[PF] Mid-Tier Hack

[schoklat]

Don't know about tiers? Look here! (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=1002.0)

The Purpose
You may agree or disagree on JasonK's tier list, but experience has shown that characters from wildly varying tiers in the same campaign creates spotlight problems, if nothing else. Yet many players simply want to play class X because they like the style...
Which is totally cool, because RPGing is a lot about style. Thus this hack tries to even the playing field a bit, without introducing too many or complex house rules or long list of bans.
The target tier will be 3/4, because it's what both I myself as well as many other people like. Not the case for you? Cool... But then this thread ain't for you, either.

Why Pathfinder?
First it's still in print, has open source material, and it is what we play here... Second while certainly still keeping its own bunch of problems, it closed a fair number of loops and loopholes, and at least helped bringing the classes closer together. Hell just the consolidation of splat material has limited many problems already.


The BIG Change
Spells of level 7-9 are gone! (mostly...) Spell progression is 90% of what makes and breakes tier 1/2.
There are still rare individuals in the world (and certainly the planes) that still can wield such power, but at least in the regular campaign world this is the domain of elder dragons and the like. There are a certain few humanoids who can do it as well, but they are rare individuals with some kind of special backup, them being the high priest of a church, having a major demonic pact, or or or...
For the players these spells are (almost) out of reach, because selling their mind and soul to more powerful beings is generally out for players. They might get their hands on the rare scroll or other magic item, but this is entirely up to the DM. He might also allow the players to replicate singular level 7-9 spells all by themselves, in that case adapt the 3.5 guidelines for epic spells (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/spellsIntro.htm).

Thus the former "full" caster classes see the following changes.

Oracle, Sorceror:
Spells per Day = as Bard (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/bard); add two spells per day per level
Spells Known = as Bard; gain a number of bonus spells know depending on your Wisdom score (in the same way you gain extra spells per day from Charisma)
Bonus Spells from Bloodline / Mystery are gained at 2/5/8/11/14/17
Cleric, Druid, Witch, Wizard:
Spells per Day = as Magus (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/magus)
Cleric: gain a Domain bonus spell slot for each level you can cast; at L1 select Craftsman / Mystic / Warrior, at L2/8/14/20 you gain a bonus feat from the item creation / metamagic / combat feat list
Druids: gain a Domain bonus spell slot for each level you can cast (if selected); Druidic contains simple signs to communicate whiled in Wild Shape (similar to a 3 year old child, or 5 year old with natural spell), you may teach that part of Druidic any close and trusted companion
Witch: extra spells known from your Patron's list are now at 2/5/8/11/14/17
Wizard: gain a Arcane School bonus spell slot for each level you can cast

General Caster / Magic Changes
You can only ever have one casting class and access to an according spell list. If you ever gain access to another via multi-classing, prestige classes or the like, ignore that part.
Unless it is part of the core identity of a class (like Magus access to some Wizard spells, or Sorcerer Bloodlines), you cannot add spells from another classes' list to your own.
Use Magic Device takes a penalty equal to twice the level of the highest spell you can cast, because it interferes with your innate magical capabilities.
Paragon Surge can never grant extra spells known (directly or indirectly)
Human Favoured Class Bonus grants 1/2 extra spell known (instead of 1).
False Priests are out, and similar prestige classes require DM approval.

Other Class Changes

Summoner:
You cannot cast any spells at a lower spell level than a Wizard. Conjuration(Calling) and Conjuration(Summoning) are the exceptions.
Some evolutions gain a higher minimum level to be in line with the new spell progression. As a guide line your Eidolon cannot gain any evolution that a similar arcane spell of the same caster level could not replicate. (For example Flight moves from L5 to L7 minimum.)
Monk:
Select Strong or Quick Monk at L1. Strong Monks can wear armor like Druids; when they do, they apply their Wis (including their Monk AC bonus) instead of their Dex to their AC and CMD, but their Wis bonus is limited in the same way their Dex bonus would be. They also add Toughness to their bonus feat list. Quick Monks add Weapon Finesse and Weapon Precision to their bonus feat list and may apply them to all Monk weapons.
Monks are treated 1/2/3 size categories larger for combat maneuvers only at level 6/11/16, and they may spend a point Ki as swift action to ignore all size restrictions for combat maneuvers for a single round.
Starting at L4 Monks may also spend a point of Ki as swift action go gain an extra move action, but this does not stack with Haste effects or any other possible extra actions for that turn.

General Changes
All classes get at least 4+Int skills per level.
New Feat "Weapon Precision": Pre-Req Weapon Finesse; Whenever you apply your Dex instead of your Str to an attack roll, you can also apply your Dex instead of your Str to that damage roll.
New Feat "One-Two Punch": Pre-Req Two-Weapon Fighting, BAB +6; When only making a single attack as standard action or as part of a charge, you may instead make a single off-hand attack as well. Both attacks are subject to all penalties, in particular those that apply to Two-Weapon Fighting.

DM Advise
Usually this should create very little power problems, the PCs are closer together in their capabilities and tier-3 classes can tackle all the common challenges just fine. You may want to have a look at certain abilities though, as some tricks enter the game later than usual (for example Death Ward L13 vs L9).
A good way to present tougher adversaries instead is to instead improve their HP / numeric defenses / limit status effects against them / give them a partial or full extra turn each round.
Mind this hack certainly does not close all loops (and it doesn't even intend to), like planar binding an Efreeti for its Wishes. In particular a number of items remains unaddressed. In any situation don't hesitate to make an on-the-spot judgement based on above guidelines and communicate your reasoning to your players.


Closing Words
I certainly missed a few outliers, both at the top and at the bottom of the tier list, but I think that should cover most of it. As said, I did not intend to close every possible loophole anyway, that is something that people have different tastes on and such can easily be handled by the DM at the table.
Still feel free to add suggestions if I missed any glaring issue for the tier-1/2s, or how the low tier-4/5s could be buffed. I prefer general guidelines over many small, individual fixes... but sometimes that might still be necessary. (cf Paragon Surge or Monk)

[Spore]

No fighter fixes? I mean twice the skill points is nice, but nothing to loose one's panties over. Other than that, great ideas and simple to recreate.

[JHShadon]

General Changes
All classes get at lest 4+Int skills per level.

Even rogues?

[Stux]

Something else to consider, this is a rule that I am currently using in a PF campaign to make lower tier classes more viable:


Any spell with a casting time of Standard Action does not come in to effect until the beginning of the caster's next turn, and the caster must concentrate on the spell in the intervening round or lose it.

(Note that its not quite the same as making them all 1 round casting time, as they still get their move action on the turn they begin casting.)

What this does is gives a real purpose to mundane combat - it is immediate, whereas most magic is not. Furthermore fighters and rogues and such become very important in protecting friendly casters and disrupting enemy casters.

[Spore]

Even rogues?

Should spell "at least".

[Drachasor]

I always preferred the "higher level slots are still there, but are only good for metamagic". Bit less work that way.

Still, casters will dominate what you have here.

Edit: I think it needs more work to rework spellcasting and you should probably bring in Tome of Battle to replace the weaker classes or some sort of Gestalt system.

[Psyren]

You may agree or disagree on JasonK's tier list

Who? :smalltongue:



Edit: I think it needs more work to rework spellcasting and you should probably bring in Tome of Battle to replace the weaker classes or some sort of Gestalt system.

Dreamscarred Press is working on a PF update for ToB called Path of War that should work well for this.

[grarrrg]

Witch: gain an extra spell known from your Patron's list at 2/5/8/11/14/17
Umm...is this supposed to be a penalty or a bonus?
All the other casters seem to be getting some kind of minor bonus (Cleric > Feats, Oracle/Sorc extra Spells Known), so I'm confused.
As a penalty reword to "You get your Patron spells at levels...instead of normal".
As a bonus...Select a 2nd Patron and get their spells known too?



You can only ever have one casting class and access to an according spell list. If you ever gain access to another via multi-classing, prestige classes or the like, ignore that part.

HOORAY! Multi-classing is now even MORE of a bad idea!
Mystic Theurge just went to Tier 11!!


Use Magic Device takes a penalty equal to twice the level of the highest spell you can cast.

So the better I am at casting spells, the WORSE I am at casting spells?
Does not compute.


False Priests are out, and similar prestige classes require DM approval.

Since you've already cracked down on UMD, I don't see the point in NOT allowing Razmiran Priest (either one).
The UMD was the main reason to do either of them anyway.
The _2_ off-list spells the Archetype (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/sorcerer/archetypes/paizo---sorcerer-archetypes/razmiran-priest) grants are in no way gamebreaking.
And the small handful the PrC (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/false-casting) give you all come with a "+1 level" penalty already.
That and pretty much EVERY "healing" spell the PrC gets only does Temp HP anyway.


Monk:
[list] Select Strong or Quick Monk at L1. Strong Monks can wear armor like Druids, but lose Dex to AC/CMD while doing so, and they add Toughness to their bonus feat list.
I thought the idea was to give Monks BONUSES to give them a boost?
How does "you get Armor but no DEX" help again?


Quick Monks add Weapon Finesse and Dervish Dance to their bonus feat list and may apply them to all Monk weapons.


Adding Weapon Finesse is fairly pointless here. As Monks can ignore it as a requisite for Dervish Dance, and Dervish Dance already does BOTH DEX to To-Hit and Damage anyway.
Sure, if you want to Finesse with a Non-Monk weapon it might be useful, but overall is a waste.


Starting at L4 Monks may also spend a point of Ki as swift action go gain an extra move action, but this does not stack with Haste effects or any other possible extra actions for that turn.
Here we go.
Monks gain free Pounce at level 4.
No need to spend Ki on anything else ever again.

[DarkSonic1337]

Something else to consider, this is a rule that I am currently using in a PF campaign to make lower tier classes more viable:
"Any spell with a casting time of Standard Action does not come in to effect until the beginning of the caster's next turn, and the caster must concentrate on the spell in the intervening round or lose it. "

(Note that its not quite the same as making them all 1 round casting time, as they still get their move action on the turn they begin casting.)

What this does is gives a real purpose to mundane combat - it is immediate, whereas most magic is not. Furthermore fighters and rogues and such become very important in protecting friendly casters and disrupting enemy casters.

So then Magic Fighters are just not a thing in your campaign then? If not that's fine, just curious because I'm really fond of blending swordplay and sorcery (the Magus is my all time favorite d20 class).

[WbtE]

These house rules are well-intentioned, but they don't address the tremendous versatility that puts the Tier 1 classes on top. Wizards are not better than Bards simply due to having higher level spells, they also benefit from a broader repetoire.

They're also a lot more complex than "You may only play one of these classes:"-style fixes. :smallfrown:

[schoklat]

No fighter fixes?

To be honest I have seen enough examples that put easily into T4.
Aside from that, I don't have any idea how to easy give them a broader approach that is not already covered in an archetype and does not treat on the toes of the bunch of other "fighty" classes. But I'm interested in suggestions here.


Something else to consider, this is a rule that I am currently using in a PF campaign to make lower tier classes more viable:
[...]
(Note that its not quite the same as making them all 1 round casting time, as they still get their move action on the turn they begin casting.)

It's a fair approach if that works for you, but I'd like to stay away from it. For one thing casters are already down to less and weaker spells. Second it hurts the fighty types as well, because they get their combat buff a whole round later. And third it kills any gish types.
But worse, it slows combat down considerably due book keeping, more fine planning and all. It's OK to have it for a few strong spells like summons, but for all that's not the route I'd take.


I always preferred the "higher level slots are still there, but are only good for metamagic". Bit less work that way.

Still, casters will dominate what you have here.


These house rules are well-intentioned, but they don't address the tremendous versatility that puts the Tier 1 classes on top. Wizards are not better than Bards simply due to having higher level spells, they also benefit from a broader repetoire.

You underestimate the reach of those nerfs. Getting way less spells overall, and getting powerful spells much slower hurts a lot. Especially if you don't have much else to fall back on, like Sor/Wiz.
Will casters stil be useful, possibly even strong? Sure. Will they dominate like before? Certainly not.


Umm...is this supposed to be a penalty or a bonus?
All the other casters seem to be getting some kind of minor bonus (Cleric > Feats, Oracle/Sorc extra Spells Known), so I'm confused.
As a penalty reword to "You get your Patron spells at levels...instead of normal".
As a bonus...Select a 2nd Patron and get their spells known too?

It was a clarification on when they get their patron spells.
Aside from that, only the Cleric got any real buff. Witches & Wizards got nothing and Druids only a tiny buff so they don't have to leave Wildshape to communicate basic things. Ora/Sor adjustments only address their relative position to other casters as before, and give them the option to get back a few of the overall spells learnt they lost.


So the better I am at casting spells, the WORSE I am at casting spells?
Does not compute.

Since you've already cracked down on UMD, I don't see the point in NOT allowing Razmiran Priest (either one).
The UMD was the main reason to do either of them anyway.

Cross-list spells is one of the Major Route To Power things for casters, hence I shot it down. Sor in particular could still UMD more than well enough simply by virtue of having a high Cha.
Non-casters didn't lose a thing.


I thought the idea was to give Monks BONUSES to give them a boost?
How does "you get Armor but no DEX" help again?

The intention is to redurce their Str/Dex/Wis (+Con) dependency to Str/Wis or Dex/Wis. So for the Str path being able to use armor while still getting Wis & class bonus, they can keep Dex as low as they deem reasonable regarding Init / Ref / feats. I updated the text to make it a bit more obvious.


Adding Weapon Finesse is fairly pointless here. As Monks can ignore it as a requisite for Dervish Dance, and Dervish Dance already does BOTH DEX to To-Hit and Damage anyway.
Sure, if you want to Finesse with a Non-Monk weapon it might be useful, but overall is a waste.

Reread DD and found that it did way more than just Dex-to-DMG. Instead made a new feat and left DD as it was, and reworded things to be a bit clearer.


Here we go.
Monks gain free Pounce at level 4.
No need to spend Ki on anything else ever again.

Where's the problem?! A bunch of other classes can get that directly or indirectly, and often not much later. Monks were supposed to be mobile, but in practise they were among the most lacking in the regard. I realise its a strong buff, but Monks were weak enough that they needed nothing less.
Besides at least the +4 AC or the free haste attack still have a place while you are in melee, and whatever else you can spend Ki on gained from feats / archetypes / whatever...

[Stux]

So then Magic Fighters are just not a thing in your campaign then? If not that's fine, just curious because I'm really fond of blending swordplay and sorcery (the Magus is my all time favorite d20 class).

There is actually a Magus in our group. Spell Combat works so you get to do your attacks and then the spell comes in to effect next round. Spell Strike outright ignores the delayed casting rule, as it provokes attacks of opportunity anyway (seeing as it has to be a spell with touch range) and so there is a chance for the enemy to interrupt, plus it is more likely for the spell to fail as you are making an attack against full AC (at a -2 if used as part of Spell Combat) rather than against Touch AC.


For one thing casters are already down to less and weaker spells. Second it hurts the fighty types as well, because they get their combat buff a whole round later. And third it kills any gish types.
But worse, it slows combat down considerably due book keeping, more fine planning and all. It's OK to have it for a few strong spells like summons, but for all that's not the route I'd take.

I don't think it hurts fighty types more than it benefits them. Sure their buffs are delayed a round, but so are the enemy's. Plus the promptness of buffs is less essential as there is the delay in the enemy casting. Also there are additional house rule tweaks on a class by class basis to make gishes viable.

As for book keeping, its really not an issue. Each player has to remember what spell they cast in their turn, if any. Thats it. I as DM am not finding it an issue either.

More fine planning I don't see as a down side, it adds a new tactical element to combat.

But yeah, it does change combat quite a bit, so I can understand not wanting to implement it. Just thought I let you know how it works for us!

[grarrrg]

The intention is to redurce their Str/Dex/Wis (+Con) dependency to Str/Wis or Dex/Wis. So for the Str path being able to use armor while still getting Wis & class bonus, they can keep Dex as low as they deem reasonable regarding Init / Ref / feats. I updated the text to make it a bit more obvious.

Reducing "DEX dependance" by penalizing it is not the way to go.
What if someone rolled stats and wanted to play a Monk, well, now they have to choose between putting a moderate score in DEX and forgoing armor, or wearing armor and wasting their DEX score.

Basically, if an ability is supposed to be a GAIN it should be a flat out bonus, not a reverse-penalty-nerf-thing.


Where's the problem?! A bunch of other classes can get that directly or indirectly, and often not much later.

I agree they need a boost, but the "pounce not much later" part is incorrect.
The classes that can get (a form of) pounce do not get it until around level 10.
Level 4 is quite a ways off from level 10.

[schoklat]

Reducing "DEX dependance" by penalizing it is not the way to go.
What if someone rolled stats and wanted to play a Monk, well, now they have to choose between putting a moderate score in DEX and forgoing armor, or wearing armor and wasting their DEX score.

Basically, if an ability is supposed to be a GAIN it should be a flat out bonus, not a reverse-penalty-nerf-thing.

At the moment I don't see your point.
DEX <= 14 ? Go strong Monk, your armor bonus will far outshine whatever DEX you got earlier. (Besides you still could just not wear armor if you really wanted. When you get poly'd it's a benefit as well, etc -- see below.)
DEX >= 16 ? Go quick Monk instead and be able to do some decent damage for once.


I agree they need a boost, but the "pounce not much later" part is incorrect.
The classes that can get (a form of) pounce do not get it until around level 10.
Level 4 is quite a ways off from level 10.

Druids get it a L6. All other casters got it L7-8 before, and could even put it on the party's beatstick if they managed to get around the "personal" clause (for example Tattooed Sorcerer, any Magus, ...) A Wordcaster's version Haste gives you the same option straight out as level 2 spell.
Going / dipping Battle Oracle (lame curse, Barb says *HI*) gets it at L1 once/day, and the same is available as Quick Runner's Shirt.
And I'm certainly missing a bunch of ways here.

So yea, a current tier-5 class who's schtick it is to be mobile getting a pounce equivalent (actually half, because you can only move speed, not speed x2) while burning some of its resources for it... I don't see the problem.

[Stux]

Synthesist Summoners can get pounce at level 1.

[schoklat]

But yeah, it does change combat quite a bit, so I can understand not wanting to implement it. Just thought I let you know how it works for us!

Yeah, fair point.
While most of our players are good building decent or even good characters, many have a bit of analysis paralysis. The changes I posted are virtually all during the character planning / building phase, and only the little Monk buff changes actual table play (and even that very straight forward and only for that character).

[WbtE]

You underestimate the reach of those nerfs. Getting way less spells overall, and getting powerful spells much slower hurts a lot. Especially if you don't have much else to fall back on, like Sor/Wiz.
Will casters stil be useful, possibly even strong? Sure. Will they dominate like before? Certainly not.

I'm sure that you meant to say that you respect my difference of opinion and merely wished to stress the points that you felt were salient. I also respect your opinion, but I suspect that fewer spells just means changing the paradigm of the game from "5 minute workday" to "4 minute workday". :smallsmile:

Some follow-up questions: What do you propose doing about magic items which determine their cost based on the caster level (and very often, minimum caster level)? e.g. Are these changes meant to affect the cost of potions with 2nd-level (and higher) spells? If so, do you want to keep the old WBL table or write a new one? If you are keeping the old WBL table, what does this mean for people running adventure paths? If you are not keeping it, then will you also be writing new guidelines for treasure?

[schoklat]

[...], but I suspect that fewer spells just means changing the paradigm of the game from "5 minute workday" to "4 minute workday". :smallsmile:

Letting 5min adventure days happen or not is always up to the DM.
When I DM I don't even need any time critical things ("The princess will be dead by midnight!!"), and even rarely any "wandering monsters". I just make the game world alive and make it clear that things move on with our without the players doing <stuff>... sometimes they rush, sometimes they stroll.


Some follow-up questions: What do you propose doing about magic items which determine their cost based on the caster level (and very often, minimum caster level)? e.g. Are these changes meant to affect the cost of potions with 2nd-level (and higher) spells? If so, do you want to keep the old WBL table or write a new one? If you are keeping the old WBL table, what does this mean for people running adventure paths? If you are not keeping it, then will you also be writing new guidelines for treasure?

I'd leave things as they are, mostly (see below), because all that CL / price / ... business only has bare bone rules and still is quite arbitrary anyway. And magic items themselves are rarely a problem, especially considering non-casters tend to need them move than casters. So for the ease of play I'd just leave them as they are, and have the DM change the odd outliner as it comes up.
Now the one place I would enforce the change is the price scrolls, wands and such. Those are directly fixed to the spell progression, and they do offer a major power leap. But they are also easy to change, as they follow strict formulas -- I might simply add the newly calculated tables. It has the added side advantage that some of the rare powerful spellcasters still around might gift the PCs a rare and powerful item that would usually still be out of their reach.
*

[SassyQuatch]

]Spells of level 7-9 are gone! (mostly...)


Paragon Surge can never grant extra spells known (directly or indirectly)
Human Favoured Class Bonus grants 1/2 extra spell known (instead of 1).

Summoner:
[list] You cannot cast any spells at a lower spell level than a Wizard. Conjuration(Calling) and Conjuration(Summoning) are the exceptions.

[list] All classes get at least 4+Int skills per level.
Agree with these and have added them into my own games. Most of the rest of your fixes are OK at best, bad at worst, and sometimes seem to be buffing classes that should be nerfed and nerfing classes that need more buffs. Just my opinion though.

Now for the part where I brag about my game some more, because that seems to be all the rage these days.

My casters do indeed get limited, but they follow more of a theme and have more restricted spell lists rather than keeping many of the spells that break games but making them slightly harder to get. Mostly this is done by:


1/2 BAB progression for any class that gets any spells that go above 6th
A severely reduced core list of spells for each arcane class.
Summoner progression is mostly followed. 1-6 and a very small fixed list selection of 7-9 spells, with the worst offenders scrapped completely.
Each "school" (some alterations made) has a separate class with it's own specialized 1-9 spells and unique class features. Multiclassing exists, but you can progress only your 1-6 core, all other features and specialist spells are gained only by levels in that specific class.
Magus is essentially the caster who also wants to fight, the Wizard is the universalist who progresses only 1-6 but has a small bit more selection.
Sorcerer is much the same, with 1-9 specialization through pruned bloodline spells.
Cleric similarly has a smaller core list and access to 1-9 only with domains (also picked to remove brokenness)
Druid loses pretty much all class features, but can get many of them back through a class selection list. More spells are retained, but very few 7-9 make it onto the list which is pruned to avoid brokenness.
UMD can be used only on spells you have access to, not to any specialized lists you cannot already access.


Just a few of the many things I did, but notice that the most significant changes was in reducing spell access. Things like attacking UMD do not address the issues, but only delay access to game breaking shenanigans. Sure, at the moment I even allow some level 7-9 spells, but care is taken in spell selection since even the allowing a class unfettered access to their 1-6 spells often creates major problems.

[schoklat]

Agree with these and have added them into my own games. Most of the rest of your fixes are OK at best, bad at worst, and sometimes seem to be buffing classes that should be nerfed and nerfing classes that need more buffs. Just my opinion though.

Facts, not hear-say please.

[SassyQuatch]

Facts, not hear-say please.
That isn't hearsay (not hyphenated), it is an opinion. Kind of like what I said in my post. You even quoted it. Words: they mean things.

But sure, it's already been mentioned but:

Magic makes you magic bad - UMD gets nerfed because... well, just because.
Intelligent spellcasters are dumb - can't even learn from a new list by multiclassing.
Imbalanced application -most full caster classes get small buffs to make up for their losing high level spells, Summoner only get's nerfs, Monk gets a mix of probably too-good abilities and nerfs that make certain archetypes near useless.
One feat that allows you to dump a stat entirely, another one lets you do what you could already do without that feat.


Those are facts. You have been handwaving comments about them away, but objectively they make little sense and most people will recognize that you have a few good points scattered throughout. Which is why we have specifically been saying that you can have your houserules but that we probably will not be adopting or even considering a number of your "fixes" since they appear to be poorly implemented.

EDIT: You also started off your first post by giving a back-handed insult to the board by implying that we don't understand the tier system (despite it being brought up in almost every single thread of homebrew design), then continued on by attributing the system to the wrong person. Sanctimoniousness does not go over well.

[schoklat]

Magic makes you magic bad - UMD gets nerfed because... well, just because.
Intelligent spellcasters are dumb - can't even learn from a new list by multiclassing.

You don't like the premise. Sure, happens.
Now read my OP again, "The Purpose". THX

Mini PS: If you want RP reasons... Magic X interferes with magic Y. Gosh, problem solved, so easy!


Imbalanced application -most full caster classes get small buffs to make up for their losing high level spells, Summoner only get's nerfs, Monk gets a mix of probably too-good abilities and nerfs that make certain archetypes near useless.

Cleric gets a little extra feats, that is all.
Summoner doesn't lose any core features. In fact he's now the only one with access to Summon Monster VII / VIII / IX, Gate (both even as SLA) and Greater Planar Binding. Big nerf...
And lastly... Monk, a pretty much agreed T5, get's a feature everyone could get for 1k, that other full classes got jack free at L1... Breaking the game -- big time!


One feat that allows you to dump a stat entirely, another one lets you do what you could already do without that feat.

Heared of Agile Weapons yet?
Feat is simply there for consistency and because some ppl hate to have core features as items. Besides you are down two feats... Ask other people who got a clue about balancing how much "two feats" are worth. *Plus a bunch of other stuff that TWF is still weaker.*
MH/OH as Standard via feat it not something you could do before.


Those are facts. You have been handwaving comments about them away, but objectively they make little sense and most people will recognize that you have a few good points scattered throughout. Which is why we have specifically been saying that you can have your houserules but that we probably will not be adopting or even considering a number of your "fixes" since they appear to be poorly implemented.

I don't think you really know what those two words actually mean.


EDIT: You also started off your first post by giving a back-handed insult to the board by implying that we don't understand the tier system (despite it being brought up in almost every single thread of homebrew design), then continued on by attributing the system to the wrong person. Sanctimoniousness does not go over well.

How dare I link my sources?
How dare I inform newcomers about some things "veterans" take for granted?

[SassyQuatch]

You don't like the premise. Sure, happens.
Now read my OP again, "The Purpose". THX
Sure, another insult. Now I don't understand the premise despite most of my first post describing how I follow that same premise but in a somewhat different manner.


Mini PS: If you want RP reasons... Magic X interferes with magic Y. Gosh, problem solved, so easy!
Ooh. Arcane magic doesn't like arcane magic. Must be because of those arcane magic feuds. Or maybe you are once again just handwaving away criticism. There is still a lot of cognitive dissonance in saying that a Wizard can't learn off of the Summoner's list or vice-versa even though the Summoner is basically just cribbing off the Wizard in the first place. And the issue that multi-class spellcasting has always been terrible to implement and never posed a threat to your "purpose" in the first place and is just a way to punish spellcasters who don't want to single-class.


Cleric gets a little extra feats, that is all.
So all that stuff about extra spells is my imagination? Because I just reread your OP and it still says "bonus spell" a lot.

Summoner doesn't lose any core features. In fact he's now the only one with access to Summon Monster VII / VIII / IX, Gate (both even as SLA) and Greater Planar Binding. Big nerf...
So when you said that you are limiting high level spells you just up and forget to mention that one class still has their high level spell access. This actually makes your houserules less balanced, not more balanced.

And lastly... Monk, a pretty much agreed T5, get's a feature everyone could get for 1k, that other full classes got jack free at L1... Breaking the game -- big time!

So that is why the Strong Monk gets a terrible armor use feature?


Heared of Agile Weapons yet?
Feat is simply there for consistency and because some ppl hate to have core features as items. Besides you are down two feats... Ask other people who got a clue about balancing how much "two feats" are worth.
So instead of buying Agile on a number of weapons you get a better version that applies to all Dex-to-hit weapons.


*Plus a bunch of other stuff that TWF is still weaker.* MH/OH as Standard via feat it not something you could do before.
Yes, because the rules state that you can do it without a feat.

If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. You suffer a –6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –10 penalty to the attack with your off hand when you fight this way. You can reduce these penalties in two ways. First, if your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. An unarmed strike is always considered light. Second, the Two-Weapon Fighting feat lessens the primary hand penalty by 2, and the off-hand penalty by 6.
Where does it state an action type? It says once per round, but not an action type. Your feat says that you can now keep Two-Weapon Fighting penalties to do what you can already do with the Two-Weapon Fighting feat.


I don't think you really know what those two words actually mean.
Perhaps it is you who does not understand how to look at your own rules objectively. There seems to be plenty of people here that don't see this as wonderful a fix as you seem to feel it is. Is everybody else wrong except for you? Because I don't think so.


How dare I link my sources?
How dare I inform newcomers about some things "veterans" take for granted?
So you come to the part of the forum with many veterans, pretend that it is full of newcomers, and tell them about things they already know. And give credit to somebody called JasonK, even thought JaronK's name is in the first post of your source. And the fact that tiers don't have much to do with your fix other than making the Summoner now a god with his retained spell access and other casters having to jump through a few more hoops to get to game-breaking power levels.

Not trying to be mean here, but if you come to Homebrew Design you will get feedback and not all of it positive. You might need to change how you view such criticism since at the moment you come off as making excuses instead of actually listening.

[schoklat]

*rant*
Not trying to be mean here, but if you come to Homebrew Design you will get feedback and not all of it positive. You might need to change how you view such criticism since at the moment you come off as making excuses instead of actually listening.

I didn't ask for getting my back padded.
I did ask for constructive criticism. {{scrubbed}}

[awa]

if you are complaining about linking to the tiers your being negative for the sake of being negative. Not everyone has seen them or we wouldn't have the occasional what are these tier questions/ threads. The fact that many people know them dose not mean everyone does.

So he misspelled the creators name it's not that big a deal. mention it but don't say hes trying to steal it.

while i personally have little opinion on the fixes/ nerfs in question several of the posters seem to be unnecessarily hostile to the creator.

[Realms of Chaos]

As stated by SS, having the summoner and only the summoner possess access to gate (one of the more powerful 9th level spells) is a bit head-scratching.

Even when compared with the small buffs that every other caster class is getting, having access to gate seems unbalanced. You may want to take a similar tact as with your other casters, slowing the delay of SLAs so that you don't get high spell access and giving them something else to make up for it (such as more or superior tactical use of these abilities).

[schoklat]

You may want to take a similar tact as with your other casters, slowing the delay of SLAs so that you don't get high spell access and giving them something else to make up for it (such as more or superior tactical use of these abilities).

Could you give a specific example?
As note, I'd prefer something generally applicable over a dozen mini-changes.

[Realms of Chaos]

A specific example? Well, here are a couple of examples off of the top of my head:


A limited distance of teleportation (similar to shadow dancer) that can only be used for personal travel or summoned creatures. Teleportation is part of conjuration so it helps express more of a general conjurer feel.
A version of lay on hands (including mercies, though maybe at a staggered rate) that only works on eidolons and summoned creatures. Healing is part of conjuration (and the summoner already has spells to heal eidolongs) so it also helps express more of a general conjurer feel.
A limited number of evolutions points usable each day to augment creatures you summon through spells (probably from a reduced sublist for minimal shenanigans).
A tactician approach imitating the bard's inspire courage, inspire competence, inspire heroics, and inspire greatness performances, without performance and only affecting eidolon/summoned creatures.
The ability to choose an alignment or elemental descriptor/subtype (such as fire or lawful), gaining an extra spell known of that descriptor per spell level and minor bonuses when summoning a creature of the chosen subtype.


The above are all right off of the top of my head (so balance may be weird) but they seem easy enough to summarize in a sentence or two and any one of them would probably be enough.

[schoklat]

Ah I get it, thanks.
I thought you wanted to buff the former 9/9 casters. Because right now only Clerics got anything.

I'll think about it regarding the Summoner. I changed least there, because it was mostly on the lower end of T2 already, and besides summoning its casting got nuked just as hard as the rest.
PF Gate isn't as bad, because outside Blood Money cheese (which Summoner lacks) it's rather hard to fuel it. Note that I didn't close all "holes" in PF (like binding Efreet). But I didn't intend to either, as I see it beyond the scope of a small hack and rather something to be done based on table agreement.