Tier 4, 5 and 6 classes only

[Balor01]

How would you feel if only Tier 4, 5 and 6 classess were at your disposal for a game? (Those being Rogue, Barbarian, Warlock, Warmage, Scout, Ranger, Hexblade, Adept, Spellthief, Marshal, Fighter (Dungeoncrasher Variant), Fighter, Monk, CA Ninja, Healer, Swashbuckler, Rokugan Ninja, Soulknife, Expert, OA Samurai, Paladin, Knight, CW Samurai, Aristocrat, Warrior, Commoner)

What implications would that have for the game?

thanks




Screaming munchkins need not apply.

[Bogardan_Mage]

I think it probably ends up more or less how the designers expected the game to be played. The Warlock acts as a blaster Wizard, the Healer and Adept as healbot Clerics, the Ranger as a Druid who doesn't use any of his useful abilities or spells, and the other classes are capable of holding their own against these (pity about the Bard but I'm sure you can cobble together that character concept from some other class). I think it sounds like a lot of fun.

[Eldan]

Hm. A few things I can see right away:

The DM would have to be very careful in creating encounters as, without fitting magic items, a lot of obstacles would be very hard to impossible to overcome. The warlock and warmage can at least help with incorporeal monsters and a few other things, but even just flight would be hard to get. Don't even think of using puzzle monsters with that are tough but have a glaring weakness to be exploited by an enemy.

Watch out for races, in higher level games. If you want to stay in the spirit of this, you'd have to ban races with spell-like abilities or racial spellcasting.

I have a feeling that eqiupment would probably become a lot more important. You can't really do a lot of interesting things with the class features of these classes. So if the players like coming up with creative plans, these plans will probably include alchemical consumables, mechanical items, liberal use of crafting skills and one-shot magic items of some kind.

Without access to at least interesting equipment like that, chances are that I, personally, would get extremely bored and leave early, especially if there was much combat. Combat drags endlessly even if you have classes that have access to efficient tactical planning and can end things quickly. Actually grinding through walls of HP with melee combat? Probably couldn't hold my attention for more than five minutes.

[Pilo]

Warmage and Healer to rainbow servant is the new T1.

[Fouredged Sword]

The warlock becomes the new tier one with scrolls instead of spell slots.

[Emmerask]

The warlock becomes the new tier one with scrolls instead of spell slots.

If there are only tier 4-6 classes then the scroll selection more then likely is also limited to those spells available by the lower tiers ^^

Overall I think I would like it, I mostly like to optimize lower tier classes in any case so that I do not overshadow the party ^^

[sleepyphoenixx]

I don't mind restricting myself to T3 but T4-6 classes are all seriously one dimensional.
I'd probably be bored out of mind after one or two sessions.
I like my versatility too much.

[AmberVael]

How would you feel if only Tier 4, 5 and 6 classess were at your disposal for a game?

Well, I do love the Warlock... but I'd likely be hesitant overall. I generally enjoy classes with more options- not necessarily all the options like the tier 1 classes have, but I tend more towards tiers 2 and 3 than 5 and 6. I'd be very likely to get bored with the repetition. I like having more tools with which I can create solutions and interact with the world.

Some of the tier 4 classes can be okay, but once you start dipping below them my interest wanes.

[Rosstin]

I don't mind restricting myself to T3 but T4-6 classes are all seriously one dimensional.
I'd probably be bored out of mind after one or two sessions.
I like my versatility too much.

Sometimes it can be broadening to play a class without any cool toys, it teaches you the other things that a character may have to offer, like being a leader or negotiator, or just roleplaying more deeply.

I say this as an obsessive spell preparer... you work really hard to make sure you always have the right spells, but sometimes you're just better off relaxing and going with the flow of the story, playing your character and paying attention to who the other characters are.

[Pesimismrocks]

I far prefer tier 3 as it allows far more IC versatility rather than most tier 4s. Most of these have spam attacks. Fighters power atttack, all warlock invocations are at-wills so you have very few of them. You character will never vary game to game.

That being said it's far more balanced. So if you prefer balance over versatility than this is great.

And also-on balance. D&D isn't a game you win. It's a team effect. People say that having morepowerfu characetrs make the other characters feel useless and dull. Removing Tier 1-3 wont change either problem. Your character may do it better than everyone else in your party, but the modifier is still the same.

[Eldan]

Sometimes it can be broadening to play a class without any cool toys, it teaches you the other things that a character may have to offer, like being a leader or negotiator, or just roleplaying more deeply.

Eh. I don't relaly believe in that. Most of my characters tend to be very talkative. They also tend to be tiers 2 or 3. I mean, at least on the lower levels, the intellectual exercise becomes getting through the day with only a handful of spells and doing everything else by talking. That doesn't necessarily stop at higher levels, either, even if the temptation is there.

[Togo]

We're playing a game like this on the boards at the moment. It's a lot of fun.

We have a healer, a paladin marshal, a paladin fighter, a warlock. It works fine.

[sleepyphoenixx]

I object to the assumption that having options means you roleplay less or worse.

[Emmerask]

I object to the assumption that having options means you roleplay less or worse.

I agree, though what it might imply is that you can become "lazy" because spells tend to have ready made solutions ^^
A character who does not have these options might find very creative solutions that wouldnt have come up otherwise.

[Tvtyrant]

The only problem is deciding what classes go in what tiers. Shadowcasters are considered tier 4 by many, but they get 9th level spells and can insta-gank anything without access to teleportation.

[sleepyphoenixx]

I agree, though what it might imply is that you can become "lazy" because spells tend to have ready made solutions ^^
A character who does not have these options might find very creative solutions that wouldnt have come up otherwise.

If you can afford to throw a spell at every little problem that comes up your DM is far too soft with you :smalltongue:

[hymer]

That's what scrolls, wands, etc. are for, never running out of spells. :smallwink:

I just want to say that some of the most sophisticated literature in the world was written under censure, and its sophistication is required by the censure. Could the authors have made something just as good without that obstacle? Perhaps. But imagine playing tennis without a net.

So I think there's something to be said for playing a non-spellcaster - that it leads non-über roleplayers like me to think differently than I do when I'm looking for ways to shape my big toolbox to the task at hand.

[Balor01]

Thanks for answers.

Main thing is, I am currently DM-ing a group of tier 3s (only three in fact and one of them could as well be a donkey or a cart tagging along) and it is a shredding experience, meaning opponents get two-shotted.

I also have a feeling feeling of achievement is lost in such environment. I especially like "special" item comment. Like that +1 sword being actually "OMG magical sword" instead of crying over lack of OP weapon abilities or just giving Ignore DR, add +10d10 sonic dmg to your pencil via Warblade maneuver.

I like 2E and Baldurs' Gate approach a lot. But I like the versatility of 3E.

And current campaign has proven me that 90% of published material is seriously underpowered when tier 3+ characters are played by optimizers. (not necessarily munchkins)

[ericgrau]

I'd be bored, mainly. Even if I felt like playing a beatstick that campaign anyway, I'd want to know where all my magical toys went.

Why exactly would you want "balance" or "nitty gritty" at the expense of fun? I thought this was a game. You can still roleplay and so on, which is fun, but there are fewer fun things.

[Karnith]

If your problem is the rocket tagginess of the game, then switching to lower tier classes isn't necessarily going to help. Basically any martial character is pretty easily capable of demolishing equivalent-CR creatures in a hit or two if built properly (Barbarians in the tier 4-6 range in particular), and a number of other classes get similar capabilities (Warlock with Eldritch Glaives or Eldritch Claws, Warmages with Orbs of X, Rogues with their Sneak Attacks, and so on).

Something else to keep in mind, based on your "+1 weapons" comment is that a low-tier party will, for the most part, be more item-dependent than a higher-tier party, not because their numbers are worse (though they often are) but because they're generally going to have pretty tightly focused class abilities and are going to need to lean on magic items (or something) to compensate.

[Emmerask]

In the end I give the same advice I gave in the ban teleport thread,
there are a ton of REALLY good systems out there for lower powered games which feature stuff like actually fun none magic combat that has more then the handful of options d&d mundane combat offers.

So even while this t4-6 game might work I am rather sure you will have more fun overall with a different system :smallsmile:

[Eldan]

Thanks for answers.

Main thing is, I am currently DM-ing a group of tier 3s (only three in fact and one of them could as well be a donkey or a cart tagging along) and it is a shredding experience, meaning opponents get two-shotted.

I also have a feeling feeling of achievement is lost in such environment. I especially like "special" item comment. Like that +1 sword being actually "OMG magical sword" instead of crying over lack of OP weapon abilities or just giving Ignore DR, add +10d10 sonic dmg to your pencil via Warblade maneuver.

I like 2E and Baldurs' Gate approach a lot. But I like the versatility of 3E.

And current campaign has proven me that 90% of published material is seriously underpowered when tier 3+ characters are played by optimizers. (not necessarily munchkins)

Well if that's your problem... remember, Tier 4 characters don't have to be weaker, necessarily than T3 characters. They can even be stronger, in one very specialized field. It's just that the can't do anything else. A barbarian charger can still quite handily out-damage a warblade.

[lsfreak]

If your problem is the rocket tagginess of the game, then switching to lower tier characters isn't necessarily going to help.

This deserves to be said again. The T5/4 barbarian, fighter, and paladin are better at flattening someone with raw damage higher-tier melee. It's just that that's all they can do, and even trivial changes (such as littering the place with rocks) completely ruins their ability to fight well, rather than just making it a bit more difficult.

Sounds to me like you need to ask them to tone down the damage a bit, and/or you need to start throwing different kinds of challenges than you're used to at them, things where "smash it" and "smash it harder" don't cut it, or smashing things makes it more difficult for them in the long run.

[Hecuba]

I object to the assumption that having options means you roleplay less or worse.

Not less, nor worse, but differently.
Constraints can support creativity if you use them as a framework to expand upon.

[sleepyphoenixx]

If you or your DM use encounters "out of the book" then yes, anything T3 and upwards will take any kind of challenge out of the game.
If, on the other hand, the encounters are tailored to the party having upper tier classes allows for a lot more variety and creativity on the DMs part imo.
There's only so many ways you can challenge a party of T4-6 characters without putting them in a situation they have no way to deal with after all.

[Balor01]

If you or your DM use encounters "out of the book" then yes, anything T3 and upwards will take any kind of challenge out of the game.
If, on the other hand, the encounters are tailored to the party having upper tier classes allows for a lot more variety and creativity on the DMs part imo.
There's only so many ways you can challenge a party of T4-6 characters without putting them in a situation they have no way to deal with after all.

Yeah, this is pretty much it. I am completely unable to use most of premade modules. Everything must be redesigned in order to be at least a bit challenging. That is why i ws thinking of tier 4 and less.

It is not so much a problem of a single OP character as is a group dynamic between these (actually smart) players and their characters.

"Taking any kind of the challenge out of the game," is pretty accurate description.

[Eldan]

The thing is, premade modules were always bad. The self aware ones at least tell you that they are only there for inspiration, for the DM to write their own thing around.

[JaronK]

If you're running premades, then restricting to T4- is a reasonable plan because that's what they're designed for. Heck, I'm running through a premade in a game right now with a Dwarf using Axe and Shield and I'm still smashing my way through lots of stuff. And that's not super optimized... it's just a Dwarf where I optimized Dwarfyness (Dwarvencraft Dwarf War Axe!).

I mean, I think if the plan is to really challenge the PCs using premades, then restricting the tiers down a bit is probably wise.

JaronK