On second thought, let's not try to poke holes in each other's ranged DPR builds. It's not quite worth it.
Poke away, progress is made through constructive criticism(which yours was), that build however was just tinkering around in Orc pub and reading guides on DPR possibilities, of course, every build will have weaknesses and it wasn't meant to be "this is the best way to do it" merely an example of why I think Fighter (and Barbarian) have the highest potential DPR from lvl 1 when compared to other classes
I think that might be the first time anyone on here has taken my constructive criticism as such, but I could be suffering from selective memory. Either way, I'm touched. Thanks.
My suggestion would be to divide the rankings into levels 1–4, 5–10, 11–16, and 17–20 to correspond with the Tiers of Play described in Chapter 1 of the Dungeon Master's Guide. The game is designed to have them as power level break points; also, they're used as restrictions in Adventurers League.
Hmmm; I think you're underestimating druids for "Buffs/Heal" and "Control/Debuffs" at least in early/mid levels. (I haven't played enough high-level 5E to really judge there.) They're full casters with a wide selections of options, including some great area-control spells no one else gets. For healing, they've got Cure Wounds, Healing Word, Lesser and Greater Restoration, etc. And don't forget the expanded list for Land druids.
I think you're quite a bit off-base with sorcerers.
I disagree with almost every Early game ranking you gave except Tank, which is definitely a D. I personally would put it as a D+ for Mid and Late game as well (considering the D6 Hit Die; C is probably acceptable if they choose to go Draconic).
First of all, while yes, any class can do some awesome damage if geared for it, in comparison to other classes, I would say Early game Sorcerer DPR is a solid C with Mid and Late game being a B based on your criteria (really good when specced for it).
Second, a D/C/C in Utility/Skills?? Whaaat? First of all, any class with access to Cantrips is not going to be a D in that category, period. Sorcerers have access to Light, Mage Hand, Mending, Minor Illusion, and Prestidigitation. Just having a couple of those (like Minor Illusion and Prestidigitation) gives huge utility to Sorcerers. Sorcerers earn at least a C for the Early Game, if not a B; this becomes even stronger at Level 3 with Metamagic. I would say B/C/B would make a bit more sense. The only reason a Sorcerer wouldn't be an A/A/A is that they can't change their spells, but the few utility spells they DO choose are going to be really good ones.
I feel like C/B/A for Buffs/Heals is pretty generous. I would be more inclined to a C/B/B or a D/B/B. While Sorcerers do have a few smattering of buffs, the more notable ones don't come until later (such as Haste at level 5). In fact, if it wasn't for stuff like Twinned Haste or Greater Invisibility, Sorcerers would fall quite flat in this category.
As for Control/Debuffs, Sorcerers can excel in this at the get-go. They can opt for Cantrips that can provide some nice debuffs: Chill Touch (prevents healing), Ray of Frost (-10 Movement), and Frostbite (disadvantage on next weapon attack roll). Sleep is one of the BEST crowd control spells in the very early game (AoE NO SAVE, AND available at level ONE). They can get more like Darkness and Web at level 3 and Counterspell and Hypnotic Pattern (probably one of the best CC in the game) at level 5. Sorcerers are easily a B/A/A or an A/A/A in this category.
Finally, Stealth/Social as D/B/B??????? I'm curious what kind of Sorcerers you have been playing with, because this can easily be the Sorcerer's strongest area; judging by your rankings, it would seem like you play with a lot of blasty Sorcerers, which is totally fine, but I think you've missed the much cooler side of the coin with this class, so let me pull the curtain on a whole new world. To begin, Sorcerers are already Charisma based, which gives them nice modifiers for Persuasion and other social skill checks. Sorcerers can choose the Friends Cantrip which is useful in quite a few special social situations. Level One gives them access to Charm Person and Disguise Self, but Level Three is where a Sorcerer can be stronger than ANY other class in DnD when it comes to social situations in just two words: Subtle Spell. A seemingly simple metamagic that is frequently overlooked by many players. So what's so great about Subtle Spell you may ask? Well it's quite simple: cast almost ANY spell right in front of ANYONE without being noticed (works especially well if you have a discreet arcane focus that you can hold on to without drawing any attention). You want to know what else you get at Level 3? Suggestion. Subtle Spell in combination with many spells can be almost game breaking. Want the NPC to do exactly what you want, but don't want others to know you enchanted them? Subtle Spell Suggestion. Troublesome guards or townsfolk in the way? Subtle Spell Sleep. Scare the crap out of someone or want to perform a minor miracle? Subtle Spell Minor Illusion. Want to secretly send a message to an ally without anyone noticing? Subtle Spell Message. Want to read an NPC's mind without them knowing? Subtle Spell Detect Thoughts. I think I made my point. And if your DM is following RAW, then Sorcerers are the ONLY class capable of doing anything like this (according to RAW, Vocal components of spells require specific pitch and wording and Somatic spells require noticeable gestures, meaning that these aren't things you can "stealth" or "hide"). This category is easily an A/A/A; no other class can even touch Sorcerers here (although, without Subtle Spell, it would be more like a B/B/B or maybe a C/B/B, but definitely not a D in any slot).
Did you consider the content in Xanathars Guide to Everything?
If not will there be an update including the changes it brings?
Could you break it down further into what sub classes that are most suited/required to get a certain rating?
possibly rate the individual subclasses.
Change the groups to correspond with Tiers of play from DMG, 1–4, 5–10, 11–16, and 17–20?
If you have considered XGE, then i would argue that the monk's DPR rating should go up with the addition of the Kensei
Keep up the good work.
I believe at the beginning it was aiming this guide at beginner to intermediate players. Personal thought is that Xanathars would be more for intermediate to advanced players.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
Did you consider the content in Xanathars Guide to Everything?
If not will there be an update including the changes it brings?
Could you break it down further into what sub classes that are most suited/required to get a certain rating?
possibly rate the individual subclasses.
Change the groups to correspond with Tiers of play from DMG, 1–4, 5–10, 11–16, and 17–20?
If you have considered XGE, then i would argue that the monk's DPR rating should go up with the addition of the Kensei
Keep up the good work.
I believe at the beginning it was aiming this guide at beginner to intermediate players. Personal thought is that Xanathars would be more for intermediate to advanced players.
That and this post was made Sep 1, XGTE came out Nov 21 (easy to overlook, but the OP was before the new book)
I really don't get your judgement of the paladin. In general, most people I know rate it as one of the highest in terms of pretty much every field, and would rate the paladin on the same level as wizard. They have strong potential in every field that resonates well as a whole.
This seems really great. I came to 5e because I got sick of 3.5 unbalance.
How much into consideration did you take all the suplemment books? Does this work for core only as well? I don´t want to make the game too complex so I plan on using only the three core rulebooks.
This seems really great. I came to 5e because I got sick of 3.5 unbalance.
How much into consideration did you take all the suplemment books? Does this work for core only as well? I don´t want to make the game too complex so I plan on using only the three core rulebooks.
The list was made before Xanathar's, and the effects of Sword Coast Guide / Elemental Evil Guide are pretty much low impact, so its really more relevant for core only than anything else.
Do keep in mind, however, that the difference between tiers is FAR smaller than in 3e, and all of the classes (without any multiclassing) are roughly balanced to an extent or another, and results will vary wildly between tables.
All in all, while tier ratings can be fun to hash out, they are unrealistic in 5e, since they change so much depending on playstyle.
This is an excellent ontology and set of supporting models. I love the assumptions and the variables.
The evidence is weak! You selected variables so well and then didn't populate them correctly.
My suggestion (and I may even adopt your ontology and only-slightly modify your models) is to take the 9 Basic Races (Dragonborn, Forest Gnome, Half-Elf, Half-Orc, High Elf, Human, Lightfoot Halfling, Mountain Dwarf, and Tiefling) and spread them across all of the subclasses, looking at Levels 3-6, 7-10, 11-16, and 17-20 with additional inclusion of optimized/likely multiclass combinations, especially selecting from the Barb/Fighter, Barb/Rogue, Bard/Paladin, Bard/Warlock, Cleric/Druid, Cleric/Ranger, Druid/Cleric, Fighter/Barbarian, Fighter/Ranger, Fighter/Rogue, Monk/Cleric, Monk/Ranger, Monk/Rogue, Paladin/Sorcerer, Paladin/Warlock, Ranger/Cleric, Ranger/Fighter, Ranger/Rogue, Rogue/Fighter, Rogue/Ranger, Rogue/Wizard, Sorcerer/Paladin, Sorcerer/Warlock, Warlock/Paladin, Warlock/Sorcerer, Wizard/Cleric, and Wizard/Fighter. Ones you must include would be: Evocation/Tempest, ArcArcher/Gloom, Forge/WarWiz, Swords/Hexblade, Vengeance/DivSoul, and Arcana/Moon.
Since that would be a ton to sort through, I would use something like Monte-Carlo Simulations to reduce the noise and narrow in on a subset or sample of the total possibilities. Use like the Poisson distribution when it comes to your ontology-value map as it drives forward through the level jumps.
Just did a google search of highest dpr. and it's odd to me that this tier list places monks so low on damage while the tier list based on average damage per round places them only second to Paladins at level 1 and level 5.
Clerics, particularly War Domain, have amazing early lv. Dpr. A War Domain Cleric can offset the decreased accuracy of Great Weapon Master or Sharpshooter with the Bless spell and deal an average of 40 Dpr reliably at 1st Level. 1st-4rth War domain Clerics have the Best single target Damage, I think that's much better than a C rank
Bards have great early level Dpr as well, albeit reliant on having allies. The Dissonant whispers spell gives anyone next to the target a free opportunity attack on the target on a failed save, this could be three or four attacks reliably depending on the target. Casting this on a boss with an optimized team usually leads to around 62 damage if you and two greatsword toting dudes are standing around (3rd Level) it's a death sentence. (college of whispers bard with a paladin and war cleric used for example)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Learning is power, power corrupts, study hard be Evil.
This is an excellent ontology and set of supporting models. I love the assumptions and the variables.
The evidence is weak! You selected variables so well and then didn't populate them correctly.
I agree that the evidence is weak, but I'd go even farther and say that the assumptions and variables leave something to be desired. For instance:
DPR - the raw damage numbers that a class can put out in combat
As has been demonstrated elsewhere, casting Bless can potentially contribute more to the party's overall damage output than using Action Surge or a Barbarian rage. Does this count as DPR? Why or why not? What about things like the DPR value of granting Advantage to everyone in the party by knocking an enemy prone with Shield Master? Again, this can be pretty significant but is frequently overlooked by simpler analysis simply because it is not as easy to calculate the contribution of such abilities as it is something that does not scale off of teamwork.
Tank - the Frontline for the party (High AC, big HP pool, and self-healing type abilities) a rating of survivability
Buffs/ Heals - the ability to directly help your party members and keeping them alive and doing well in their roles
Control/Debuffs - the ability to stop enemies from hurting you or your allies
There's an awful lot of overlap in the definitions given here, and seems to be a case of over-emphasizing the means rather than the ends. The reader is left to wonder what makes one form of stopping enemies from hurting you "control" but another "tanking," or one form of keeping your party members alive "buffs/heals" and another "control/debuffs" and why this differentiation even matters when it comes to tiering things.
For example, there's a reason that Booming Blade is often considered a good tanking ability, but it's unclear how this would be rated. It helps your party members and helps keep them alive and doing well in their roles because it discourages and punishes undesirable enemy movement. It helps stops an enemy from hurting your allies for a similar reason. But it does all of these things through the means of dealing or threatening to deal damage. Oddly enough one of the few categories it seems like it would be exempt from according to the definitions we are given would be tanking, because the examples given seem to only account for personal survivability... which I personally find a rather lacking definition of a tank. For example, being really good at running away is a pretty good way to keep yourself alive, but probably isn't what most people think of as filling the tank role.
If merely keeping yourself alive made you a tank, then this would be a tank:
Other assumptions that stood out as problematic to me were things like providing these ratings independent of any build details, especially for the sort of classes that are versatile enough that they can fill very different roles depending on how they are built. Check out some of the Abjurer builds floating around and explain how those have a D survivability at all levels, for instance.
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" -- allegedly Benjamin Franklin
Tooltips (Help/aid)
Great post.
Thanks :D
I was considering sourcing feedback from the D&D subreddit as well, but the community here is much nicer I think :P
Berserk Sig by The Hollow
My suggestion would be to divide the rankings into levels 1–4, 5–10, 11–16, and 17–20 to correspond with the Tiers of Play described in Chapter 1 of the Dungeon Master's Guide. The game is designed to have them as power level break points; also, they're used as restrictions in Adventurers League.
What would the latest Mystic and Artificer from UA be?
Post under the same name at Giant in the Playground, and rarely here.
Hmmm; I think you're underestimating druids for "Buffs/Heal" and "Control/Debuffs" at least in early/mid levels. (I haven't played enough high-level 5E to really judge there.) They're full casters with a wide selections of options, including some great area-control spells no one else gets. For healing, they've got Cure Wounds, Healing Word, Lesser and Greater Restoration, etc. And don't forget the expanded list for Land druids.
I think you're quite a bit off-base with sorcerers.
I disagree with almost every Early game ranking you gave except Tank, which is definitely a D. I personally would put it as a D+ for Mid and Late game as well (considering the D6 Hit Die; C is probably acceptable if they choose to go Draconic).
First of all, while yes, any class can do some awesome damage if geared for it, in comparison to other classes, I would say Early game Sorcerer DPR is a solid C with Mid and Late game being a B based on your criteria (really good when specced for it).
Second, a D/C/C in Utility/Skills?? Whaaat? First of all, any class with access to Cantrips is not going to be a D in that category, period. Sorcerers have access to Light, Mage Hand, Mending, Minor Illusion, and Prestidigitation. Just having a couple of those (like Minor Illusion and Prestidigitation) gives huge utility to Sorcerers. Sorcerers earn at least a C for the Early Game, if not a B; this becomes even stronger at Level 3 with Metamagic. I would say B/C/B would make a bit more sense. The only reason a Sorcerer wouldn't be an A/A/A is that they can't change their spells, but the few utility spells they DO choose are going to be really good ones.
I feel like C/B/A for Buffs/Heals is pretty generous. I would be more inclined to a C/B/B or a D/B/B. While Sorcerers do have a few smattering of buffs, the more notable ones don't come until later (such as Haste at level 5). In fact, if it wasn't for stuff like Twinned Haste or Greater Invisibility, Sorcerers would fall quite flat in this category.
As for Control/Debuffs, Sorcerers can excel in this at the get-go. They can opt for Cantrips that can provide some nice debuffs: Chill Touch (prevents healing), Ray of Frost (-10 Movement), and Frostbite (disadvantage on next weapon attack roll). Sleep is one of the BEST crowd control spells in the very early game (AoE NO SAVE, AND available at level ONE). They can get more like Darkness and Web at level 3 and Counterspell and Hypnotic Pattern (probably one of the best CC in the game) at level 5. Sorcerers are easily a B/A/A or an A/A/A in this category.
Finally, Stealth/Social as D/B/B??????? I'm curious what kind of Sorcerers you have been playing with, because this can easily be the Sorcerer's strongest area; judging by your rankings, it would seem like you play with a lot of blasty Sorcerers, which is totally fine, but I think you've missed the much cooler side of the coin with this class, so let me pull the curtain on a whole new world. To begin, Sorcerers are already Charisma based, which gives them nice modifiers for Persuasion and other social skill checks. Sorcerers can choose the Friends Cantrip which is useful in quite a few special social situations. Level One gives them access to Charm Person and Disguise Self, but Level Three is where a Sorcerer can be stronger than ANY other class in DnD when it comes to social situations in just two words: Subtle Spell. A seemingly simple metamagic that is frequently overlooked by many players. So what's so great about Subtle Spell you may ask? Well it's quite simple: cast almost ANY spell right in front of ANYONE without being noticed (works especially well if you have a discreet arcane focus that you can hold on to without drawing any attention). You want to know what else you get at Level 3? Suggestion. Subtle Spell in combination with many spells can be almost game breaking. Want the NPC to do exactly what you want, but don't want others to know you enchanted them? Subtle Spell Suggestion. Troublesome guards or townsfolk in the way? Subtle Spell Sleep. Scare the crap out of someone or want to perform a minor miracle? Subtle Spell Minor Illusion. Want to secretly send a message to an ally without anyone noticing? Subtle Spell Message. Want to read an NPC's mind without them knowing? Subtle Spell Detect Thoughts. I think I made my point. And if your DM is following RAW, then Sorcerers are the ONLY class capable of doing anything like this (according to RAW, Vocal components of spells require specific pitch and wording and Somatic spells require noticeable gestures, meaning that these aren't things you can "stealth" or "hide"). This category is easily an A/A/A; no other class can even touch Sorcerers here (although, without Subtle Spell, it would be more like a B/B/B or maybe a C/B/B, but definitely not a D in any slot).
Great Post!
I have a few questions:
If you have considered XGE, then i would argue that the monk's DPR rating should go up with the addition of the Kensei
Keep up the good work.
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
How do you get a one-armed goblin out of a tree?
Wave!
since this post i had indeed played a non- blasty sorcerer and your right i was definitely looking too much at the damage potential of this class
Berserk Sig by The Hollow
Actually, I just got the Xanathars Guide to Everything
but I wasn't really planning on updating this, Thanks for the feedback though guys much appreciated.
Berserk Sig by The Hollow
I really don't get your judgement of the paladin. In general, most people I know rate it as one of the highest in terms of pretty much every field, and would rate the paladin on the same level as wizard. They have strong potential in every field that resonates well as a whole.
This seems really great. I came to 5e because I got sick of 3.5 unbalance.
How much into consideration did you take all the suplemment books? Does this work for core only as well? I don´t want to make the game too complex so I plan on using only the three core rulebooks.
The list was made before Xanathar's, and the effects of Sword Coast Guide / Elemental Evil Guide are pretty much low impact, so its really more relevant for core only than anything else.
Do keep in mind, however, that the difference between tiers is FAR smaller than in 3e, and all of the classes (without any multiclassing) are roughly balanced to an extent or another, and results will vary wildly between tables.
All in all, while tier ratings can be fun to hash out, they are unrealistic in 5e, since they change so much depending on playstyle.This is an excellent ontology and set of supporting models. I love the assumptions and the variables.
The evidence is weak! You selected variables so well and then didn't populate them correctly.
My suggestion (and I may even adopt your ontology and only-slightly modify your models) is to take the 9 Basic Races (Dragonborn, Forest Gnome, Half-Elf, Half-Orc, High Elf, Human, Lightfoot Halfling, Mountain Dwarf, and Tiefling) and spread them across all of the subclasses, looking at Levels 3-6, 7-10, 11-16, and 17-20 with additional inclusion of optimized/likely multiclass combinations, especially selecting from the Barb/Fighter, Barb/Rogue, Bard/Paladin, Bard/Warlock, Cleric/Druid, Cleric/Ranger, Druid/Cleric, Fighter/Barbarian, Fighter/Ranger, Fighter/Rogue, Monk/Cleric, Monk/Ranger, Monk/Rogue, Paladin/Sorcerer, Paladin/Warlock, Ranger/Cleric, Ranger/Fighter, Ranger/Rogue, Rogue/Fighter, Rogue/Ranger, Rogue/Wizard, Sorcerer/Paladin, Sorcerer/Warlock, Warlock/Paladin, Warlock/Sorcerer, Wizard/Cleric, and Wizard/Fighter. Ones you must include would be: Evocation/Tempest, ArcArcher/Gloom, Forge/WarWiz, Swords/Hexblade, Vengeance/DivSoul, and Arcana/Moon.
Since that would be a ton to sort through, I would use something like Monte-Carlo Simulations to reduce the noise and narrow in on a subset or sample of the total possibilities. Use like the Poisson distribution when it comes to your ontology-value map as it drives forward through the level jumps.
Just did a google search of highest dpr. and it's odd to me that this tier list places monks so low on damage while the tier list based on average damage per round places them only second to Paladins at level 1 and level 5.
https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/3erj4d/comparing_the_damage_output_of_level_5_characters/
https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/4i1dff/the_optimists_guide_to_dd_5e_damage_by_class_and/
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?497686-Average-Damage-by-Level
Clerics, particularly War Domain, have amazing early lv. Dpr. A War Domain Cleric can offset the decreased accuracy of Great Weapon Master or Sharpshooter with the Bless spell and deal an average of 40 Dpr reliably at 1st Level. 1st-4rth War domain Clerics have the Best single target Damage, I think that's much better than a C rank
Bards have great early level Dpr as well, albeit reliant on having allies. The Dissonant whispers spell gives anyone next to the target a free opportunity attack on the target on a failed save, this could be three or four attacks reliably depending on the target. Casting this on a boss with an optimized team usually leads to around 62 damage if you and two greatsword toting dudes are standing around (3rd Level) it's a death sentence. (college of whispers bard with a paladin and war cleric used for example)
Learning is power, power corrupts, study hard be Evil.
As has been demonstrated elsewhere, casting Bless can potentially contribute more to the party's overall damage output than using Action Surge or a Barbarian rage. Does this count as DPR? Why or why not? What about things like the DPR value of granting Advantage to everyone in the party by knocking an enemy prone with Shield Master? Again, this can be pretty significant but is frequently overlooked by simpler analysis simply because it is not as easy to calculate the contribution of such abilities as it is something that does not scale off of teamwork.
There's an awful lot of overlap in the definitions given here, and seems to be a case of over-emphasizing the means rather than the ends. The reader is left to wonder what makes one form of stopping enemies from hurting you "control" but another "tanking," or one form of keeping your party members alive "buffs/heals" and another "control/debuffs" and why this differentiation even matters when it comes to tiering things.
For example, there's a reason that Booming Blade is often considered a good tanking ability, but it's unclear how this would be rated. It helps your party members and helps keep them alive and doing well in their roles because it discourages and punishes undesirable enemy movement. It helps stops an enemy from hurting your allies for a similar reason. But it does all of these things through the means of dealing or threatening to deal damage. Oddly enough one of the few categories it seems like it would be exempt from according to the definitions we are given would be tanking, because the examples given seem to only account for personal survivability... which I personally find a rather lacking definition of a tank. For example, being really good at running away is a pretty good way to keep yourself alive, but probably isn't what most people think of as filling the tank role.
If merely keeping yourself alive made you a tank, then this would be a tank:
Other assumptions that stood out as problematic to me were things like providing these ratings independent of any build details, especially for the sort of classes that are versatile enough that they can fill very different roles depending on how they are built. Check out some of the Abjurer builds floating around and explain how those have a D survivability at all levels, for instance.
Ludic: adjective (formal). showing spontaneous and undirected playfulness.