Limiting Clerics and other casters.

[Bobbybobby99]

Hello! I often see assorted debates on regulating the power of Tier 1 spellcasters, and engage in them myself. This is a noble thing, and so of course I was looking for advice on a particular idea.

If you limited Wizards and Sorcerers to their schools, and Clerics to their domains, what would happen? If you made it so Wizards could only select spells from, say, two schools, only one of which could be either Transmutation or Conjuration, would that limit their power significantly? If Sorcerers had three banned schools, including one of Transmutation or Conjuration, would that make them near tier 3? If clerics spontaneously cast from a list of 7 domains, at least 4 of which had to be from their deity, would that make them less overpowered? If you took away natural spell and had Druids use the Spontaneous Divine variant, would they be reasonable?

[Troacctid]

If you limited Wizards and Sorcerers to their schools, and Clerics to their domains, what would happen? If you made it so Wizards could only select spells from, say, two schools, only one of which could be either Transmutation or Conjuration, would that limit their power significantly?
They would be less fun to play, and would not fill the same role in the party that they are traditionally expected to. Not really a great fix.


If Sorcerers had three banned schools, including one of Transmutation or Conjuration, would that make them near tier 3?
They're already near tier 3, and underpowered compared to other full casters. They also already have a pretty limited spell selection, so this shouldn't really be necessary.


If clerics spontaneously cast from a list of 7 domains, at least 4 of which had to be from their deity, would that make them less overpowered?
I don't know, but I'm pretty sure at that point they would no longer be recognizable as clerics.


If you took away natural spell and had Druids use the Spontaneous Divine variant, would they be reasonable?
It would help, but it seems much less effective than just using the Player's Handbook II shapeshift variant.

[LTwerewolf]

The problem isn't "spellcasting." If it were, spellthief and ranger would be considered overpowered along with everyone else. No, the problem is "certain spells" which completely obviate entire party members or give a binary solution of either "nothing happens" or "you win" that can be cast in such relative safety that after enough time, the answer is "you win."

It requires either pick banning spells, which will take a very long time, or a much better solution is to require your spellcasters to check with the dm when they pick spells and the dm can allow/disallow on a case by case basis.

[Cosi]

The problem with this exercise (and others like it) is that you need to figure out what you are balancing to before you try to balance there. You could do any number of things to Wizards, and some of them would be appropriate in any given campaign. If you wanted Wizards to act as mobile artillery, it would be reasonable to give them only Evocation. If you wanted them to traffic with demons and angels, you could give them only conjuration instead. If you wanted them to play nice with Fighters, you would have to reduce their spellcasting drastically. If you wanted them to play nice with Clerics, you wouldn't need to do anything.

As far as specific changes, those seem kind of meh.

School Limitations: You can still break the game with Conjuration + Abjuration for planar binding and magic circle. A Wizard can still stomp face taking only the best Conjuration and Illusion/Divination/Evocation/Whatever spells at every level. The Sorcerer probably doesn't even have enough spells to notice the restriction.

Domains: That seems okay (although you will see a lot of people worshiping stupid and obscure gods to get the domains they want). You should also give them the Healer list so that they can still do basic restoration type stuff.

No Natural Spell: That's reasonable enough. Natural Spell isn't terribly broken, but having it cost a feat is stupid.

[PacMan2247]

Tracking spell components is sufficient for most needs in limiting primary casters. Eschew Materials only negates the need for materials costing under 1 gold piece; Stoneskin,Forcecage and a lot of other spells that see a lot of use have incredibly high costs associated with just a single casting. Even at the appropriate levels for casting, powerful spells require pretty significant investments, and most spells don't specify the value of things required, so components harvested from undead or aberrations are going to be at market prices which are entirely up to the DM's discretion.

[Randomguy]

I'd argue that there's two main problems with tier 1 classes: The first is versatility: they're always 24 hours away from being able to solve basically any problem, the second is that there are so many splatbooks out there and each introduces a whole pile of spells and a few of them are always broken. (Not to say that there aren't any broken spells in the PHB.)

Fixed list casters solve this problem quite nicely: They're limited to a certain theme of spellcasting so they can't always come back the next morning with the right trick to solve the problem, and they have limited access to broken spells: They only get what's on their list + whatever they can pick up from advanced learning, so you don't get a single class that has shapechange and Gate and celerity and ice assassin.

If you're okay with extensive homebrew, then I recommend Grod's fixed list casters (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=16920452&postcount=4). Even the Druid and Cleric become spontaneous casters with sharply limited spell lists. There's also a whole bunch of new casters for the different schools.

As a side bonus you no longer have silly things like a desert themed druid being able to function extremely well underwater with basically no investment, like in normal 3.5.

For lower level play, Gnorman's E6 (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?483755-E6-Compendium-Volume-3&p=20626832) has the same fixed list + theme caster idea but is less stringent about separating them by school. The options for the arcane caster are basically blasting (sorcerer) , illusions + enchantment + divination (wizard), or dark magic (think dread necromancer but less limited to necromancy) (warlock). (A variation of the original warlock is still around, it's just called the Invoker).

[jiriku]

Restricting casters to fewer choices is a good way to knock down T1 power. However, doing it on a school-by-school basis might be a case of using a sledgehammer where a precision chisel is needed. You may knock out many appropriate spells while leaving in some game-breakers. My approach has been to homebrew thematically appropriate casters.

[Cosi]

Tracking spell components is sufficient for most needs in limiting primary casters.

No, it doesn't.

First, many of the best spells don't require expensive components. I don't think anyone would call a Wizard who casts sleep, color spray, glitterdust, web, stinking cloud, major image, evard's black tentacles, charm monster, cloudkill, and wall of stone to have lost any serious power, and all of those spells have material components less than 1 GP if they have material components at all.

Second, the broken spells generally don't have material components at all. planar binding and dominate person are broken spells, but they also have no material component. Not "a cheap material component", no material component. The Wizard who recruits millions of followers and stomps all over game balance with them is not limited at all by any level of strictness in enforcing material components.

Third, Wizards can pretty easily get infinite wealth, so unless you're patching that, costly components don't have any meaningful restriction on Wizards. Using planar binding or fabricate to make money is quick and easy, and it makes the cost of diamond dust or jade circlets basically meaningless.

Fourth, Grod's Law (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?328767-More-realistic-D-amp-D-Economy/page4&p=17613518#post17613518): You cannot and should not balance bad mechanics by making them annoying to use.

Basically, this makes casters less interesting (because everyone takes Eschew Materials) but not less powerful, because it has little effect on most spells Wizards cast and no effect on the broken ones.


The first is versatility: they're always 24 hours away from being able to solve basically any problem,

This is basically meaningless. It doesn't matter if you can currently solve Wizard problems, and are 24 hours away from solving Rogue problems, or Fighter problems, or Ranger problems, or whatever. At any given point you can only solve one set of problems, just like every other character. Also, false to a degree, particularly at low levels.


the second is that there are so many splatbooks out there and each introduces a whole pile of spells and a few of them are always broken. (Not to say that there aren't any broken spells in the PHB.)

There are very, very, very, very few broken spells in splatbooks. ice assassin, spirit binding, I think there's a "planar binding for Druids" spell somewhere, and that's everything I can think off of the top of my head. If you expand it to "broken options for spellcasters", the list gets longer as you can include things like the Incantatrix, DMM, or Persist Spell.


Fixed list casters solve this problem quite nicely: They're limited to a certain theme of spellcasting so they can't always come back the next morning with the right trick to solve the problem,

So? They, or at least existing ones, cast spells spontaneously. That means that while they have less spells overall, they are vastly more likely to use whatever Rogue or Fighter or Bard negating spell when the situation does come up. A Beguiler is going to be able to cast knock when knock is useful a lot more often than a Wizard.


and they have limited access to broken spells: They only get what's on their list + whatever they can pick up from advanced learning, so you don't get a single class that has shapechange and Gate and celerity and ice assassin.

So? Once you break the game the game is, by definition, broken. The game is not any less shattered if you "only" have your infinite army of mind controlled minions, rather than infinite armies of mind controlled, undead, bound, and simulacrum minions.


As a side bonus you no longer have silly things like a desert themed druid being able to function extremely well underwater with basically no investment, like in normal 3.5.

Shouldn't characters be able to go on whatever adventure happens to show up? Of all the things you can object to about casters, their ability to go on the cloudscape adventure, the volcano adventure, the underwater adventure, and the planar adventure seems like one of the least problematic.

[nedz]

If you limited Wizards and Sorcerers to their schools, and Clerics to their domains, what would happen? If you made it so Wizards could only select spells from, say, two schools, only one of which could be either Transmutation or Conjuration, would that limit their power significantly?

Did this once in AD&D - it worked fine. My goal was to create more flavoursome casters, I wasn't interested in balance.

I'm currently running a 3.5 game with no T1s. The game is only at level 5, but I'm not seeing any problems so far. I did also ban, or fix, many problem spells too.

There is an expectation, in 3.5, that casters can solve any problem and many players see this as an entitlement. I prefer to look at this the other way: if players want to play a mundane character then they should be entitled to not have their character sidelined after a certain level.

[Inevitability]

They're already near tier 3, and underpowered compared to other full casters. They also already have a pretty limited spell selection, so this shouldn't really be necessary.

Allow me to disagree here. Rather than claim they are 'near tier 3', I'd argue sorcerers are the most powerful Tier 2's out there. They have access to the best spell list in the game, have a bunch of support, and because they have access to spells that can substitute for a few dozen other spells (Summon Monster, Polymorph, Shadow Evocation, Shadow Conjuration) the small list of spells known doesn't hurt as badly. The definition of tier 2 is:


Has as much raw power as the Tier 1 classes, but can't pull off nearly as many tricks, and while the class itself is capable of anything, no one build can actually do nearly as much as the Tier 1 classes. Still potentially campaign smashers by using the right abilities, but at the same time are more predictable and can't always have the right tool for the job. If the Tier 1 classes are countries with 10,000 nuclear weapons in their arsenal, these guys are countries with 10 nukes. Still dangerous and easily world shattering, but not in quite so many ways. Note that the Tier 2 classes are often less flexible than Tier 3 classes... it's just that their incredible potential power overwhelms their lack in flexibility.

Seems appropriate to describe a class able to duplicate most of a wizard's tricks, except only a few at the time.

Nor are sorcerers underpowered compared to full casters. To tier 1's, yes. To tier 1 and 2 combined, perhaps. But the average full caster (which includes Beguilers, Warmages, Dread Necromancers, Healers, and Adepts) will be far less powerful than a sorcerer.

And sorcerers may have a limited spell selection compared to tier 1's, but they can expand it in many ways. Heritage feats, sandshaper dips, Extra Spell...

[Willie the Duck]

Restricting casters to fewer choices is a good way to knock down T1 power. However, doing it on a school-by-school basis might be a case of using a sledgehammer where a precision chisel is needed.

Agreed. Every fix to 3.x that doesn't effectively re-write the system (in which case, are you still playing 3.x?) seems to become a sledgehammer sculpting.

Yes, there are obvious, easy-to-address things to do to reduce spellcaster dominance--cutting natural spell, persistent spell (or DMM, or whichever link in the iconic CoDzilla-cleric chain you want to clip), limiting the selection of spells to reduce tier 1's "can be anything within 24 hours" ability.

Heck, you could just flat out say, "no one can be a straight tier1 or 2 spellcaster, 1/3rd of your levels have to be in something else." That would definitely reduce the power that those classes have in comparison to everything else...

...but that wouldn't "fix" the spellcasting issue. The spellcasting issue isn't limited to any one category (school of magic, wizard/cleric/druid, save-or-dies/battlefield control/direct-damage, core vs. non-core). Therefore categorical, rules-based ("deontological" if you will) fixes don't really solve it. The only real way to fix it that me and my groups have found is for the DM and Players to agree, "We all know what the abusive stuff is. don't do it."

[Florian]

@Bobbybobby99:

As has been pointed out, it´s not the casters themselves, it´s the spells that make or break it. You could limit a caster to one spell known/two levels and still would´t cut down the power and flexibility.

[Troacctid]

Allow me to disagree here. Rather than claim they are 'near tier 3', I'd argue sorcerers are the most powerful Tier 2's out there. They have access to the best spell list in the game, have a bunch of support, and because they have access to spells that can substitute for a few dozen other spells (Summon Monster, Polymorph, Shadow Evocation, Shadow Conjuration) the small list of spells known doesn't hurt as badly. The definition of tier 2 is:



Seems appropriate to describe a class able to duplicate most of a wizard's tricks, except only a few at the time.

Nor are sorcerers underpowered compared to full casters. To tier 1's, yes. To tier 1 and 2 combined, perhaps. But the average full caster (which includes Beguilers, Warmages, Dread Necromancers, Healers, and Adepts) will be far less powerful than a sorcerer.

And sorcerers may have a limited spell selection compared to tier 1's, but they can expand it in many ways. Heritage feats, sandshaper dips, Extra Spell...
Sure, a high-op, high-level sorcerer is very strong, but in most practical, low to mid level situations, your sorcerer isn't going to be outperforming a warblade, bard, beguiler, dread necromancer, etc. for the majority of the game. Combine that with the fact that it is essentially just a worse version of wizard, and I think it's hard to justify nerfing it, especially when Wizards of the Coast already did such a good job nerfing it into the ground from the start.

[Flickerdart]

The best way to balance T1 casters is to ban all PHB spells. Now playing a caster becomes interesting* and challenging**, because your cleric can't just grab restoration as soon as the fighter gets a boo-boo.

* if you find flipping through the Spell Compendium interesting
** if you didn't cheese initiative and solve all your problems with orb spells

[Efrate]

Banning all PHB spells doesn't help. PHB has a lot of great stuff, so does the compendium. You take draconic polymorph instead of polymorph. You take ice assassin still. You don't get gate and planar binding, true, but there are still more than enough spells to still invalidate the rest of the party. You just have to look a little harder. It helps a bit but there are still too many options, too much power in the tier 1 spellcasters in general. You can still do save or die, battlefield control, divinations, buffs, debuffs, blasting, minionmancy, etc. from non-PHB. Some not as good, some better, but it doesn't change the fact that the power trough is just too substantial to overcome between mundanes and casters.

[Flickerdart]

Banning all PHB spells doesn't help. PHB has a lot of great stuff, so does the compendium. You take draconic polymorph instead of polymorph. You take ice assassin still. You don't get gate and planar binding, true, but there are still more than enough spells to still invalidate the rest of the party. You just have to look a little harder. It helps a bit but there are still too many options, too much power in the tier 1 spellcasters in general. You can still do save or die, battlefield control, divinations, buffs, debuffs, blasting, minionmancy, etc. from non-PHB. Some not as good, some better, but it doesn't change the fact that the power trough is just too substantial to overcome between mundanes and casters.
That's working as intended. Casters should still be able to do all those things! But a lot of the alternative spells come at a later level, or are not as good in other ways. And having to look harder takes care of a lot of munchkins who just grab lists of de best spellz from some board, without really understanding what they are doing.

[Efrate]

If they are munchkinning thats a seperate issue, but if they know anything just look up xxx handbook, see the spell list, take out the PHB ones and grab the others. Same issue. If they want OP stuff, and they are looking, 5 minutes n google and the problem is solved.

Oh darn I don't polymorph at level 7, I just summon a better BSF than the BSF, a trap finding monster, I shape the battle field so my enemies are helpless, I just throw an orb of force into whatever's chest and its explodes, or what have you. You still have the capacity to invalidate most of the rest of the party. You nerveskitter wall of XX block Line of sight, ruin movement, make it so your mundanes can't get into battle to do something immediately, then cast something else next turn since you are going first anyways to end the encounter if need be before the enemies move. Your mundanes are not even in position yet. There entire contribution has been double moving near the threat.

[PaucaTerrorem]

I've always felt that there is a simple fix for this.

Don't play with ass-hats.

Lay it down to everyone early; everything is on the table, don't exploit my kindness. You have something crazy in mind, come talk to me OOC. By that same mentality be okay with allowing something crazy on the spot but talk to them later saying it won't be allowed again.

[Cosi]

Sorcerer Tier: I don't really care, but the Sorcerer is clearly not the worst class in Tier Two. That's the Favored Soul, which is exactly the Sorcerer except the Cleric list doesn't have good spells like color spray or cloudkill on it, and you have to burn spells known on restoration and similar.


There is an expectation, in 3.5, that casters can solve any problem and many players see this as an entitlement. I prefer to look at this the other way: if players want to play a mundane character then they should be entitled to not have their character sidelined after a certain level.

But if your character concept is a low level one, isn't it unfair to ask you to play it at high level?


limiting the selection of spells to reduce tier 1's "can be anything within 24 hours" ability.

Again, not the problem. 0% of the issue with Clerics is that they can come back tomorrow with control water or repel vermin. 100% of the issue with Clerics is that they can be a better Fighter than the Fighter while also being able to summon angels, raise the dead, and see the future. Today.


...but that wouldn't "fix" the spellcasting issue. The spellcasting issue isn't limited to any one category (school of magic, wizard/cleric/druid, save-or-dies/battlefield control/direct-damage, core vs. non-core). Therefore categorical, rules-based ("deontological" if you will) fixes don't really solve it. The only real way to fix it that me and my groups have found is for the DM and Players to agree, "We all know what the abusive stuff is. don't do it."

It's not even really an issue with "spellcasting". There are non-casting abilities that are overpowered (Iron Heart Surge, White Raven Tactics, Leadership) and there are casting abilities that are underpowered (Unreduced Metamagic, Shadowcasters, Evocation). The issue is that there was not any effort at all to balance things, or even come out with what a coherent vision of "balanced" would be.


The best way to balance T1 casters is to ban all PHB spells. Now playing a caster becomes interesting* and challenging**, because your cleric can't just grab restoration as soon as the fighter gets a boo-boo.

This was stupid the last time you said it and it's stupid now. Let's review:

Wizards don't care if they're playing fair, because the marginal difference between glitterdust and cloud of bewilderment is zero.

Huge swaths of abilities the party is supposed to have no longer exist. Raising the dead, healing ability damage, restoring negative levels, traveling to other planes, divination, and 99% of other utility spells are gone.

You can still break the game. spirit binding is almost exactly planar binding, and ice assassin is still insane.

This change does literally nothing good for the game, and it makes it massively harder to deal with normal adventures. At least the guy who wanted to track material components cost casters a feat slot.

[ExLibrisMortis]

The most effective nerf to t1 casters is the Syndrome technique: gestalt everyone with the UA Spellcaster.

[razorback]

I've always felt that there is a simple fix for this.

Don't play with ass-hats.

Lay it down to everyone early; everything is on the table, don't exploit my kindness. You have something crazy in mind, come talk to me OOC. By that same mentality be okay with allowing something crazy on the spot but talk to them later saying it won't be allowed again.

This, to me, carries a lot of weight.
When we get new players, we let them know we are not running a high op game. For others, its fun. For certain groups I've played with, its fun.
But my core group has different levels of op and not everyone is that invested, so the two of us that have some Google/Op Fu skills, we know to keep it in line with the rest of the group so everyone can contribute and have fun.
It's about everyone having fun and being able to contribute and have their moment to shine.

2¢

[Efrate]

There is nothing wrong with having a somewhat optimized wizard in a mixed op party, provided the player of wizard doesn't go to the nines all the time. You god wizard makes the rest of the party think they are awesome and doesn't routinely just hit the I win buttons. That is perfectly viable and fine. Having the capability when stuff hits to fan to bring out the stops and pull a victory out of defeat is fine, as long as you don't routinely do it to the detriment of the party.

Its more the don't play with douche bags line, but I hope that is a common enough to most groups. And honestly its the easiest solution. If you want to totally rewrite all casting everything for all of 3.5 you are welcome to, but a hefty dose of common sense and don't be that guy fixes most of the problems at the table.

[Hecuba]

Hello! I often see assorted debates on regulating the power of Tier 1 spellcasters, and engage in them myself. This is a noble thing, and so of course I was looking for advice on a particular idea.

If you limited Wizards and Sorcerers to their schools, and Clerics to their domains, what would happen? If you made it so Wizards could only select spells from, say, two schools, only one of which could be either Transmutation or Conjuration, would that limit their power significantly? If Sorcerers had three banned schools, including one of Transmutation or Conjuration, would that make them near tier 3? If clerics spontaneously cast from a list of 7 domains, at least 4 of which had to be from their deity, would that make them less overpowered? If you took away natural spell and had Druids use the Spontaneous Divine variant, would they be reasonable?

Limiting the number of Spells available does indeed help limit high tier casters significantly.
There are, however, some obvious issues such a system creates.


This limits much of the kit differentiation between prepared and spontaneous casters.
If you don't have a vested interest in maintaining the Wizard/Sorcerer and Cleric/Favored Soul distinction, it is far simpler to just ditch the prepared classes and sit at low T2.
In the absence of compensating mechanics, this can change traditional party dynamics in such a way that makes important effects unavailable.
People will generally freak the heck out about healing, but other effects are generally more important.
You have to address spell replication effects or it falls apart.
Miracle, Wish, Limited Wish, AnySpell, Greater Anyspell, Shadow Conjuration, Greater Shadow Conjuration, Shadow Evocation
You're not nerfing Druids hard enough in this context. Wildshape, even without Natural Spell, is enough to reach T3.
If you want Druids not to be T1, either they need not to get 9s or you need to pick the high level spells they do get in advance with that goal specifically in mind.


If you are set on this idea, consider the following

Wizard

Wizards choose one school to specialize in. They can cast from this school and universal spells normally.
Wizards may add any spell from the normal Wizard spell to their spellbook, even if it is not in their specialized school.
A wizard can cast non-specialist spells they have learned and added to their spellbooks, but it takes longer. Spells that normally take 1 round or less, instead take 1 minute. Spells that take longer than 1 round take 10 times as long as normal.
Each round a wizard casts in this manner, they must maintain concentration normally and threaten as with normal casting
Spell replication effects always must be cast in this fashion, even if they would they are in the Wizard's Specialist school or the Universal list
Every even level, a Wizard may choose one spell from outside their specialist school of a level equal to (at most) the highest level spell they can cast, rounded up. They may prepare and cast this spell as they would one from their specialist school.
The wizard may add this spell to their spellbook for free upon gaining the relevant level. This is in addition to the spells they are already entitled to for free when leveling.


Cleric

Clerics choose 3 domains at level 1. They may cast from these domains normally.
Every 5th level, Clerics get an additional domain.
If your group freaks out about healing and is not content with spontaneous coversion, consider tacking on the healing domain (or potentially even all healing spells) for free.
Clerics may cast Cleric spells not in one of their domains, but it takes longer. Spells that normally take 1 round or less, instead take 1 minute. Spells that take longer than 1 round take 10 times as long as normal.
Spell replication effects always must be cast in this fashion, even if they would they are in the Wizard's Specialist school or the Universal list.
Each round a cleric casts in this manner, they must maintain concentration normally and threaten as with normal casting.
This won't work in the context of domain-granting PRCs without heavy reworking of the PRC in question. I'm looking at you, Sovereign Speaker.


Sorcerer/Favored Soul
Leave as is, except for nerfing spell replication effects to the same casting time as for Clerics & Wizards above.

Druid
Dump them down to Bard progression. They are still probably at or near Tier 2.

Spirit Shaman
I'm honestly not sure whether to give them the Cleric/Wizard treatment or the Sorcerer/FS treatment above.

[Cosi]

The most effective nerf to t1 casters is the Syndrome technique: gestalt everyone with the UA Spellcaster.

Yes, but that's probably not on the table for someone who explicitly wants to limit casters.


Its more the don't play with douche bags line, but I hope that is a common enough to most groups. And honestly its the easiest solution. If you want to totally rewrite all casting everything for all of 3.5 you are welcome to, but a hefty dose of common sense and don't be that guy fixes most of the problems at the table.

It's not just "don't play with douchebags", although that is important. Reasonable people can have different expectations for the game system, and communication is necessary to resolve those differences. Otherwise your four players show up with a Rogue that fights in melee with one weapon, a Fighter/Ranger multiclass, CoDzilla, and a minion-spam Wizard.


Wizard[QUOTE]

It seems to me if you're going to that much work to limit the Wizard, you should at least mention spells like planar binding.

[QUOTE]Cleric

Doesn't resolve CoDzilla. In fact, making casting in combat harder encourages you to persist buffs.

[Hecuba]

It seems to me if you're going to that much work to limit the Wizard, you should at least mention spells like planar binding.
I considered including with other spell replication effects, but I actively decided against it (its already in minutes-long casting range).

The issue there is not with class chassis or even a class of spells. Planar Ally is fine, simply because it has drawbacks. Most other callings spells are fine too. The issue is that Planar Binding itself (and its variants) is unbalanced: its hardly unique in that regard, though it is a worse offender than most. Calling them all out would make a short blurb into a rule-book length discussion.

Edit: P.S. - I didn't think it was that much work: it was just hard to find a concise way to say it well. It's more or less the same as the cleric one, just with more tailoring needed to work with the Wizard kit.


Doesn't resolve CoDzilla. In fact, making casting in combat harder encourages you to persist buffs.

If your cleric is behaving like a melee warrior, the problem is mostly solved already. At that point, the issue is not that the Cleric is Tier 1, but rather that the Fighter is Tier 5.

[PacMan2247]

No, it doesn't.

First, many of the best spells don't require expensive components. I don't think anyone would call a Wizard who casts sleep, color spray, glitterdust, web, stinking cloud, major image, evard's black tentacles, charm monster, cloudkill, and wall of stone to have lost any serious power, and all of those spells have material components less than 1 GP if they have material components at all.

Second, the broken spells generally don't have material components at all. planar binding and dominate person are broken spells, but they also have no material component. Not "a cheap material component", no material component. The Wizard who recruits millions of followers and stomps all over game balance with them is not limited at all by any level of strictness in enforcing material components.

Third, Wizards can pretty easily get infinite wealth, so unless you're patching that, costly components don't have any meaningful restriction on Wizards. Using planar binding or fabricate to make money is quick and easy, and it makes the cost of diamond dust or jade circlets basically meaningless.

Fourth, Grod's Law: You cannot and should not balance bad mechanics by making them annoying to use.

Basically, this makes casters less interesting (because everyone takes Eschew Materials) but not less powerful, because it has little effect on most spells Wizards cast and no effect on the broken ones.



So, first, nobody was talking about nerfing casters; the discussion was about limiting them.

Second, Planar Binding has no material component, but the required Magic Circle requires enough silver dust to form an unbroken circle with a 3-foot diameter, and Dominate Person requires sufficient knowledge of the target to manage to give them orders without a new saving throw every time.

Third, infinite wealth is only useful when you're looking to buy something that's available.

Fourth, ignoring game mechanics because you find them inconvenient can be used to make anything overpowered, and to pretend that rules for balancing different player choices don't exist and them complain about how unbalanced those different options are is ludicrous. I'll continue using the rules provided for the game, rather than opinions from the internet.

[LTwerewolf]

So, first, nobody was talking about nerfing casters; the discussion was about limiting them.

You understand the term nerf right? Limiting is a form of nerfing.


Second, Planar Binding has no material component, but the required Magic Circle requires enough silver dust to form an unbroken circle with a 3-foot diameter, and Dominate Person requires sufficient knowledge of the target to manage to give them orders without a new saving throw every time.

Powdered silver isn't exactly expensive when it's even necessary. Finding out enough about a person once they've been dominated is as easy as asking them.


Third, infinite wealth is only useful when you're looking to buy something that's available.

Or when you plan to craft things yourself. You know, or that.


Fourth, ignoring game mechanics because you find them inconvenient can be used to make anything overpowered, and to pretend that rules for balancing different player choices don't exist and them complain about how unbalanced those different options are is ludicrous. I'll continue using the rules provided for the game, rather than opinions from the internet.

Cosi and I don't always see eye to eye (in fact the term rarely would be generous) but this seems overly hostile for no reason towards him. He's not creating new things and new reasons that casters are broken out of thin air. These things are readily available to any caster that uses the player's handbook and uses the spells exactly as written, with no controversial readings.

[Troacctid]

If your cleric is behaving like a melee warrior, the problem is mostly solved already. At that point, the issue is not that the Cleric is Tier 1, but rather that the Fighter is Tier 5.
Well that's the question, isn't it—are you only worried about balancing players against the encounters they're facing so that combats aren't all stomps in one direction or another; or are you worried about balancing them against the other players in the party so no one feels overshadowed by anyone else; or are you trying to balance game elements against each other to promote class diversity and meaningful choices? Because all of those things are different.

A cleric who plays fighter and does it better than the fighter is not a problem if you're only concerned about the first issue. However, it sure as hell fails on the latter two counts.

This is also why I disagree with nerfing the sorcerer—I try to concern myself primarily with the third issue, and the sorcerer, compared to other casters like wizards, clerics, psions, beguilers, and even warmages, is just not a very appealing option, even though, at an absolute level, its power level might appear to be high.


So, first, nobody was talking about nerfing casters; the discussion was about limiting them.
Adding new limitations is a form of nerfing.


Fourth, ignoring game mechanics because you find them inconvenient can be used to make anything overpowered, and to pretend that rules for balancing different player choices don't exist and them complain about how unbalanced those different options are is ludicrous. I'll continue using the rules provided for the game, rather than opinions from the internet.
I always track verbal, somatic, material, and focus components. You need to have your spell component pouch available, you need a free hand, etc. It's really not a balancing factor. It only ever matters in unusual circumstances, like if you're grappled or if your component pouch is stolen. You could give all casters Eschew Materials and make all spells automatically Stilled and Silenced, and it would have no significant effect on their power level. (See: psionics.)

[Cosi]

I considered including with other spell replication effects, but I actively decided against it (its already in minutes-long casting range).

Uh... I don't think anyone is trying to cast planar binding in combat. You cast the spell in downtime, and then enter combat with a dozen high CR bruisers.


Calling them all out would make a short blurb into a rule-book length discussion.

But not calling them out in a fix is, in my view, okaying them. If you're saying "I've banned this stuff to tone down casters", that's implicitly saying "everything else is fair game". If it wasn't, wouldn't you have banned it?

Caster power is overwhelming more a result of a few dozen spells/feats/PrCs than it is "versatility". Addressing the fact that a Wizard can cast glitterdust, enervate, and major image in the same day rather than the fact that they can cast planar binding at all is going about the problem exactly wrong.


If your cleric is behaving like a melee warrior, the problem is mostly solved already. At that point, the issue is not that the Cleric is Tier 1, but rather that the Fighter is Tier 5.

That makes it worse. The whole Cleric Archer/CoDzilla meme was an attempt to put an end to the idea that Clerics were balanced with Fighters by building a Cleric that could beat the Fighter at his own game. If the Cleric is providing party buffs and logistical support, you can kind of pretend the Fighter is, if not balanced, at least useful. Once the Cleric starts fighting better than the Fighter, that particular shell game is over. The fact that CoDzilla is probably worse than a caster Cleric is just icing on the cake of suck that is the Fighter.


Second, Planar Binding has no material component, but the required Magic Circle requires enough silver dust to form an unbroken circle with a 3-foot diameter, and Dominate Person requires sufficient knowledge of the target to manage to give them orders without a new saving throw every time.

planar binding: The silver dust is a fixed cost. Also, you don't really need a magic circle if you can credibly threaten to kill whatever you're trying to bind. The circle just makes things a little safer.

dominate person: "Explain anything about yourself that would change the orders someone who has cast dominate person on you would give you". Done. Maybe one extra save.


Third, infinite wealth is only useful when you're looking to buy something that's available.

Point me to magic item availability rules, outside the GP limit? This isn't a bad suggestion, but the RAW economy is incredibly simple. Also, in this case it punishes non-abusive players more, as they can't bid up the prices of scarce components.


Fourth, ignoring game mechanics because you find them inconvenient can be used to make anything overpowered, and to pretend that rules for balancing different player choices don't exist and them complain about how unbalanced those different options are is ludicrous. I'll continue using the rules provided for the game, rather than opinions from the internet.

The rules don't reduce power basically at all. The most egregious abuses don't interact with these rules at all, and even a typical caster doesn't interact enough to care. If he does, Eschew Materials is just one feat slot away.

[Troacctid]

Point me to magic item availability rules, outside the GP limit?

They are on pages 231-232 of the Magic Item Compendium.

[Hecuba]

Because all of those things are different.

A cleric who plays fighter and does it better than the fighter is not a problem if you're only concerned about the first issue. However, it sure as hell fails on the latter two counts.

I care about both issues, but I regard them as different problems: there are many tables for which one will be major problem and there other won't.

Moreover, unless you are considering fixing the fighter by giving them Vancian-style casting, the nuts and bolts of the fixes will have little interdependence.