Author Topic: Tier System For Classes (Repost)  (Read 466245 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

The Lurker

  • That monkey with the orange ass cheeks
  • ****
  • Posts: 258
Re: Tier System For Classes (Repost)
« Reply #60 on: August 13, 2009, 05:09:22 PM »
Q:  Why is my favorite class too low?  It should TOTALLY be much higher!

A:  Remember, you're probably more experienced with your favorite class than with other classes.  Plus, your personality probably fits well with the way that class works, and you probably are better inspired to work with that class.  As such, whatever your favorite class is is going to seem stronger for you than everyone else.  This is because you're simply going to play your favorite class in a more skillfull way... plus you'll be blinded to the shortcomings of that class, since you probably don't care about those anyway (they match with things that you as a player probably don't want to do anyway).  As such, if I did this right most people should think their favorite class is a little too low, whether that class is Fighter or Monk or Rogue or whatever else.  If everybody looks at this system and sees that one or two of their favorite classes are a tier or so too low, but most other stuff looks about right, I consider it a success.[/roll]


This answer makes no sense. So if I think a class should be better/worse based on experience my experience makes me biased and hence wrong?  So no matter what I say you will be right?  Think about what you are
implying here: I (JaronK) don't know the class as well as you, which makes my assessment of the class more objective.

 So a cardiologist should not write a paper on the effectivness of CABG procedure because he knows the heart inside out?  So a psychiatrist shouldn't give a lecture on antidepressant because his interest in psychiatry makes him biased?

Can you see how rediculous your reasoning is?

I have to call BS on this.   Just because you play a class that suits your playstyle or personality does not change absolutely change your OP skills. You run under that assumption and then claim that you are not under such biases is insulting and invalid.  You should listen to people with more experience on a class since they have more..... Experience.  If what you want is a system that will truly reflect what you are trying to achieve then other peoples feedback and experiences should be taken into account and not dismissed as bias (of which many have accused you of).

I can make a psychic warrior that can make a pretty good run at taking out The Big Five at higher levels if I really want to. Does that mean that psywars are Tier 1?
D&D isn't a PvP game.  It's a PvE game.  So, pretty darn good at taking out outsiders and dragons is impressive (because they generally are not glass bullets, unlike classed NPCs).

Point was that The Big Five are the strongest 'creatures' in the game, except (possibly) for deities (maybe). If I can compete on that level with a class that's widely regarded as the quintessential tier 3 class, I can take down just about anything, dragons included.

That's just because I'm good with them, though. They're by no means tier 1 (or even tier 2), and yet I optimize them well by default, and thus they're stronger for me than the average player.

Doesn't mean they're not tier 3, just that I'm better with them than your average werebear.
I noted dragons and outsiders because those tend toward "I'm a full spellcaster, but I also get more HD, BAB, and better saves than an equal CR spellcaster."  For instance, the planetar is a CR 16.  It casts as a level 17 cleric and has better stats than a level 17 cleric.  Planetars are probably the single hardest CR 16 creature to kill in print (because it's like a level 17 cleric, but better).  Dragons are hard because on top of having CR-4ish sorcerer casting (buffs...) they also have really good stats for their CR, double the fighter's bab, 5 natural attacks, and a breath weapon they can strafe with.  Oh, and they automatically have good AC and saves.

I mean, you can optimized your NPCs to the point that they aren't glass bullets, but dragons and outsiders have the racial ability "I have better stats than you" and casting on top (or SLAs for evil outsiders; blasphemy at will is still pretty potent).

But yeah, NPCs have the best offensive punch, but they are glass bullets.  Dragons and outsiders are harder to kill and have nearly the same offense, so they are a better "Dude, I just owned the hardest enemy" benchmark.

Samb

  • Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 319
Re: Tier System For Classes (Repost)
« Reply #61 on: August 13, 2009, 05:11:31 PM »
The whole point of optimizing a character/class is to take it to the top.  The concept of "moderate optimization" is a fallacy and doesn't make any sense to begin with. Either you make the best or you fail at it.  

Is this tier system for newbie DnDer's or for straight min/maxers?  Of course a less informed person would make an inferior psywar compared to someone like Lycan, yet JaronK would value the input of a novice over an expert like Lycan which is counterproductive in an arguement of what a class can and cannot do.

"Sure [class x] can all this based on what you said but since you are so good with [class x] I will only listen to a novice who says it can't all the cool stuff you just mentioned". If it sounds silly, that is because it is.

That is like saying you will only see a family doctor for your heart attack after he referred you a cardiologist. Even doctors admit when they are out of their expertise and JaronK's credibility would do well to take that into account.    

Anklebite

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2009
  • I shall play you the song of my people.
Re: Tier System For Classes (Repost)
« Reply #62 on: August 13, 2009, 05:29:37 PM »
the point of the tiers is that they are RELATIVE, and are assuming that all the chars are on the same level of optimization.  lets say you are really good with monks. you can make a tier 2-3 monk.  but still, a person who has the same relative skill with a sorcerer as you do with a monk will be tier 0-1, and blow you out of the water.  THAT is the point of the tier system: to compare the value of classes against eachother assuming the same level of optimization.
I do not suffer from paranoia; I enjoy every second of it.
Pioneer of the Ultimate Magus + Sublime Chord + Ultimate Magus combo

Samb

  • Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 319
Re: Tier System For Classes (Repost)
« Reply #63 on: August 13, 2009, 05:50:00 PM »
the point of the tiers is that they are RELATIVE, and are assuming that all the chars are on the same level of optimization.  lets say you are really good with monks. you can make a tier 2-3 monk.  but still, a person who has the same relative skill with a sorcerer as you do with a monk will be tier 0-1, and blow you out of the water.  THAT is the point of the tier system: to compare the value of classes against eachother assuming the same level of optimization.
No that is not the issue I am addressing. My beef is that JaronK refuses to listen to any feedback that might prove him wrong.

The_Mad_Linguist

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 8780
  • Simulated Thing
Re: Tier System For Classes (Repost)
« Reply #64 on: August 13, 2009, 05:50:20 PM »
The whole point of optimizing a character/class is to take it to the top.  The concept of "moderate optimization" is a fallacy and doesn't make any sense to begin with. Either you make the best or you fail at it.  

If we "make the best" then all classes and levels are equal, since we get Pun-Pun at level one.  
Linguist, Mad, Unique, none of these things am I
My custom class: The Priest of the Unseen Host
Planetouched Handbook
Want to improve your character?  Then die.

Samb

  • Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 319
Re: Tier System For Classes (Repost)
« Reply #65 on: August 13, 2009, 06:09:23 PM »
The whole point of optimizing a character/class is to take it to the top.  The concept of "moderate optimization" is a fallacy and doesn't make any sense to begin with. Either you make the best or you fail at it.  

If we "make the best" then all classes and levels are equal, since we get Pun-Pun at level one.  
Isn't that revealing....

Midnight_v

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2660
  • Dulce et decorum est pro alea mori.
Re: Tier System For Classes (Repost)
« Reply #66 on: August 13, 2009, 06:19:59 PM »
EDIT: The last 3 posts made it in while I was typing this.

Quote
The whole point of optimizing a character/class is to take it to the top.  The concept of "moderate optimization" is a fallacy and doesn't make any sense to begin with. Either you make the best or you fail at it.
  ???
 Something's wrong with this statement. I disagree with it. The point of optimization is NOT to take it to the top. Its more have the ability and knowledge set to achieve a certain goal. Using that weak definition then pun pun would be the ultimate goal for all of us. Which just isn't the fucking truth.
 This is why I hate the term "min/max -er; -ing etc.." because learning the minimums and maximums are jus the very basics of optimization. Sometimes finding the maximum is harder, but the entirety of that its finding the working paramaters, that I might achieve "MY GOAL". WHich "my goal" varies from person to person but to say the point of optimization is to take it to the top is stupid, or at least misleading. As it neglects important things like "oppurtunity cost".  Easily we could make a one trick pony that has the highest sneak attack damage EVER!!OVER9000!!!etc etc... that would be taking it to the top, in a sense but wouldn't in and of itself be a playable character.
I also wonder when I read
Quote
"moderate optimization" is a fallacy  
Fallacy, I don't think that word means what you think it mean... cause i have to wonder... well what fallacy is it?
Red herring? No. False dillemna? uh-uh. Well? There is actually a list of actually fallacies and things either fall under one of the existing ones or not but one of the flaws of Stromwind and Oberonni was that they used fallacy to define thier problems but apparently many people didn't know what the fuck they meant and use that word to try to describe ideas they Disagree with. Not to say that, this is the case with you but a fallacy that is not.
 Perhaps you mean to say "oxy-moron" though i've just explained that its not implicitly an oxymoron either despite you seeming assertion that it is so.
 The point of optimization is about goal setting and achieving that goal within a set parameter, if it was about taking it to the top in the terms of power (an actually using that power) everyone would be trying to beat pun pun with omnificers and the such, but thats not the case.

Quote
That's kind of what people have been complaining about.  JaronK hasn't been using the same base level of optimization for all classes.  He's been using his personal preferences.
People meaning you and a few others, but that second part about personal preferences is bullshit and you know it, or maybe you don't get it. Its actually about the what one picks up reading the Co boards for years, coupled with trying to actually sort that classes on power tiers while everyone is getting pissed that thier personal preferences are not recognized.
 I'm pretty much a fucking Beast when it comes to optimizing barbarians ( and other rage like builds) but I'm never going to be like *barbarians are totally tier 3* because I can fucking kill your warblade All day everyday and twice on sundays. However, similar things happen... quite a bit. Further, if no one contests it that shit will fly, but it just so happens that everyone showed up and started talking about that shit all at once, Jaronk I'm sure would listen to reason if harder to refute evidence were presented.
 I do like the whole rubic of ... for example. The sorceror can theoretically change the way we play completely.
[spoiler](Even without the use of gimmicks like ... wish farming etc... which basically totally shatters the game on other levels. I find that to be one of the rare times when a dm should totally Duex ex machina your ass and make it some total fucking plot point to send many inevitables at you at some inconvientent point)[/spoiler] by doing various things like becoming the fucking Henry Bendix "Weatherman" from Stormwatch and we're then playing that instead of D&D. (yes its a comic book. Yes you should google it.)
  Frankly I'm sure the beguiler could do it too... throughs SCM or something, but to argue that is like suddenly saying anyone with acess to this Prc, feat or gamebreaking combo. Is automatically considered tier X, which probbably shouldn't be the case.
\\\"Disentegrate.\\\" \\\"Gust of wind.\\\" \\\"Now Can we PLEASE resume saving the world?\\\"

Soda

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 484
Re: Tier System For Classes (Repost)
« Reply #67 on: August 13, 2009, 06:32:01 PM »
I like the way Frank did it in that link a while back. The tiers should account for the potential of a class but also better account for how easy it is to reach that potential.
For example, sorcerers are capable of great power, but can very easily fail due to poor spell selection. Druids, on the other hand, aren't so easy to mess up, because all you really need is the only core Druid feat, then turn into any animal, and you're doing fine.

Midnight_v

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2660
  • Dulce et decorum est pro alea mori.
Re: Tier System For Classes (Repost)
« Reply #68 on: August 13, 2009, 06:35:39 PM »
I like the way Frank did it in that link a while back. The tiers should account for the potential of a class but also better account for how easy it is to reach that potential.
For example, sorcerers are capable of great power, but can very easily fail due to poor spell selection. Druids, on the other hand, aren't so easy to mess up, because all you really need is the only core Druid feat, then turn into any animal, and you're doing fine.
That does sound pretty good. Could you post a link for that?
\\\"Disentegrate.\\\" \\\"Gust of wind.\\\" \\\"Now Can we PLEASE resume saving the world?\\\"

Samb

  • Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 319
Re: Tier System For Classes (Repost)
« Reply #69 on: August 13, 2009, 06:54:59 PM »
Wow midnight did I do something to make you into a grammer nazi?  Why don't you just calm (the fuck) down and read what I am really talking about, which is not the definition of optimization.

My beef was that JaronK sees no need to adjust any standing based on other people's experiences.  Look at my original post before malign me.  JaronK makes himself out to be objective, and we that use classes that he doesn't know as well as biased.  He creates a situation where he is always right, even on classes that he himself has little to no first hand knowledge.

"You know more hence I will not listen to you" Is essentially what he is saying.

High optimization for him might just be run of the mill optimization to someone familar with a given class.  However, if you point this out to him, he will more often than not cite: "you like the class hence you are bias and wrong" clause (2nd answer in his FAQ).  
« Last Edit: August 13, 2009, 06:57:21 PM by Samb »

Soda

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 484
Re: Tier System For Classes (Repost)
« Reply #70 on: August 13, 2009, 06:57:24 PM »
That does sound pretty good. Could you post a link for that?
Thar ya go.

Midnight_v

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2660
  • Dulce et decorum est pro alea mori.
Re: Tier System For Classes (Repost)
« Reply #71 on: August 13, 2009, 07:27:26 PM »
Wow midnight did I do something to make you into a grammer nazi?  Why don't you just calm (the fuck) down and read what I am really talking about, which is not the definition of optimization.

My beef was that JaronK sees no need to adjust any standing based on other people's experiences.  Look at my original post before malign me.  JaronK makes himself out to be objective, and we that use classes that he doesn't know as well as biased.  He creates a situation where he is always right, even on classes that he himself has little to no first hand knowledge.

"You know more hence I will not listen to you" Is essentially what he is saying.

High optimization for him might just be run of the mill optimization to someone familar with a given class.  However, if you point this out to him, he will more often than not cite: "you like the class hence you are bias and wrong" clause (2nd answer in his FAQ).  

Dude... I'm totally "the fuck" calm.  :lol
 Further I'm not a grammar nazi. I actually don't care if you misspell words or leave out ";" or "use who instead of whom". More like a Logicpimp so you handling my hoes incorrectly might get you bitchslapped. . . yeaaaah...

seriously though
 I just think that... "you like the class hence you are bias and wrong" clause (2nd answer in his FAQ).  many times is actually the case. Many people simply CAN NOT be objective.

However... I do see how the way jaronk phrases it can easily be used to to group think people or as an excuse to summararily throw arguments out. Now that... that would be wrong.

I don't see it as him saying "I'm right you're wrong, nyah" but I do understand how he could be admanant in what he's written thus far and before someone can be like...
"This guys not being adamnant, he's the one being BIAS and unwiling to listen to reason"
Someone has to address his actual argument.
 
  I found that explanation about how the sorceror can change the way we play the game, just on a whim one day to be a pretty high selling point personally. Though in a bubble I think sorceror sucks... its a 5 level class "if that" that gets a slightly retarded spell progression. Which means as a class... it fucking sucks, In my book.
 However... the brute power of the freedom to chose 9th level spells eventually or rather giving full spell caster progression is too damn much to just ignore and be like "this class is better equall, cause its gets every important spell plus has class abilities".
 Thing is... I think that each tier still needs better definition. Casting genesis and fighting evil from own demiplane using srcy and die + teleport kills... just changes everything.
Also accountants, and ... whatever... opening a buisness can be manipulated to generate exrta wealth and thats totally acceptable as they've made a few books describing it.

Lastly... I've no problem with you... you're generally pretty wity, actully. The idea that optimization is all about "building the best" seemed like an off comment is all.
have you read the Tao of optimization?
It just reimded me of that...

Quote
  .
A Druid is like a Cleric:
He lacks the power of a Wizard
Yet adds in versaitility.
This is the truth
Of the CoD:
Having 300 when you need 100 once
Is not optimal.
Having 100 whenever you need 100

Is
WHich is why saying its not always just about the MAXIMUUUUUMMM!@@!!SXXZZ
LOL
M_v



\\\"Disentegrate.\\\" \\\"Gust of wind.\\\" \\\"Now Can we PLEASE resume saving the world?\\\"

Samb

  • Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 319
Re: Tier System For Classes (Repost)
« Reply #72 on: August 13, 2009, 08:07:10 PM »
Assuming one has a bias and if they really have one are two completely different things.  Having a deeper understanding of a class is and being bias for it are not the same things and do not go hand in hand.

I dislike the Factotum, I have always loved rogues.  But even I have to admit my love for rogues is mostly fluff and RP reasons.  Mechanically factotum is just better.  I could take the same feats in rogue and more or less put them on a factotum and it would be theh same or better than a rogue.  But none of this has made me love a factotum.  (The thought of playing a nerd with an inferiority complex is just not appealing).

I am addressing his argument: having an understanding of a class and liking it does not make you bias 100% of the time.  It is illogical to dismiss input from people that is an expert just because you assumed they had a bias that very well might not even exist.  In fact it just makes JaronK look biased to his own rankings, and hiding behind his FAQ to resist any input.

The_Mad_Linguist

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 8780
  • Simulated Thing
Re: Tier System For Classes (Repost)
« Reply #73 on: August 13, 2009, 08:23:11 PM »
Assuming one has a bias and if they really have one are two completely different things.  Having a deeper understanding of a class is and being bias for it are not the same things and do not go hand in hand.

I dislike the Factotum, I have always loved rogues.  But even I have to admit my love for rogues is mostly fluff and RP reasons.  Mechanically factotum is just better.  I could take the same feats in rogue and more or less put them on a factotum and it would be theh same or better than a rogue.  But none of this has made me love a factotum.  (The thought of playing a nerd with an inferiority complex is just not appealing).

I am addressing his argument: having an understanding of a class and liking it does not make you bias 100% of the time.  It is illogical to dismiss input from people that is an expert just because you assumed they had a bias that very well might not even exist.  In fact it just makes JaronK look biased to his own rankings, and hiding behind his FAQ to resist any input.
Meh, he has altered rankings before based on input.  If you want to suggest a rephrasing, feel free.
Linguist, Mad, Unique, none of these things am I
My custom class: The Priest of the Unseen Host
Planetouched Handbook
Want to improve your character?  Then die.

Brainpiercing

  • Hong Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 1475
  • Thread Killer
    • Email
Re: Tier System For Classes (Repost)
« Reply #74 on: August 13, 2009, 08:31:21 PM »
Quote
its a 5 level class "if that" that gets a slightly retarded spell progression. Which means as a class... it fucking sucks, In my book.

Ya sorcs suck. And Wizards are worse. Make it a specialist and suddenly it's only three levels long. Hell, that's only one level better than a fighter. Man, Wizards have got to suck.

Now take the Duskblade. Noone in his right mind takes less than thirteen levels of duskblade. Now that class must rock!




:)

JaronK

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
Re: Tier System For Classes (Repost)
« Reply #75 on: August 13, 2009, 11:16:55 PM »
My beef was that JaronK sees no need to adjust any standing based on other people's experiences.  Look at my original post before malign me.  JaronK makes himself out to be objective, and we that use classes that he doesn't know as well as biased.  He creates a situation where he is always right, even on classes that he himself has little to no first hand knowledge.

You seem to be assuming a lot here, and I'm not sure why.  I DO use other people's experiences.  However, I've found that everyone has favorite classes... classes that they work better on.  I do too (my favorites are generally skillmonkeys and necromancers).  It's just instinct.  As such, for every person there will be a few favorite classes that look to low on the system simply because they're good with that class and not with other classes.  I'm not very good with Druids for example... they just don't click for me.  Yet I can do all sorts of impressive stuff with a Factotum.  Does that mean Druids are worse than Factotums?  No, it means I like playing skillmonkeys, and my playstyle works better with them.

The point of what you quoted is not "I know better than you."  The point is "whichever class is your favorite will look too low to you."  When I play a Factotum, it's going to be far stronger than when I play a Favored Soul.  The point is also not "I won't listen to your opinion."  It's "your opinion might be colored by what classes you like better than others, and I'll take that into account."  I have used other people's arguments for where a class goes... I placed the Psychic Warrior based on Lurker's (and others') arguments, in fact, and that's also how the Eurdite got placed.  I've wavered a LOT on the Barbarian, Duskblade, and Hexblade based on people's arguments too.  But very often I'll have one or two people going off about how great one class is, and a bunch of others are saying the class just isn't as good, and in that case I tend to go with the idea that the people who are raving about the class probably just play it more and are more familiar with it.

But do you really want me to place the Fighter where someone like Aelrynth says it should go?  Should I place the Monk based on where Sir G. thinks Monks belong?  How about all the people who think Rogues are Tier 2 along with Sorcerers?  Or the people who think Sorcerers belong down near Tier 5 because they suck so much?

I do listen to people's arguments, and I take a long time to decide if I want to move a class (because if I keep switching every week it's just plain confusing).  I just also take into account that there may be some bias, and I ask that people not get offended if their favorite classes aren't quite as high as they think they should be.  Take it as a compliment... if you can make a Fighter totally outperform a Warblade, then you're probably quite good with Fighters.  Go you.  But please don't assume in that case that you're making Warblades as well as you make Fighters.

The FAQ entry is not to say "I don't need to listen to you."  It's to say "please don't be offended if your favorite class isn't as high as you think it should be."  Everyone's favorite class(es) should look too low to them.  That's just how it is.

Also, note that I do not assume "average optimization" or "high optimization" or "low optimization."  I assume equivalent optimization.  Any time I see someone arguing for where their class could be, I start trying to match what they did with classes one tier up or one tier down from them and see what I get.  For example, when Lurker started talking about Beguilers could do powerful things and get solid utility spells because they could take Arcane Disciple and get powerful spells, I realized that he was using the Complete books to add spells to their spell list, at a cost of needing Wisdom and one feat.  So I thought about what a Sorcerer doing the same thing would get... for the effective cost of one feat (since you would have taken a metamagic feat anyway most likely and you get another one free when you enter the class) and the inability to take other PrCs, a Sorcerer could take Mage of the Arcane Order.  Similar cost, also from the completes, with a similar goal (gain more spells) but suddenly instead of getting one or two solid powerful utility spells you get books and books of them.  So I felt comfortable that with similar optimization, a Sorcerer is still far stronger than a Beguiler.  Meanwhile, doing the same thing with a Warmage gets you something weaker than a Beguiler (since your base spell list is much worse).  So it all works out.  I read his arguments, but when applied to other classes they didn't quite work.

I will strongly disagree however with the idea that the point of optimization is to take it to the top.  Breaking games isn't fun (at least to me).  If I wanted, I could easily make Warblades that do near infinite damage, but that's hardly fun, so I don't.  I stopped making Shadowcraft Mages for similar reasons.  The point of optimization, in my opinion, is to make your character capable of doing what you think it should be capable of doing when you sit back and imagine what your character would be like.  If you want to play with world shattering power you can optimize for that, or you could just optimize to the point where your character is a particularly scary assassin (and has the abilities to back that up), or you could do what I recently did and make a character who was just really good at building stuff because he's on a personal mission to improve the world.  Could I make that last character able to instantly develop the whole world in any way he wants via flowing time genesis tricks?  Sure, but once I accomplish that goal the character's not fun to play anymore... at that point I'd retire.  So that's no fun.  So I don't think the point of optimization is to go for the max.  It's just to go where you want your character to go.

JaronK

Anklebite

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2009
  • I shall play you the song of my people.
Re: Tier System For Classes (Repost)
« Reply #76 on: August 14, 2009, 02:35:01 AM »
 :clap

I used to be of the school "WHAT!!?! monks are WAY better than THAT tier! look at THIS one!" but I realized that was just what I could do with a monk. using the same amount of trickery and skill to improve a higher tier class still blew my monk out of the water. splatbooking to all hell, I could get a mond that does about 116d8 worth of damage on a normal strike, and had the shadow sun healing/inflicting trick.... but the warblade could do infinite damage easier and earlier than I could do 116d8. 
I do not suffer from paranoia; I enjoy every second of it.
Pioneer of the Ultimate Magus + Sublime Chord + Ultimate Magus combo

The_Mad_Linguist

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 8780
  • Simulated Thing
Re: Tier System For Classes (Repost)
« Reply #77 on: August 14, 2009, 03:17:46 AM »
To make the guide more useful, it might be interesting to have a little rating of how optimization dependent a class is for effectiveness.  For example, the druid just needs a non-sucky wisdom and natural spell to rock rock on, even when played by a newbie, while a sorcerer can end up screwed for several levels if you started out with bad spells.

The warmage is rather optimization independent, as it is relatively* difficult to reduce or improve performance.


*Barring rainbow servant antics and the like.
Linguist, Mad, Unique, none of these things am I
My custom class: The Priest of the Unseen Host
Planetouched Handbook
Want to improve your character?  Then die.

Midnight_v

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2660
  • Dulce et decorum est pro alea mori.
Re: Tier System For Classes (Repost)
« Reply #78 on: August 14, 2009, 04:25:33 AM »
Quote
its a 5 level class "if that" that gets a slightly retarded spell progression. Which means as a class... it fucking sucks, In my book.

Ya sorcs suck. And Wizards are worse. Make it a specialist and suddenly it's only three levels long. Hell, that's only one level better than a fighter. Man, Wizards have got to suck.

Now take the Duskblade. Noone in his right mind takes less than thirteen levels of duskblade. Now that class must rock!

You're skill at sarcasm has pushed me from my chair... :lol

You know  what the hell I mean  :P. Its class feature are its spell progression, and theres no reason to play sorceror 6. So there might as well have been progression because the whole thing is just pre req for what ever prc your taking. Which is could have been better if ... I don't care to speculate. If. . . I suppose anything you do just makes it tier 1? Bah, I fail, at explanation.
*shoots self in brain. Waits for regeneration to kick in*



:)
\\\"Disentegrate.\\\" \\\"Gust of wind.\\\" \\\"Now Can we PLEASE resume saving the world?\\\"

JaronK

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
Re: Tier System For Classes (Repost)
« Reply #79 on: August 14, 2009, 01:05:52 PM »
To make the guide more useful, it might be interesting to have a little rating of how optimization dependent a class is for effectiveness.  For example, the druid just needs a non-sucky wisdom and natural spell to rock rock on, even when played by a newbie, while a sorcerer can end up screwed for several levels if you started out with bad spells.

The warmage is rather optimization independent, as it is relatively* difficult to reduce or improve performance.


*Barring rainbow servant antics and the like.

Something in the FAQ maybe?  Sure.

JaronK