Balancing magic?

[Inevitability]

Before you tell me, yes, I know magic in 3.5 is amongst the most overpowered things in gaming. I also know that if someone says they have a 'quick and dirty fix' to bring magic to the same level as casters, chances are they don't know what they are saying.

But I think the idea I have here is pretty interesting. What if no magic lasts longer than a single round?

To clarify: Whether it is a spell, a natural ability, a (Su) or (Sp) ability, or some obscure subsystem (looking at you, incarnum and truenaming), it doesn't last longer than a single round. Damage remains, as do any instantaneous effects, but anything like the effects of Blindness, or a summoned creature, disappear.

Extend Spell would make a spell last two rounds instead. Persistent Spell would not exist, and the same goes for magic items.

So what would the implications of this be?

[Eldan]

First negative side effect I can see is that it makes 90%+ of buffs worthless. Which has the effect of casters just solving problems instead of buffing their party members, which means they would probably still fall behind.

And without magic items, you'd have to rewrite, oh, every monster out there, since it would be just about impossible to hit required numbers without them.

Also, Incarnum is not a thing anymore. Most of it is buffs.

[Deophaun]

Extend Spell would make a spell last two rounds instead. Persistent Spell would not exist, and the same goes for magic items.

Everyone dies to the first competent flying monster.

[Vhaidara]

Yeah, it basically forces casters into playing optimal builds, since nothing else works. That's the fundamental issue with every "quick and dirty" fix: magic is so fundamentally broken that, outside of targeted needs, anything you do to hurt the optimal stuff (reduced spell slots, spells known, cast times, component costs, lowered save DC, you name it) hurts the weakest forms of magic (blasting, gishing) significantly more than the strongest (no save just suck, save of die, world alteration, etc)

Further, you destroy noncasters. Now no one can fly without having it racially. Incarnum as a subsystem (it is honestly one of the better ones wotc wrote, probably by accident) ceases to be. Warlocks get absolutely trashed.

[Grod_The_Giant]

As others have said, this instantly destroys huge swathes of spell-space-- and not in a good way. Let's look at the general types of magic.

Direct Damage: Largely unaffected. Good-- quick and dirty fixes tend to punish this the most.
Debuffs/Save or Loses: Apart from permanent effects (like, ironically, Blindness/Deafness), these are useless-- at best you're trading turns with your target.
Buffs: Gone. Just gone. Anything defensive is instant garbage; Anything offensive is... well, if your allies can use the buff in a way that's more efficient then your standard action, then it's a quick damage strike. The Snake's Swiftness line is probably better than anything else, and that's pretty sad.
BFC: Pretty much useless, apart from the odd standout like Wall of Iron
Summons: Nooope. At best, trade your action for something's full attack routine.
Save or Dies: Unaffected-- death is permanent.
Divination: Varies wildly, but probably the overall most appropriate weakening. Some things (say, Divination) are untouched; others (Scrying) are greatly weakened, and some (Tongues) are practically useless.
Minionmancy: Weirdly, this is untouched by your specific rule-- things like Planar Binding and Animate Dead are instantaneous. If we take the spirit of the rule, they're less then useless.


To reduce the blow to one where things remain useable, how about we reduce the duration of everything to 1 round/level? That way you pretty much dismantle long-term buffs and debuffs, but spells last long enough in combat to actually accomplish things.

[OldTrees1]

As others have said, this instantly destroys huge swathes of spell-space-- and not in a good way. Let's look at the general types of magic.

To reduce the blow to one where things remain useable, how about we reduce the duration of everything to 1 round/level? That way you pretty much dismantle long-term buffs and debuffs, but spells last long enough in combat to actually accomplish things.

If everything is 1 round/caster level, then wouldn't casters continue to use their 1 spell/encounter save or lose debuffs (you know, the spells that trivialize encounters)?

[Troacctid]

I also know that if someone says they have a 'quick and dirty fix' to bring magic to the same level as casters, chances are they don't know what they are saying.
Yep. Sounds about right.

[Grod_The_Giant]

If everything is 1 round/caster level, then wouldn't casters continue to use their 1 spell/encounter save or lose debuffs (you know, the spells that trivialize encounters)?
But they can also use their buffs and BFC, which are best at playing with other people. It's a toss-up. Crippling debuffs are really hard to deal with, given how baked-in binary save results are. Something like M&M's Affliction (http://www.d20herosrd.com/6-powers/effects/effect-descriptions/affliction-attack) works wonderfully, but would take a lot of work to fit into D&D.

[danzibr]

Yep. Sounds about right.
Ha, I had the same thought.

However, I did want to say... while all quick and dirty fixed we've encountered don't do the job, that doesn't mean there isn't one we haven't thought of (a relevant sig comes to mind). I lean toward it being impossible, but hey, ya never know. It'd probably be more like... if you want to nerf magic in this certain way then x, if you want to nerf magic in that certain way then y, etc.

[JeenLeen]

A middle ground could be to have the durations be as-is, but with a limitation of "or until the end of a scene", a scene being a narrative event in the story/game (including a single battle, like one room in a dungeon). So if a buff generally lasts 1 min/level, it now lasts 1 min/level or until the end of a scene.

This does not largely impact a single battle -- so it doesn't fix the five-minute adventuring day problem or the fact that magic outshines what mundanes can do in general -- but it does fix things like buffing with one spell and it lasting for an entire dungeon crawl, or even days. I recall I had a high-level wizard and I have a Day A and Day B spell-list, and I'd rotate buffs that lasting almost 48 hours to keep constantly super-buffed. A wizard has to recast for the next battle.

For some utility spells, like Flight, this means the wizard can fly, for a little while, but they can't outclass the mundanes in movement all the time. So, that's a plus that doesn't render the spell useless; likewise for summons or even summoning dead (assuming you go with the spirit of the rule, and don't treat it as instantaneous). However, I do get that this 'middle ground' doesn't fix the real problem of spellcasting overwhelming mundanes; it simply puts in a limit to how long a single spell lets them overwhelm mundanes, and that limit might not even apply if the casters actively try to work around it (e.g., fight a single battle a day).

[Troacctid]

Ha, I had the same thought.

However, I did want to say... while all quick and dirty fixed we've encountered don't do the job, that doesn't mean there isn't one we haven't thought of (a relevant sig comes to mind). I lean toward it being impossible, but hey, ya never know. It'd probably be more like... if you want to nerf magic in this certain way then x, if you want to nerf magic in that certain way then y, etc.

There are too many fundamental flaws in the design and balancing of casters and the magic system and the relative power of mundane characters to fix them all with one change. You can make quick and dirty changes to improve it, but "fixing" is not going to happen without a more comprehensive rework, like what 5e did. (I mean, unless "Port in 5e magic" counts as quick and dirty, and I don't think it does.)

FWIW this "one round duration" idea is neither a fix nor an improvement. It mostly just breaks things.

[Milo v3]

So what would the implications of this be?
A lot of people would stop playing spellcasters.

[Flickerdart]

Making everything last 1 round turns combat into a friends check: do you have more friends than the enemy? If yes, your side can use magic to screw around with the other people. If no, the other side can do that to you.

You'd also have casters abusing things like extract gift to buff themselves into stupid power permanently.

[Masakan]

I still think the best way to balance magic is to just get rid of prepared/Vancian casting.

[squiggit]

Ha, I had the same thought.

However, I did want to say... while all quick and dirty fixed we've encountered don't do the job, that doesn't mean there isn't one we haven't thought of (a relevant sig comes to mind). I lean toward it being impossible, but hey, ya never know. It'd probably be more like... if you want to nerf magic in this certain way then x, if you want to nerf magic in that certain way then y, etc.

Well the problem is that a lot of spells aren't problematic and a lot of spells that are problematic are problematic for specific reasons. Blanket nerfs to magic often negatively impact the former without doing a lot to specifically impact the latter.

So I think in general quick and dirty fixes to magic don't work because magic isn't broken. Spells are broken. So any fix is going to have to target those particular spells that cause problems.

[Grod_The_Giant]

I still think the best way to balance magic is to just get rid of prepared/Vancian casting.
It's a good first step, to be sure. "Knows all the spells" is only really thematically fitting for one archetype (wizard), and even then he shouldn't also be the best at them.

Going a step father and replacing ALL casters with fixed-list casters, in that vein of the Beguiler, does even more- especially since you can write the list to exclude the worst spells. It's probably the best balance of low impact/high effect, although it's not exactly a quick fix. Especially not if you write entirely new classes like I did. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?317861-Fixed-List-Caster-Project-%283-5%29&p=16545265#post16545265)

EDIT: Added a link, since I'm not on my phone anymore and apparently I took it out of my signature.

[Masakan]

It's a good first step, to be sure. "Knows all the spells" is only really thematically fitting for one archetype (wizard), and even then he shouldn't also be the best at them.

Going a step father and replacing ALL casters with fixed-list casters, in that vein of the Beguiler, does even more- especially since you can write the list to exclude the worst spells. It's probably the best balance of low impact/high effect, although it's not exactly a quick fix. Especially not if you write entirely new classes like I did.

That's kinda going overboard and I bring it up because as a lot of people know, there are rules that allow you to make clerics and druids spontaneous so you can easily get away with an all spontaneous caster campaign.

[Eldan]

Prepared casting is a limiting factor, it doesn't increase power. Think about it. If you had a wizard and a sorcerer with the same amount of spells known and spells per day, which would you rather play?

What needs to go are two things: spells that are super-versatile or so powerful that preparing them is never wrong, and unlimited spellsk known for wizards. It's what I did, at least, in addition to some other changes.

I also put thematically limited spells together and made them prerequisites for each other, but that's a bonus, not a requirement.

[Vhaidara]

That's kinda going overboard and I bring it up because as a lot of people know, there are rules that allow you to make clerics and druids spontaneous so you can easily get away with an all spontaneous caster campaign.

Yes, but spontaneous casters are only slightly better balanced than prepared. It's the question of destroying 5 million planets before breakfast or 4. Most people prefer the games where you don't.

[Eldan]

Again, spontaneous casters aren't weaker because they cast spontaneously. They are weaker because they get their spells later and have fewer spells known. Which shows how to limit caster power: give them the most powerful spells later and limit them in spells known.

[oxybe]

balancing 3rd ed magic?

step 1: no caster that be every wizard ever. You can't be Tim the Enchanter of Monty Python fame one day and Circe the Enchantress of Greek lore the next. Specialized enchanters, necromancers, evokers, illusionists, etc... with flavorful class abilities and possibly some cross-specialization dipping is far more flavorful then "I AM DA VIZZARD. I CASTS THE MAGICS AND MAKE MANS FALL DOWN."

step 2: focus on the scope of all classes. wizards who gain the ability to create demiplanes are not par with fighters who get slightly better at hitting things in a world of demons and angels. Bring the fighter types up and the wizards down.

step 3: kill vancian casting. this is more because vancian casting's fiddly tendrils tend to be in every casting class and it seriously hampers my ability to make characters that aren't mundane but also not robe and hat wearing magic guys.

[Grod_The_Giant]

That's kinda going overboard and I bring it up because as a lot of people know, there are rules that allow you to make clerics and druids spontaneous so you can easily get away with an all spontaneous caster campaign.
Ehh... wizard to sorcerer is a small step. You get more predictable, but you still have access to a massively wide range of options and approaches. Taking another step down to Beguiler or Dread Necromancer is a significant narrowing of focus, with-- unsurprisingly-- a significant increase in balance.


Prepared casting is a limiting factor, it doesn't increase power. Think about it. If you had a wizard and a sorcerer with the same amount of spells known and spells per day, which would you rather play?
That's actually a really good point, and one that I think we tend to gloss over-- "prepared casting" tends to become a shorthand for "knows (potentially) all the spells." It's the latter that's the problem.

(It is, I would argue, a poor choice for the dominant spellcasting mechanic, since it adds a lot of unnecessary complexity, but that's another issue.)

[Banjoman42]

So while it isn't quite as quick, what if one were too:
a) Round out the schools, so that conjuration and illusion didn't have as many uses (toss out shadow conjuration, etc.), and schools like evocation and enchantment have more uses (add more spells like Heroism), then
b) every character has to choose 4 schools that they cast, and are prohibited from all others.
I think this pretty much knocks down every class to tier 2, and from there it's only a matter of adding more versatility to the lower classes and nerfing some of the ridiculous tricks.

As for the five minute adventuring day, why not just impose a penalty to anyone who prepares spells x amount of time in y period of time? No matter how much sleep you get in between, it's still hard to cram study for & take 8 tests in 3 days.

[Eldan]

I have no problem whatsoever with the 5 min adventuring day. If my players want to adventure for 30 minutes and then rest for 23:30, well... the enemy just got a day to do their evil plan.

If you want to be nice for your players, start giving them hints. They are in a dungeon. "You hear someone running away from the closed door." If they don't take that... "There's hammering and sawing on the other side of the door." "Now It's just quiet." "Now you hear something bubbling and the door feels warm."

[Banjoman42]

I have no problem whatsoever with the 5 min adventuring day. If my players want to adventure for 30 minutes and then rest for 23:30, well... the enemy just got a day to do their evil plan.

Same here, just thought I would include a possible solution.

[Eldan]

It's not realy a solution though, is it? They are still preparing the same amount of spells in the same timespan: all their spells every 24 hours. The difference is that instead of using those 24 hours to adventure, they use most of it resting.

[Banjoman42]

It's not realy a solution though, is it? They are still preparing the same amount of spells in the same timespan: all their spells every 24 hours. The difference is that instead of using those 24 hours to adventure, they use most of it resting.
That's why I said that there should be some kind of penalty: because if the casters are now weakened, any random encounters you toss at them in the meantime can present more of a threat. It would have to be a big enough penalty that it would be more beneficial to actually ration spells in place of roughing it through a few random encounters. Theoretically, it could be done, but I've never really seen the problem with a 5 min adventuring day (unless Divinations and intense planning were used as well, but I've kinda limited that with my other suggestion).

[Deophaun]

If I was going to fix magic, I'd just ban tier 1 and 2 classes and PrCs, and create some fixed-list divines to fill in for the cleric/fix the healer.

[Banjoman42]

If I was going to fix magic, I'd just ban tier 1 and 2 classes and PrCs, and create some fixed-list divines to fill in for the cleric/fix the healer.
I think that's a fine solution from a mechanics stand point, but it essentially hurts one of the biggest reasons to play 3.5 in the first place. I, for one, play 3.5 because of all of the character options (and I like rules-heavy), but that's a debate for another thread. Unless, of course, you redid all of the Tier 1s and 2s, but then it isn't really a quick fix is it?

[kalasulmar]

Just limit their spells known per level. Fiddle around with it and find a number that works for you.

Or make their spellbook capacity finite. They can only have one spellbook "active" at a time, with a set number of spell levels therein. Make them choose loadouts, as it were. Bfc book, blaster book, buffer book, necro book, enchanter book, or maybe an all around with the classics book.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Or make their spellbook capacity finite. They can only have one spellbook "active" at a time, with a set number of spell levels therein. Make them choose loadouts, as it were. Bfc book, blaster book, buffer book, necro book, enchanter book, or maybe an all around with the classics book.
That doesn't really do that much, since you can still know way too many spells and change out your arsenal every day.

[Psyren]

As Grod said, dropping down to narrower, low-tier casting does the trick. Say, replace Wizards with Alchemist/Magus, Sorcerers with Bards, Cleric with Warpriest/Inquisitor, Druid with Hunter/Mystic Ranger, then stir in the other T3/T4 "other-magic" classes like Incarnate and Binder for good measure.

Alternatively, there are plenty of widely-reviewed alternate casting systems out there. Spheres of Power seems to be well-liked around here.

[NichG]

The thing about fixes is that actually, people want different things out of the game. Some people want high speed xanatos rocket chess, but would like the noncasters to be able to keep up. These people often play buffing casters.

Other people want to play magical macgyver and so things that decrease the versatility of a caster will bother them.

Other people want to reduce the game-changing nature of casting, and so certain abilities will bother them even if you make them costly or inconvenient.

You can't satisfy all of these people perfectly at once. You sort of have to make a choice about what you want the game to look like after your modification. People who don't like that target will not like your fix, but that can still be okay as long as your players like that target.

Maybe an interesting project would be to take the entire system and write a Tier 5, Tier 3, and Tier 1 version of everything - monster, items, classes, etc.

[kalasulmar]

That doesn't really do that much, since you can still know way too many spells and change out your arsenal every day.
But it does slow them down without dropping the ban hammer or doing a rewrite like you did. Or just make sure you have players with a sense of restraint.

[Banjoman42]

But it does slow them down without dropping the ban hammer or doing a rewrite like you did. Or just make sure you have players with a sense of restraint.

Restraint? Have you seen the optimization threads around here?

[Vhaidara]

Restraint? Have you seen the optimization threads around here?

Do you realize that most of us would never play the things we talk about here in a million years?

[Kelb_Panthera]

Do you realize that most of us would never play the things we talk about here in a million years?

Except Emperor Tippy. Him and his play at the level most of us consider theoretical only.

[Sayt]

Just limit their spells known per level. Fiddle around with it and find a number that works for you.

Or make their spellbook capacity finite. They can only have one spellbook "active" at a time, with a set number of spell levels therein. Make them choose loadouts, as it were. Bfc book, blaster book, buffer book, necro book, enchanter book, or maybe an all around with the classics book.

What if you enstrictend this (I know, I know, not a word). What if you had one and only one spell book, one hundred pages, one hundred spell levels known. You can be prepare as you like, but once that book is full, that's your spells known list. Need UMD for scrolls/wands of spells not in your book. You still have twice~ as many spells levels known as a sorcerer, but you have less freedom in what you cast day-to-day, so you only really come down to T2, but it's something.

Basically the way to Balance casters is to select every spell over, hmm, first level, hit the delete key, and start writing with your brain engaged.

Otherwise, Grod's restricted list is a good way, probably.

[kalasulmar]

What if you enstrictend this (I know, I know, not a word). What if you had one and only one spell book, one hundred pages, one hundred spell levels known. You can be prepare as you like, but once that book is full, that's your spells known list. Need UMD for scrolls/wands of spells not in your book. You still have twice~ as many spells levels known as a sorcerer, but you have less freedom in what you cast day-to-day, so you only really come down to T2, but it's something.

Basically the way to Balance casters is to select every spell over, hmm, first level, hit the delete key, and start writing with your brain engaged.

Otherwise, Grod's restricted list is a good way, probably.

I like it. But allow them to edit the book like sorcerers can do with swapping out spells, but still with the hard cap of x spell levels in your book. That would make UMD a must have skill and CHA a non-dumpable stat.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Before you tell me, yes, I know magic in 3.5 is amongst the most overpowered things in gaming. I also know that if someone says they have a 'quick and dirty fix' to bring magic to the same level as casters, chances are they don't know what they are saying.

But I think the idea I have here is pretty interesting. What if no magic lasts longer than a single round?

To clarify: Whether it is a spell, a natural ability, a (Su) or (Sp) ability, or some obscure subsystem (looking at you, incarnum and truenaming), it doesn't last longer than a single round. Damage remains, as do any instantaneous effects, but anything like the effects of Blindness, or a summoned creature, disappear.

Extend Spell would make a spell last two rounds instead. Persistent Spell would not exist, and the same goes for magic items.

So what would the implications of this be?

You say you know that a quick, dirty fix cant work then propose a quick and dirty fix.

The only way to fix the "problem" is to go straight to the spell lists with a pruner. Summon X, planar bindinge/ally, gate, (limited) wish, miracle, celerity (any), polymorph and co, and anything else that breaks action economy or gets multiple spells from one slot, *snip*

If you really just can't stand magic being able to do things that would normally require mundane skills, snip them too. Though, with the limitations of such spells in mind, they're not really an issue IMO.

If absolute defenses and save or lose effects rub your fur the wrong way, snip them too.

Finally, eliminate whatever options allow spellcasters to bypass their intended limiting factors; uncanny forethought, quicken and persistent spell, eidetic spellcaster, and so on.

This will require a long, arduous, and detailed process of picking through the existing options and pruning away the most game breaking ones. Anything less is going to cause as many problems as it solves and which options are prune-worthy will vary with each play group.

As for the power disparity between spontaneous and prepared casters, flip their casting level progressions and they get a lot closer to parity or limit the prepared casters absolute spells known for a similar result, both would be too much.

That's just all there is too it.

[Taveena]

Given Incarnum doesn't actually HAVE a duration... I'm not even sure what you were proposing there. You spend 8 hours resting, 1 hour shaping melds, and then have... one round where they take effect?

Warlock isn't actually quite as badly hurt as it looks at first glance, what with actually having the ability to debuff without expending resources or doing damage. Incarnum Glaive only lasts a round anyway, after all.

[Flickerdart]

Here's a blanket fix for magic - although it's really a blanket fix for spells.

Step 1: Ban every spell that allows you to open the Monster Manual to more than one page. Creating undead, summoning monsters, and polymorphing is now gone. Encourage spells like trollshape or summon Bob the hound archon as replacements - they fill the same niche, but are lower in power and versatility. Ice assassin is right out.
Step 2: Ban every spell that gives a skill bonus larger than half the caster's level. Ban every spell that bypasses a skill check - or modify those spells to require a skill check (perhaps with a bonus). Knock is still useful if it requires a skill check (after all, that's basically the Arcane Trickster's Ranged Legerdemain ability) but no longer telling rogues to go sit in the corner.
Step 3: Flip self-only buffs into "anyone but the caster" buffs.

[Triskavanski]

Here's my fix.


Ban all casters and martials and everyone is John (pftdcast.com/resources/EveryoneIsJohn.pdf)

[danzibr]

There are too many fundamental flaws in the design and balancing of casters and the magic system and the relative power of mundane characters to fix them all with one change. You can make quick and dirty changes to improve it, but "fixing" is not going to happen without a more comprehensive rework, like what 5e did. (I mean, unless "Port in 5e magic" counts as quick and dirty, and I don't think it does.)

FWIW this "one round duration" idea is neither a fix nor an improvement. It mostly just breaks things.

Well the problem is that a lot of spells aren't problematic and a lot of spells that are problematic are problematic for specific reasons. Blanket nerfs to magic often negatively impact the former without doing a lot to specifically impact the latter.

So I think in general quick and dirty fixes to magic don't work because magic isn't broken. Spells are broken. So any fix is going to have to target those particular spells that cause problems.
I'm inclined to agree.

For lulz, quick and dirty fix: ban all pure casters (that is, casters that get up to 9ths, so like Bard and Pally are ok). It's quick, and boy is it dirty. Then the most powerful classes become like... partial casters.

[Flickerdart]

I'm inclined to agree.

For lulz, quick and dirty fix: ban all pure casters (that is, casters that get up to 9ths, so like Bard and Pally are ok). It's quick, and boy is it dirty. Then the most powerful classes become like... partial casters.
You're hitting a lot of classes like Beguiler that don't deserve it, and missing crazy things like Nar Demonbinder or all the spells under 6th that are still stupid good. Draconic Polymorph wins even at level 20.

[Aetis]

I agree that there isn't really a quick method of fixing magic in 3.5.

Someone with a high degree of system mastery will have to go through the allowed sourcebooks and cut them out on case-by-case basis.

I found moderate success in limiting magic by playing at lvs below 13, and allowing only Core + PHB2/completes, with Polymorph/Planar binding, etc banned.

It isn't perfect, but this fixes most of the glaring problems I think.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Here's a blanket fix for magic - although it's really a blanket fix for spells.

I'd add a ban on absolute effects - anything with no save, no mundane way to overcome it. Things like Wind Wall or Iron guard.


Ban all casters and martials and everyone is John (pftdcast.com/resources/EveryoneIsJohn.pdf)
A fine game, but not one that really fills the same niche.

[Tvtyrant]

You could always go the Pokemon route. Spells are divided into levels now, and our handbooks tend to divide them into usefulness. Cut spells known to 1/level, make the uses the day dependent on how good the spell is. Crappy spells get up to 5/day, great spells are 1/day. Cut 9th level spells all together.

So a level 20 mage would know about 20 spells, and have between 20 and 100 castings total based on how good the spells they choose are. It also helps with level 1-3, because instead of getting off one encounter ender and then using a crossbow you can use Burning Hands 5 times a day at level 1, and pick up a 1/day color spray at level 2.

Edit: I don't think I explained very well, but my suggestion is essentially to go the Shadowcaster route of having spells be separate abilities. The number of times you can use each ability is based on how good it is instead of what level you are, so the best spells are effectively 1/day. Later you can swap spells for spells of the same level to offset the increasing weakness of spells like sleep.

[Eldan]

I wouldn't say core only. The opposite woudl probably be better, ban core, allow only the spell compendium. Far better.

That said, going over the spell lists is difficult. Opinions differ over what is too good. Personally, I really really dislike alter self, as one example. Others might think it's okay.

[Flickerdart]

Personally, I really really dislike alter self, as one example. Others might think it's okay.
Alter self is pretty much the poster child for an overpowered low-level spell though. It gives you:

A size increase or decrease, like enlarge person or reduce person but for longer
An AC bonus, much like shield but potentially better and also for longer
Flight, like fly but lower level, and potentially faster
Burrowing, like burrow, but potentially faster
Climbing, like spider climb, but potentially faster
Swimming, like speed swim, but potentially faster
Better movement speed, like longstrider but most likely faster and stacking
Natural weapons, like claws of the beast, but more
Skill bonuses like a bunch of spells
Bonus feats like heroics, though less choice
A disguised appearance like disguise self but better because it's real


That's 12 different spell functions rolled into one. The people that like this spell probably spit on 99% of the game's spells as underpowered.

[Eldan]

Right. I'll admit, that wasn't the best example. Let me go dig through the spell list.

Just from the core wizard, level 1, I can see arguments from banning all o fthe following:

Protection from [Alignment]: makes you immune to mind-affecting.
Grease: targets balance, a skill very few people have, is a save-or-suck
Summon Monster I: does allow a choice of creatures from the MM
Comprehend Languages: invalidates a skill
Detect Secret doors: invalidates a skill
Charm Person: invalidates a skill
Hypnotism: save or suck
Sleep: save or suck
Color spray: save or suck
Disguise self: invalidates a skill
Silent image: too versatile
Cause fear: save or suck
Feather Fall: invalidates a skill

See what I mean? That's almost half the list and a lot of it is very iconic. It gets worse the higher you go. Level 9 features:

Gate
Disjunction
Astral Projection
Shapechange
Wish

Which I guess no one would argue about are very strong. But there's also

Imprisonment
Prismatic Sphere
Summon Monster 9
Foresight
Teleportation Circle
Dominate Monster
Shades
Soul Bind
Etherealness
Time Stop

All of which I've seen arguments against. If we were to ban all of those, we're left with...

Freedom (which is purely reactive and thus a bit boring)
Refuge (actually a bit interesting)
Nothing in divination
Hold Monster, Mass and Power Word Kill (two save or dies, some people would also remove those)
Crushing Hand and Meteor Swarm (woooooow. Hoooow Awesoooome)
Weird (another save or die, but a bad one)
Energy Drain (one of the better blasting spells)
Wail of the Banshee (save or die)
And nothing in transmutation

So, one effect removal spell, one nice teleportation trick, a list of save or dies, one crappy blasting spell, one good blasting spell and two empty schools.

Which of course starts the argument: how strong should a 9th level spell be?

[Kelb_Panthera]

Feather Fall: invalidates a skill

While I don't entirely agree with some of your selections for problematic spells, this one just srikes me as outright wrong. What skill is invalidated by feather fall? Climb, maybe?

[Milo v3]

While I don't entirely agree with some of your selections for problematic spells, this one just srikes me as outright wrong. What skill is invalidated by feather fall? Climb, maybe?
Jump/Acrobatics checks to lower fall distance for the purposes of damage maybe?

[Troacctid]

Grease: targets balance, a skill very few people have, is a save-or-suck
Really? Knocking the enemy prone is a save-or-suck now? You spent your standard action to MAYBE take away their move action. That's not really that impressive. At best, it's mediocre battlefield control out of a low-level slot.

[Eldan]

While I don't entirely agree with some of your selections for problematic spells, this one just srikes me as outright wrong. What skill is invalidated by feather fall? Climb, maybe?

Hey, I didn't say I agreed with all of these. But with the strictest possible reading, yeah, tumble to avoid fall damage. That was a silly example and way over-the-top.

As for grease: more because it prevents all movement than because of falling prone. Again, I don't really agree that these should go.

[Psyren]

It's worth noting that Pathfinder nerfed a number of spells on the list above.



Protection from [Alignment]: makes you immune to mind-affecting.

This is false - even in 3.5, it only makes you immune to compulsions and charms that grant "ongoing control." Not only are there mind-affecting spells that are neither of these (including many illusions), there are even other compulsions that don't grant any control (like Confusion and Sleep.)

[Banjoman42]

Do you realize that most of us would never play the things we talk about here in a million years?

I apologize for not putting that in blue or otherwise indicating that was a joke. Yes, I am aware that in a million years, when you finally annoy your DM enough that he/she gives in, you will play the things you talk about.