Greetings everyone,
I'm looking for opinions on the latest tier rankings. Where do the classes stand. Which classes are considered must haves in any party, which classes are inferior. If you were mocking up a dream team of 5 what classes would be on the team.
Well - there is still the same question that I always have to ask whenever one of these tier threads comes up:
What are you wanting to optimize for? Specifically. Because that will change the rankings.
Just the best party to make it through an AP that's all. Not most healing, not most damage, just the best overall party to make it through a campaign. Like for example if your creating a Basketball dream team you would get Jordan, if you were getting a center this is debatable but you might get Wilt Chamberlain, etc
Just the best party to make it through an AP that's all.
lol - which AP? Age of Ashes needs different optimizations than Agents of Edgewatch.
Anyway, for general purpose adventuring I don't think it has changed since the CRB was first released. What I personally consider the most mechanically optimal 4-person party is Fighter, Good Champion, Bard, and Rogue.
Fighter for the attack damage. Can be swapped out for Precision Ranger without too much trouble.
Champion for the defenses and some in-combat healing. Be sure to grab a shield.
Bard for spellcasting and in-combat healing. Other spellcasters can be used instead, but they will lose the resource-free party-wide buffing ability of Bard.
Rogue for general skills - especially Medicine-based out of combat healing.
The starting party in my PF2-converted Ironfang Invasion campaign was a elf ranger with Flurry edge, gnome Stormborn druid, a gnome rogue with Thief racket, and a halfling rogue with Scoundrel racket who multiclassed to Draconic Sorcerer at 2nd level. The players selected these classes because in Session Zero I pointed out that Trail of the Hunted would involve hiding with refugee villagers in the Fangwood Forest as Ironfang patrols hunted for them. Optimal meant being able to hide in a forest.
At 3rd level, a goblin liberator champion joined the party. She was not a survival expert like the others, but she was high-Dexterity leather-armor stealthy build rather than a more typical heavy-armor build.
Before the end of Trail of the Hunted they defied the expectations and were already attacking back against the Ironfang Invasion. Hiding well in the forest was a tool for ambushing enemies from the forest. They went off the map so I improvised an Ironfang garrison, twice as strong as the party, to persuade them to turn back. They decided to pick off the fringes of the garrison in an ambush, closed in to pick off some more, got forced to hole up in an empty inn, had an Old-West-Style shootout with spells and arrows from the windows, and defeated the garrison. That was a Beyond-Extreme-Threat challenge.
Every class has its strengths. Find a way for those strengths to work together and the party will be optimal.
As for the tiers, I like Nonat1's YouTube video Pathfinder Class COMPLEXITY Tier List, which ranks both power and complexity. I have not seen enough classes in action to judge its accuracy.
Just the best party to make it through an AP that's all.lol - which AP? Age of Ashes needs different optimizations than Agents of Edgewatch.
Anyway, for general purpose adventuring I don't think it has changed since the CRB was first released. What I personally consider the most mechanically optimal 4-person party is Fighter, Good Champion, Bard, and Rogue.
Fighter for the attack damage. Can be swapped out for Precision Ranger without too much trouble.
Champion for the defenses and some in-combat healing. Be sure to grab a shield.
Bard for spellcasting and in-combat healing. Other spellcasters can be used instead, but they will lose the resource-free party-wide buffing ability of Bard.
Rogue for general skills - especially Medicine-based out of combat healing.
Whereas I look at this party and see that they are light on ranged attack, and light on multi target damage. Both of these I could work with as a GM. For an AP though this party probably will work really well.
Rankings really has a lot of campaign dependencies.
Let's say Age of Ashes.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
What I personally consider the most mechanically optimal 4-person party is Fighter, Good Champion, Bard, and Rogue.
It's funny to see how by combining strong classes individually you end up with a pretty lackluster party (lack of ranged option, lack of mobility, lack of spellcasting, lack of healing, lack of Int-skills support, lack of versatility). In my opinion, it's a good TPK candidate for nearly 10% of the fights (for example, this party can't face a spellcasting dragon).
I'd personally go for:
Fighter with Champion Dedication. You need someone who trades blows at melee range and protects allies. Fighter is definitely the king at it.
Starlit Span Magus with Psychic Dedication. Massive ranged damage dealer + Arcane spellcasting + Int-based skills support. A must-have of any optimized 4-man party as it covers very interesting ground while providing crazy damage output.
Divine Sorcerer with Psychic Dedication. Healing + AoE blasts + general spellcasting + buffing (with Amp Guidance, you can switch to Bard Dedication at mid levels if you really want the compositions).
Dex-based Half-Elf Monk with Medic Dedication and then Alchemist Dedication. Every party needs a jack of all trades. There are multiple choices for this one but as the party lacks a tough melee character I think the Monk will outperform a Thief Rogue or a melee Alchemist. This character provides tanking, healing (it will certainly become the main healer at high level), mobility and versatility (especially once it grabs Alchemist Dedication).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As for Tier list, I'd go for that:
Tier A (strong classes that you should take in your party):
- Strength based Fighter
- Thief/Ruffian Rogue
- Sorcerer
- Bard
- Summoner with Dex-based Eidolon
- Starlit Span Magus
Tier B (good classes that fit any party):
- Cleric
- Strength based Champion
- Barbarian
- Druid
- Monk
- Summoner with Str-based Eidolon
- Strength based Magus
- Strength based Thaumaturge*
- Strength based Inventor
- Non-Thief/Ruffian Rogue
Tier C (functional classes but better options exist out there):
- Alchemist
- Wizard
- Oracle
- Ranger
- Gunslinger*
- Psychic
Tier D (weak options):
- Alchemist (yeah, at 2 places, the class is functional but still clunky and long adventuring days will kill you, so that's campaign dependent)
- Investigator
- Witch
- Swashbuckler
- Finesse builds (I put as a general category as most of the time they are quite lackluster especially at low level)
* classes I don't know very well
But as Gortle says tier lists are extremely campaign dependent. So depending on players you'll see extremely different rankings.
|
It's also because PF2e is very much team game so that complicates things :p Like bard is extremely stronk because in team work game its party buffer. All of classes are functional but the weaker classes tend to struggle early game. (swashbuckler and alchemist kinda become online after level five) There are also multiple different party compositions that work (you don't need fighter in any party, but any party benefits from fighter since they are good beatstick)
It's also because PF2e is very much team game so that complicates things :p Like bard is extremely stronk because in team work game its party buffer. All of classes are functional but the weaker classes tend to struggle early game. (swashbuckler and alchemist kinda become online after level five) There are also multiple different party compositions that work (you don't need fighter in any party, but any party benefits from fighter since they are good beatstick)
No, it's not just early game. Investigator is problematic during the whole game as is Witch (actually, Witch gets worse when taking levels due to their non scaling Hex cantrips).
Summoner is weak before Tandem Move (a clear tax feat) still I rate it high as it's an extremely versatile class overall.
So it's a bit more complicated than just early game. Now, early game tend to raise more attention as people play the first levels more often than the last ones.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
My opinions on tiers have been public for a while now. Basically everything is B or C, but that would be boring so I've spread them a bit more. Look here if you are interested.
But as Gortle says tier lists are extremely campaign dependent. So depending on players you'll see extremely different rankings.
Dependant on particular builds too. You seem very keen on your Dex based Eidolon/Summoner - which I have not tried.
But as Gortle says tier lists are extremely campaign dependent. So depending on players you'll see extremely different rankings.Dependant on particular builds too. You seem very keen on your Dex based Eidolon/Summoner - which I have not tried.
I've been very positively surprised by this build. It's in my opinion the most versatile option in the game. You combine spellcasting, melee and ranged damage, toughness, skills and a few specific shenanigans. Most versatile builds lose here and there (in general in damage and/or toughness, or are feat-constrained) but the caster Summoner is really everywhere, always able to contribute meaningfully and very adaptable to the situation.
|
|
It's also because PF2e is very much team game so that complicates things :p Like bard is extremely stronk because in team work game its party buffer. All of classes are functional but the weaker classes tend to struggle early game. (swashbuckler and alchemist kinda become online after level five) There are also multiple different party compositions that work (you don't need fighter in any party, but any party benefits from fighter since they are good beatstick)No, it's not just early game. Investigator is problematic during the whole game as is Witch (actually, Witch gets worse when taking levels due to their non scaling Hex cantrips).
Summoner is weak before Tandem Move (a clear tax feat) still I rate it high as it's an extremely versatile class overall.
So it's a bit more complicated than just early game. Now, early game tend to raise more attention as people play the first levels more often than the last ones.
Investigator is weird in that its skill class made for specific type of campaign that can be made to be decent enough in combat, but explicitly doesn't feel like combat class.
And with witches, while people say their class feats and unique focus spells are weak compared to other casters, they are still casters. By which I mean that wizard/witch that uses all class feats to take silly archetype feats is still valid build from level 1 to 20 just because of how spells work even if its inoptimal. Its still makes witches weaker than other casters, but it doesn't really affect their performance much in my experience because most impactful things casters have is their spell lists anyway.
My suggestion was going to be to include:
Fighter (strength based), Bard, and Thief Rogue.
Probably round out the 5 with divine and arcane casters. I like the sorcerer over wizard. I don't really love any of the divine casters, but I'd probably have a cleric to round things out.
If anyone decides to take cleric dedication, or even sorcerer dedication with divine spell list, you can probably forgo a cleric specifically but it get's trickier.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There's also Spell Substitution and Spell Blending giving them some options for either flexibility or high level slot number.
And since the release of the Psychic, having bad focus power is not really a problem as a single level 2 Dedication gives you some of the best Focus Powers in the game.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What I personally consider the most mechanically optimal 4-person party is Fighter, Good Champion, Bard, and Rogue.It's funny to see how by combining strong classes individually you end up with a pretty lackluster party (lack of ranged option, lack of mobility, lack of spellcasting, lack of healing, lack of Int-skills support, lack of versatility).
*blows raspberry*
Because obviously Bard can't do any spellcasting or healing and Rogue has no ranged options and can't pick up INT skills.
If you only have 4 characters and just list main classes by name (no subclass options), are you going to be able to pick a party that doesn't have some weaknesses?
This is also why I mentioned at the very beginning that you want to specify very particularly what you are optimizing for. This party is optimized for tight quarters dungeon crawls like Abomination Vaults.
Because obviously Bard can't do any spellcasting
By lack of spellcasting, I was not stating that there was no spellcaster. But you expect more than one spellcaster in a 4-man party. Especially considering that your spellcaster is a support one and as such has more impact on how the martials operate than on the actual level of magic it can dish out.
or healing
Bards are secondary healers. If you need a few hit points, they'll be fine. But as soon as you need real healing, your party loses a lot of efficiency as you need to use a truckload of actions to generate just ok healing.
Rogue has no ranged options
Rogues are notoriously bad at range because they have hard time getting their Sneak Attack. As do Fighters as they lose their proficiency. Bards are not good ranged damage dealers because the occult spell list is lackluster when it comes to damage. And Champions can't really protect against ranged attack. So, yeah, I think your party is extremely vulnerable when it comes to ranged options.
can't pick up INT skills
The Rogue has to cover Dex-based skills, Medicine (according to you) and Int-based skills. It's a lot (8 skills), even for a skill monkey.
If you only have 4 characters and just list main classes by name (no subclass options), are you going to be able to pick a party that doesn't have some weaknesses?
There's a difference between having some weaknesses and meet an auto-TPK as soon as the fight involves range or flight.
This is also why I mentioned at the very beginning that you want to specify very particularly what you are optimizing for.
I obviously agree. But I find your party to be over specialized in fighting melee brutes. Against anything else you lack options.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Bards are secondary healers. If you need a few hit points, they'll be fine. But as soon as you need real healing, your party loses a lot of efficiency as you need to use a truckload of actions to generate just ok healing.
Soothe does pretty comparable healing to 2-action Heal, so I am not entirely sure where you are getting this from. Maybe elaborate more.
Rogues are notoriously bad at range because they have hard time getting their Sneak Attack.
Did Dread Striker stop working while I wasn't looking? Or Dirge of Doom?
------
And if you have a party of 4 that has two spellcasters and a rogue, you are going to be really short on front line brawlers. So instead of having trouble with ranged or flying you instead have problems when you face more than one hard hitting, fast moving enemy that evades your lone brawler and chases your spellcasters around.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I was not aware Rangers were voted so low in power. That's interesting. I am still heavily enjoying mine. Only lvl 1 but I put out between 3 and 5 attacks a round and do a lot of dmg.
That's the thing. "Tier" really doesn't mean the same thing in PF2 as it did in 3.x of PF1.
- Basically everyone has a certain core level of competence. Every class out there is either reasonably competent at melee or has a solid set of spells to play with. Regardless of how you arrange your classes, two of the weakest will pretty much beat one of the strongest unless they make blatantly suboptimal choices (like crippling their own stats) or throw the fight. That really wasn't true in 3.x
- What's available in a class is a lot broader. A str-based maneuver monk is going to serve a very different role in the party than a dex/cha kobold stumbling style master who dips swashbuckler. A snares/archery ranger who prepares ground and plays turret is going to play very differently from a two-weapon flurry ranger who's just optimizing as hard as they can on how many times they can stab the enemy. A chirurgeon dedicated healer alchemist and a bomber alchemist may be similar in what they're handing out at the beginning of the day, but they serve very different roles in combat.
- Personal optimization isn't nothing, but it's not nearly as big a deal. Party optimization is generally stronger. There are a lot of very strong combos out there that are a serious stretch to pull off with one character, but that blossom gloriously when you have two different people each contributing half. Rogues at range have problems... unless someone else is out there incidentally spreading the flat-footed love, in which case they do just fine. Forced move and snares/persistent area effects are hard to get on the same character in any sort of viable way, but the combo is really very strong. Grappled, prone, and persistent intimidate are great tastes that go really well together, while also being almost impossible to stack fully if you only have one person setting it all up. Bon Mot can be either totally awesome or basically useless, depending on which defenses your party as a whole wants to target. Some of them get weirdly specific, too. Like... Flame Order Druids and Flames Oracles have a combo that's just hilariously unfair, but trying to pull it off as a single character is basically unworkable. (Also works pretty well for flames oracle+bomber and flames oracle+elf.)
- Specific tactics are a much bigger deal. In PF2, you get a lot more puzzle monsters out there - monsters that are really touch if you let them execute on their plan, but that get a lot easier if you can figure out what their plan is and disrupt it and hit them in their weakness. Sure, sometimes you'll be able to execute on your own plan, and that's great, but in a lot of ways, your build is more a set of tools that you walk into the encounter with to try to figure out a solution. As such, having a build that fits you is suddenly a much bigger deal. Flexibility is heavily costed in build resources, because flexibility can be a big deal... but only if you have the mindset to use it right.
I'm not saying that there aren't classes that are a bit overtuned versus a bit undertuned. There are. At the same time, the best way to maximize overall power is to pick a character who's going to fit you personally, work together with your party to build up some synergies with their characters, and then pay attention to tactics and be willing to shift with the monsters your'e fighting against. Just trying to pick a "well, what four classes should we take" is, overall, a much weaker approach.
PF2 rewards thoughtfulness.
|
Well, I would like to think my build is pretty supportive, which should hopefully enable other martials. Since I can't find a campaign I am regulated to PFS, and so I will probably never see it realized, but at level 8 I'd be taking Warden's Boon, at level 12 Double Prey (although I am conflicted between that and Distracting Shot) at level 14 Shared Prey to give other people my Hunter's Edge benefit, then at level 20 some day haha Triple Threat, so basically spreading my buffs/flurry edge around to other martials. In addition I have an animal companion so using my Animal Companion to set up Flanking has been big for me, as it both helps my cat attack better, and helps the other martial too.
Soothe does pretty comparable healing to 2-action Heal, so I am not entirely sure where you are getting this from. Maybe elaborate more.
Soothe does 9.5 average healing and 5 lowest healing per level. Heal does 12.5 and 9 respectively. So it heals 30% more, but moreover the variance is far smaller. I've seen a lot of situations where a bad roll to Soothe ended up feeling as if no healing had been done.
And Heal has an AoE version, something that Soothe can't handle. It's niche, but it is useful.Stating they are "comparable" is like stating Investigator does comparable damage to Fighter.
Did Dread Striker stop working while I wasn't looking? Or Dirge of Doom?
Yes. I'm speaking of ranged combat, so Dirge of Doom, Demoralize and Fear stop working as they don't have the range, and as such Dread Striker. Rogues are quite bad at ranged damage.
And if you have a party of 4 that has two spellcasters and a rogue
So what?
If you really want a Rogue, Magus or Summoner can provide additional spellcasting while also bringing some melee durability.I don't think the Rogue is an easy fit for a 4-man party as they need other melee martials to function properly, unbalancing your party greatly.
I was not aware Rangers were voted so low in power. That's interesting. I am still heavily enjoying mine. Only lvl 1 but I put out between 3 and 5 attacks a round and do a lot of dmg.
Rangers are fine (C means functional). Just, they don't do anything better than other classes. They have more Trained skills, but that's not really a bonus in PF2 as it's easy to get Trained in skills. Besides that, they are not really tanky and are not exceptional damage dealers. So, they are fine, but when you speak about optimization it's not the class you look at.
Rogues are notoriously bad at range because they have hard time getting their Sneak Attack. ... And Champions can't really protect against ranged attack. So, yeah, I think your party is extremely vulnerable when it comes to ranged options.
The Thief rogue I mentioned in comment #5 is an archer. At low levels, she would hide behind a tree or a crate and then her first Strike after hiding would catch her target flat-footed. At 10th level she gained Precise Debiliations, which could render a flat-footed target flat-footed to the end of her turn, so so long as she hit once per turn, she no longer needs to hide. But she still uses her third action to Hide, for defense. And all the other party members benefit from the Precise Debiliations flat-footedness, too.
Rogues attacking from the shadows is a classic Dungeons & Dragons tradition. Flanking is more recent.
The Scoundrel rogue took Sorcerer Multiclass Dedication at 2nd level, gaining Produce Flame and Telekinetic Projectile. Both cantrips have 30-foot range, which is too close for safety, so he gained Dragon Claws for quickly switching to melee.
I was not aware Rangers were voted so low in power. That's interesting. I am still heavily enjoying mine. Only lvl 1 but I put out between 3 and 5 attacks a round and do a lot of dmg.
Due to Ironfang Invasion throwing patrols and armies at the PCs, the ranger in our party has to fight a lot of low-level enemies. Individual enemies drop fast, so the ranger often had to Hunt Prey on a new target every turn. It was a heavy action tax. To balance this imbalanced situation I invented a custom feat that let her Hunt Prey as a free action at the beginning of her turn if her previous prey had dropped dead, unconscious, or helpless.
The advantage of low-level enemies is that the ranger's snares can kill an enemy instead of merely softening them up.
5 attacks per round? I can see 4 attacks per round with Hunted Shot or Twin Takedown. I suppose Commanding an Animal Companion could replace a Strike by the ranger with two Strikes from the companion, but gaining an animal companion costs a class feat which means no Hunted Shot nor Twin Takedown. How can a 1st-level ranger manage 5 attacks per round?
|
|
Rogues are notoriously bad at range because they have hard time getting their Sneak Attack. ... And Champions can't really protect against ranged attack. So, yeah, I think your party is extremely vulnerable when it comes to ranged options.The Thief rogue I mentioned in comment #5 is an archer. At low levels, she would hide behind a tree or a crate and then her first Strike after hiding would catch her target flat-footed. At 10th level she gained Precise Debiliations, which could render a flat-footed target flat-footed to the end of her turn, so so long as she hit once per turn, she no longer needs to hide. But she still uses her third action to Hide, for defense. And all the other party members benefit from the Precise Debiliations flat-footedness, too.
Rogues attacking from the shadows is a classic Dungeons & Dragons tradition. Flanking is more recent.
The Scoundrel rogue took Sorcerer Multiclass Dedication at 2nd level, gaining Produce Flame and Telekinetic Projectile. Both cantrips have 30-foot range, which is too close for safety, so he gained Dragon Claws for quickly switching to melee.
I was not aware Rangers were voted so low in power. That's interesting. I am still heavily enjoying mine. Only lvl 1 but I put out between 3 and 5 attacks a round and do a lot of dmg.Due to Ironfang Invasion throwing patrols and armies at the PCs, the ranger in our party has to fight a lot of low-level enemies. Individual enemies drop fast, so the ranger often had to Hunt Prey on a new target every turn. It was a heavy action tax. To balance this imbalanced situation I invented a custom feat that let her Hunt Prey as a free action at the beginning of her turn if her...
Step 1: Be Human (Half-Elf Heritage)
Step 2: Pick Ancestry Feat: Natural Ambition [Hunted Shot]Step 3: Pick Ranger Feat Animal Companion
Step 4: Hunt Prey -> Hunted Shot -> Command an Animal [Stride+Strike]
Step 5: Hunted Shot -> Strike -> Command an Animal [Strike+Strike]
Although I'm sure it's not optimized, it is why I took Flurry Ranger, which means it also applies to my animal companion.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Did Dread Striker stop working while I wasn't looking? Or Dirge of Doom?Yes. I'm speaking of ranged combat, so Dirge of Doom, Demoralize and Fear stop working as they don't have the range, and as such Dread Striker. Rogues are quite bad at ranged damage.
So you are talking about extreme range then - not the more typical 30 or 60 foot range that most of the battles that I have ever been in have been at. The range where very few characters do any big amounts of damage unless they are specifically building for it - which usually weakens them for other roles.
And if you have a party of 4 that has two spellcasters and a rogueSo what?
If you really want a Rogue, Magus or Summoner can provide additional spellcasting while also bringing some melee durability.
I don't think the Rogue is an easy fit for a 4-man party as they need other melee martials to function properly, unbalancing your party greatly.
Well, the idea that having a Rogue in the party is unbalancing is certainly news. I'm now curious: How many other people on this thread feel that way?
A party of Druid, Fighter, Divine Sorcerer, and Precision Ranger probably has good extreme range damage in the form of Fireball and Longbow, sufficient in-combat healing, maybe enough front line presence if the precision ranger switch hits. But they are lacking in skills. Especially those INT-skills you were mentioning earlier.
My point is that no matter what you pick, someone else is going to come along and nitpick it for you. Because none of the classes in PF2 are so powerful that they can handle any and all roles at the same time. Any 4-character party that you build is going to have flaws and weaknesses that the players have to be aware of and try to mitigate.
If you don't believe me, go ahead and throw out the names of four classes yourself.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So you are talking about extreme range then - not the more typical 30 or 60 foot range that most of the battles that I have ever been in have been at.
All the options I gave you (and you gave me) have a 30 feet range. So in the typical 30 to 60 feet range they just don't work. We are speaking of typical ranged combat.
My point is that no matter what you pick, someone else is going to come along and nitpick it for you.
Well, when the nitpicking is that you don't cover a lot of ground and that you have a massive flaw that will lead to a near auto TPK during 5% of the fights, I think it's more than nitpicking. The lack of ranged option was just one flaw among many. This party is specialized in eliminating melee brutes. It lacks a lot of versatility in any other type of fights.
If you don't believe me, go ahead and throw out the names of four classes yourself.
I already did. And I'd be happy to know what weaknesses my party has.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you don't believe me, go ahead and throw out the names of four classes yourself.I already did. And I'd be happy to know what weaknesses my party has.
Scanning... There has been a lot of content in this thread...
You mean this one, yes?
Fighter
Magus (ranged)
Divine Sorcerer
Monk
Augmented with a bunch of multiclass options, but there is no reason that any of the party compositions I suggested couldn't do the same.
It looks a bit weak on skills. It doesn't look like anyone is a key-stat Wisdom class, so no shoe-in for wisdom skills like medicine, nature, or tracking. Also no universal Recall Knowledge ability.
Not sure bow Magus is front line, but there are two left. I'm also not convinced that it fully counts as the second spellcaster that you were wanting with so few spell slots that it has. You will be spending a lot of money on consumables to make up the difference - hope your adventure is near a town at all times.
There is only the one in-combat spellcaster healer, and that is the same character doing buff/debuffs, so you won't be able to do both at the same time. And none of the buff/debuff spells are renewable, so spending spell slots on buffs/debuffs means fewer spell slots for healing or damage. Even Sorcerer does eventually run out of slots.
Augmented with a bunch of multiclass options, but there is no reason that any of the party compositions I suggested couldn't do the same.
Definitely, I got more into the details. You're free to do it (and even encouraged as your Rogue seems a bit of a Schrödinger Rogue as of now).
It looks a bit weak on skills.
It covers all attributes, but it's true it doesn't have a skill monkey. So it's not bad on skills but not good either.
It doesn't look like anyone is a key-stat Wisdom class
Wisdom is a universally raised stat, so anyone can raise Medicine or Survival and get a good bonus. That's why I haven't pointed Wisdom as a weakness of your build, only Intelligence (that none of your characters has any point in raising unless you choose a weak Racket on your Rogue).
Not sure bow Magus is front line, but there are two left.
Bow Magus is definitely not a front liner. It can switch hit honorably (it doesn't really lose damage when switch hitting, but it loses actions which is hard on a Magus), but I expect the Fighter and the Monk to be the tanks.
I'm also not convinced that it fully counts as the second spellcaster
I've never said you need 2 spellcasters, I said that a single spellcaster is low. Especially one that is all in on support and as such can't compete with a Sorcerer in terms of spell power.
And no need of consumables, actually your party needs more consumables as you'll have to compensate for the lack of spellcasters with potions or scrolls.There is only the one in-combat spellcaster healer
The Monk is supposed to be a secondary healer (and Monks are good secondary healers). At high level, it can even become the main healer. A main healer + a secondary healer is not exactly the best combination for healing but it's not a bad one.
that is the same character doing buff/debuffs, so you won't be able to do both at the same time
The Magus can definitely help. And your build has a single caster so I think this weakness is more one of yours.
And none of the buff/debuff spells are renewable, so spending spell slots on buffs/debuffs means fewer spell slots for healing or damage. Even Sorcerer does eventually run out of slots.
The Sorcerer is supposed to take Focus Spells for buffs, so they are fully renewable. Debuff is not renewable for your Bard, too (unless you speak of Dirge of Doom but then you have no more renewable buffs).
As I have more spellcasters I have less sustainability than your build. But it's not a weakness of my build (more a strength of yours), as it can live through most adventuring days and even long ones won't be much of an issue.Overall, you haven't found a point of failure to my party. As you stated, you can't fully avoid weaknesses. But I don't think you can find a quite common situation where my whole party is unable to handle a Moderate encounter.
Just pointing out that there is no perfect party.
I'm not even all that good at powergaming. I'm sure there are others on these boards that are better than me at nitpicking the One True Build.
Did Dread Striker stop working while I wasn't looking? Or Dirge of Doom?Yes. I'm speaking of ranged combat, so Dirge of Doom, Demoralize and Fear stop working as they don't have the range, and as such Dread Striker. Rogues are quite bad at ranged damage.
There are plenty of ways of getting sneak attack at longer than 30ft range. Mastermind, Steath, Invisibility 4 - all my high level rogues have had that.
It is really a question of the Rogue's player putting a plan together.
I'd be happy to know what weaknesses my party has.
Your party is very good, I am seeing balance.
I'm not especially seeing any synergy in the absence of detail.
Poor Perception and Initiative.
There are plenty of ways of getting sneak attack at longer than 30ft range. Mastermind, Steath, Invisibility 4 - all my high level rogues have had that.
It is really a question of the Rogue's player putting a plan together.
Mastermind is not really a strong Racket, so when we are speaking of optimized party I don't think it's a good fit. And Sneak, having used it (I have a bow Scoundrel) it's extremely weak, mostly because on top of losing an action hiding you don't know if you have succeeded before attacking, leading to a number of attacks against a non-Flat-Footed enemy.
But it's true, I forgot about Invisibility. Still, it's not automatic (20% of level 10+ enemies have True Seeing, 30% above level 15, and I don't count other precise senses as I don't know how to search for them) and it asks for party support. So you may end up in a situation where you can't apply Sneak at range in a satisfying way with a melee Rogue.
Poor Perception and Initiative.
Yes, definitely. That's also the biggest issue I've seen with it. I don't think it's invalidating the party, but investigations may be a bit slow.
But it's true, I forgot about Invisibility. Still, it's not automatic (20% of level 10+ enemies have True Seeing, 30% above level 15, and I don't count other precise senses as I don't know how to search for them) and it asks for party support. So you may end up in a situation where you can't apply Sneak at range in a satisfying way with a melee Rogue.
True Seeing is a counteract check and not automatic. So if you need it you can always take Invisibility and Disappearance at higher levels to have a better chance. But I'm going to use your own logic against you here. True Seeing is limited to 60ft range therefore it is useless, just be outside 60ft when you fire. You are clearly talking about long range combat here.
Yes, it's true, you can stay out of range. So, I remove what I said, you can make the Rogue a valid ranged combattant.
There is no unified tiering system people use when discussing this kind of stuff, so it is only clear what is at the top and what is at the bottom.
You will see most people saying Bard, Fighter and Sometimes Rogue and Champion are at the top (Starlit Magus with Psychic dedication too if you want to count specific builds) and Investigator, Witch, Swashbuckler and Alchemist at the bottom.
As for what is better and worse of all the missing classes, you will see a lot of discussion. IMO all the remaining classes are rather equal.
True Seeing is a counteract check and not automatic. So if you need it you can always take Invisibility and Disappearance at higher levels to have a better chance.
Monsters getting a TS higher than level 6 is quite rare, so Disappeareance just works even when they have it most of the time.
But....I actually collected stats on some of my early PFS games and looked at the total damage my Rangers did in comparison to other martials and it was typically dead last. Champions and Fighters were easily out-damaging me. Sure, I outdid the Investigator, but that is a faux martial.e dice gods bless you and you get those high burst damage rounds. For...
Champions and Fighters start out with a good reaction attack. A Ranger have to buy one and it is the worst version. Champions and Fighters are just so much better at low level. The Ranger can be Ok but it is also very easy to build one with negative synergies.
I'm with N N on that one. The Ranger is only competitive in damage if it starts the round with a Prey. The whole Hunt Prey mechanics cripples the Ranger damage output as it's a straight up tax that is not compensated with superior damage output (compared to the competition).
Next to that, the Ranger is not really tanky. It's in the low end of melee martials on that regard.
And when it comes to skills, extra Trained skills is a minor advantage, Legendary Perception is nice, and the few bonuses from Hunt Prey are negligible.
A Fighter or Barbarian will outdamage and outlive a Ranger without losing much on the skill side. A Rogue will outskill and outdamage a Ranger without losing much on the tankiness side.
To put the Ranger on par with the other classes, you need to give the Masterful Hunter bonus right at level 1. Flurry Ranger would become absolute meat grinders in the right situation but would need to set up things for it to happen. Outwit Ranger would have a valid bonus to AC and their skill bonuses would be interesting enough to go for a weaker combat attribute array (by focusing more on Wisdom and Charisma and less on Strength and Dexterity). For Precision Ranger the Masterful Hunter bonus doesn't apply much but an increase in Precision dice (d12) would give them the "one big hit per round" vibe they should have.
I would say that both precision + bow and, with a buff-heavy party, flurry + shuriken can compete with most ranged options (well, with everything but Starlit, really) even with the Hunt Prey tax. Class feels a bit off at some level ranges (6 to 10 feels quite meh as a precision bow user, for example), but these feel quite in line overall with the likes of Gunslinger, ranged Thaumaturge, bow monk with Heaven's Thunder or most Bow fighter builds.
Melee is more painful, though. While precision feels adequate for a ranged damage booster, it feels a bit meh for melee, and the action economy of melee flurry is just too taxing.
And then there is Outwit, which is just a worse Thaumaturge now.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Precision + Bow has historically been the Ranger niche, in my opinion. The one sole build that was both quite simple and working at a good power level.
With the Starlit Span out there, it becomes far less interesting.
I haven't really checked the Flurry Shuriken build. It is a rather weird build, though.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I had another PFS adventure last night, it was the second one they ever made about the mosquito witch. I was pretty effective in one of the encounters, but in the later encounter without any Darkvision I was completely out of the fight the entire time. I couldn't see anything, and although I had lit a torch, I can't use my Shortbow (which requires 2 hands) and a Torch at the same time. We have no magic users, only 1 Inventor (never even heard of that class), 1 Champion of some kind (not sure what kind, never used a reaction) and 1 Monk, plus me. I did feel my Survival skills and Nature were useful for the adventure.
Thankfully now that I've played 2 scenarios apparently I get a free Wayfinder which has a built in Light Spell and I do have low-light vision as a half elf, but I am beginning to see the action economy problem. Against low HP foes, if my cat kills the foe after I hunt prey, then I'm left to take 1 normal shot, or hunt prey and cannot Hunted Shot a different target. That feels a bit bad, but I love my Ranger. Maybe in time I will become disillusioned. Then again there is more to a character than just physical stats.
I haven't really checked the Flurry Shuriken build. It is a rather weird build, though.
Only really works with both precision and damage boosts in the party, but it is rather strong. I only tried it out with a Fervor Witch and it deals really high damage and it is very easy to play.
Also works with bear companion, but I don't like that that much since it takes an action from you that you could be using on getting value out of your party buffs.