[3.5] Implications of banning PHB classes

[fortesama]

After a little fight between me and a player due to me influencing every1 to minmax resulting in a relatively ordinary human druid surrounded slightly more overpowered casters and an charger which consistently outdamages hem, we had the odd idea of banning all of the classes from the player's handbook once the current story line is over.

The immediately obvious effect would be the removal of overpowered classes like wizard, druid and cleric. It also takes off crap classes like fighter, paladin and monk. Unfortunately, it takes off the bard and sorc, 2 of my personal favorites. It also takes off the fighter, pally and monk for dips

Anything else i'm missing? Yes, we're still aware that the problem spells like polymorph and shapechange are still there. And it doesn't remove the artificer, archivist and erudite but our DM said their easier to control since they don't get to cast as 10th level casters at 6th level, nor learn like 6 spells per level up. And StP erudite has to burn xp to learn arcane spells iirc.

[holywhippet]

Most of the fighter classes are easily replacable using classes from splatbooks - especially tome of battle.

The archivist class isn't exactly overpowered - unless a DM allows it to be so. Their ability to gain lots and lots spells is only possible if they can find divine scrolls containing them. Come to think of it, since that game will be free of clerics and druids they might have some problems picking up the spells.

I'd be more worried about the Ur-priest to be honest.

[Katana_Geldar]

Isn't that going a bit too far?

[Thurbane]

Sorcerer (and Wizard) can be (sort of) replaced by Beguiler, Warmage or Dread Necro, or psionic classes.
Bard could be replaced by Beguiler taking the Prestige Bard from UA.
Paladin could be replaced by Favored Soul taking the Presitge Paladin from UA.

Ranger would also be missing...a woodsman type warrior, but I suppose you could refluff one of the ToB classes as a ranger (might have to add in some outdoorsy type skills).
Rogue could be replaced by Scout, Factotum or Beguiler.

[fortesama]

So...
Wizard/Sorcerer -> Beguiler/Dread Necro/Warmage/Erudite/Psion
Cleric -> Archivist/Favored Soul/Ur-Priest/Rainbow Warsnake @ Lvl 11 w/ cheese
Druid -> Spirit Shaman
Fighter -> Warblade
Barb -> nuthin. Maybe Totemist?
Bard -> nuthin. Maybe PrC Bard?
Paladin -> Crusader
Monk -> Swordsage
Rogue -> Ninja/Beguiler/Factotum/Scout

Seems a bit more tolerable. Erudite, Artificer, Rainbow Servant and Ur-Priest might be a bit problematic. We use text over table.

[dsmiles]

Sorcerer (and Wizard) can be (sort of) replaced by Beguiler, Warmage or Dread Necro, or psionic classes.I'd like to contest that, the psion is waaay too balanced to replace the wizard. :smalltongue:

[Waker]

Nothing huge, but there is still: Wu Jen, Shugenja, Healer, Marshal and Spellthief.

[Endarire]

Artificer. Consider what he can do.

[Flickerdart]

I ran a game that banned the core classes (as well as a lot of other stuff) and the party did just fine. Between ToB, Incarnum and psionics, all the important party roles (glass cannon, glass cannon, glass cannon and glass cannon) are taken care of.

[Kobold Esq]

Off the top of my head:


Paladin/Fighter/Barbarian -> Crusader/Warblade/Knight (shudder)

Ranger/Rogue -> Scout/Spellthief/ninja

Bard -> Beguiler/prestige bard

Druid -> Spirit Shaman?

Sorcerer/Wizard -> Psion, Artificer, Wu Jen, Beguiler, Warmage, Dread Necro

Cleric -> Favored Soul, Archivist

Monk -> Swordsage

I see a number of distinct power UPs for the replacement classes. The only ones that maybe take a hit are Wizard and Druid, but even that isn't much.

[HunterOfJello]

Banning all PHB classes could be fun for a game where everyone decides to play classes that they would usually not pick. As long as everyone agrees on the idea beforehand, I don't see any problem with it.

However, I don't think that banning all the PHB classes will change the trend of some characters being significantly more powerful than others. There are still plenty of Tier 1 and 2 classes outside of the PHB.

~

The most interesting effect this could likely have is the fact that you'd be eliminating the 2 main Arcane Spellcasters. There are a few specialist classes with fixed arcane spell lists out there, but you'd be dropping all the major arcane spellcasters. The only one left that I can think of would be the Wu Jen. (The arcane caster's general role can be taken over by an Archivist or Psion, but I'd be interested in how the game would pan out over time.)

[Doc Roc]

Towards the end of the Test of Spite, we'd eliminated about half of them. Most of our problems came from the ones we'd left alive. Draw from this whatever conclusions you will.

[Coidzor]

It gets rid of two of the better classes that have trapfinding out of the box or can grab it with an easy ACF. As well as the Barbarian which can also get a (lobotomized) form of trapfinding.

Leaving Artificer, Factotum, Scout, Ninja, Beguiler, and the Spellthief.

So, while three of those classes are solid/better replacements(and a fourth as a dip on a fullcaster with master spellthief), it still cuts down on one's options for a skillmonkey.


Also, it loses the Barbarian and thus all of the things that build off of or require rage are now unavailable (well, there might be a class in OA that rages... or it might just be "like rage" and thus still not work). No Bearington Bearman. :smallfrown:


our DM said their easier to control since they don't get to cast as 10th level casters at 6th level

What. Seriously. What? :smallconfused: Loredrake Sorcerer Kobolds with the Greater Draconic Rite of Passage can only get 9th level sorcerer casting as 6th level characters (6 levels + 2 loredrake + 1 rite of passage) The rite of passage is a patch to make up for having a worse spell progression than wizards do, and the loredrake bit requires them to become dragons and is rather debated as far as legality anyway.

[The Glyphstone]

It gets rid of two of the better classes that have trapfinding out of the box or can grab it with an easy ACF. As well as the Barbarian which can also get a (lobotomized) form of trapfinding.

Leaving Artificer, Factotum, Scout, Ninja, Beguiler, and the Spellthief.

So, while three of those classes are solid/better replacements(and a fourth as a dip on a fullcaster with master spellthief), it still cuts down on one's options for a skillmonkey.


Also, it loses the Barbarian and thus all of the things that build off of or require rage are now unavailable (well, there might be a class in OA that rages... or it might just be "like rage" and thus still not work). No Bearington Bearman. :smallfrown:



What. Seriously. What? :smallconfused: Loredrake Sorcerer Kobolds with the Greater Draconic Rite of Passage can only get 9th level sorcerer casting as 6th level characters (6 levels + 2 loredrake + 1 rite of passage) The rite of passage is a patch to make up for having a worse spell progression than wizards do, and the loredrake bit requires them to become dragons and is rather debated as far as legality anyway.

There's the White Dragonspawn trick too, which I think accounts for the +1 missing spellcaster level.

[stainboy]

It sounds like you should ban Stupid Kobold Thing before you ban sorcerers. Just saying.

[Eldan]

If I were you, I would look into the Tier System (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?PHPSESSID=49i3o487f9trnr51n5hs5nahu6&topic=5293.0), which roughly groups classes by optimization potential and versatility.

So, my suggestion is: don't ban the entire PHB. Ban tier 1 (Wizard, Cleric, Druid, Archivist, Artificer, Erudite (Spell to Power Variant)), Tier 5 (Fighter, Monk, CA Ninja, Healer, Swashbuckler, Rokugan Ninja, Soulknife, Expert, OA Samurai, Paladin, Knight, CW Samurai (with Imperious Command available)) and Tier 6 (CW Samurai (without Imperious Command available), Aristocrat, Warrior, Commoner), maybe also Tier 2 (Sorcerer, Favored Soul, Psion, Binder (with access to online vestiges), Eurdite (No Spell to Power)).

That leaves, from the PBH classes, still the Bard, Rogue, Barbarian and Ranger, all of which are relatively good and balanced classes.

[Runestar]

Congratulations, you have just fixed 3.5e! :smalltongue:

[Grim Reader]

I've had similar thoughts myself.

Ban most of the PHB. Keep Unearthed Arcanas Wildshaping Ranger. And maybe the Rogue, Bard, Barbarian and Sorcerer.

Druid gets replaced by Spirit Shaman for spells, and Ranger for Wildshape. Wildshape on a melee class is less trouble.

Wizard is replaced with Sorcerer, Beguiler, Warmage and Dread Necromancer.

Cleric is replaced by Favored Soul, and Archivist (far less trouble without Domain spells floating around).

Melee is replaced By Tome of Battle classes.

[Jornophelanthas]

Don't forget about the Warlock as a potential replacement for some Wizard and/or Sorcerer party functions.

Also, I'm currently playing in a campaign where the DM has banned all non-spontaneous casters (at least to the players; there are still NPC Wizards, Clerics and Druids). As a result, every caster that is allowed is Charisma-dependent to some extent. This is not a wholly balanced situation.

[Coidzor]

There's the White Dragonspawn trick too, which I think accounts for the +1 missing spellcaster level.

...Isn't that one completely RAW illegal due to the types involved? Or at least some kind of schrodinger's dragonity, where one is both a dragon and not a dragon simultaneously...

I'd say it's far-fetched that a DM would allow such a situation to come to pass even in a high-powered game, but this group apparently managed to make a druid feel worthless and useless, so my world is kind of turned upside down right now. :smallconfused:

[JaronK]

Just banning T1, 2, 5, and 6 will be better than banning core... it will keep everything nice and balanced.

But if you want to ban core classes, here's the obvious replacements.

Wizard: Factotum, Archivist, Artificer
Cleric: Crusader, Archivist, Favored Soul
Druid: Spirit Shaman, Binder, Totemist, Psychic Warrior
Sorcerer: Favored Soul, Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Warmage, Warlock, Psion
Rogue: Factotum, Ninja, Scout
Barbarian: Warblade
Fighter: Warblade, Crusader, Samurai, Knight
Monk: Unarmed Swordsage, Soulknife
Bard: Factotum, Marshal
Paladin: Crusader, Knight
Ranger: Warblade, Swordsage (likely PrCing into archery classes), Psychic Warrior, Totemist

The problem here is that's not much more balanced than it was before... Samurai and Soul Knives are likely going to be worse than any Monk or Fighter you had before, while Archivists and Artificers can rock out just like Wizards and Druids and Clerics.

JaronK

[Partysan]

...Isn't that one completely RAW illegal due to the types involved? Or at least some kind of schrodinger's dragonity, where one is both a dragon and not a dragon simultaneously...

I'd say it's far-fetched that a DM would allow such a situation to come to pass even in a high-powered game, but this group apparently managed to make a druid feel worthless and useless, so my world is kind of turned upside down right now. :smallconfused:

It's legal by RAW, but messes up logic. This is because while the fluff order of the abilities has them exclude themselves (Dragonborn is born in and gives dragon type, Dragonspawn applied by ritual to a nondragon), but in character creation by raw templates (Dragonspawn) are applied before feats (Dragonborn), so it works.

[Curmudgeon]

It's legal by RAW, but messes up logic. This is because while the fluff order of the abilities has them exclude themselves (Dragonborn is born in and gives dragon type, Dragonspawn applied by ritual to a nondragon), but in character creation by raw templates (Dragonspawn) are applied before feats (Dragonborn), so it works.
That's not right. Only Inherited templates are applied before feats. But Dragonspawn is a template that's acquired after the creature already has class levels. From Dragonlance Campaign Setting, page 223:
Spellcasting (Su): All spawn gain the ability to cast spells as 1st-level sorcerers. If the base creature already possessed levels in sorcerer, then the dragonspawn's effective sorcerer level increases by +1. Level 1 feats like Dragonwrought are taken before the Dragonspawn template can be acquired. Since Dragonwrought changes the Kobold's type to dragon, Dragonspawn (which requires humanoid or monstrous humanoid type) is no longer a legal option.

[cfalcon]

I would point out that some of the OPness you run into from the T1 guys is likely just because people have been playing those guys since their whole lives. Forcing them into other T1 roles (or tricking them into T3 classes) doesn't solve your problem, but it might make for a refreshing game or two.

As the rest of the thread has pointed out, you probably need to do more than just that. The "power levels" of the PHB guys vary wildly over the levels. If you want to remove fighters, barbarians, monks, and rangers, you'll have success replacing them with their much more powerful 9swords brothers, but you'll have an issue when it comes to the full casters. Mostly your group probably hasn't looked fully into what a psion, incarnate, factotum, are capable of.

[Flickerdart]

I would point out that some of the OPness you run into from the T1 guys is likely just because people have been playing those guys since their whole lives. Forcing them into other T1 roles (or tricking them into T3 classes) doesn't solve your problem, but it might make for a refreshing game or two.
T1 has only one role, which is all the roles - versatility is what defines them. A single T1 character can be the beatstick, the skillmonkey, the battlefield controller and the medic all in one. The only way to force them into anything is by having a character who already does a thing so they don't have to bother.

[cfalcon]

Most T1 roles can't be everything at the same time. I'm saying, if you ban wizard, cleric, druid, there will just be some other T1 thing to be OP with, and do everything you want with, and break the game with. The DM is likely relying on a lack of familiarity with these other equally broken things.

In my opinion (and experience), the DM needs to apply houserules as required to stop whatever violations he perceives, preferably in a way that is spelled out and honest (and at the start of the game). But if banning the PHB classes works for that group, good for them.

[Aldizog]

If the problem is you "influencing everyone to minmax," banning the core classes, or trying to limit it to certain tiers, is not going to be much of a solution. I'd suggest trying another edition of D&D with less space for optimization, or another game entirely.

[fortesama]

Thanks for the input guys. I guess i've made a few guesses right. I think I'll try to get the group to take a look at the tier list and modify the ban to the t1-2 and t5-6 classes instead as far as the players go, though NPCs of those classes may be found occasionally

I've tried suggesting 4e and M&M to them (and warhammer 40k but that's another story) and most of the players said they're interested. The DM and one of the players said it's an algebra cluster**** until i pointed out that 3e has it a bit worse. Dunno what they'll do with it. Until then, we'll wait for the current story to end before we finalize the plans.

On a side note, what explanation can u think of on why a lot of the NPCs we meet have a class level or 2? That random barkeep we met at one point turned out to have rogue, while a farmer family had a loli sorceress and a warblade for example. Our DM handwaved it as the world being so ridiculously dangerous that a lot of people ended up getting one or two. By far we only met one character with only NPC levels: Adept 2

[Callista]

Don't ban tiers. Just make your characters together and make sure everybody's at a similar power level.

Why? The tier system assumes everybody's optimized. In a real game, that won't be true--you'll have a fighter who's stronger than the wizard or a rogue who's doing more than the party cleric. I know; I've seen it. Heck, I've seen a monk being the second-most-powerful character in a party of five, and that takes some doing.

It gets me annoyed sometimes that people take tiers as the gospel truth and don't look at the assumptions behind them. Yes, an optimized wizard will outstrip an optimized fighter by level 5. But you're assuming they're both optimized, which is almost never the case.

4th edition may solve balance problems (at the cost of heavily streamlining the game), but if your group is like mine, you'll probably lose players over it. They are so different in style that people who like 3.5 will frequently not enjoy 4th and will grow bored with it. It's like suddenly switching a radio station from oldies to teen pop music and expecting to keep your listeners... A better idea, if you are dead set on 4th edition, is to find or form a group that is playing 4th edition. It's just a different game.

[BenTheJester]

We ran a game like that once.

Our party was: Hexblade/Spellthief, Dread Necro, Beguiler and a Dragonfire Adept.

It was a very fun game.

[Flickerdart]

On a side note, what explanation can u think of on why a lot of the NPCs we meet have a class level or 2? That random barkeep we met at one point turned out to have rogue, while a farmer family had a loli sorceress and a warblade for example. Our DM handwaved it as the world being so ridiculously dangerous that a lot of people ended up getting one or two. By far we only met one character with only NPC levels: Adept 2
Well, Sorcerer is easy - the gift can awaken naturally and in an area where there are already lots of Sorcerers, people won't feel like outcasts practising to make something of it. Maybe a dragon was very fond of the village's women a few hundred years ago or something.
Skilled musicians would be Bards, so a pub might keep such a minstrel employed as a point of pride; their singer is not merely an Expert but someone who can do more. Bards would also excel as town mayors or chieftains, since the Charisma and the ability to inspire people is handy. It's not that the guy happens to be a Bard, it's that being a Bard is what got him there.
Rogues are even easier to explain, especially if it's a barkeep. Maybe he ran with the wrong crowd in his heyday, and keeps a secret room in the back of his place where the gang can store the occasional sack of gold or unlucky member until the heat dies down. The reason he actually made it to retirement was because of his skills at knowing who to backstab and then going through with it.

[JaronK]

Why? The tier system assumes everybody's optimized.

Actually, it says quite clearly that it assumes everybody's optimized to the same degree. If everyone's not optimized at all, they're all to the same degree. A healbot Cleric still has a lot more available power than a TWF/OTWF Fighter. And note that the OP has already said the entire party is optimizing heavily right now.

From the Tier thread itself:


Q: What assumptions were used in making this system?

A: I tried to use as few assumptions as possible, to ensure the system would apply to as many games as possible. However, I had to use a few. The primary assumptions are equivalent player skill and equivalent optimization level. If one class is heavily optimized (taking the best available options, whatever best might mean in this case) and another example of the same class is not very optimized at all (taking a bunch of random options without regards to power) then obviously the same class would have two very different power/versitility levels. Likewise, an incompetent player (or one who's simply not trying) will do far less with a powerful class than someone who's creative and knows the rules well. I simply can't measure those factors, so the system assumes it's the same.


It gets me annoyed sometimes that people take tiers as the gospel truth and don't look at the assumptions behind them.

...yeah, me too.

JaronK

[joe]

I kinda like e6 as a solution to overpowered casters myself. ^_^

[linebackeru]

Ban Tier 1 and 2.

I hope you're also banning magic items. If not, then who is crafting them?

[Eldan]

Warlocks can easily do it, but also Beguilers and their fellows of limited casters.

[JaronK]

I hope you're also banning magic items. If not, then who is crafting them?

Warlocks, one assumes. But Factotums and Binders should have no trouble with it either. Beguilers, Dread Necromancers, and even Warmages can do a bit, and I imagine there'd be a decent business for Healers who can churn out a few Wands of Lesser Vigor.

Another possibility might be casting races... I'd imagine Solars might make items to hand out to champions of light, Ethergaunts might make items for their personal use and then be slain and have their items stolen, and Dragons could have a few nice things in their hordes as well.

JaronK

[Callista]

Okay, granted: The tier system assumes equal optimization.

But that happens barely more often than everybody being optimized at a high level, so the rest of what I'm saying about it is still valid...

[jiriku]

+1 to JaronK's and Callista's suggestions. The real problem isn't the PHB classes -- it's the variance in power between actual PCs. If all the PCs inhabit a fairly narrow power band, then the game will go well unless the DM lacks the skill to challenge them (which is a separate problem altogether, ultimately solvable with E6).

The problem can be addressed in a simple manner by requiring the high-skill players to play lower-tier classes (it's a challenge!), and pointing the lower-skill characters towards simple, effective mid-tier classes (like ToB classes, warlocks, or dragonfire adepts) that are hard to screw up. I don't recommend pushing low-skill characters towards high-tier classes, as that sort of player usually performs poorly when confronted with lots of options.

The problem can be addressed in a much more complicated manner by rebalancing the entire game, but doing that right will take over a thousand hours and considerable skill, and can't be accomplished by the shortcut method of "Let's ban X!"

[Tyndmyr]

Banning core is a helluva lot easier than banning non core.

Consider banning core spells too, if you want to really mix it up(leave in spells that are listed in multiple places like explicitly on spell lists, so classes like Healer still make sense).

[navar100]

Banning core is a helluva lot easier than banning non core.

Consider banning core spells too, if you want to really mix it up(leave in spells that are listed in multiple places like explicitly on spell lists, so classes like Healer still make sense).

At this rate, just admit to yourself you don't like 3E already and play something else.

[Callista]

Why would that be an indication you don't like 3.5? Seems to me like banning core would be an interesting way to shake things up and force people to play something other than the usual PC classes. It's not a way to increase game balance--that stays about the same--but it's a perfectly valid option, so long as nobody is dead-set on playing a core class and everybody's willing to share books so that the people who only have Core books can still build their characters the way they want. If you've got a bunch of players who always end up playing the vanilla wizard, fighter, rogue, cleric, then that might be a good way to force them to try something new.

[navar100]

Why would that be an indication you don't like 3.5? Seems to me like banning core would be an interesting way to shake things up and force people to play something other than the usual PC classes. It's not a way to increase game balance--that stays about the same--but it's a perfectly valid option, so long as nobody is dead-set on playing a core class and everybody's willing to share books so that the people who only have Core books can still build their characters the way they want. If you've got a bunch of players who always end up playing the vanilla wizard, fighter, rogue, cleric, then that might be a good way to force them to try something new.

That is not the intent of the suggestion. Sure, any game can have everyone play beguilers, scouts, warblades, and favored souls just to do something different. However, the concept of banning Core because you find it "broken" or "imbalanced" or what have you really means you just don't like 3E.

[JaronK]

That is not the intent of the suggestion. Sure, any game can have everyone play beguilers, scouts, warblades, and favored souls just to do something different. However, the concept of banning Core because you find it "broken" or "imbalanced" or what have you really means you just don't like 3E.

That's silly. Banning the broken and unbalanced stuff in core, but not playing 4e, means you want to access the mechanics and fun stuff of 3E without the game dissolving entirely... which does happen sometimes.

@Callista: most groups play with reasonably similar levels of optimization, and when they don't it's obvious who's optimizing more. That makes it easy to see what's going on. It's actually pretty rare to see a DMM:Persistent Cleric in a group without any other high optimization (and that player usually gets told to stop it), and groups that run higher optimization often try to boost the lower optimized players up.

JaronK