Ranger and Paladin full caster levels

[gtwucla]

Having discussed this with my play group, I thought I'd throw this question up on the board:

Changing nothing else about the ranger and paladin, but granting them 0 level spells at level 1 (and then 1st level spells at level 5 and so on), how much of a difference would it make? We've been using it for a while and enjoyed it, but we tend to have only a few combat encounters a campaign.

[tsj]

Wouldn't it basically make a ranger in to a druid and
a paladin in to a cleric?

Personally I would run a gestalt game instead ... where a ranger is always gestalten with a druid

And a cleric is always gestalted with a paladin

That way 4 classes becomes 2 classes

It would force a cleric to be lawful good though

[gtwucla]

I see this word come up a lot in the forums, what is gestalting? Just that a ranger is a druid and a paladin is a cleric? I mean they are very similar, but it one is more combat oriented and one more spell oriented. I mostly ask because it always bothered me that they randomly get spells a quarter of the way into the class. I don't think it'd break the bank to have them get zero 0 level spells at level 1.

[RedWarlock]

Gestalt:

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/gestaltCharacters.htm

Basically, combining two classes to use the better of the two numerical options (so, better hit dice, skills, saves) and both full sets of class abilities. So a sorcerer|fighter would have full sorcerer casting, d10 hit dice, and good fort and will saves. Basically think of it as an alternate form of multiclassing.

As to your original idea, it sounds decent, maybe good for a higher-magic campaign world. Minimal change in class strength, a little more utility. Paladin and ranger (plus hexblade and spellthief) are usually seen as fairly weak.

[gtwucla]

Ah ok. That makes sense.

Now let's take this a step further, what if also Rangers use the Druid spell list (up to level 4) and have no animal companion, Paladins use charisma based spells from the cleric spell list, and DCs are flat 10 + 1/2 caster level + mod.

[johnbragg]

Another option, that preserves Paladin and Ranger as distinct classes, is gestalting with my Theophilite. You get four domains, and the clerics' domain spell. So you cast one spell from each spell level per day, chosen from four domain lists. So you have level-appropriate firepower, but without the flexibility or the spell slots of a full caster class.

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?318391-quot-Theophilite-quot-3-5-Replaces-Cleric-at-Tier-3-4-PEACH

Typical Paladin would pick from Good, Law, Protection, Strength, Sun(Pelor), Healing, War plus whatever 3rd party and homebrewed domains.
Typical Ranger selections would be Plant, Animal, Earth, Air, Fire, WAter, HEaling, maybe PRotection, Strength.

[Droopy McCool]

Ah ok. That makes sense.

Now let's take this a step further, what if also Rangers use the Druid spell list (up to level 4) and have no animal companion, Paladins use charisma based spells from the cleric spell list, and DCs are flat 10 + 1/2 caster level + mod.

This is close to what my group uses.

Rangers lose AC, get full CL, use the Druid spell list, and use the Adept spell progression (goes up to 5ths). Paladins use Charisma, get full CL, use the Cleric spell list, and use the Bard spell progression.

This makes both classes a weaker version of the Druid and Cleric respectively, but nobody in my group ever wants to play a Wizard, Cleric or Druid anyway. Effectively the tier 1's are erased, while the Sorcerer uses Intelligence and isn't allowed spells higher than 6th level. We figure this puts the most powerful classes in the game to about tier 3.

Granted, we have also buffed every mundane class as well. Works for us.

McCool

[kylehanson]

Changing nothing else about the ranger and paladin, but granting them 0 level spells at level 1 (and then 1st level spells at level 5 and so on), how much of a difference would it make?

It seems fine to me; there seems to be a minimal power difference. I run a campaign with 0th level spells like Pathfinder: lower power (e.g. cure minor wounds instead simply stabilizes a dying character), a limited number known or prepared in a given day, but each of them is castable an unlimited number per day. After the first couple of levels, 0th level spells are not used much -- except for perhaps high-pressure days where the PCs don't get much of a chance to rest.

I think the high-powered variant Gestalt is much more high-powered than this much more moderate change. And I agree with another prior poster's note that Rangers and Paladins are generally considered a bit underpowered compared to other base classes.