You know, I figured, what the heck. I have my own perspective on the Tiers, so I may as well share it.
For those of you unfamiliar with what tiers are about, tiers are not an idle measure of how "awesome" a class is, but rather a measure of its problem-solving capabilities in terms of power and versatility. Consider a wide array of challenges (ie. kill a dragon, rescue a princess, cross a chasm, make your way past a trapped maze, protect a village/fortress from advancing hordes, uncover a spy, find a mystical artifact, solve a murder mystery, assassinate an enemy, make your way through swarms of monsters, make your way to a distant destination in the nick of time, protect/heal a VIP from taking large amounts of damage, uncover/resolve court intrigue, escape prison, and so on). What sets apart the high tiers (tier 1 and tier 2) are their ability to easily solve challenges (any sort of challenge for tier 1) through class abilities and the low tiers (5 or 6) is that they can only seriously contribute to a small variety of challenges and even then can end up performing badly. Spellcasters therefore tend to be higher in the tiers because not only are there extremely powerful spells in PF, but every spell is its own trick, thus providing an incredibly robust arsenal of tools to handle a very large variety of situations while the mundanes are usually stuck barely having any tricks at all beyond full attacking and rolling skills if they have the ranks for it (and even then many spellcasters can outperform mundanes at the mundanes' own job or otherwise render them unnecessary by using the right spells). As such, the major limitation on a spellcaster's problem-solving is whether he can cast the appropriate spells in time (and that includes the usage of partial spell preparation or methods to expand your spells known to hand yourself the appropriate spells as needed). This is why we call Pathfinder spellcaster edition.*
The basic purpose of a tier list is to help people eyeball party balance and what kind of character is in danger of being severely overshadowed, made redundant, or otherwise left feeling useless. Even if you are a low optimization group that avoids the more potent tricks in a class's arsenal, large differences in tiers do tend to assert themselves sooner or later. At the end of the day, you don't want your game to feel like the comedic
superhero team-up of the Angel Summoner and the BMX Bandit. This is especially troublesome when you have high tiers and lower tiers covering the same party role, like having a Druid or Summoner in the same party as a Barbarian or Fighter, but even without that, it is easy to end up with high tier classes dominating campaign challenges and encounters in ways that leave low tier characters feeling like a mop-up crew for an already resolved encounter when it should have been their time to shine. Because of this, it is generally recommended to either not have wide gaps in tiers, have the lower tiers perform strongly at their role (and the higher tiers avoid stepping too much into the lower tiers' roles), or that you gift lower tiers unusual rewards and items that make them more flexible than common members of their class, so they are at lower risk of standing around being useless (maybe you give your party archer some neat light armor with shadow property, a fancy +1 ghost touch net, a grappling hook, adamantine pickaxe, hat of disguise, helm of telepathy, ring of invisibility, alchemical items, flying carpet, who knows). Also, although a party of T4s and lower can be quite balanced and fun to play, the difficulty is obviously higher, so you need to check that the basic needs of the party are covered and that the players are approaching combat and other challenges smartly. The benefit of high tier classes, obviously, is that they make the game easier.
Also, just to address some common arguments brought up by people who I am rather certain are just rushing for reasons to act dismissive: No, this tier list is not about level 20 characters, or spellcasters once they have 9th level spells. (At the very least, Summoners and Oracles would be automatic T1 if that were the case, because they have Gate and Miracle.) It is not a 3.5+PF tier list either. The list also assumes
no game-breaking intent (as even a Vow of Poverty Monk who keeps his vow can become T1 with the right stunts). It assumes low-op to mid-op, played with a basic degree of competence (ie. you know and employ the basic strengths, tactics, and necessities of your class, so no 100% blaster Wizards, no Bards who act like they're a non-combat class outside of just inspiring courage, no Clerics who think their only job is to heal, no Oracles taking genuinely class-crippling curses without resolving the crippling part somehow, no Alchemists who filled their formula books with formulas that their class has no way of using because paizo is funny that way, no Human Paladins who thought it would be hilarious to put their favored class bonus into positive energy resistance just because they could...). High optimization tends to raise a class by at least a tier, and being bad at your class can easily bring it down one or more tiers.
*For the curious, other reasons why we regard Pathfinder to be spellcaster edition are that martials have to invest large amounts of resources (feats & money) just to stay useful at their primary role while spellcasters need much less to get going and are free to invest those resources into adding whatever they like to their characters (a problem inherited from 3.5, and also a major factor why doing a campaign without access to magical items just makes the martial/caster disparity even worse) and because Pathfinder significantly buffed spellcasters (ie. tons of extra spells known for spont casters; Wizards now get to cast their
bannedopposition schools, can now choose familiars at lvl 1 that provide a +4 initiative bonus, and get
much better hp; Clerics gained automatic proficiency with their deity's favored weapon, superior healing, and access to stronger domain powers like Druid animal companions; etc.) while martials are more disadvantaged (new feat taxes, "realism taxes," a combat maneuver system that requires investment and does not work without extreme optimization at higher levels, difficulty with full attacking if they have to move (esp. below level 10), and the new inability to
Quick Draw alchemical weapons (what you
did in 3.5 if you felt like doing something useful with full attacks other than attack for damage)). PF did nerf a number of crazy spells, but it also retained and added plenty of other crazy spells to make up for it.
The Tiers
Anything in
red is weak for its tier. Anything in
blue is strong for its tier. Not sure if there's a point to color-coding Tier 1s or Tier 6s, but I marked the vow of poverty monk in red for Tier 6 since it's so stupid it's usually in a league of its own.
Tier 1: Capable of doing absolutely everything, often better than classes that specialize in that thing. Often capable of solving encounters with a single mechanical ability and little thought from the player. Has world changing powers at high levels. These guys, if played with skill, can easily break a campaign and can be very hard to challenge without extreme DM fiat or plenty of house rules, especially if Tier 3s and below are in the party.
Wizard, Druid, Cleric, Witch, Sorcerer (
Razmiran Priest archetype, Paragon Surge spell, Mongrel Mage archetype, Mnemonic Vestment robe), Oracle (Paragon Surge spell, Mnemonic Vestment robe, Dreamed Secrets feat, Spirit Guide with Versatile Spontaneity + Magical Epiphany feats, etc.), Psychic (Mnemonic Esoterica discipline power, Mnemonic Vestment robe,
Amnesiac archetype),
Shaman, Arcanist,
Bard/Skald (Music Beyond the Spheres masterpiece)Tier 2: Has as much raw power as the Tier 1 classes, but can't pull off nearly as many tricks, and while the class itself is capable of anything, no one build can actually do nearly as much as the Tier 1 classes. Still potentially campaign smashers by using the right abilities, but at the same time are more predictable and can't always have the right tool for the job. If the Tier 1 classes are countries with 10,000 nuclear weapons in their arsenal, these guys are countries with 10 nukes. Still dangerous and easily world shattering, but not in quite so many ways. Note that the Tier 2 classes are often less flexible than Tier 3 classes... it's just that their incredible potential power overwhelms their lack in flexibility.
Oracle,
Psychic, Sorcerer, Summoner, Unchained Summoner,
Monster Tactician InquisitorTier 3: Capable of doing one thing quite well, while still being useful when that one thing is inappropriate, or capable of doing all things, but not as well as classes that specialize in that area. Occasionally has a mechanical ability that can solve an encounter, but this is relatively rare and easy to deal with. Can be game breaking only with specific intent to do so. Challenging such a character takes some thought from the DM, but isn't too difficult. Will outshine any Tier 5s in the party much of the time.
Alchemist, Bard,
Skald, Inquisitor,
Magus, Investigator, Warpriest, Eldritch Scoundrel Rogue, Vigilante w/ spellcasting archetype, Occultist, Mesmerist, Medium (when it can seance its spirits easily),
Spiritualist,
Hunter, Paladin (Sacred Servant+Oath of Vengeance, or Torag patron spells), Fiendish Bond Antipaladin with Succubus or Shadow Demon
Tier 4: Capable of doing one thing quite well, but often useless when encounters require other areas of expertise, or capable of doing many things to a reasonable degree of competence without truly shining. Rarely has any abilities that can outright handle an encounter unless that encounter plays directly to the class's main strength. DMs may sometimes need to work to make sure Tier 4s can contribute to an encounter, as their abilities may sometimes leave them useless. Won't outshine anyone except Tier 6s except in specific circumstances that play to their strengths. Cannot compete effectively with Tier 1s that are played well.
Adept, Barbarian, Unchained Barbarian, Bloodrager,
Paladin, Ranger,
Slayer,
Medium (when it can't seance well),
Kineticist,
Shifter,
Antipaladin, Sohei Monk (preferably with Qinggong Monk powers),
Fighter,
Cavalier,
SamuraiTier 5: Capable of doing only one thing, and not necessarily all that well, or so unfocused that they have trouble mastering anything, and in many types of encounters the character cannot contribute. In some cases, can do one thing very well, but that one thing is very often not needed. Has trouble shining in any encounter unless the encounter matches their strengths. DMs may have to work to avoid the player feeling that their character is worthless unless the entire party is Tier 4 and below. Characters in this tier will often feel like one trick ponies if they do well, or just feel like they have no tricks at all if they build the class poorly.
Brawler,
Vigilante, Ninja,
Rogue, Unchained Rogue, Gunslinger*, Swashbuckler, Archetyped Monks, Unchained Monk
*Admittedly firearm builds, once they have their kinks worked out, tend to be T4, but that is overwhelmingly a result of feats and items. The Gunslinger class itself does precious little for the build, and is really only used for the dex to damage class feature, after which just about everyone multiclasses out of Gunslinger. Hard to say whether it should be marked T4 due to firearm builds being strong or T5 because the actual class is bad and outperformed by many T5 and higher classes if you develop them as firearm builds, so I am making a special note of this.
Tier 6: Not even capable of shining in their own area of expertise. DMs will need to work hard to make encounters that this sort of character can contribute in with their mechanical abilities. Will often feel worthless unless the character is seriously powergamed beyond belief, and even then won't be terribly impressive. Needs to fight enemies of lower than normal CR. Class is often completely unsynergized or with almost no abilities of merit. Avoid allowing PCs to play these characters.
Vanilla Monk, Aristocrat, Expert, Warrior, Commoner,
Vow of Poverty Monk
