now that we are past the production life cycle of PF1...
let's try to come up with some decent metrics for PF1, DnD 3.5, along with PF2 analogs that encompass play-styles, roles, and goals of the players.
ROLES:
I think classes fall into one of several wide categories or roles; [Martial, Skilled/Social, Spellcasters, Downtime]. I'd like to keep this general rather than get into ranged, two-handed, evocations, or gold piece value generated per week. We can compare within a Role but across Roles will have less value. Some will be in two Roles, but we can choose the better and just apply a simple modifier to the rating for the other lesser effective role (I hope). I expect there will be Role Specializations/subcategories (like Martial-DamagePerRound, Martial-Ranged, Martial-Maneuvers, Spell-DamagePerRound, Spell-Recovery/Healing/ConditionRemoval, etc).
EXPERTISE:
I think some classes are simple (Gunslinger) whereas some really take some expertise (Wizard) beyond feat selection. So I'd go; [Simple, Average, Expert]. This is about how hard it is to build and play the class rather than its power.
POWER:
a bit tricky as there are different kinds. DPR(martial or magic), targets sidelined or controlled, areas or objects controlled, minions(yeah, the accursed Leadership spammed or never leave the summoner/necromancer/enchanter alone to cast at their leisure). Gold is it's own kind of power as it leads to hiring minions and excessive magic items on hand.
id begin with dividing the roles into five categories. i think these are the roles i most frequently see pop up.
spoiler:
the HAMMER
This role is about striking hard and striking true. From a pure combat perspective, how good is the class at actually dealing consistent damage? Here we find the traditional martials such as Fighter and Barbarian.
the DEFENDER
How good are you at soaking punishment for your party? This role is often combined with the HAMMER but exceptions occur frequently. Good saves, high AC, self-heal and condition removal are important factors here. Paladin is a perfect example.
the CONTROL
We are still talking combat here so this is battlefield control. Your ability to change the game state during combat. Spellcasters rank high here with staples such as Grease, Obscuring Mist, and Color Spray. But we also find those with other ways to inflict conditions.
the HEALER
This is about the three categories of healing. Preventative, active, and mending. A wand of CLW will top you up between encounters but it wont pull the HAMMER back from the brink of death during combat, or make the party immune to negative levels before you venture into a vampire den. Condition removal is absolutely crucial here.
the PROBLEM SOLVER
This is a very broad role and also the most powerful because here we see the potential to circumvent combat entirely. Skillsets such as social, stealth, and knowledge belong here. But more commonly this role is defined by spellcasting, especially at high levels. Do note that this category also involves combat as in the case when a wizard casts Fly on a fighter to enable them.
someone with more imagination is free to come up with better names so that an acronym is possible. HDCHP doesnt exactly roll off the tongue. to give an example in practical terms (rated from 1-5) here is how id rate the slayer and bard in their potential for the different roles at mid levels.
id begin with dividing the roles into five categories. i think these are the roles i most frequently see pop up.
...
Slayer
H 5
D 3
C 1
H 1
P 2
Bard
H 2
D 2
C 3
H 3
P 4
...
I think you are defining sub-Roles(subcategories) rather than top level Roles. Some are clearly aspects of the Martial Role. I tried to widen the scope with Roles as there are several ways to maximize a sub-Role which have clearer metrics. So my wider view is a Role is comprised of several metrics. Metrics use numbers rather than subjective opinion.
You could assign a hit list of sub-Role metrics to Classes.
I think the questions go; "I want to be a strong martial". Okay, "what kind(sub-Role) of Martial?" then that yields a list of Class builds.
Classes are themes/styles with a central Role. As the theme changes(archetypes) the sub-Roles shift around.
I realize I am creating some generic jargon as I try to get away from Class, Archetype, Prestige Class, and such to create a generic flow down to specific class builds rather than classes. Ofcouse the analysis and method can be applied to the classes and archetypes.
sample metrics;
Ability scores: determine & rank three required scores. assume 16+[Lvl/4], then 14+[Lvl/5], then 12+[Lvl/5] in those scores
Saves: assume 3 +Floor[0.75*Lvl] +any abil bonus, or 3 +CR.
Target AC=10 +Floor[1.2*CR] or Floor[4+ 0.75*Lvl].
S1= (Skill Ranks +Nmbr Class Skills +Class skill bonus abilities +Class skill substitution abilities) at above levels.
F1= (feats +Class feats usable on others(teamwork) +Class feat like abilities/discoveries) at above levels.
Q1= (total Spell Levels{spells, SLAs, SUs, hexes, etc each at RND(SplLvl^0.8, 2)} +Metamagic/Item Creation feats +Cost of (Pearl of power/Class cost for same item){Storing 1 accumulative spell per castable spell level Ratio} ) at above levels.
A1= DPR.
D1= (Fort +Rflx +Will bonuses from abilities, class, usual feats for build +Evasion type feats +Natl AC +ER +DR +SR value) at above levels.
D2= (Nmbr Armr/shld feats/abilities +SplLvl(see above) of Defensive spells{assume 25% of total} at above levels.
i get what youre saying but "the martial" is not a role. its a theme
when people ask for advice the absolute most common terms i hear are "support/buffer", "social", "tank", "healer", "skillmonkey", "frontliner", "debuffer", and so on. and very often people have already chosen a class which they think fulfill their primary roles best. so when people ask for a "healer bard" theyve already decided on the support and skillmonkey roles.
the big issue with trying to ground everything in metrics is the approachability of the system. people keep repeating the class tier system despite its faults (like people point out in Joynts thread) because its so simple. if i tell someone that the rogue has a D2 value of 2.13 assuming usual feats and CR distribution theyll have no clue what im talking about
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
As far as "roles" go, I would list them as:
- battlefield control (includes both maneuvers like trip and spells, also the "tank" that blocks enemies from other party members)
- buffer (mostly spells, but also abilities that add bonuses to allies)
- damage dealer (any form of damage: blasting, melee or ranged weapon attacks, etc.)
- de-buffer (again mostly spells, but also abilities that impose penalties on opponents)
- healer (includes status removal)
- utility (often skills such as "face/social" or "locks/traps," but also spells and abilities that can bypass/deal with challenges and/or provide out of combat benefits)
There is often at least some overlap between "roles" (e.g., the "tank" is both battlefield control and [melee] damage dealer) for any given character. Also, the "roles" are not directly aligned with a given class; granted, the full BAB classes will be better as the damage dealer than (most) +3/4 or +1/2 BAB classes but they are not limited to only dealing damage.
I'd agree those are classic functional areas used in chat to describe what PCs can do in a tactical combat centric way. It really devalues some areas.
Utility is a catch all of non-combat & non-damage areas.
I'd combine some and detail others.
Accuracy, precision, utility, reproduceability, and avoidance of comparative judgements & opinions are cleary my goals. I'm not saying the existing jargon and ratings are wrong, just speculative and not based on game mechanics. Think of it as a 'by the numbers' approach.
Several metrics would be aggregated to form a rating for a Role. Not all Roles will have the same mix of metrics. Metrics quantify functional areas in the game. Hopefully my top level methodology and terminology isn't too confusing. 8^| I posted sample metrics to show expectations, the what and how of this systemic approach.
The other thread (Alternative Class Tier System) is about various value judgement systems.
Accuracy, precision, utility, reproduceability, and avoidance of comparative judgements & opinions are cleary my goals. I'm not saying the existing jargon and ratings are wrong, just speculative and not based on game mechanics. Think of it as a 'by the numbers' approach.
Yes but you can't.
Azothath wrote:
Q1= (total Spell Levels{spells, SLAs, SUs, hexes, etc each at RND(SplLvl^0.8, 2)} +Metamagic/Item Creation feats +Cost of (Pearl of power/Class cost for same item){Storing 1 accumulative spell per castable spell level Ratio} ) at above levels.
This sounds like an objective and calculatable measure. Talking of PF1.
Take total spell levels.
A wizard [usually not always, which alone messes up calculating anything] gets an extra spell/level compared to a witch.
Then the witch spell list is much less extensive and powerful than the wizards. How do you objectively measure that? You don't.
Then a witch does not get permanency, which reduces the effectiveness of item creation feats markedly but this plays no role in the calculation.
Many classes get hexes. But only a witch and sylvan trickster rogue can get the major and grand hexes. No part in the calculation that does not account for archetypes either.
A spontaneous caster has access to only a small subset of the spells on their list. A divine prepared caster has access to all, an arcane prepared caster has access to all the spells they can find. Well known and extremely significant but entirely absent from the objective calculation.
How to feed some entries in as a number is going to be the tricky part. I envision 0.5, 1, 2, 3 as working for the vast majority with "1" as the usual entry.
Pretty much that will capture the vast majority of class features/abilities.
The results will have to be normalized at some arbitrary point, I choose 16th level above.
