So having played PF for awhile now, here are my takes --
1. Cleric
Channel Energy is, RAW, ridiculous. Oh the ways I dislike this ability. It is non-disruptable (unless you ready to disarm their holy symbol), it is area of effect healing that clerics use to have to wait NINE levels to get (Cure Light Wounds), and its supposed draw back is mitigated by a feat (Selective Channel). The purpose of the ability was supposedly to free up the Cleric to get to use non-healing spells in combat, but more often than not the Cleric's logical play is to Channel again. And the uses per day are almost impossible to exhaust, again, with a single feat. Oh, and it only really helps the PCs, as the healing version for bad guys only really works in the contrived and stereotypical "bad necromancer with his undead minions".
It's use as an anti-undead option to replace turn undead is fine, which needed a fix from 3.5 as it was either stupid (didn't work) or stupid (made undead pathetic).
Add to that the domains are so strong, particularly Liberation. And the class already was one of the best as it basically negated long term status effects. But they lose... for all this power... heavy armor proficiency?
2. Sorcerer
Actually, really like the changes to the Sorcerer. In 3.5 there was almost no reason not to multiclass out of it to a PrC that offered full spellcasting progression ASAP. Now, with the bloodlines, there is a reason to actually stay within the class. It's power ranking is simply due to the basic mechanical strength of spellcasting and being spontaneous provides a slight edge over the Wizard.
3. Wizard
I like the change to specialization, that now you just use double the spells per day rather than total exclusion to a school. Again, ranking due to the strength of spellcasting.
4. Bard
Disclaimer: My personal pet class. It is so good right now too. Particularly, the change to bardic music and bardic knowledge. BK use to be really hard to gain much out of it. By streamlining it into regular knowledges they gave a significant advantage. Being able to start a music as a swift or move action is glorious. In combat, you have a medium BAB to work with, but given the bonuses from Inspire Courage you can actually make a decent melee or archer from it.
5. Paladin
Smite is improved, it gets access to more immunities, it gets the ridiculous channel energy, and it can heal itself as a swift action. Even gets a strong power replacement for the mount (which was more thematic but not very powerful). Without question the premium melee combatant now. The option to give the smite to allies... sooo good, as my group is finding out lately. My only problem with the class is an aesthetic one - I always thought of Paladins as being unique and special. As a mundane "regular" class, they lose that.
6. Rogue
The ease of restrictions on what can be sneak attacked helps them. The talents are neat, but not amazing. The problem I see with them is that they are fast becoming the new "3.5 fighter", meaning they make a great dip for two levels (to get evasion, trap disarming, a little SA and a talent) more than being taken as a base class.
7. Druid
That a caster can fall this low shows how lame this class has become overall. It has power simply because it chooses to cast spells for a living, and its animal companion is strong to boot, but its spell selection is weak comparatively, its restrictions against metal still stiff, and its conditional strength upon uncontrollable aspects (weather, overground, etc) troubling. Wildshape is almost not worth it outside of out of combat utility. It is the latest in 18th century technology in the 21st century. It is good, but only in comparison to non-casters, not in comparison to other casters.
8. Ranger
Basically the second best non-caster (Rogue really earning its position only as its prize as a level dip), it is still good for getting free feats for weapon style. Favored enemy is ok so long as it is taken to something frequently encountered (like undead). It isn't bad, it just isn't very good. Sad for them, the thing they really should do best (archery) they don't do best or rather better enough when compared to either the Fighter or Bard.
9. Fighter
Little more versatility with armor choices, little more damage with a broader use of weapons. Still, an indentured servant to casters, and still better for leveling dipping for feats than as a core class. The critical feats offer a nice little sideshow, but still kinda meh.
10. Monk
Good saves. Weak damage output. SR is ok. Their best niche is to simply grapple something and wait for the real characters to help. But first they better drink a potion of enlarge person or they can't even do that right. Doesn't even get full BAB. The sauce is weak with this one.
11. Barbarian
In 3.5 they use to be the best melee class. When they fixed Power Attack, they fixed Barbarian. Or rather, spade it. It's rage powers are a joke, mostly emulating weaker versions of feats. It gets a whole bunch of can't do weakness compared to melee classes which, in turn, are weak compared to caster classes. It is the slave's slave.
|
You need to look a lot closer before making these judgements, especially with the Cleric.
Also, channel energy increases MAD. And to say evil clerics are only good as necromancers is wrong- they can also channel negative energy to harm the PC's, and exclude their own minions with selective channeling if they wish.
I am willing to take bets somebody will come and say 'Hi Welcome', or give you the long version.
Mr. Fishy isn't allow to play here...Mr. Fishy was bad...last time.
If you want another thread on this:
You need to look a lot closer before making these judgements, especially with the Cleric.
Also, channel energy increases MAD. And to say evil clerics are only good as necromancers is wrong- they can also channel negative energy to harm the PC's, and exclude their own minions with selective channeling if they wish.
I am willing to take bets somebody will come and say 'Hi Welcome', or give you the long version.
Channel energy as an attack versus the healing property is worlds apart. Using it as an attack it comes off as a kind of weak fireball. Using it as a heal it is an amazing version of cure mass that can't even be disrupted. The only way to really compare it is in healing scenarios and the good guys get it and bad guys really don't except in one limited carving.
And I wasn't saying evil clerics are only good as necromancers, I was saying that specific to the channel energy ability. Clerics, being spell casters, make great enemies.
Pulls up a chair, and some popcorn. I am a demon. I am immune to flames.
Mr. Fishy isn't allow to play here...Mr. Fishy was bad...last time.
I invite you. You are a most entertaining fish. That is the only reason I am not having fish o filet.
MR.OP this thread has come up multiple times. You can just do a search and read to find out why your premises are flawed. If I was not involved in other debates I would join.
Question of the day: Why am I attracted to flame-bait threads? It is almost like they seek me out and hunt me down
PS: Mr.OP I am not accusing you of anything. You can start such threads by accident, and the way a party plays can do a lot for perception of a class.
PS2: Druids are awesome. While you are searching for the other versions of this thread do a search for treantmonk's guide to druids.
Ah, I tought it would be a thread encouraging people to rank the core classes instead of a review.
Well, I gave my take, but I am definitely open to hearing other people's takes, or their take on my take, or whathaveyou.
If you want another thread on this:
This thread has already begun, albeit some time ago. Can we move the discussion of class power rankings to the previous power-ranking discussion?
Thanks to Karameikos for the link.
You think Channel Energy is overpowered? o_O
Sorcerer over wizard?
Druid closer to the bottom?
Uhhhh.
I disagree :p
You think Channel Energy is overpowered? o_O
Sorcerer over wizard?
Druid closer to the bottom?
Uhhhh.
I disagree :p
I'd put the sorcerer over the wizard only because there is no "guessing game" to prepare the right spells for the day. Granted, the wizard has more versatility, but many of those spells can be covered with a few scrolls. The wizard, by prepping to be versatile, can actually have a problem of running out of impact spells on rare occasion.
Channel Energy for reasons previously stated.
Druid is still a spellcaster, it is just unfortunately the worst spellcaster. It is the most limited of tactical nukes, acknowledging that it is still a... tactical nuke. :)
You think Channel Energy is overpowered? o_O
Sorcerer over wizard?
Druid closer to the bottom?
Uhhhh.
I disagree :p
I'd put the sorcerer over the wizard only because there is no "guessing game" to prepare the right spells for the day. Granted, the wizard has more versatility, but many of those spells can be covered with a few scrolls. The wizard, by prepping to be versatile, can actually have a problem of running out of impact spells on rare occasion.
Channel Energy for reasons previously stated.
Druid is still a spellcaster, it is just unfortunately the worst spellcaster. It is the most limited of tactical nukes, acknowledging that it is still a... tactical nuke. :)
Most of the spells(assuming the player has a clue) are generally useful. There generally are not right or wrong spells, and if there is a "right" spell then the sorcerer does no even have the option to get it. Well he might, but hat depends on how open the DM is with scrolls.
Channel Energy is not that great unless you are the walking band-aid for a group that can't stay out of trouble, and the negative version is pretty good. There is no energy resistance(negative energy).Edit:Obviously if you are insulting the druid you don't understand the value of battlefield control, nor did you read the guide.
I'm surprised no one's brought this up:
I think the classes still fall more or less in line with their 3.5 predecessors.
Aa for the list, no the list is not perfect, but it is pretty close.
That system is flawed. For example, it defines "tier 1" as "Capable of doing absolutely everything, often better than classes that specialize in that thing". However, a Wizard -can't- do "absolutely everything". It can barely heal and it can't tank.
It could do both of those things with the Summon Monster X spells alone.
|
That system is flawed. For example, it defines "tier 1" as "Capable of doing absolutely everything, often better than classes that specialize in that thing". However, a Wizard -can't- do "absolutely everything". It can barely heal and it can't tank.I'm surprised no one's brought this up:
I think the classes still fall more or less in line with their 3.5 predecessors.
+1
So having played PF for awhile now, here are my 1. Cleric
Channel's really nice for what it is, and what it is is a way to make the cleric better at something he shouldn't be spending a round doing in combat.
Weigh against that most of the really good core cleric spells are weaker in PF than in 3.5 and the loss of heavy armor prof and it's hard to say the cleric got stronger.
2. SorcererActually, really like the changes to the Sorcerer. In 3.5 there was almost no reason not to multiclass out of it to a PrC that offered full spellcasting progression ASAP. Now, with the bloodlines, there is a reason to actually stay within the class. It's power ranking is simply due to the basic mechanical strength of spellcasting and being spontaneous provides a slight edge over the Wizard.
I agree with you there until the last sentence.
Sorcerer's not a bad class, but wizard's just stronger. In short:
1) Int is a better stat to have most of your points dumped into than Chr,
2) Having picked the wrong spells to have for a day is less bad than having picked the wrong spells to have for your entire life and
3) For all odd levels, the wizard is a spell level ahead. That isn't a small difference.
4. Bard
It's missing its strongest 3.5 trick, being 3.5's version of fascinate, but overall I think the class did get better.
6. RogueThe ease of restrictions on what can be sneak attacked helps them. The talents are neat, but not amazing. The problem I see with them is that they are fast becoming the new "3.5 fighter", meaning they make a great dip for two levels (to get evasion, trap disarming, a little SA and a talent) more than being taken as a base class.
To whom does that look like a good level dip?
It's not to any of the full casters. It's not to anyone who wants to wear medium or heavier armor. That doesn't leave a lot.
Do you mean Summon Monster IX?
No, or spells wouldn't have been plural.
I'm pretty well convinced you're trolling, now.
Do you mean Summon Monster IX?No, or spells wouldn't have been plural.
I'm pretty well convinced you're trolling, now.
The versatility of the summon spells is not that well known since most people only use them to fight. I think she really does not know.
I'm fond of the summon monster spells because most of the time the thing they provide is threefold:
Extra spell slots and the actions to use them -- usually of spells that I don't directly have access too (trumpet archon and it's access to 7th level clerical spells I'm looking at you).
Lantern Archons.
Meat shields that I don't have to care about and damage dealing abilities that aren't vital.
I think before I respond I'd just like to say that I am not saying anything is "unplayable". Even the Barbarian deals damage and kills things. It can still have a heroic storyline. This is simply a measurement of effectiveness in my review.
==
Wraithstrike:
There are spells that have great utility value but that are "all or nothing". Say, water breathing. A slot dedicated to it is more often than not dead.
The "right" spell, in this case, is one that gets prepared that has a direct application for the day and achieved its job at the best efficiency for any option.
As for channel energy not being that great, have you DM'd Pathfinder using just core and the APLs as listed? It's strong man. With CE, many standard combats become weak as the damage outputs can't possibly match continuous every round in combat group heals.
As to insulting the druid, I have not yet read the guide you posted but I will check it out. I'm always open minded to new opinions. I do, however, have some rather capable people playing, we've used the druid, and it has so far come up as inferior in comparison to any of the other primary spellcasters.
If you disagree though, where would you rank him? Ahead of the sorc, wiz or cleric?
==
Lillithsthrall:
A fair point. Of course, the difference between the two is minutia. They are both awesome in terms of power.
==
Ikedoe:
Fundamentally, a melee class structured on heavy movement loses out a lot for the fact that full attacks are rewarded to those that don't move. So the only thing to compensate for that would be additional effects to that one attack. Which would seem to be something that allowed some sort of inhibitor to the victim of that standard attack (paralyzed, stunned, tripped, etc). Unfortunately, most of that is lessened by the weaker BAB.
==
Dire Mongoose:
On the issue of CE, the cleric is still doing what he always did (healing) he is only doing it at a severely higher value than what he did before. Have you noticed anymore non-healing spells being cast by the cleric in combat than before? Because I certainly haven't. As to spells being weaker, which ones were weakened? I know death ward is now, but that is actually a bigger loss for fellow teammates than himself considering his good will and fort saves.
On the Sorc v Wiz, I agree that int is better than cha. I agree that the spell progression advantage is big for the wiz too. Again, it just comes down to the spell choices each day that tilts it for me to the sorc.
Finally, on the Rogue, a single level dip (or two) allows any other character to basically have all the best things of that class. Access to that tidy +3 to most skills, access to disarming significant traps, and some SA to go. Almost any non-spellcaster (where constant spellcasting progression is admittedly too important) can fulfill one of the four core roles of an RPG for a small investment.
I will only comment about the Monk, so you can use a competitive one in your campaing.
Monks only have a weak damage output if you choose to go for AC (a build with Dex and Wis). If you go for damage (a build with Str and Wis)you get a moderate damage output, fighters are still the kings of mele damage, of course.
Until grapple gets clarified and errated I wouldn't use grapple.
Monks get full BAB when using something similar to Two Weapon Fighting or performing Combat Maneuvers (move and disarm/trip/etc. is an ok option IMO).
The Monk is one of the few classes that can pay for a Permanency spell to enchant his (unarmed) weapons, which is far cheaper than any magic weapon.
The niche of a Monk is being a mediocre (mediocre like in the middle of the scale) mele character that moves a lot and gets one of the best defenses against magic of the game.
If a player wants a mele character that doesn't get hurt by spells too often then the Monk is the class he is looking for.
+1
I never thought about the permanency spell... I always pay tons for the amulet of mighty fists.
I also dont go for Grappling, but instead go for Ki Throw.
Wraithstrike:There are spells that have great utility value but that are "all or nothing". Say, water breathing. A slot dedicated to it is more often than not dead.
The "right" spell, in this case, is one that gets prepared that has a direct application for the day and achieved its job at the best efficiency for any option.
As for channel energy not being that great, have you DM'd Pathfinder using just core and the APLs as listed? It's strong man. With CE, many standard combats become weak as the damage outputs can't possibly match continuous every round in combat group heals.
As to insulting the druid, I have not yet read the guide you posted but I will check it out. I'm always open minded to new opinions. I do, however, have some rather capable people playing, we've used the druid, and it has so far come up as inferior in comparison to any of the other primary spellcasters.
If you disagree though, where would you rank him? Ahead of the sorc, wiz or cleric?
I have never seen water breathing prepared. Who actually prepares that spell unless they know they will need it. Even then I would just buy the scroll.
There are normally several ways to solve a problem, so the "right" spell is often overhyped. If it is not overhyped the sorcerer who can't even change spells might be out of luck.CE is not that great in my games because my group does not get beat up a lot. As I said before if getting beat on is common then it has a lot of value, but I have learned that not needing healing is the better path to try to follow. I guess the truth is somewhere in between. I have played a druid, and it is awesome. I did not even use wildshape that much, and even though it got a big nerf it is still a good class. I thought they had destroyed the class too until I played one, so I guess I can understand. I think the druid and cleric are about equal. They just do different things. It depends on the party also. If a group needs healing a lot I would take the cleric. If not then I would recommend a druid. How was the druid inferior to the other casters?
I will only comment about the Monk, so you can use a competitive one in your campaing.
Monks only have a weak damage output if you choose to go for AC (a build with Dex and Wis). If you go for damage (a build with Str and Wis)you get a moderate damage output, fighters are still the kings of mele damage, of course.
Until grapple gets clarified and errated I wouldn't use grapple.
Monks get full BAB when using something similar to Two Weapon Fighting or performing Combat Maneuvers (move and disarm/trip/etc. is an ok option IMO).
The Monk is one of the few classes that can pay for a Permanency spell to enchant his (unarmed) weapons, which is far cheaper than any magic weapon.
The niche of a Monk is being a mediocre (mediocre like in the middle of the scale) mele character that moves a lot and gets one of the best defenses against magic of the game.
If a player wants a mele character that doesn't get hurt by spells too often then the Monk is the class he is looking for.+1
I never thought about the permanency spell... I always pay tons for the amulet of mighty fists.
I also dont go for Grappling, but instead go for Ki Throw.
The issue with that spell combined with permanency is one dispel magic and it is gone forever.
==Ikedoe:
Fundamentally, a melee class structured on heavy movement loses out a lot for the fact that full attacks are rewarded to those that don't move. So the only thing to compensate for that would be additional effects to that one attack. Which would seem to be something that allowed some sort of inhibitor to the victim of that standard attack (paralyzed, stunned, tripped, etc). Unfortunately, most of that is lessened by the weaker BAB.
==
Remember that the Monk can move and perform a Combat Maneuver (i.e. trip) with a standard action using his level as BAB.
The movement bonuses for the Monk aren't that good, not just for the Monk, for anyone with multiple attacks, but it is a small and almost exclusive bonus to have.
Dire Mongoose:
On the issue of CE, the clerc is still doing what he always did (healing) he is only doing it at a severely higher value than what he did before.
Generally speaking, well-played clerics are not casting healing spells in combat. Heal is an exception to this.
If your argument is that Channel is a big power boost to people who don't play cleric very well, I would definitely agree with that. Not everything in the game can be balanced with the best (mechanically) players in mind.
Full arcane casting was great in 3.5 and now it has just gotten that much better.
Really? Explain.
Full arcane casting was great in 3.5 and now it has just gotten that much better.Really? Explain.
For the wizards, it's about the same at higher levels, except for the extra hp and the fluff. But now, they no longer suffer from the humiliating weakness they had to survive to at 1st and 2nd level.
I remember having to kill kobolds with my quaterstaff as a 1st level wizard back in 3.0. PF's wizards don't even need a crossbow when they run out of spell now.
I don't know about the sorcerer. He seems mostly unchanged.
Full arcane casting was great in 3.5 and now it has just gotten that much better.Really? Explain.For the wizards, it's about the same at higher levels, except for the extra hp and the fluff. But now, they no longer suffer from the humiliating weakness they had to survive to at 1st and 2nd level.
I remember having to kill kobolds with my quaterstaff as a 1st level wizard back in 3.0. PF's wizards don't even need a crossbow when they run out of spell now.
I don't know about the sorcerer. He seems mostly unchanged.
I can agree on HPs, but most spells suffered the nerfbat. Since spells are the most powerful feature of arcane spellcasters, I can assume that overall they didn't improve their power.
Not to say that "ZOMG caster has been nerfed !!!!11!" but say that their power is greater is IMHO a little bit too much.
I can agree on HPs, but most spells suffered the nerfbat. Since spells are the most powerful feature of arcane spellcasters, I can assume that overall they didn't improve their power.
Not to say that "ZOMG caster has been nerfed !!!!11!" but say that their power is greater is IMHO a little bit too much.
The sad thing is that, while some spells indeed suffered the nerfbat, to many others where wearing an amulet of anti-nerfbat while PF was in production. Stinking Cloud, Summon Monster, Haste, Fly, etc. I won't even talk about high level spells. And the nerfbat used against some spells was only a masterwork nerfbat, where it should have been a +1 vorpal nerfbat.
Another thing to consider about druids: Spontaneous casting of Summon Nature's Ally. This is significant. If you ever find that you have a slot prepared that you misjudged, summon a creature. Now you have two actions a round.
As I posted elsewhere, you can't rank them without builds and context.
"Wizard" is as descriptive as "Food". Both describe a thing, but there is a lot of room between Pizza and Salad.
But what about veggie-pizza?
The sad thing is that, while some spells indeed suffered the nerfbat, to many others where wearing an amulet of anti-nerfbat while PF was in production. Stinking Cloud, Summon Monster, Haste, Fly, etc. I won't even talk about high level spells. And the nerfbat used against some spells was only a masterwork nerfbat, where it should have been a +1 vorpal nerfbat.I can agree on HPs, but most spells suffered the nerfbat. Since spells are the most powerful feature of arcane spellcasters, I can assume that overall they didn't improve their power.
Not to say that "ZOMG caster has been nerfed !!!!11!" but say that their power is greater is IMHO a little bit too much.
Even if I can definitively see "moar nerf" as reasonable, I can just admit to disagree with you on the entity of the nerf :)
Haste is more an help for other party members. Stinking cloud is subjected to weather, and creature away can retreat and wait for the nausea expire..
Just to say that are not auto-win. I could, as an example, definitively see as reasonable reducing the nausea duration of SC and call it a very useful spell anyway.
Going higher level as well, I could definitively, say, see an increase in casting time of the Mansion, or a reduction of the control over the Gated creature as reasonable as well.