Oh, indeed. It is possible to make those. It is not clear if you can have both templates, but if you can, that is four times the cost in HD. So, a tenth level cleric animating a burning, bloody skeleton could animate twenty HD, divided by four, which is five hit dice. It is then normal when counting control, meaning the cleric can have eight of them. Note that each of these then has 33 hp, using the higher charisma of the two templates. I sincerely doubt that will be more than a bother in a fight between two groups at EL 10, let alone the EL 14 the level 10 group will be expected to encounter. Yes, very embarrassing.A few good burning bloody skeletons do make a good replacement for the frontliners, and clerics make the best necromancer as far as I can see, so I think they've got that covered. (Well, in neutral-to-evil parties at least, depending.)Considering that bloody skeletons are CR 1/2, and burning skeletons are CR 1/2, I sincerely doubt that.You realise that you can make skeletons from things other than 1HD humanoids yes?
Because if you didn't that would be really quite embarrassing.
If you think that's how it works, no wonder you don't get it.
You animate something like a bloody burning Hezrou demon skeleton (this is "outsiders are good candidates" level optimization, not exact cherrypicking), in a Desecrate spell.
It has 10d8+20+10=75 HP, 3 attacks at +14 with Grab on all of them and 10' reach, AC 13 (terrible). And you have at least two of those, and anything but fatal levels of cold damage is a temporary annoyance to them.
Ahhh, yes, as I said, a cleric can truly shine. If they specialize.
Ahhh, yes, as I said, a cleric can truly shine. If they specialize.
My suggestion was a few thousand gold and absolutely ZERO other resources other "being a 10th level cleric of a non-good god, having at least one day of downtime after an adventure".
Four feats, yes. All the feats you get until level 7. Do you know why Power attack and Combat reflexes are in there? Because it's a way to get at least some combat capability for a relatively small feat investment. I mean, your BAB remains what it is, so Power attack isn't going to be all that fun after a few levels, and you have no better hit Points to match the damage you will take as a meleer, but you can at least do some damage if someone provokes an AoO. It helps your action economy a bit.
Minimum wisdom would mean 13, right? Animate dead is a 3rd level spell. That is all well and good... but how is your save DC coming along? Yes, SF (necromancy) helps. But you have put yourself in a situation where your plane shifts probably won't send off very many monsters. And in Exchange, you have combat ability that CERTAINLY isn't going to win you any prizes.
Clerics don't have to specialize in melee to be amazing at melee. They just have to summon something else that is.
Well... It's pretty clear: Tier 1 doesn't exist.
If you go by the definition linked earlier, then it probably doesn't anymore, no. I maintain that the closest you will get is with a wizard, possibly some archetype of it.
The problem with summoning something that is Amazing at melee is something I have gone through too many times here already. With the feats, you can. Without them, don't even try. By the level you get the creatures, they will not really make a significant contribution to the fight. Such as the aforementioned CR 4 hound archon, which you can summon as a lvl 7 cleric.
And as we know... All encounters are composed of a single big creature... None of them are made of 3+ creatures, right?
You're intentionally raising the definition of tier 1 to impossibly high standards, downplaying the effectiveness of Cleric's spells, using inconsistent arguments and ignoring the answers to those arguments.
I'm sorry, Sissyl, I usually enjoy your posts, even when we disagree... But I think you're arguing in bad faith in this thread.
...which is what the description of tier 1 linked Before actually said. "Able to do everything, often better than people specialized in it". That is a sodding tall order. And yet, it WAS possible in 3.5. That things have changed now did nothing for the definition of tier 1, did it?
Or if it did... does tier 1 now mean "With heavy investment in non-changeable resources like feats, the class is able to match specialists in one particular area, and still be able to contribute on some level in other areas"? Sure, I can buy that. If so, cleric would be a poster child for tier 1.
Honestly, drop the burning and just use Desecrate to cancel the doubling from bloody, and you'd get some plenty good few minions in no time, that almost can't be lost. There, no investment past the gold expenditure (and by mid levels it won't compare to equipment costs). Spend a mere one feat (Command undead) if you enjoy them enough to want another.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's still a Tier 1 class, however, because once you choose to specialize in a single role, you can perform backup at the rest.
You choose to frontline? It's easy to make a cleric that is good at front-lining: pick a god with a good martial weapon (Gorum=greatsword) and grab a few buff spells (Divine Favor/Power, Bull's Strength, Blessing of Fervor, some defensive ones, etc.) and go to town. Maybe take Crusader if you want free Heavy Armor Proficiency and a few other combat feats.
But for this build, you really only need a handful of feats: Power Attack, Weapon Focus. And that's about it.
Feeling ranged? Awesome. Pick a deity with a good ranged weapon (Erastil=longbow) and start shooting. The only two feats really needed to make a decent archer are Point-Blank Shot and Precise Shot. Yeah, dedicated rangers/slayers/divine hunter paladins will outdo you at this game, but if you have one of those already, then this could be your secondary focus. The same buff on yourself apply here (Divine Favor, Blessing of Fervor, Bull's Strength for composite bows, etc.), with the only loss being that Cat's Grace isn't on the cleric's list.
(Also, why is that? They have every single other one besides Cat's Grace. Was this an oversight, or an intentional design decision? That's a question for another time.)
Chose to summon? Alright, clerics have the best standard action summons in the game. (excluding the broken SLA that is the summoner). Choose an appropriate god with a "good alignment" (LE, CG, LG, the ones with good summons choices), and take Sacred Summons. Even without Augment Summons/Superior Summons, standard action summons gets bodies on the field, helping your front-liners by giving flanking and having extra attacks that may help get the enemies down. Pouncing smiting celestial dire tigers are a force to be reckoned with, no matter how many you have.
And if you want to be even more thorough, take the Herald Caller archetype. It gives you Augment and Superior for free (and let's you skip SF (conj.) for those other cool feats), as well as giving you more skill points per level to be useful outside of combat. Yeah, you give up shields and medium armor, but with all the extra feats you have, pick up the proficiencies if you really want them back.
Want to be a dedicated healbot/condition remover (a perfectly valid role for those who want to do so willingly)? Completely possible. Take the Healing (Restoration) Domain, and you have a few extra Cures per day, as well as the best low-level condition removal power in the game. Channel actually isn't really a useful in-combat healing ability at higher levels, but it's a nice out-of-combat "free" resource pool of your party needs topped off. And, let's not forget to mention Heal. Enough said.
Feeling the urge to be the Arm, buffing your allies to where they smash everything? Perfect, the cleric list is well-suited to doing so. If you're feeling "Bard-ish", take Evangelist for a nice Inspire Courage ability plus a few other goodies. This, plus the normal spells for buffing (stuff that the melee cleric would cast on himself), makes for a nice buff-cleric. Variant channeling even comes into play her as well, as there are several choices that give "channel bonuses" to attack rolls, saving throws, damage rolls, and other things that are useful to have alongside a half-power channel.
Want a Save-or-Suck Cleric? Good news, you're in luck! There are two usual ways to do the SoS cleric: channeling (Charisma-focused) or spells (Wisdom-focused). With variant channelings such as the Rulership (dazed) or Madness (confused) coming online as soon as 1st level, you get a nice area of effect debuff that only requires a few resources to be deemed "useful" (Improved Channel, the DC boosting trait, Selective/Extra channel, etc.). And this is a viable strategy (see "hangover cleric"). With spells, there's so many bad-touch/debuff builds for the cleric out there, it's insane. Rocket your Wisdom up, and start throwing them around.
All of these roles (melee/ranged combat, buffer, healer, SoS/D) can be wonderfully performed by the cleric with minimal specialization. The true power of the cleric, however, comes from the multiple roles it can fill (or substitute for) at once.
That melee cleric doesn't have a problem being a secondary buffer, as many of his buff spells are multi-target (Bless, Prayer, Blessing of Fervor, etc.). That buffer has the option of fudging the healer role, as he still has channel (sans super negative Charisma), and can pull his own in a fight with some support from his spells and allies. And so on, and so on.
TL;DR: the cleric is awesome, and a freaking Tier 1 class. If you still can't see why it is, I can't help you anymore than that.
Honestly, drop the burning and just use Desecrate to cancel the doubling from bloody, and you'd get some plenty good few minions in no time, that almost can't be lost. There, no investment past the gold expenditure (and by mid levels it won't compare to equipment costs). Spend a mere one feat (Command undead) if you enjoy them enough to want another.
Sounds like a better idea, yes. And by mid levels, of course, the skeleton with 20 HD is a CR 8 creature. Sure, they have fast healing. Sure, you can get them back. But is that going to worry a CR 15 creature? Ultimately, skeletons are like channeling, a tactic that won't scale well. And as you say, this is another tactic that comes into its own with a bit of feat investment...
Don't all tactics come into their own with a feat investment?
Everyone needs feats and wants to specialize. It's a base assumption of the game. That includes wizards.
** spoiler omitted **...
I absolutely couldn't have said it better myself. A cleric needs feats and rounds buffing to equal the specialists in melee and ranged. Summoning works, but only well if you invest in it, perhaps even going so far as to CHOOSE AN ARCHETYPE THAT GIVES UP ALL HOPE OF MELEEING. And yes, clerics CAN help out in other areas even if they can approach or even match the specialists in their chosen field.
I love playing clerics. It's just that the cleric class has become far more balanced than you guys think.
Ultimately, skeletons are like channeling, a tactic that won't scale well.
LOL.... this should be stickied somewhere... QFT!
Don't all tactics come into their own with a feat investment?
Everyone needs feats and wants to specialize. It's a base assumption of the game. That includes wizards.
True. Clerics don't need to do it to be awesome, though...
They can use their summons, planar allies, undead minions and buffs to fulfill the frontliner role... While still being capable healers, scouts, buffers and utility casters.
Then they can buy a Guided weapon and make themselves great combatants even though they invested all their resources in Wisdom.
They can't be good at everything at the same time, but they can be good at anything they want. All they need is a not-completely-idiotic selection of prepared spells... And that's really easy to get.
Don't all tactics come into their own with a feat investment?
Everyone needs feats and wants to specialize. It's a base assumption of the game. That includes wizards.
These guys have been harping about how clerics don't need to specialize in any way to be awesome at whatever they like. See, their spell list lets them do anything and be anything. When I tell them clerics can't do that, at least not as they are now, they said I was arguing in bad faith.
There were multiple examples of clerics being awesome at pretty much any given role without anything but their spells and a few gold coins...
You ignored all of them, downplayed the effectiveness of several powerful options, raised the definition of tier 1 to impossible standards and used quite inconsistent arguments...
That's arguing in bad faith in my book.
The tactics suggested were all heavily dependent on feats, archetypes or (worst) several rounds of buffing. Why should I need to play up that?
Buffing is a complicated option in general. You can do it, you can get some mileage from it, but if someone is actually trying to beat a martial class in melee, you need to buff up seriously. That costs rounds and spell slots.
The rounds it takes are rounds you do not otherwise contribute to the battle. This shoots your action economy to hell. Tactically, the contribution you make on round 1 always matters more than what you do later. On average, combat lasts maybe three turns.
Your buffs expire. As soon as the GM says "fifteen minutes later", it is time to start buffing again before the next combat happens.
The spell slots are not a trivial cost, either. Each buff is a slot you could have been using for whatever else. Divination spells have been suggested. Sure, you have spell slots, but it is not the cornucopia that has been described in this thread.
Which of my arguments were inconsistent?
The one where they had to be better at everything then others ALL THE TIME.
The tactics suggested were all heavily dependent on feats, archetypes or (worst) several rounds of buffing.
Nothing about tier 1 suggests that it isn't allowed to take time to buff, and the statement that the tactics suggested "were all heavily dependent on feats [and] archetypes" is simply wrong.
Buffing is a complicated option in general. You can do it, you can get some mileage from it, but if someone is actually trying to beat a martial class in melee, you need to buff up seriously. That costs rounds and spell slots.
Neither of which are relevant to tiers.
The spell slots are not a trivial cost, either.
No, but they are an option. The cleric has an option to use spells to turn into a fighter, and it's a choice that can be made on an encounter-by-encounter basis. The fighter has no such option to turn into a cleric.
Which of my arguments were inconsistent?
All of them. In addition to being inconsistent, they're also factually unsound and rely on a complete misunderstanding about what "tier 1" means.
As I pointed out several pages ago, your (mis)definition of tier 1 means that tiers 1 and 2 are empty and meaningless. You yourself owned that later. It's generally considered to be an argument in bad faith to misinterpret terms of debate into nullity. So we can add deceptive, misleading, and "in bad faith" to the attributes of your arguments on this thread.
The one where they had to be better at everything then others ALL THE TIME.
... or the one where they had to be better at everything without expending spell slots.
... or the one where they had to be better at everything instantly, without expending rounds.
... or even the one where they had to be better at everything instead of merely at anything.
So, given the definition of "able to do everything, often better than the specialists", a cleric can be tier 1 even if getting them equal fighting prowess to a fighter through buffs takes long enough that the fight is over when they have buffed?
Interesting idea, Orfamay. Interesting idea.
Or maybe "able to do everything" doesn't extend to melee?
So, given the definition of "able to do everything, often better than the specialists", a cleric can be tier 1 even if getting them equal fighting prowess to a fighter through buffs takes long enough that the fight is over when they have buffed?
Yes, because it's not really that uncommon for parties to have advanced warning that trouble is brewing. Between GM foreshadowing, rods of extend and similar gadgets, and the use of divination spells, it's not at all all unreasonable for the cleric to have the opportunity to pre-buff.
And quickened spells and whatnot are also available at higher levels.
As a simple example of the former, consider the entire "Skull and Shackles" adventure path. Any time naval combat is involved, "one ship can spot another from miles away, making it virtually impossible to surprise another ship." Indeed, the danger there is that the cleric might start buffing too soon -- if it takes fifteen minutes to run the opposing ship down, a 1 minute per level buff would run out before the enemy vessel was in combat range, but if you wait until the ships are within a minute of closing, you can cast all the buff spells you want.
Another example, of course, is the much-derided scry-and-fry, where the party picks the time and place for the encounter based on (gasp!) divination spells and can buff appropriately beforehand.
Again, which divination spells? Augury gets you "weal or woe". Divination gets you "yes, no or a cryptic phrase". Are you suggesting we go up to vision? See, clerics don't get clairaudience/clairvoyance. Weal or woe is definitely not good for specifics, same with yes/no/cryptic phrases.
And Skull and Shackles? Really? Well, in the rest of PF canon, ship to ship combat is exceedingly rare. Perhaps clerics are tier 1 in Skull and Shackles? Just like anyone able to go nova will have a brilliant time in Kingmaker's hex crawl?
Scry and fry is a valid tactic. Sadly, it is also one made largely impossible in most adventures written for PF.
** spoiler omitted **...
No need to even grab martial weapons! Longspears and Morningstars are all melee clerics need, though a martial slashing weapon could come in handy for something better than a sickle to deal with DR/Slashing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sissyl,
I think I get where you're coming from. It seems like you're saying:
1.) Arcane spells have more and more deadly combat options, so you can more easily spank monsters as a high DC wizard.
2.) Arcane spells have more "universal" encounter winners (invisibility, fly, haste, etc.) so it's easier to have a better option prepared by chance.
3.) Clerics don't get the class feature feats of wizards, fighters and barbarians, so their feats are much rarer and they get to feat in less directions.
4.) Clerics were stronger in 3.5.
How am I doing?
One of the (many) problems with the position you've taken is that you've interpreted "able to do everything, often better than the specialists" as "able to do everything, always better than the specialists."
Clerics can melee, for example, and aren't meaningfully any worse than any of the other 3/4 BAB classes. A single buff (Divine Favor or Divine Power), does more than eliminate the BAB deficiency relative to a full BAB martial.
So, as far as melee is concerned, that is all that has to be shown. There is no requirement to show that specifically melee is better than any or all specialists (though, I'm sure someone will come along and show a really strong cleric melee option). The fact that they can function in melee is all that has to be shown for Tier 1, as long as it can be shown that they can also perform and excel at other functions (which people have shown already on multiple occasions).
My interpretation is that the tier 1 class needs to be able to outshine any of the specialists a significant part of the time, as time is typically spent when playing PF. Which is not, I might add, naval combat. Divine favor doesn't get you more hp. It doesn't do jack for your AC. It only adds minimally to your damage. So, how does that make a cleric outshine a martial? No, you need more. Either more buffs (which will take time to come online), or other resources like feats or archetypes etc. I.e. stuff that isn't easily changed.
And no, proving that they "can function in melee at all" is far from the mark.
Sissyl,
I think I get where you're coming from. It seems like you're saying:
1.) Arcane spells have more and more deadly combat options, so you can more easily spank monsters as a high DC wizard.
2.) Arcane spells have more "universal" encounter winners (invisibility, fly, haste, etc.) so it's easier to have a better option prepared by chance.
3.) Clerics don't get the class feature feats of wizards, fighters and barbarians, so their feats are much rarer and they get to feat in less directions.
4.) Clerics were stronger in 3.5.How am I doing?
Brilliantly. Thank you.
Not sure if its helpful, but I think some of this might at least be new information.
Clerics can take care of combat encounters in a number of ways that helps solidify their T1-ness. They do need some specialization, as all classes do, in order to dominate, but they don't need to specialize in much elses to do it "often better than specialist." Specialize for melee, and you only really need one buff. Specialize for blasting...you need enemies susceptible to your blasts (aligned against them for many) and a few feats. Specialize for summoning, you need feats. But one of these specializations is needed to "do combat".
You have a BAB of +5, putting you behind on 2 points of accuracy, and one attack. Pop up divine power, you get +2 attack (equal with full BAB), one more attack (with full accuracy, 5 points above a normal iterative), and a +2 damage. This takes one standard action to put you on par with melee. So, instead of attacking and moving up in the first round of combat, you cast and move up. Losing one attack in a fight is an OK trade off for effective full BAB.
Also, for duration, Magic Vestiments and Greater Magic Weapon are the cleric's long term buffs. They save you the trouble of buying magic weapons and armor. It may not be the most attractive buff, but it scales to where eventually you get essentially free weapons and armor. The money you save can get you a good bit.
Dextrous foes? A dire lion summoned to pounce has a +9 attack, 5 attacks, and can grapple, putting anything at a disadvantage. Mix in the free attacks it gets while maintaining and it can do severe damage to certain things, and is equipped to take on a CR 7 creature with a bit of luck.
There are a bunch more examples (lantern archons, dretches, rhino, etc) but well-thought choices can contribute just fine. They don't inherently dominate without feats, but see above on T1.
So, given the definition of "able to do everything, often better than the specialists", a cleric can be tier 1 even if getting them equal fighting prowess to a fighter through buffs takes long enough that the fight is over when they have buffed?
Interesting idea, Orfamay. Interesting idea.
Or maybe "able to do everything" doesn't extend to melee?
Yes-ish,
"able to do everything, often better than the specialists"Can the cleric do combat better? Yes.
Is it practical? Maybe not
But CAN the cleric do melee combat with no significant investement? Yes, at most 1 feat non-horrible stats, and buying either basic gear or using spells to make magic weapons.
So the cleric is "able to do it"
"often better than the specialists"
This is part of where you're getting hung up on. A cleric casting 1 buff while moving into position so it's getting the first full attack rather than charging in and receiving a full attack. Still lets the fights end just as fast and lets the clerics be good at combat with little investment. Can the cleric burn half it's spells to be a battle juggernaut for a fight? YES, letting it be better than the specialists.
One of the big things you seem be getting hung up on is the "often better than the specialists" part. This doesn't mean "ALWAYS better than the specialists" but out of the myriad of interactions in the game, the spell is OFTEN better than a specialist. It is hard to be a better melee damager than a specialist. But it's really easy to be a better face than the face skills, infiltrator than the sneak guy, better trap finder than the trap guy.
It seems you keep saying that unless the cleric is ALWAYS better at everything with no investment it's not tier 1. A cleric that has no summoning feats and summons something doesn't need to auto-win the encounter with just that summon. But having some extra bodies block the way, provide flanking. Be a pest that they have to waste time attacking. Provide SLA and SU effects. (like you can summon an actual bard, great for parties with no bard) so a cleric is contributing to winning combat, 1 spell, only requirements is having a spell. Can it specialize to make summoning better than this default? Of course. But it doesn't NEED to to be helping. And helping in combat is doing combat. Filling combat roles. It doesn't need to ALWAYS be better than every other combatant to be "able to do everything" since I just showed how it can do combat. Is this one of the times where it's easy to outdo a specialist? No, but CAN they? sure if they burned half their spells. Is it practical do have as a main tactic? No. But CAN THEY? Yes, they have that option if it was needed.
So even though they maybe can't do all roles in one day, the fact that they can do any role any day, and that they can be good at the role they pick on the day they pick it, is what makes them Pathfinder tier 1 (which yes, is lower than 3rd's tier 1).
Wait, did someone just diss divination? As in the cryptic hint button for what flavor of pain you're gonna face? Lady, sir, whatever gender name you prefer, I'm sorry, but if you diss the spell for getting information out of nothing in a game where information is the most important thing for survival I cannot take you seriously. At all. I don't care how cryptic the spell is, there's a way to figure out what it means. And once you figure out what it means it's up to you to figure out how to take advantage of the information presented.
I mean maybe you're not good at one of those parts so that's why it seems like a weak spell to you but if that's the case the only advice I have, at risk of sounding like a Souls fan, is to get good.
It's like watching red mage argue that he can't cast spells when he needs them because then he won't have the spells when he needs them, and be weaker for casting them.
*****************************
The 3.5 argument doesn't matter. The question is can clerics fulfill the requirements of tier 1?
The answer is yes.
Do they have to do things to get there?
Irrelevant. That is not the question, the question is can they do it?
They can. Combat and the many ways to do it is still only a single category. There is no reason to get hung up on it alone. Skills is honestly the point clerics are the weakest at, and again spells means they can handle this too. Condition removal and repair the cleric can do, obstacle avoidance/removal they can do, endgame maneuvers (bypassing 'encounters' in their various forms), crafting, strategy, tactically the cleric performs well (read does good) and can easily be great at.
Please note that the requirement is not is capable of constantly doing this at all times without rest or respect. Simply being able to handle all roles and do so well, meeting or exceeding specialists at the task.
My interpretation is that the tier 1 class needs to be able to outshine any of the specialists a significant part of the time, as time is typically spent when playing PF.
See, this is NOT the definition that ANYONE is talking about EXCEPT YOU. This is why no one is answering you. I don't think ANYONE THAT'S BEEN DEBATING WITH YOU THAT CLERIC IS TIER 1 would say that the cleric, "needs to be able to outshine any of the specialists a significant part of the time" something else you've added but not here, "AND not invest at all at it."
So even though you keep quoting, "able to do everything, often better than the specialists" and saying that clerics fail to meet this definition of Tier 1, you're not actually talking about this quote at all. You're talking about you're own little idea that you haven't shared till now.Divine favor doesn't get you more hp. It doesn't do jack for your AC. It only adds minimally to your damage. So, how does that make a cleric outshine a martial? No, you need more. Either more buffs (which will take time to come online), or other resources like feats or archetypes etc. I.e. stuff that isn't easily changed.
And no, proving that they "can function in melee at all" is far from the mark.
Using our definition of "able to do everything" wading in with a divine favor or summoning some bodies is all that's need to be able to "do combat," you're participating in combat effectively.
But it's nice for you to finally share this hidden definition of Tier 1 with use that you've been using. It'll finally allow better conversation to be had as now we can be on the same page. We can tie our comments to addressing clerics being our tier 1 or address them to being your tier 1.
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
Brilliantly. Thank you.Sissyl,
I think I get where you're coming from. It seems like you're saying:
1.) Arcane spells have more and more deadly combat options, so you can more easily spank monsters as a high DC wizard.
2.) Arcane spells have more "universal" encounter winners (invisibility, fly, haste, etc.) so it's easier to have a better option prepared by chance.
3.) Clerics don't get the class feature feats of wizards, fighters and barbarians, so their feats are much rarer and they get to feat in less directions.
4.) Clerics were stronger in 3.5.How am I doing?
Gotcha. My claim would be that the vanilla cleric is still tier 1, but it is the bottom of tier 1, whereas it used to be the arguably strongest class in the game. It's not tier 2, because it is still world ending AND very flexible. It loses ground to wizards, who honestly got better and new classes like the Master Summoner. I'd look at it this way:
There are 3 filters to gain entry to tier 1.
Filter #1:
We are creating a vacuum in which we evaluate only class skills, features and 20 point buy stats; no race, no general level feats or general level bonuses, no money, no equipment. All class features are from the base class only. We'll level the PC's in question to level 10, so we can look at class features.
The we make a bunch of challenges:
1.) fly over or bypass a lake of lava with no rim
2.) go unseen through a crowded plaza in broad daylight
3.) defeat a CR 10 monster in combat (yes this is not APL for a single 10th level PC)
4.) defeat a lethal trap
5.) Deduce a series of skill based binary answers
6.) detect several hidden things
7.) detect several magically hidden things
8.) defeat a horde of minions
9.) cure or avoid 10 random inflictions of CR -2 to +2, delivered 1 per minute.
10.) heal or negate 100 points of hp damage dealt 1 a round for 100 rounds. the damage is untyped.
11.) Travel across 100 miles in 8 hours.
Then we ask the question: Who can do all 11 at 10th level with just their class skills, stats and abilities. Then we ask who can do all of them without foreknowledge and in 2 days. Finally in 1 day and the encounters are random.
Finally, we ask if you can do 5 of the 10 better than the class designed to do the thing without magic.
You are a well built tier 1 or the best classes in the game if you can blindly, randomly bypass these challenges back to back.
You are tier 1 if you can do all 10 in 2 days without foreknowledge and you did 5 out of 10 better than the specialized class (or are the specialized class).
You are tier 2 if you can do all 10 with foreknowledge and 5 out of 10 better than the specialized class.
Initial thoughts:
remember, no gear, no feats, no race.
All non-casters fall away immediately. Their class abilities cannot bypass several of these challenges. They can't do all 10. This is the bulk of playable classes.
All of the full casters can qualify for tier 2 immediately. Several of the partial casters will pass as well.
There's actually a good chance the full spontaneous casters and the memorized casters will qualify for tier 1. I can think of common designs for several classes that would get the job done. Unless their spells are weird, the cleric has this locked up. Some partial casters will make it.
Filter 2:
one question: can your default class abilities break the game system wide open? If yes, tier 1 or 2. If no, tier 3. Clerics have miracle. That's all you need to wish engine (they have other stuff as well earlier. planar ally is a great example). this step filters out most of the partial casters. they can kick ass in reasonable challenges all day long, but they cannot break the game.
Filter 3:
Can you, without changing your character sheet, but with time, now duplicate 8 out of every 10 other ways other classes can break the game?
Clerics can absolutely copy almost every way to break the game. This step filters out most of the spontaneous casters, because their spell selections are locked.
If yes, tier 1. If no, tier 2.
The interesting discussion is weird classes like the Master Summoner, who uses depth of action economy and a ridiculous amount of maximum level SLA's to try to brute force the gap between tier 2 and tier 1.
Brilliantly. Thank you.Sissyl,
I think I get where you're coming from. It seems like you're saying:
1.) Arcane spells have more and more deadly combat options, so you can more easily spank monsters as a high DC wizard.
2.) Arcane spells have more "universal" encounter winners (invisibility, fly, haste, etc.) so it's easier to have a better option prepared by chance.
3.) Clerics don't get the class feature feats of wizards, fighters and barbarians, so their feats are much rarer and they get to feat in less directions.
4.) Clerics were stronger in 3.5.How am I doing?
Gotcha. My claim would be that the vanilla cleric is still tier 1, but it is the bottom of tier 1, whereas it used to be the arguably strongest class in the game. It's not tier 2, because it is still world ending AND very flexible. It loses ground to wizards, who honestly got better and new classes like the Master Summoner. I'd look at it this way:
There are 3 filters to gain entry to tier 1.
Filter #1:
We are creating a vacuum in which we evaluate only class skills, features and 20 point buy stats; no race, no general level feats or general level bonuses, no money, no equipment. All class features are from the base class only. We'll level the PC's in question to level 10, so we can look at class features.
The we make a bunch of challenges:
1.) fly over or bypass a lake of lava with no rim
2.) go unseen through a crowded plaza in broad daylight
3.) defeat a CR 10 monster in combat (yes this is not APL for a single 10th level PC)
4.) defeat a lethal trap
5.) Deduce a series of skill based binary answers
6.) detect several hidden things
7.) detect several magically hidden things
8.) defeat a horde of minions
9.) cure or avoid 10 random inflictions of CR -2 to +2, delivered 1 per minute.
10.) heal or negate 100 points of hp damage dealt 1 a round for 100 rounds. the damage is untyped.
11.) Travel across 100 miles in 8 hours.Then we ask the...
Two points
1) best definition of tiers given on this thread so far.
2) effectively ends this discussion for most reasonable people.
Thanks, Mulgar. I have had a lot of convention discussions on this topic.
I have never seen Divination so flatly scoffed off.
It is the single most powerful divination in my opinion. You get information from literally nothing. You can miss every hook and clue in the adventure and still get by with a successful casting.
If figuring out cryptic phrases is too hard for you then I just don't know what to say to someone who refuses one of the most powerful tools for a Cleric.
The single most useful item I ever received as a character was simply a jewel that cast Divination twice per week.
Scavion,
While we both love Divination, it requires a cooperative DM. A gygaxian DM can render it less good without breaking the letter of the spell.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Scavion,
While we both love Divination, it requires a cooperative DM. A gygaxian DM can render it less good without breaking the letter of the spell.
I don't think that is fair to the discussion. Spells are meant to do SOMETHING. Fiating away a spell meant to have a somewhat clear and beneficial effect is what I'd call bad GMing.
Gygaxian DM pretty much means Garbage DM to me.
Scavion,
While we both love Divination, it requires a cooperative DM. A gygaxian DM can render it less good without breaking the letter of the spell.
I don't think that is fair to the discussion. Spells are meant to do SOMETHING. Fiating away a spell meant to have a somewhat clear and beneficial effect is what I'd call bad GMing.
Gygaxian DM pretty much means Garbage DM to me.
In this day and age, true.
Back in the day almost everyone gm'd that way.
I don't think that is fair to the discussion. Spells are meant to do SOMETHING. Fiating away a spell meant to have a somewhat clear and beneficial effect is what I'd call bad GMing.Scavion,
While we both love Divination, it requires a cooperative DM. A gygaxian DM can render it less good without breaking the letter of the spell.
And it's not like the ability of the GM to arbitrarily nerf spells into uselessness is confined to divination spells. How many discussions have we as a forum had about wish? Or teleport? Or dominate? Or simulacrum?