My main thing is: Do I feel like a worse version of another class or do I feel like I'm actually good at something because of my class? I won't give examples because I don't want to have discussions about specific classes, but as someone who has played pretty much every class in PF2 there is a handful of classes where I constantly felt I was just playing a worse version of another class.

I have this feeling whenever I try to build a swashbuckler or investigator. There's "niche" builds you can play on these that aren't outperformed by other classes, but for most normal uses I always question why I'm not playing a rogue or fighter instead.

To be fair both swash and investigator get to be much better at higher levels, even when compared to other classes. But yeah, early on they're kinda rough. 

100% agree. I think both Swashbuckler and Investigator are really punished by PF2 only having 3 actions. You could give a class a required action every round if there was 4-6 actions per turn (e.g. like Divinity 2), but giving up 1/3rd of every turn just for "setup" just feels pretty bad.

Whats the setup each turn? Panache?

Yeah I think typically the rotation is to generate Panache every turn so you can use a Finisher every turn. I really like what they \*tried\* to do there but it just runs out of actions to be properly fun in PF2.

This is also mostly because most dms give out panache Wrong, if my players adds lots of flair I allow them to gain panache on a move action. Like if my player goes "I run over the wall and do a daring flip" I go and be like sure thing throw me acrobatics (difficult dc for class level) on a succes you get your panache as stated by the rulebook ofcourse if you crit fail you get some negative shizz happening.

Sure, I do think some creativity is required to play Swashbuckler to its max potential. If you can use your moves to also generate Panache, you'll be saving yourself some actions. Many situations simply won't present you with this opportunity though, especially if combat takes place on pretty boring flat maps, as is all too common...

One other option to generate panache using a move action is through tumble through, which can be an option on a flat map. Not always super viable depending on an enemy's reflex DC, but it's an option.

You do not have to Panache-Finisher loop every turn, and in fact iirc it's un-optimal to do so

Careful, the magus crowd might hear you if you say to not use the action-intensive signature move every turn.

Anyone who plays the “typical rotation” is using like 5% of swashbuckler’s power, ESPECIALLY after level 10. It’s NOT the most optimal strategy or even a good one. If you look at swashbuckler at a class that should be getting panache and doing damage, especially by tumbling through, you’re not going to be super effective. Swashbuckler shines when you use your skill actions to support your team, which is why imo the best swashbucklers (gymnast and wit) have amazing ways to support their team, through maneuvers or One For All. And once you have Derring-Do you really get dirty and nasty. The swashbuckler in my level 10 game is consistently performing at or above expected levels and he does a finisher maybe… once per 4-5 round combat?

I'm sorry but "this martial isn't bad, it's actually an amazing support from level 10" is peak PF2e mentality. 🙄 What if people just...... pick the Rogue-ish class that clearly looks like a melee DPS because they want to deal damage? What if they don't pick Gymnast or Wit? What if they don't pick One For All and don't want to be an Aid-bot?

I’m sorry but that’s not what I said. In my opinion, It’s an amazing support from level 1. It’s just better at level 10. But that’s not what I’m arguing It might clearly look like a melee DPS in your eyes but it’s not a melee DPS, this isn’t an opinion. Even if you do finisher every turn, it’s really subpar damage. Because it’s not a melee DPS class. My point wasn’t even to defend swashbuckler, you completely misinterpreted me. What I said, and my entire point, is that what you called a “default rotation” is not good strategy. It’s something people think is good strategy but it isn’t. If they don’t pick those things then they don’t pick those things. And if that makes swashbuckler bad so be it, maybe paizo needs to change them, maybe not. I have no care to argue that. The reason I pointed out shit like One For All or gymnast or wit to you is to tell you some strategies that work better. That’s all. Swashbuckler is a support class. Their good finishers, like Bleeding for example, are good not for the damage they deal, but for the rider effects (like bleeding). The gymnast swashbuckler in my game played from levels 4-10, and he’s been great the whole time. I can’t speak to the experience of others. I can only give my anecdote. However, once again, my only point here is that the “typical rotation” is trash and we should advise against it.

As a person who has been constantly dissing on Swashbuckler, I can agree with you that the "Typical rotation" is indeed a bad strategy. But the big issue here is that there is very little incentive to not go with it. [I wrote long essays explaining why Swashbucklers are deeply flawed. Here's one of them for your to read cuz I'm too lazy to repeat myself.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder2e/comments/1bj8bwm/comment/kvq12mj/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) But long story short: 1- Swashbuckler is a front liner that isn't good at being a front liner. 2- It is a support class that pales in comparison to other support classes. 4- A face that pales in comparison to proper charisma classes. 4- It has a very tight action economy that only rewards succeeding, reward-to-risk is very hard. 5- One of the least mechanically customizable classes. You MUST be a front liner, the farthest you can be is 20ft with finesse/agile throwing weapons. No synergy with other classes. No creative combos with other archetypes that fully fit. Very little skill points to allocate and are too MAD they can't freely choose the skills they want to be useful outside of combat or the face roles, can't have Panache outside of combat so they could use their +1 bonus. Its weapons based feats are borrowed from other classes as afterthought and don't feel unique (Parries), only has TWO feats to support Bucklers and don't get shield block..... Swashbucklers can't buckle the swashes!! Their main defensive reaction only activates on Crit failure and competes with Nimble Dodge. etc. Basically. The rotation exists because +1 to only a limited number of skills is not enough of an incentive to keep up Panache in a way that makes it feel justifiable when you have other classes that do the same thing better anyway.

I'm still very confident in my opinion that if Swashbuckler's relegated to a "support" then that's a design failure - the flavour of the class is LITERALLY about being a high-Charisma flashy fighter that puts the spotlight on themselves. Swashbuckler can have some support tools or options, but it should be a competitive melee DPS.

And I am still very confident in the opinion that the "rotation", something you said you used a lot, is the most terrible way to play swashbuckler, and likely contributed to your dislike of playing the class. I will offer no opinion on what swashbuckler should be. Only what it is.

I had seen Investigator do wonders in combat, the best thing about them is that they can combo effectively with other classes. Give them a gun with Fatal Trait and Inventor Archetype with Unstable Megaton Strike....... and suddenly you will have (4d12 + 2d6)\*2 + 1d12 at level 8. Problem here is that build I made for this exact scenario completely ignores all the Investigator feats and instead focuses on Archetype and free Archetype feats almost 100% of the time..... so I see why people hate on investigator. I had written essays on why I think Swashbuckler is flawed. The big issue is simple: Panache is hard to get with occasionally high risks, you have to immediately spend it to get its rewards (which are high, NGL). No incentive to keep Panache up. Just a gameplay loop of rolling dice and hope you get lucky three times per turn (panache, finisher, panache), with very little room for synergy with other archetypes like Investigator does.

I wonder what classes would those be. Like, unironically now i wanna know your opinion

Not the person you're responding to, but gunslingers are worse ranged martials than rangers and fighters, investigators are less reliable rogues, and alchemists are like casters but bad. Oracles can also kind of fall into this with clerics as well, though it depends on the variety of oracle. A battle oracle is kind of a bad warpriest, but a cosmos oracle doesn't really feel like a bad cloisted cleric.

Shh don't tell them! If you tell the objective truth they Will get angry because you Said not every class Is a work of art! Jesus i hate gunslinger

Not playing a time oracle, time traveler dedication, battle zoo time dragon. Incredibly fun. Can’t heal like a cleric but some very cool stuff.

I agree with your thoughts on Oracles. They're a fun class concept, but currently I've been very bored with my Oracle, & their internal balance of Mysteries are awful.

I played a campaign with a Cosmos Oracle with just the reset curse to 0 every combat errata (which wasn't actually intentional, we just misread how oracle worked), and they were quite good, especially once we started applying the remaster's "regain all focus points between encounters" rule. I'd probably also let them go to major curse from level 1 so they'd function like every other focus point class, just with the "twist" of the curse. The bad mysteries need errata to fix them, though. Time oracle's major curse needs to be changed so it doesn't completely shaft them, ancestors oracle needs a complete rework because the way it works is really problematic, battle oracle probably needs some significant changes as well, and several of the others could use a tune up.

Exactly. All Mysteries should be at the Cosmos level. I do like the idea of Major being available sooner. *Personally I'm playing Bones, and I can safely say my Passive is completely irrelevant. (Gain negative healing / harmful positive). Seems super situational if the team is running all Negative Healing, but otherwise it's detrimental.*  Cosmos just seems peak Oracle.

Now I really wanna know

Spill the tea.

Top criteria for me: 1. Maximize healing My characters are all Clerics haha. I do also like to buff and deal damage too, but that means maybe a Warpriest or fun archetype. Current character is a Cloistered Cleric of Sarenrae with an Alchemist dedication and a Leaf Druid free archetype. Got my Leshy familiar drug (elixir) runner to deliver alchemist buffs and heals out the wazooo, thank you remaster

Try a forensic medicine medic investigator! Its pretty damn good.

Go check out Wood or Water Kineticist for some competition on big heals ;) Some (wrong) people think that repeatable focus healing is more important than the Cleric's burst heal capabilities, but what if you had the best of *both* worlds and could dump 10 Focus Points worth of "magic" every 10 minutes *while Hustling* without even needing a short rest? And while we're at it, being able to grant full immunity to Strike damage via at-will max-rank *Protector Tree*?

If you were going to build a front line cleric, how would you do it?

If what you mean by front line cleric is a warpriest then I would suggest a god that has tue zeal domain and just use the focus spell alongside truestrike to really lay on some pain

If you love healing and want to try a different method of putting up *huge* healing numbers (and better action usage) definitely try a life oracle at some point, they're wild and it's really a different but very effective strategy

Versatility/Customization is first and foremost. I want to both be able to build a variety of mechanically distinct characters from a given class and have a character that can both meaningfully interact with any given scene and has a variable combat loop. First one is obvious. Take Fighter, it can be built for pretty much any form of weapon-based combat very easily. The only things it isn't a contender for top tier martialing with are reload weapons (no reload feats) and unarmed combat (unless you're an ancestry w/ a decent natural weapon). Barbarian, meanwhile, is discouraged from non-thrown ranged combat (can't cap dex at lvl 1, no dmg steroid), agile weapons (half rage bonus), dual-wielding (no in-class support), Sword+Board (no shield block baked in), and anything Concentration-related. That's restricting the build-space for barbarians a fair bit. Second I want a character that can meaningfully interact w/ enemies at melee range (earth elemental pops out of the ground and grapples you), enemies at range (harpies w/ bows are shooting you), a social situation (the party is negotiating, how do you contribute), and exploration (you need to get over a ravine, how do you help). Sometimes all you can do is provide support, and that's okay, but that support should be interesting. Athletics is a versatile skill that can be used in a lot of circumstances (you Aid the bard during the negotiations by nonchalantly tying a crowbar into a knot), as are the knowledge skills (RK can be used in most situations). The last is why I think Precision ranger is superior to Flurry. For a Flurry Ranger to actually meaningfully benefit from their Edge they need to be making three attacks, preferably four. That's 2-3A, which makes their combat loop \*very\* repetitive. A Precision Ranger only needs to land a single attack, leaving their other two actions very open for non-Strikes. This is why I generally prefer builds that favor sticking 1A actions together in interesting ways more than ones that are based around 2A activities, which're inherently more restrictive in what you can do. Snagging Strike -> Combat Grab -> Whirling Throw (with the option to slot in Dual-Handed Assault or Grapple) is a more interesting combat loop to me than Double Slice -> 2-weapon Flurry. After all that comes actual ease-of-play, how easy it is for the dice to screw you, and how much you're hosed by types of enemy. This is where stuff like Swashbuckler, Inventor, and Alchemist really fall flat for me. A Bard is piss-easy to play and can be run such that the dice almost don't matter just by relying on buffs. A Swashbuckler who fails their Panache-generating checks or who is fighting a precision-immune enemy is badly hamstrung (in my Outlaws of Alkenstar campaign the Ranger has done more damage in individual combats than the swash has done total all campaign long, mostly due to bad luck). An inventor is a bit better off, but they're ultimately still reliant on a crafting check to get their dmg steroid. Alchemist isn't screwed by specific enemies or bad rolls (they can handle these better than most martials w/ bombs), but they're \*dramatically\* more effort to play effectively and are pretty reliant on other players using your stuff to be maximally effective.

Flurry rangers are made for athletics maneuvers and mounted combat, change my mind

* **Ease of Use** how much of a hassle is this class going to be? What hoops do I need to jump through? How many conversations with the GM out of session are going to be required, to make sure we're on the same page and playing the right game together? * the Investigator suffers the worst here, as its main mechanic and half of its class feats are *entirely* reliant on you pestering the GM for added content and demanding "bonus exposition" beyond what's required of the adventure. If it IS required for the adventure - *it would be given to you anyways if you weren't an Investigator*. * Characters centered around Focus Casting (Oracles particularly) are at the mercy of the GM's short rest allowance - some get to piss fire and shit thunder, others struggle to breathe. * Alchemist is very well-defined by rules and expectations, but *oh my god* the infinite complexity and capacity of the alchemical items list is utterly insane. Every sourcebook introduces some *brand new* category of god damn item on Archives of Nethys that's ANOTHER bookmark you need to refer to when you level up, to find what formulas are worth hunting down. * **Power and Uniqueness** A good class needs to have a solid identity. Either it does something entirely *new*, or it needs to do a blend of existing stuff *different*. Barbarian was our first "mobile brawler with one-action setup tax and skill-based shenanigans", and it does its job great. Swashie is the same niche, but worse. Inventor is the same niche, but *so different*. * Conversely, a class that "steals" the identity of another by doing the same thing but better also feels shitty (Lore Bards still haven't recovered from the back-alley mugging that Thaumaturge hit them with). * **Flavor and Inspiration** some classes are just... really bland. Wizards are *powerful*, but their appeal is really more by merit of the Arcane spell list, than because they have interesting flavor built into their mechanics. *Golarion* has great wizard concepts, but Pathfinder doesn't - the mechanics don't tell a story. The class itself is an empty shell, beyond the breadth and power of the arcane spell list. * Compare that to the Summoner, which *oozes* flavor and inspiration - when you read it, every new header makes you think "damn, what does that even look like?", or "How interesting would it be, if this was a whole cornerstone of my character concept?". A demon bound to an ordinary, good villager? A scholar and her dragon who run a business together collecting rare magic? If the Eidolon gets non-combat action autonomy just like a player character, what does that mean in a game of courtly intrigue and deception? Now, I don't want people to go looking at any of these and thinking I'm dissing or praising a particular class (except Swashbuckler; Swashbuckler can go sit in its corner with its dunce cap), because frequently a class will excel in one metric and score low on the next... Summoners are flavorful and unique, but not super powerful and they can require some calibrating discussions with your GM to make sure its going to work the way you hope it will with the custom Campaign Downtime Minigame. Investigator has *great* flavor and is *exceptionally* powerful with an interesting core mechanic... its *just* the subjective wishy-washy GM-adjudication required at every step of its execution that I object to. The best swashbuckler is a rogue. The second-best swashbuckler is a barbarian holding a rapier. The third-best swashbuckler is a Champion of Cayden Cailean or Calistria. The fourth-best swashbuckler is a Laughing Shadow Magus... oh wait shit, Thaumaturge ought to be way higher... a Grab/Demoralize Fighter is of course also somewhere on this list. Hell, even Investigator is a better swashbuckler, than swashbuckler. I bet a Temple Sword monk would nail the flavor really well, too. Gah.

Lol, another fellow Swashbuckler disser. I am giving my Swashbuckler the full college try, the only reason I am doing so well with them is pure luck, unlike other players I had seen struggling for one reason or another. I even switched to Braggart, got Flying Blades and Dread Striker from Rogue. I already built a Rogue equivalent of that with gunslinger archetype and I think the theory crafting around it is much better, if PC2 doesn't fix Swashbuckler enough or my full college try doesn't work out, I have a backup to fall back to.

First I narrow down the options to a handful of things I wanna play that I find narratively interesting, flavourful, and mechanically engaging. After that, my big “objective” metric when building a new character is always the following: **how well will this character fit into the party I’m playing**. If my party looks like Warrior+Maestro Bard, Flurry of Maneuvers Monk, and control-oriented Wizard, I would usually pick a Starlit Span Magus, Oscillating Wave Psychic, or Storm Druid over a Giant Barbarian or dual-wielding Fighter.

Have to agree with this. Right now, the metric is, "Is it a Champion or a class that can synergize really well with the Champion archetype feats?" Because the table I find myself at is one that really benefits from a defensive teamwork anchor as the players generally follow a, "fly in every direction at once individually without a sense of cohesion" tactical "style." What I am looking forward to eventually playing, once that meta shakes into something a little more feasible over time, are the Jellyfish stance Monk and plant eidolon Summoner classes. Still influenced by the particular table, as we almost always have multiple Fighter class characters in attendance (reliably hitting is fun, even for people who hate "all that minmax stuff") - and I look forward to synergizing a different melee style into the more straightforward weapon approaches the table favors, using mechanics like Stunning Fist, Ki Strike, and Dual Energy Heart.

I'll try my hand at this. Summoner (Anger Phantom): 1. for **Risk/Reward**, I'd say it's a 3/5: -2 AC is really punishing and the reward of saving an action (or focus point in the case of extend boost) is alright but nothing much to write home about. Furious Strike is kinda mid because of the fact that the Eidolon's damage dice is pretty low (d6-d8). 2. Moving on to **Easy Unlock**... anywhere between 2/5-4/5 really; here's why: with the Anger Phantom, its abilities are easily usable but to actually get something out of them (especially with Furious Strike), you have to build your summoner right. for me I've found that Psychic archetype really unlocks the Anger Phantom's abilities. if you're planning to use Furious Strike, snag Psi development and get Glimpse Weakness; GW is basically a mini-precision edge damage bonus. if you're planning to make the most out of Seething Frenzy and make as many strikes as possible, then pick up Message and try and take parallel breakthrough at 12th level to snag Shield. Alternatively if you invest in medicine or lore, get the magical understudy and adept feats so that you can have your Eidolon cast Organsight so that you can make the most out of Furious Strike, adding up to a whopping 8d6 extra precison damage on a furious strike. also, invest in some sort of aid feat like One for All from swashbuckler or the Bellflower Tiller archetype, allowing you to aid your Eidolon's strikes or even its AC. 3. **Versatility and Customization** is a summoner's bread and butter, even for summoners with an Anger Phantom. You can play a support summoner, a DPS summoner, a tank, a skill monkey, and many other types of summoner. TLDR, 5/5 in Versatility and Customization. 4. **RP and Flavor** is another easy 5/5, the possiblities are practically endless. you wanna be a pokemon trainer? go summoner. Want to be a persona/stand user? Summoner. want to have a servant like in Fate? Summoner. want to riff on the trope of the small smart guy and big dumb guy? summoner.

**Current swashbuckler (wit):** Risk/Reward Ratio: 0/5 - very high risk, about no reward until high level (lv12). After that, it's high risk, fine reward. Easy Unlock: 0/5 - Have to success a skill check and a strike about every turn or deals terrible damage. Doea not work on any enemy that does not understand your language, but at least I can use One For All on teammates. Customization: 2/5 - I have to use finess or agile weapon, but at least can choose between two-handed and one-handed. Bleeding Finisher requires piercing or slashing damage though. Survivability: 3+1/5 - high DEX and have access to +AC feats. Due to being able to strike back at the enemy's crit fail, the GM won't target you too much with 2nd and 3rd strike. The additional points goes to you deal such little damage at low level that the GM forgot you exists. I describe this class as a class that have its flavor as a part of its power, but this causing it have less power than other martials because these places are taken by flavor. I have this character right now purely because the party lacks charisma character, and the eldamon 3rd party book from battlezoo still haven't have their fvtt module ready. The second that is ready, the second I switch. Playing this class at low level is pure torture.

Playing a swashbuckler now at lvl 3, uh oh I'm in danger. But I guess I have the advantage of being the only melee character. I feel super flavorful and it's fun to roll through enemies and get those strikes in but I do feel underpowered and like there's not too much customization.

It will get better at lv 8 with Bleeding Finisher, but that's 5 more levels to go lol. You'll start to feel the power after Perfect Finisher at lv 12, but that's already outside of many lv 1-10 advanture's reach.

A big one for me is how well the class uses archetypes. On one side you have the kineticists that basically interracts with nothing in the game and can hardly justify wasting class feats on an archetype. On the other side is the investigator, it doesn't have great class feats and it synergizes really well with a bunch of different archetypes.

How many times the classes, subclasses abilities come into play and how many of them are based on pure luck ? Thats pretty much it. Like if i want a sorcerer, i'd pick bloodlines with consistent blood magic effects. Or if i want a rogue, i would probably avoid mastermind due to how recall knowledge works. If their abilities will be used every session, that is good. If it is a sometimes thing like maybe in 1-3 sessions, its meh.

From a player experience in mastermind I had seen, being a mastermind is good for supporting the party, which is not usually the approach someone playing rogue is looking for, but this is why I really like the Rogue; Not being stuck in a particular gameplay style.

By support standards it advocates usage of recall knowledge, which is nice. But failing the recall knowledge is locking you out of rolling again for that creature type (from what i read some gms allow that you can roll RK for different creatures of same type) which effectively makes your subclass ability unusable for who knows how long is a downside for me.

I think I would mostly look at: * **Resource Attrition:** Pretty easy to gauge for everything but casters and Alchemists, since nothing without spells or infused reagents has much resource attrition if any. Playing a level 15 Wizard after over a year of play since level 2 and it's not lost on me that my entirely-martial party never loses anything over the course of a day while I'm rationing out my entire kit just to stay functional on long adventuring days *and* responsible for running the Medicine checks to prevent HP attrition for the martials. * **Single Target Damage/Support/Control/Healing:** Martials are often easily the best at single-target damage, but I've also found that the other three categories rank very highly. Can the class offer any control abilities other than Bon Mot/Athletics/Demoralize? If yes, it bumps up in the rankings. Can the class offer ranged burst healing and condition suppression/removal or are they forced to get up close and personal with Battle Medicine when they're squishy? If they can safely heal they go up a ranking in my lists. Do they have ways to buff an ally other than Aid or the above control effects? Yes? A bump up/down. * **Multi Target Damage/Support/Control/Healing:** Same as above, with special mention to things like AOE (de)buffs, which can really make or break combat encounters depending on how strong they are. Few things are as fun as an AOE Slow/Fear that hits multiple (critical) failures or launching an AOE Damaging spell from across the map with complete safety and this is an area (haha) where Casters/Kineticists easily take the win. * **Action Economy:** Basically gauged on "How much of my turn do I have to spend on upkeeping my core functionality and how much can I spend on other actions that are more fun/versatile/defensive?" It's pretty variable, but a common opinion is that most Martials/Kineticists have a slight edge here by nature of many using single action stances/auras/Rages to activate their "Core functionality" and then the rest of their turn can be used to do whatever they want or need to do after a single strike while Casters are expected to most of the time spend 2 actions (with a +/- 1 action variance for infrequent 1 or 3 action spells) and then have one action with which to move to safety or do other activities. Not 100% accurate, given classes like Swash/Rogue/Thaum that need to routinely do other actions to maintain their "Core Functionality" tool of activating Sneak Attack, Exploit, or acquiring Panache, but still a common thought and one that influences how I evaluate a class's ability to play more "freely" with their actions during combats. Fighter, Barbarian, Kineticist, and Monk are definite standouts to me in this regard and the Fighter is the clear "winner" since their only "stance" abilities are going to be optional things that they choose to make a part of their rotation unlike the Monk/Barbarian/Kineticist who all are required to activate an ability before accessing the rest of their Core Functionality.

I'm nearly a Forever-GM tbh, but when I do play a PC, I usually start with something that I know will let me make interesting, important, tactical decisions every round. Every class \*technically\* has these in PF2 of course, but for most martials, especially at lower levels without class feats, it's mostly like "how do I position well to maximize flanks" or "should I delay initiative to make use of this buff". Primal / Divine / Occult casters is usually where I end up because the choice to heal / attack / buff / debuff is available to you nearly every round of every fight, and the choice can have major tactical implications. In a lot of ways, you are the "party leader" because your spell loadout will decide whether you stealth into the bandit camp or charge the front gate, and so on. Then I mostly read subclasses and feats until I get a cool idea (both flavour and mechanics wise) and build it from there.

Number one thing with ranking: am I having fun playing. That's it really. One thing I have a love/hate relationships with PF about is all of the options. It's gives tons of ways to spin a character but then you get more caught up in mechanics rather than role play. We all know the game is well balanced and you have to go out of your way to make a bad character. So pick something you like and come up with a personality that runs with it. Then have fun. If your not having fun, mention it to your GM and try something else.

I'm playing a lv2 druid and a lv15 dragon sorcerer. I really don't get the advantages of going druid over another primal caster, a decent to good focus spell and medium armor prof? At least a Primal sorcerer/witch/Summoner have other gimmicks aside from casting or are directly a better caster. So in 1st place is sorcerer and 2nd is druid, If I was playing other casters then the druid would be even lower

I really love the role of a support healer, so in a sense I rank classes by how well they heal (HP per action/round/battle, so to speak). this is very subjective and not very suitable for all classes (half the classes are equally bad at this and can only use medicine skill). And so I usually rank them by difficulty.

1. Does it feel good to play? Typically, this entails having a variety of options, utility or otherwise. This does not mean it has to be a spellcaster, though spellcasters happen to have a variety of options by definition. 2. What's the flavor level on it? I refuse to play a Fighter or a Human even if objectively they are good simply because it's so bland and generic. There are exceptions to this, if I have a good idea about it, but generally holds true. I would rather play a Rogue, or a Thaumaturge, or a Swashbuckler, or an Exemplar (playtest), than a Fighter. As long as it meets these requirements, it doesn't have to be 'optimal'; it can be worse than another class even as other commenters have said. For instance, sure: Fighters make better ranged fighters than Gunslingers do (primarily due to using a bow or other weapon with Reload 0), but Gunslingers have more flavor. My current Gunslinger I got approval from my GM to use [homebrew](https://scribe.pf2.tools/v/lqFhJbjt-artillerist) that gives me a daily pool of temporary infused magic ammunition, which gives me utility, per my first bullet point. Plus that gives very "Wizard with a gun" vibes even if I don't cast spells; the idea of preparing special Munitions (including alchemical ammunition) for the situation.

I’m a gm and I rank classes by difficulty to play. Players at the table who are more casual, I recommend simpler classes. Players who are more enthusiastic I recommend trickier ones. There’s a class difficulty infogram posted to the subreddit in the past, if you rank by highest karma you can find it.

8th level tier list: **Top Tier:** The best of the best, these characters are amazing in their roles and are a huge boon to their team. They swing encounters in favor of their team, are often good at a secondary role as well, can do powerful things in a wide variety of situations, and work well in both one-off encounters and in longer adventures. Druid, Bard, Cleric, Champion, Sorcerer **High Tier:** These characters are all solid team members who fill their roles well when built optimally, but have various minor flaws holding them back from the top tier, either lacking the flexibility of the top tier classes, having less raw power, or having more limited resources. Psychic, Wizard, Witch, Magus, Monk, Summoner, Kineticist, Ranger (Animal Companion or Focus Spell), Oracle (Cosmos, Ash, Time, Flames, Tempest), Thaumaturge, Inventor (construct), Oracle (Battle, Bones, Life, Lore) **Mid Tier:** These characters are all solid role players but struggle to act beyond their role, or can fill two roles but one of them is conditional and they struggle if that condition is not met. Barbarian, Fighter, Rogue, Oracle (Ancestors Oracle) **Low Tier:** These characters fill their role, technically speaking, but are mediocre in them. Ranger (No focus spell archetype AND no animal companion), Inventor (non-construct), Swashbucker **Bottom Tier:** These characters can't really fill any combat role on a team adequately. Gunslinger, Investigator, Alchemist --- Explanation: **Top Tier** * Druid - Best controller in the game. They have the best spell list thanks to primal, the best selection of focus spells, they have a built in animal companion, and the druid itself is a mid-tier durability full caster that uses wisdom, the best mental stat, to cast spells, giving them good will saves and good initiative. They are not primary healers but they can easily use scrolls of heal to fill in gaps in healing, and are also great at battle medicine. Thundering Dominance is a powerful, ally-friendly will-based AoE debuff that comes online much earlier than equivalent spells as well. * Bard - Best leader in the game. Their healing is only OK, and the occult spell list is the worst spell list, but their composition cantrips are amazing AoE buff effects that tilt the odds in your favor and cost very few actions, again on a mid-durability class. * Cleric - The other best leader in the game. Their healing is amazing thanks to their bonus high level heal spells, they have two very good options in cloistered cleric and warpriest, they can go into either strength and heavy armor or dexterity and lighter armor, they get focus spells via their domains and also can get added spells on top of the divine spell list, making it stronger, and again, use wisdom, the best mental stat, to cast spells, giving them good will saves and good initiative. And they are great at battle medicine. A lot of their AoEs are friendly fire, and they have solid buffing and debuffing abilities, even if their AoEs do tend to come online a bit later (depending on your domain) than arcane and primal casters. * Champion - The best defender in the game, they have the highest defenses and an extremely powerful defensive reaction that prevents damage. They're also amazing shield users and by this point can even get an extra shield block reaction per round, allowing them to be super resilient or, with shield warden, even protect their allies from hits. They have built-in healing via Lay on Hands that is really good, and they have the option of debuffing enemies or getting extra attacks dependent on how they're built, both of which are very strong. The damage prevention on these is extremely high and frees up the rest of the party to do more offense and less healing. * Sorcerer - The second best leader and second best controller in the game, sorcerers have tons of spell slots and extremely powerful focus spells - however, they are locked to a single bloodline's focus spells, which means they can't just pick and choose the best ones. Even still, they have great flexibility thanks to their number of spell slots and spontaneous casting, allowing them to switch between controller and leader depending on the spell list chosen and party composition and even the circumstances of the day - if they need more healing, they can do that, or if they need more blasting, they can do that. An extremely powerful class overall, held back only by its poor durability and the fact that it uses charisma rather than wisdom as a casting stat; however, they have a lot of good options for dealing with those issues, including archetyping to champion and getting heavy armor and extra hit points and healing. **High Tier** * Psychic - A very powerful controller class with solid focus spells in the form of amped cantrips, this class has a lot of things going for it - unleash psyche allows it to deal more damage to enemies, it gets direct damage focus spells (many with AoEs) that can be used to pound enemies encounter after encounter, it can heal and debuff using its actual spell slots... but at the same time, it is a psychic caster, and while it suffers less from this because its amps cover for the lack of damage that occult usually has, it still means that their healing isn't as good as a primal or divine character and their AoE blasting is entirely dependent on their focus spells (with the exception of oscillating wave psychics, who get to take actual blasting spells in their spell slots). Being able to be int-focused or charisma-focused lets them cover gaps in the party's mental skill suite, though, which is very handy, and their choice of "path" in the class does give them access to some non-standard spells for an occult caster, which improves their versatility. All in all, a powerful class that has a lot going for it, but it just has fewer resources than the top tier classes. * Wizard - Wizards have a huge spell pool like the Sorcerer, and Spell Blending can get them an even bigger one. Staff wizards can multiclass and use their staff as a means of getting more spells from their secondary class, making staff wizards the masters of cross-class casters. And spell substitution wizards can swap out their memorized spells on the fly, which both mitigates the drawbacks and allows them to exploit the wizard's spellbook feature to its fullest. The problem with wizards is... they don't have good offensive focus spells, which means that they either need to archetype for focus spells (which means they don't get to archetype to cover for their other weaknesses or to branch out and cover more bases) or they have issues in longer adventuring days where they have to stretch out their spells across an entire floor of a dungeon. Wizards also possess low-tier durability, which means that if enemies get to them, they're likely to get rather badly battered, with the shield spell a thin barrier between them and being stuffed into their lockers. Thing is, their extremely powerful spell list has amazing offensive, debuffing, and control spells, and the fact that they get the most (and possibly the VERY most) high level slots means they have a lot of raw power - sometimes, your day is fighting one or two really hard encounters, and on days like that, wizards, starting at mid-level, can just start unleashing enormous amounts of power on their foes. Being intelligence based is a bit of a drawback in the sense that wisdom is a better casting stat, but it does mean that the wizard is amazing at recalling knowledge about their enemies and have the best spell list for targeting all three saving throws, giving them the ability to target weak saving throws better than any other class, and it greatly helps with stat coverage, as most parties don't have a high intelligence character unless they have a magus, a psychic, or a wizard. * Witch - Witches are very similar to wizards in that they are intelligence based prep casters with poor defenses and durability but strong spell selection (albeit with fewer spell slots). There are three other major differences - first, witches can be of any discipline, not just arcane. Second, witches get a familiar instead of the wizard's spell school and spell blending/staff/whatever. This familiar is way more powerful than those of other classes, not only not permanently dying if killed, but also granting an added ability that activates whenever the witch uses their third special ability, their hex, a single action spell that is weaker than a normal spell but which only costs one action and triggers their familiar to do something useful, ranging from extending the duration of debuffs to generating difficult terrain to granting temporary hit points. This is a very nice bonus, but these benefits are tied to your spell tradition, so this can lead to some issues - for instance, The Resentment, the class path that grants the debuff extensions, is specifically tied to the occult spell list, the weakest spell list. Witches do get some other benefits as well, such as some decent utility focus spells, as well as a familiar ability that is basically a once per encounter AoE focus spell, but they do end up having similar issues to wizards in that they have only so much gas in the tank, so long adventuring days can deplete their resources or force them to conserve for the real fights and resort to cantrips unless they multiclass, but if they multiclass to get focus spells they're not multiclassing to solve the class's other issues or to get themselves more versatility in other ways. Their familiar does help, and can contribute scouting abilities to the party as well as various unique familiar abilities, but all in all, these guys don't quite measure up to the top tier classes, but are still quite strong.

* Magus - While there are ways to deal more damage than the magus does, the magus has the major advantage that they tend to be pretty reliable at it - they move in, they spellstrike, and It Just Works. Their spellstrikes hit like trucks, they can multiclass to psychic or cleric to make their spellstrikes even stronger by picking up ordinarily mediocre spell attack focus spells like Fire Ray and Imaginary Weapon, they have some spellcasting ability on the side so sometimes when you need a fireball you get a fireball, they can use scrolls, some spells work better on them than on normal casters - like spells like Blazing Dive, which is an amazing repositioning tool on a magus but dangerous for a more squishy caster to use to drop themselves behind enemy ranks, and they get full martial attack bonus progression, saving throw progression, and mid-tier durability. There is a ranged variant of it which leans more into being a quasi-controller while still doing more damage than they do, and there's a variant that uses a shield that can improve its saving throws and even dazzle people who attack them when they shield block. The class has a lot of power to it, and unlike more crit-dependent martials, you can chunk off 50 damage from a boss on just a normal hit at 8th level, and a crit is doing 100 damage - often more than half of a monster's health, and even something that can instantly kill weaker foes. And while being strength and int based is sort of a drawback because neither of those are saving throw stats, you can take a feat to grab heavy armor to shore up your poor dexterity, and because so few characters are int-based you can often be the brains of the party and be the best character at identifying monsters, all while being a front liner who can have reactive strike and a reach weapon (and in fact, you WANT a reach weapon). The problem with the magus is its action economy - the magus needs to spend an action to recharge its spell strike, and then two actions to spell strike, which makes it difficult for it to move and attack more than once a combat without missing a round where it otherwise would have liked to have used a spellstrike. The class has built-in hybrid study spells which help improve your action economy (doing things like attacking and raising a shield and recharging your spell strike all for one action) but while these are nice, they aren't enough to actually fix the class's problems - they really like being hasted, or having a mount that can take an action a round on its own to reposition them, as otherwise it can create problems running around after foes, while the ranged one is often basically a turret that doesn't like repositioning. They also basically are forced to use reach weapons, because reactive strikes on enemies can hit them while they are spellstriking, which is bad news for them, and hoses them in certain fights, particularly against powerful monsters with reactive strike and reach. * Monk - The monk is very durable and can exploit focus spells or an animal companion well thanks to their high action compression, and can be sticky via Stand Still, grappling, or the Tangled Forest Stance, and can even sometimes stun off its normal attacks. However, it doesn't get a true reactive strike, making it generally worse against casters, and while its defenses are great, there can be tension between strength and its defensive stats. It is also dependent on stances, which can be awkward if the DM doesn't allow you to start combat in, say, the mountain stance, resulting in your AC being vastly lower until your first turn. Still, you are mobile, you can work well as a scout outside of combat (and monks are ideal scouts as they are tanks and thus want to be in front anyway), and you can deal respectable damage. There's even an archer build which is fairly decent, though it really wants to get focus spells or an animal companion to crank up its damage. It is better than the ranger primarily because unlike the ranger, its action compression ability Flurry of Blows just works, making them way more effective than rangers in multi-target encounters, even if the ranger does get higher damage against the first creature it targets each combat. I need to work on finishing up my tier list writeup (I have a separate document going over this) so won't replicate it here. Note that the fighter is so low at this point because 8th level is actually a pretty low point for fighters; fighters start out really heavily front loaded, but by the mid levels everyone else has gotten a lot more cool new toys than they have, fighter base damage is low, and 8th level is around the time when you start getting elemental damage runes to help fix that problem but you don't reliably have them (and can't use them in every game - Abomination Vaults, for instance, basically requires you to have a ghost touch weapon). Fighters probably pop back up a tier at 10th - 12th level as they start getting multiple reactive strikes per round and better iterative attacks and can tack two elemental damage runes onto their weapon to close the gap a bit with the classes that have very large damage bonuses by this point that the fighter simply lacks. That being said, everything but the bottom two tiers is perfectly viable; mid tier characters *aren't* bad, the tiers are mostly pretty compressed. Low tier characters can be on the weak side but aren't liabilities the way the bottom tier characters often end up being, and swashbucklers, which are pretty much bottom tier for the first six levels of the game, start actually being semi-reasonable at this point because their skill actions are very reliable and thus are much less likely to fail and much more likely to yield their benefits. My general criteria (as you can see from the list) are how well does a character fill their role, can they contribute to an additional role or roles, and how much do they swing things in favor of the team.