Post/Author/DateTime	Post
angryman 01-24-05, 04:58 AM	This is my attempt at balancing my future campaigns for the core classes. Mostly it's stuff I think is broken or weak, with a lot of added stuff from these boards. So without further ado, I present (with a big IMO)- Angryman's D&D 3.6 Wizard, rogue, ranger, monk, barbarian and bard are unchanged. I don't think these classes are unbalanced- they, to me, seem extremely well balanced. Cleric The cleric loses Heavy Armour proficiency. The cleric loses a good fortitude save. Divine Power disallows spellcasting while under its effects. Divine Metamagic is gone. Druid The Wild armour enchantment is gone. Wild Casting (casting while wild shaped) is a +1 metamagic feat. Fighter Weapon specialisation scales with level, negating the need for greater weapon spec. It scales at a rate of one per 4 levels and caps at +5 at 20th. Every four levels, starting at 4th, you may choose another specialised weapon. Better feats such as Armour Specialisation (+2 to AC) are allowed. Feat synergies are included. Paladin Use the Ultimate Paladin from these boards. Sorcerer Eschew materials as a 1st level bonus feat. This is of course incomplete, and doesn't include newer classes, but that's why I posted this suggestion- to get help/advice/flames...well, not flames.
JayF 01-24-05, 05:32 AM	Hello I think that you are a bit harsh with the cleric ! To keep in line with your proposals, I would just say : The cleric loses a good fortitude save. Divine Power disallows spellcasting while under its effects. As you are powering up other classes, it should be ok. The changes to the other classes seem balanced.
Zaphod Zarniwoop 01-24-05, 05:45 AM	I don't quite get why so many people are all for restricting the Cleric's abilities. I've played in one campaign and DMed three (two still continuing today), but no player ever wanted to play a Cleric. If you've got powergamers in your group that are trying to max out their combat skill, just have a word with them. Or if you want an in-game solution, make sure your NPC spellcasters know Dispel Magic. Anyways, the Druid is arguably as powerful as the Cleric. Though he doesn't get buff spells per se, his wild shape has more or less the same effect and lasts longer, plus he has an animal companion going for him, offsetting his armor restrictions and slower Cure progression. Basically what I'm trying to say is that Clerics are only unbalanced if you see the game as nothing more than a combat engine. From the RP perspective, they're usually pretty bland.
Neeek 01-24-05, 06:43 AM	I don't quite get why so many people are all for restricting the Cleric's abilities. I've played in one campaign and DMed three (two still continuing today), but no player ever wanted to play a Cleric. If you've got powergamers in your group that are trying to max out their combat skill, just have a word with them. Or if you want an in-game solution, make sure your NPC spellcasters know Dispel Magic. First, just because the players in your campaign don't recognize how freakin' broken the Cleric is, doesn't mean it's not broken. Second, a buffed Cleric *wants* you to try to dispel him. A DM from a similar level character only has a 50% chance of working, for each buff, and when they cast DM, what they *aren't* casting is something that might actually threaten the Cleric. Third, you used the Oberoni Fallacy. Shame on you. snip stuff on Druids being just as broken as clerics. Yes, they are. Basically what I'm trying to say is that Clerics are only unbalanced if you see the game as nothing more than a combat engine. From the RP perspective, they're usually pretty bland. The game *is* nothing more than a combat engine. RP, excluding some often ignored skills, and really silly alignment rules, is entirely seperate from the system. Attempting to balance classes with RP considerations is both a bad idea from an RP stand point, since it restricts the kinds of character that are playable, and from a balance standpoint, because it, you know, doesn't.
detectevil 01-24-05, 07:22 AM	The only way to balance the system, in my eyes it to rebalance the magic system as a whole. The simple fact that you can't fight magic without magic is bad for the game. Taking heavy armors away from clerics is a little harsh and not very apealing, specially since it can be regained with a single level of fighter (something all classes like taking) and clerics had that since they first apeared, so it's in the colective imaginary (like mounted paladins and two weapon fighting rangers) As to Paladin's, Ultimate Paladin is one of the few Ultimate Classes I don't like, and it's not really that well balanced. A better option is Jaerome Darkwind's Revised Paladin. It's greatly balanced and very well flavored (and very well recognized)
angryman 01-24-05, 08:14 AM	Well, I don't like taking the Heavy Armour from the cleric, but this is my argument... Clerics are pure casters, they are the ONLY pure casters to get full armour. Half the "pure" warrior -ranger, barb- classes don't get it. The real reason is a) they are priests, and b) giving them Medium means they need Dex at least a little. This makes them a little more MAD, which in this case is a good thing. Taking a fighter level is fine because their strongest point, their casting, suffers for it. I was thinking the clerics of War should get Heavy Armour and prof. with the deity's weapon (no weapon focus). In this way, the traditional tank cleric is possible through the war domain. Or if you want an in-game solution, make sure your NPC spellcasters know Dispel Magic. I've never liked these arguments as balancing factors. I shouldn't need to always have NPCs on hand who have dispels. VERY few monsters get it, btw.
Dunelord 01-24-05, 08:33 AM	The simple fact of the matter is your wrong about the whole RP/combat being seperate. A Paladin who slaps around a 10 year old girl because he is bored is going to be very different then one who doesn't. Yes you can go into the whole evil thing which you did bring up BUT the point I am making is that Clerics SHOULD be under very heavy role play restrictions. I for one don't feal they are over powered. Yes their are some crazy builds that make for very powerful clerics BUT that is true with any class that cast spells, and some that don't.
Neeek 01-24-05, 10:58 AM	The simple fact of the matter is your wrong about the whole RP/combat being seperate. A Paladin who slaps around a 10 year old girl because he is bored is going to be very different then one who doesn't. Yes. The silly alignment based rules I was refering to. I for one don't feal they are over powered. Yes their are some crazy builds that make for very powerful clerics BUT that is true with any class that cast spells, and some that don't. Um...That's the whole point of the thread. Attempting to balance the classes so that they all are about the same power level, and more importantly, so classes aren't "just plain better" at *everything* than others. A good start would be to simple eliminate the Barbarian, Paladin, Ranger, Bard, Sorcerer, Monk and possibly Rogue and Druid classes entirely. You don't need them at all. Barbarians, Monks(which is a poorly thought out class anyway), Rogues(combat abilities) and Rangers(most of their abilities) can all be feat trees, allowing you to take some of their abilities, or all of them, as you please. Sorcerers and Bards are just variant wizards, with the other Bard abilities being feats, and can be treated as such(allow for a "Sponanteous Caster" feat, for example). Druids can just be a Cleric domain/feat series, and Paladins/Rangers can be redesigned to work as Cleric/Fighters. Clerics would go down to *light* armor. And the whole spell list for every class would have to be redesigned. No more game-breaking stuff like Wish or Shapechange. Wish granting is now exclusively purview of monsters like Efreeti. Fighters would be given various options for Armor/weapons from none(getting Monk AC and Improved unarmed strike) to Full(Heavy Armor, Martial Weapons). And a Feat every level. And the Feats will actually scale by level. And no more bad feat trees. Two Weapon Fighting is *1* feat. The whole tree. 1 feat. Dodge/mobility/spring attack: 1 feat. To deal with Skills, just have everyone pick a skill set(we can probably get away with 4-6 different lists. Scholar, Diplomat, Hunter, Rogue, Wanderer(old bard stuff), Cityfolk) for each level, and give them 4 or 6 skill points per level. Now everyone can have an out of combat roll, and the out of combat role isn't shoehorned by their in combat role. Doing all of this would not only balance the game far better than it is currently, but allow for a gigantic increase in RP options. So the system is just better, since you lose the ability to make none of the old classes and have a ton of additional flexibility.
detectevil 01-24-05, 11:28 AM	Well, when I created a Priest class to replace and rebalance the cleric, it got poor reviews on the boards, but at playtesting in my group we found it kind of balanced. Well, except for the NPC that had Good/Chaos/War/Destruction as domains. But hey, if that is not recepy for a juggernaut machine of doomsday, I don't know what is. But in my world I also added a role-playing rule called Faith, but all characters had it, according to their alignement. Paladins were forced to use the LG Faith, Honor, and Samurai the LN Faith, Bushido. Clerics were forced to follow the Faith of their deities alignement, whatever it was. For each faith, the character might receive different forms of divine intervention when in trouble, according to their level of Faith, including Resurection and Returning to Earth as a Celestial at Faith 9 and 10. Clerics, Paladins and Samurai would loose their powers if their faith fell to lower than 2. Point is, if it's not wrote down in the character sheet, players just won't get it.
Arcane Guyver 01-24-05, 11:47 AM	I like many of these changes. I too am probably going to eliminate heavy armor from the cleric (making the Fighter the only class to start with it, since Paladin & PsyWar aren't around). I saw a suggestion last night that is pretty good: seperate the domains from the cleric's spellcasting. At 1st level choose one of the domains to be your 'primary' domain, and you get the 1st-level spell for that domain. At 2nd level you get the 1st-level spell for the other domain. Basically it's a little something to keep Clerics from prestiging out at first opportunity.
dragoncc 01-24-05, 02:27 PM	I like many of these changes. I too am probably going to eliminate heavy armor from the cleric (making the Fighter the only class to start with it, since Paladin & PsyWar aren't around). I saw a suggestion last night that is pretty good: seperate the domains from the cleric's spellcasting. At 1st level choose one of the domains to be your 'primary' domain, and you get the 1st-level spell for that domain. At 2nd level you get the 1st-level spell for the other domain. Basically it's a little something to keep Clerics from prestiging out at first opportunity. That's a really good idea, i think I'll give it a try (I already nixed the heavy armor thing) but I think that will do the trick nicely. I do agree with those that say that each cleric should have a set of core beliefs that are related to the religion he/she chooses & should have to roleplay that aspect as well - but I believe all characters should do this (not necessarily religion related but stated beliefs) not just clerics. Clerics just have a higher set of beliefs to act on is all & can be penalized for changing their minds when their god hasn't. (A tool my DM loves all to well :( )
the Horc 01-24-05, 08:09 PM	I personally would like to see the creation of 8-HD Battlecasters, modeled off the Psychic Warrior. So the Cleric with the heavy armor proficiency and the Druid with the Wild Shape would be 8-HD classes with medium BAB and 6 caster levels, while there also exists a 4 or 6 HD class (depending) that has full Spellcaster progression, little if any armor, and some bonus feats or class abilities. I'd try and make feats balanced, so people don't go "Oh God, why did I take this piece of crap feat?" Possibly the application of SKR's feat point system, or the rebalancing of feats in general.
danielinthewolvesden 01-24-05, 08:28 PM	Note that my thread/poll in this forum rated Cleric and Wizard as precisely even in power terms- but you don't propose a "fix" for Wizard- which needs one as badly as the cleric. In a way- moreso, as there is no doubt that the Wizard is more fun to play. These two are good ideas, however. The cleric does need a bit of a nerf. "Divine Power disallows spellcasting while under its effects. Divine Metamagic is gone." Clerics do need to be held to a strict faith, I agree. Clerics are powerful, but few want to play them, as being a "healing monkey" isn't much fun. My other suggestions: Wizard- can't use "Sudden" feats. Add a "blip" to upper spell progression so that 9th level spells are reached same time as Sorc. Druid- as you said- but NO "wild casting"- that feat is gone, gone, gone. :mad: Fighter- I like part of it- but instead of "armor spec" I'd give him "shield spec"- "sword and board" is realisticly much better than THW or TWF. I'd say that "armour spec" -rather than adding +2 to AC- would allow one more point of DEX to be used, and be one less AC check penalty instead. I'd also allow a Fighter at start to select ONE add'l skill from a long list to be a class skill. At 5th level he gets a bonus 4 skill points, or maybe a free "2+2" feat. Takes care of that "empty level". Sorc- gets 4 skill points per level, plus as you said. Note that spellcasting PrC's give a strong advantage to Wizards as quite a few require ALL of a Sorc's limited skill ranks, and maybe only half of a Wizards. This evens them up. I'd also give the Sorc a bonus Metamagic feat @9th level (that's when a Wizard gets 5th level spells, but the Sorc doesn't.)
angryman 01-24-05, 10:05 PM	danielinthewolvesden, those are some excellent additions- I was thinking of kicking wild casting anyway. I don't have the book where wizards get sudden metamagic, so I would get rid of that, too. And bumping Sorcerers up to 4 skill points/lvl would be nice too- perhaps even throwing in Diplomacy as a class skill, too, if they get it. They are often the face of the party, so it stands to reason.
Arcane Guyver 01-24-05, 10:37 PM	Have you seen Monte Cook's variant Sorcerer, from Complete Book of Eldritch Might (one of the very best unofficial books ever written)? It gives the Sorcerer a higher HD, 4 skill points per level, adds Diplomacy & Gather Info as class skills, and does the whole "spells with costly components cost 1/25 XP" thing. Oh yes, and more spells known at early levels. The cost? The spell list being rearranged; many 'wizardly' spells are taken off entirely (like Arcane Mark), others are bumped up a level (like Invisibility). Even with all that, I personally don't think it went far enough; stuttered spell progression is retarded, and giving some Extra Spell bonus feats every once in awhile could discourage prestiging out with a minimal power increase.