If we were to do one of those "Standard" Tier lists you see floating around. From S to F, What classes would you put into each Tier. S being for the most powerful and F being for the the classes which outright fail. So far in my head my list is looking a little bit like this. I thought long but my list is far form complete but it looks a little this this so far.
S: Fighter, Ranger
A:
B:
C:
D:
F:
?Not sure if any class is in the straight F Tier, as no class doesn't fail. Fighter and Ranger cause of how they are built but if you want to break it down further it'd be S-Ranger (Flurry), A-Ranger (Precision), B-Ranger (Outwit). However that would make the list more complicated however we could break the classes down by Sub-class. Like Barbarian and Rogue we got sub-choices to make just like most martials, we could make this more complex but. Let's see what you'd do.
Inventor feels like the only real outlier although it is perfectly capable of handling adventures and is overall interesting.
Cleric/fighter/rogue are probably at the top end of the power range.
Fighters are pretty straight forward and their high accuracy means they perform real well.
Rogues are just packed with power this go round they are just real strong with some very interesting build options.
Clerics are just top notch at their role having a full extra set of top level heal or harm spells in addition to all their normal stuff.
Most of the rest float between those points some like animist are probably up at the top but are also a LOT more complex.
I'm going to be completely honest given how this game is, standard tier lists don't work because the entire game is between S and B. Even your usual suspects for worst class have nothing on the level of variance I've seen in other class-based TTRPGs.
Yup even the one sort of acknowledged as being the weakest the inventor is still a perfectly functional class. The balance in PF2e is really good and all the classes so far are mostly in a good place.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Take this for a wishy-washy opinion, but I don't think "Powerful" can be properly gagued in a game that is designed around team work and support. Some classes are more severely pigeon holed into supportive roles where their contributions are not readily evident.
the barbarian/fighter just did a bajillion poitns of damage... because the rogue/swashbuckler flanked him to lower his AC
and the inventor helped lower his AC, and the Bard was buffing his to hit.
but that's my wishy-washy opinion.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I find tier lists just don't really apply in Pathfinder 2e, and I take great joy in that.
My classic example: I played through Outlaws of Alkenstar using Core Rulebook rules.
My team?
- Vanguard Gunslinger
- Armor Innovation Inventor
- Bard
- And my guy, the Bomber Alchemist
And let me tell you... we kicked a**. We synergized so well. Probably the strongest team I've ever been a part of... but with the exception of the Bard, none of the other classes would make the traditional "best class" lists.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't feel ranger is S until way late into the game, which to me is enough to not make it an S tier class. I would put it at A.
Inventor is the perfect example of an F class. Something has to be there and there's no other class more perfect for that role than the inventor.
Yeah, the only reason I would put the Inventor one rank higher than F is because we need a category alone for the Munitions Master Inventor.
I'd put martials in the top half, casters further down in general (though subclass-dependent).
S: Champion, Fighter, Rogue
A: Barbarian, Bard*, Cleric, Exemplar, Guardian, Monk
B: Animist, Gunslinger, Ranger, Summoner, Swashbuckler, Thaumaturge
C: Alchemist, Commander, Kineticist, Oracle, Sorcerer
D: Druid, Magus, Psychic, Witch, Wizard
F: Inventor
* The Bard… honestly, I'd say S at low levels, but starting at mid-levels it loses a bit of its shine, as the (non-spellcasting) class features are no longer carrying it.
Though other occult casters have a similar issue: the list is weak and not very versatile. This was usually balanced around stronger class features, but A) the Psychic flat-lined when other classes were remastered and never caught up, B) the only good occult Witch patron got nerfed while the other occult patrons weren't worth it at all, and C) the occult Sorcerer bloodlines are just crap (Aberrant lost all its usefulness when the Remaster brought most debuffs from touch to range 30ft, Shadow never worked in the first place, Hag & Harrow are a joke).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Commander at C feels way to low. In fact, the more I see commander in play the more I think it could probably be on S tier.
Gather to Me! is effectively a free positioning tool for the whole party at the beggining of combat, and the perfect repositioning tool in the middle of combat. Strike Hard! effectively allows the commander to hit someone using the attack modifiers and damage of a stronger martial like a barbarian or rogue, and since Drilled Reactions is a thing, you don't even spend their reaction if they have something else to do with it.
And from 7th level onwards the commander is just OP. Demoralizing Charge is effectively a Stride + Strike + Demoralize which gives immense freedom to your teammates. I GM for a commander and I seen multiple encounters where the PCs don't make a single Stride outside of those granted by the commander, allowing the other PCs to effectively play as if movement and positioning weren't a thing in the system.
Plant Banner is insane. Rallying Banner is the perfect tool to heal the party after a nasty AoE damage effect. Fortunate Blow is a Sure Strike effect for an ally every turn.
The commander is really strong.
Commander at C feels way to low. In fact, the more I see commander in play the more I think it could probably be on S tier.
Gather to Me! is effectively a free positioning tool for the whole party at the beggining of combat, and the perfect repositioning tool in the middle of combat. Strike Hard! effectively allows the commander to hit someone using the attack modifiers and damage of a stronger martial like a barbarian or rogue, and since Drilled Reactions is a thing, you don't even spend their reaction if they have something else to do with it.
And from 7th level onwards the commander is just OP. Demoralizing Charge is effectively a Stride + Strike + Demoralize which gives immense freedom to your teammates. I GM for a commander and I seen multiple encounters where the PCs don't make a single Stride outside of those granted by the commander, allowing the other PCs to effectively play as if movement and positioning weren't a thing in the system.
Plant Banner is insane. Rallying Banner is the perfect tool to heal the party after a nasty AoE damage effect. Fortunate Blow is a Sure Strike effect for an ally every turn.
The commander is really strong.
I'm actually in agreement with you that the commander may be S-Tier or at least high A. It enables the party so much and doesn't lose much personal power to do so.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm going to be completely honest given how this game is, standard tier lists don't work because the entire game is between S and B. Even your usual suspects for worst class have nothing on the level of variance I've seen in other class-based TTRPGs.
Yeah this is the big challenge. This was easier in say 3.5 where the class tier list ranged from "can break the game in multiple ways and is the best at everything" to "barely functions at its own stated core mechanic." And that's assuming we leave out the "doesn't actually function RAW" case.
So the tiers are a lot narrower in PF2. But then you also have to specify criteria:
- Power as in offense, support, exploration/downtime/skill challenges, or all of them? What's the weight? Because in an influence/infiltration/research subsystem heavy game, Investigator becomes a LOT stronger than in a straight dungeon crash adventure.
- Is complexity vs power tradeoff a factor? ie: If I can get the same power out of Wizard as I can from Sorcerer but one requires hyper specific builds and significant system mastery where the other is "take whatever you want and its fine", do we count that?
- Is how wide the class power range is a factor? ie: are we talking fully minmaxed builds, suboptimal builds, or the range? (A youtuber in the past did one of these with a plot to account for this and it was excellent.)
- How much do you penalize classes that work better in specific party compositions than others? (Bard and Commander are two that come to mind as becoming really awesome with the right party around them.)
- How heavily do we weight high level play vs low level play, as some classes are strong out of the gate while others ramp up. (My Oracle was pretty meh at low level but at level 19 is arguably the strongest character in the party.)
I don't know the answer to any of those. :) I do like it when people post a bit of an explanation as to how they got a given ranking though, as I find the reasoning why someone rates a given class where they do just as interesting as the rating itself. And that's also more of a conversation starter: "Summoner is C" is one thing, but "Summoner is C because there's a bunch of PFS scenarios where having to make saves twice and take the worse is crippling due to repeated hazard exposures" is an actual point of discussion.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Tier lists are rough in PF2 because the build path you take matters.
For example, an untamed druid with storm or animal might be an A or S tier class, but every other druid might be only C tier.
The particular build in PF2 has a powerful effect on the tier of the class. Even sorcs might get a slight tier bump or drop based on the bloodline, though most of their feats are obvious and the bloodline has less of an impact than the druid order for a druid.
I'll think about how to describe this and post in later.
I'll make an attempt of martial tier list. I won't include casters because, personally, I don't like the caster playstyle that much and thus haven't played many casters as a consequence, so more than likely I'll end up downplaying casters in favor of martials in the tier list and that's not going to be fair or accurate for them (even though this is ultimately an opinion so it isn't really "accurate" to begin with, but I digress).
Classes to the left are meant to have a higher rating than those to the right.
S: Fighter, Rogue, Commander
A: Barbarian, Champion, Guardian, Thaumaturge, Monk
B: Ranger*, Exemplar, Magus*, Swashbuckler
C: Gunslinger, Alchemist*
D: Investigator
F: Inventor
* Ranger is hard to place because each subclass could have its own spot. Flurry IMO begins at middle B but ends at middle A, Outwit is a low C, and Precision starts at high B but arguably ends at low B. If we include vindicator, I honestly can't give it a rating higher than low C.
* The IW and psychic errata probably makes magus a low B, but assuming Impossible Magic gives the class some deserved buffs it could probably jump to high B.
* Alchemist is a bit tricky because I'm comfortable leaving it at C in most builds, but the bomber alchemist IMO has enough support to bump it to high B or low A.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Here's my list. Order within a tier isn't significant, so I'll do it alphabetically. This is based on my experiences as a GM and as a player. If a class has one absolutely awesome option and a bunch of crap ones, I'm taking somewhere in the middle. In general the gaps between the tiers aren't that big, so its not like even the C tier classes are bad. You can mix classes from pretty mcuh any tier in a party and the game will work, and that means class balance overall is pretty good.
S Tier
Bard - I think I've had more Bards in my games than any other class, with multiple muses, and they're always among the most beloved people in the party with the other players. The fact that people keep playing them and they keep being effective says a lot.
Cleric - Divine Font just makes the class really flexible with your other spells and eases the pain of being a prepared caster massively. It just works well.
Champion - More flexible a class than it looks as I've seen people do some really fun things like "wrestle a triceratops so it can't attack the Bard" with this class, aside from the obvious "shield and retributive strike" build. It tells you what it does on the tin and it delivers that extremely well.
Fighter - Another class I see a ton of. Also my favorite for brand new PF2 players, because I can give them one , explain how to play it in a couple of minutes, and know they will have a good time. It's also very forgiving build wise: you can do absolutely suboptimal stuff and still carry your weight. Can get dull if you specialize it and find you have nothing to do in a social scene, but it doesn't HAVE to be that way.
Oracle - Surprised myself with this one given all the problems I have with Remaster Oracle. But I'm playing one at level 19 in Spore War and they're very powerful at high level, which is weighting things somewhat. Boatloads of spell slots, some good focus spells, and Cursebound abilities to mix up what you can do and have a lot of options. Biggest downside is that subclass balance is among the worst in PF2.
Rogue - Packs a punch, good build diversity, is good at so many things that they have something good to contribute in every scene. What more can you ask out of a class?
Thaumaturge - My favorite class in PF2. Lots of flavour, tons of build flexibility, packs a punch in combat and also often has tools to be really good in other situations. Also I love it as a GM because this is the one player I know will always Recall Knowledge and I really enjoy getting to tell players things (right or wrong, because Dubious Knowledge).
A Tier
Barbarian - Promises a certain thing, delivers it really well. Want to be a big menace on the battlefield? You can.
Commander - Really wants a party willing to play along with it's gimmick, but hugely powerful if it does. Also I have a player that wants to roll Warfare Lore for everything and now they can.
Guardian - Speaking of "delivers what it says it does" really well. Great for a defensive character. Might be on par with Champion but I have less experience with it.
Sorcerer - Not a complex class to build and it's good at what it does. Not a lot to say really, it's just a really good class.
B Tier
Alchemist - Complexity is a big factor in this rating. This class is one of the hardest in PF2 to play well. If you have the system mastery to play it well, you can get S-tier results, but if you don't, there are gotchas with the subclasses and an overwhelming item list that can cause decision paralysis and hold you back.
Druid - Perfectly fine, has good builds. But Untamed is kind of misleading in that you're still a caster with forms that can fight, not a frontline Bear.
Exemplar - Don't have a lot of experience with it, but it's got fun options and I like the theme.
Investigator - Somewhat campaign dependent. In a dungeon crawl against random enemies where the GM is limiting Devise? Ugh. But in a campaign with a strong theme for investigations and with a lot of subsystems? Feels good. But it's a more GM-dependent class than any other.
Kineticist - The biggest knock against the class is all the things it doesn't interact well with in the rest of the system because it functions as its own thing (Mythic is the worst example). It's a cool class and another one where if you really know what you're doing you can get S-tier results, but the design is a pain as a GM sometimes.
Monk - Perfectly fine, though I've seen a lot of low level Monks struggle and come online with a few levels. Thematically pretty generic/dull.
Swashbuckler - Remaster version is nice. I don't have a lot to say about it, it does a thing and it works.
Summoner - I really like this class, though it's quite complex and fiddly at times. A player that can get the most out of it can really shine, but I've seen it trip folks up.
Witch - Among PF2's most interesting classes thematically IMO. Has some good powers now and tradition versatility is cool. But it really expects you to use your familiar and players that don't do that are squandering it, making this harder to play than some other casters.
C Tier
Gunslinger - If you want to use reload weapons, this is what you play. If you don't, it's a waste of time. For the right character it's pretty fun, but it can be a hassle to play around it's limitations.
Magus - Entirely a one trick pony. It's a good trick, but there's not much going on without it. I see lots of folks try it out but not many stick with it in a long campaign because the gimmick can get old.
Ranger - Class works fine, but I find it dull both thematically and mechanically. It doesn't feel like it has a strong niche and what it does can be done by other classes for the most part, but it works.
Wizard - Remaster didn't do it any favours and the complexity of having to manage a spellbok and prepared casting just doesn't really get you anything for the effort. Clerics and Druids at least get to prepare from their entire tradition without the extra bookkeeping.
D Tier
Invetor - I don't think it fulfills its own class fantasy very well, and although you can build a pretty good one, the baseline isn't great.
Psychic - The class gimmick of amps is great on an archetype (recent nerfs aside) but doesn't carry the whole class, and the lack of spell slots really hurts. I just don't see why I'd ever play one.
Not Rated
Animist - I have no experience with this class at all, and it doesn't seem to exist in my groups. So I don't want to rate it since that'd be based strictly on how other people rated it. If I did that, probably A? It looks like a good spellcaster.
That's my list. Feel free to disagree. :)
I'll preface this by saying that I only run games with free archetype. This may be different if my groups had more limited feat choices.
My personal list -
S: Bard, Cleric, Champion, Fighter, Rogue
A: Animist, Barbarian, Commander, Druid, Exemplar, Guardian, Oracle, Sorcerer
B: Gunslinger, Kineticist, Monk, Swash, Thaum, Witch
C: Alchemist, Magus, Ranger, Summoner, Wizard
D: Investigator, Psychic
F: Inventor
In terms of power...
S: Bard, Champion, Fighter, Rogue, Thaumaturge
A: Barbarian, Cleric, Guardian, Oracle, Sorcerer
B+: Commander, Druid, Exemplar, Kineticist, Ranger
B: Gunslinger, Monk, Swashbuckler, Summoner
C: Alchemist, Investigator, Magus, Witch
E: Inventor, Psychic, Wizard
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My tier list is based on top possible builds for the given class including stat distributions. An underestimated aspect of maximizing is being able to place all stat boosts into stats that boost not only your main combat abilities, but saves, hit points, and skills.
This tier list is based on classes I've played or seen played up to 18 to 20.
S Tier
Rogue: Good at every aspect of the game. Good feats nearly every level. Best at skills. Great combat ability. Good at every level. Great stat distribution going Dex or Str. Archetype is great for non-rogues. One of the best designed classes for PF2 gameplay.
Druid: Untamed Form with Animal/Storm. Great stat distribution. Good at most aspects of the game. Quality feats. Untamed Form is the main way to build as this gives you climbing, flight, burrowing, combat ability, breath weapons, and lots of useful abilities across levels that work well for combat and exploration. You can do it all day.
Sorc: Best pure caster in the game. Lots of slots. Up to 45 spells known. Can obtain good bloodline focus spells. Good caster feats at nearly every level. Charisma is a great main stat that allows you to solve lots of problems using charisma skills.
A tier
Fighter: Best martial crit fisher in the game. Build using big weapons and reaction attacks. Can build a decent armor class too so ok to go sword and board or duel weapon fighter. It won't be do quite as much damage as a two-hander, but still good with crits. They aren't good at many other aspects of the game other than combat.
Cleric: Great at healing. Divine spell list is better now. Wisdom main casting stat allows good stat distribution focus. Feats better after remaster. Some focus spells are good.
Bard: Best group buffer in the game. Charisma good stat. Mainly a caster. Feats are generally good. One of the better casters in the game and can be good at social skills, but pretty focused on buffing the party. If you don't like doing that, won't be that fun a class.
Magus: Great at big crits. Can make the best archer in the game. Very locked in playstyle, but if you like to crit fish big crits can be fun. Fun class fantasy. Best attack cantrip and spell user in the game. You should build around attack roll cantrips.
Champion: Good defender. Feats not that great, but ok. One of the highest AC classes in the game which becomes quiet helpful at high level. I would put this B tier because it's a narrow AC focus, but having seen high level champions in play they are a real pain to deal with as the high AC makes them real hard to bring down. They stand in groups of mooks taking no hits and even bosses have a lot of problems hurting them. Then when you do hit them, shield block further reduces the hit. If you go after their buddies, the two champion reactions make the target pay. It creates a powerful if limited combination.
Monk: Monk is borderline S tier. It's definitely high A tier. Dex based monks are best. Best martial action economy in game. Good feats at nearly every level. Damage really starts to stack up at high level. High AC. Good saves that you can build as you want. Best mobility. I keep it in A tier because it stats a little slow, but starts to grow in power past level 10. Very strong in the end game. Build for versatile combat style incorporating maneuvers and attacks. Easy to use a shield to maximize AC. Use that mobility to your advantage.
Barbarian: Pretty one trick pony like the fighter. But that trick is pretty brutal in fights. Starts off a bit slow because AC isn't great. But at high level becomes a real machine of destruction that is able to take tons of damage while whacking out enemies with powerful melee attacks.
Kineticist: Con a good combat stat. Good saves. Very versatile builds. Damage is very middle of the road, but versatile. You have some very good damage stacking builds. Many builds have proven to do well. One of the most versatile classes in the game.
B Tier
All other casters except Psychic: Casting is good. Spells are very good. If you can cast them at Legendary casting with a maxed out casting stat, you are going to do well. Thus this is about as low as a caster with Legendary casting can get. This mostly covers Wizards and witches. Not the greatest feats. Intelligence is not a great casting stat any longer as more skills doesn't mean much and Recall Knowledge can be situationally ok, but not necessary. If you can learn the best spells to use for your spell list and use them with maxed out casting, you're still gonna hammer. Also covers oracle. Oracle B tier because feats are mostly front loaded. Mysteries not too good now or unique. Upper level feats pretty boring and weak. Focus spells a very mixed bag. Curse vary from tolerable to absolutely weak and not worth taking. It's still a 4 slot caster.
Summoner: Interesting class. Can be fun. Doesn't have that top end power, but if you like building to do different things can be fun. It's not a straightforward build class. You have to think about what you want to do and build for it. Good action economy. Too few casting slots. Eidolon makes you mostly a martial attacker with some casting ability.
Ranger: Nice mix of abilities. Gets Legendary perception. Combat ability middle of the road. Can use any fighting style. Surprisingly good at buffing party if you take the Shared Prey line of feats in a martial group.
Alchemist: Versatile damage dealer. Intelligence not a great combat stat. Has some interesting build. Mostly a decent class if you know how to build it. Low B tier borderline C tier. It's versatility lifts it up a bit.
Swashbuckler: A much better class after remaster. Very playable now. Easy to generate panache. Not quite as good a combatant than most other martials, but very viable. It has some interesting builds. It can have some strong shining moments even if it doesn't do damage like a fighter or rogue.
C Tier
Investigator: Combat ability far too limited. Intelligence not a great combat stat. Remaster improved it, but still just too narrowly focused for general play. Can be A or S tier in a campaign built to take advantage of its non-combat abilities, but combat abilities are D tier which combined is C tier.
F Tier
Psychic: This class has some really creative design. Main problem is the creativity did not translate into a very playable class. I think a lack of baseline damage really hurt the class. It tried to make all all these interesting and unique abilities, but it turned the class into this mess of abilities that aren't very good in actual play. Shatter Mind is probably the best amped focus damage spell. Amped message is ok. The only really good Mind was The Silent Whisper. Every other mind focus amped abilities were real weak.
Psyche actions incredibly hard to use in normal play with movement.
3 focus points go fast and doesn't work well in any kind of pro-longed combat against multiple encounters as my group likes to do.
Class more reliant on focus points for power. If you don't get a chance to rest, you are pretty weak and useless class.
Unleashed Pscyhe mechanic is one of the worst designed mechanics I've ever seen. 2 rounds of enhanced damage for 2 rounds of stupefied which makes you make a flat check to cast at all, -2 on perception, will saves, charisma or intel skills, and even more importantly your spell DCs and attack rolls. This is not worth the exchange at all.
I hope the original designer or a new designer gets a chance to do an oracle like makeover of the psychic class to make it more playable and effective. It has a lot of great creative work that needs to be translated into more effective abilities that last more than a few rounds without a core ability with a 2 round duration that hamstrings the class.
One major change would be changing stupefied to drained. An ability like Unleash Psyche should not completely ruin your casting ability after using it when that is all you have to use to fight with as a class. It would be like making the barbarian enfeebled after raging. Really, it's even worse than enfeebled as a barb could at least still fight, but a psychic might not even be able to cast at all if stupefied.
Classes Not Rated due to a lack of experience with the class: Exemplar, Inventor, Gunslinger, Thaumaturge, Guardian, Commander, Animist
I will have more information on the Exemplar, animist, and Guardian soon. We only hit level 4, but so far Guardian, Animist, and Exemplar are looking A or B tier, but pretty fun. We'll see how well they scale to higher levels.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A hypothetical class that can perform every role simultaneously. Does not exist, thankfully
I think you are underestimating the power of skills. Skills can perform like magic now. Some are even more powerful than magic because of no incapacitate for many social skills.
A rogue can perform well in every aspect of the game.
They even have control abilities with debilitations like the thief's making someone off-guard to the group with sneak attack or Ruffian debilitating a weakness.
They can use magic items with trick magic item and a maxed out skill with cheap consumables.
Amazing combat ability.
Legendary perception. All three saves give the bonus on a critical success which you can improve to Master with a general feat. So the rogue ends with Legendary Perception, Master Fort, Legendary Reflex, and Master will.
There is no way to fight alone like say an S-tier wizard in PF1 if that is what you mean. But the Rogue is incredibly versatile and scales even better at higher level. With the use of skills, they can shine in every aspect of the game.
Exploration, Combat, and Downtime.
Rogue is crazy strong. That level 19 Master Strike ability is a mook destroyer.
I might agree with you up to level 10, but past 10 and as you reach the higher levels the rogue really starts to stand above the other martial classes as it starts building up the legendary skills and skill feats.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
If we're talking about the original concept of a tier list, it's based on how much a class can take over several other classes of a lower tier, a mix of flexibility and power, right? I think if you try to translate that into PF2e, accounting for guaranteed 3 legendary skills, the easy ability to archetype and the lowered ceiling of spells, the tiers would be something like:
The original tier lists in 3.5 were GM tools, fundamentally: the spread was so wide that putting a tier 5 class in a party where everyone else is tier 1-2 would leave one player functionally incapable of being useful without massive GM intervention and the other players actively avoiding just doing everything themselves.
The list was a warning to not let players do that because someone is going to have a bad time.
Here's the old descriptions:
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.
Tier 2: Has as much raw power as the Tier 1 classes, but can't pull off nearly as many tricks, and while the class itself is capable of anything, no one build can actually do nearly as much as the Tier 1 classes. Still potentially campaign smashers by using the right abilities, but at the same time are more predictable and can't always have the right tool for the job. If the Tier 1 classes are countries with 10,000 nuclear weapons in their arsenal, these guys are countries with 10 nukes. Still dangerous and easily world shattering, but not in quite so many ways. Note that the Tier 2 classes are often less flexible than Tier 3 classes... it's just that their incredible potential power overwhelms their lack in flexibility.
Tier 3: Capable of doing one thing quite well, while still being useful when that one thing is inappropriate, or capable of doing all things, but not as well as classes that specialize in that area. Occasionally has a mechanical ability that can solve an encounter, but this is relatively rare and easy to deal with. Can be game breaking only with specific intent to do so. Challenging such a character takes some thought from the DM, but isn't too difficult. Will outshine any Tier 5s in the party much of the time.
Tier 4: Capable of doing one thing quite well, but often useless when encounters require other areas of expertise, or capable of doing many things to a reasonable degree of competence without truly shining. Rarely has any abilities that can outright handle an encounter unless that encounter plays directly to the class's main strength. DMs may sometimes need to work to make sure Tier 4s can contribute to an encounter, as their abilities may sometimes leave them useless. Won't outshine anyone except Tier 6s except in specific circumstances that play to their strengths. Cannot compete effectively with Tier 1s that are played well.
Tier 5: Capable of doing only one thing, and not necessarily all that well, or so unfocused that they have trouble mastering anything, and in many types of encounters the character cannot contribute. In some cases, can do one thing very well, but that one thing is very often not needed. Has trouble shining in any encounter unless the encounter matches their strengths. DMs may have to work to avoid the player feeling that their character is worthless unless the entire party is Tier 4 and below. Characters in this tier will often feel like one trick ponies if they do well, or just feel like they have no tricks at all if they build the class poorly.
Tier 6: Not even capable of shining in their own area of expertise. DMs will need to work hard to make encounters that this sort of character can contribute in with their mechanical abilities. Will often feel worthless unless the character is seriously powergamed beyond belief, and even then won't be terribly impressive. Needs to fight enemies of lower than normal CR. Class is often completely unsynergized or with almost no abilities of merit. Avoid allowing PCs to play these characters.
Tier 1 and 6 don't really exist in PF2, and I'm not convinced Tier 2 does either. And even Inventor is capable of getting out of tier 5, it's not a good class but it's not "3.5 Samurai" bad.
I have experience only with the characters in my campaigns. My PF2-converted Ironfang Invasion campaign had two rogues, a champion, a druid, a monk, a ranger, and a sorcerer. My Fistful of Flowers and A Few Flowers More mini-campaign had a barbarian, kineticist, psychic, rogue, swashbuckler, playtest animist, and playtest exemplar, all leshies. My Strength of Thousands campaign has two bards, a champion, a kineticist, a magus, a rogue, and a wizard. A few playtest characters have joined the campaigns, but I ought not judge a class by its playtest, and I will leave out the two playtest characters from A Fistful of Flowers. That gives four rogues, two bards, two champions, two kineticists, a barbarian, a druid, a magus, a monk, a psychic, a ranger, a sorcerer, a swashbuckler, and a wizard--13 distinct classes out of 27.
Rogues are popular, versatile, and fully functional in combat. S tier.
Bards are popular and good for roleplaying. In combat they offer both built-in support and spellcasting. A tier.
Champions are popular and excellent at defending themselves and the party. Their strong reactions break past the usual limits on actions. A tier.
The druid is a versatile spellcaster with many good combat spells. A tier.
The monk is solid at combat, mobile on the battlefield to help whoever needs it, and defends themselves well. A tier.
The sorcerer is a versatile spellcaster with many good support spells. A tier.
Kineticists are popular and versatile. Their combat abilities feel a little weak but their versatility gives them many options to exploiting the particular limitations of their opponents. B tier.
The barbarian is exceptional at combat. B tier.
The magus is exceptional at combat. B tier.
The psychic is a spellcaster with some good combat spells. B tier.
The ranger is good at combat. C tier.
The pre-Remaster swashbuckler is good at combat and mobile on the battlefield, but has trouble gaining panache against high-level enemies. D tier. The Remastering changes probably raise the swashbuckler to C tier.
The wizard is a spellcaster with reasonable battlefield-control spells. C tier.
However, for these individual player characters the player mattered as much as the class. My wife, a grandmaster tactician, played a rogue, kineticist, and bard. Her character always found something significant to contribute. Another player who played the ranger, playest animist, and bard barely develops her characters' abilities, often forgetting to select feats or spells, so her characters tend toward mediocre despite the class. A player who loves combat optimization played the druid, swashbuckler, and magus, which boosted the combat effectiveness of the druid and magus, but highlighted the weakness of the pre-Remaster swashbuckler. A newbie player who left for college after the 1st campaign played a rogue. Despite her inexperience she was pulled her weight with sniper tactics and then became extremely valuable once her Precise Debilitation feat made opponents off-guard to every PC.
I treat popularity among my players as a significant asset, because Pathfinder is not just a combat game. It is immersive roleplaying and a class should fit what the player wants to roleplay.
Community & Social Media Specialist
|
| 12 people marked this as a favorite. |
While I won't make a full tier list right now, I want to say something controversial and yet so brave lol
I love investigators. I feel empowered by gaining information. The Pathfinder Tales books that involve, to ME, the most powerful and intriguing stories are the ones surround investigator class characters.
All this being said, I'm aware that an investigator in combat is about to do some razzle dazzle in a corner and likely not actually... kill anything lmao BUT! I STILL LOVE MY NERDY DUDES (gender neutral)!! AND I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT! INVESTIGATOR S TIER IN MY HEART! IT'S MY SILLY OPINION!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All this being said, I'm aware that an investigator in combat is about to do some razzle dazzle in a corner and likely not actually... kill anything lmao
So I find this really amusing because in my Strength of Thousands game, the Investigator is nicknamed "The Terminator". He got that name because his go-to strategy is "shoot it in the face with a bow" and it's gotten him a lot of kills.
He recently picked up a Fatal firearm, so he may be doing even more of this in the future.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think one of the issues that gets investigators rated a bit lower in general is a lot of what they do sort of needs GM buy in/support. To really shine they need lots of stuff to investigate. A very flavorful and fun class but some tables just don't let them play to their strengths.
But if you have a gm and an adventure that plays to their strength you can go full on sherlock holms goodness.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think one of the issues that gets investigators rated a bit lower in general is a lot of what they do sort of needs GM buy in/support. To really shine they need lots of stuff to investigate. A very flavorful and fun class but some tables just don't let them play to their strengths.
But if you have a gm and an adventure that plays to their strength you can go full on sherlock holms goodness.
Doesn't help that any other character can just investigate themselves. Don't need the gm to point it out to you if you just know enough mystery tropes or have enough OSR experience to know what to look for.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think one of the issues that gets investigators rated a bit lower in general is a lot of what they do sort of needs GM buy in/support.
And the rest are things rogues can already do and better.
I personally feel all the investigation stuff could have been its own archetype rather than making a class that's almost identical to the rogue but nerfed to accomodate for the investigation abilities.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A hypothetical class that can perform every role simultaneously. Does not exist, thankfullyI think you are underestimating the power of skills. Skills can perform like magic now. Some are even more powerful than magic because of no incapacitate for many social skills.
Oh, I do agree that skills are powerful. That's why I said everyone getting three legendary skills is such a big shift in ability to contribute. That said, double skills didn't make it into consideration for A for the same reason as Cleric did - you can just cover that with two characters with good planning.
B+ is very much the 'will make other classes feel defunct in this role' tier, though. It's just not an A (by my own judgement) because nobody's going to look at a rogue spending 3 actions to cast Bless off a scroll and go 'ah, yes, no need for status bonus'. Only the Animist gets the privilege of giving themselves Legendary Thievery, 10d4 x rank healing and not only the divine spell list but also basically every effect you want from the other lists at zero build cost
I would not cast bless with my rogue.
I was thinking more 4th level invis all the time with Blank Slate level 16 feat which is basically Hidden Mind all the time for free.
Animist doesn't have that capability. Not sure why you think they do. Giving yourself Legendary Thievery without the magic items, feats, or dexterity to support it isn't a great use of it. What makes Legendary Thievery great? Just the ranks? No. It's feats like Quick Unlock, Pickpocket, and Legendary Thief. That's what makes Legendary Thievery so great. As a rogue with Legendary Thievery, maxed out dex, and an item to boost Legendary Thievery can sneak in, steal the items off a person before they even notice. Leave guards or monsters standing there with nothing.
Just getting a Legendary in a skill doesn't mean much if you don't have the skill feats to make that skill shine.
I'm playing an animist right now. Your statements are false. The animist has very limited spell slots to access apparition spells. It otherwise works off the divine list and has limited spells on the divine list.
It can only cast one vessel spell at a time. To do more than one is action intensive to get started and maintain it.
Rogue is a fluid to play class with many passive abilities that work without casting or hoop jumping.
Gang Up is passive flanking for the rogue and allies.
Opportune Backstab works off a very easy to activate trigger that is any other martial in the group will do normally.
Debilitations work off sneak attack which they do anyway with no action cost.
Rogue thief can stick 2d6 additional sneak attack damage on the target indefinitely.
Blank Slate is a passive that operates much like Hidden Mind.
Saves better than the animist by a good amount.
AC higher than the animist.
Double Debilitations as part of the class chassis.
Master Strike at level 19 which gives a free one shot death strike on any target.
You can build a ranged sniper at high level able to sneak attack from far away while being extremely hard to locate.
Legendary Perception which gives access to the General Feat that gives true seeing all the time.
Your animist abilities like healing cost a focus point which the animist runs out of in a fight whereas a rogue has no substantial focus point abilities. Their abilities work all the time, often passively with no action cost. That's the ultimate action economy having no action cost to do it.
I'll see if the animist is S tier as I work mine up. But at level 4, it's just ok. The casting is far more limited than you claim. Sorc and even oracle better caster than the animist in terms of overall resources.
|
Community & Social Media Specialist
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So I find this really amusing because in my Strength of Thousands game, the Investigator is nicknamed "The Terminator". He got that name because his go-to strategy is "shoot it in the face with a bow" and it's gotten him a lot of kills.
He recently picked up a Fatal firearm, so he may be doing even more of this in the future.
Oh absolutely!!! 100000%!!!
|
Community & Social Media Specialist
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think one of the issues that gets investigators rated a bit lower in general is a lot of what they do sort of needs GM buy in/support. To really shine they need lots of stuff to investigate. A very flavorful and fun class but some tables just don't let them play to their strengths.
But if you have a gm and an adventure that plays to their strength you can go full on sherlock holms goodness.
This right here!!!! If you have a GM that sees your passion for the class and wants to make sure you still have fun, it can be done!!! Please GM's hear my plea! We can have both brains and brawn!
Commander at C feels way to low. In fact, the more I see commander in play the more I think it could probably be on S tier.
[...]
The commander is really strong.
I don't dispute most of that (except Plant Banner¹ & Gather to Me!²).I've seen a Commander totally own with a Fighter & Rogue in the party.
But I've also played a Commander in a party where the only "martials" were a Guardian and a Summoner. There's one strong non-martial tactic, Slip & Sizzle, but that only works with blaster casters.
The Commander is a support-class that is extremely reliant upon big hit martials in your party, like a Fighter, Barbarian, Rogue, et.al. But if your party has none of those, e.g. Alchemists, Kineticists, control/buff/debuff casters, or the like, then the Commander is crap and pretty weak in terms of their own damage. Your biggest moments will be when Mountaineering or Naval Training comes up.
In other words, the strength of the Commander comes not so much from the class itself, but from your party having S-/A-tier martials. At least support casters can work with pretty much any party class composition, but the Commander is doomed if the "wrong" classes are present. This is a significant downside to the Commander that makes me rank that class lower.
¹: Plant Banner is very dangerous. The moment you plant the banner, you lose all your brandish tactics – your beloved Strike Hard and Demoralizing Charge – and if it's stolen/destroyed, your party is frightened and the Commander loses all tactics (as your banner aura is gone). If your GM never has enemies go after your banner, then you'll be fine, but otherwise you're just one Interact action or Disintegrate spell away from being a totally useless character who just frightened his party. [Fun fact: having a Ghost in your party makes this so much easier, as they can make your banner incorporeal and you just need ghost-touch gloves.]
²: Gather to Me! is usually the most powerful in the first round of combat, but one frequent obstacle is Commanders winning initiative (Warfare Lore + INT). This means your party doesn't have Reactions to spend on your tactics. You can give out 1 reaction (or more, at higher levels) or Delay to remedy that, but this comes at a price. After the first round, people usually want to keep their reactions for more important things. It has a similar problem as the Thousand League Sandals in this regard. At low levels, the Loose Time's Arrow spell leaves this tactic in the dust – and at high levels Haste (7) does.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think one of the issues that gets investigators rated a bit lower in general is a lot of what they do sort of needs GM buy in/support. To really shine they need lots of stuff to investigate. A very flavorful and fun class but some tables just don't let them play to their strengths.
But if you have a gm and an adventure that plays to their strength you can go full on sherlock holms goodness.
One of my Pathfinder hot takes (if you can call it that) is that Investigator should be uncommon or even rare to flag this exact dynamic.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One of my Pathfinder hot takes (if you can call it that) is that Investigator should be uncommon or even rare to flag this exact dynamic.I think one of the issues that gets investigators rated a bit lower in general is a lot of what they do sort of needs GM buy in/support. To really shine they need lots of stuff to investigate. A very flavorful and fun class but some tables just don't let them play to their strengths.
But if you have a gm and an adventure that plays to their strength you can go full on sherlock holms goodness.
Yeah, investigator seems like a feast or famine class. It will either be sub-par in a traditional hack-and-slash dungeon crawl or dominate all exploration and downtime in an intrigue adventure, where exploration and downtime are prominent.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Tiers are probably depending on whether it's specialized effectiveness or universal competence and flexibility. Any tier list focusing on being able to do anything and minimal weaknesses Animist is the example of S tier, if it's focused best at what it does, then you have something like Fighter as your example of S tier. In the alternate scales animist and fighter will be in A tier. If you say ranking is either that adaptive flexibility or being incredibly good at what it does, Animist and Fighter are both S. Then A tier is going to be flexible or focused characters who are not quite as pushed, and B the clunky versions. Maybe Barbarian is our focused A tier (though arguably S) and Magus is our B tier clunky focused character. Just to give examples. Methodology matters a lot when it comes to what is in your top and bottom tiers
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
My opinion?
S-tier: Sorcerer
A-tier: Animist, Alchemist
B-tier: Barbarian, Bard
C-tier: Commander, Cleric
D-tier: Druid
F-tier: FighterI may have misunderstood the task…
I feel terrible for the Wizard
|
Note: even the poor classes are playable.
Excellent Classes that go beyond just being good
- Fighter: solid martial chassis, many solid feats, and the higher accuracy that just makes everything easier. The "pick your weapon" choice enables a lot of different builds.
- Rogue: exceptional chassis (three saves that go to success->crit, legendary perception), strong class features (sneak attack, deny advantage, debilitation, master strike) and a couple of insane feats (gang up, opportune backstab) and many just plain good feats.
Good Classes that do what they promise, and do it very well
- Thaumaturge: damage output close to a barbarian, but with more of an out of combat game as well, and general versatility
- Sorcerer: lots of spells, strong focus spells, good feats
- Guardian: really effective defence
- Champion: really effective defence
- Bard: buffs are good, there are strong occult spells (but it also has some big blind spots) and you have a solid chassis
- Cleric: good spell list, divine font
Fine Classes that do what they promise
- Ranger
- Barbarian
- Magus
- Monk
- Druid
- Alchemist
- Exemplar
Poor Classes with some problem holding them back.
- Investigator: most adventures don't have a mystery so complicated that you needed the extra narrative crowbar for it, and their combat loop is just awkward. Why not play a magus, thaumaturge, alchemist or rogue who investigates things?
- Swashbuckler: it's functional now, but the extra finisher damage doesn't justify the awkwardness of being locked out of further attack actions.
- Gunslinger: guns are poor, the class spends all its budget making them adequate
- Psychic: cantrips are the guns of the spells. This class spends all its budget trying to make cantrips almost like real spells, and hands in being able to cast enough real spells to do it. Sorcerers tend to just have much better focus spells too.
- Wizard: most schools are too meh in their spell selection. You get few base skills because you're an intelligence class, so basically got tricked. And having a lot of skills is so-so if you can't keep upgrading all those extra skills. Also, intelligence skills really lack strong skill feats.
- Witch: awkward action economy and the hexes and familiars just don't seem to justify the fragile chassis. Also, see wizard intelligence.
- Kineticist: too different from other classes to profit from a lot of archetypes or loot, and doesn't get enough content in new books
Not rated due to lack of experience
- Animist
- Commander
- Summoner
- Inventor
- Oracle
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Tiers are probably depending on whether it's specialized effectiveness or universal competence and flexibility. Any tier list focusing on being able to do anything and minimal weaknesses Animist is the example of S tier, if it's focused best at what it does, then you have something like Fighter as your example of S tier. In the alternate scales animist and fighter will be in A tier. If you say ranking is either that adaptive flexibility or being incredibly good at what it does, Animist and Fighter are both S. Then A tier is going to be flexible or focused characters who are not quite as pushed, and B the clunky versions. Maybe Barbarian is our focused A tier (though arguably S) and Magus is our B tier clunky focused character. Just to give examples. Methodology matters a lot when it comes to what is in your top and bottom tiers
I made my tier list based on how well they handle PF2 gameplay.
There is no analogue to the Tier list for PF1 as PF2 doesn't play like PF1. There is no class that is a God Wizard or anything in PF2. There aren't many bad classes either. The psychic is the worst class I've seen and even it is playable, but by PF2 standards way behind other classes in overall capability. Doesn't much stand out in any aspect of the game like say even the Investigator who may not be exciting for combat, but in the right campaign they are top tier. In Agents of Edgewatch, the Investigator made that campaign easy to run and was easily figuring out every clue.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you play dual class games at all, Summoner is a top tier dual class for a caster. Gives the whole feel of summoning a powerful creature and has amazing action economy for casting.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would not cast bless with my rogue.I was thinking more 4th level invis all the time with Blank Slate level 16 feat which is basically Hidden Mind all the time for free.
Animist doesn't have that capability. Not sure why you think they do. Giving yourself Legendary Thievery without the magic items, feats, or dexterity to support it isn't a great use of it. What makes Legendary Thievery great? Just the ranks? No. It's feats like Quick Unlock, Pickpocket, and Legendary Thief. That's what makes Legendary Thievery so great. As a rogue with Legendary Thievery, maxed out dex, and an item to boost Legendary Thievery can sneak in, steal the items off a person before they even notice. Leave guards or monsters standing there with nothing.
Just getting a Legendary in a skill doesn't mean much if you don't have the skill feats to make that skill shine.
I'm playing an animist right now....
I feel like you're misunderstanding my tier list a little...
The rogue is very good at its job. That's why it's B+, being good at being a martial and the best with skills in terms of breadth. And a lot of that is on class features, so it can archetype into things like half casting, hence the B+ following the 3.PF tier philosophy. But it cannot be a legendary caster of any tradition, for instance.
Animation is A- because it will underperform any B+ or even C+ like barbarians and sorcerers that focus on their lane. But they're the only A class because they can decide, every 10 min, if they want to be the class with 5 Legendary skills. Or be a bad martial by shape-shifting. Or cast all the fire spells on a fire weak enemy, or Quandry on a boss. Without any build resources, mind you, so you can get even more skills or martial abilities that work shapeshifted or more spell slots or focus spells or whatever. That's A quality.
What do you mean? The skills they get are Lore skills only. Very limited function. And as far as skills like crafting, these skills only become good with skill feats. You can't get craftig long enough make anything.
Only a handful of the focus spells are any good.
This is not how the animist works. You still have to specialize to do the thing you want to do well. If you make a Witness to Ancient Battles animist, they still have to have a combat stat that works to make doing melee battle good.
If someone were listening to your description of the animist, they would be very, very disappointed when they played it.
PF2 has three different modes of play: combat, exploration, and downtime. The rogue is good at all three of those, much better than the animist at nearly every one.
You keep thinking your spells can say outdo a rogue gathering information in a city or something like that. They really can't. Or a rogue using diplomacy or intimidation. Skills operate much like spells now and with skill feats can obtain a similar result.
So the rogue can perform the stuff you keep bringing up far better than an animist that would lack the skill feats to make skills shine, not do as much damage, and require far more prep time to even try to compete with a rogue at multiple facets of the game.
It's false the animist gets five Legendary skills of worth. They get the standard three and two lore skills with maybe one they could pick up from a vessel spell with no feat support for it. These are all very limited and the rogue can do what they do without a focus spell spent and do it all day while doing superior single target damage all day and stealth and scout better and use social skills better and match the animist with skills that are equivalent to what spells do. If they need some spell power, they can use trick magic item with a secondary skill.
Anyone making both classes will find the rogue outperforms the animist i the high level game, noticeably so.