Does it break the game if I ban Teir 1 classes? [Pathfinder]

[Thomar_of_Uointer]

So I've been rolling this idea around in my head, and I wanted to ask it to the boards as a game balance question. I'm also interested in knowing, "how much work does this make for me as a GM?"

How does it affect the game if I ban the Cleric, Druid, and Wizard? They're all Tier 1 classes by the sole fact that they can access their entire spell list and swap out different prepared spells on a daily basis. Banning them should fix the "linear warriors quadratic wizards" problem, right?

I can offer the following substitutes to players so that this change isn't restrictive:

Cleric: If you want to be a healer, play an Oracle. If you want to lay down some divine smiting, play a paladin. If you want to be an undead slayer, then Ranger works well (or even Ranger/Oracle or Ranger/Sorcerer).

Druid: Oracle also covers this. If you want an animal companion, the Nature set of Oracle abilities lets you do that. If you want a t-rex as an animal companion, maybe you should try Summoner instead. If you just like being a woodsy character, play a Ranger or a Ranger/Oracle. If you want shapeshifting, play a sorcerer and take the appropriate polymorph spells.

Wizard: Just pick Sorcerer. If you really want to be a "book mage", then there's already a few Sorcerer bloodlines that do that for you. You may also be interested in Psion, which I very much approve of.

The only major change I can think of is that players will become more reliant on scrolls to access their spell lists. It might be a good idea to have scrolls be easier to buy from NPC vendors (low-level scrolls are no more expensive than a horse.) Runestaves or the equivalent (an item that lets you burn a spell slot to cast a specific spell) will be very nice treasure for PCs. PCs who want to craft magic items will need scrolls badly, or they'll have to find other mages.

If we extend the concept that every caster can't use the entire spell list, we also come to a very interesting conclusion. Most magic items require multiple casters to coordinate so that they can meet all of the spell prerequisites. This is actually an awesome idea for world-building. PCs will have to get help from NPCs if they want to craft items, or PCs who can cast spells will be solicited by NPCs to help with crafting. Most magic items will be stamped with the insignia of the organization that comissioned them. This actually makes a ton of sense and explains how magic items are hard to make, yet still fairly common in a medium/high-magic setting.

I can also see that I would need to make more clearly defined organizations in a campaign to make character backstories easier. The question of "where did I get my adventurer training?" is important for PC backstories, so making a few guilds for the setting will probably be necessary. And that's fine, I was planning on doing that anyways.

Is there anything else about banning those three classes that I should be aware of?

[Gorfnod]

Banning them should fix the "linear warriors quadratic wizards" problem, right?

Short Answer - No

Long Answer - Nooooooooooooooooo

But seriously you are still going to have the problem that in the higher levels caster > melee. Limiting players to Tier 2 casters helps to eliminate some of the ridiculousness but now you will just have "linear fighter, quadratic sorcerer". A Tier 2 character can can break a game just as easily as a Tier 1, just in not as many ways.

I would like to note that I banned Tier 1 classes some time ago and it does alleviate some problems but the biggest thing for me was simply the time saved waiting for prepared spell lists.

Of course now I have an alchemist in my party so, yay for extracts....

[Menteith]

How does it affect the game if I ban the Cleric, Druid, and Wizard? They're all Tier 1 classes by the sole fact that they can access their entire spell list and swap out different prepared spells on a daily basis. Banning them should fix the "linear warriors quadratic wizards" problem, right?

I'd also call the Witch a Tier 1 class - witches know their entire spell list, have the same spells/day of a Wizard, and can change spells every day without an issue. Even if you do that though, casters are still going to offer substantially higher utility than everyone else, even if limited to the lower tiers. Take an Alchemist with Infusion - even at low levels, they can prepare incredibly useful abilities like Fly and Invisibility, and they gain more options as they level. Melee still improve, but most of the upgrades are combat enhancements, and don't do anything to level the field in other respects.

Don't get me wrong, it's fine to ban those classes and say that no one can play a class with full spellcasting progression. It won't make the game unplayable or anything, and it narrows the gap between classes. Unless everyone knows exactly what they're getting into, I'd actually recommend staying away from Tier 1 casters anyway. The potential for wrecking a game, even unintentionally, is always going to be there.

[Orsen]

For the campaign my group is playing right now, we agreed to play tier 2 through 4 and we haven't missed tier 1 at all. I was worried about lack of healing so I offered the Favored Soul PC all spells from the healing domain to be known in addition to his normal number of spells known, as well as one free casting of each a day. It's worked great for us.

[erikun]

Banning them should fix the "linear warriors quadratic wizards" problem, right?
Not at all. The quadratic part is magic itself - spells are roughly twice as good every two spell levels or so, while fighter bonuses are just +1 every level. What you will avoid is the spellcaster saying, "I have just the spell for this, so let's come back tomorrow" and trivializing the encounter.

Please note that Sorcerers can still carry around wands and trivialize the encounter anyways, which is probably what most high-optimized Wizards do anyways. I'm not sure how well the Pathfinder Oracle works, but I do note that Favored Soul and Healer were not necessarily good replacements for a Cleric...

[CTrees]

Ban all full casters. There's task they're needed to handle which can't be hit at a more moderate capability by one of the lower tier classes. Solutions may be different or more difficult, but the game won't break. Heck, your best blaster might just become a monk!

[Novawurmson]

Something I've been working on is dropping all tier-1's to 2/3 spellcasting and giving them some more class features to compensate. You might want to consider the same.

[killem2]

I've never played path finder, but assuming its very much like d&d 3.5, I'd have to say classes don't break the game, players break the classes.

Unless your player base is jumping into your session, as if this was a World of Warcraft raid, and you have to min/max every possible aspect to succeed, and satisfy any epeens that might be needing some TLC, I would find it very difficult to ban entire classes from the roster.

Even then, I'd probably just max hp for monsters, and build encounters around their weaknesses.

[Novawurmson]

I've never played path finder, but assuming its very much like d&d 3.5, I'd have to say classes don't break the game, players break the classes.

Required (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=1002.0) reading (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5070.0).

[Metahuman1]

Ban Teir 5 and lower classes as anything other then a Dip.

Now that they have to play Teir 4-2, the game is still not balanced, but closer.

Porting Tome of Battle, which is basically a Drag and Drop into Pathfinder sans the minor skill adjustments, will also help.

[Tyndmyr]

Short Answer - No

Long Answer - Nooooooooooooooooo

This.

Seriously, how is a wizard going to break your game in a way that a human sorcerer can't?

[killem2]

Required (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=1002.0) reading (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=5070.0).

I don't know what those, are, I'm at work, I can't access the sights. I'm sure its to some obscure handbook, created by power gamers, which just further explains my point that the classes don't break the game, the players do.

:mitd:

I'll check it when I get home though. My comment still stands.

[Tyndmyr]

I don't know what those, are, I'm at work, I can't access the sights. I'm sure its to some obscure handbook, created by power gamers, which just further explains my point that the classes don't break the game, the players do.

:mitd:

I'll check it when I get home though. My comment still stands.

It explains the tier system, what's in what tier, and why. It's good stuff, and it's something that people should read.

Yes, disruptive players ARE more problematic than imbalanced classes...but that doesn't mean imbalanced classes aren't a potential problem. More to the point, if your players are sufficiently knowledgeable and mature enough to play nice with tier 2 classes, they will do the same with tier 1. The only real difference between them is how MANY game breaking toys they have access to.

[marcielle]

Thing is this: You start with players playing what they want. If one outshines the rest to the point they aren't having fun, talk. If talking doesn't work, send all fullcasters to the moon.

Sraight beguilers and warmagfes are ok but Dread necor 20 can break games pretty hard if you give them a lick of downtime. Spawn abuse + mine black onyx are my favorites.

[Gavinfoxx]

Just say, "I'm only allowing classes that are arguably Tier 3, be they homebrew, wotc, pathfinder, or whatever." And then come up with a HUUUGE list of ~Tier 3 classes from all over, including homebrew... I have a 3.5e / pathfinder added classes for backconverting list of Tier 3 classes. Unfortunately, I don't know how or if pathfinder changed or nerfed things like Bard, as an example... did they make it Tier 4? You might want to enable some of the options from 3.5e, reduce some of the nerfs to Bard... and I dont know how to change the psychic classes which WEREN'T updated to pathfinder, for example, but those will need some adjustment!

This list is mostly 3.5e, but it should help somewhat... I know pathfinder changed wild shape quite a bit, for example...

Bard
Beguiler
Dread Necromancer
Binder (WITHOUT the Online Vestiges, especially summon monster)
Shadowcaster

Druid, with at least one, possibly more, of several nerfs:
Shapeshift Variant (Player's Handbook II, this is a big one)
Deadly Hunter Variant (Unearthed Arcana, SRD)
Druidic Avenger Variant (Unearthed Arcana, SRD)
Spontaneous Divine Caster Variant (Unearthed Arcana, SRD)

Shaman (Oriental Adventures, possible Tier 2 due to spell access)
Shugenja (Complete Divine)
Crusader (Tome of Battle)
Swordsage (Tome of Battle)
Warblade (Tome of Battle)
Factotum (Dungeonscape)
Duskblade (Player's Handbook II)
Totemist (Magic of Incarnum)
Incarnate (Magic of Incarnum)
Psychic Warrior
Psychic Rogue (Online, see: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/psm/20040723b and http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/psm/20040723c , give it the same treatment that psychic warrior got for pathfinder, perhaps?)
Wilder
Ardent
Ranger (Wildshape variant Ranger, unfortunately, I don't know how that will interact with pathfinder's beast shape...)

Now for WotC Affiliates and Pathfinder. Note that these are MUCH shakier in their statuses, and my info is dated
Nightstalker (Races of Ansalon, a Dragonlance book, possible Tier 4)
Summoner
Alchemist
Inquisitor
Magus

Now for the homebrew stuff, I link you to every class which is also a link in this thread:

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=174628

Those just need converting to pathfinder

[Novawurmson]

I don't know what those, are, I'm at work, I can't access the sights. I'm sure its to some obscure handbook, created by power gamers, which just further explains my point that the classes don't break the game, the players do.

They explain the concept of tiers, which is a good thing to be aware of when the OP, if no one else, is concerned about them. Try looking up a few of the threads that explain how the Druid basically gets a Fighter as a class feature.

I don't know how many times I had a player who was a Fighter, Monk, or Paladin and sadly ask if they could change their character because they didn't feel like they could do anything useful compared with the rest of the party (or a Cleric or Sorcerer trivialize every encounter I threw at them) before I came to these boards and discovered where the flaws in 3.5 lay and how to correct them. We played at extremely low optimization levels, but the tier system typically stays true at all optimization levels.

True, I never had a player come up with an overpowered Wizard, but that was mostly because most of my players didn't enjoy spellcasters.

[Person_Man]

Simpler solution: Sit down with your party. Ask them what they want to play. If the majority want to play at a certain Tier, then ask all of them to play at (or near) that Tier. If your goal is to achieve a more balanced party, then a group of all Tier 1-2 players work work just as well as a group of all Tier 3 players, or Tier 4-6 players.

[Novawurmson]

Simpler solution: Sit down with your party. Ask them what they want to play. If the majority want to play at a certain Tier, then ask all of them to play at (or near) that Tier. If your goal is to achieve a more balanced party, then a group of all Tier 1-2 players work work just as well as a group of all Tier 3 players, or Tier 4-6 players.

Once again, Person_Man has probably the best solution.

I generally find that what most of my players want out of a class is tier 3-4; the ability to shine in an area and not be useless in the others. ymmv

[illyrus]

Yeah, going to go with magic (or magic-like things) tending to be the issue. Also its play style in that problem players tend to play the spellcaster as the "star of the show" as opposed to a more supportive role. A magic user can easily make an entire party shine and still have spells left over for fun things. This would allow the GM to build an encounter to challenge the party as opposed to challenge the magic user but risk overpowering the rest of the party.

Also a problem player can be a problem player at any tier, an NPC expert (tier 5) with some level 1-5 scrolls can be an overpowering force in some cases.

[El Dorado]

What level are you planning to play up to? 5th and 6th level clerics and wizards are less problematic than 15th level ones. One of the wizard's big advantages is the wide variety of spells available. One speed bump for this is actually having him negotiate (Diplomacy check) with NPC casters to get the spells he wants. You could implement something similar for clerics if their power was funneled through the church hierarchy instead of directly from the gods.

[CTrees]

Yeah, going to go with magic (or magic-like things) tending to be the issue. Also its play style in that problem players tend to play the spellcaster as the "star of the show" as opposed to a more supportive role. A magic user can easily make an entire party shine and still have spells left over for fun things. This would allow the GM to build an encounter to challenge the party as opposed to challenge the magic user but risk overpowering the rest of the party.

This is how I built my last wizard - buff/debuff+battlefield control. From my party's perspective, the encounters were "look at all the awesome stuff I did!" as opposed to the "I'm useless, the wizard is outshining all of us *grumble*" which leads to wonky encounter design to "compensate." From my perspective, the party was a group of especially hardy pets which I didn't waste a Planar Binding spell to summon. Everyone was happy, basically.

[Menteith]

I've never played path finder, but assuming its very much like d&d 3.5, I'd have to say classes don't break the game, players break the classes.

Unless your player base is jumping into your session, as if this was a World of Warcraft raid, and you have to min/max every possible aspect to succeed, and satisfy any epeens that might be needing some TLC, I would find it very difficult to ban entire classes from the roster.

It's absurdly easy to unbalance a group and overshadow people unintentionally. There are some effects that can only be generated through spellcasting - obvious stuff like Flight, Invisibility, Teleportation - and an intelligent caster can end a fight on their own within the opening round. Lets use the Alchemist - a Tier 3 caster - who has Fast Bombs and Confusion Bomb with either Rapid Shot or Two Weapon Fighting (none of those things are that odd or require abuse to get). On the first round, a full attack will disable 3 enemies through Confusion Bomb without a save.

You're coming off as ignorant and a little hostile when you make these kinds of statements. There is a serious power disparity between classes, and it doesn't take a player "min/max(ing) every possible aspect to succeed, and satisfy any epeens that might be needing some TLC", all it takes is someone picking a Fighter in a high op game for them to feel useless. There's nothing wrong with banning these classes, especially if not everyone's familiar with the game.

[Ashram]

Don't know if this has been brought up at all, but OP, you may want to check the rules for crafting items in PF again: Unless the item is spell trigger or spell completion, a crafter need not know the spell in question to craft an item of it; I.E. Craft Magic Arms & Armor, Craft Wondrous Item, Forge Ring and certain uses of Craft Rod would not require the spell. All this does is bump up the Spellcraft DC to make the item by +5.

[Glimbur]

Ban all full casters. There's task they're needed to handle which can't be hit at a more moderate capability by one of the lower tier classes. Solutions may be different or more difficult, but the game won't break. Heck, your best blaster might just become a monk!

Some spells on the cleric list are just assumed to be available to the PCs based on what abilities monsters have. Raise Dead et al, Restoration to deal with ability damage/drain and negative levels, Remove Curse( also available to sorc/wiz). There are also more niche cases like Water Breathing for underwater adventures, Stone to Flesh for fixing petrification, Cure Blindness/Deafness, Planeshift, Break Enchantment, Wish/Miracle to kill the Tarrasque... it's possible to make a campaign that doesn't need any of these spells (though making Raise Dead not necessary is somewhat difficult if you want to preserve the risk of death) but it diminishes the amount of monsters and situations you can use.

[Telonius]

I've never played path finder, but assuming its very much like d&d 3.5, I'd have to say classes don't break the game, players break the classes.

Unless your player base is jumping into your session, as if this was a World of Warcraft raid, and you have to min/max every possible aspect to succeed, and satisfy any epeens that might be needing some TLC, I would find it very difficult to ban entire classes from the roster.


It's absurdly easy to unbalance a group and overshadow people unintentionally. There are some effects that can only be generated through spellcasting - obvious stuff like Flight, Invisibility, Teleportation - and an intelligent caster can end a fight on their own within the opening round. Lets use the Alchemist - a Tier 3 caster - who has Fast Bombs and Confusion Bomb with either Rapid Shot or Two Weapon Fighting (none of those things are that odd or require abuse to get). On the first round, a full attack will disable 3 enemies through Confusion Bomb without a save.

Both of these are true to an extent. A munchkin is going to be a munchkin no matter what, and is going to disrupt a game no matter how many things a DM bans or nerfs. A mature gaming group is going to be okay no matter how skilled the players or how optimized the game is. ("Mature" would include having enough game mastery not to insist on playing a Truenamer when everybody else is Tier 2 or higher, or a DMM Cleric if everybody else is Tier 4 or lower). However, this does not magically make D&D a balanced system; it makes it a balance-able system. There are myriad traps and gamebreakers, even in the PHB; and it takes a lot of game mastery to recognize them.

Even very experienced players and DMs can accidentally miss something. I remember having an after-game discussion with a friend of mine who'd played D&D for years. We were talking about cursed items, and I mentioned Dust of Sneezing, from the DMG, as being one of the most broken items in the game. He didn't believe me at first, but the look of absolute horror on his face when he looked it up was priceless. Having that in the DMG is like leaving a green can of rat poison next to the Mountain Dew. Yeah, easy to ignore it if you know it's there, but man, if you miss it ...

[Menteith]

Both of these are true to an extent. A munchkin is going to be a munchkin no matter what, and is going to disrupt a game no matter how many things a DM bans or nerfs. A mature gaming group is going to be okay no matter how skilled the players or how optimized the game is. ("Mature" would include having enough game mastery not to insist on playing a Truenamer when everybody else is Tier 2 or higher, or a DMM Cleric if everybody else is Tier 4 or lower). However, this does not magically make D&D a balanced system; it makes it a balance-able system. There are myriad traps and gamebreakers, even in the PHB; and it takes a lot of game mastery to recognize them.

Even very experienced players and DMs can accidentally miss something. I remember having an after-game discussion with a friend of mine who'd played D&D for years. We were talking about cursed items, and I mentioned Dust of Sneezing, from the DMG, as being one of the most broken items in the game. He didn't believe me at first, but the look of absolute horror on his face when he looked it up was priceless. Having that in the DMG is like leaving a green can of rat poison next to the Mountain Dew. Yeah, easy to ignore it if you know it's there, but man, if you miss it ...

There are features that when used as intended serious unbalance the game (See - Animal Companion). If I use it the way it should be used, I will invalidate a good deal of the melee at low levels. Banning tier one casters doesn't stop the abusive players, but it'll limit the unintentional unbalancing.