3.5e Quickfix: 5 simple rules to balance your game.

[Grod_The_Giant]

There are, of course, innumerable attempts at improving the balance of 3.5e, ranging from the most rudimentary houserules to elaborate overhauls (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?329161-Giants-and-Graveyards-Grod-s-collected-3-5-revisions). And in truth, I think a lot of the issues have been solved, in one way or another-- look long enough and you can find homebrew replacements for just about everything, all carefully tailored to power levels of your choice. But... at that point you're playing another system. I love my Giants and Graveyards rules, but I'll be honest-- they're pretty much never going to be used outside of my table.

So here I wanted to do something a little bit different. How high a ratio of effect to houserule could I get? How many classes could I fix with a few quick lines of text? So while I normally frown on "quick fixes"... what do you think of these?

The Caster Nerf
1. Classes normally capable of casting 9th level spells are limited to 7th level spells. They have the spells per day (and spells known) progression of a Bard (or Psychic Warrior) one level higher, except that they gain 7th level spells at 18th level. Casters with a low BAB have twice as many spells/day as shown on the Bard table.


Casters who normally gain 9th level spells get 7th level spells at 18th level.
Bards use these revised rules as well, though they do not gain 7th level spells. Factotums should have spell level access adjusted to match.
If they have a poor BAB, they gain one bonus spell per spell level, and/or a Reserve Feat (Complete Warrior) at first level and every four levels thereafter (temporarily counting as having a 2nd level spell available when picking a feat at 1st level)
If they're a spontaneous caster, they gain one bonus spell per spell level, as well as one bonus spell known per spell level. (Casters who don't have a table of spells known/spell level, such as the Warmage, do not gain the latter benefit)
If they're a prepared caster, they have a limited spell list: all 0 level spells and 5 first level spells known, plus 5 additional spells per class level (working out to around 15 spells known/spell level). Clerics, Druids, and similar classes pick spells outright when they gain a level, with clerics picking from all of their god's domains as well as the original list. Wizards, Archivists, and other spellbook users can add spells up to the aforementioned limit.
Manifesters simply use the Psychic Warrior progression, gaining 7th level powers at 18th. If they have poor BAB, double the amount of power points and increase the number of powers known by 50%.


9th level casters are too powerful. This is an established fact. But 6th level casters... 6th level casters tend to work pretty well. The Bard is a lovely T3, as are most of Pathfinder's 6th level gish (Magus, Hunter, Warpriest, Alchemist, etc). But we'll be a little nicer to them, especially since there are so many lovely 7th level spells that make great capstones-- Greater Teleport, Prismatic Spray, <Alignment Word>, Control Weather, etc). The bonus spells help make up for the reduced endurance that comes from fewer spell levels. Slower access to spells, and (if using the optional additions) limited options for prepared casters mean improved balance all around.


The Half-Caster Boost
2. Classes with 4th level spells use the Duskblade progression instead, drawing their 5th level spells from whatever class list is most appropriate (Druid for Ranger, Cleric for Paladin, Sorcerer/Wizard for Assassin and Hexblade, etc).
Alternate Option: Classes with 4th level spells use the Recharge Magic variant (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/rechargeMagic.htm).


Paladins, Rangers, and similar classes have surprisingly good lists, especially with splatbook support, but they don't really have the slots to support them. This gives them enough casting ability to actually use their magic for power and utility, as it was intended.


The Noncaster Boost
3. Any class without access to a magic system* gains the following benefits:
Double all static numerical bonuses. (That is to say things that aren't "+Charisma" or "+level")
Anything with a daily usage limit is instead changed to an HOURLY limit.
At noncaster level 6 you gain an extra move action, which updates to a standard at 12th.
You can upgrade a class' BAB one step, it's HD 2 steps, or gain 4 new class skills and skill points/level.
You automatically gain all skill tricks you qualify for, and may use them at will. If you multiclass into a magical class, you instantly lose this benefit, though you keep any skill tricks you had already gained.


There are a lot of low-tier classes that are almost there, with potentially useful abilities that are too weak, limited, or both to be useful, and without meaningful abilities to use them. These bonuses are intended to be broadly applicable and effective, and-- based on a cursory analysis of T4/5 classes, is usually enough to kick them up 0.5-1 tier, and make them significantly more fun to play in the process. Skill tricks in particular serve to give meaningful boosts to options.

Magic Items
4. Any class without access to a magic system* gains an Ancestral Relic (as the feat) at 4th level. They gain a second Ancestral Relic at 8th level, a third at 12th and a fourth at 16th. They may choose an existing item to become their new Relic provided that its current value is less than the listed maximum for their level. Levels in classes with access to magic systems do not count towards the progression of your Relics, either their max value or the number you receive.

Optional: If you can use Weapon of Legacy rules properly, those are an acceptable replacement.


You need magic items in this game. This makes sure the ones who really need them, have them. Don't forget about MiC effect combination rules.


The Quality of Life Improvement
5. Characters always grant at least 4+Int skill points per level, and cross-class skills only cost one point per rank. At BAB +1, characters gain two Fighter bonus feats they qualify for.
Optional Variant:

Two things that are always in demand in 3.5: skill points and low-level feats. This change makes it much easier for characters to actually have the skills they want, and lets them actually get started on whatever combat style they're interested in without wasting so much time.

Most importantly, Certain skills are Linked. Whenever you put ranks in one skill, you gain an equal number of ranks in any skills that it's Linked to. You cannot exceed the normal cap on skill ranks using Linked skills; however, if you have a skill as a class skill, any skill it's Linked to also counts as a class skill. This replaces Skill Synergies. The various Linked skills are:
Autohypnosis and Concentration ("Concentration")
Balance and Tumble ("Acrobatics")
Bluff and Disguise ("Deception")
Climb, Jump, and Swim ("Athletics")
Disable Device and Open Lock ("Thievery")
Handle Animal and Ride ("Animals")
Hide and Move Silently ("Stealth")
Knowledge (Arcana) and Spellcraft ("Arcana")
Knowledge (Nature), Knowledge (Geography), and Survival. ("Nature")
Listen, Search, and Spot ("Perception")


3.5 has too many skills. Merging them would be advantageous, but requires constant rulings about existing material that was written with the assumption of separate skills. This has roughly the same effect, but doesn't leave any room for interpretation.


*"Magic system" is defined as spells, Invocations, Psionics, Incarnum, ToB, ToM material, or any similar mechanic providing access to a large list of level-appropriate abilities. When multiclass characters, only count their levels in classes that don't grant magic abilities when determining at what ECL they gain the benefits of rules 3 and 4.

---------------------------------

Alternate Fix: Careful Class Choice
(Note: this requires Pathfinder material
Use only the following classes:

Alchemist (PF)
Bard (Upgrade spells/day and spells known progressions to match the Pathfinder version)
Binder
Brawler (PF)
Crusader
Dragonfire Adept (Increase damage to 1d6/level)
Hunter (PF)
Incarnate
Inquisitor (PF; gains Trapfinding at first level)
Investigator (PF)
Magus (PF)
Psychic Rogue
Psychic Warrior
Ranger (Wildshape or Mystic ACFs only)
Skald (PF)
Swordsage (gains Trapfinding at first level)
Totemist
Warblade
Warlock (upgrade to 1 invocation known/level, and damage to 1d6/level)
Warpriest (PF)

Any prestige class that grants access to spells higher than 6th level is also removed from the game.

Player's Handbook Class Equivalencies

Barbarian: Brawler, Skald, Totemist, Warblade focused on Tiger Claw
Cleric: Binder, Incarnate, Inquisitor, Warpriest
Druid: Hunter, Ranger, Totemist
Fighter: Brawler, Crusader [avoid (Su) strikes to keep a mundane flavor], Warblade
Monk: Brawler, Swordsage, Psychic Warrior
Paladin: Crusader, Warpriest
Rogue: Investigator, Psychic Rogue, Swordsage [avoid (Su) strikes to keep a mundane flavor]
Sorcerer: Dragonfire Adept, Magus (Eldrich Scion), Warlock
Wizard: Alchemist, Binder, Ranger (Mystic Ranger with Sword of the Arcane Order), Incarnate, Warlock





They're not a perfect fix for everyone, to be sure, but... what do you guys think?

[nedz]

How does this stuff work with multi-classing, especially point 4 ?

You seem to have invoked skill point inflation, I'm not sure what the implications of this are.

Also, Savant breaks 5, FWIW, because: all skills are class skills. This is probably not a major thing.

[Troacctid]

3. Any class without access to a magic system* gains an untyped bonus to all Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution-based class skills, as well as Spot, Search, and Listen, equal to three times their class level. They also automatically gain any skill trick they qualify for, as well as a minimum of 4 skill points/level. They ignore normal limits on how many times skill tricks may be used.


If you can't have magic power, you need power somehow. This helps put the "bad***" in "bad*** normal." Mental skills are excluded, because Diplomacy really doesn't need any boosting, and it's not great to shut everyone else out like that.


This constitutes a major stealth-nerf to classes such as Incarnate, Psychic Rogue, Psychic Warrior, Ranger, Spellthief, Paladin, etc. They were already making significant sacrifices compared to their mundane counterparts in order to gain their magic abilities, and they were well-balanced (for the most part) as a result. Many of them were even underpowered. Now you've dropped a ginormous new sacrifice on their heads without giving them anything in return.


2. Classes with 4th level spells gain twice as many spells per day as written (0 spells/day becomes 1). They also gain full CL=class level, and gain a slot for 0-level spells (any 1st level spells on their list that are normally cantrips/orisons) at 1st level.


Paladins, Rangers, and similar classes have surprisingly good lists, especially with splatbook support, but they don't really have the slots to support them. This gives them enough casting ability to actually use their magic for power and utility, as it was intended.


I'd consider this a positive change, but I think it's too minor to have a meaningful impact; it's not really a "fix" so much as a small buff. I prefer my own solution of having these classes use the recharge magic variant.


5. Characters automatically have a number of ranks in all class skills equal to one-half their level plus 2 (rounded down).
Optional:

When first taking a level in a class, characters pick two extra skills to add to their list of class skills




Skills are how noncasters interact with the world, but no-one gets enough of them. This fixes that in as simple a way as I could come up with. The optional rule gives a bit more customization, as well as a way for classes to get "really should have this" skills (ex, a Fighter gaining Spot and Listen)


This seems absurdly generous. A little too Monty Haul for my tastes. I'm not a fan.

[JBarca]

There are, of course, innumerable attempts at improving the balance of 3.5e, ranging from the most rudimentary houserules to elaborate overhauls (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=15150359&postcount=16).
I think you linked the wrong thing here? What you've got is Darin's guide to Warlock Wands. So unless I'm missing a very clever joke?



1. Classes normally capable of casting 9th level spells are limited to 7th level spells. They have the spells per day (and spells known) of a Bard one level higher, except that they gain 7th level spells at 18th level.

Optional (But highly recommended):

If they have a poor BAB, they gain one bonus spell per spell level.
If they're a spontaneous caster, they gain one bonus spell per spell level, as well as one bonus spell known per spell level. (Casters who don't have a table of spells known/spell level, such as the Warmage, do not gain the latter benefit)
If they're a prepared caster, they have a limited spell list: 5 spells per class level. Clerics, Druids, and similar classes pick spells outright when they gain a level, with clerics picking from all of their god's domains as well as the original list. Wizards, Archivists, and other spellbook users can add spells up to the aforementioned limit.
Manifesters simply use the Psychic Warrior progression, gaining 7th level powers at 18th. If they have poor BAB, double the amount of power points and increase the number of powers known by 50%.



9th level casters are too powerful. This is an established fact. But 6th level casters... 6th level casters tend to work pretty well. The Bard is a lovely T3, as are most of Pathfinder's 6th level gish (Magus, Hunter, Warpriest, Alchemist, etc). But we'll be a little nicer to them, especially since there are so many lovely 7th level spells that make great capstones-- Greater Teleport, Prismatic Spray, <Alignment Word>, Control Weather, etc). The bonus spells help make up for the reduced endurance that comes from fewer spell levels. Slower access to spells, and (if using the optional additions) limited options for prepared casters mean improved balance all around.


Definitely one way to limit magic. I like the extra spells/day. Quantity has never been the problem, and limits there only bore players. The only issue I have is the limit on spells known. What's the point of playing a prepared caster, now? Spontaneous now have more spells known (for most levels) and more/day at higher levels. A limit is probably fine. But 5? That might be too harsh.



2. Classes with 4th level spells gain twice as many spells per day as written (0 spells/day becomes 1). They also gain full CL=class level, and gain a slot for 0-level spells (any 1st level spells on their list that are normally cantrips/orisons) at 1st level.


Paladins, Rangers, and similar classes have surprisingly good lists, especially with splatbook support, but they don't really have the slots to support them. This gives them enough casting ability to actually use their magic for power and utility, as it was intended.

Fully on board here.



3. Any class without access to a magic system* gains an untyped bonus to all Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution-based class skills, as well as Spot, Search, and Listen, equal to three times their class level. They also automatically gain any skill trick they qualify for, as well as a minimum of 4 skill points/level. They ignore normal limits on how many times skill tricks may be used.


If you can't have magic power, you need power somehow. This helps put the "bad***" in "bad*** normal." Mental skills are excluded, because Diplomacy really doesn't need any boosting, and it's not great to shut everyone else out like that.

Wow. This has some interesting combinations. After a very brief skim of the skill tricks... Acrobatic Backstab and a +27 (when you qualify) to Tumble checks? Rogues can now freely Sneak Attack every round. Invisibility is no longer an issue w/in 30ft of mundanes (Clarity of Vision). All movement speeds increase by at least 10ft (Quick Swim, Leaping Climber, Extreme Leap). Constant concealment (Shrouded Dance). Etc. Most of these aren't a huge issue, of course. But just something to keep in mind. Unlimited Skill Tricks is a very nice thing to have. And a huge bonus to skills? I understand the point, but it's a very hefty bonus.
It also has the potential to make skills less valuable. Why bother with ranks in Hide when you're getting a free +30 at 10th level? Is this a problem? Probably not. But it definitely changes the way players will think about skills.



4. Any class without access to a magic system* gains an Ancestral Relic (as the feat) at 4th level. They gain a second Ancestral Relic at 8th level, a third at 12th and a fourth at 16th. They may choose an existing item to become their new Relic provided that its current value is less than the listed maximum for their level.

Optional: If you can use Weapon of Legacy rules properly, those are an acceptable replacement.


You need magic items in this game. This makes sure the ones who really need them, have them. Don't forget about MiC effect combination rules.

I'm unfamiliar with these rules, so, going by the general tone, I'm going to assume it's basically a free set of magic items? If so, I'm all for it.



5. Characters automatically have a number of ranks in all class skills equal to one-half their level plus 2 (rounded down).
Optional:

When first taking a level in a class, characters pick two extra skills to add to their list of class skills




Skills are how noncasters interact with the world, but no-one gets enough of them. This fixes that in as simple a way as I could come up with. The optional rule gives a bit more customization, as well as a way for classes to get "really should have this" skills (ex, a Fighter gaining Spot and Listen)


I really like it. Nothing annoys me more than feeling restricted because I can't have my scholarly Rogue know things, or my Paladin Intimidate enemies.

Overall, I think I like it. I don't have a problem with the system as-is, for the most part, but for what you're trying to do, I think this is as good a "quick fix" as I've seen.

[OldTrees1]

3. Any class without access to a magic system* gains an untyped bonus to all Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution-based class skills, as well as Spot, Search, and Listen, equal to three times their class level. They also automatically gain any skill trick they qualify for, as well as a minimum of 4 skill points/level. They ignore normal limits on how many times skill tricks may be used.


5. Characters automatically have a number of ranks in all class skills equal to one-half their level plus 2 (rounded down).
Optional:

When first taking a level in a class, characters pick two extra skills to add to their list of class skills



I really like the at-will skill trick change!

So all non magical characters automatically have 3.5 * Class level + 2 "ranks" (ranks + a new bonus) to their class skills and can at most spend ~0.5 skill points per level to increase that to 4 * Class level + 3. While this provides a welcomed boost,
1) It drastically reducing the ability to differentiate two characters of the same class based upon their skills.
2) It raises the bar for non magical skill users so that individual cross class skills (beyond the 2 new class skills in the optional rule) become increasingly difficult to become skilled in.

[Chronos]

Under these rules, what would be the advantage of a rogue n versus a rogue 1/fighter n-1? So far as I can tell, the latter would have essentially the same skills, but much more fighting ability.

And with the huge buff to physical skills but not to mental, you're effectively making Hide and Move Silently uncounterable. Nobody can ever see any badass normal, including another badass normal.

[OldTrees1]

Under these rules, what would be the advantage of a rogue n versus a rogue 1/fighter n-1? So far as I can tell, the latter would have essentially the same skills, but much more fighting ability.

And with the huge buff to physical skills but not to mental, you're effectively making Hide and Move Silently uncounterable. Nobody can ever see any badass normal, including another badass normal.

Pick 3 rogue class skills. 2 would have been added to the fighter list via the optional rule, however the 3rd would only get +3(and 2 ranks) instead of +3N(and 2+N/2 ranks)

Also note that Spot and Listen (regradless of class/crossclass) get the +3N (presumably to counter +3N Hide and Move Silently Rogue Ns get)

[Grod_The_Giant]

So far the main issue seems to be skills, particularly the big bonus from Rule 3. I have to agree, on second glance- that bonus to all skills IS too much. To replace, how about gaining a 3*level bonus to ONE skill of your choice every, oh, every third level, along with all the unlimited use skill tricks you want?(Assuming you're nonmagical).

Prepared casters still have a drastic advantage over spontaneous- that's 5 spells known per CLASS level, not spell level. Three times as many as a sorcerer.

(Also yes, fixed the link in the first post)

[Zanos]

1. Prevents primary casters from getting access to effects when the game expects them to have them. Most specifically healing, but other utilities come into mind as well. Very little incentive to not play a class that isn't a 6th level caster already, since they usually got additional class features. Few campaigns will ever see level 18, so their additional access to 7ths will hardly ever matter. Limiting the spells known of prepared casters only encourages them to try to find spells that can do it all even more. Shadow X and similar spells become tremendously powerful. Nerfs already balanced 9th level casters like the Dread Necromancer, Beguiler, and Warmage.

2. This is fine.

3. Adding a bunch of numbers to stuff rarely turns out well. Give them more SP, an expanded class list, and some skill tricks. Adding a +yes to a handful of skills means they will either autopass all the DC's or you'll have to jack the DCs so high nobody else could ever make them.

4. I'm not actually familiar with the ancestral relic rules.

5. Personally, I would just use PF skills so you can get a reasonable score in anything, and it being a class skills just grants a small bonus. This seems like a very bizarre solution.

[Cosi]

1. Classes normally capable of casting 9th level spells are limited to 7th level spells. They have the spells per day (and spells known) of a Bard one level higher, except that they gain 7th level spells at 18th level.

Knocking out high level spells isn't super effective at nerfing casters. You still have wealth loops (wall of iron, flesh to salt), absurd minionmancy (spirit binding, dominate person), and buffbots (DMM: Persist, Incantatrix). Beyond that, you remove a large contingent of spells that aren't really a problem. I don't think anyone believes that meteor swarm needs to be removed, or that word of recall is more of an issue than teleport.

If you really want one rule to nerf casters, I think you should go with some variant of "no spells which allow you to control creatures from the Monster Manual" instead. No gate, no greater planar binding, no shapechange, but you still get true resurrection and mindblank.

Removing summon monster is a loss, but if you really care (and are willing to use a much vaguer rule) you could try something like "no spell that makes a call to a set of elements not wholly enumerated in the spells text". So no heroics, but you still get summon monster.

About the only benefit I see here is that it puts everyone on the same spell progression.


2. Classes with 4th level spells gain twice as many spells per day as written (0 spells/day becomes 1). They also gain full CL=class level, and gain a slot for 0-level spells (any 1st level spells on their list that are normally cantrips/orisons) at 1st level.

As has been pointed out already, this is not nearly enough. Also, in terms of "bang for buck", this hits all of two classes. I cannot imagine that possibly being enough to matter.


3. Any class without access to a magic system* gains an untyped bonus to all Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution-based class skills, as well as Spot, Search, and Listen, equal to three times their class level. They also automatically gain any skill trick they qualify for, as well as a minimum of 4 skill points/level. They ignore normal limits on how many times skill tricks may be used.

This isn't enough. The epic usage of Balance which is "almost as good as a 3rd level spell" is DC 120. A DC 100 Climb check is slightly worse than spider climb, which is a 2nd level spell.

IMHO, there's a much simpler way to fix skills. Just give all of the skill replacing spells (fly, knock, etc) out as SLAs at whatever level casters get them. So 6 ranks of Open Lock gives you Knock 3/day or something. No RNG breaking bonuses required.


4. Any class without access to a magic system* gains an Ancestral Relic (as the feat) at 4th level. They gain a second Ancestral Relic at 8th level, a third at 12th and a fourth at 16th. They may choose an existing item to become their new Relic provided that its current value is less than the listed maximum for their level.

I have three problems with this:

1. There is zero versamilitude to doing this. You can imagine why a sneaky theif, or a mighty warrior, or a savage tribesman might be better than a simpering arcanist at lifting heavy things or running really fast. But there's no (in-world) reason why they'd have more magic items.
2. If you're willing to make that versmilitude sacrifice, you can fix all the problems that way. When the TWF Ranger starts lagging behind, just toss him The Sickle Whose Crop Is Pain (hits targets with an enervate, uses drained levels to cast spells Devourer style) and The Fang of the Yuan-ti Raja (does a pile of acid damage, inflicts poison, and gives you snake powers). The middle ground is sacrificing too much for too little.
3. Fixing mundanes by giving them magic items only looks like a solution. What happens when the already good enough DMM Cleric picks up the plussier than normal sword the Fighter got because he picked a fake class?


5. Characters automatically have a number of ranks in all class skills equal to one-half their level plus 2 (rounded down).

Whatever. I perfer giving everyone a bonus equal to their level on skills (so that the RNG doesn't diverge), making training a small bonus, then giving out skill tricks or spells at rank milestones.


They're not a perfect fix for everyone, to be sure, but... what do you guys think?

They're bad. They come from an understanding of imbalance that I fundamentally disagree with. The issue isn't that casters are too good. Casters are fine. The issue is that mundanes are too bad. Also, there are a few broken spells. The simple fix to that is to ban mundanes. IMHO five point fix for 3.5 is just:

1. Ban anything without 9ths. Also Warmage and Healer. [Obvious]
2. Ban the spells that destroy the game (planar binding et al, polymorph et al, etc). [Obvious]
3. All casting PrCs are full casting. [Build options are good]
4. Everyone is on Wizard progression. [Unfied mechanics are good]
5. There is no five.

[AvatarVecna]

All in all, I think I vastly prefer Grod_the_Giant's other "ultimate fix" for 3.5 (namely, to play Mutants & Masterminds instead).

[Mr Adventurer]

Why mess about with "like Bard, but with these ADDITIONAL changes" when you csn leave slots as-is and just ban 8th+ (or 7th+, whatever) level spells? This would leave the slots open for more of your highest level, and metamagic.

Optional expansions would be bonus metamagic feats at levels 15+, and/or spontaneous casters to learn metamagic versions of their lower level spells in their higher level slots regardless of whether they have the feat (e.g. Extended Mind Blank as a spell known in a 9th level slot even for a Sorcerer without the Extend Spell feat).

[Grod_The_Giant]

Why mess about with "like Bard, but with these ADDITIONAL changes" when you csn leave slots as-is and just ban 8th+ (or 7th+, whatever) level spells? This would leave the slots open for more of your highest level, and metamagic.
Because that leaves the game entirely unchanged for the vast majority of the time? Particularly at levels people play at?

[Troacctid]

Because that leaves the game entirely unchanged for the vast majority of the time? Particularly at levels people play at?

Yes, but at most of those levels, the casters aren't actually overpowered, so that's really an upside.

[Telok]

Something I've always wanted to try is the following:

1) Stats no longer provide bonus spells, spell slots, power points, or other "more magic" bonuses or increases. In addition no item can add spells, refresh slots, or otherwise increase the number of spells or powers a character can cast. <This is not about potions and scrolls! Those are stored spells and expendable magic items. This applies to Pearls of Power, Cognizance Crystals, and such.>

2) Stats no longer increase the save DC of magic, psionic, or otherwise supernatural abilities. <Yes you have to reduce the DCs of the monster SLAs. You may also want to increase Cloaks of Resistance to the same price as Rings of Protection too.>

3) There is no Concentration skill. Martial Adepts should substitute the Martial Lore skill and characters can still make Concentration checks. <This does not prevent you from trying to cast on the defensive. It just means that there isn't a skill to let you auto-pass the check.>

[ericgrau]

1. I was worried about the low level scaling but you get to 3rds right on time so this works out great. As in it doesn't nerf rookie casters into the ground in a futile attempt to stop heavily optimizing casters. A mild manageable nerf which is nice.

2. That's fine I usually overcome this with dirt cheap items anyway, so it doesn't make much difference either way. Helps rookies who don't know this trick I suppose.

3. Nope. Big numbers don't solve anything. Only make a mess in low optimization while failing to hinder low optimization, as I was worried about in #1.

4. This is really nice. Again, buffs those who don't have magic with needed magic items, without getting crazy.

5. Nah. Similar to #3 but not as bad.

I'd drop 3 and 5 and you're good to go. Basically subtly encourages people to play non-casters without pretending to fix optimized casters nor nerfing rookie casters into the ground. If you want something for skills simply use the low DCs as written in the book, but while limiting the scope of skills to common sense: yes, you can easily pass diplomacy checks even without maxing it out, no not everybody is your friend regardless of what you roll.

I would play with 1,2 and 4 in a heartbeat, and I'm pretty stingy about sweeping changes.

Yeah multi-classing is an issue, but it's one you can overcome. Even if you can't think up a hard solution it's usually easy to find an ad hoc solution.

[Grod_The_Giant]

The skill nerfs... The latter was because 3.5 has too many different skills for the number of points it gives you; it was the simplest way I could come up with to help with that. I could also use Linked Skills, as I used in Giants and Graveyards. Buy a rank in a skill, get a rank in the skill(s) it should be merged with. Effectively lowers the number of skills in the game without having to tweak any existing material... But it comes with a list to reference. Or just a flat skill point boost, but that doesn't seem like quite enough? Dunno.

The big number thing is because I have to have SOME way to boost noncasters, and skills are the most omnipresent noncombat mechanic in the game. But... Hmm. How about this instead?

At third level, and every subsequent third level, characters without access to a magic system gain either a bonus feat or one of the following benefits. These are not necessarily the result of formal training in magic, but may be due to petty dabbling, overexposure to outside magic, curses, magical rewards, and so on. Groups are encouraged to work the acquisition of new abilities into the plot of the game if they wish, as long as the abilities are gained at some point in the appropriate level.

Spells have a caster level equal to the character's level, and a save DC of 10+1/2 level+Int, Wis, or Cha (chosen once when the ability is first acquired). Chosen spells must have a casting time of one standard action or less, and no expensive material or experience components.

Characters retain these benefits if they multiclass into a magic using class, but only nonmagical levels count when determining when they gain bonus abilities and how powerful a spell they can emulate.
A spell of one fourth their character level or less as a SLA usable 3/day.
A spell of one to fourth their character level or less as a supernatural or extraordinary ability usable 1/day. The character's body may alter slightly to reflect this ability.
A spell of one fifth their character level or less as a SLA usable at will.
The benefits of spell of one fifth their character level or less with a duration of at least one minute per level as a supernatural or extraordinary ability. The character's body may alter slightly to reflect this ability. If dispelled or otherwise removed, the benefits resume 1d4 rounds later.

I'm sure that's open to abuse somehow, because there are ten thousand spells out there, but hey.

[ericgrau]

The skill nerfs... The latter was because 3.5 has too many different skills for the number of points it gives you; it was the simplest way I could come up with to help with that. I could also use Linked Skills, as I used in Giants and Graveyards. Buy a rank in a skill, get a rank in the skill(s) it should be merged with. Effectively lowers the number of skills in the game without having to tweak any existing material... But it comes with a list to reference. Or just a flat skill point boost, but that doesn't seem like quite enough? Dunno.
Keeping the DC low and flat on everything, as written, is effectively the same as giving a flat skill boost.

The danger here is diluting the rogue, or requiring high DC skill checks for every little thing that should be doable untrained with an ability check. Or expanding the scope of a skill too far to do everyday tasks, like the infamous being "blind" and unable to notice any foes without spot. Not "primarily to detect characters or creatures who are hiding" as the skill is written in the very first sentence. "Sometimes a creature isn’t intentionally hiding but is still difficult to see" is way way overused beyond "sometimes". And once you need a skill to do ordinary things, everyone must get it to be able to function normally, and therefore nobody has more and is extraordinary at it. Then the rogue cries.

For example I often put 5 ranks in balance and stop there to avoid being flat-footed. And I wouldn't max out swim either.

Or another suggestion I've heard is to play without skills for a while to remove excessive reliance on them. Role-play it out instead. If everyone needs skills to function you're doing something wrong.



The big number thing is because I have to have SOME way to boost noncasters, and skills are the most omnipresent noncombat mechanic in the game. But... Hmm. How about this instead?

At third level, and every subsequent third level, characters without access to a magic system gain either an additional feat or one of the following benefits:
A spell of one half their character level or less as a SLA usable 3/day.
A spell of one half their character level or less as a supernatural or extraordinary ability usable 1/day. The character's body may alter slightly to reflect this ability.
A spell of one fourth their character level or less as a SLA usable at will.
The benefits of spell of one forth their character level or less with a duration of at least one minute per level as a supernatural or extraordinary ability. The character's body may alter slightly to reflect this ability. If dispelled or otherwise removed, the benefits resume 1d4 rounds later.
The relics are already a nice way to do this, and it avoids interfering with their class' style. The above isn't bad, but then you have to explain the SLA story-wise somehow. Vs. an item that they can just find or get passed down to them.

The skill tricks might still be a nice idea. I don't know enough details to say if they're over the top or not for low-med optimization (where simple fixes are less futile). If you do give them out for free as soon as someone qualifies then keep a reference list for convenience.

If you want something to help skills that doesn't also benefit casters, then I'd do a flat bonus rather than a scaling bonus. This helps more with low flat DCs, and also helps with opposed checks for whatever they max out. Since they aren't an auto-win to the annoyance of low-optimization or the poor rogue who can't do more than auto-win. For example a flat +2 or +4 to all skills, including those usable untrained. Not more than that, or it pushes towards auto-win.

[Cosi]

At third level, and every subsequent third level, characters without access to a magic system gain either an additional feat or one of the following benefits:
A spell of one half their character level or less as a SLA usable 3/day.
A spell of one half their character level or less as a supernatural or extraordinary ability usable 1/day. The character's body may alter slightly to reflect this ability.
A spell of one fourth their character level or less as a SLA usable at will.
The benefits of spell of one forth their character level or less with a duration of at least one minute per level as a supernatural or extraordinary ability. The character's body may alter slightly to reflect this ability. If dispelled or otherwise removed, the benefits resume 1d4 rounds later.

How is this different from just making them play casters?

I mean, other than the fact that it is totally insane.

First, why are you giving them normal progression for spells when actual casters get stuck with nerfed progression? You now get better magic for not using magic, which is dumb.

Second, making the spells SLAs is nuts. Consider the following character:

3rd - Whatever. color spray is probably good, maybe power word pain on a high mobility skirmisher. Can I wait a level to get at-will silent image?
6th - Again, nothing amazing. Maybe heroics or something on a Rogue.
9th - How do you feel about lesser planar ally as a standard action, with no XP cost? Kinda puts summon monster to shame. Alternatively, free animate dead. Maybe you want minor creation to make poison or acid in combat.
12th - You could take planar binding as a combat spell. Or major creation to make a adamantine cage full of lava around any enemies you dislike. If only there were a 6th level shadow conjuration variant...
15th - limited wish all the way. Full casters just got one or two 6th level spell off a fairly limited list. You get three, off any list and you don't pay XP costs, material component costs, GP costs, or take more than a standard action.
18th - Hey, now you get wish! Congrats on being the only character in the game with greater planar binding, polymorph any object, or true creation.

Third, the levels for this are kind of awkward unless you round up. The 9th and 15th are still insane, but the 3rd comes just as 1st level combat spells stop being good and doesn't give you great utility.

Fourth, I don't think anyone takes the permanent spell option. For fly or whatever, helping allies at will seems better. Maybe bump the personal version to 1/2 level (if you do this, the above build takes fly at 6th).

Fifth, what are CL/DCs on the SLAs? I assume character level and 1/2 character level + stat of choice, respectively, but it'd be nice to know.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Note: just finished editing the SLA bit. (Forgot vital details like CL and different levels of spell availability)

[ericgrau]

SLAs are nice but I think their style is an issue. It's like you're a caster but you're not. Maybe if every mundane PC is blessed by a deity. Or item based similar to relics. It needs an explanation.

[Cosi]

Note: just finished editing the SLA bit. (Forgot vital details like CL and different levels of spell availability)

I don't think those were the changes it needed. It still breaks spells that are balanced at any price point other than "1 standard action, no other costs", you've just forced people to take spells so anemic they can barely matter. The hypothetical character now gets to choose from (ignoring options I consider to be dominated, like 3/day or permanent when you could get at-will):

3rd - 0th level at-will
6th - 1st level at-will, 1st level 1/day if you have a profound fear of AMFs
9th - 2nd level 3/day, [Ex] 2nd level 1/day, 1st level at-will
12th - 3rd level 3/day, [Ex] 3rd level 1/day
15th - 3rd level at-will, [Ex] 3rd level 1/day, 2nd level at-will
18th - 4th level 3/day, [Ex] 4th level 1/day, 3rd level at-will

What are you putting in those blanks that's good enough to matter?

The 0th is likely cure minor wounds for healing (save on godsticks), launch bolt for offense (can the material component you don't need be a Colossal+++ bolt?), or prestidigitation for utility.

The 1st could be silent image to beat any mindless enemy in the campaign, or maybe alarm for security. I assume there are better splat options.

I'm not really sure what you take after that. Maybe 3/day wraithstrike, at-will heroics, 3/day phantom steed, at-will Bard charm monster, 3/day shadow conjuration? I'm sure there's better stuff, but I don't think that's pulling the Fighter out of his hole.

[OldTrees1]

The skill nerfs... The latter was because 3.5 has too many different skills for the number of points it gives you; it was the simplest way I could come up with to help with that. I could also use Linked Skills, as I used in Giants and Graveyards. Buy a rank in a skill, get a rank in the skill(s) it should be merged with. Effectively lowers the number of skills in the game without having to tweak any existing material... But it comes with a list to reference. Or just a flat skill point boost, but that doesn't seem like quite enough? Dunno.

The big number thing is because I have to have SOME way to boost noncasters, and skills are the most omnipresent noncombat mechanic in the game. But... Hmm. How about this instead?

Well, let's solve each problem at the source:
3.5 has too many skills for the skill points it gives you. The quick fix is to change the number of skill points granted. This maintains the ability to have the deaf sniper or the blind scout while still fixing the skills:skill points ratio.

Skills are too outclassed by equal level spells? Then boost the skills that the player invests in. The struggle here is balancing the uninvested nonmagical(1), the invested nonmagical(2), and the magical(3). You want the equation to be 1<3<2 but with the invested vs uninvested gap being large enough but not too large. Unfortunately that might be too many constraints to find a solution.

[Cosi]

Skills are too outclassed by equal level spells? Then boost the skills that the player invests in. The struggle here is balancing the uninvested nonmagical(1), the invested nonmagical(2), and the magical(3). You want the equation to be 1<3<2 but with the invested vs uninvested gap being large enough but not too large. Unfortunately that might be too many constraints to find a solution.

There's a simple solution.

Just have training give you magic. When a Rogue learns about the art of opening locks, there's no reason he shouldn't learn knock, given that it is a way to open locks. When a Ranger learns to navigate the wilderness, he should eventually get find the path or know direction. When a Barbarian practices his rage face, that should give him frightful presence. And so on.

Of course, that level of specification is hard to do with a simple set of houserules.

[OldTrees1]

There's a simple solution.

Just have training give you magic. When a Rogue learns about the art of opening locks, there's no reason he shouldn't learn knock, given that it is a way to open locks. When a Ranger learns to navigate the wilderness, he should eventually get find the path or know direction. When a Barbarian practices his rage face, that should give him frightful presence. And so on.

Of course, that level of specification is hard to do with a simple set of houserules.

The trouble with that solution is that frequently the solver makes the mistake of turning the non caster into a caster which invalidates the solution for some players. However this mistake is not an inevitable part of your solution. So if that mistake is avoided then it works quite well as a quick fix.

[Grod_The_Giant]

I admit, rewriting the skill system to grant scaling benefits at increasing ranks would possibly be the single best thing you could do for the game. But it would be a fairly intense project.

Anyway, expanding my definition of "quick and easy" a bit, I get this for noncasters:
Double all static numerical bonuses. (That is to say things that aren't "+Charisma" or "+level")
Anything with a daily usage limit is instead changed to an HOURLY limit.
At noncaster level 6 you gain an extra move action, which updates to a standard at 12th.
You can upgrade a class' BAB one step, it's HD 2 steps, or gain 4 new class skills and skill points/level.

Having a slow day at work, I went through all the low tier classes that would be affected, and by my count you get at least a one tier boost to almost all of them. At the very least you end up with quite capable combatants with good skills.

[Troacctid]

The big number thing is because I have to have SOME way to boost noncasters,
Why? You already hard-nerfed full casters. Are Incarnates, Warlocks, Spellthieves, Paladins, and Psychic Warriors really so overpowered that you need to nerf them too?

[Grod_The_Giant]

Why? You already hard-nerfed full casters. Are Incarnates, Warlocks, Spellthieves, Paladins, and Psychic Warriors really so overpowered that you need to nerf them too?
No. Monks, Fighters, Scouts and the like are so weak I need to boost them.

[Troacctid]

No. Monks, Fighters, Scouts and the like are so weak I need to boost them.

Is a Scout so much weaker than a Spellthief or Savant? Is a Fighter so much weaker than a Hexblade or Soulborn?

[Grod_The_Giant]

Is a Scout so much weaker than a Spellthief or Savant? Is a Fighter so much weaker than a Hexblade or Soulborn?
Which is why I pumped up all of those half casters by turning them into proper functioning gish? (Except the Soulborn, I guess)

[Troacctid]

Which is why I pumped up all of those half casters by turning them into proper functioning gish? (Except the Soulborn, I guess)

What, with one or two extra low-level spells per day? That doesn't come close to making them functional gishes, and it certainly doesn't come close to +30 on a dozen different skills, extra magic items, and strictly better spell-like abilities like you're giving Rogues. Would you ever play a Spellthief under this proposed fix? I certainly wouldn't.

[Grod_The_Giant]

What, with one or two extra low-level spells per day? That doesn't come close to making them functional gishes, and it certainly doesn't come close to +30 on a dozen different skills, extra magic items, and strictly better spell-like abilities like you're giving Rogues. Would you ever play a Spellthief under this proposed fix? I certainly wouldn't.
First, please follow the discussion a little better, as I've discarded most of those options for exactly the reason you're complaining about. The first post has been updated to reflect the day's discussion.

Secondly... yes, I would. I like the classes; I like the mix of magic and mundane options. Comparing to the revised wizard progression (and before bonus spells, admittedly) they have anywhere from a quarter to half as many total spells/day, with a full CL and often support in the form of things like Battle Blessing. I think the progression is decent, but would 3 times base spells/day be more fitting, do you think? Or should they get the noncaster boosts from rule 3?

[Troacctid]

Well I've been using recharge magic for half-casters and I like it so far.

I don't think you can reasonably get away with lumping all "magic"-users together. Paladins just aren't at the same balance point as Bards. Incarnates and Warlocks are pretty close to Rogues. Soulborn are weaker than Fighters. Etc. If a fix doesn't respect the different needs of different classes, some babies are going to get thrown out with the bathwater.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Well I've been using recharge magic for half-casters and I like it so far.

I don't think you can reasonably get away with lumping all "magic"-users together. Paladins just aren't at the same balance point as Bards. Incarnates and Warlocks are pretty close to Rogues. Soulborn are weaker than Fighters. Etc. If a fix doesn't respect the different needs of different classes, some babies are going to get thrown out with the bathwater.
I am aware that different classes are different, and that it's impossible to address everything in a few simple rules without, as you say, losing a few babies. Yes, the Barbarian is now a bit too powerful at low levels. Yes, the Fighter doesn't benefit as much as, say, the Ninja. Yes, the Healer gets seriously injured. Yes, these fixes entirely bypass the Warlock. This is an experiment to see how much good a few quick-fix rules can do. And you know what? If you look at the list of base classes, I think the vast majority of them are brought into the high T3-mid T4 range. I call that a positive result.

[Cosi]

The trouble with that solution is that frequently the solver makes the mistake of turning the non caster into a caster which invalidates the solution for some players. However this mistake is not an inevitable part of your solution. So if that mistake is avoided then it works quite well as a quick fix.

So?

Casters have level appropriate abilities. Non-casters don't. If you want non-casters to be level appropriate, the solution is to make them casters. The character concept of "no magic" is just like the character concept of "can't beat a hill giant in a fight" or "can't kill dragons". It's a low level concept. If people want to do that, they can play a low level game.

[OldTrees1]

The trouble with that solution is that frequently the solver makes the mistake of turning the non caster into a caster which invalidates the solution for some players. However this mistake is not an inevitable part of your solution. So if that mistake is avoided then it works quite well as a quick fix.

So?

Casters have level appropriate abilities. Non-casters don't. If you want non-casters to be level appropriate, the solution is to make them casters. The character concept of "no magic" is just like the character concept of "can't beat a hill giant in a fight" or "can't kill dragons". It's a low level concept. If people want to do that, they can play a low level game.

1) There is a difference between the difference "caster vs non caster" and "magic vs non magic". My post talked about the first, but your post conflates the two.

2) The difference between caster and non caster is in the casting/design around limited use abilities that get expended. As a restriction on casters, this mechanic cannot be something that limits the design space from designing powerful non casters.

3) Now that we are on the same page (talking about caster vs non caster and noticing that this distinction is unrelated to the power limits of each design space) I want to address the crux of my post. I said that turning a non caster into a caster would invalidate the solution for some players. You asked "So?". Well the significance is that it is the player's (and DM's) opinion of the solution that matters. If a "solution" does not work for a group, then it cannot be a solution for that group.

In summary: If something invalidates a solution for a player, that solution is invalid for that player.

[Cosi]

1) There is a difference between the difference "caster vs non caster" and "magic vs non magic". My post talked about the first, but your post conflates the two.

2) The difference between caster and non caster is in the casting/design around limited use abilities that get expended. As a restriction on casters, this mechanic cannot be something that limits the design space from designing powerful non casters.

If I understand your post correctly, you've defined caster as "daily powers" and non-caster as "at-will powers". Those definitions make the Barbarian a Caster and the Warlock a non-caster.

I think you it would be helpful to use different terminology.


3I said that turning a non caster into a caster would invalidate the solution for some players.

Keeping in mind your definition of caster/non-caster, it's less of a problem. There's nothing conceptually wrong with Open Lock granting at-will knock rather than 3/day knock. That said, there are some mechanical issues with the "all at-wills, all the time" constraint.

First, if all skill powers have to be at-will, that locks out some abilities. For example, Craft can't ever give fabricate (or at least can't do it at low levels without radically altering manufacturing).

Second, it has the potential to cheapen the actual skill use. The idea of giving limited daily uses of knock to people with ranks in Open Lock was to give them a reason to still roll Open Lock sometimes. If it's at will they (currently) don't.

Third, it loses some of the value of casters preparing those spells. If the Rogue gets at-will knock, the Wizard is never going to prepare it. If he gets it 3/day, the Wizard might.

None of those are insurmountable, but they are all problems that are unique to requiring the caster/non-caster split you want.


In summary: If something invalidates a solution for a player, that solution is invalid for that player.

Sure.

But as a corollary to that, if players reject all solutions that are possible within the given constraints (simple, balanced with an unmodified X class, consistent with the established fantasy world of D&D), the problem cannot be solved for them.

[OldTrees1]

If I understand your post correctly, you've defined caster as "daily powers" and non-caster as "at-will powers". Those definitions make the Barbarian a Caster and the Warlock a non-caster.

I think you it would be helpful to use different terminology.
Barbarians are more designed around full attacks than designed around rage(which they use to augment the first) and even then rage is designed to be up constantly in combat rather than limited use abilities being used every round.
Warlocks kinda are non caster magic users (although some may say that it is still casting and thus fullfills the 1st half even if not the 2nd half).

But thank you for humoring the silly definition of mine. :)


Keeping in mind your definition of caster/non-caster, it's less of a problem. There's nothing conceptually wrong with Open Lock granting at-will knock rather than 3/day knock. That said, there are some mechanical issues with the "all at-wills, all the time" constraint.

First, if all skill powers have to be at-will, that locks out some abilities. For example, Craft can't ever give fabricate (or at least can't do it at low levels without radically altering manufacturing).

Second, it has the potential to cheapen the actual skill use. The idea of giving limited daily uses of knock to people with ranks in Open Lock was to give them a reason to still roll Open Lock sometimes. If it's at will they (currently) don't.

Third, it loses some of the value of casters preparing those spells. If the Rogue gets at-will knock, the Wizard is never going to prepare it. If he gets it 3/day, the Wizard might.

None of those are insurmountable, but they are all problems that are unique to requiring the caster/non-caster split you want.
Those are problems on the first look and that is important. However the 1st and 2nd are due to lacking/not finding a cost to apply (take 20 would cheapen rolling if not for the time penalty) which is a very easy issue to solve. A 5 second answer to the example would be to have fabricate have a ranks prerequisite and take a long time(which also addresses the 3rd issue). The 3rd issue does not seem to be a problem (kinda sounds like a feature considering the flak knock gets for obsoleting rogues) but can be solved by adding the appropriate cost.

Still I want to go back to that first sentence, those are problems on the first look and that is important. Personally I think the higher difficulty to design such features is smaller than the benefit of having the at-will rogue rather than X/day rogue. However for some (especially those that need to rely on WotC), the higher design difficulty is larger than the benefit. So my ability to see easy solutions to these issues does not detract from them being issues.


Sure.

But as a corollary to that, if players reject all solutions that are possible within the given constraints (simple, balanced with an unmodified X class, consistent with the established fantasy world of D&D), the problem cannot be solved for them.

Good corollary. Despite our cognitive bias being to miss potential solutions, we must remember somethings might not have a solution. (Trying a numerical boost to skills seemed to be one when I tried it with limitations I assumed)

[Cosi]

Those are problems on the first look and that is important. However the 1st and 2nd are due to lacking/not finding a cost to apply (take 20 would cheapen rolling if not for the time penalty) which is a very easy issue to solve.

You can do stuff, definitely. It's just an issue the other solution doesn't have.


A 5 second answer to the example would be to have fabricate have a ranks prerequisite and take a long time(which also addresses the 3rd issue).

I'm not sure you can reach a sweet spot where it's useful to an adventurer, usable at will, and doesn't totally destroy the economy. It's probably solvable, just more complicated.