Post/Author/DateTime	Post
stone_thecrows 03-26-08, 07:40 PM	Ok so you're going to run a new campaign and you want it to be as balanced as possible... 1, What Classes would you ban? 2, What Spells would you ban? 3, What else would you do or house-rule on, to help overall balance? I want this game to be as balanced as possible in 3.5 rules. Even if I have to remove spells like Wish etc. to achieve this, I'm prepared to listen to what you guys think. Please help!
PenderGrass 03-26-08, 07:58 PM	Try starting with just the Core books. The first 3 books were subjected to the most intense playtesting. :dragon: *****
heffroncm 03-26-08, 08:08 PM	Play core only. Ban all classes but Cleric, Wizard, and Druid. Players will all be balanced against each other.
Talisman 03-26-08, 11:27 PM	First, for a new GM, core only is the way to go. Thre's good stuff in other books, but make sure you read and understand it thoroughly before allowing it in your game. Second, be wary of clerics, druids and wizards in the hands of optimizers. I wouldn't ban 'em, but if the C/D/W players seem to be dominating, you might have a private word with them about their latest, greatest spell combo...divine power + righteous might, I'm lookin' at you. Third, and I'm going against my own advice here: replace the wild shaping druid with the shapeshifter variant in PHB2. Much better. Fourth, be very wary of any spell/effect that gives PCs access to material that is traditionally GM-only - specifically, monsters. Monsters have weird and funky abilities, which the players will exploit and use without mercy. Watch out for wild shape and the summoning spells. You might want to just ban the summoning spells and be done with it. Fifth, ban these spells: forcecage, alter self, polymprph, shapechange, ray of enfeeblement, divine power. Be extremely wary of any spell or effect that says "always", "never," or any other absolute. Spells that don't allow counters - or that are perfect counters - are deceptively powerful.
Cranewings 03-26-08, 11:41 PM	This is what I do with wizards; don't let wizards get spells with each new level but instead make them find or research each and every spell. If it is a busy game without a lot of downtime for the characters, then the only spells the wizard gets are ones that you let him have. Then don't let NPC wizards leave spellbooks sitting around the pc can use. If the pc is an arcane spell caster, use some flavor text and say the npc wizard is an alienist and gets his powers from the old ones. Then if he gets the book of secrets he will sooner go mad than learn how his enemy teleported.
StevenO 03-26-08, 11:52 PM	USE POINT BUY STATS. Sure some character concepts have far fewer "important" stats but using PB 28 will let most concepts get played while limiting some of the "broken" options. PB 25-28 leaves published CRs relevant which should make your job much easier. Point Buy is also far better for balance because you avoid huge discrepancies in PC stats that you could get when rolling; 14,10,10,10,10,8 is by RAW an acceptable set of rolled stats but they'd pale compared to a player who manages to roll 17,16,14,12,11,10. For a first time game stick to CORE material only to start with although you may expand later.
Vaelan 03-27-08, 12:27 AM	Do not allow core spellcasters or non-core spellcasters that emulate them. Stick to alternate magic systems (except Psionics, they're too much like core magic), because they're all much, much more balanced than the core magic.
stone_thecrows 03-27-08, 03:34 AM	Would ToB help balance the game? Or is the real problem (as it would appear from the replies) in the Spell department? If spell power is one of the main issues can you guys name and shame the main offenders, and is there anything in the Spell Compendium that needs its wings clipped?
NordicBirch 03-27-08, 07:19 AM	Would ToB help balance the game? Or is the real problem (as it would appear from the replies) in the Spell department? If spell power is one of the main issues can you guys name and shame the main offenders, and is there anything in the Spell Compendium that needs its wings clipped? There isn't really any problem. There are just some things (Shapechange) that some DM's aren't good enough to handle. Most of the time in-game responses and actually knowing what the rules really say are enough to keep things happy. Take it easy and as the saying goes learn to walk before trying to fly, rushing into new books and higher level only leads to misunderstood rules. Basically, make sure you understand everything that is in your game. Banning is very rarely needed although it is rather actively used... Start with core only and add material as you get comfortable with it, you don't need to allow a whole book at one go either. ToB is easier in that it is effective but difficult to unbalance but it's a whole new system so read it carefully and check the forums for issues. Char Op. board is a good way to learn what to expect from which ability/prc. There are some things that look broken but are useless and vice versa.
Evil DM Mk3 03-27-08, 09:00 AM	wait and hope for 4th edition. Cos 3rd has never had a hope of anything as fancy as BALANCE.
StSteven 03-27-08, 12:49 PM	Yeah...forget about balancing characters. You can stick with Core, but not because it is balanced. It is just easier to implement all of the rules correctly. This allows for the most balance possible in the core. Again, core is not balanced. You can add ToB to help a little, but it doesn't balance out with full casters either. It does give fighter types more interesting things to do, but it doesn't balance with casters. Don't kill yourself banning things. I have never banned anything, and have never had a broken game. I've never had a balanced game either though.
Sigurd van Norhusen 03-27-08, 02:45 PM	Encourage heavy use of psionics. They are balanced better than the Core spellcasters. Exception: Stay the hell away from Complete Psionics. Better use Dreamscarred Press' material.
Sunic_Flames 03-27-08, 03:05 PM	USE POINT BUY STATS. Sure some character concepts have far fewer "important" stats but using PB 28 will let most concepts get played while limiting some of the "broken" options. PB 25-28 leaves published CRs relevant which should make your job much easier. Point Buy is also far better for balance because you avoid huge discrepancies in PC stats that you could get when rolling; 14,10,10,10,10,8 is by RAW an acceptable set of rolled stats but they'd pale compared to a player who manages to roll 17,16,14,12,11,10. For a first time game stick to CORE material only to start with although you may expand later. Broken options like... fighters? Non broken options like... wizards and CoDzilla? :rolleyes: Read up on SAD and MAD and its effects in game and get back to me. As for balance... do not use core only. I repeat. No core only. That's about as imbalanced as it gets. Seriously. In core, they were still working out the kinks in the system, which is why you get clearly false assumptions like full BAB and a few combat feats being worth as much as near all spellcasting abilities, a secondary feature that exists, and a third feature worth a damn. Druid and Ranger, I'm looking at you. No wild shape, craft AC, much lower casting capacity. Not to mention the other martial classes. Massive power disparity between the two. If anything, you should ban core classes. The later casters don't measure up to CoDzilla, and the later martial guys are not always jokes. End result? Closing the gap. The reason for this is simple. They had a better idea of what worked and adjusted accordingly. It's like trying to sculpt something. First time, you'll probably shatter it or at least do a crude job at best. More practice, and you get better.
RobbyPants 03-27-08, 03:11 PM	In the last game I ran, I made some changes to various races and classes. Some of the changes were for flavor, and some for mechanics and balance. Here are a few changes I made off the top of my head: Removed the -2 Cha from half orcs. Also gave them +2 bonus on Intimidate Gave half elves a bonus skill point each level (four at level one) as the human ability Used an updated fighter class that I made, filling in the odd levels Used OneWing4ngel's paladin, but I haven't actually play-tested it yet. Another thing I might do in my next game is make using the shapeshifting variant of the druid mandatory (getting rid of the animal companion and wildshape). Also, I wonder is the recharge magic system from Unearthed Arcana would help with balance. Casters would probably get more spells per day, but not so many during a single combat. Also, the amount of out-of-combat spells available would encourage them to keep the rest of the party fully healed and buffed. This would bring up the power of the non-casters respectively, assuming the party is working well together.
StevenO 03-27-08, 05:10 PM	Broken options like... fighters? Non broken options like... wizards and CoDzilla? :rolleyes: Read up on SAD and MAD and its effects in game and get back to me. ... It is somewhat difficult to "break" a class like the Mystic Theurge to get 9th level casting of two different types when you have to split your "casting" stat. Not that the MT is that so strong by itself but limiting stats makes playing it to in its strenghts more difficult if you must play it through its weaknesses. Sure point buy may make some of those classes that seem like they only need one stat look stronger but are they really? For a Wizard to PB that almighty INT 18 another character can likely buy up the save stats which go a long ways to countering that DC advantange plus provide other benefits. A PB 25 wizard running 8,12,12,18,9,8 has little spell advantage over a wizard running 9,14,14,16,10,8 but the second wizard has a large number of advantages over the INT 18 wizard in the form of higher AC and hp. Make it a sorcerer instead of a wizard and the skill advantage from the high INT goes away as well. Generally, all the classes can function just fine with only a 14 in their "prime" attributes although full casters probably should start with a more expensive 15 in their casting stat to naturally cast 9th level spells when the time comes. I've read enough on MAD and SAD classes and frankly as average stats go up MAD classes become that much stronger. SAD classes may work with only one good ability score but with PB starting with a higher score cost more while more balanced stats have their advantages. The MAD class may spread out scores more but because they use multiple stats they gain more benefit from higher scores.
Sunic_Flames 03-27-08, 05:31 PM	It is somewhat difficult to "break" a class like the Mystic Theurge to get 9th level casting of two different types when you have to split your "casting" stat. Not that the MT is that so strong by itself but limiting stats makes playing it to in its strenghts more difficult if you must play it through its weaknesses. Sure point buy may make some of those classes that seem like they only need one stat look stronger but are they really? For a Wizard to PB that almighty INT 18 another character can likely buy up the save stats which go a long ways to countering that DC advantange plus provide other benefits. A PB 25 wizard running 8,12,12,18,9,8 has little spell advantage over a wizard running 9,14,14,16,10,8 but the second wizard has a large number of advantages over the INT 18 wizard in the form of higher AC and hp. Make it a sorcerer instead of a wizard and the skill advantage from the high INT goes away as well. Generally, all the classes can function just fine with only a 14 in their "prime" attributes although full casters probably should start with a more expensive 15 in their casting stat to naturally cast 9th level spells when the time comes. I've read enough on MAD and SAD classes and frankly as average stats go up MAD classes become that much stronger. SAD classes may work with only one good ability score but with PB starting with a higher score cost more while more balanced stats have their advantages. The MAD class may spread out scores more but because they use multiple stats they gain more benefit from higher scores. ...And a MT is inferior to a cleric or wizard. Also, you're not getting 9th level spells on both sides pre epic. You can get 9th on one and 7th on the other though. Or some other mix. Its purpose is for those who want to do both and at least be half decent at it. Which is an example of something subpar becoming better, to not be so far behind the leaders. Thank you for proving my point. The 25 PB wizard doesn't run that array if he wants effectiveness. He runs 8 14 14 17 8 8. The only mechanical effect of his dump stats is his good save is down a point or two. How many intelligent enemies attack the wizard's mind anyways? Not many. Most will attack Fort and Ref. 15 is the minimum for a prime stat. Casters need it to get their spells on time. Everyone else needs it for... whatever they do. 18 isn't necessary, but is nice. Now compare to your MAD guy like say... a tank Fighter. He doesn't have enough points to go around. Crank it up to 32, now he does. So does the Monk, the MT, and a number of other subpar options. Maybe even a Paladin. The Wizard? He's not that much stronger. He's near ceilinged already. Everything else is just about flavor text for him. It's a catch up mechanism, closing the gap. Low PB on a SAD just pigeon holes it somewhat into being min/maxed. No flavor stats. Not that big a deal. Low PB on an MAD means spread too thin.
StevenO 03-27-08, 07:02 PM	...And a MT is inferior to a cleric or wizard. Also, you're not getting 9th level spells on both sides pre epic. You can get 9th on one and 7th on the other though. Or some other mix. Its purpose is for those who want to do both and at least be half decent at it. Which is an example of something subpar becoming better, to not be so far behind the leaders. Thank you for proving my point. As you were advocating that one MUST play non-core to have anything resembling balance may I point out the Ur-Priest and Sublime Chord classes to you because you seem to have missed them? Wizard 10/Ur-Priest2/MT8 can have 9th level spells for both divine AND arcane spells. While it certainly is possible to get the WIS 19 and INT 19 needed to do that it usually requires either some crazy starting stats, great (and possibly impossible) racial modifiers, and/or an expenditure for stat boosting items. 15 is the minimum for a prime stat. Casters need it to get their spells on time. Everyone else needs it for... whatever they do. 18 isn't necessary, but is nice. An who else NEEDS a starting 15? Lets take a look at what has prereqs that high: Snatch Arrows (DEX 15 + two other feats) Improved Precise Shot (DEX 19, +11 BAB, two other feats) Manyshot (DEX 17, +6 BAB, two other feats) Two Weapon Fighting (DEX 15) TW Defense (DEX 15, TWF) Improved TWF (DEX 17, +6 BAB) Greater TWF (DEX 19, +11 BAB) Ok, it looks like there are a few more things that may need something better than a starting 14 to get but most of these can be gained as class features WITHOUT meeting the prereqs. Only Snatch Arrows actually requires a DEX 15 but with a starting score of 14 that makes it available at 5th level. Perhaps the DEX based non-Ranger who want those Archery/TWF feats would benefit from a higher starting DEX but DEX is possibly the most useful stat in the entire game. One stat covering AC, Initiative, a saving throw, a large number of personal use skills, ranged attack, and quite possibly melee attacks doesn't need much more reason for improvement. Now compare to your MAD guy like say... a tank Fighter. He doesn't have enough points to go around. The PB 25 "tank" fighter could stat out something like 15,13,14,10,12,8 and do fine. Hey it even has a starting WILL save that is as good as a Wizard starting with WIS 8 has. If looking for some Combat Expertise type stuff I'd probably switch up the 10, 12, and 13 a bit or even drop that 15 back down for the points to boost the other stats. Using PB 25 on a Monk or Paladin at I wouldn't start with anything over a 14 and could be happy with it Crank it up to 32, now he does. So does the Monk, the MT, and a number of other subpar options. Maybe even a Paladin. The Wizard? He's not that much stronger. He's near ceilinged already. Everything else is just about flavor text for him. PB 32 wouldn't change much. For a fighter I'd be stating with STR 14, DEX 14, CON 14, INT 12 which leaves me with more than enough points to fill out the other two stats and boost one or two of these. You still wouldn't see me buying an 18 and even a 17 is unlikely. It's a catch up mechanism, closing the gap. Low PB on a SAD just pigeon holes it somewhat into being min/maxed. No flavor stats. Not that big a deal. Low PB on an MAD means spread too thin. So starting with straight 18s is no benefit at all to a SAD class at all when compared to a MAD class? Starting with straight 14s must make any character incredibly underpowered because those stats are spread "too thin" to make any real character. I have seen evidence that Point Buy is actually far more beneficial to MAD characters than rolled stats can ever be. I'm in the camp that believes a standard 4d6 drop lowest should equate to a PB 28-29 in the long run. Now if when getting that "average" you happen to roll an 18 and 16 that pretty much means the rest of your stats aren't too good which means there is no way you would play a MAD class. Conversely getting a completely average set of rolls that vary from 12-14 may make you a terrible candidate for a so called SAD class. All in all point buy IS the most balanced way for a character's stat generation. It lets the MAD character spread out their scores, the SAD characters to concentrate theirs, and the role player to put things were they seem fit. Note for those who don't know: SAD=Single Attribute Dependancy, MAD=Multiple AD. A SAD class is one where most or all of their class abilities are keyed to a certain ability and the rest can slide; the Wizard is the prime example of a SAD character although other spellcasters also are close. A MAD class is one that benefits from or uses multiple ability scores; the Paladin is the biggest example as it wants good physical stats for combat, INT for some skill points, WIS to power spellcasting (although there are spellless variaties that allow this to dump) and CHA for smites, turns, and saves.
Braithwaite 03-27-08, 07:54 PM	Stone, please listen to Sunic_Flames, who is right, not StevenO, who is not.
Tequila_Sunrise 03-27-08, 08:24 PM	Check out my Tome of Collected House Rules and Variants (click on the second link in my signature). They're intended to make your game more balanced and easier to run. I also suggest a simple disclaimer to all your players before you start playing: "I want everyone to have fun, so if any particular class, spell or other option becomes really problematic, I reserve the right to modify or ban it." TS
StevenO 03-27-08, 09:04 PM	Stone, please listen to Sunic_Flames, who is right, not StevenO, who is not. So what am I incorrect about? That point buy is much better for game balance than rolled stats? Sorry, but nothing about rolled stats says "balance" as rolling a high set vs. rolling a lower set doesn't mean anything when you are goint to play any given class. To be balanced any two players should be able to make identical characters (maybe they are twins) but when rolling stats you are very unlikely to have the same set of stats and if one is just plain better than the other that will make that character just plain better than the other. Now from a the view point of character optimization rolled stats may be better because you can get above average sets to work with while you can pigeon hole those poorer sets. I guess if you use a rolling method like 4d6 seven times, rerolling 1s and 2s, then dropping the lowest die and final score you may get something close to "balanced" stats between the PCs. Of course your net stats are going to MUCH MUCH higher that the game generally assumes thus throwing everything else out of balance unless further steps are taken to power up all the opposition. As a DM looking for simplicity you'd be much better off keeping the PC power level close to what the game assumes (which is stats less than PB 30) otherwise many of the normal aids (CR, Wealth by level guidelines, and such) become worthless.
Magikeeper 03-28-08, 01:07 AM	Hmmm... this strongly depends on how many classes you want to deal with. First, anything similar to core casting > than anything else. This sadly includes psionics, as much as I love the XPH. Now, I don't know how experienced you are, so I'll give a few suggestions: ------------------ First-ish game, does not want to learn a crapton of new rulesets, prefers to give players a few options rather than ban specifics (the kind of person who might want to play "core only".): Allowed Classes: ToB classes, Rogue, Barbarian, Warlock, Marshal. You have to learn the ToB system (Warlock system couldn't be much easier), but you don't have to bother with arcane/divine spell cheese so it evens out. Marshal is on the internet - I added it because I know some people like playing supporting roles and the other classes are rather self-sufficient. Marshal is really a dip class though – I would suggest multiclassing after 1-4 levels. The only issue is the lack of healing – then again, you would have 2 item using classes and the crusader’s healing maneuvers. You could also create a healing invocation. Healing Touch – Range: Touch , Effect: Heals <Caster level> HP. Or, if you dislike the idea of the party being able to fully heal in-between any combats: Life Transfer – Range: Close , Effect: Warlock sacrifices XHP, target is healed of 2XHP Yeah, Life Transfer allows for an infinite healing loop between 2 warlocks. But it would take a really long time and if two warlocks want to spend one of their precious invocations doing so, I’d let them. SPELLS: Taking out core casters solves this problem. Although would allow a warlock to take free actions while using dark discorporation. It doesn’t make a whole lot of sense otherwise. ------------ I was going to give a few other suggestions for different levels of experience, but I decided to save myself some time and ask before hand: How experienced are you? What books do you have?
stone_thecrows 03-28-08, 03:41 AM	Hmmm... this strongly depends on how many classes you want to deal with. First, anything similar to core casting > than anything else. This sadly includes psionics, as much as I love the XPH. Now, I don't know how experienced you are, so I'll give a few suggestions: ------------------ First-ish game, does not want to learn a crapton of new rulesets, prefers to give players a few options rather than ban specifics (the kind of person who might want to play "core only".): Allowed Classes: ToB classes, Rogue, Barbarian, Warlock, Marshal. You have to learn the ToB system (Warlock system couldn't be much easier), but you don't have to bother with arcane/divine spell cheese so it evens out. Marshal is on the internet - I added it because I know some people like playing supporting roles and the other classes are rather self-sufficient. Marshal is really a dip class though – I would suggest multiclassing after 1-4 levels. The only issue is the lack of healing – then again, you would have 2 item using classes and the crusader’s healing maneuvers. You could also create a healing invocation. Healing Touch – Range: Touch , Effect: Heals <Caster level> HP. Or, if you dislike the idea of the party being able to fully heal in-between any combats: Life Transfer – Range: Close , Effect: Warlock sacrifices XHP, target is healed of 2XHP Yeah, Life Transfer allows for an infinite healing loop between 2 warlocks. But it would take a really long time and if two warlocks want to spend one of their precious invocations doing so, I’d let them. SPELLS: Taking out core casters solves this problem. Although would allow a warlock to take free actions while using dark discorporation. It doesn’t make a whole lot of sense otherwise. ------------ I was going to give a few other suggestions for different levels of experience, but I decided to save myself some time and ask before hand: How experienced are you? What books do you have? I'm fairly experienced and have all completes, all FR, all Races of, XPH, Heros, Exalted, Sand, Frost, B9S, Mini HB, Libris, Savage....kinda all of them! Which is why I want to balance 3.5 and not have to buy 4.0!! [But lets not get into that issue here please!]
Sunic_Flames 03-28-08, 08:27 AM	Ok, tank. No, it's not a sword and board. That's how you make a mobile bit of difficult terrain. It's a tripper. That way you can actually do your job. Let's see... Str and Con, for the obvious reasons. The more the better. Dex and Int 13+, required for feats. Ideally 14+ dex for more AoOs, and 14 Int if you care about the extra skill point. Wisdom at a non crappy level to make up for your wimpy Will save. Only Cha can safely be ignored. Have fun. Completely impossible on 'elite' array and not effectively possible on 25 PB. Alternately, you could focus on dealing massive amounts of damage, in which case it becomes a little less MAD. Charging however is a bit more situational than tripping as more stuff thwarts it. And it tends to provoke knee jerk reactions and gets banned accordingly. By the way, most DMs ban Ur-Priest and Sublime Chord. Assuming they even allow evil, which I believe the Ur-Priest is restricted to. Still, for every one thing in splatbook x you could point out that's broken you could find at least 3 in the core books to counter it. Core contains about half the broken material in the entire, several dozen book system.
Kursk 03-28-08, 08:32 AM	Try starting with just the Core books. The first 3 books were subjected to the most intense playtesting. :dragon: ***** Bingo and seconded. Also, handle the polymorph abuses. Need to boost melee classes (& rogue) and reign in spell casters a bit.
Evil DM Mk3 03-28-08, 09:24 AM	I'm fairly experienced and have all completes, all FR, all Races of, XPH, Heros, Exalted, Sand, Frost, B9S, Mini HB, Libris, Savage....kinda all of them! Which is why I want to balance 3.5 and not have to buy 4.0!! [But lets not get into that issue here please!] The problem is that the problems that make 3rd edition unbalanced are built right into the central system. I suppose the best way to start dealing with it would probably be this then: Drop the clerics spells per day to the same as wizards and make domain spells have to take up normal slots. Use the shifter variant of the Druid from PHBII if you have it. It causes less headaches and wild spell does not work. Give their spells the same treatment as cleric spells. Decide on either the wizard OR the sorcerour. Or the psion. (I dislike Psionics but I have to agree they are better on the balance foot) Other classes are going to make your job harder. On that subject, you might want to throw out the Druid alltogether (the cleric would leave a bigger hole). Create a very large indeed number of powerful feats for martial types. I mean POWERFUL. Fighters et all cannot be as flexible as casters so you have to ensure that in the area they choose to engage in (damage, battlefield control or whatever) they can out perform a caster by a good margin. A damage focused fighter's sword needs to out damage a wizard's fireball. Otherwise why give up all that flexability to be weaker in a specialised area?
Sunic_Flames 03-28-08, 10:07 AM	Actually a damage focused fighter's sword already outstrips a fireball. Even a completely unoptimized one (starting strength 15, level up point, Weapon Spec: Greatsword) is going 2d6+6 with a MW weapon. Average 13. Fireball averages 17.5, but allows a save for half. Which makes it around... average 13. Now add a magic bonus to the sword. Thing is, fireballs suck. Outdoing them just means you don't suck (as much). The real issue is lack of versatility to deal with differing circumstances leading to a lack of options = not much to do, boring and ineffective. Also, no crowd control except trip, which means they can't even draw fire that well. Making the fighter feats a lot better would work, that way you could maybe have more than about a half dozen tricks ever period you're decent at, or one or two you're good at. Except they all have about the same weaknesses, so might as well throw all the eggs into one basket and at least be good at what you do, even if it isn't possible half the time and fails half the rest of the time.
green_yawgmoth 03-28-08, 10:39 AM	I wouldn't ban anything. I'd start by getting some mature players who value character development over big numbers.
Krusk 03-28-08, 11:10 AM	You should probably handle it like so. Start at level 1. Core PHB races only. Then leave all books open to picking for feats class spells ect, with one stipulation. stipulation, ask every player to go over every character choice with you. "I am going to take power attack, so i can lower my to hit by a few and deal a bit more damage." Is something you might want to allow. "I am going to take power attack, so i can grab leap attack ect and build an uber charger" is something you might want to avoid allowing options to. "im going to take polymorph so i can turn into a bird. For flying and stuff" is ok. "Im going to take polymorph so i can turn into a hydra, then combined with quickened wraithstrike and my levels in abjurant champion i should be able to destroy most things." probably should be avoided.
Sunic_Flames 03-28-08, 11:28 AM	Eh? A charger is manageable. A polymorpher... forget it.
Yami 03-28-08, 11:33 AM	There's a lot of advice here, some contradictory. Always fun. Well, I'm going to add my 2¢. :) Balance for me means balance between players. Players will never balance with what YOU can do as the DM because...well...you can do anything. :) The issue, at it's heart, is fun. If one player is significantly stronger or weaker than his companions, you've probably got unhappy or dissatisfied players on your hands. Low Level Play For a first time DMing, I suggest starting with low level play, preferably level 1. Issues with low level play are: Low BaB proportion to AC, compared to the rest of the game, leads to play that is tedious, frustrating, and will often kill characters and enemies in a single hit. Digital play - you hit or you don't, you're at full health or you're dead. The best fix I've found for this is a hit point bonus - anything under 10 hit points, and it'll make most characters able to stay concious if they're hit once, but won't effect later play much. Casters are extremely limited in spells. This means wizards get 3-4 spells per day, and are then little better than a commoner. Clerics hoard every bit of magic power they have for healing, because even the smallest bit of damage is a huge portion of a player's available hit points. Power differential favors Fighters. Mundane Items for everyone, the constant ability of a fighter to do damage, the higher number of fighter hit points, the likelihood of greater armor class all combine to make fighters powerful and relevent in combat (out of combat, their lack of skills still makes them irrelevent in most situations), and casters much closer to irrelevent. If you're going long term, you have to consider how the balance of power will shift drastically - the fighters will be absolutely necessary in low level play, but will decrease in importance, This can easily lead to player dissatisfaction.
stone_thecrows 03-28-08, 12:17 PM	I wouldn't ban anything. I'd start by getting some mature players who value character development over big numbers. *sigh* If only I could find some...
Krusk 03-28-08, 12:30 PM	Eh? A charger is manageable. A polymorpher... forget it. The concept and method is the point. Not the examlpes used.
Sunic_Flames 03-28-08, 12:34 PM	Indeed. Just making sure things are actually filtered properly, and not just a planning a combo = must be broken route. Also, 'Sune's Law. "As a D&D discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving a inverse relationship between roleplaying and optimizing approaches one."
Edymnion 03-28-08, 12:38 PM	wait and hope for 4th edition. Cos 3rd has never had a hope of anything as fancy as BALANCE.I'm sorry, apparently you never played anything that came out before 3e if you think that, because you obviously have no clue what you are talking about in light of the history of the game. Hell, 3e was the system that practically *STARTED* the entire idea of everything should be balanced with everything else.
Dark Stryke 03-28-08, 01:15 PM	Would ToB help balance the game? Or is the real problem (as it would appear from the replies) in the Spell department? If spell power is one of the main issues can you guys name and shame the main offenders, and is there anything in the Spell Compendium that needs its wings clipped? Never read the spell compendium, so I can't help you there. However, the real problem with casters is that (compared to their melee/ranged counterparts) - They are incredibly weak at low levels - Moderately balanced at mid levels (the 6th to 14th level sweet spot, really) - Incredilbly over powered at high levels. Spells just plain scale better than physical attacks. However, you have to ask yourself... is there anything wrong with that? Surely a party without an arcane spellcaster or a healer is a lot less survivable, and probably a lot less fun. Fighters like to be buffed up, rogues enjoy getting a Greater Invisibility spell cast on them, rangers like the Fire Arrows spell, etc etc. The most 'balanced' party I ever ran included four characters who took a mix of classes. What I mean by 'balanced' is that no one could outshine anyone else in all situations. Everyone had their own part to play, and no one was completely useless in any combat. The party was: Scout/Dragoon (a class I made up, basically a paladin with a few dragon themed powers). This was the party's ranged expert, though in a fight where arrows weren't an option, he could run in and start swinging his +2 Holy Dragon-bane Greatsword. Cleric/Barbarian/Divine Crusader of Kord (Prestige class I made up. Think divine Rage Mage). The party's tank/healer. He could deal incredible bursts of damage with a rage and his strength domain power, but could also switch to healing and buffing whenever it suited him. Monk/Sorcerer/Enlightened Fist/Paladin. Basically, this guy was Batman. He could melee, his sorcerer levels provided him with a mix of buff, battlefield control, and attack spells, and his incredible charisma score and paladin levels meant he could heal in a pinch. He couldn't do anything the best, but he could do all of it. Wizard/Rogue. Skill monkey and arcane firepower all wrapped into one. He spent a lot of time reasearching spells for his spell book, and he had an answer to almost any problem the group faced. This group worked because nobody was a pure physical or pure magical character. Since everyone had a mix of abilities (and only the wizard/rogue managed to get to even 8th level spells), an overall higher level of balance was achieved. Basically, if you want to not ban anything, encourage your characters to multiclass to open new doors for them. You may see some really interesting characters pop up!
Magikeeper 03-28-08, 01:55 PM	Evil DM: Making Fighters more powerfull damage-wise isn't the issue. As long as you don't stomp on melee powergaming, a non-casting class should be able to splatter foes at high levels. The issue is the lack of versatility - and that is what becomes important at high levels. That's why ToB classes are often considered more powerful than core melee. The damage totals may favor the core (ubercharger?), but actually having choices is awesome. Balance for me means balance between players. Players will never balance with what YOU can do as the DM because...well...you can do anything. :) The issue, at it's heart, is fun. If one player is significantly stronger or weaker than his companions, you've probably got unhappy or dissatisfied players on your hands. Very true. That's why I picked the selection I did - Marshal was probably too weak but the other classes were all on par with each other and most of them make building an average PC easy (it is hard to make a crappy warblade). However, I wouldn't want the OP's books to go to waste :P. Do you have the ToB though? I highly recommend it for creating melee PCs that are still fun to play at high levels. Although I also think that uberchargers aren't that big of deal - and for some classes a nessesity at high levels - Krusk has a point. If you can trust your players to tell you why they are doing something and help outline any possible problems you should be able to iron out a PC you're both happy with. I would apply this to the PC as a whole rather than each individual ability. If a PC uses 17 broken abilities but somehow ends up with an average PC the fact that some of the abilities were broken doesn't matter right? Also, I would allow non-core races. However, make sure you know what your PC is talking about. I once told my DM 3-5 times that my PC was going to have regeneration ("is that okay with you?" "Yeah, sure") just to find out in-game that he didn't actually know what it was :sigh:. Anyway, balancing party members against each other is the important part. How hard this is depends on your group. However, here is a list of abilities that make your life as a dm harder: -Any kind of constant unusual mobility. One 5th level PC with wings is cool. An entire party that's flying around 24/7 at low levels is a nightmare. - Constant Truesight. This is unlikely to come up, but it does get annoying in certain campaigns. -Constant Incorporeal. That said, the Psion Uncarnate is underpowered when compared to a full Psion. Like most of these, more of an issue at low levels. This falls under “unusual mobility” but it also makes a PC invincible during a large number of encounters. I don’t think regeneration is an issue, especially if the regeneration is 1-2. You can still knock the PC out, and if everyone else dies they are still screwed. Then again, I don’t like killing PCs. I appear to be out of time... I'll post more later. -------------------- Edit: To answer your question: Yes, the ToB would help balance the game. And yes, spellcasters are the big issue. Although there are problematic spells (I'm sure someone has made a list somewhere), Dark Stryke has covered the real issue. I don't think randomly nerfing spellcasters is going to solve that issue though.
stone_thecrows 03-29-08, 06:48 AM	If I were starting a new Campaign [and not in the middle of one] I would implement the following changes. Melee: Offer the ToB classes as the only melee options. Or possibly offer Manoeuvres on non-Feat levels for the Fighter [would probably stick with Crusader options] Cleric: Remove any Feat that gives alternative uses to Turn attempts. Use the Pathfinder Turn rules [30ft burst dealing/healing positive or negative energy] and give Undead with Turn Resistance a DR value against the damage. Rogue: Allow Sneak attack damage on more enemies. Excluding Oozes, Incorporeal, Ethereal & Elementals. However I would use a DR system for some Undead etc. based on Hit Dice. Also up Rogue hit die to d8. Wizard: Hit die changed to d6. Spells: Ban Gate and Time Stop. Imposed a +3 spell level adjustment to the multi-form spells like Alter Self and Poly-whatsit. And Ray of Enfeeblement is level 2. Plus judge other problematic spells on a case by case basis. Full Casters: Use the Spirit Shaman spell progression chart, basing all spell casting around 2 stats [one for bonus spells and one for save DC's]. Possibly adjust it based on whether spells are gained spontaneous or via preparation. Well its a step in the right direction,I hope :)
StSteven 03-29-08, 09:07 AM	Fireball averages 17.5, but allows a save for half. Which makes it around... average 13. Well if your caster is wasting a 3rd level area spell to deal damage to one enemy, you won't have to work so much on balancing him.
Jaxgaret 03-29-08, 09:30 AM	Simplest solution for a balanced game: Go to this link - Rate The Classes By Power (Summary) (http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=14758242&postcount=135). Go to the list sorted by average. Allow only classes that are within a range that you choose - for example, only allow anything with a rating of between 4.5 and 6.5, that would be my suggested range (or between 5 and 7, which includes ToB as the strongest allowed classes, which makes for an interesting campaign). For a more powerful, higher magic campaign, choose a higher range. For a less powerful campaign, choose a lower range. For even more balance, choose a narrower range. Ban everything else. There, now you are running a balanced campaign.
Evil DM Mk3 03-29-08, 09:42 AM	Well if your caster is wasting a 3rd level area spell to deal damage to one enemy, you won't have to work so much on balancing him. Thank you for that.:)
Sunic_Flames 03-29-08, 03:48 PM	Well if your caster is wasting a 3rd level area spell to deal damage to one enemy, you won't have to work so much on balancing him. You left out the part where the caster probably can't AoE without hitting the Fighter or something. That, and what you meant to say is if your caster is wasting a 3rd level spell on Fireball, you won't have to work so much on balancing him.
stone_thecrows 03-29-08, 06:05 PM	You left out the part where the caster probably can't AoE without hitting the Fighter or something. That, and what you meant to say is if your caster is wasting a 3rd level spell on Fireball, you won't have to work so much on balancing him. ..nice..:D