PDA

View Full Version : Easy way to ballance 3.5?



Maho-Tsukai
2010-07-31, 12:17 PM
I am planing to make a re-worked version of 3.5 with some minor changes to fix the balance issues but before I make an official write up with nice grammar and a pretty layout for the homebrew forum, I want some opinions on the general idea of the system. The basic premise is to put everybody at tier 3, the "balanced" tier, thus creating a game that is balanced yet can still be suitably epic at the same time. To do this I would make the following changes:

Ban all tier 1 and 2 classes except the wizard and the cleric. The wizard and Cleric lose prepared casting and gain the spells known and spells per day of the "spellcaster" generic class.(They still use their original casting stats.) The cleric can no longer spontaneously convert his spells to heals/inflicts and loses both his domain spell slots and his domain spells. He still gains the granted power of his domains. The wizard/sorcerer spell list and the cleric spell list are taken out of the game/no longer exist. Instead Wizards can chose their spells known from any of the following lists... Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Warmage. Clerics can chose spells from the following spell lists: Healer(Gate is removed from the healer spell list.), Dread Necromancer. The Dread Necromancer and any other class which can chose spells from their list uses my "fixed" dread necro spell list in the homebrew forum. The fighter, rogue and other classes below tier 3 are also removed/non-existent and the spell lists of the healer and Warmage classes only remain as lists from which the cleric and wizard can draw spells known from.

So is this feasible or is it still not work?

Snake-Aes
2010-07-31, 12:18 PM
Any single spell is already enough to put casters ahead of noncasters.

Boci
2010-07-31, 12:20 PM
Replacing melee with ToB and rogue's with factotums and beguilers is generally seen as a good move for game balance. As far as casters go, I'm currently trying to get a full set of advanced learner classes to complete the beguiler and dread necro so that every school of magic has its place in the game, but without being OP. this is harder for clerics, but i considered deviding them based on the Shugenja's four elements.


Any single spell is already enough to put casters ahead of noncasters.

No, otherwise there wouldn't be any tier 3 full casters.

Maho-Tsukai
2010-07-31, 12:22 PM
Yeah, full casters are ahead of non-casters. That's the point of this fix. Everything is essentially a "caster" so to speak. Melee fighters use TOB, "rogues" are beguilers and factotums. Every class has some form of "spells." My main question is if clerics and wizards can be put on tier 3 by replacing their spell lists with being able to chose from select, thematically and functionally appropriate spell-lists of tier 3-4 classes, giving them the spells known/spells per day of the spellcaster generic class and taking away some overpowered class abilities(domain spells, for example.) This fix would give them more options then the stanbard tier 3 caster classes, but they have less spells per-day then them and far less class abilities. I was also considering reducing the number of bonus feats wizards get or outright taking the bonus feats away, but I am not sure if this is needed.

Snake-Aes
2010-07-31, 12:23 PM
No, otherwise there wouldn't be any tier 3 full casters.

Oh, ok, nevermind, forget that the only noncasters past T3 are the ToB classes.

Boci
2010-07-31, 12:26 PM
Yeah, full casters are ahead of non-casters. That's the point of this fix. Everything is essentially a "caster" so to speak. Melee fighters use TOB, "rogues" are beguilers and factotums. Every class has some form of "spells." My main question is if clerics and wizards can be put on tier 3 by replacing their spell lists with being able to chose from select, thematically and functionally appropriate spell-lists of tier 3-4 classes, giving them the spells known/spells per day of the spellcaster generic class and taking away some overpowered class abilities(domain spells, for example.)

Isn't that a sorceror (tier 2) with without the delayed spell progression?

Maho-Tsukai
2010-07-31, 12:28 PM
I thought the spellcaster had the same spell progression as the sorcerer, but with less spells per day. So if they don't that's a mistake by me and the wizard and cleric would use the sorcerer spell progression but with one-two less spells per-day of each level then the sorcerer. Also, by taking away the wizard/sorc and cleric lists, clerics and wizards lose most of their broken spells. It's basically a goobye to polymorph, gate, shapechange, wish ect....and in the end it's the broken spells that made the classes so powerful, not the classes themselves.

QuantumSteve
2010-07-31, 12:29 PM
If you want to balance every class across every level, playing 4th is really your best option. That or some kind of hybrid that keeps the parts you like most about 3.5.

If you're fine with the concept of "Quadratic Wizards", then just stop at lv 12-15, before Wizards "Quadratic" all over your campaign. Only a handful of Core spells are really in need of tweaking. And you can always give melee characters "spells" of their own with ToB. Really, 3.5 isn't that unbalanced across most levels if you don't go looking for ways to unbalance it.

And if you really hate Wizards. Make them start at Lv 1 and make their lives suck until they gain enough levels to actually contribute to the party. :smalltongue:

Tinydwarfman
2010-07-31, 12:31 PM
If you're fine with the concept of "Quadratic Wizards", then just stop at lv 12-15, before Wizards "Quadratic" all over your campaign. Only a handful of Core spells are really in need of tweaking. And you can always give melee characters "spells" of their own with ToB. Really, 3.5 isn't that unbalanced across most levels if you don't go looking for ways to unbalance it.


Uh, wizards get quadratic at 7th. 4th level spells are freaking godly.

QuantumSteve
2010-07-31, 12:37 PM
Uh, wizards get quadratic at 7th. 4th level spells are freaking godly.

They're good, sure. They're what a Wizard gets for being an XP sponge for his first 5 levels. Lv 7 is the big payoff where a Wizard starts getting better than everyone else. I don't see them getting really game breaking until 6 level spells.

Critical
2010-07-31, 12:38 PM
Options:
1. Everyone plays casters.
2. No one plays casters.

Maho-Tsukai
2010-07-31, 12:41 PM
I suppose I could scrap the idea of giving wizards and clerics the ability to chose from several tier 3-4 spell lists and instead give them their own spell lists based on the shugenja spell list but missing some elements. I can see a wizard spell list drawing from air, fire, Earth and Maho, and clerics drawing from water and Maho. Also, I stated that the goal of this is that everybody plays a "caster." I am just looking for ways to make the wizard and cleric tier 3s to match the TOB classes and(which are basicly casters) tier 3 casters.

Likewise, I could simply not try and make the cleric and wizard tier 3 and just use the shugenja to fill both the cleric and wizard roll. I however would refluff them as either cloth wearing priests of elemental deities or elemental mages. Magic in the world would thus be based on elemental schools of magic. In fact, I could actually do away with the original schools all together and have the "schools" of magic be the elements. The more narrow casters like DNs and beguilers would be refluffed to have power over one type of element to such a degree where they gain powers associated with it that no ordinary mage could ever hope to have. Beguilers would be air specialists and DNs would be dark(Maho) specialists. Maho unlike OA would be a full shugenja elements rather then a school that can only be learned as an off element school. Maho would be refluffed as "Darkness" to fit into the elemental magic theme. Feats which apply to spell schools would instead be applied to one of the elements. In fact, this "elemental magic" idea could make for a very interesting setting, now that I think of it. As for bards? Well, I just would not include them as a playable class, espcially since a water shugenja can fill the healer roll, an earth shugenja can be a party buffer and a factotum or beguiler can be the skillmonkey.

Yora
2010-07-31, 01:16 PM
Oh, ok, nevermind, forget that the only noncasters past T3 are the ToB classes.
And while ToB calls them maneuvers, they are still spells.

Urpriest
2010-07-31, 01:31 PM
Beguilers, Warmages, and Dread Necros are generally seen as lower tier and less gamebreaking because of their lack of gamebreaking wizard spells, so I see this as a very reasonable direction to go in balancing the classes.

That said, you'd still be lacking representation for the Summoner archetype, not to mention perfectly reasonable Abjuration, Divination, and Transmutation (some class should be able to focus on arcane shapeshifting).

Wu Jen have a pretty limited list, and behave almost exactly like wizards. What tier are they considered?

Any plans for representing Psions and the like? They seem trickier to balance, and I wouldn't want to replace them all with Psychic Warriors.

Fax Celestis
2010-07-31, 01:32 PM
See signature. Stir in parts you like. Sprinkle liberally with intelligent players who aren't douches. Garnish with victory. Serve.

AmberVael
2010-07-31, 01:41 PM
See signature. Stir in parts you like.
Alternately, you can skip these two steps...


Sprinkle liberally with intelligent players who aren't douches. Garnish with victory. Serve.
And just go right to this.

Really, just get some players who know what they're doing, say "this is the power level I want," and you'll get a ton further than just trying to shove in a ton of new rules to the game (or carve them out).
(Edit: Er, this might come off like I'm insulting d20R. Not really my intention)

Machiavellian
2010-07-31, 01:47 PM
How about you drop balance and just have fun. It's just a game. Like in the PbP Sands of Shandala, I'm planning on playing (if I reach 20)

Half-Hobgoblin (vistani instead of human)
Gladiator (KoK) 6/Warblade 6/Ronin 4/Suel Arcanamach 4

I use a bastard sword and shield. Who cares about balance when all you want is to have fun?

Boci
2010-07-31, 01:48 PM
And while ToB calls them maneuvers, they are still spells.

I'll believe you when you show me a maneuver equivilant to 3 9th level core spells. Its a shame vatican casting came before ToB, made everyone thing that the system automatically = spells.


Alternately, you can skip these two steps...


And just go right to this.

Really, just get some players who know what they're doing, say "this is the power level I want," and you'll get a ton further than just trying to shove in a ton of new rules to the game (or carve them out).
(Edit: Er, this might come off like I'm insulting d20R. Not really my intention)

To be fair, as a player it helps to know exactly what you can and cannot use.

jiriku
2010-07-31, 01:48 PM
I suppose I could scrap the idea of giving wizards and clerics the ability to chose from several tier 3-4 spell lists and instead give them their own spell lists ... drawing from air, fire, Earth and Maho....

Likewise, I could ... refluff them as ... elemental mages. Magic in the world would thus be based on elemental schools of magic ... In fact, this "elemental magic" idea could make for a very interesting setting, now that I think of it.

If you're interested in elemental magic, I may have just the thing for you (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=160451). Fax also has many many well-developed options for you to consider, although you'll need to invest in learning d20r mechanics.

I'd recommend against giving the cleric or wizard the lists of lower-tier classes. Cleric and wizard are actually pretty dry, boring classes without their spell lists. Just use the classes that have those better-balanced lists in the first place (for example, don't play wizard with the beguiler or dread necro list -- play beguiler or dread necro!).

Fax Celestis
2010-07-31, 01:49 PM
Er, this might come off like I'm insulting d20R. Not really my intention

It's cool, bro. I still love you.

http://27.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l0696uKoAy1qzoh7no1_500.jpg

Kalrik
2010-07-31, 02:04 PM
I am still a fan of the gentleman's rule. If everyone cooperates, then the game won't be broken. That is how I've fixed the balance issues in my game. Yes, that PC wizard has the ability to break the game, but he won't because then it wouldn't be fun. MOST players won't go out of their way to optimize their charactes...if you have good players.

If you don't like having clerics that ruin the fun for a fighter, then tell your players that you don't approve and then ensure that their are no gods that grant clerics the melee domain options. In my world, teleportation is a long forgotten magic and cannot be learned unless it is found, even by sorcerers.

You are the GM and can do what you want, but retooling the core classes is a mistake, imo. I've found that, at least my players, respect you more when you are simply honest with them. Yes, this class/spells are powerful; dont' break it.

Tyndmyr
2010-07-31, 02:09 PM
Ban all tier 1 and 2 classes except the wizard and the cleric. The wizard and Cleric lose prepared casting and gain the spells known and spells per day of the "spellcaster" generic class.(They still use their original casting stats.) The cleric can no longer spontaneously convert his spells to heals/inflicts and loses both his domain spell slots and his domain spells. He still gains the granted power of his domains. The wizard/sorcerer spell list and the cleric spell list are taken out of the game/no longer exist. Instead Wizards can chose their spells known from any of the following lists... Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Warmage. Clerics can chose spells from the following spell lists: Healer(Gate is removed from the healer spell list.), Dread Necromancer. The Dread Necromancer and any other class which can chose spells from their list uses my "fixed" dread necro spell list in the homebrew forum. The fighter, rogue and other classes below tier 3 are also removed/non-existent and the spell lists of the healer and Warmage classes only remain as lists from which the cleric and wizard can draw spells known from.

So is this feasible or is it still not work?

You pretty much failed at "ban all..." It's such a sweeping set of changes that it's really not worth doing at all.

It's so much easier to just make sure your players all pick classes of roughly equal power levels, and perhaps toss a few bonuses to whoever picked the lowest tier class.

lord_khaine
2010-07-31, 02:14 PM
Alternately, you can skip these two steps...

Quote:
Sprinkle liberally with intelligent players who aren't douches. Garnish with victory. Serve.

I agree with Vael, the imbalance is a bit overestimated, and if you let people use ToB classes then i really dont think you will have any problems.

Boci
2010-07-31, 02:16 PM
You pretty much failed at "ban all..." It's such a sweeping set of changes that it's really not worth doing at all.

I dunno. I always felt that one of the strengths of 3.5 is that you can ban all core classes and still have a perfectly (arguably better) functioning game.
And for some, mass banning makes sense, like my game set in Trippyverse Fallout.

Doug Lampert
2010-07-31, 02:16 PM
They're good, sure. They're what a Wizard gets for being an XP sponge for his first 5 levels. Lv 7 is the big payoff where a Wizard starts getting better than everyone else. I don't see them getting really game breaking until 6 level spells.

XP spunge? Seriously?

At level 1 your CROSSBOW is barely worse than other character's attacks, and you also get 5 spells per day without specializing, spending a feat, or scribing a scroll. The spells available include Grease, Charm Person, Hypnotize, Sleep, Color Spray.

Every one of the above is a potential encounter winner at level 1.

You also get Enlarge Person and Magic Weapon, both of which are non-negligable buffs.

At level 5, when you're claiming he's STILL an XP spunge he has haste, invisibility, and all the basic buffs. Not to mention that if he feels the insane urge to blast he's got fireball and fly.

Tyndmyr
2010-07-31, 02:21 PM
I dunno. I always felt that one of the strengths of 3.5 is that you can ban all core classes and still have a perfectly (arguably better) functioning game.
And for some, mass banning makes sense, like my game set in Trippyverse Fallout.

That's a strength, sure. There's so much available in D&D that even a small subset of it is plenty for a game.

Still, his changes are not "an easy way to balance 3.5". Saying to his players "we're aiming for a tier 3 game here" would be much easier, and likely a lot easier for them to work with.

Boci
2010-07-31, 02:24 PM
That's a strength, sure. There's so much available in D&D that even a small subset of it is plenty for a game.

Still, his changes are not "an easy way to balance 3.5". Saying to his players "we're aiming for a tier 3 game here" would be much easier, and likely a lot easier for them to work with.

"We're aiming for a tier 3 game here" is the same as "No tier 1, 2, 5 and 6 classes" only the latter is more absolute. Plus he seemed to be keen to preserve the different schools of magic, which was why I recommend doing something similar to what I am trying to do.

Tyndmyr
2010-07-31, 02:29 PM
The difference is, you can build characters in such a way as to make them fit into a given tier.

Imagine a wizard, focus specialized in enchantment. Bans conjuration, abjuration and illusion. Grabs toughness so he'll have a few extra hp early on. Yeah, the power level of that wizard is going to be significantly different from optimized wizard builds. It won't be a bad character, but it will probably work nicely in a tier 3 group.

If you tell your players what the goal is, and work with them, you shouldn't NEED to do massive bans.

Emmerask
2010-07-31, 02:30 PM
ninjaŽd :smallbiggrin:

Boci
2010-07-31, 02:32 PM
The difference is, you can build characters in such a way as to make them fit into a given tier.

Imagine a wizard, focus specialized in enchantment. Bans conjuration, abjuration and illusion. Grabs toughness so he'll have a few extra hp early on. Yeah, the power level of that wizard is going to be significantly different from optimized wizard builds. It won't be a bad character, but it will probably work nicely in a tier 3 group.

If you tell your players what the goal is, and work with them, you shouldn't NEED to do massive bans.

Good point. How the hell did I not think of that?

Emmerask
2010-07-31, 02:34 PM
The difference is, you can build characters in such a way as to make them fit into a given tier.

Imagine a wizard, focus specialized in enchantment. Bans conjuration, abjuration and illusion. Grabs toughness so he'll have a few extra hp early on. Yeah, the power level of that wizard is going to be significantly different from optimized wizard builds. It won't be a bad character, but it will probably work nicely in a tier 3 group.

If you tell your players what the goal is, and work with them, you shouldn't NEED to do massive bans.


I agree, though your wizard has still a better and wider spell selection then a warmage (which is t3 if I remember correctly) so I would say more around tier 2,5 then tier 3 :smallwink:

Kalrik
2010-07-31, 02:35 PM
Aren't we getting away from the fact that Magic is supposed to be powerful? All these threads about balance tend to neglect that magic is just that, magic. Magic is the bending of reality to make the impossible possible through ancient secrets learned and mastered or the ability to channel a miniscule amount of your god's power. I'll admit, though, that in a game we don't want players to feel left out because their one party cleric/wizard is getting all the glory.

I may not be the person to comment, since I don't see an issue with the power levels. I agree with everyone who posted and said that using ToB would be a good way to beef up the melee fighter types.

On the topic of the OP, cutting the spell list is a mistake. I feel that the classes will lose too much flavor. It is easier to identify the trouble spells and either disallow them, or make them increasingly rare. I stated before that I dislike teleport, it takes away from adventuring. A character needs to quest for that spell and usually wont' get it for several levels after being able to cast it. I make my players run any spell choice by me before they can take it. The easy explaination for the "why can't I have this spell" is "I feel that it is not appropriate for my game." Then be absolutely sure that you don't have ANY npc's using that spell.

I run Pathfinder now, so the spell problems have been made a little less problematic: save or suck and save or die spells have been hit acceptably hard.

AmberVael
2010-07-31, 02:38 PM
I agree with Vael, the imbalance is a bit overestimated, and if you let people use ToB classes then i really dont think you will have any problems.

I disagree that the imbalance is overestimated, but I do think it doesn't matter nearly as much if you have players who know what they're doing. It isn't hard to make characters of a decently similar power level, even from a variety of classes in different tiers (though obviously it is easier to decrease power than to increase it).

Trying to put in a ton of house rules to fix the imbalance usually just makes things more confusing and limiting. By the time you've made a decent set of coherent fixes that still allow variety... well, you're not really playing D&D 3.5 anymore. You could play something similar and based off of it, and you can even have a great time, but I think that by the time you've managed to make a balanced system of D&D, you've essentially created a new system (which is basically my opinion on the aforementioned d20R- what little I've seen looks good, but it's something entirely new I'd need to learn and work with. Some of the basics might be the same, but hey, so are many of the basics of Mutants and Masterminds).

I'm not even sure trying to balance a system inherently is a good thing (but this might be going off topic, so I'll leave it here).

Maho-Tsukai
2010-07-31, 02:42 PM
Yeah..the title is misleading, and I feel like an idot now for not catching that. I generally suck at titeling things. However, what I'm planing on doing now is actually considering this project an alternet version of 3.5 rather then a retooling of it. As far as things go, I will be altering the magic item system, eliminating most PrCs and base classes and creating a more consildated version of 3.5 thats intended to be about tier 3-level play that will be considered a variant game rather then a ballancing act. All the classes in the game will be tier 3 or close to it, and some of them will be slightly refluffed. The main classes I have planed on including are the Crusader, Warblade, Swordsage, Duskblade, Bard, Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Binder and Mage(refluffed, Arcane shugenja)

As far as PrCs, they will be used as much as for flavor as they will be for crunch. Characters with levels in 5 differnet PrCs and stuff like that will be gone. Characters can only ever take up one PrC, and PrCs will have a big impact on RP and may also include RP related entry requirements at a DM's discretion. There will not be PrCs for everybody, either. Most of them will be meant to represent specific character archtypes and will be things players can take to develop their character as well as gain new abilites. Not every class will also have a suitable prC to take either. In fact, as far as this thing gose I only plan on having a small handeful of PrCs, The Prestege Paladin, Blackguard, Anima Mage, Assassin, Animator(Altered version of a 3rd party class.) and the Dark Magus.(Refluffed, Arcane Maho-Tsukai) The Prestege Paladin and Blackguard will get limited manuver progression as appose to spell progression or spells, the Assassin will exchange his spellbook for spell progression and will no longer be an evil only class. The Dark Magus(Maho) will be purged of his taint supression since this variant will not be using taint rules. Anima mage will also be stripped of it's evil only-ness as well.

Fax Celestis
2010-07-31, 02:45 PM
Aren't we getting away from the fact that Magic is supposed to be powerful?Sure. But the greatest swordsman in the world is also supposed to be powerful.

And this is a game, and people are supposed to have fun. If someone is being constantly overshadowed by someone else, it becomes a lot less fun.


...I think that by the time you've managed to make a balanced system of D&D, you've essentially created a new system (which is basically my opinion on the aforementioned d20R- what little I've seen looks good, but it's something entirely new I'd need to learn and work with. Some of the basics might be the same, but hey, so are many of the basics of Mutants and Masterminds).

Yeah, d20r is rapidly evolving into a very different beast.

Kalrik
2010-07-31, 02:59 PM
I agree. The greatest swordsman in the world should be powerful too. If one is using ToB, then he will be. :D

Boci
2010-07-31, 03:01 PM
Aren't we getting away from the fact that Magic is supposed to be powerful?

Beguilers have power. Dread necromancers have power. Wizards have the still beating heart of the system in their open palm, and a scary grin on their face.

Gavinfoxx
2010-07-31, 03:03 PM
What do you guys think of this (Unfinished, I think) Rebalancing compendium on Brilliantgameologists?

http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=2096

Is there an equivalent one on these boards?

Kalrik
2010-07-31, 03:06 PM
Beguilers have power. Dread necromancers have power. Wizards have the still beating heart of the system in their open palm, and a scary grin on their face.

Only if we make them that way.

Machiavellian
2010-07-31, 03:16 PM
Only if we make them that way.

Kalrik, you are correct. An evoker is by far the least optimized design, and a well designed Ranger/Rogue sniper can kill him. However, if said wizard were optimized (Say a Diviner/Divine Oracle/RWoT), then the Ranger has no chance in hell.

That being said, in my old group, one to two people were optimized AT MAX. The rest of us usually played oddball characters. Personally, I played a bard with no arms who played a drum with his head.