Fixes for 3.5 character classes.

[Bobbybobby99]

I was thinking about it, and, as I commonly do, came up with some class 'fixes' for use in my next game, or rather 'make this class fun, interesting, exciting, and scintillating to play'. This is what I came up with.

. Wizards are all focused specialists with all appropriate Unearthed Arcana variants, and also retain a familiar and a bonus metamagic feat at first level and every fifth level. They memorize spells without spellbooks, through meditation, and thus cannot learn spells from scrolls or other people, though they gain 4 free spells known each level.
. Clerics can spontaneously cast from their domains rather than cure/inflict spells, and gain a bonus domain every fifth level, while they can only prepare three different spells in a single level, though they can still prepare the same spell multiple times. Rather than worshiping a single deity, clerics generally worship two in a dualistic fashion.
. Druids use charisma for casting, can only wild shape into a number of chosen forms equal to their level, can rebuke animals and plants, automatically gain the natural spell feat at level 5, and gain a +3 bonus to animal companion level at tenth level and every five levels after.
. Archivists can rebuke dragons, and gain a metamagic feat every five levels. They memorize spells without spellbooks, through meditation, and thus cannot learn spells from scrolls or other people, though they gain 4 free spells known each level. They can only learn spells from the Cleric or Druid lists, not including domains.
. Sorcerers automatically have the rapid metamagic feat at level 1, alongside a single heritage feat of their choosing. At first level and every fourth level after, they gain a bonus metamagic or heritage feat of their choosing.
. Favored souls solely use charisma for casting, have a single domain that adds to their spells known, and can choose from their deities domains when choosing other spells known. At fourth level and every four levels after, they gain a bonus fighter feat.
. Spirit shamans use intelligence for casting, and gain an additional two spells retrieved each level. They gain a +10 bonus to a particular skill based upon their spirit guide at fourth level, a bonus which increases by 10 every four levels after, and can always take ten on that skill.
Badger: Concentration.
Bat. Listen.
Bear: Spellcraft.
Coyote: Sleight of hand.
Crane: Balance.
Cricket: Perform.
Crow: Appraise.
Dolphin: Diplomacy.
Eagle: Sense motive.
Elephant: Knowledge.
Elk: Heal.
Fish. Swim.
Fox: Bluff.
Frog: Jump.
Hawk: Spot.
Horse. Ride.
Lizard. Climb.
Monkey: Tumble.
Octopus: Disguise.
Otter: Gather information.
Owl: Move silently.
Parrot: Speak language.
Rabbit: Hide.
Raccoon: Disable device.
Scorpion: Intimidate.
Snake: Escape artist.
Spider: Use rope.
Turtle: Craft/Profession.
Vulture: Search.
Wolf: Survival.
. Shugenjas use wisdom for their casting, gain a small elemental as a familiar, and can choose an additional spell known, of the highest spell level they know, from the wizard, cleric, or druid list, that matches the focus of their element (as determined by the DM), every even level.
. Dread necromancers use intelligence for spellcasting and other purposes, have the corpse crafter feat for free, are all tomb-tainted souls, gain a bonus feat with corpse crafter as a prerequisite at first level and every five levels after, and can ignore up to 25 GP of material components per level for necromancy spells.
. Bards use wisdom for casting and add their wisdom bonus to perform checks, gain 4 more bardic musics per day, gain lyric spell as a bonus feat, and their bardic musics starting with the word 'Inspire' have twice as much of an effect as they would otherwise. Every six levels, they gain an additional 4 bardic musics per day, beyond the number allotted by their level.
. Rangers are all Wild-Shape Rangers, can only wild shape into a number of chosen forms equal to twice their level, have a full animal companion, have favored environments as well as favored enemies, and gain a fighter bonus feat at first level and every fourth level after.
. Warlocks gain an invocation every level, an extra invocation at first level and every six levels after, and choose which mental stat to base their invocations off of. They automatically receive an Animal Companion/Familiar (similar to that of an Arcane Hierophant), with an added Celestial, Anarchic, Axiomatic, or Fiendish template.
. Rogues can sneak attack targets normally immune to sneak attacks for half damage, and add their class level to sneak attack damage. They gain a free fighter bonus feat at first level and every even level after, and gain one free skill trick every level.
. Berserkers are not illiterate, can cast spells and otherwise do tasks requiring concentration while raging, have a base of 5 rages per day rather than 1, and gain a fighter bonus feat at first level and every even level after.
. Scouts automatically have a full animal companion, wild empathy, and can choose any one mental stat to be their primary. They gain a +2 bonus on skill checks with their chosen mental stat at first level and every level after that.
. Warmages can choose which mental stat they use for spellcasting, have a familiar, and can choose one spell each level for eclectic learning (which has spells one level higher than they would be otherwise), adding any one wizard spell to their list, while still getting advanced learning, and can cast in any armor.
. Healers spontaneously cast from their list, can choose which mental stat they use for spellcasting, can lay on hands as a paladin of thrice their level, add their ranks in heal to damage healed by their spells, can ignore up to 25 GP of material components per level, and can add one healing or abjuration spell from the cleric spell list to their list every level.
. Fighters have all good saves, have a favored weapon, and add 1d6+class level damage to attacks made with it, increasing by 1d6 every even level, and gain a bonus fighter feat every level, add one fourth their fighter level to all attack rolls, and can choose another favored weapon every four levels.
. Monks have full BAB, can choose which mental stat to base their AC off of, can use flurry of blows with a standard action attack, gain a fighter bonus feat every four levels in addition to at first, second, and sixth level (in lieu of limited monk feats), and gain a +10 bonus on one skill of their choice every even level, only taking the bonus once for a single skill.
. Paladins come in all varieties, use charisma for spellcasting, have smites per encounter rather than per day, a bonus fighter feat every even level and a bonus exalted or vile feat every odd level, and add their charisma bonus to their attack rolls, effective mount level, and AC as well as their saves.

What do you think? The tier one classes are still tier one (mostly), but are the other classes reasonable?

[Troacctid]

I wouldn't switch bard casting to Wis. It feels wrong. Perform is Cha-based.

Also, I'd add sanctified spells to the healer list.

[Ashtagon]

Can I play a spirit shaman diplomancer? +50 to Diplomacy (at 20th level) from class features seems quite nice.

[Bobbybobby99]

Can I play a spirit shaman diplomancer? +50 to Diplomacy (at 20th level) from class features seems quite nice.

Certainly; that was a deliberate choice to make an otherwise unappealing class more fun to play (though I encourage DMs to not use diplomacy 'as is' anyways, since it's rather game breaking).


I wouldn't switch bard casting to Wis. It feels wrong. Perform is Cha-based.

Also, I'd add sanctified spells to the healer list.

That's more of a setting thing; I tried to balance the 'types' of spellcaster so each would have equal ability score representation. In terms of sanctified spells, that seems like it might be a bit too much combined with the extra spells.

[Troacctid]

That's more of a setting thing; I tried to balance the 'types' of spellcaster so each would have equal ability score representation. In terms of sanctified spells, that seems like it might be a bit too much combined with the extra spells.
If you want to switch an arcane caster to Wisdom, I'd go with the witch, not the bard. But I don't see any particular need to have Wis-based arcane casters in the first place.

Healer as-written has sanctified spells, so if you're making it spontaneous, it's actually a nerf by omission if you don't add them back to the spell list.

[Pex]

Simplest solution to me is borrow from Pathfinder.

Arcane caster - Sorcerer, Archivist, Witch (no Wizard if it's too much for you)
Divine caster - Cleric, Oracle, Shaman (no Druid if it's too much for you)
Warrior - Fighter, Unchained Barbarian, Ranger, Paladin, Unchained Monk
Arcane Gish - Magus
Divine Gish - Warpriest (no Inquisitor if it's too much for you. Spontaneous Bane ability alone can cause some people grief.)
Skill monkey - Unchained Rogue, Bard

[Honest Tiefling]

Charisma based druids (Except for fey-type druid shennigans) just seems bizarre. If anything, I would say they have the strongest argument to be a wisdom based caster as they rely upon understanding and surveying the lands for their abilities.

If you want a wisdom based arcane caster, why not swap the Dread Necromancer to wisdom instead of intelligence? Both the Archivist and the Wizard fill the intelligence based caster role quite nicely, so I think making the Dread Necromancer wisdom based would be a decent change of pace. You could fluff it as they are Gravewalkers, who are in tune with the grave dirt and burial mounds.

[Ashtagon]

Certainly; that was a deliberate choice to make an otherwise unappealing class more fun to play (though I encourage DMs to not use diplomacy 'as is' anyways, since it's rather game breaking).

Is spirit shaman really so unappealing in your eyes. I see it as a solid tier 2, if not tier 1. It's certainly not in need of any beefing up. Full caster with druid spell list and sorcerer-style spontaneous casting, except the spells known can change on a daily basis. Smaller variety of spells on any given day compared to a prepared caster, but he doesn't need to faff around with spellbooks or researching spells. And that's on top of some interesting unique class abilities.

[Troacctid]

No, I'm with Bobby, spirit shaman is pretty unappealing as-written. The class is mostly just a worse version of a druid. It could use a buff.

Currently, in my games, I'm allowing them to retrieve a number of spells of 1st level or higher each day equal to their level plus their key ability modifier, like the 5e druid. I also changed their casting to just Charisma instead of split Wis/Cha, added Knowledge (religion) and Knowledge (the planes) to their class skills, and made the chastise spirits ability count as turn undead for divine feats and the like.

[nedz]

Wizards are all focused specialists with all appropriate Unearthed Arcana variants, and also retain a familiar and a bonus metamagic feat at first level and every fifth level. They memorize spells without spellbooks, through meditation, and thus cannot learn spells from scrolls or other people, though they gain 4 free spells known each level.

I like this

. Clerics can spontaneously cast from their domains rather than cure/inflict spells, and gain a bonus domain every fifth level, while they can only prepare three different spells in a single level, though they can still prepare the same spell multiple times. Rather than worshiping a single deity, clerics generally worship two in a dualistic fashion.

We have been doing this for years - much more flavour. Though one god only.


Sorcerers automatically have the rapid metamagic feat at level 1, alongside a single heritage feat of their choosing. At first level and every fourth level after, they gain a bonus metamagic or heritage feat of their choosing.

ACF: Metamagic Specialist (PH2 61): lose familiar. Gain the ability to apply metamagic rapidly 3 + INT bonus times per day.


Favored souls solely use charisma for casting, have a single domain that adds to their spells known, and can choose from their deities domains when choosing other spells known. At fourth level and every four levels after, they gain a bonus fighter feat.

Favored souls are weird. They are chosen by a god, but don't get the god's domain spells. I'd dump the Fighter feat and give them more domains - at 5th, 10th, 15th, 20th, say.


Rangers are all Wild-Shape Rangers, can only wild shape into a number of chosen forms equal to twice their level, have a full animal companion, have favored environments as well as favored enemies, and gain a fighter bonus feat at first level and every fourth level after.

I have swapped the Druid and Ranger's AC in one game and it seems to work quite well.


Warlocks gain an invocation every level, an extra invocation at first level and every six levels after, and choose which mental stat to base their invocations off of. They automatically receive an Animal Companion/Familiar (similar to that of an Arcane Hierophant), with an added Celestial, Anarchic, Axiomatic, or Fiendish template.

Warlock need a boost. By one reading of RAW they get to swap an invocation every time they gain a new invocation - not just at 6th, 11th, etc.


Rogues can sneak attack targets normally immune to sneak attacks for half damage, and add their class level to sneak attack damage. They gain a free fighter bonus feat at first level and every even level after, and gain one free skill trick every level.

There are several ACFs which allow this - also spells.


Berserkers are not illiterate, can cast spells and otherwise do tasks requiring concentration while raging, have a base of 5 rages per day rather than 1, and gain a fighter bonus feat at first level and every even level after.

I assume you mean Barbarians.


Healers spontaneously cast from their list, can choose which mental stat they use for spellcasting, can lay on hands as a paladin of thrice their level, add their ranks in heal to damage healed by their spells, can ignore up to 25 GP of material components per level, and can add one healing or abjuration spell from the cleric spell list to their list every level.

What about the spells in SpC. Exalted spells from BoED are also available - by RAW.

You seem to have handed out several of the Fighters toys for free. This class suffers from this already - so what point is there in anyone playing one now ?
In 3.5 this class is really only a 2 level dip already, so this is a minor point - unless you wanted to go more the other way that is.

[Bobbybobby99]

I like this

We have been doing this for years - much more flavour. Though one god only.

ACF: Metamagic Specialist (PH2 61): lose familiar. Gain the ability to apply metamagic rapidly 3 + INT bonus times per day.

Favored souls are weird. They are chosen by a god, but don't get the god's domain spells. I'd dump the Fighter feat and give them more domains - at 5th, 10th, 15th, 20th, say.

I have swapped the Druid and Ranger's AC in one game and it seems to work quite well.

Warlock need a boost. By one reading of RAW they get to swap an invocation every time they gain a new invocation - not just at 6th, 11th, etc.

There are several ACFs which allow this - also spells.

I assume you mean Barbarians.

What about the spells in SpC. Exalted spells from BoED are also available - by RAW.

You seem to have handed out several of the Fighters toys for free. This class suffers from this already - so what point is there in anyone playing one now ?
In 3.5 this class is really only a 2 level dip already, so this is a minor point - unless you wanted to go more the other way that is.
I mostly use Berserker as a way to avoid confusion.

"You see a barbarian approaching."
"Oh man, is he going to rage?"
"What, no, he's not necessarily-I mean, you see someone who looks like a barbarian. From a barbarian tribe."
"So they look really angry?"
"Nope."
"Oh, so they're one of those variants where it adds to dexterity instead of constitution?"
"No, they're a- Oh forget it, you see a barbarian. He looks very angry. Rawr."

In terms of the Fighter, you do get 20 fighter feats instead of 11, which should add to versatility, if not raw power (you could complete multiple feat chains, say, or be both competent with both a sword and an arrow). The new weapon specialty thing (that's sort of like a sneak attack on every attack) is nice, alongside the +5 bonus to attack rolls at level 20. It isn't great, but it's pretty good. Do you have any suggestions for making it better?


Charisma based druids (Except for fey-type druid shennigans) just seems bizarre. If anything, I would say they have the strongest argument to be a wisdom based caster as they rely upon understanding and surveying the lands for their abilities.

If you want a wisdom based arcane caster, why not swap the Dread Necromancer to wisdom instead of intelligence? Both the Archivist and the Wizard fill the intelligence based caster role quite nicely, so I think making the Dread Necromancer wisdom based would be a decent change of pace. You could fluff it as they are Gravewalkers, who are in tune with the grave dirt and burial mounds.

It depends on the setting, really; in mine, Druids have a more faerie theme, so there in makes sense. Here's the table I'm using.

Physical: Fighter (Constitution), Berserkers (Strength) Rogue (Dexterity), Monk (Any).
Natural: Ranger (Wisdom), Druid (Charisma), Spirit shaman (Intelligence), Scout (Any).
Divine: Cleric (Wisdom), Favored soul (Charisma), Dread necromancer (Intelligence), Healer (Any).
Arcane: Bard (Wisdom), Sorcerer (Charisma), Wizard (Intelligence), Warmage (Any).
Elemental: Shugenja (Wisdom), Paladin (Charisma), Archivist (Intelligence), Warlock (Any).

It has a nice sort of concordance to it, but I had to switch around quite a few casting stats for it. None the less, it feels right to me. Bards, rather than being silly entertainers, are the wise passers of stories, epic poems, and aesops. Shugenjas are wisdom based, like they already should have been. Paladins are less MAD. Dread Necromancers aren't technically divine, but complement the Healer thematically. Spirit shamans call upon a library of spirits with careful focus and their wits about them.

[Honest Tiefling]

It depends on the setting, really; in mine, Druids have a more faerie theme, so there in makes sense. Here's the table I'm using.

I take back my remark on the druid. Fey druids make more sense with charisma, and if every druid is a fey druid, well my complaint makes no dang sense. (through the ability to turn into fey instead of elementals would be quite nice in my opinion.)

I stand by the Dread Necro going into Wisdom, giving you a wisdom arcane caster if you shift bard back to charisma. I agree with others, the bard has to be charisma. Plenty of people play them with no common sense whatsoever, and they are supposed to be able to bring people to tears or rage with their very voice. Very charisma focused in my opinion. I would consider splitting the class into the Charisma Bard and some sort of Sage dealy that does many of the same things, but without a musical focus. Too often people have wanted to mechanically play a bard but not know a thing about music (myself included).

Through, I believe it was Dragon Lance that had a feat to change the Casting Stat of a class. I personally don't believe that is worth a feat, but if you tack on some minor bonuses, perhaps it would become worthwhile in case someone really wants to do something different? Then again, I don't know how regimented magic is in your world.

[The Viscount]

I'm going to ask a few specific questions in the interest of refinement.

1. What happens to a druid's animal companion at and after level 15, at which point they have an effective animal companion level of 21+?

2. What list of skills can Spirit Shaman choose to boost using the class feature?

3. What do you mean by a spell that "matches their element" for Shugenja? The elements are not solely lists of spells with their descriptors. For example, Fire includes feeblemind, Earth has spell resistance, Water has righteous might, and Air has Dimension Door. With this in mind, how would you decide which spells are appropriate for which lists?

4. When you say Dread Necromancers use Intelligence "for spellcasting and other purposes" do you mean Negative Energy Burst, Fear Aura, Scabrous Touch, Undead Mastery, and Enervating Touch? What about for rebuking?

5. Are you changing the corpsecrafter feat's benefits? Because as is, the enhancement bonuses to strength and dex will not stack with Undead Mastery, so only the +2 hp per HD stack.

6. Are you changing warlock's alignment prerequisite and fluff of fiendish/fey background? Because otherwise, axiomatic and anarchic familiars don't really line up, and celestial familiars would certainly be out of place.

7. For Scout, what does "and can choose any one mental stat to be their primary" mean? Scouts don't have spells and don't have any class features that mention a mental stat. Do you just mean the stat for the skill bonus? Also, are you fully prepared to deal with the consequences of a +40 bonus to all the skills of a certain stat? For example, if a Scout chooses Cha, they can make UMD checks for wands without any failure at level 7, which is actually earlier than other skillful classes would get.

8. When you say warmage chooses one spell each level for eclectic learning, does that include the regular eclectic learning restriction of 1 level lower than the highest level of spells available?

9. If a Healer chooses Lesser Vigor as their bonus spell, do they add the hp healed from Heal once or every round?

10. What does the Fighters favored weapon specify? Is it one specific weapon, taking some period of time to bond to? Or is it does it apply to, say, any greatsword? Either way, please remember that because of the way DR works in 3.5, a fighter will need more than one weapon to overcome different types.

11. What do you mean by "paladins come in all varieties"? Do you mean all alignments? If so, this will not work with the exalted feats, which require a good alignment.

12. For all the classes that have bonus fighter feats, do they still have to meet the requirements (I'm mostly thinking of the BA requirements), and what is their effective fighter level for the purpose of feats such as Weapon Specialization?

[Ashtagon]

No, I'm with Bobby, spirit shaman is pretty unappealing as-written. The class is mostly just a worse version of a druid. It could use a buff.

Currently, in my games, I'm allowing them to retrieve a number of spells of 1st level or higher each day equal to their level plus their key ability modifier, like the 5e druid. I also changed their casting to just Charisma instead of split Wis/Cha, added Knowledge (religion) and Knowledge (the planes) to their class skills, and made the chastise spirits ability count as turn undead for divine feats and the like.

A worse version of the hands-down best class in the game, either including or excluding any combination of 1st party splatbooks? I'd play that. It's still solid tier 2 if not tier 1.

[Jormengand]

1. What happens to a druid's animal companion at and after level 15, at which point they have an effective animal companion level of 21+?

"The epic druid’s animal companion continues to increase in power. At every three levels higher than 18th (21st, 24th, 27th, and so on), the companion gains +2 bonus Hit Dice, its natural armor increases by 2, its Strength and Dexterity modifiers increase by 1, and it learns one additional bonus trick." (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/classProgressions.htm#epicDruid)

[Troacctid]

A worse version of the hands-down best class in the game, either including or excluding any combination of 1st party splatbooks? I'd play that. It's still solid tier 2 if not tier 1.
Do you play druids with the phynxkin companion and spontaneous affliction ACFs too?

The only reason to play it is if you want to intentionally nerf yourself. That's not a healthy power level. There need to be meaningful tradeoffs—you need to get something back for what you're giving up. Hence, buffs.

[Honest Tiefling]

Never played Spirit Shaman, but...Shouldn't it have an idenity beyond 'nerfed druid'? It might be fine and dandy for most games, but I am greatly suspecting that our (presumably) Karkadann friend here wants is power and flavo, especially if he's giving out benefits to the druid of all things.

So there's a question. If Druids are tied to the fey, what is this setting's take on the Spirit Shaman?

[Ashtagon]

Do you play druids with the phynxkin companion and spontaneous affliction ACFs too?

The only reason to play it is if you want to intentionally nerf yourself. That's not a healthy power level. There need to be meaningful tradeoffs—you need to get something back for what you're giving up. Hence, buffs.

ACFs are optional, even when the relevant splatbook is available. But even if the DM forced them on my druid, I'd still be a full caster.


Never played Spirit Shaman, but...Shouldn't it have an idenity beyond 'nerfed druid'? It might be fine and dandy for most games, but I am greatly suspecting that our (presumably) Karkadann friend here wants is power and flavo, especially if he's giving out benefits to the druid of all things.

So there's a question. If Druids are tied to the fey, what is this setting's take on the Spirit Shaman?

I'm calling the spirit shaman a "nerfed druid" because if you look at it purely in terms of spellcasting potential, that's what it is.

Now, I have no idea what the OP's idea on the spirit shaman's flavour is, but the default flavour is that of an animist nature priest who sees every natural object as having its own life-force spirit. It plays heavily on tropes found in Shenism, Shinto, and Tengrism. Although not called out as such, it really is the Oriental Adventures shaman class done properly. If you look at its class abilities aside from spellcasting, it is clear that the focus is more on the immaterial than the material world.

But yeah. Class fixes. Without stating up-front what your goal is in a class fix, it's really impossible to say whether you have succeeded on a flavour point of view. That leaves only power levels to examine things on. And "full caster able to diplomance" seems quite powerful to me. There's greater levels of power sure, but this one is fairly obvious and fun (for me at least).

[Cosi]

If you are looking to make characters more interesting, the first thing you should do is make all PrCs that advance casting grant full casting. Being an Acolyte of the Skin or Green Star Adept is cool, flavorful, and not powerful enough to be broken. But if it takes away half your casting, no one will ever do it. As such, setting things up so people do it makes the game better.


But yeah. Class fixes. Without stating up-front what your goal is in a class fix, it's really impossible to say whether you have succeeded on a flavour point of view. That leaves only power levels to examine things on. And "full caster able to diplomance" seems quite powerful to me. There's greater levels of power sure, but this one is fairly obvious and fun (for me at least).

But you can't judge it on power level either! There's no stated goal. He's kind of made some noise about classes "being interesting" and "tier ones staying tier one", but there's no notion of what power level he wants.


The only reason to play it is if you want to intentionally nerf yourself. That's not a healthy power level. There need to be meaningful tradeoffs—you need to get something back for what you're giving up. Hence, buffs.

If you want to make a class weaker, it is totally healthy to take away abilities without giving them anything in return. Is that something you want to do? I don't know, but it totally could be.

Also, this is not really responsive to the idea that the Druid is still worth playing if nerfed in some way. Is the Wizard worse if it can't cast any Enchantment spells? Yes. Is it still playable? Yes.


Wizards are all focused specialists with all appropriate Unearthed Arcana variants, and also retain a familiar and a bonus metamagic feat at first level and every fifth level. They memorize spells without spellbooks, through meditation, and thus cannot learn spells from scrolls or other people, though they gain 4 free spells known each level.

If I wanted to be a focused specialist in a particular school of magic, I would play a Beguiler/Dread Necromancer/Warmage. Why would I play a Wizard in this set-up for reasons other than "they didn't write the appropriate niche class"? Also, this doesn't really limit the power of Wizards much. Banning Evocation, Enchantment, and Necromancy doesn't cost you anything and 4 spells a level is easily enough to get everything cool.


. Clerics can spontaneously cast from their domains rather than cure/inflict spells, and gain a bonus domain every fifth level, while they can only prepare three different spells in a single level, though they can still prepare the same spell multiple times. Rather than worshiping a single deity, clerics generally worship two in a dualistic fashion.

Uh, sure? Like, I'm not sure what you're trying to do here. Also, the dualism thing is interesting, but it seems like something that should be justified in setting.


. Druids use charisma for casting, can only wild shape into a number of chosen forms equal to their level, can rebuke animals and plants, automatically gain the natural spell feat at level 5, and gain a +3 bonus to animal companion level at tenth level and every five levels after.

Automatically giving Druids Natural Spell is good. It makes the 6th level feat an actual choice, and therefore makes them more diverse and thus more interesting. Charisma for casting is whatever. Wild Shape form limits like that are a bad idea. It's not really enough to stop Druids from getting the forms they need (Flyer, Swimmer, Combat, Stealth is only four), but it does reward swapping out your Druid character to keep all your forms current.


. Archivists can rebuke dragons, and gain a metamagic feat every five levels. They memorize spells without spellbooks, through meditation, and thus cannot learn spells from scrolls or other people, though they gain 4 free spells known each level.

Rebuking Dragons is a deeply weird ability, though not necessarily overpowered (actually, probably kind of weak because of how Dragon HD and rebuke limits grow). There should probably be an explanation for it. You also need to address the fundamental problem with Archivist casting. If they pull only from the Cleric list, they're worse Clerics (because they know less spells), but if they pull from any divine list they end up getting spells at brokenly low levels by claiming the existence of Geomancer Death Delvers or whatever.


. Spirit shamans use intelligence for casting, and gain an additional two spells retrieved each level. They gain a +10 bonus to a particular skill based upon their spirit guide at fourth level, a bonus which increases by 10 every four levels after, and can always take ten on that skill.

Why? If you are going to do something like this, you should probably have a list of totems which have an affiliated skill along with some domains and other powers.


. Shugenjas use wisdom for their casting, gain a small elemental as a familiar, and can choose an additional spell known, of the highest spell level they know, from the wizard, cleric, or druid list, that matches the focus of their element, every even level.

A small elemental is pretty hard core at first level. They also get sweet movement modes like Burrow or Flight. That might have unintended consequences.


. Dread necromancers use intelligence for spellcasting and other purposes, have the corpse crafter feat for free, are all tomb-tainted souls, gain a bonus metamagic feat at first level and every five levels after, and can ignore up to 25 GP of material components per level for necromancy spells.

Pretty cool, but not sold on the bonus metamagic feats. Why not just bonus feats that require Corpse Crafter (or some other list). Also, Dread Necromancer is already a pretty sweet class.


. Bards use wisdom for casting and add their wisdom bonus to perform checks, gain 4 more bardic musics per day, gain lyric spell as a bonus feat, and their bardic musics have twice as much of an effect as they would otherwise. Every six levels, they gain an additional 4 bardic musics per day, beyond the number allotted by their level.

I'm pretty sure there is at least one case where "twice as much" is ambiguous where applied to Bardic Music.


. Rangers are all Wild-Shape Rangers, can only wild shape into a number of chosen forms equal to twice their level, have a full animal companion, have favored environments as well as favored enemies, and gain a fighter bonus feat at first level and every fourth level after.

Why not give them unrestricted Wild Shape and drop it entirely for Druids? Druids will be fine, and it's a stronger niche for the Ranger.


. Warlocks gain an invocation every level, an extra invocation at first level and every six levels after, and choose which mental stat to base their invocations off of. They automatically receive an Animal Companion/Familiar (similar to that of an Arcane Hierophant), with an added Celestial, Anarchic, Axiomatic, or Fiendish template.

Doesn't solve the fundamental problem where their powers mostly suck, they don't do enough damage, and their one real niche (they're one of the few PC classes that can easily kill armies) isn't useful very often. At minimum they deserve to get Eldritch Blast as an attack action, all their invocations, and some kind of power set I care about at high levels. Probably either planar or magic item based. Maybe planar binding?


. Rogues can sneak attack targets normally immune to sneak attacks for half damage, and add their class level to sneak attack damage. They gain a free fighter bonus feat at first level and every even level after, and gain one free skill trick every level.

Honestly, dealing with Sneak Attack immunity is not terribly hard. There are Wands for most of it, and Gauntlets for the rest. The bonus feats are neat, but not really something that the Rogue is looking for.


. Scouts automatically have a full animal companion, wild empathy, and can choose any one mental stat to be their primary. They gain a +2 bonus on skill checks with their chosen mental stat at first level and every level after that.

Why not just merge with Ranger?


. Fighters have all good saves, have a favored weapon, and add 1d6+class level damage to attacks made with it, increasing by 1d6 every even level, and gain a bonus fighter feat every level, add one fourth their fighter level to all attack rolls,

I don't think this addresses the fundamental problems with the Fighter. Also, "I'm Hammer Guy, I use a Hammer" is the exact opposite of "more interesting".

[Ashtagon]

But you can't judge it on power level either! There's no stated goal. He's kind of made some noise about classes "being interesting" and "tier ones staying tier one", but there's no notion of what power level he wants.

You totally can, because the GM (The OP, I would assume) is not the only one at the gaming table. Among the people playing PCs at their gaming table, i can guarantee that at least one of them will care about how powerful their character is.

It's certainly not the best criterion to judge the OP's goals on, but absent of any other known goal, it's the only criterion that we are able to judge on.

[Bobbybobby99]

Never played Spirit Shaman, but...Shouldn't it have an idenity beyond 'nerfed druid'? It might be fine and dandy for most games, but I am greatly suspecting that our (presumably) Karkadann friend here wants is power and flavo, especially if he's giving out benefits to the druid of all things.

So there's a question. If Druids are tied to the fey, what is this setting's take on the Spirit Shaman?

The spirit shaman, as reflected by the fact that it is now reliant on Intelligence, gains its power by the complex and ornate arrangement of natural elements in order to invoke their inherent power. They tap into the fundamentals of the universe, similar to how Wizards are sometimes portrayed, and they acknowledge that the united universe is broken into smaller, individual parts; spirits, cogs in the machine, trees, birds, us.


I'm going to ask a few specific questions in the interest of refinement.

1. What happens to a druid's animal companion at and after level 15, at which point they have an effective animal companion level of 21+?

The companion goes into epic levels (and stays relevant).

2. What list of skills can Spirit Shaman choose to boost using the class feature?

This handy dandy list that I just constructed-


Badger: Concentration.
Bat. Listen.
Bear: Spellcraft.
Coyote: Sleight of hand.
Crane: Balance.
Cricket: Perform.
Crow: Appraise.
Dolphin: Diplomacy.
Eagle: Sense motive.
Elephant: Knowledge.
Elk: Heal.
Fish. Swim.
Fox: Bluff.
Frog: Jump.
Hawk: Spot.
Horse. Ride.
Lizard. Climb.
Monkey: Tumble.
Octopus: Disguise.
Otter: Gather information.
Owl: Move silently.
Parrot: Speak language.
Rabbit: Hide.
Raccoon: Disable device.
Scorpion: Intimidate.
Snake: Escape artist.
Spider: Use rope.
Turtle: Craft/Profession.
Vulture: Search.
Wolf: Survival.

3. What do you mean by a spell that "matches their element" for Shugenja? The elements are not solely lists of spells with their descriptors. For example, Fire includes feeblemind, Earth has spell resistance, Water has righteous might, and Air has Dimension Door. With this in mind, how would you decide which spells are appropriate for which lists?

That would probably be a matter of DM approval; by 'matching their element', I mostly meant 'matching the thematics of their existing spell list'. So, for instance, someone Water based could choose healing, divination, or other spells, while a Fire shugenja could choose blasty harmy spells.

4. When you say Dread Necromancers use Intelligence "for spellcasting and other purposes" do you mean Negative Energy Burst, Fear Aura, Scabrous Touch, Undead Mastery, and Enervating Touch? What about for rebuking?

All of the above.

5. Are you changing the corpsecrafter feat's benefits? Because as is, the enhancement bonuses to strength and dex will not stack with Undead Mastery, so only the +2 hp per HD stack.

Nope, since they could easily multiclass out before that point.

6. Are you changing warlock's alignment prerequisite and fluff of fiendish/fey background? Because otherwise, axiomatic and anarchic familiars don't really line up, and celestial familiars would certainly be out of place.

Well, I normally do loosen alignment requirements a bit, but they do fit fairly well as is; you could, for instance, be a lawful evil warlock worshiping Devils, and have more of an emphasis on the lawful part, or a chaotic good warlock and more emphasize the good than the chaos. But then I generally loosen alignment requirements by a step, so then you could have a neutral good warlock. They still have the fiendish/fae theme, but it's more of a fiendish/nature/pacts in general theme.

7. For Scout, what does "and can choose any one mental stat to be their primary" mean? Scouts don't have spells and don't have any class features that mention a mental stat. Do you just mean the stat for the skill bonus? Also, are you fully prepared to deal with the consequences of a +40 bonus to all the skills of a certain stat? For example, if a Scout chooses Cha, they can make UMD checks for wands without any failure at level 7, which is actually earlier than other skillful classes would get.

It means they can choose the stat that the skill bonus applies to. I think I can deal with the consequences there; it's powerful, but it's supposed to be.

8. When you say warmage chooses one spell each level for eclectic learning, does that include the regular eclectic learning restriction of 1 level lower than the highest level of spells available?

It does.

9. If a Healer chooses Lesser Vigor as their bonus spell, do they add the hp healed from Heal once or every round?

Once.

10. What does the Fighters favored weapon specify? Is it one specific weapon, taking some period of time to bond to? Or is it does it apply to, say, any greatsword? Either way, please remember that because of the way DR works in 3.5, a fighter will need more than one weapon to overcome different types.

It would apply to, say, any greatsword, and I think I'all change that up a bit.

11. What do you mean by "paladins come in all varieties"? Do you mean all alignments? If so, this will not work with the exalted feats, which require a good alignment.

They come in Honor, Freedom, Slaughter, and Tyranny versions, as from Unearthed Arcana. I was originally going to say 'exalted or vile' but that's missing for some reason, so I'll add it shortly.

12. For all the classes that have bonus fighter feats, do they still have to meet the requirements (I'm mostly thinking of the BA requirements), and what is their effective fighter level for the purpose of feats such as Weapon Specialization?

Still have to meet the requirements, and I'd say that they count as a Fighter of half their level, since that sounds reasonable.


If you are looking to make characters more interesting, the first thing you should do is make all PrCs that advance casting grant full casting. Being an Acolyte of the Skin or Green Star Adept is cool, flavorful, and not powerful enough to be broken. But if it takes away half your casting, no one will ever do it. As such, setting things up so people do it makes the game better.

But you can't judge it on power level either! There's no stated goal. He's kind of made some noise about classes "being interesting" and "tier ones staying tier one", but there's no notion of what power level he wants.

If you want to make a class weaker, it is totally healthy to take away abilities without giving them anything in return. Is that something you want to do? I don't know, but it totally could be.

Also, this is not really responsive to the idea that the Druid is still worth playing if nerfed in some way. Is the Wizard worse if it can't cast any Enchantment spells? Yes. Is it still playable? Yes.



If I wanted to be a focused specialist in a particular school of magic, I would play a Beguiler/Dread Necromancer/Warmage. Why would I play a Wizard in this set-up for reasons other than "they didn't write the appropriate niche class"? Also, this doesn't really limit the power of Wizards much. Banning Evocation, Enchantment, and Necromancy doesn't cost you anything and 4 spells a level is easily enough to get everything cool.

I was thinking about doing something along the lines of 'you can either choose to ban one of Conjuration and Transmutation, or you get to roll randomly for your banned schools'. In terms of why... well, the beguiler isn't getting any fixing, for one thing. You might like the way they cast, or their flavor. In terms of why you should play a Necromancer rather than a Dread Necromancer, it would likely be a matter of degree. Dread Necromancer doesn't get access to the other four schools involved, or only have limited access.

Uh, sure? Like, I'm not sure what you're trying to do here. Also, the dualism thing is interesting, but it seems like something that should be justified in setting.

Meh.

Automatically giving Druids Natural Spell is good. It makes the 6th level feat an actual choice, and therefore makes them more diverse and thus more interesting. Charisma for casting is whatever. Wild Shape form limits like that are a bad idea. It's not really enough to stop Druids from getting the forms they need (Flyer, Swimmer, Combat, Stealth is only four), but it does reward swapping out your Druid character to keep all your forms current.

Swapping out your Druid character? Like, intentionally getting killed in order to get a power boost? I can't imagine someone doing that at my table.

Rebuking Dragons is a deeply weird ability, though not necessarily overpowered (actually, probably kind of weak because of how Dragon HD and rebuke limits grow). There should probably be an explanation for it. You also need to address the fundamental problem with Archivist casting. If they pull only from the Cleric list, they're worse Clerics (because they know less spells), but if they pull from any divine list they end up getting spells at brokenly low levels by claiming the existence of Geomancer Death Delvers or whatever.

Well, they needed to have some flavor beyond being a clerical wizard, and giving them Draconic associations seemed as good a way as any. I think I'll add a note that they only have access to the Druid and Cleric spell lists. Alongside the paladin having access to vile feats, that feels like something I originally intended to write but didn't.

Why? If you are going to do something like this, you should probably have a list of totems which have an affiliated skill along with some domains and other powers.

See the quote before this one, and domains might be a bit much.

A small elemental is pretty hard core at first level. They also get sweet movement modes like Burrow or Flight. That might have unintended consequences.

I rarely start at first level, so it should be fine.

Pretty cool, but not sold on the bonus metamagic feats. Why not just bonus feats that require Corpse Crafter (or some other list). Also, Dread Necromancer is already a pretty sweet class.

That's a good suggestion, and I will implement it.

I'm pretty sure there is at least one case where "twice as much" is ambiguous where applied to Bardic Music.

Well, it applies intuitively to Inspire Competence (so it's somewhat significant), Inspire Courage, and Inspire greatness, which are the main things you see a bard using. I think I'll add a note that it 'doubles the effect of bardic musics starting with the word Inspire'.

Why not give them unrestricted Wild Shape and drop it entirely for Druids? Druids will be fine, and it's a stronger niche for the Ranger.

I sort of like it the way it is.

Doesn't solve the fundamental problem where their powers mostly suck, they don't do enough damage, and their one real niche (they're one of the few PC classes that can easily kill armies) isn't useful very often. At minimum they deserve to get Eldritch Blast as an attack action, all their invocations, and some kind of power set I care about at high levels. Probably either planar or magic item based. Maybe planar binding?

Eldritch glaive let's them use it as an attack action, and they're fairly reasonable at high levels just for the whole 'easily kill armies thing'. That does come up a fair amount in my high level games.

Honestly, dealing with Sneak Attack immunity is not terribly hard. There are Wands for most of it, and Gauntlets for the rest. The bonus feats are neat, but not really something that the Rogue is looking for.

Do you have any suggestions otherwise?

Why not just merge with Ranger?

It seems like they have separate niches, one as a natural rogue and the other as a natural fighter.

I don't think this addresses the fundamental problems with the Fighter. Also, "I'm Hammer Guy, I use a Hammer" is the exact opposite of "more interesting".

I think I'll make it so they can add another favored weapon every four levels.

That might make some PRCs a bit too good, and the stated goal is to make classes fun and interesting without having to make Tier 1s less interesting.

[nedz]

I'm calling the spirit shaman a "nerfed druid" because if you look at it purely in terms of spellcasting potential, that's what it is.

Well it's still T1/T2 - this Nerfed Druid is not a weak class by any means.

[Ashtagon]

Well it's still T1/T2 - this Nerfed Druid is not a weak class by any means.

Yes. You may have noticed that I've been repeatedly saying it's solidly in the the tier 1-2 range.

[Jormengand]

I think the point is, if your options are "Good mage", "Okay mage" and "Bad fighter", the only viable options are... good mage, and bad fighter. There's a possible reason to want to play bad fighter over good mage, but no point in playing okay mage over good mage, because it's entirely redundant. While fighters are in reality overshadowed at fighting by mages, having a class that has no purpose except to be a less good version of another class doesn't even make conceptual sense, even if it's still a good class in its own right.

[Ashtagon]

I think the point is, if your options are "Good mage", "Okay mage" and "Bad fighter", the only viable options are... good mage, and bad fighter. There's a possible reason to want to play bad fighter over good mage, but no point in playing okay mage over good mage, because it's entirely redundant. While fighters are in reality overshadowed at fighting by mages, having a class that has no purpose except to be a less good version of another class doesn't even make conceptual sense, even if it's still a good class in its own right.

That's a good argument as far as it goes, but it doesn't really cover the case here. There's a choice of fey-focus druid, spirit-focus "druid", and bad fighter. Given the decent set of class features that both druid and spirit shaman have, it can be said that they are about as close as evoker and illusionist; neither makes the other obsolete.

And regarding the "nerfed spellcaster" thing, that's a bit of an exaggeration, even if I did coin it myself. Here are the differences:


A spirit shaman actually has more spells per day than a druid.
A druid has "spells known: all". A spirit shaman has a very limited number of spells known, BUT they can completely change their spells known list at the start of every new day. (Typically, a spontaneous caster can only change a single spell in their spells known list once every four class levels.)
A spirit shaman casts spontaneously, including the relevant restrictions on metamagic.


In practice, that works out as druid = prepared caster with wide choice of spells, and spirit shaman = prepared caster who must prepare most spells twice, and suffers spontaneous caster restrictions for metamagic.

[Extra Anchovies]

I think the point is, if your options are "Good mage", "Okay mage" and "Bad fighter", the only viable options are... good mage, and bad fighter. There's a possible reason to want to play bad fighter over good mage, but no point in playing okay mage over good mage, because it's entirely redundant. While fighters are in reality overshadowed at fighting by mages, having a class that has no purpose except to be a less good version of another class doesn't even make conceptual sense, even if it's still a good class in its own right.

It's not quite as simple as that in practice, though. Rather than "good mage" and "okay mage", we have "good mage" and "not-quite-as-good mage with different mechanics", and those different mechanics are a possible reason to play NQAGM over good-mage. If there were a class that had weaker versions of some/all of the druid class features and no other abilities, then there's not much reason for both classes to exist in the same campaign, but I can't think of any two classes of the top of my head that are so mechanically similar as to be mutually redundant.

[nedz]

Yes. You may have noticed that I've been repeatedly saying it's solidly in the the tier 1-2 range.

Sorry missed that - there have been a lot of walls of text, and I had a migraine - so my eyes may have blurred that out :smallamused:

[Honest Tiefling]

...The DOLPHIN is the creature that grants diplomacy? That's either...Strange or a stroke of genius.

Through given that the Otter has Gather Information, are these skills perhaps related to the personality of the spirit guide or the spirits themselves?

[The Viscount]

I think the point is, if your options are "Good mage", "Okay mage" and "Bad fighter", the only viable options are... good mage, and bad fighter. There's a possible reason to want to play bad fighter over good mage, but no point in playing okay mage over good mage, because it's entirely redundant. While fighters are in reality overshadowed at fighting by mages, having a class that has no purpose except to be a less good version of another class doesn't even make conceptual sense, even if it's still a good class in its own right.

I'm going to have to object to this argument for two large reasons. Firstly, because the above argument could also be used for anything. Wizards can do virtually anything. Any class that isn't wizard could then be said to be a "worse version of wizard", no? Whatever reasons you could have for using a "bad fighter" (simplicity, not having to be super familiar with the rules, not wanting to overshadow others) could apply to choosing a class that isn't "good mage" just as easily. This argument just boils down to "why play anything that isn't Tier 1" and if you can't think of an answer to have that question, it will be very difficult for us to have this conversation.

Secondly, I'm playing a Spirit Shaman right now, so clearly there was a point in my playing it. In addition to the above reasons, which apply somewhat, I'm currently playing a Ravenloft campaign, and due to the threats we encounter, many times an animal companion would not help things, and wildshaping into animal forms does not make it easier to fight incorporeal creatures, or make it wise to tangle with vampires. In this campaign, auto-ghost touch weapons and armor and chastise spirits make it highly effective against incorporeal undead, especially at lower levels. Furthermore, Blessing of the Spirits gives a constant protection from effect which A druid does not have on their list and B protects from vampire domination and enchantment in addition to its theoretical designed use.

Back onto the main topic, thank you for answering my clarification questions. One followup: You said that a spirit shaman selecting elephant spirit guide chooses Knowledge as their skill. Does this apply to any one Knowledge, or to all Knowledges?

[Troacctid]

I'm going to have to object to this argument for two large reasons. Firstly, because the above argument could also be used for anything. Wizards can do virtually anything. Any class that isn't wizard could then be said to be a "worse version of wizard", no?
No, because they're doing something different rather than a worse version of the same thing. (Aside from maybe the wu jen or sorcerer. They look pretty bad next to the wizard.)

Druids are the ones who are actually better at everything. They're the only class that I nerf in my games. Switching the animal companion with the ranger helps a lot.

Clerics are also close, but they have to work a little harder for it and their spell list is more limited.

[BowStreetRunner]

I know how to fix fighters...give them Wizard casting.

[Cosi]

Sorry about the delay. I was offline for a while.


It's certainly not the best criterion to judge the OP's goals on, but absent of any other known goal, it's the only criterion that we are able to judge on.

But you can't actually judge (meaningfully) based on that, because there's no power target. Take an example from RAW 3e. It is hopefully not contentious to say Wizards are better than Fighters. There are arguments to be had about why or how much they are better, but we should all be able to agree that Wizards > Fighters.

But that doesn't imply any particular set of design directives. Suppose we accept that Wizards are better than Fighters. What is to be done about it? Maybe that should be fixed by nerfing Wizards. Maybe that's a good thing because it captures the dynamic of magic being better than non-magic in fantasy. Maybe that should be fixed by buffing Fighters. Maybe that's a good thing because it gives more ways to play the game. Maybe that should be fixed by nerfing Wizards some and buffing Fighters some.

I have opinions about those questions, and I can only assume you do as well. Since those opinions are probably different, design advice based on observed power level is meaningless. It's possible to say that the changes made to the Wizard take it down to the level of the Sorcerer or move it up to the level of the StP Erudite. But unless you know what the goal of the changes is, it's meaningless to do so.


Swapping out your Druid character? Like, intentionally getting killed in order to get a power boost? I can't imagine someone doing that at my table.

"It wouldn't happen at my table" is a bad excuse for flawed designs, except in extreme cases (i.e. against people willfully misinterpreting the text). And it doesn't even have to be intentional. It's just that the reality of this ability makes a Druid that shows up at level X (because a character died unintentionally, because someone joined the group, whatever) weaker than one that leveled up to level X. You could solve the problem by letting the Druid swap forms at every level.


Well, it applies intuitively to Inspire Competence (so it's somewhat significant), Inspire Courage, and Inspire greatness, which are the main things you see a bard using. I think I'll add a note that it 'doubles the effect of bardic musics starting with the word Inspire'.

Sure. Could also say "doubles numeric bonuses".


Do you have any suggestions otherwise?

What the Rogue is really missing is high level utility powers. A Ring of Blinking, acid flasks and multiple attacks (via TWF or archery feats) make it fairly easy to do enough damage, particularly with wands to ignore immunity. And skills cover low level stuff pretty well. The Rogue as written can do it, but it leans fairly heavily on UMD to do so. You could give them some totally arbitrary shadow powers or something. My quick and dirty fix would be Beguiler + Assassin list at level - 2.


That might make some PRCs a bit too good, and the stated goal is to make classes fun and interesting without having to make Tier 1s less interesting.

Which are you worried about? There are definitely some potentially dangerous PrCs held back by lack of casting advancement (the CAr one that improves polymorph springs to mind), but mostly it's not an issue. And it's not an issue in both directions. The best caster PrCs are already full casting (Incantatrix, Dweomerkeeper, Planar Shepherd, Shadowcraft Mage), and most of the non-advancing PrCs aren't that dangerous (Acolyte of the Skin, Green Star Adept).


I know how to fix fighters...give them Wizard casting.

You kid, but that does work pretty well. If you gave Fighters a couple of cool abilities to replace their feats, and then gave them Wizard casting at level - 1 starting at 5th or so, they'd be playable and reasonably interesting (if nothing exceptional).

Just Gestalting everyone with Sorcerer is probably the best ratio of imbalance reduction to words used. Sure Fighter + Sorcerer is worse than Wizard + Sorcerer, but it's a hell of a lot closer than Fighter is to Wizard.

[tsj]

It would seem that the druid and spirit shaman should swap spellcasting abilities. .. the lesser spellcasting is then compensated by wildshape

[Bobbybobby99]

Sorry about the delay. I was offline for a while.

But you can't actually judge (meaningfully) based on that, because there's no power target. Take an example from RAW 3e. It is hopefully not contentious to say Wizards are better than Fighters. There are arguments to be had about why or how much they are better, but we should all be able to agree that Wizards > Fighters.

But that doesn't imply any particular set of design directives. Suppose we accept that Wizards are better than Fighters. What is to be done about it? Maybe that should be fixed by nerfing Wizards. Maybe that's a good thing because it captures the dynamic of magic being better than non-magic in fantasy. Maybe that should be fixed by buffing Fighters. Maybe that's a good thing because it gives more ways to play the game. Maybe that should be fixed by nerfing Wizards some and buffing Fighters some.

I have opinions about those questions, and I can only assume you do as well. Since those opinions are probably different, design advice based on observed power level is meaningless. It's possible to say that the changes made to the Wizard take it down to the level of the Sorcerer or move it up to the level of the StP Erudite. But unless you know what the goal of the changes is, it's meaningless to do so.

"It wouldn't happen at my table" is a bad excuse for flawed designs, except in extreme cases (i.e. against people willfully misinterpreting the text). And it doesn't even have to be intentional. It's just that the reality of this ability makes a Druid that shows up at level X (because a character died unintentionally, because someone joined the group, whatever) weaker than one that leveled up to level X. You could solve the problem by letting the Druid swap forms at every level.

Sure. Could also say "doubles numeric bonuses".

What the Rogue is really missing is high level utility powers. A Ring of Blinking, acid flasks and multiple attacks (via TWF or archery feats) make it fairly easy to do enough damage, particularly with wands to ignore immunity. And skills cover low level stuff pretty well. The Rogue as written can do it, but it leans fairly heavily on UMD to do so. You could give them some totally arbitrary shadow powers or something. My quick and dirty fix would be Beguiler + Assassin list at level - 2.

Which are you worried about? There are definitely some potentially dangerous PrCs held back by lack of casting advancement (the CAr one that improves polymorph springs to mind), but mostly it's not an issue. And it's not an issue in both directions. The best caster PrCs are already full casting (Incantatrix, Dweomerkeeper, Planar Shepherd, Shadowcraft Mage), and most of the non-advancing PrCs aren't that dangerous (Acolyte of the Skin, Green Star Adept).

You kid, but that does work pretty well. If you gave Fighters a couple of cool abilities to replace their feats, and then gave them Wizard casting at level - 1 starting at 5th or so, they'd be playable and reasonably interesting (if nothing exceptional).

Just Gestalting everyone with Sorcerer is probably the best ratio of imbalance reduction to words used. Sure Fighter + Sorcerer is worse than Wizard + Sorcerer, but it's a hell of a lot closer than Fighter is to Wizard.

It seems like the Druid problem is fairly easily fixed by ruling that Druids that are built at later levels have to be built as if they had leveled up; so, for instance, a eight level Druid could only have one large form.

I was thinking about implementing some sort of "... At level 2, everyone gains a single cantrip usable as a spell like ability once per day. They gain a first level spell usable as a spell like ability once per day at fourth level, and an additional spell like ability of a level higher every two levels. Every two levels after a spell like ability is acquired, it gains an additional use per day, and becomes at will once it reaches seven uses per day."

[bjj8383]

Some interesting ideas. My power gamers are already difficult enough to handle, though.

[bahamut920]

If all you want is campaign party balance, it's a lot easier than an exhaustive list of houserules with sweeping changes for almost every class in the game.

Consider at least some of the following:

Use the Tome of Battle classes (crusader, swordsage, and warblade) in place of the classes they're supposed to replace (paladin, monk, and fighter, respectively). If you don't like ToB, I don't know what to tell you.
The only full casters allowed are beguiler, warmage, dread necromancer, spirit shaman, and favored soul.
Better yet, replace Vancian casting with refluffed psionics.
Factotum replaces rogue.
Druids swap animal companion progression with the ranger.
Druids must use the Shapeshifting variant in PHB2.

Only one of these changes is an actual houserule; all the rest are official WotC classes and/or variants. Additionally, the list is short. If you're playing with inexperienced players, it's best not to throw a whole bunch of changes on top of an already complicated rule system. It's enough to prevent them from falling into the "trap" classes with really low optimization floors. You probably don't even need to outright ban any of the high-tier classes; they're not going to hit the ceilings of their power.

If you're actually going to balance the classes, however, you're going to need to re-write practically every 3.5 class. The only ones that don't need major fixing are ToB (mostly fine, just need some re-writing on their progression tables), factotum (throw a 1/round limit on Cunning Surge, or make it a swift action and you're good), barbarian (needs some more out-of-combat utility, but is otherwise fine), bard (the best class in the 3.5 PHB), and beguiler.

Below is what I think of as a good start:

No class without spellcasting ability should have less than 4 + Int skill points per level. This includes fighters. Expand class skill lists with suitable skills as necessary.
Full casters should not have any better than a poor BAB. Exceptions should be rare and have limited spell lists or small numbers of spells known.
4-level casters treat their CL as level -3, not 1/2 level.
Every class should be both dip-friendly and have compelling enough class features that a player would want to take the class to level 20 and beyond. Some classes (most of the ToB classes and factotum) do this better than others (most full casters). Add class features to classes; things they can only get from that class. Every class should have a "capstone" ability at or very close to level 20, which should be the strongest ability the class receives, to encourage taking all the levels of the class, but class features should also be relatively evenly sprinkled throughout all of the class's levels. You don't need a class feature at every level, especially on spellcasters, psionics, or martial adepts. Avoid "dead levels" where a class gains nothing besides a stat increase like the plague.
Fighter needs actual class features. Doing things simply, eating the marshal class from the Miniatures Handbook (or knight from PHB2, or samurai or swashbuckler from Complete Warrior, or maybe giving players their choice of "meal") for their power and giving them 1/2 their total fighter level as a competence bonus to combat maneuvers (grapple, trip, disarm, etc) is a pretty good start. And they still get all the bonus feats, obviously (and see below for suggestions on feats). Suggestions for class skills include Spot, Listen, Knowledge (local), and Knowledge (nobility and royalty).
Rogue has plenty of out-of-combat versatility, but needs in-combat oomph. Consider allowing rogues to add 1/2 their level to the attack bonus granted by flanking or denying Dex. Giving Dex to damage with light or finessable weapons helps, too.
Swashbuckler needs more class features. Even if combined with fighter, it's still too bare-bones on class features to be worth taking for more than a few levels.
Remove the paladin's alignment restriction. Make them available to any deity, the "military arm" of the church. Battle Blessing is automatic at 4th level, instead of requiring one of the paladin's precious feat slots. Lay on Hands is a swift action. Give Smite instead of Smite Evil. Look at the variant paladins in Unearthed Arcana for options for replacing detect evil and altering spell lists for non-LG paladins (combine all variant spell lists, but restrict [alignment] spells to paladins of that alignment).
Ranger gets full animal companion progression, eats scout, gets d10 hit die, gets teamwork options with his animal companion. Changes to feats will demand more feats added to combat style lists.
Monk has full BAB and d10 Hit Die, and adds 1/4 monk level to attack when flurrying. Make them less mystical and more martial (swordsage has the mystical angle covered) by replacing largely useless Sp and Su abilities like Tongue of the Sun and Moon with stuff like competence bonuses to attack with unarmed strikes.
Wizards must specialize in a school of magic. All other schools cost two spell slots to prepare, and increase DC to learn. This may or may not be in addition to the normal selection of banned schools. Consider giving wizard some class features (nothing much, consider giving variant school powers or combining the master specialist PrC) in return. Alterations to arcane spells will reduce the power of all arcane spellcasters.
Sorcerer gets bonus bloodline feats whenever wizard gets bonus metamagic or item creation feats.
Clerics may prepare any spell off of any domain list they have access to (not just the two they choose) for the cost of one spell slot each. They gain one "free" use of each spell on both their selected domain lists per day. All other cleric spells require two spell slots each to prepare. Alter domain spell lists and granted powers appropriately. Turn/Rebuke Undead becomes a swift action. Turn Undead heals 1d6 per cleric level to all living creatures in the area of effect and is a positive energy effect. Rebuke Undead deals 1d6 negative energy damage to all creatures in the area of effect, and heals undead. Cleric has poor BAB and poor Fort save. Clerics without deities get their two selected domains and any alignment domains they qualify for.
Archivist uses the cleric list only, and prepares spells the same way as cleric (without choosing domains). Archivists may choose to gain access to the Knowledge and/or Magic domains by giving up access to a domain their deity normally grants. Archivists without deities treat Knowledge, Magic, and any alignment domains they qualify for as their "deity's" domains.
Favored Souls cast entirely off Charisma. They gain one of their deity's domains as additional spells known and gain that domain's power.
Druids have ranger animal companion progression, use the shapeshifting variant, gain free wild feats as they level up (use druid level to determine number of uses), and have spell progression as bard. They still prepare spells and treat the full druid list up to 6th level as both their spell list and their known spells.
Healers are full-list spontaneous casters and add all divine Conjuration (healing) spells to their spell list. Add appropriate defensive and buff spells to their spell list. Consider giving some free uses of Sudden Quicken on healing spells.
Combine duskblade and warmage. Reduce BAB to medium. Duskblade casts off of Int, adds Wis or Cha to spell damage with Duskblade's Edge, and is full-list spontaneous caster with access to both duskblade and warmage lists. Reduce access to Quick Cast/Sudden Quicken. Advanced Learning includes all touch-range or ranged attack spells from the sorc/wiz list. Duskblade becomes a decent mid-lines fighter/battlefield controller.
Look up the designer's hexblade fix. It's a good start, but more may need to be done to salvage the class.
Feats with numerical bonuses to character abilities should scale by level. If a feat has an Improved and/or Greater version and the "superior" versions simply directly increase the potency of the original, roll them into one and make the benefits scale at reasonable levels. Examples: Weapon Focus adds +1 at BAB 1 and +1 every 6 BAB. Two-Weapon Fighting allows you to make as many off-hand attacks as you have main-hand attacks due to BAB. Skill Focus grants a +3 bonus at 1 rank in a skill, and increases by +1 every 5 ranks. Each feat that grants a numerical bonus to something a character does should be evaluated and folded into a similar feat if possible. This reduces "feat tax" on the type of characters who need it the least; the completely mundane who need to depend on them.
Spells and spell lists need to be heavily altered, if not re-written from the ground up. Broken combinations need to be nerfed or banned, and every book and splatbook needs to be carefully combed and evaluated to salvage the actual good spells from the garbage nobody would ever use and the super overpowered god-tier spells. Contingency, polymorph spells, time stop, mind blank, celerity, true seeing, genesis, and most of the "scry or die" divinations need to be nerfed or discarded, among other things.
That's all I really have time for now (I should probably be getting to bed soon), and I wrote most of it on the spot so there are probably a few issues, but I hope this gives you an idea of how comprehensive you need to be to actually balance all the classes in 3.5. If you want a system where all classes are playing on a relatively even playing field and none are god-tier or complete trash, well, that's what 4e is for. 3.5 and Pathfinder are for people who love their broken system, warts and all.

[Cosi]

This is a long reply, and likely off topic, unless we consider the topic of this thread to be "class based 3e fixes in general" rather than "bobbybobby's proposed class fixes".


If all you want is campaign party balance, it's a lot easier than an exhaustive list of houserules with sweeping changes for almost every class in the game.

If all you want is campaign balance, and don't care at all about "fluffier" concerns (i.e. what classes feel like), you should just make everyone be a Whatever // Sorcerer Gestalt. That solves most class imbalances by virtue of putting everyone on a pretty tight baseline.


The only full casters allowed are beguiler, warmage, dread necromancer, spirit shaman, and favored soul.

So it's okay to have dominate person and planar binding, but not polymorph and simulacrum? If you are relying on the hope that people will not abuse abilities to keep things balanced, there's no need to ban things, even implicitly.


Better yet, replace Vancian casting with refluffed psionics.

Why would you do that? Psionics has worse mechanics, a pretty similar power level when not abused, and if not as much abusive stuff at least enough.


If you're actually going to balance the classes, however, you're going to need to re-write practically every 3.5 class.

I largely agree with this, though you can achieve balance with sweeping bans.


The only ones that don't need major fixing are ToB (mostly fine, just need some re-writing on their progression tables), factotum (throw a 1/round limit on Cunning Surge, or make it a swift action and you're good), barbarian (needs some more out-of-combat utility, but is otherwise fine), bard (the best class in the 3.5 PHB), and beguiler.

Why? Even if we agree that those classes are on a broadly similar power scale (which I don't, but whatever), why is it a priori true that we should balance to that scale? The Cleric, the Wizard, and the Druid are all on a broadly similar power level, couldn't we balance to them? Or the Warlock, the Healer, the Ninja, and the Fighter? Or any other group of classes?


No class without spellcasting ability should have less than 4 + Int skill points per level. This includes fighters. Expand class skill lists with suitable skills as necessary.

I think the role of skills needs to be reevaluated. Currently, most skills are essentially minor aspects of character power that are quickly overshadowed. Once people get all-day flight, your Jump bonus becomes rather less impressive. If skills aren't redesigned, then "more skill points" is snake oil. It helps mundanes at low levels, but thats precisely when they don't need help. Redesigning skills is an option, but kind of a lot of work.

I actually think everyone should have 4 + INT, but that's because of PrC requirements.


Full casters should not have any better than a poor BAB. Exceptions should be rare and have limited spell lists or small numbers of spells known.

Thematically helpful, but not a meaningful power shift (particularly not if you ignore divine power). Gishes already get decent BAB, and the gap between good and bad BAB is small until high levels. A +3 relative bonus at 6th level does not define a meaningful archetype.


Fighter needs actual class features. Doing things simply, eating the marshal class from the Miniatures Handbook (or knight from PHB2, or samurai or swashbuckler from Complete Warrior, or maybe giving players their choice of "meal") for their power and giving them 1/2 their total fighter level as a competence bonus to combat maneuvers (grapple, trip, disarm, etc) is a pretty good start. And they still get all the bonus feats, obviously (and see below for suggestions on feats). Suggestions for class skills include Spot, Listen, Knowledge (local), and Knowledge (nobility and royalty).

That doesn't really solve the problem. I mean, it helps, but far more than not having enough class features, the Fighter's problem is not having anything to do at high levels. What is he supposed to bring to the table when the party besieges Hell? A minor bonus on combat maneuvers? No, really, what?


Rogue has plenty of out-of-combat versatility, but needs in-combat oomph. Consider allowing rogues to add 1/2 their level to the attack bonus granted by flanking or denying Dex. Giving Dex to damage with light or finessable weapons helps, too.

This is exactly backwards. A Halfing Hurler or Pounce Rogue is a solid DPS build. Not Mailman Tier, but solid. What it lacks is out of combat utility.


Swashbuckler needs more class features. Even if combined with fighter, it's still too bare-bones on class features to be worth taking for more than a few levels.

Is there anything wrong with just deleting the class and pointing people at the Rogue? Is there something we want Swashbucklers to do that Rogues cannot achieve?


Remove the paladin's alignment restriction. Make them available to any deity, the "military arm" of the church. Battle Blessing is automatic at 4th level, instead of requiring one of the paladin's precious feat slots. Lay on Hands is a swift action. Give Smite instead of Smite Evil. Look at the variant paladins in Unearthed Arcana for options for replacing detect evil and altering spell lists for non-LG paladins (combine all variant spell lists, but restrict [alignment] spells to paladins of that alignment).
Ranger gets full animal companion progression, eats scout, gets d10 hit die, gets teamwork options with his animal companion. Changes to feats will demand more feats added to combat style lists.
Monk has full BAB and d10 Hit Die, and adds 1/4 monk level to attack when flurrying. Make them less mystical and more martial (swordsage has the mystical angle covered) by replacing largely useless Sp and Su abilities like Tongue of the Sun and Moon with stuff like competence bonuses to attack with unarmed strikes.

This doesn't solve anything. High level people can reasonably expect to fight dragons the size of buildings that are also archmages, lay siege to outer planes, or any number of other crazy things. Abilities like "more feats" or "bonus to hit" don't do that.


Wizards must specialize in a school of magic. All other schools cost two spell slots to prepare, and increase DC to learn. This may or may not be in addition to the normal selection of banned schools. Consider giving wizard some class features (nothing much, consider giving variant school powers or combining the master specialist PrC) in return. Alterations to arcane spells will reduce the power of all arcane spellcasters.

This is a minor nerf at best. You can make a totally defensible Illusionist or Conjurer who never touches another school while adventuring (except at 1st level for the Conjurer). And in downtime, who cares how many slots stuff costs?


Sorcerer gets bonus bloodline feats whenever wizard gets bonus metamagic or item creation feats.

Not enough to keep me in Sorcerer, just like the metamagic feats weren't enough to keep me in Wizard. You need to go all the way or nothing at all. The middle just wastes space.


Spells and spell lists need to be heavily altered, if not re-written from the ground up. Broken combinations need to be nerfed or banned, and every book and splatbook needs to be carefully combed and evaluated to salvage the actual good spells from the garbage nobody would ever use and the super overpowered god-tier spells. Contingency, polymorph spells, time stop, mind blank, celerity, true seeing, genesis, and most of the "scry or die" divinations need to be nerfed or discarded, among other things.[/list]

Some of that list is reasonable, but WTF are mind blank and true seeing doing there? Those are pretty bog standard counters for high level play. Also, scry and die is a matter of taste (and hard to get rid of as a result of some fairly fundamental design choices).

[Beheld]

Also, scry and die is a matter of taste (and hard to get rid of as a result of some fairly fundamental design choices).

Weird thing to hear from someone whom I know knows the Tomes.

[FearlessGnome]

Sorcerer gets bonus bloodline feats whenever wizard gets bonus metamagic or item creation feats.

I love playing a Sorcerer, and the main problems are lack of spells known and being a level late for everything. I'm not sure locking them in so they can't take prestige classes without losing spells known is the solution. Better than leaving them as is though. Still, I'd at least give them all the equivalent of the Kobold's Greater Draconic Rite of Passage (or whatever it's called) at level 1. There's no reason a wizard should ever have spell levels a sorcerer doesn't.

[Cosi]

Weird thing to hear from someone whom I know knows the Tomes.

My bad. For some reason, I truncated my thoughts there. It's not that Scry and Die is hard to get rid of per se (a solution like the Tome's works, so does liberal use of anticipate teleport). It's that the power of short term buffs makes surprise a potentially unbalancing advantage, even if it's arranged by some mechanism other than teleport. If you couldn't stack your buffs before jumping in, Scry and Die wouldn't be nearly as good. And other things that give you consistent access to short-term buffs (i.e. Persist) are also valuable.

[Beheld]

I love playing a Sorcerer, and the main problems are lack of spells known and being a level late for everything. I'm not sure locking them in so they can't take prestige classes without losing spells known is the solution. Better than leaving them as is though. Still, I'd at least give them all the equivalent of the Kobold's Greater Draconic Rite of Passage (or whatever it's called) at level 1. There's no reason a wizard should ever have spell levels a sorcerer doesn't.

Why not just play this, if you are talking about homebrew solutions anyway: Sorcerer that gets spells on odd levels, and has more spells known (http://tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=56529)