Op tier?

[Drammor]

So classes have been sorted into different tiers which describe their overall effectiveness. We typically have tiers 1 through 6, although there is also sometimes mention of tiers 0 and 7. It's been pointed out, however, that how well these tiers work depends largely on how well they are played and how well they are optimized.

I ask the question, then, how much does it matter? And, in what way does it matter? Are there also tiers of optimization, or should there be? Are there also tiers of play, and the same? If there were, what would they be, and how would they work?

[Tonymitsu]

I was always under the assumption that the classes were placed in their respective tiers assuming a player of exceptional knowledge making full use of all potential class resources available.

The tiers were always intended to represent what the classes are capable of when played to the fullest. This is why a Spell is Power variant Erudite (which itself is basically a Psion) is Tier 1, while a regular old psion is Tier 2.

So how much does it matter?
That depends on the skill level of your players. If your group is newbies that don't have a lot of optimizing experience or still think healbot clerics and blaster wizards is a highly effective party role then no, I suppose tiers don't matter much at all.

Are their tiers of play?
Well... that was the point of the list. To provide an easy reference point for DM's to gauge the power-level of the group and plan accordingly. Or for DM's to decide on a power level ahead of time ("Okay I want 32 point buy, all resources open, Tier 3's or lower only please.")

Though admittedly I am not familiar with Tiers 0 and 7.

[Jackinthegreen]

The classes are placed in the tiers provided the player has pretty decent knowledge of how the class works.  Many of them nudge up a tier with an exceptional player.  Many also go down a tier when the player makes idiotic choices.  This latter one is where T7 might come into play for T5 and T6 classes played poorly.

T0 is usually occupied by Psionic Artificer and StP Erudite, but both assume the DM has made allowances for them.  For a Psi Arty, it's assumed that magic-psionic transparency is in effect as well as some custom items so they can craft pretty much anything.  For the StPE, it's assumed they get the chance to acquire a lot of spells and turn them into powers, thus having both incredible versatility as well as power from having spontaneous access to their entire list.

[Azrael]

The whole reason I have this handbook writer thingy is because I intend on (eventually, when I am finished with my thesis most likely), starting a handbook regarding tiers of play. I wholeheartedly agree that there should be tiers of play and that it can go hand-in-hand with class tiers to create a more whollistic approach to min-maxing and gameplay.

My original inspiration was actually my own character Azrael and the arguments that ensued regarding him. To make a long story short, it essentially came down to him vs. Pun-Pun and H.I.V.E. Myself and KellKheraptis made the point that since Azrael is capable of doing infinity combos he (or anyone else capable of doing such) could beat a build like H.I.V.E. because essentially infinity is infinity. It would just matter who was aware of the other first and who took the initiative to get infinite actions before the other.

The case against Pun-Pun is basically that if Pun-Pun can use manipulate form to "make-up" abilities then anyone else with access to manipulate form could also do the same. So no matter what protective abilities Pun-Pun makes up with manipulate form someone else could just make an ability called "Kill Pun-Pun (no matter what protective abilities this character has, even if it states he/she cannot be killed in any way, this ability annihilates Pun-Pun from existence)" In other words, once again it matters who is aware of the other first and who uses this ability on the other first.

Both of these are rather boring to me. There's no real battle or contest, it all comes down to who can rationalize that they existed prior to the other character's existence and so forth...which essentially makes it impossible to actually have a match of skill. However, what if we take away all the factors that make this type of play impossible, every ability, spell, etc that makes it so battles aren't even fought, they are won before because of a higher awareness? Some of these abilities include (but are not limited to) CoP, Manipulate Form, and anything that allows for a numerical increase from 0 to infinity. These types of mechanisms I would classify as S-Tier (for my love of anime) abilities and should be separated from any other gameplay. Essentially, S-Tier abilities are those that make it impossible to actually play or DM a game because your character is effectively holding space-time hostage. The real point I was trying to make about Azrael (and he was designed for A-Tier, not S-tier play, though he has S-Tier abilities in order to "keep up" with the crowd) is that he could easily do without the S-tier abilities, whereas a character like Pun-Pun, H.I.V.E., or and Wizard that spouts their superiority because of CoP would be significantly less powerful, if not completely unusable without them.

My Idea goes (very roughly) as follows...

S-Tier: Anything that a character could use that makes the game completely unplayable because they essentially hold space-time hostage, or knowledge itself hostage, and create a situation that basically stipulates whoever is aware of the other first wins. Anything that hijacks the game and places the world under the player's and not the DM's control.

Nothing is banned in this format.

A-Tier: The over-powered shit that we all know and love but doesn't necessarily make the game unplayable. While your character may be super overpowered and can defeat almost anything, abilities in this tier don't allow you to hijack the game itself.

Only abilities which would make the game completely unplayable or the battle a meta-battle about who goes first (CoP, Infinites, etc) are banned in this tier.

B Tier: This is where we start really putting stuff on the chopping board and this is most likely the most difficult tier to define. This is basically what pathfinder did in order to give more balance to 3.5. So basically, without making 3.5 pathfinder, what can we take away that uber-powerful, but not necessarily game-breaking S-Tier stuff.

A lot of things are banned in this tier (entire classes such as Dweomerkeeper, Incantrix, Initiate of the Seven Fold Veil, Items like Candle of Invocation, etc). Essentially, what are all the broken things most DM's would complain about.

C Tier: Not really sure if there is a C-Tier but I suppose it would be an attempt to balance out all the classes by taking away spells like shapechange, celerity, etc...an attempt to equalize Casters and Fighters...and so forth.

Many things are banned in this tier but they are more selective in the hope that one can balance things like fighter-wizard disparity.




As I said, I do plan on going into more depth on this issue in a future handbook but it could take around 6 months for me to finish so if anyone would like to take this idea and expand upon it sooner you are more than welcome to (as long as I get some form of credit) and I'll try to participate as much as I can. I think the step before making the actual handbook would be to discuss in a general forum such as this what people think regarding these limitations. Obviously there will be a lot of input and it will be a long process to achieve some sort of consensus.

[veekie]

Might want to consider optimizability as a big factor. While almost all of us here can be considered experts at the game, non experts tend to get monstrously screwed up with spell selections. So you have the following metrics:

-Minimum functionality - A Fighter has higher minimum function than a wizard. He'd always be able to thump heads. This usually means nothing except when introducing a new player.

-Peak acceptable optimization - The highest level of optimization you can achieve without interpreting rules differently from their most likely intent or completely ripping the system in half. This rules out theoretical techniques , infinite or near infinite loops, etc.

-Optimization costs - How much do you have to limit a character to reach your peak function? This is usually high for martial characters, who must lock into a fighting style, and extremely low for T1 characters, who can do their favorite thing, and also everything else.

-Breadth of coverage - Related to the above, what kind of capabilities can you cover?

[Solo]

Also got to consider how the player approaches the metagame.

[PlzBreakMyCampaign]

Veekie, I like that. I'll use something similar for a chart-based system instead of the 1 dimensional one I have on my Base class & tier information thread (when I get to finishing it that is).

[awaken_D_M_golem]

Tier 7?


Tier 0 is somewhat quantifiable:
If you can do something the Tier 1s can do,
but earlier with all the normal trimmings.

Recharge on Psions or Erudites clearly gives
you cure novas, buff novas, and combat novas,
with all day staying power.

Basically Tier 0 is Theoretical Optimization.


So then you hand an absolute Noob said
recharge Psion, and let them slowly but
surely learn how to be >> CoDzilla.

[Nedz]

I'm pretty sure Tier 0 is things like
Wizard/Incantatrix
Druid/Planer Shepherd (for certain planes, like the time dilation trick)
Wizard/Beholder Mage
etc.
Which are not TO but are > T1

[sirpercival]

Wizard/Beholder Mage

[Drammor]

Don't forget Illithid Savant.

[hunterofjello]

I think it's worth pointing out that the Base Class Tiers were not at all designed with the inclusion of Prestige Classes. They also weren't designed for multitasking either. Although they usually aren't, they should really be regarded as what Tier the character would be in for taking levels only in that single class. Separate lists for Prestige Class Tiers exist for good reason because of things like Ur-Priest.

I also believe its stated that the Tiers are designed for PCs that are designed by players using very basic optimization.

[TC X0 Lt 0X]

Wizard/Beholder Mage

My Beholder Mage actually started out as a Druid.
He was also a Planar Sheperd, Ur-Priest, and Ardent, soo...

[sirpercival]

OK, but wizard/beholder mage isn't optimal at all.  It's almost as bad as cleric/ur-priest.

[RFLS]

I think you'll find, actually, in JaronK's post that he says the tier system assumes equal optimization for classes when making the comparison. It does not assume any level of optimization, beyond knowledge of how the rules work.

Not saying "knowing that Natural Spell is a must for druids," for rules-knowledge, just knowing what the feat does. If that makes sense.

[Nedz]

OK, but wizard/beholder mage isn't optimal at all.  It's almost as bad as cleric/ur-priest.

Ok, my bad on that one.

[Scottzar]

I think you'll find, actually, in JaronK's post that he says the tier system assumes equal optimization for classes when making the comparison. It does not assume any level of optimization, beyond knowledge of how the rules work.

Not saying "knowing that Natural Spell is a must for druids," for rules-knowledge, just knowing what the feat does. If that makes sense.

Theoretically, yes. But practically, all classes can become pun-pun at the same time in the same way. Level nines is a couple thousand pp away. etc.

Tiers function at a CO level of play. A first time, doesn't actually read the rules player would conform to completely different tiers, and TO doesn't even have applicable tiers.