D&D 5E (2024) Class Tier List 1 Year Later.

[Paul Farquhar]

A bit DM and campaign dependent. Sorcerers decent in social pillar.

The party only needs one face, and sorcerers are competing with paladins and warlocks for that role. And if there is a bard they may as well go home.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

On the whole, I would say "good in combat" is a fairly meaningless measure. 5e combat is easy. A ranger with a broken leg would win, anything else is just overkill.

It's really what characters can do in non combat situations that matters, in particular, the things that shine the spotlight on the person playing that character, when there is no "my turn" crutch.

 

[Zardnaar]

The party only needs one face, and sorcerers are competing with paladins and warlocks for that role. And if there is a bard they may as well go home.

I'm not making assumptions about party compositions.

Also players like doing their wn things in skill checks at times or canvas a room or want things done quicker

 

[FrogReaver]

I'm not making assumptions about party compositions.

Also players like doing their wn things in skill checks at times or canvas a room or want things done quicker

that also means you cannot assume someone else good at charisma skills is not also in the party as there’s a lot of possibilities there.

 

[Zardnaar]

that also means you cannot assume someone else good at charisma skills is not also in the party as there’s a lot of possibilities there.

Same argument applies to wizard though. Skill checks can do a lot of it along with knowing languages.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

that also means you cannot assume someone else good at charisma skills is not also in the party as there’s a lot of possibilities there.

Statistically, chances are, there is going to be someone else with good charisma in the party. Frankly, sorcerers cannot be "S" tier so long as bards exist.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Same argument applies to wizard though. Skill checks can do a lot of it along with knowing languages.

Having seen a party seriously struggle without anyone who can detect magic as a ritual, that really should not be underestimated. And of course who goes into a dungeon without sending a familiar to scout it out first?! Warlock familiars are better, but as expendable scouts wizard familiars do fine.

 

[Zardnaar]

Statistically, chances are, there is going to be someone else with good charisma in the party. Frankly, sorcerers cannot be "S" tier so long as bards exist.

Its a minor part of Sorcerers power. I put both in S tier. Bards are better at social, Sorcerers generally at damage/combat.

I had both in recent games. Sometimes NPCs want to talk to specific person. Not the "face"

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Yeah totally agree but mostly this is a result of Zard trying to fill out the entire span with Best at S-Tier and Worst at D-Tier just because that's how Tier lists typically work.

Really it ought to be the latter of what you wrote above with Sorcerer at S-Tier, Wizard at A-Tier, and the worst classes as B-Tier, because in reality no classes are actually all that bad. Even the worst class (Ranger) is totally playable now and not really all that far behind the best class.

I think there's still room for classes to be C-tier. 5.5e has mostly addressed the D-tier issues, but there's still some....I guess I would call it +/- factors involved. IMO, Ranger has been lifted from D to C by 5.5e--it passes.

Wizard is A+ if you have either a GM who lets you pick up spells frequently, or (as noted) fewer encounters per day. The former definitely isn't guaranteed, but the latter is in my experience almost universal. That is, I've literally never had a single 5e group where the group actually did do 6-8 combat encounters per day. Maybe, MAYBE an average of 5 encounters per day. If you have both of these effects, Wizard is absolutely S-tier even at lower levels.

Conversely, if your group is starved for short rests, I could see Warlock, Fighter (especially Battle Master), and Barbarian becoming X- or even dropping a tier.

Certainly the tier ranges are much better than 3e's tiers were, but that's damning with faint praise given how absolutely horrendous the balance problems and tier differences were in 5e. "Better than one of the most broken games ever published" is hardly a difficult bar to clear.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Its a minor part of Sorcerers power. I put both in S tier. Bards are better at social, Sorcerers generally at damage/combat.

Which as I pointed out, doesn't matter. Bards are better at control, which is were casters matter, and they can heal, and buff, and are much much better at social. And the things that bards don't do well wizards cover better than sorcerers.

And if you have INT based skills, there is a very good chance that there is no one else better than you at those.