Power Gaming Tier Guide.
The following is how I would rate your players in D&D in genral 5E in particular. It uses the old tiering system from 3.5 in regards to the classes I am not using tier 6 as such . Tier 1 is the highest, tier 5 is the lowest. It roughly rates how good at optimizing your players are and roughly where they are.
Tier 5.
There is no optimization at tier 5. Players play whatever the hell they like and do whatever the hell they like and often at cross purposes. Attack stats may be 13 or lower and there is no coordination to party make up or how PC interact with each other. A Rogue for example may be the only melee PC in a party like this and find sneak attack difficult or there is no healer in a dungeon crawl campaign or the DM wants to run a nautical game and everyone rolls up knights or something.
Tier 4.
At this tier players can generally work out the basics. Putting a 16 in your attack stat may be a good idea or a 3/2 split between melee and ranged may be a good idea in a 5 man party or 2/2 split in 4 person party.
Tier 3. This is a moderate amount of optimization at this level. Pumping your attack stat is a good idea and basic obvious feats are being used. For example a great weapon fighter will take the great weapon master feat, a cleric may take the warcaster feat, an archer takes the sharp shooter feat. More advanced combos start being discovered and used.
Tier 2. This level has a high degree of optimization. Feat combos are used along with spell combos and class ability combos. For example commander’s strike off a battle master fighter may start getting used on a Rogue or ranger type PC, polearm master +sentinel is a bit of a combo, and advantage+bless starts getting used to offset penalties from feats like sharpshooter or great weapon master. Multiclass combinations are discovered and obvious ones like SorcererX/Warlock2 are noticed.
Tier 1.
Put simply the whole party is built from the ground up and designed to be individually optimized in addition to being optimized with each other. Players work out how to enable the Rogue to sneak attack 3 times per round and advanced combos are routinely used. A party with this level of optimization could be built around the short rest mechanic as well in addition to the usual feat combos. An example party.
Battlemaster fighter, shield master+sentinel feat, 20 strength, resilient feat (wisdom)
Light Cleric (bless bot+ boom spells)
Great Sword Fighter great weapon master feat, healer feat, 20 strength)
Rogue (thief) with healer feat, 20 dex, and another good feat.
Lore Bard (faerie fire enabler+cutting words+ skill monkey)
Such a party has every single PC having short rest mechanics and can enable the thief to heal as a bonus action and sneak attack 3 times per round. The light cleric and lore bard would debuff and both have short rest mechanic recharge abilities along with the fighters.
I would say the groups I play with generally fall into Tier 3. Certain individuals (myself included) might be classed as Tier 2, though, while a few others might be Tier 4.
pukunui wrote:
Inform the players (for everyone's best interests) they should "build" their characters organically, not like a Magic deck.
I would say most of my players are Tie 4. Not much thought is given to character optimization beyond having some type of healer in the group. But with so many classes having access to healing that is not a problem. Once they create their characters they cooperate very well together. My teams groaned at the excesses of PF as more books came out. The hated how it was neccessary to build complex charactrers with the right magic item to fight CR approprate encounters. They felt magic items lost their charm and most spells were just numbers instead of cool effects. We prefer spells to be trumps rather than number crunching modifiers. PFE trumps charms and summoning, SIlence trumps sonics attacks, Gust of Wind certain spells, etc. Not all the modify crap. So we still use many spells from earlier editions.
All my players are Tier 2 people. Actually they can be Tier 2 people.
However, only one of them will almost always go for Tier 2 type characters and then customize him freely in whatever space is left after optimization. Most of the others will go for Tier 5 and play whatever the hell they feel like playing, even if they can optimize up to Tier 2 if they feel like.
I always try to make my games proper for my players and the characters they have, and often it means not an enormous focus on combat. This means the optmizing player can feel good with himself that his character is strong in a fight but he isn't in clear superiority amongst the rest because the game is not much about that. Other "non optimized" characters tend to shine as much as him in their own moments.
Every once in a while we will play a combat-heavy game (usually some oriental fantasy / martial arts / samurai flick style) where all players invest better in optimization. But even them my players will usually pick a concept they like (even if combat-related such as choice of martial arts and such) and then optimize on top of that concept, even if the concept itself is not the most optimized of all choices (Tier 3 most likely).
I dare say my players have perfect potential to be Tier 1 people. But they never chose to do so as they much rather choose what they feel like playing than picking a choice only because it's "best" for party synergy.
I imagine a full Tier 1 game must be incredibly boring. When players play what they don't feel like just because of game mechanics they tend to lose enthusiasm and the game itself becomes "meh." I've had cases of players picking a class because "I think the party needs it" only to get bored and switch characters a session or two later.
Rastapopoulos wrote:
Why do I get the impression Zard just wanted to show off his "Tier 1" party idea ... 
More important than optimising tiers is "fun" tiers. I would place the most fun around tier 3, and reducing either side of that.
Psikerlord wrote:
Over time just based on system mastery and players becoming more proficient with the game tier 3 would be the average. Players from previous edition will progress faster. And if there is a catalyst in the group that really understands the mechanics, then the drive to optimize or synergize is more likely.
Online, i'm Tier 1
However, in play we're Tier 3.
Though we have run a few tier 1's for 1 shots.
I think this list misses the point. How good a player is at optimizing shouldn't really enter into it.
The question isn't how power-gamey people are. It is what power level makes your group (both players AND DM) happy. Any idiot with a calculator can optimize a character, or read a spell description and find the synergies. But is that fun for your group?
Some people aren't happy unless they eke every ounce of efficiency out of game mechanics. Others could care less about the mechanics, or even want to purposefully weaken themselves to see how things go.
But none of that indicates "skill". D&D isn't a "skill" game, it is a social event. The trick is to figure out what your groups see as fun: character-wise, story-wise, time-wise and do that. Don't worry about what some other group does, or where you rate.
Brock_Landers wrote:
JerboaTheFeared wrote:
The group I DM is now about a tier 3. We've got 2 relatively newer D&D players who are actually the ones trying to min/max. One newer player is less concerned with optimization. Of the two experienced players, one is trying to be Tier 5 consciously. The other is a min/maxer who is also trying to be less so.
In the Horde of the Dragon Queen campaign I play in, we are all trying to avoid Min/Max so we are more like 4. We even rolled 4d6 in order to determing PCs initial attributes.
Tier 2: When asked about their character, the specifics of their builds are mentioned long before the character's name-- if the character even has a name. Background is used/mentioned only if it provides a mechanical advantage.
Tier 1: Personallity has no place in these builds, as acting out said personality could hamper tactical advantage. Mention of a name before build indicates a lack of dedication to your build, thus relegating the character to Tier 2 at best. Names are optional and those given are for identification purposes only. Backgrounds are used only if they provide a clear tactical advantage.
/Sarcasm 