I ought to take it to another thread, so I'll do that once I have a few thoughts in order.

[Power]

The funny thing is that if you build a Bard as a selfish 2H fighter (Dawnflower Dervish, for instance), he can beat most martials. Low AC and HP are his only weaknesses on that front, but Dance of 23 Steps masterpiece can boost his AC (Fun fact: You can activate dance of 23 steps as a free action on your turn after you attack then stop maintaining it on your next turn before you attack and just repeat this trick every turn to avoid the attack/concentration penalties) plus he has all the usual wizarding attack avoidance (Blur, Mirror Image, and Displacement) and worst come to worst you can take a Toughness feat and/or put favored class bonuses into hp.

[Bribri]

On the note of ACG:Is Hunter really effective enough to be on par with the other tier 3’s? It’s the poor mans druid in a lot of peoples eyes but that’s comparing it to a tier 1 class; of course it’s going to be a bit behind! How does it compare to the likes of bard or inquisitor? It strikes me as at least red in that area, or even a Blue tier 4.

I will freely admit I’m more of a dabbler when it comes to pathfinder optimizing. Knowing enough to get by so I pose the question to you guys along with my thoughts.

Sure:It gets 0-6 casting which is the all season pass into the tier 3 bracket but do its actual class abilities compare?

Animal focus looks good at a glance, twice so when you consider it boosts its animal companion as well… but at the end of the day all it does is save you Gold; Gold that you were already short on since you’re shopping for two. As an enchantment bonus it’s just a replacement for the stat boosting belts, gloves, and fezs you’d normally buy allowing that money to go elsewhere. Assuming you’re in a game with any amount of downtime, a simple craft-wondrous-item feat will probably give you a comparable rebate wouldn’t it?

I mean really inspire courage will out do it at most levels fairly easily, and that -does- stack with enchantments, boosting the entire party on top of that. Though I will admit animal focus’s flexibility has a certain draw to it.

Then there’s the animal companion. We’ve all seen the complaints about those:Splits your magic item funds, stronger ones get in the way in cramped dungeons, scale poorly becoming fragile/weak at higher levels. Charge builds can be nasty but even the most basic issues with environment ruin them along with the above issues

Not to say it’s a -weak- class ability, quite handy in fact, particularly at low levels or low attribute games; but it’s always been more of a secondary thing… not one of the major draws of your class. Is the money you’re saving on animal focus as well as the bonus teamwork feats enough to keep it competitive?

Comparing it to another class again:Paladins, a (high)tier 4 class, arguably have comparable mounts. Sure those don’t get the money saving animal focus but they DO eventually get the celestial template which translates into damage reduction, elemental resistances, and a free smite. Not to mention the convenience of being able to summon it; a partial solution to the cramped dungeon issues. They’re still a little behind thanks to the lack of freebee teamwork feats but when you consider everything -else- a paladin gets… yeah it’s just not as impressive. Are the two additional spell levels alone enough to put them a tier above?

But what do I know? I haven’t gotten a chance to see hunter in an actual game after all so this is all guess work. What do you lot think?