Classes into tiers

[Sadrik]

Realizing this will be controversial and everyone has their pet class that they will want to promote up a tier. I personally look at the tiers as how strongly and mechanically unique the classes are.

Tier 1 (Common)
Fighter
Cleric
Wizard
Rogue

Tier 2 (Uncommon)
Druid C/W
Ranger F/R
Sorcerer W variant
Paladin F/C
Bard R/W

Tier 3 (Rare) Theme?
Barbarian F variant
Warlock Sorcerer variant
Warlord F variant
Psion Sorcerer variant
Monk F variant

Tier 4 Theme?
everything else

Where should the classes end and the themes begin?

 

[Tony Vargas]

Tier 1 might as well be "Source."

 

[the Jester]

If you are defining them in terms of strong mechanical uniqueness, I think the sorcerer would traditionally be more a tier 3 class (seriously, not much different from a wizard, at least historically) and the warlock tier 2 (much farther from a wizard than a sorcerer is).

If paladin and ranger are emblematic of the level of uniqueness you need for tier 2, I think you can put the warlord there too.

 

[Deadboy]

I would vote all the classes as tier 1 "strongly and mechanically unique."

 

[Herremann the Wise]

I disagree with Rogue being tier one, I'd knock it back down to tier two. My reasoning is twofold:

*In terms of combat, I see the rogue as a pure derivative of the fighter or martialist.
*By trying to have the rogue as the "skill monkey", I think it sucks away too much of that oxygen from the other classes. Why can't all classes be particularly skilful? By erasing the rogue, you allow the other classes to breath up and neatly subsume that former space.

As such I'd replace the rogue with the "Primal" character (thus the core neatly represents the primary four 4e sources). Therefore you have:
- The Martialist [Specializing in skilful and powerful non-magical pursuits]
- The Wizard [Specializing in the "taint" of unnatural arcane magic]
- The Priest [Specializing as a conduit between the Deities and their Celestial Servants and the Mortal Realm.
- The Primalist [Specializing in spirits and the spiritual realm overlaying the material plane].

These are like different platters from which characters can take their stuff. Like primary colours, it is when you start mixing these that the tier two/three classes are produced. Mix the martialist and priest to get the cleric/paladin. Mix the Martialist/Primalist to get the barbarian on one side of this spectrum or the shaman at the other. Mix the wizard and the primalist to get the Voodoo guy or the priest and the primalist to get the Necromancer. Different from what has been chosen for 5e sure but if I was starting the whole thing from scratch, that is what I would do.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Blood & Bones]

Realizing this will be controversial and everyone has their pet class that they will want to promote up a tier. I personally look at the tiers as how strongly and mechanically unique the classes are.

They are already thinking in this direction... making elements of the game "common" "uncommon" and "rare". Common elements being those that are basic to the game, uncommon elements are ones that are popular, but can easily removed from the game, and rare elements are those weird/interesting things that have a small fan-base, but isn't really popular.

Examples: Fight (common), Barbarian (uncommon), Psychic Warrior (rare).
Alternatively: Elf (common), Drow (uncommon), Winged Elf (rare).

 

[Blood & Bones]

I disagree with Rogue being tier one, I'd knock it back down to tier two. My reasoning is twofold:

1) OD&D is the only version that matters, and Rogues were optional in the original game.
2) I like my traps deadly, and my doors locked!

<jk>

 

[mkill]

How does this improve the game? I just don't see how this affects the game at all, it's a label like power sources in 4E. Remove it and the game stays the same.

 

[Mallus]

Question: what does this accomplish?

They only categorization that's remotely useful is general vs. specific, ie.

General (or archetypal) class: fighter.

Specific (or variant) class: paladin.

 

[Fifth Element]

How does this improve the game? I just don't see how this affects the game at all, it's a label like power sources in 4E. Remove it and the game stays the same.

Question: what does this accomplish?

As stated in the OP, it seems to be an attempt to determine where class should end and theme should begin. It's not an argument that some classes should be designated "Tier 1" in the game itself. It's a design consideration.