Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Ryan_Singer 08-26-06, 01:06 AM	I just moved and am starting up a completely new campaign with a completely new group. I've been thinking about the lessons I've learned from my last couple of games (some of the best I've been in). Each of those games has included a mix of very intelligent players who utilized information from multiple source to create very effective characters, and players who quickly created characters that were mostly core just to have fun playing. The most important lesson I learned is that class choice was by far the best way for a casual player to keep up. Players who picked Wizards, Rogues (especially w/ TWF and, with advice from the min-maxers, throwing vials of acid), Clerics and Druids stayed relatively strong even grouped with the min-maxers. Fighters, Sorc's, Rangers, they all fell behind. I'm thinking of pre-empting this problem when I create my new group. Here is my list of suggested classes for my players, to hopefully keep balance easier: 1. Wizard - allowable as-is. Spells include setting material, core and spell compendium. Any others with specific GM permission. No polymorph. 2. Cleric - Same as Wizard. No divine metamagic. 3. Druid - Same as Wizard, PHBII shapeshift required, can get animal companion as feat. 4. Rogue - As-is. Players are strongly encouraged to pick up TWF and vials of acid, and to max-out UMD. 5. Ranger - Uses the Prestige Ranger class from UA, multiclassed Druids get it. 6. Paladin - See ranger. 7. Bard - See Ranger. 8. Warblade - Encouraged. 9. Fighter - Not recommended, players expressing interest should be pointed at Warblade 10. Swordsage - Recommended 11. Monk - See fighter, but swordsage. 12-14. Psionics - all good. 15. Sorcerer - Metamagic variant from PHBII required. Anyone have feedback? Think this is a bad idea? A Good one? Which classes, if any should be added?
Solik 08-26-06, 02:33 AM	There's a lot of factors at play here, including level range. If you'll be sticking to lower levels, there's really no problem with the martials. If you're going mid-range or higher, then yeah, the Book of Nine replacements should be great. If they're totally new, you should be starting at level 1. New players can also get lost in spell lists; they're not likely to make effective casters right out of the box. Your newbie fighters will quite likely outshine your newbie casters at least through level seven. And if they're new, they're probably going to lose a few characters and/or want to restart and try other things. I don't see any reason to worry about balance in terms of their builds just yet. Just be a little sneaky with your treasures. They probably won't notice too much if you're the one doing the balancing for them.
X-Codes 08-26-06, 08:52 AM	A sorcerers aren't that bad, honestly. A well-rounded sorcerer (one with a buff, nerf, nuke lineup for all his spell levels above 4 and scrolls for situational stuff) with a combat-able familiar (Salt Mephit comes to mind, obtainable at level 7 with Improved Familiar) can be a dominating presence on the battlefield (if you don't believe me, just wait for that Mephit to go Ubercharger on your arse! ;) ).
Ryan_Singer 08-26-06, 11:28 AM	A sorcerers aren't that bad, honestly. A well-rounded sorcerer (one with a buff, nerf, nuke lineup for all his spell levels above 4 and scrolls for situational stuff) with a combat-able familiar (Salt Mephit comes to mind, obtainable at level 7 with Improved Familiar) can be a dominating presence on the battlefield (if you don't believe me, just wait for that Mephit to go Ubercharger on your arse! ;) ). I believe you that a well-built sorc can dominate a party, just like a chain-tripper or a well-built bezerker. The point of my thread, however is to keep the players who don't put much energy into their builds (spell choice, feat choice, etc) roughly at an even keel with those who do through helping them choose inherently good classes. For your average non-optimizer, Sorc is a worse choice than wizard because you are mostly stuck with bad spell selection, whereas the wizard can learn new spells as they see which ones help and which don't.
Eela6 08-26-06, 01:20 PM	Personally, for starting out new players, Sorcerer is the way to go. While Sorcerer is a bit weaker than Wizard, it's much easier to play. A good Wizard is expected to have ten to thirty utility spells availible through scrolls and prepared spells out of the box (first level scrolls are incredibly cheap, after all, and Wizards get Scribe for free). Preparing spells is also an annoying mechanic. If you have a new player who wants to play a caster, encourage them to start them out with a Warmage, Dread Necromancer, Beguiler, or other Sponateous Caster. When they have to select Spells Known (Advanced Learning or if a Sorcerer/Favored Soul/Shugenja, etc), talk to them about effective spell choice, and what kind of spells they want. You should soon be able to reach a compromise that keeps both flavor and power, and is easy to play. If a player's spell choice consistently falls behind, offer them a change in their spell selection at the end of the session - you can keep doing this until you find a set up that works. It's important to make a new player feel effective and have fun with their character concept. On the subject of Fighter-Types, Book of Nine Swords encouragement looks good. The Prestige Bard/Ranger/Paladin might be an interesting way to go - there's also some interesting variants over on the Classes + Prestige Classes Board that you may want to look into.
Ryan_Singer 08-26-06, 04:31 PM	Preparing spells is also an annoying mechanic. If you have a new player who wants to play a caster, encourage them to start them out with a Warmage, Dread Necromancer, Beguiler, or other Sponateous Caster. When they have to select Spells Known (Advanced Learning or if a Sorcerer/Favored Soul/Shugenja, etc), talk to them about effective spell choice, and what kind of spells they want. That's good advice! Thanks! Ryan
ashcat_lt 08-26-06, 08:54 PM	how about asking your powergamers to help your newbs?
Ryan_Singer 08-27-06, 12:49 AM	how about asking your powergamers to help your newbs? Because experienced players != powergamers. Many experienced gamers quickly generate their characters just to have fun. The point is, I want to create an environment from day 1 that doesn't put too much of a disadvantage on people who don't want to read 6 or 7 books to create their characters. Ryan
tsuyoshikentsu 08-27-06, 07:48 PM	I like it. Sort of like the list I created a while back on that thread I never should have started.
Andrew 08-27-06, 11:25 PM	I guess I'm a little lost. Is the intent to set a "low bar" so that someone who doesn't want to worry about build stays competitive, or crop out choices to keep boundaries on optimization? Or both?
Ryan_Singer 08-27-06, 11:32 PM	I guess I'm a little lost. Is the intent to set a "low bar" so that someone who doesn't want to worry about build stays competitive, or crop out choices to keep boundaries on optimization? Or both? Both, by doing things like no divine metamagic and forcing druids to use the shapeshift variant, I cut down on the worst optimization abuses, and by encouraging non-optimizers to pick effective classes, I help them stay useful.
allenchan 08-28-06, 12:17 AM	First, I find a little of this pointless. Fighters are still better in some regards than warblades. Some of the best rogues are not made to deal damage. Druids are fine with their normal wildeshape (following the rules of known creatures only, and the errata'd ability). Divine metamagic isn't bad, persistant metamagic is. Honestly, instead of making hard and fast rules that are honestly not accurate all the time, just take everything on a case by case basis. So stop trying to shoehorn people and let them play what they want, with encouragement and/or concern given when due, as a good DM should.
Andrew 08-28-06, 12:33 AM	I would put the cleric trim as disallowing persistent spell feat rather than divine metamagic if you feel that it is a problem. I'd put "recommended" for the sorcerer variant rather than "required". The main problem I can see is that if this is the extent of the list, there are about 2 "easy" options left: rogue and sorcerer, and sorcerer requires a non-core variant. Everything else requires daily spell preparation, multiclassing, or learning base classes and mechanics that can't be found in the PHB, like psionics or the martial adept maneuvers from ToB. I think if the players you were worried about lagging behind wanted to do that, you wouldn't have to worry about their performance. I think the idea of a recommended list is a good one, but I don't think the best intersection for both of your goals is a list like this. I think a less formal approach is going to be most reliable if you have worries about optimization, maybe including a list of tricks you think are either too strong or you personally dislike the effect they have on the flow of your games, and having your power players walk you through their ideas a few steps ahead so that things are less of a suprise.
Galroth 08-28-06, 12:52 AM	Or instead of disallowing divine metamagic, just disallow what breaks it.... Nightsticks.
tsuyoshikentsu 08-28-06, 03:09 AM	Or instead of disallowing divine metamagic, just disallow what breaks it.... Nightsticks.Mi compadre, it's quite easyto break DMM without Nightsticks.
Leilond 08-28-06, 04:08 AM	It look like a bit pointless and too complicated I apply these simple rules and I don't have any problem 1) All in the PHB is ok 2) All other stuffs (magic items, spells, PrC, powers, Feats and so on) must be submitted to my attention and approval before add it into our game Nothing more is really important. In this way I don't need to know every single module or dangeoun magazine feat. When a player found one that he likes he will bring it to me and I will read. Stop
AntiDjinn 08-28-06, 05:39 AM	Instead of disallowing divine metamagic, how about having each deity have a portfolio of metas available with their spells? For example, a fire god might offer Flame Strike in standard, empowered, maximized, and twinned varieties; you pray for the version you want as a spell of the appropriate level. This would let the fire deity offer a load of fire spells without having to write new ones. A god of thievery might offer still and silent spells, but a deity of nobility might take offense at even being asked to grant a spell that has been rendered sneaky. This option would mean that divine casters can't presume to slap personal improvements on divine boons from their gods, but versions of spells will still vary from religion to religion. If put the most abusable metas under the gods with the least desirable domains then you will force the player to make some hard choices at the onset.
DarkThoughts24 08-28-06, 07:21 AM	aside for trying to push the warblade over the fighter, and the swordsage over the monk, it's a good list. fighter is a good teaching class. it can teach three important lessons: feat chains, equipment selection, and co-opperation. and a monk is a good preprestige class training for various supernatural/spelllike/extraodrinary abilities usage. so often you get players who get into these combo prestige classes with abilities and a player not used to it cannot keep track of it.
Ryan_Singer 08-28-06, 06:38 PM	It look like a bit pointless and too complicated I apply these simple rules and I don't have any problem 1) All in the PHB is ok 2) All other stuffs (magic items, spells, PrC, powers, Feats and so on) must be submitted to my attention and approval before add it into our game Nothing more is really important. In this way I don't need to know every single module or dangeoun magazine feat. When a player found one that he likes he will bring it to me and I will read. Stop But PHB fighters/monks/etc fall behind and PHB Druids can break wildshape easily. This doesn't fix my problem at all, it just misunderstands it. MY problem isn't that optimizers can optimize, it's that non-optimizers can do much better if they didn't pick bad classes.
KnaveofClubs 08-28-06, 07:23 PM	This is why (hate me if you want) I usually stick to core sources. Players Handbook "1", DMG "1" , and Monster Manual "1" are all I need. I hardly ever reach out for other sources or supplements. There is plenty enough for a variety of creativity and fun gameplay.
Ilthorin 08-28-06, 08:31 PM	This is just my opinion but honestly I don't see why all of this tweaking is necessary. As the DM you control all of the encounter s, treasure handed out, spells available for purchase (by wizards) etc. So that you should be able to keep all of you players characters balanced. Yes I know there will be exceptions and rare instances where a character gains an edge over the rest. But I've always found this easy to correct without being heavy handed or have to do a major rule rewrite. Now there are some classes that I would certainly steer a new player away from. Druid being number one, not because of any power issue but more because of complexity. (Choosing which spells to memorize from multiple sources, all the stats for the animal forms, it can be a bit much) NOW i have to admit we have made a change from the last campaign to our current one. What myself and our other DM has found is that advancement takes place too fast. (maybe we are just too old school) For a new player the barrage of new abilities from leveling every 3 sessions can be more overwhelming then anything else. SO for our current campaign I have been cutting xp rewards in half. (We've been playing once a week for about 3-4 hours for about 3-4 months and they are just about to hit 4th level. I've found that this allows the players to get more used to their abilities, spells and feats/skills. It's giving the newer players time to peruse the other splat books and plan ahead even if it's just a little. If you have a month to think about your next level even the casual player can find something nice. I've also found that as the DM it allows me to plan out the encounters with better balance. Perhaps it's just me but I find it is alot easier to plan out the key for a sizable dungeon when I know the party is only going to level once or perhaps twice as they traverse it rather then jumping 5 levels. Forgive me if I have rambled a bit here.
Lokathor 08-28-06, 09:04 PM	This is why (hate me if you want) I usually stick to core sources. Players Handbook "1", DMG "1" , and Monster Manual "1" are all I need. I hardly ever reach out for other sources or supplements. There is plenty enough for a variety of creativity and fun gameplay. But the PHB is the one that contains all the bad classes. That's the point he's trying to get across.
Aufenshauft 08-29-06, 04:43 PM	Here is my list of suggested classes for my players, to hopefully keep balance easier: 1. Wizard - allowable as-is. Spells include setting material, core and spell compendium. Any others with specific GM permission. No polymorph. 2. Cleric - Same as Wizard. No divine metamagic. 3. Druid - Same as Wizard, PHBII shapeshift required, can get animal companion as feat. 4. Rogue - As-is. Players are strongly encouraged to pick up TWF and vials of acid, and to max-out UMD. 5. Ranger - Uses the Prestige Ranger class from UA, multiclassed Druids get it. I see you had problems with polymorph, huh? Just ban that spell and be done with it. If you want, just give people ideas for what they can do if you see someone a little underpowered. That usually does it. Warning with rogues. That is the only class you really suggest to them. Fully expect them to play one and then use everything to their advantage. Seriously, a straight rogue can wreak havok in the game when they use everything to their advantage.