| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The tiers are essentially a measure of how many toes a given class steps on. Classes that have many of their abilities poached by other classes, such as rogues, have a very low tier (higher number) since they can't really do anything unique. A wizard, on the other hand, can potentially do most anything any other class can thanks to his versatile spell list and class abilities; so it is considered by most to be a tier 1 class.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The tiers are essentially a measure of how many toes a given class steps on. Classes that have many of their abilities poached by other classes, such as rogues, have a very low tier (higher number) since they can't really do anything unique. A wizard, on the other hand, can potentially do most anything any other class can thanks to his versatile spell list and class abilities; so it is considered by most to be a tier 1 class.
More to the point, the wizard is even capable of stepping on the GM's toes and rewriting large portions of the adventure path.
I asked because I'd never heard the term before, and while there is a large temporal gap in my D&D experience - roughly anything after AD&D up to Pathfinder, which I discovered seven months ago, I've read pretty much everything I could find on the latter.
Sounds like this is nothing official, just various peoples' opinions on the relative power (or merit, I suppose) of the classes. Seems to me though that if the disparity is that wide (leaving aside the NPC classes) there's something wrong with the system's balance. Or perhaps not - some characters, it seems to me, ought to be a lot more powerful than others.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sounds like this is nothing official, just various peoples' opinions on the relative power (or merit, I suppose) of the classes.
It's not. And even the tier system is not supposed to be about the merit of the classes; it was proposed as a guide for novice players to make sure that everyone's expectations are on the same page. The basic idea being that if I am playing a tier 5 character in a group where everyone else is tier 1 or 2, then I'm going to feel outclassed.
Seems to me though that if the disparity is that wide (leaving aside the NPC classes) there's something wrong with the system's balance. Or perhaps not - some characters, it seems to me, ought to be a lot more powerful than others.
That's part of the ongoing discussion.
Some people like phenomenal world-shattering cosmic power, and other people prefer realism. It's hard to balance the two, and it's made harder when the realism focuses more on one group of classes than another. (Wait a minute, a mage can literally summon angels, but a gunfighter can't jump to the top of a second-story building?)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The tiers are essentially a measure of how many toes a given class steps on. Classes that have many of their abilities poached by other classes, such as rogues, have a very low tier (higher number) since they can't really do anything unique. A wizard, on the other hand, can potentially do most anything any other class can thanks to his versatile spell list and class abilities; so it is considered by most to be a tier 1 class.More to the point, the wizard is even capable of stepping on the GM's toes and rewriting large portions of the adventure path.
I read the Jade Regent player's guide for a game I ended up not getting to participate in. I thought the section dedicated to telling caster players "if you teleport you will ruin the story so please don't do that" was really amusing.
But Fighters are pretty much the bottom in 3.5, with Rogues elbowing past them into last place in the Pathfinder Tier ratings.
The Complete Warrior Samurai is offended but not surprised you forgot him.
The tier structure varies a lot on the DM. Wizards are very Tier 1 under DM's who allow them to dominate. Unlimited access to spells, non-restrictive interpretations of spells, especially certain spells allowed to break games, mainly Simulacrum and Blood Money.
That would be RAW, which is what the tiers are decided by. Not saying anyone actually plays purely by RAW, but if you do, Wizards are in fact above and beyond everyone else.
|
The only problem I have is I always get crappy cards in the booster packs.
Oh, wait, wrong Magic. Sorry.
On that topic my collection being wroth significantly more than a brand new car irritates some individuals...
Myself included.
It is understandable that some collections could be amazingly large, the game's been out twenty years now. When I sold off 90% of my RPG collection when my daughter was born (which wasn't even close to what I had before I went on Federal vacation and lost everything I owned), I made a few grand off of it. And I had only been collecting since '08 at that point.
Oh, and, yeah, magic in 3x is ridiculous. No drawbacks, casting is way too easy, and too many spells stomp all over other classes niches.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The tier structure varies a lot on the DM. Wizards are very Tier 1 under DM's who allow them to dominate. Unlimited access to spells, non-restrictive interpretations of spells, especially certain spells allowed to break games, mainly Simulacrum and Blood Money.
The other thing is that given that very few campaigns break the 12th level tier, Wizards and Sorcerers seldom get to the point where they are so nakedly powerful that they can dispense with the other classes.
I find if you interpret wizards into the ground then the other classes will only get furthered pushed into the ground via the fairness of harsh interpretation.
If wizards cannot be creative with spells, then so much less for rogue skills and fighter strength.
The only problem I have is I always get crappy cards in the booster packs.
Oh, wait, wrong Magic. Sorry.
On that topic my collection being wroth significantly more than a brand new car irritates some individuals...
Myself included.
That is a lot of cards.
Indeed but it's less about quantity and more about having a bunch of cards in the >500 range.That is a lot of cards.The only problem I have is I always get crappy cards in the booster packs.
Oh, wait, wrong Magic. Sorry.
On that topic my collection being wroth significantly more than a brand new car irritates some individuals...
Myself included.
Oh man. Think of all the warhammer 30k mini's you could get if you sold those cards!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The tier structure varies a lot on the DM. Wizards are very Tier 1 under DM's who allow them to dominate. Unlimited access to spells, non-restrictive interpretations of spells, especially certain spells allowed to break games, mainly Simulacrum and Blood Money.
The other thing is that given that very few campaigns break the 12th level tier, Wizards and Sorcerers seldom get to the point where they are so nakedly powerful that they can dispense with the other classes.
I find if you interpret wizards into the ground then the other classes will only get furthered pushed into the ground via the fairness of harsh interpretation.
If wizards cannot be creative with spells, then so much less for rogue skills and fighter strength.
Not to mention it essentially reduces the argument to "Tier I characters don't break the game. They're totally balanced once you house-rule out all their game-breaking powers."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is funny because is true. It is sad because is true.I read the Jade Regent player's guide for a game I ended up not getting to participate in. I thought the section dedicated to telling caster players "if you teleport you will ruin the story so please don't do that" was really amusing.The tiers are essentially a measure of how many toes a given class steps on. Classes that have many of their abilities poached by other classes, such as rogues, have a very low tier (higher number) since they can't really do anything unique. A wizard, on the other hand, can potentially do most anything any other class can thanks to his versatile spell list and class abilities; so it is considered by most to be a tier 1 class.More to the point, the wizard is even capable of stepping on the GM's toes and rewriting large portions of the adventure path.
It isn't sad, funny, or true. What the guide says is "don’t expect to be able to skip past the significant long overland journey sections with spells like teleport, wind walk, or shadow walk." It's not saying 'please don't cast teleport', it's saying that won't help. (MINOR JADE REGENT SPOILERS:)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh man. Think of all the warhammer 40k mini's you could get if you sold those cards!
Judging how expensive Games "We're not game company" Workshop is making their models? 7.
Not to mention it essentially reduces the argument to "Tier I characters don't break the game. They're totally balanced once you house-rule out all their game-breaking powers."The tier structure varies a lot on the DM. Wizards are very Tier 1 under DM's who allow them to dominate. Unlimited access to spells, non-restrictive interpretations of spells, especially certain spells allowed to break games, mainly Simulacrum and Blood Money.
The other thing is that given that very few campaigns break the 12th level tier, Wizards and Sorcerers seldom get to the point where they are so nakedly powerful that they can dispense with the other classes.
I find if you interpret wizards into the ground then the other classes will only get furthered pushed into the ground via the fairness of harsh interpretation.
If wizards cannot be creative with spells, then so much less for rogue skills and fighter strength.
Especially since that's acknowledged as part of the basic structure. "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."
To put it another way, if you need house rules to keep the character from breaking the campaign, because simple RAW is not limiting enough, it's a tier 1 character.
|
What happens when you never let the wizard have access to other Wizards spell books or anything but basic scrolls and such. I know they get any spell they want when they level and that can be an issue, or enforcing the copying rules and such. When it takes the wizard a week to decipher a 7th spell from another spell book of 7th level spells (each 7 pages) they are eating up valuable in game and table time. Hold them to their own rules of limitation.
Also if the wizard is clogging up their spells per day with things spells that other classes have natural abilities for they are just trying to show off or won't have other spells prepared.
Sure they can break narrative, if you let them. If you just hold them to their class abilities and don't give them the down time to do all of this you limit them without having to dumb them down.
I don't have the rules in front of me for copying a spell from another persons spell book. I think it is 1 hr per page, so anything over a 4th level spell will eat into their sleep time, their prep time and their day light hours.
Just my two coppers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What happens when you never let the wizard have access to other Wizards spell books or anything but basic scrolls and such.
The same thing that happens when you use extreme DM fiat to nerf any other class. The class in question gets nerfed.
The problem is that you will end up nerfing almost every other class at the same time. By RAW, everyone has crafting time in the evening, and also by RAW, a wizard can buy 75% of the spells he's interested in at almost any village inn. If you decide that you're going to eliminate magic item shops to keep him from buying the spells he needs, you're also going to nerf every other character that relies on equipment, which means you'll end up nerfing the ranger and rogue more than the wizard. (Mr. Hosler pointed this out earlier.)
And you'll do nothing to nerf the cleric (also game-breakingly tier 1) since he doesn't need a spellbook.
So the effect is that you will annoy the wizard, cripple the fighter, and not even slow down the cleric.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What happens when you never let the wizard have access to other Wizards spell books or anything but basic scrolls and such. I know they get any spell they want when they level and that can be an issue, or enforcing the copying rules and such. When it takes the wizard a week to decipher a 7th spell from another spell book of 7th level spells (each 7 pages) they are eating up valuable in game and table time. Hold them to their own rules of limitation.
Also if the wizard is clogging up their spells per day with things spells that other classes have natural abilities for they are just trying to show off or won't have other spells prepared.
Sure they can break narrative, if you let them. If you just hold them to their class abilities and don't give them the down time to do all of this you limit them without having to dumb them down.
I don't have the rules in front of me for copying a spell from another persons spell book. I think it is 1 hr per page, so anything over a 4th level spell will eat into their sleep time, their prep time and their day light hours.
Just my two coppers.
Yes, you can agressively limit wizards, the problem ofcourse, is A that is antagonistic and creates an adversarial relationship between player and dm, B there are other tier 1 classes that have no such limitations (druid, and cleric come to mind), and C, downtime is a rational part of the adventuring system. If you dont allow downtime, your party is going to go 1-20 in like 2 months. That isnt rational story telling. Not even proffesional soldiers fight every single day during wars. Rational people need downtime to recover, and to lead lives. And the assumption of said downtime is built into most adventure paths.
Heck, the whole downtime system introduced in ultimate campaign is basically there so everyone who isnt a wizard has something to do in that assumed time when a wizard is crafting, researching etc.
Saying I can remove base assumptions of the game and of the vast majority of long term story telling (downtime) in order to limit the basic function of a specific class isnt the answer to the magic problem, because it creates other problems. It limits the kind of story you can tell (anything without a constant ticking clock of doom), it hurts other characters (no retraining, no gathering resources, no developing npc-pc relationships), it creates an irrationally fast pace of level advancement (neophyte to master wizard in 2 months of in world time), and its going to make the wizard's player actively try to oppose the dms actions in order to get the downtime he needs to do his thing. Once that player vs dm mentality seeps into a game, it is extremely disruptive and often destructive.
|
|
@Kolokotroni & Orfamay Quest
Both very fair points. What if we just remove spells from all spell lists (cleric/druid) that give abilities that other classes get naturally?
Doesn't trivialize the Rogue/Fighter/Monk/Barb
Yes I know spells like rage help a fighter out but that is the barbs stick and lets try to keep it that way.
To many games are blurring the lines of the classes. Many online games just make it so that you don't have to have all the classes present to get the buffs. Lets not make it that way in PF.
If we try to keep each class having a certain point in the game where they shine then people will want to play them.
I know magic is supposed to be the binding force (no SW pun intended) but if we let those wizards have all the fun than we are taking away from other fun classes. If you just playing for mathematics and want the best possible outcome all the time and don't care about RPing a character then be my guest and have the casters snap their fingers and conjure up whatever it is you need.
This could also be r/t class bloat and the fighter just being a frame work for adding stuff to make a new class instead of retro fitting them.
I don't have the rules in front of me for copying a spell from another persons spell book. I think it is 1 hr per page, so anything over a 4th level spell will eat into their sleep time, their prep time and their day light hours.
Just my two coppers.
One hour is required to study the spell, to see if you can copy it. The actual copying takes an addition one hour per spell level. So a 9th level spell would take ten hours - assuming you don't fail any of the checks involved.
It seems to me wizards are unlikely to say to other wizards 'sure, you can borrow my spell book! Take as long as you want with it.' If the BBEG is a wizard, and you manage to defeat him, and you manage to find his (probably very well hidden and protected) spell book that's another story - but the book will only have the spells that wizard knows, and he may not know that many. As for buying a spell book in the local magic shop, well, it is to laugh. :-)
@Kolokotroni & Orfamay Quest
Both very fair points. What if we just remove spells from all spell lists (cleric/druid) that give abilities that other classes get naturally?
There are actually relatively few of them, and those spells are not as problematic as you think.
For example, Crafter's Fortune gives a straight-up bonus to a crafting roll, and thereby weakens an advantage that rogues have over wizards. But the issue is that crafter's fortune is non-specific, which means I can pull it out and craft anything while the (realistic) rogue had to learn a specific craft skill to make the item in question. It's not clear, though, that eliminating this spell would actually do much, because it's so rarely used, and because it solves a problem of what do you mean no one here knows how to bake a cake? or whatever RP challenge is at hand.
Knock, I grant you, should be taken out and shot, because it directly addresses a rogue's core compentency.
But if you remove knock, the wizard will simply use disintegrate. (Locked door? What locked door?) which does everything knock does and more. Similarly, the fly spell makes the climb spell totally useless as a side effect of its real purpose. But it doesn't grant an ability that a rogue gets naturally, and in fact, it would be a game-changer after about 5th level to eliminate it from the game.
The problem is that spells solve problems, and they usually solve problems well (which is why they're useful in the first place). Martials also solve problems, but they solve them realistically and therefore not well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One hour is required to study the spell, to see if you can copy it. The actual copying takes an addition one hour per spell level. So a 9th level spell would take ten hours - assuming you don't fail any of the checks involved.I don't have the rules in front of me for copying a spell from another persons spell book. I think it is 1 hr per page, so anything over a 4th level spell will eat into their sleep time, their prep time and their day light hours.
Just my two coppers.
Meh. That's what coffee is for. If you don't get enough sleep during the night, you're fatigued the next day. If the cleric can't use a lesser restoration, and if the paladin can't use an appropriate mercy, and if the bard can't use an invigorate spell -- well, gosh, the wizard takes a strength penalty until tomorrow night.
I know too many college students to be afraid of spending all night studying.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
@Kolokotroni & Orfamay Quest
Both very fair points. What if we just remove spells from all spell lists (cleric/druid) that give abilities that other classes get naturally?
Doesn't trivialize the Rogue/Fighter/Monk/Barb
Yes I know spells like rage help a fighter out but that is the barbs stick and lets try to keep it that way.
For me at least, niche protection isnt a good solution. Mostly because the game is designed around a party of 4 players, it shouldnt have to be around four specific classes. I like that you can have a party without any specific class and still function as needed. The point shouldnt be that you NEED a fighter or a rogue, it should be that the fighter and rogue are cool enough on their own merits to be worth playing at least some of the time. Besides, given the proliferation of classes, niche protection is basically impossible. We have many rogish classes, many fighterish classes, trying to somehow protect the niche of any one of those classes in that kind of environment is impossible.
I also dont think just taking out the specific spells is a good solution either. In the end it is the very nature of spells that is the problem in my mind. Unless you basically remove every single potent spell the probem isnt resolved. Either magic, or not magic, or both need a fundamental redesign to fix this.
To many games are blurring the lines of the classes. Many online games just make it so that you don't have to have all the classes present to get the buffs. Lets not make it that way in PF.
I basically completely disagree with this. I LIKE that aspect of the game. I like that you can run a party with say, an alchemist, a magus, a bard and an inquisitor, and get by pretty much normally. I like flexible classes. I like those blured lines. The issue is that the classes all need to blur the lines equally.
If we try to keep each class having a certain point in the game where they shine then people will want to play them.
The problem isnt that classes dont have their own moment to shine, its how much and how effectively they shine. Rogues and fighters can still shine. Its just that barbarians, paladins, rangers, etc often do it better, with a wider variety of means to go about being awesome.
I know magic is supposed to be the binding force (no SW pun intended) but if we let those wizards have all the fun than we are taking away from other fun classes. If you just playing for mathematics and want the best possible outcome all the time and don't care about RPing a character then be my guest and have the casters snap their fingers and conjure up whatever it is you need.
Personally I want to change what magic is in the game. I think the fire and forget, can do anything every time nature of magic is a problem. The thing is though, changing that has to start from the ground up. The whole point of the wizard, and to a degree the cleric is that they should have access to this vast toolbox. You cant just take the toolbox away and replace it with a hammer and a wrench and call it done. You need to change the classes with it. Idealy I would elimitate all the 9 level casters except the druid(I feel the druid gets enough other 'stuff' to where even hard nerfing spells leaves a playable interesting class in its wake), and replace 'spells' as they stand with a much more simplified list of abilities that are more akin to feats and class abilities in their flexibility and applications.
Its actually a major personal project I am currently working on based around the concept of 'riven magic' from the rogue genius games class the riven mage. Basically 'riven spells' are simple effects that can have more or less energy (called flux) pumped into them for greater or lesser effects. So theres a spell called 'blast' and based on your level, you can pump a certain amount of flux into a blast spell for a bigger or smaller blast. They are swift actions to 'cast' and they are supernatural abilities (no attacks of opportunity or spell resistance) but they are dramatically reduced in power, and scope. So for instance you cant fly, but you can 'flit' or effectively fly a short distance once. All the spells are at most rounds per point of flux (which is capped essentially at 1+1/2level) spent.
Basically this means that spells in this system cant be all a character does most of the time. He needs skills, or combat abilities, or something else to give them something to work with. The 6 level casters (and the druid) are pretty much a perfect framework for that. So I am creating archetypes for each of them to replace their spells with riven magic.
This could also be r/t class bloat and the fighter just being a frame work for adding stuff to make a new class instead of retro fitting them.
I personally really like what many people call class bloat. My prefered way to add options to the game is new classes. They are easiest to manage as a dm, they are often the most balanced way of adding options, they are self contained, they are easiest to explain to new players or to players unfamiliar with them, and they require the least amount of work to incorporate into your game. Heres 5 pages, read those, your done.
No need to go through 100 pages of feats, archetypes or alternate features/talents to find what fits. You also know right away if something works for your concept. Sure you can make a swashbuckler with a mix of fighter/rogue/feats and other options. But the swashbuckler class is far simpler to create, manage and absorb. There is also the least room for unforseen interactions with other rooms. Classes are for the most part self contained. A new swashbuckler class feature only affects the swashbuckler. Much less of hte 'find the perfect combination across 20 books' mentality. And it still allows for an extremely wide variety of concepts if you find enough classes.
So when I add to my game, my favorite way to add, is to find a base class that fits the concept I am looking for and add that.
Teleport as written in RAW cannot bypass a desert that the players have never crossed.It absolutely can, provided the location they are teleporting to is one they are familiar with. (They could have previously gone around the desert, or through a portal, or any number of ways to get to point B without having had to go through the desert).
Now, if your goal is IN the desert that you've never visited, then you will have a harder time of it.
But that's just me being pedantic.
The bolded portion was meant to imply that the players have not seen the location they are trying to reach.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There actually is a middle ground between "nerfing the wizard into the ground" and letting him walk away with the entire game. It's from practiced game mastery and it' s not something that can be taught with a single message board post.The tier structure varies a lot on the DM. Wizards are very Tier 1 under DM's who allow them to dominate. Unlimited access to spells, non-restrictive interpretations of spells, especially certain spells allowed to break games, mainly Simulacrum and Blood Money.
The other thing is that given that very few campaigns break the 12th level tier, Wizards and Sorcerers seldom get to the point where they are so nakedly powerful that they can dispense with the other classes.
I find if you interpret wizards into the ground then the other classes will only get furthered pushed into the ground via the fairness of harsh interpretation.
If wizards cannot be creative with spells, then so much less for rogue skills and fighter strength.
I liked the nerf that 5e gave Knock. Wanna get thru a locked door? It works fine. Wanna get thru a locked door with some modicum of discretion/stealth? Knock is NOT the answer.
5E seems to have done a lot of good things. First and foremost, cantrips appear to be far more meaningful, and thus allowing room for the reduction in power of the 'impact' spells as well as reduced spell slots. That is certainly one way to go about addressing the problem.
So alot less 'mr fix it' over the course of the adventure, but no 'i plink with my useless crossbow'.
*Googles for a 5e SRD*
Huh, well I guess it might as well not exist. If Paizo can take some beneficial concepts from them for Unchained, then great!
There are the free Basic Rules documents for 5e.
I am aware.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It looks like a huge number of people play with really bad DMs and players that are real dbags. I have never seen a player intentionally ruin an AP by circumventing something via teleport, etc.
I've seen a few people attempt to do this unintentionally. When the GM said they shouldn't, the common response was "why not?"
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It looks like a huge number of people play with really bad DMs and players that are real dbags. I have never seen a player intentionally ruin an AP by circumventing something via teleport, etc.I've seen a few people attempt to do this unintentionally. When the GM said they shouldn't, the common response was "why not?"
I thought the whole point of GMing for PCs was because they do unexpected things.
If your campaign can't handle teleport either don't go to that level or don't allow the spell to exist.
The fact that a "Good GM" is needed, in order to correct the many 'on the fly' wonky imbalances that are created by the players simply using the powers they were allowed to have,just goes to show the amount of improvement the system still has left in it.
It's far from "Idiot proof".
*folded hands* ... I guess the system itself is not yet fully understood.
I have over 65 house rules to correct the things that I feel are off...and that's just me.Even if half my opinions turn out be be objectively wrong,that still leaves a lot of questionable issues.
A "Normal" GM should be able to have his PCs do everything on their sheets without breaking the scenario.
If I as a player have teleportation,using it to get to distant objectives is a "no brainer". It should be the first idea that comes to mind.Asking the player not to do so is just ridiculous.
Might as well ask them to stop attacking so much,so that the bad guys can get a few licks in and make the story better.
Or better yet,take a dive this fight,so your comeback will be more heroic!
The above is good natured sarcasm..I know it doesn't always translate well on the inter-tubes :)
Meh. That's what coffee is for.
Coffee is native to Earth. I doubt it even grows on Golarion. :-)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Meh. That's what coffee is for.Coffee is native to Earth. I doubt it even grows on Golarion. :-)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
okay, okay. I plead illness. And somebody has been running around the multiverse seeding planets with identical flora and fauna.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What happens when you never let the wizard have access to other Wizards spell books or anything but basic scrolls and such. . . .
Then you've just encouraged everyone to be a murderous wizard with blood transcription or a human (half elf heritage)/half elf wizard with paragon surge and fast study at level 5. Both of which they can pick up with their +2 spells per level for free.
There actually is a middle ground between "nerfing the wizard into the ground" and letting him walk away with the entire game. It's from practiced game mastery and it' s not something that can be taught with a single message board post.*folds hands*
"I can explain it more clearly; I cannot make it simpler."
- J. Robert Oppenheimer, during a lecture at UC Berkeley
------------------------------------------------
Pathfinder and the magic rules embedded within it are both dynamic systems, and there are many paths which lead to Rome. I'm sure Lazar could lay out his specific house-rules for a non-nerfed magic system, but nobody would care to read them. Moreover, some judgments will always have to be made on the fly, if for no other reason than because there will always be more splatbooks.
Is your critique really that he doesn't properly understand a system which is, by definition, open-ended and beyond rational reckoning? Quite a cheap shot, that.