Pathfinder Pathfinder: Wrath of the Righteous Pre-Release Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[Tacgnol]

By the way, what is this concept of class tiers - in my observations, it mainly signifies how much a class is twisting the core rules, or how much it can break the game?

It is less about raw power and more about versatility. A low tier character might be able to do one thing really well, like they might be amazing at dealing damage in combat but completely useless in all other situations.

A tier 1 character on the other hand is good in almost every situation, they can perform well in almost every combat, they can be extremely useful in social situations and they can probably provide a lot of utility generally.

As NJClaw says, it's of slightly less relevance in CRPGs as lots of situations don't apply.

 

[Lacrymas]

You also can't be as creative with spells as you can in PnP. The lowest tiers of characters aren't even good at what they are specialized to do, though, the DM has to break a sweat in order to create a campaign suitable for such characters. And when you mix up tiers of characters, oh boy.

 

[fantadomat]

You also can't be as creative with spells as you can in PnP. The lowest tiers of characters aren't even good at what they are specialized to do, though, the DM has to break a sweat in order to create a campaign suitable for such characters. And when you mix up tiers of characters, oh boy.

It depends on the group and the DM. Also a lot of spells could have a non combat roles.

 

[Lacrymas]

I meant you can't use the spells in CRPGs as creatively as you can in PnP due to the limitations of the medium.

 

[Tacgnol]

You also can't be as creative with spells as you can in PnP. The lowest tiers of characters aren't even good at what they are specialized to do, though, the DM has to break a sweat in order to create a campaign suitable for such characters. And when you mix up tiers of characters, oh boy.

I've noticed (at least in most of my pathfinder games), more experienced players often prefer to play lower tier characters as they enjoy the challenge of trying to optimise them.

I guess it depends on groups.

 

[Lacrymas]

If we go by the famous tier system for 3.5E, I'd say the best campaign for me would be characters of tier 3 and 4, i.e. no wizards, clerics, druids, artificers, erudites, favored souls, etc. If we limit the spell circle to like 6 at most (at level 19), I'd be ok with them too.

 

[Pink Eye]

About 2 more weeks till alpha!

 

[Lacrymas]

When is the race poll? And when do we get our accounts?

 

[InD_ImaginE]

When is the race poll? And when do we get our accounts?

Backerportal is supposed to be finished by this month.

If you pledged through Codex, DarkUnderlord or maybe Infinitron needs to actually do the backing over Paypal when Backerportal is finished, then he probably need to contact us to make our own ID, and then we need to wait for Owlcat to process that as well.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

I know, It is a silly question. I will not just create a thread to ask this and don't know any better place to post.

Between a LV 20 Hellfire Warlock from 3.5 D&D and a lv 20 Winter Witch from Pathfinder, who is stronger and why?

The barbarian.

 

[Pink Eye]

When is the race poll? And when do we get our accounts?

Race poll will come once they've processed the money, and have the backportal set up. So, sometime April I think.

 

[NJClaw]

I know, It is a silly question. I will not just create a thread to ask this and don't know any better place to post.

Between a LV 20 Hellfire Warlock from 3.5 D&D and a lv 20 Winter Witch from Pathfinder, who is stronger and why?

The barbarian.

One of my favorite things in D&D 3.5 is the alternative class feature in the Dungeonscape handbook that gives barbarians the ability to disarm traps because they can simply break them with brute force.

 

[Pink Eye]

By the way, what is this concept of class tiers - in my observations, it mainly signifies how much a class is twisting the core rules, or how much it can break the game?

Eh, class tiers are quite stupid.

 

[Harthwain]

I meant you can't use the spells in CRPGs as creatively as you can in PnP due to the limitations of the medium.

Not necessarily. A lot depends on how you implement the system.

 

[Rinslin Merwind]

Eh, class tiers are quite stupid.

Let me guess, because monks is doing badly according to these tiers for almost all editions?

 

[Pink Eye]

Eh, class tiers are quite stupid.

Let me guess, because monks is doing badly according to these tiers for almost all editions?

Yeah. Monk is considered weak in pnp. But in the video game he is quite powerful. That's why the class tiers are stupid. Another niche that is considered weak, but is quite capable, is TSS and Inquisitor.

 

[NJClaw]

Eh, class tiers are quite stupid.

Let me guess, because monks is doing badly according to these tiers for almost all editions?

Yeah. Monk is considered weak in pnp. But in the video game he is quite powerful. That's why the class tiers are stupid. Another niche that is considered weak, but is quite capable, is TSS and Inquisitor.

Pathfinder Monk is not "considered weak" according to class tiers, not even close. Pathfinder Monk is a tier 3 or 4 class, which means that there is at least one thing that they are very good at.

Tiers are not about "how strong" a class is, they are more about what a class can do. A Monk can fight while being very resilient and in Pathfinder they can do it very well, but that's all they can do. In a videogame adaptation like Kingmaker, they are an amazing class because the thing they are good at is one of the most important aspects in the game.

This said, I agree, class tiers are pointless if we are talking about videogames, but I think everybody agrees on this.

 

[Pink Eye]

Eh, class tiers are quite stupid.

Let me guess, because monks is doing badly according to these tiers for almost all editions?

Yeah. Monk is considered weak in pnp. But in the video game he is quite powerful. That's why the class tiers are stupid. Another niche that is considered weak, but is quite capable, is TSS and Inquisitor.

Pathfinder Monk is not "considered weak" according to class tiers, not even close. Pathfinder Monk is a tier 3 or 4 class, which means that there is at least one thing that they are very good at.

Tiers are not about "how strong" a class is, they are more about what a class can do. A Monk can fight while being very resilient and in Pathfinder they can do it very well, but that's all they can do. In a videogame adaptation like Kingmaker, they are an amazing class because the thing they are good at is one of the most important aspects in the game.

This said, I agree, class tiers are pointless if we are talking about videogames, but I think everybody agrees on this.

>but I think everybody agrees on this.
Oh god no. If I had a dollar for everyone that used Ineffect's metric on what's weak or strong, I'd be rich.

 

[Pink Eye]

Ah! I shouldn't have came back! Waiting for alpha is killing me! It's like I am waiting for Tangledeep to release all over again! Ahhh!

 

[mediocrepoet]

You've been here for like an hour.

 

[Pink Eye]

You've been here for like an hour.

It feels like that hour was an eternity!

 

[NJClaw]

Eh, class tiers are quite stupid.

Let me guess, because monks is doing badly according to these tiers for almost all editions?

Yeah. Monk is considered weak in pnp. But in the video game he is quite powerful. That's why the class tiers are stupid. Another niche that is considered weak, but is quite capable, is TSS and Inquisitor.

Pathfinder Monk is not "considered weak" according to class tiers, not even close. Pathfinder Monk is a tier 3 or 4 class, which means that there is at least one thing that they are very good at.

Tiers are not about "how strong" a class is, they are more about what a class can do. A Monk can fight while being very resilient and in Pathfinder they can do it very well, but that's all they can do. In a videogame adaptation like Kingmaker, they are an amazing class because the thing they are good at is one of the most important aspects in the game.

This said, I agree, class tiers are pointless if we are talking about videogames, but I think everybody agrees on this.

>but I think everybody agrees on this.
Oh god no. If I had a dollar for everyone that used Ineffect's metric on what's weak or strong, I'd be rich.

The tiers system has nothing to do with Ineffect. It's around since 2013, Ineffect wasn't even born yet.

 

[Pink Eye]

Eh, class tiers are quite stupid.

Let me guess, because monks is doing badly according to these tiers for almost all editions?

Yeah. Monk is considered weak in pnp. But in the video game he is quite powerful. That's why the class tiers are stupid. Another niche that is considered weak, but is quite capable, is TSS and Inquisitor.

Pathfinder Monk is not "considered weak" according to class tiers, not even close. Pathfinder Monk is a tier 3 or 4 class, which means that there is at least one thing that they are very good at.

Tiers are not about "how strong" a class is, they are more about what a class can do. A Monk can fight while being very resilient and in Pathfinder they can do it very well, but that's all they can do. In a videogame adaptation like Kingmaker, they are an amazing class because the thing they are good at is one of the most important aspects in the game.

This said, I agree, class tiers are pointless if we are talking about videogames, but I think everybody agrees on this.

>but I think everybody agrees on this.
Oh god no. If I had a dollar for everyone that used Ineffect's metric on what's weak or strong, I'd be rich.

The tiers system has nothing to do with Ineffect. It's around since 2013, Ineffect wasn't even born yet.

I am not talking about that tier system. I am talking about tiers in general. This idea that certain classes are weaker than others. The metric in which people use to rank them, and so on.

 

[Tacgnol]

Eh, class tiers are quite stupid.

Let me guess, because monks is doing badly according to these tiers for almost all editions?

Yeah. Monk is considered weak in pnp. But in the video game he is quite powerful. That's why the class tiers are stupid. Another niche that is considered weak, but is quite capable, is TSS and Inquisitor.

Pathfinder Monk is not "considered weak" according to class tiers, not even close. Pathfinder Monk is a tier 3 or 4 class, which means that there is at least one thing that they are very good at.

Tiers are not about "how strong" a class is, they are more about what a class can do. A Monk can fight while being very resilient and in Pathfinder they can do it very well, but that's all they can do. In a videogame adaptation like Kingmaker, they are an amazing class because the thing they are good at is one of the most important aspects in the game.

This said, I agree, class tiers are pointless if we are talking about videogames, but I think everybody agrees on this.

>but I think everybody agrees on this.
Oh god no. If I had a dollar for everyone that used Ineffect's metric on what's weak or strong, I'd be rich.

The tiers system has nothing to do with Ineffect. It's around since 2013, Ineffect wasn't even born yet.

I am not talking about that tier system. I am talking about tiers in general. This idea that certain classes are weaker than others. The metric in which people use to rank them, and so on.

Certain classes are weaker than others though. Even if a class excels at one area, there are probably classes that excel in that area and are more versatile to boot.

The tier system is extremely useful for GMs, as you can use it to assist you in balancing encounters. Obviously for CRPGs it is slightly less relevant as the situations are much more limited.

 

[LabRat]

Damn that Chinese virus and their communists. I hope it's not the end of world.