Banning/Altering Spells that Make Classes Obsolete (3.5)

[SirNibbles]

What are some spells that you would either ban or alter in order to not make an entire class/build/feature redundant?

Here are a few that immediately spring to mind for me:
Knock (Sorc/Wiz 2) | Rogue
Glibness (Bard 3) | Party Face
Comprehend Languages/Tongues (Sorc/Wiz 1/3) | Party Face, Local
Create Food and Water (Cleric 3) | Mule, Forager
Detect Secret Doors (Sorc/Wiz/Bard 1) | Rogue
Spider Climb (Sorc/Wiz 2) | Any class/race that grants a climb speed

___

There's a very interesting prestige class adapted for 3.5 from the Al-Qadim setting called the Corsair (Dragon Magazine #321, page 86).

"Those new to Al-Qadim often mistake corsairs for common pirates, but nothing could be farther from the truth. The corsairs of Al-Qadim are adventurers, traders, thieves, messengers, and explorers - and more than a few are pirates as well. Corsairs are freebooters who uphold honesty, honor, and bravery while plying their trades at sea.

The peoples of Al-Qadim and the surrounding lands hail the corsairs for their daring and ruthless efficiency, as well as their gallantry and hospitality. Their trademark, however, is their swordplay. Many master swordsmen come from the ranks of the corsairs of the Great Gulf and the Corsair Domains, where the use of twin scimitars is common.

Most corsairs were previously fighters or rangers, although the occasional bard finds the swashbuckling life to his liking."

Here is one of its abilities:

World Traveler: Corsairs travel the world's seas and visit countless ports of call. As at result, they pick up bits of useful lingo from everyone they meet. At 3rd level, a corsair learns Aquan and one other language he doesn't already know as if he had put ranks into the Speak Language skill. If the corsair already knows how to speak Aquan, he still gains the other language.

At 7th level, the corsair learns two new languages as if he had put ranks in the Speak Language skill.

This would be a very interesting class feature if not for the fact that it's completely outclassed by a level 3 Wizard spell. It was this class feature that inspired me to make this post.

[nyjastul69]

Find Traps (Clr 2) is another one.

[SimonMoon6]

Feather Fall | monk's slow fall ability

[sleepyphoenixx]

Those spells don't really replace any classes or builds though. Unless your spellcasters have unlimited spell slots for some reason? And even then they fall behind an actual skillmonkey.
Sure, people like to talk about how the wizard can do the jobs of the rogue and the fighter better than those classes in addition to his own, but have you actually tried doing that in a game? Because it doesn't work that way.
Those spells are stop-gaps at best when you're missing a dedicated skillmonkey. Otherwise it's things your skillmonkey picks up to enhance what he can already do in a crunch.

Seriously, if your party wizard wants to replace the rogue he's going to be investing so many spell slots into it that he'll contribute to nothing else. He's essentially your bargain-bin skillmonkey now, so it's not exactly a balance issue.
Not to mention that i pity your rogue players if all they are to you is a trap/lock opening device. Those aren't a class role. They're part of one, but it's generally something you try to have someone in the party pick up (ideally more than one, at least for search/spot/listen), not something you define your build by.

Tongues and Comprehend Languages don't turn you into a party face either. You actually need charisma for that, which wizards tend to dump, not to mention skill points in actual social skills. Understanding someones language doesn't turn you into a face.
There's also the fact that even Tongues is not quite as good as actually speaking the language in question. Not to mention that everyone can pick them up for cheap with skill points anyway.



Create Food and Water (Cleric 3) | Mule, Forager

Seriously? That's a party role now?
I'm honestly not sure if you're joking or just looking for things to ban for the sake of banning something with this one.
For most groups i've played with this is an annoying bookkeeping chore that gets handwaved unless it actually affects the story.
The same applies to languages btw. Getting a free language isn't an interesting class ability, it's just a bit of flavor. It's worth 1 measly skill point ffs.

If you want to do something for caster-mundane balance i'd start by banning Persistent Spell. Forcing your casters to spend the first round(s) of combat putting up short-term buffs will do a lot more to make mundane classes important than banning a few utility spells.
It'll also blunt the power of most gish and CoDzilla builds (though druids less so) if they have to make do without persisted Wraithstrike, Divine Power etc.

[SirNibbles]

Feather Fall | monk's slow fall ability

To be fair I think that was obsolete without Feather Fall.



Seriously? That's a party role now?
I'm honestly not sure if you're joking or just looking for things to ban for the sake of banning something with this one.
For most groups i've played with this is an annoying bookkeeping chore that gets handwaved unless it actually affects the story.


It takes away the danger of being deep in a dungeon or out in a vast waste and having to worry about making it out before you starve. I think having to carry food or be able to find it in the middle of nowhere helps make the game feel more real and more interesting. If you've read Jules Verne's Journey to the Centre of the Earth you'll remember the tension caused by the party's lack of water and the intra-party dynamic it created.

All of that disappears when you can feed at least 15 people for a day with a single spell.

[Particle_Man]

Cleric: Divine Favour/Divine Power/Righteous Might - leave the beat stick stuff to the beat sticks!

[sleepyphoenixx]

It takes away the danger of being deep in a dungeon or out in a vast waste and having to worry about making it out before you starve. I think having to carry food or be able to find it in the middle of nowhere helps make the game feel more real and more interesting. If you've read Jules Verne's Journey to the Centre of the Earth you'll remember the tension caused by the party's lack of water and the intra-party dynamic it created.

All of that disappears when you can feed at least 15 people for a day with a single spell.
You'll have to ban teleports too then. And Plane Shift. And the multitude of cheap magical items that have a similar effect. And Rings of Sustenance. And races that don't need to eat. And the survival skill.

More seriously, this is a problem for low-level adventurers. If you want to incorporate that kind of thing into a campaign you can do it at low level easily enough, before these effects become available.
The same applies to the "long and dangerous overland journey" trope and a lot of others. Genre classics like Lord of the Rings are low level adventures by D&D standards.
It's just not a thing that happens to high-level parties. They're concerned with bigger issues like interplanar invasions, evil gods trying to manifest in the material plane, scry & die tactics, various apocalypses and the like. Not basic wilderness survival.

Another thing to keep in mind is that something that's fun and interesting to read in a book isn't necessarily fun and interesting in a pen and paper RPG. Or do you think you'd like having Frodo as a player character in a party with Aragorn and Gandalf as DMPC?

[SirNibbles]

You'll have to ban teleports too then. And Plane Shift. And the multitude of cheap magical items that have a similar effect. And Rings of Sustenance. And races that don't need to eat. And the survival skill.
__
More seriously, this is a problem for low-level adventurers. If you want to incorporate that kind of thing into a campaign you can do it at low level easily enough, before these effects become available.
__
The same applies to the "long and dangerous overland journey" trope and a lot of others. Genre classics like Lord of the Rings are low level adventures by D&D standards.
It's just not a thing that happens to high-level parties. They're concerned with bigger issues like interplanar invasions, evil gods trying to manifest in the material plane, scry & die tactics, various apocalypses and the like. Not basic wilderness survival.
__

Another thing to keep in mind is that something that's fun and interesting to read in a book isn't necessarily fun and interesting in a pen and paper RPG. Or do you think you'd like having Frodo as a player character in a party with Aragorn and Gandalf as DMPC?

Races that don't need to eat and the survival skill are the kinds of things I want to be relevant.
__

Higher level shouldn't mean less danger- it should mean more. Keeping things that are dangerous to low levels (like drowning, starvation, weather) while adding in increasingly dangerous things (like those that you mentioned) makes the game more, rather than less interesting.
__

E L M I N S T E R
L
M
I
N
S
T
E
R

__

You do make good points. I suppose it'd come down to what kind of setting the DM is trying to portray and what kind of game the players want to play.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Races that don't need to eat and the survival skill are the kinds of things I want to be relevant.
__

Higher level shouldn't mean less danger- it should mean more. Keeping things that are dangerous to low levels (like drowning, starvation, weather) while adding in increasingly dangerous things (like those that you mentioned) makes the game more, rather than less interesting.
In my experience it just becomes a bookkeeping hassle.
Players generally have enough to keep track of at high levels, and most simply aren't interested in tracking rations and rolling survival checks. They want epic battles and intrigue.
YMMV, but if you want to incorporate things like that as a regular thing into your games i'd at least talk it over with your group first.


E L M I N S T E R
L
M
I
N
S
T
E
R
Most people hate Elminster with a fiery passion, at least in the context of him showing up in actual games instead of staying in the books.
Quite a few people dislike the Forgotten Realms setting alltogether because of the density of high-level NPCs.


You do make good points. I suppose it'd come down to what kind of setting the DM is trying to portray and what kind of game the players want to play.
Of course. If you and your players are interested in a "gritty" campaign like that there's no reason you can't play one.
It's just that D&D is not very good at that. In my experience it becomes less "interesting survival story" and more "Dungeons & Bookkeeping".
If your group is interested i'd suggest trying it out in an oneshot first. That's generally what i do with every new thing i want to introduce and it's served me pretty well so far.

[Felyndiira]

Higher level shouldn't mean less danger- it should mean more. Keeping things that are dangerous to low levels (like drowning, starvation, weather) while adding in increasingly dangerous things (like those that you mentioned) makes the game more, rather than less interesting.

If you do this, you'll have to ban practically the entire sorcerer/wizard list, reducing casters down to just simple blasters (if that - even a lot of the blasting spells will need to be banned). Possibly a bunch of supernatural abilities off of other classes, as well, which means gutting about 4/5 of the classes (and practically all of the useful prestige classes) in the entire game.

This way lies madness. D&D is simply not designed for low-level threats and challenges remaining a danger at high levels alongside planet-gobbling creatures. It might be better to find a more suitable system if this is what you're after.

[Particle_Man]

What if you banned all 9th and 6th level casters? That should make the game fairly gritty (if you are kind you might allow some method of quick low-level healing, at least).

[Quertus]

Ok, apparently this thread is misnamed. Should it instead be, "banning spells which make my adventure ideas obsolete"?

If so, I say your choices are either a) don't play those adventure ideas when the party has communicated that they're not interested by taking spells which obsolete them; b) communicate with your players, and enter into a gentleman's agreement with them not to take such abilities; or c) hack the system into unrecognizable pieces with crazy levels of house rules.

If, however, what we really care about is role protection, may I suggest banning knowledge skills and spellcraft to everyone but wizard, HP to everyone but barbarian, armor to everyone but knight, social skills to everyone but expert, carrying things to everyone but hulking hurler, and weapons (including damaging spells) to everyone but fighter?

Personally (in case it wasn't obvious) I think both of these are incredibly dumb ideas. I enjoy seeing how this particular party will handle any given challenge. Mandating that there's only one right way to get food etc just seems... boring, making the game too predictable.

Oh, but if you really do want to limit the wizard to just spells which hold a unique role, make sure to make them all at-will abilities, to fairly balance them with mundane at-will abilities.

Of course, some would say that the wizard's role is to know all the spells, which makes this whole thread about cutting into the wizard's role. :smallconfused:

[Deophaun]

Detect secret doors and find traps? Really? Really? They last 1 min/level, and detect secret doors even requires concentration. They're not useful unless you already know there's a door or trap there, which means I can abbreviate that to they're not useful.

Create food and water is silly. If your cleric wants to waste a 3rd level spell slot on what the Ranger's been doing for free since level 1, let 'em.

I'll give you spider climb, if only because I like how balancing lorecall does it by helping those who've invested the skill points. But flight is available at the same level, so why bother?

You want to hit something, go for something like mage armor. "Wizards can't wear armor with ACF, but FOOLED YOU! they don't actually have to wear any."

[Ellrin]

To be fair I think that was obsolete without Feather Fall.



It takes away the danger of being deep in a dungeon or out in a vast waste and having to worry about making it out before you starve. I think having to carry food or be able to find it in the middle of nowhere helps make the game feel more real and more interesting. If you've read Jules Verne's Journey to the Centre of the Earth you'll remember the tension caused by the party's lack of water and the intra-party dynamic it created.

All of that disappears when you can feed at least 15 people for a day with a single spell.

All of that stuff disappears by the time you can get a handy haversack, too, and everyone in the party should have one of those by the time you can casually throw around third level spells.

There's something to be said for not letting the convenience of magic get in the way of a good atmosphere or reduce non-magical expertise to minor roles, but you seem to essentially want to restrict magic to the battlefield.

[Blu]

Glibness (Bard 3) | Party Face

Usually bards are party faces... sooo it's kind of redundant.

Also, the idea of removing spells because they negate party roles seems strange. The casters will either find another spell to do the task or you will end up removing almost all spell of the game. Summon monster something can create corpses for trap activation, teleport can instantly cover a lot of distance, and that ignoring more powefull shenanigans. I mean, spells are really strong, and is not a handful of bans on low level spells that will help balance that

[Fizban]

In general, kicking the offending spell up two levels will make it much more palatable. That's a 4 level shift, essentially a whole strata of gameplay up from the initial position, such that in a game where you start off spamming those you instead can't spam them until you're fairly deep into the campaign, and a game where you'd normally start with the spell doesn't get to start with it at all.

This can be applied to basically any spell, not just ultilties: Stinking Cloud is bonkers at 3rd, but at 5th it's not so crazy compared to Cloudkill or Wall of Force. Web pretty much stops all movement for peanuts, but at 4th it's comparable to Solid Fog. Same with Glitterdust and say, Fear. Wings of Cover is basically a license to buy wands of invincibility, but at 4th level you just can't spam it for cheap until waay later. And so on.

[Dagroth]

Have to ban all the Orb spells and anything else that shoots at targets at a range, since those make Archers obsolete.

[Particle_Man]

If, however, what we really care about is role protection, may I suggest banning knowledge skills and spellcraft to everyone but wizard, HP to everyone but barbarian, armor to everyone but knight, social skills to everyone but expert, carrying things to everyone but hulking hurler, and weapons (including damaging spells) to everyone but fighter?

I think you have found a way to make the barbarian superior to every other class choice. It is hard to be effective when you are permanently unconscious. ;)

Edit: More seriously, one other fix I heard of is only allowing a spellcaster to take spellcaster advancing levels every other character level at most.

[ryu]

I think you have found a way to make the barbarian superior to every other class choice. It is hard to be effective when you are permanently unconscious. ;)

Edit: More seriously, one other fix I heard of is only allowing a spellcaster to take spellcaster advancing levels every other character level at most.

Not really. A level ten wizard is orders of magnitude more threatening than any five level 20 fighters without even having ten levels in some other class.

[Zanos]

Elminster is epic level, a chosen of the god of magic, and like a million other snowflake things. Stop using him as an example of anything.


This can be applied to basically any spell, not just ultilties: Stinking Cloud is bonkers at 3rd, but at 5th it's not so crazy compared to Cloudkill or Wall of Force. Web pretty much stops all movement for peanuts, but at 4th it's comparable to Solid Fog. Same with Glitterdust and say, Fear. Wings of Cover is basically a license to buy wands of invincibility, but at 4th level you just can't spam it for cheap until waay later. And so on.
Fear completely removes enemies from combat on a failed will save. Glitterdust halves their damage output and makes them kind of crappy on a failed will save. Web has a save and checks to move though and requires a very specific environmental factor limiting it's tactical usage that solid fog doesn't care about, not to mention that there's no checks at all to overcome solid fogs movement restrictions.

[rel]

If I can suggest an alternative method:

Decide what you want your game will be about, where the challange will lie and how the spellcasters (and other classes) go about solving these challanges.

Then only use a subset of the published material that produces the desired results.

[Quertus]

I think you have found a way to make the barbarian superior to every other class choice. It is hard to be effective when you are permanently unconscious. ;)

The role being protected is "tank". Only the barbarian is allowed to tank through HP; everyone else gets their starting racial HP, and no additional HP added as they level. Only the knight is allowed to tank through armor; everyone else is stuck with just dex. As crazy as it sounds, I've played homebrew games that were this niche specialized. I personally highly recommend communication, and working together to make sure everybody has a role to play over hard-coding roles this way, but, since the thread title is about protecting roles, I thought I'd volunteer this alternative.


If I can suggest an alternative method:

Decide what you want your game will be about, where the challange will lie and how the spellcasters (and other classes) go about solving these challanges.

Then only use a subset of the published material that produces the desired results.

Yes, if you remove the players' ability to do anything other than exactly what you want, the way you want it done, it's much easier to keep them on the rails.

[SirNibbles]

The role being protected is "tank". Only the barbarian is allowed to tank through HP; everyone else gets their starting racial HP, and no additional HP added as they level. Only the knight is allowed to tank through armor; everyone else is stuck with just dex. As crazy as it sounds, I've played homebrew games that were this niche specialized. I personally highly recommend communication, and working together to make sure everybody has a role to play over hard-coding roles this way, but, since the thread title is about protecting roles, I thought I'd volunteer this alternative.



Yes, if you remove the players' ability to do anything other than exactly what you want, the way you want it done, it's much easier to keep them on the rails.

All I'm saying is that the solution to everything shouldn't be 'the spellcaster casts a spell and all is well.'

[ryu]

All I'm saying is that the solution to everything shouldn't be 'the spellcaster casts a spell and all is well.'

The problem isn't that the spellcasters are good. The problem is that pretty much everything that isn't a spellcaster is quantifiably bad. Seriously. Who wants to play an archetype whose defining feature is having less relevant options than everyone else?

[Ashtagon]

I'd favoucher rewriting for most problem spells, and only ban in extremis. Eg. ..

Knock: allows the wizaRd to attempt disable device on a given lock repeatdly till it opens. Doesn't grant any skill ranks.

Rope trick: duration is tens of minutes per caster level instead of hours.

[Larrx]

People always bring up knock in these sorts of discussions, but knock actually has built in niche protection. It has a verbal component, and you can't just whisper those. It's loud. And it costs a slot. It's nice to have, but the rogue is still better.

[Uncle Pine]

You should also ban elves, because they get free detection to secret doors. That also makes Rogues obsolete, doesn't it?

[ryu]

People always bring up knock in these sorts of discussions, but knock actually has built in niche protection. It has a verbal component, and you can't just whisper those. It's loud. And it costs a slot. It's nice to have, but the rogue is still better.

I mean what the hell lame guard within distance to hear you casting it is also not going to notice the door opening? What?! Are you attacking something that isn't a dungeon with the full expectation that they'd have to have defenses? If so the initiative is yours and you have much better things to do in most cases than manually traverse the halls of your enemy. A simple scry and teleport strike directly at your objective is much more efficient.

[Troacctid]

People always say Knock invalidates the Open Lock skill, and I'm always like, really? Like, first off, Open Lock isn't even a particularly good skill to begin with, so I don't see the big deal. It's kind of like complaining that Comprehend Languages invalidates Decipher Script. You could strike the spell from existence and my characters still wouldn't put ranks in it. Second, you're spending a 2nd level spell slot to open a door? Bro, you're an adventurer, it's a dungeon, just kick it in. C'mon. Third, if you're on the Knock plan, what exactly are you going to do when the dungeon turns out to have (gasp) TWO locked doors?!

[ShurikVch]

Here are a few that immediately spring to mind for me:
Knock (Sorc/Wiz 2) | RogueKnock (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/knock.htm):
The effect is limited by the area.
: One door, box, or chest with an area of up to 10 sq. ft./level"10 sq. ft./level" is 200 sq. ft. at 20th level, which means about 20'x10'
So, for example, in a "sneak into the Giant's stronghold" adventure - if Storm Giant is 21', 20' doors just wouldn't cut it, thus Knock just wouldn't work (and it's at the 20th level! :smalleek:)
Also:
Each spell can undo as many as two means of preventing egress.OK, but what if the door have 4 locks?
Just how many of 2nd-level slots occupied with the Knock spell?

By the all, I would call Knock straight inferior to Rogue's skills, if not for it's ability to overcome the Arcane Lock (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/arcaneLock.htm) (which, BTW, is real insult for Rogue class - best Rogue in the world can't overcome a 2nd-level spell without the scroll or wand)

[lord_khaine]

Thats actually a really good point. Just put 3 locks on everything you want securely locked. Or 5 if you really want to spite them..
That already forces them to waste 3 level 2 spells on a single door.

And can follow the argument on the Arcane lock, if not because i had newer seen it in use.

[Ashtagon]

By RAW, doesn't knock work on multiple locks, provided they are all on the same door/chest/whatever?

[sleepyphoenixx]

All I'm saying is that the solution to everything shouldn't be 'the spellcaster casts a spell and all is well.'
It isn't, because spellcasters are still limited by daily resources. The solution to (almost) anything can be "the spellcaster casts a spell", but that also means he doesn't have that spell slot later.
And you can't just rest whenever to regain spells. See Recent Casting Limit (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/arcaneSpells.htm#recentCastingLimitRestInterruptio ns).

You can't regain spells more than once every 8 hours as an arcane caster. Divine casters have it even worse - they can only regain spells once a day at a set time.
This is an intended part of the game. It forces resource management on your spellcasters, which is a major check on their power in actual gameplay. You, as a DM, need to enforce this.

Make it clear that your players can't just rest every 100 meters into a dungeon. Their enemies will take advantage of that. The BBEG won't wait around until they conveniently arrive in the nick of time to stop him.
If your players still try to use the "15 minute workday" have them reap the appropriate consequences, but ideally you want to come to an OOC agreement to keep resting reasonable before it gets that far.


By the all, I would call Knock straight inferior to Rogue's skills, if not for it's ability to overcome the Arcane Lock (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/arcaneLock.htm) (which, BTW, is real insult for Rogue class - best Rogue in the world can't overcome a 2nd-level spell without the scroll or wand)
I'm not seeing a problem. D&D is pretty high magic, and rogues have UMD for a reason. WBL is part of character abilities too.
If someone takes exceptional measures to prevent people breaking in it should take equally exceptional measures to circumvent them, not just a skill check.

[Darth Ultron]

They really don't balance magic vs mundane at all. The coasar has a nice ability that makes sense...but is sadly out classed by a spellcaster with one spell.

Well, part of the answer is to boost the mundane. The ''wow a language or two'' is an amazing ability in a mundane game where you have thing like ''wow, fire does 1d6 extra damage'', but it falls behind when you get characters that ''can bend time and space and reality like Play-Dough''.

But making the ability more ''picks up language and so gets the spell like ability of ''comprehend languages'' once a day per charisma bonus...is much, much better.

[Beheld]

By the all, I would call Knock straight inferior to Rogue's skills, if not for it's ability to overcome the Arcane Lock (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/arcaneLock.htm) (which, BTW, is real insult for Rogue class - best Rogue in the world can't overcome a 2nd-level spell without the scroll or wand)

Which is part of the reason my preferred reading of the Rogue class/preferred Homebrew Rogue can treat the Arcane Lock spell as a magical trap, and disable it. :smallcool:

[sleepyphoenixx]

Well, part of the answer is to boost the mundane. The ''wow a language or two'' is an amazing ability in a mundane game where you have thing like ''wow, fire does 1d6 extra damage'', but it falls behind when you get characters that ''can bend time and space and reality like Play-Dough''.


A language is still only worth one skill point for someone who has Speak Language as a class skill. That's not an amazing class ability in any game.

Not to mention that D&D really doesn't do low magic or low treasure "mundane" games well.
The entire game is build with the assumption in mind that player characters will have a certain level and variety of abilities as they level, and magic items are a big chunk of that.

[Quertus]

All I'm saying is that the solution to everything shouldn't be 'the spellcaster casts a spell and all is well.'

I agree, in a team game with multiple paths to power, magic shouldn't be the solution to everything. And, as others have noted, it isn't. Even a wizard who knows every single spell (or a cleric) only can have so many spells prepared. A smart wizard lets the mundanes handle everything they can, mundanely, saving his spells for the things they can't do. A courteous player is similarly incentivized to not step on other players toes. So, as long as you're playing with smart, courteous players, there's not a problem. And if you're not playing with smart, courteous players, well, you've got bigger problems than just the extent of solutions available with magic.

Magic offering all these possible solutions is a good thing. It means you can fill in the gaps in your lineup by wasting spell resources covering for your deficiencies.

[Particle_Man]

Not really. A level ten wizard is orders of magnitude more threatening than any five level 20 fighters without even having ten levels in some other class.

Ok, assuming that you don't think that a level one wizard is orders of magnitude more powerful than a level 20 non-wizard, what level of wizard would you say is balanced against a level 20 non-wizard? Then cut *that* in half. That is how many levels of spellcaster, total, would be allowed in a level 20 game. Space the levels of spellcaster apart to be about evenly spread through 20 levels.

So if, for example, you think that a level 6 wizard is balanced vs. a level 20 fighter, then the campaign rules would allow for only 3 levels of spellcaster (spaced about 6 levels apart).

[Darth Ultron]

So if, for example, you think that a level 6 wizard is balanced vs. a level 20 fighter, then the campaign rules would allow for only 3 levels of spellcaster (spaced about 6 levels apart).

Well, the problem is not just pure levels. A wizard can pick and choose from hundreds of spells, and items that cast them spells. A mundane character might have ''one ability or thing they can do'' a level...maybe...and they can't change them.

[Cosi]

Every time someone looks at a game where some characters get new and interesting abilities as they level and other characters don't, then blames the characters with new and interesting abilities for balance problems, I die a little on the inside. This is the path that leads to bland and terrible games like 4e. People should get abilities at high level that obsolete low level challenges. Otherwise, why bother gaining levels?

A spell like comprehend languages isn't obsoleting a skill like Speak Language. It's just another way of achieving the goal of understanding a language. Do you demand that people not bring characters who speak Dwarven to a party where someone already speaks Dwarven? If not, you aren't really concerned about spells "obsoleting" characters. After all, spells are a resource you spend to gain abilities, just like skill points. Your character's ability to speak Dwarven is no more or less obsoleted by someone showing up with comprehend languages than by someone else showing up with Speak Language (Dwarven).

This is not to say there are not spells that are problematic. Certainly, minionmacy and form changing as categories need to be retooled. Certainly, there are imbalances between magical and mundane characters. But fundamentally, the magical characters are in a better position. They get more diverse abilities, and they get abilities that allow them to operate in a fundamentally different way at high level. In a level-based system like D&D, those are good things.


Knock (Sorc/Wiz 2) | Rogue

knock is fine. knock is the best example of having magical and mundane solutions to a problem that are both well designed. knock is swifter and surer than Open Lock, but it also costs a spell slot you could have used on glitterdust or web. The problem is 0% "knock spanks the pants off Open Lock" and 100% "the Rogue never gets an ability to compete with dimension door or fabricate".


Comprehend Languages/Tongues (Sorc/Wiz 1/3) | Party Face, Local

comprehend languages isn't the problem. The problem is that learning languages doesn't work very well. You get plopped into the undiscovered tribe with the strange language in the middle of the adventure, but you learn languages between adventures. comprehend languages needs to exist until Speak Language is overhauled into something you can learn during an adventure.


Create Food and Water (Cleric 3) | Mule, Forager

That's not a class. That's barely even a role.


Spider Climb (Sorc/Wiz 2) | Any class/race that grants a climb speed

Isn't Sorcerer a class that grants a climb speed by virtue of having spider climb on its spell list?


This would be a very interesting class feature if not for the fact that it's completely outclassed by a level 3 Wizard spell. It was this class feature that inspired me to make this post.

So give it to them before the Wizard gets 3rd level spells. It's a language, why do you care?


This way lies madness. D&D is simply not designed for low-level threats and challenges remaining a danger at high levels alongside planet-gobbling creatures. It might be better to find a more suitable system if this is what you're after.

Exactly. If you want to have low level threats be relevant through the whole campaign, play a low level campaign. There are more than enough monsters at any particular CR to keep you amused for as long as your group remains functional, without ever having to level up to the point where abilities that "break the game" would come online.


All I'm saying is that the solution to everything shouldn't be 'the spellcaster casts a spell and all is well.'

Yes. Non-casters should get abilities that solve high level problems.


Ok, assuming that you don't think that a level one wizard is orders of magnitude more powerful than a level 20 non-wizard, what level of wizard would you say is balanced against a level 20 non-wizard? Then cut *that* in half. That is how many levels of spellcaster, total, would be allowed in a level 20 game. Space the levels of spellcaster apart to be about evenly spread through 20 levels.

So if, for example, you think that a level 6 wizard is balanced vs. a level 20 fighter, then the campaign rules would allow for only 3 levels of spellcaster (spaced about 6 levels apart).

Why nerf the Wizard? Why not buff the Fighter? After all, you've decided that level 20 Fighter == level 6 Wizard. Why not make the change that makes characters more interesting?

[lord_khaine]

Why nerf the Wizard? Why not buff the Fighter? After all, you've decided that level 20 Fighter == level 6 Wizard. Why not make the change that makes characters more interesting?

I personally prefer a mixture of those two things. To start by allowing the Warblade as the default melee choice that new material and homebrew is compared to.

[Particle_Man]

Why nerf the Wizard? Why not buff the Fighter? After all, you've decided that level 20 Fighter == level 6 Wizard. Why not make the change that makes characters more interesting?

It can go the other way if you like. In that case, every time a character gains a character level that can represent either 1 level of a caster class or 6 levels (for example) of a non-caster class, and assuming you allow epic levels, no nerfing is needed.

[ryu]

It can go the other way if you like. In that case, every time a character gains a character level that can represent either 1 level of a caster class or 6 levels (for example) of a non-caster class, and assuming you allow epic levels, no nerfing is needed.

Because, as we all know, 60 levels of fighter is entirely capable of granting in class teleportation right? Mundanes don't suck because of numbers. Mundanes suck for the qualitative difference of not getting options as they level. No amount of attack bonus or free melee feats will change that.

[Deophaun]

Because, as we all know, 60 levels of fighter is entirely capable of granting in class teleportation right?
Martial Study as a fighter bonus feat says "would you like that as a swift action?"

[Troacctid]

You don't even need Martial Study, because you got miracle as a spell-like ability thirty levels ago.

[ryu]

You don't even need Martial Study, because you got miracle as a spell-like ability thirty levels ago.

I said in-class. You can at least make a case for the fighter bonus feat despite that being a similar kind of leeching off a less awful class to accomplish the exercise.

[Troacctid]

I said in-class. You can at least make a case for the fighter bonus feat despite that being a similar kind of leeching off a less awful class to accomplish the exercise.
I mean, it is a feat. It's not like you are multiclassing for it.

[ryu]

I mean, it is a feat. It's not like you are multiclassing for it.

You wouldn't be multi-classing using your level 60 WBL for an epic command activated miracle item, but we both know that doesn't count.

[Troacctid]

There is an epic feat that gives you Miracle 1/day as a spell-like ability.

I don't see why it wouldn't count.

[ryu]

There is an epic feat that gives you Miracle 1/day as a spell-like ability.

I don't see why it wouldn't count.

Same reason leadership for a caster cohort that can actually do things doesn't count.

[Troacctid]

Under this houserule, getting access to epic feats 17 levels early is a feature of the class.

But if you prefer—Incarnates, with only their class features, are now getting gate at the same level that Sorcerers get glitterdust.

[ryu]

Under this houserule, getting access to epic feats 17 levels early is a feature of the class.

But if you prefer—Incarnates, with only their class features, are now getting gate at the same level that Sorcerers get glitterdust.

I don't lump Incarnates in with mundanes. They aren't great, but they at least do things natively. There's a good reason I don't respect fighters. Short of using WBL or feats that mimic other classes to pretend to have class features they get basically less than most any other PC class, and even a couple NPC classes.

[Troacctid]

How about how Monks get dimension door before Wizards even get dimension hop?

[ryu]

How about how Monks get dimension door before Wizards even get dimension hop?

Cute. Do keep in mind that only puts them above fighters, and that dimension door is one of the suckier teleportation options for ending your turn directly after use in addition to the weak range. In all honesty abrupt jaunt is better in a fight, and alter self for a flying form is much more efficient in the vast majority of travel scenarios. Dimension door isn't actually a good spell as I see it. It's not as garbage tier as they get, but it's not good either.

[Troacctid]

You can get flight with feats. You get two of them every level, after all. Or be a Raptoran or Dragonborn and you get it for free all day at level 2, about 7 levels before the Wizard gets the same thing.

[ryu]

You can get flight with feats. You get two of them every level, after all. Or be a Raptoran or Dragonborn and you get it for free all day at level 2, about 7 levels before the Wizard gets the same thing.

Except flight is far from only thing being lacked here. It's just one of the things quantifiably better than the option you listed in the majority of situations. Do you really want me to start listing off all the things casters get for free that non-casters have to pay resources to replicate, and usually poorly if they even can? We will be here literally all month if I itemize them one by one.

[Troacctid]

Paying resources to replicate it is not exactly a problem when you have exponentially more resources than the casters.

[ryu]

Paying resources to replicate it is not exactly a problem when you have exponentially more resources than the casters.

Oh yes it is. There's literally dozens of ways to spread your resources much further than anyone else as a caster. For example even disallowing infinite loops of any kind feats only cost 3000 GP, and epic feats can be accessed early by an appropriately old dragonwrought kobold. You wanna play the epic feat game you lose. Money goes further too with native access to item crafting and a lack of need for all the replication of already present abilities.

[Troacctid]

Then perhaps you'll enlighten me as to how your 5th level Sorcerer is getting more resources than a 30th level Fighter who starts with 4,291,000 additional gp and has miracle as a spell-like ability 1/day.

[ryu]

Then perhaps you'll enlighten me as to how your 5th level Sorcerer is getting more resources than a 30th level Fighter who starts with 4,291,000 additional gp and has miracle as a spell-like ability 1/day.

Sorcerer building isn't my specialty, but a elven generalist domain wizard abusing versatile spellcaster can casts ninths from first and on. It's not even actually an infinite loop either. It's a set loop, with a hard end, that grants set resources that just happen to be higher than any number of epic feats will grant you. Alternatively for a build better at mid levels dragonwrought kobold for access to epic spellcasting in the mid teens. That said I rather highly doubt that a party would actually split gold in a manner such that the least competent member gets an exponentially higher share.

[Dagroth]

Sorcerer building isn't my specialty, but a elven generalist domain wizard abusing versatile spellcaster can casts ninths from first and on. It's not even actually an infinite loop either. It's a set loop, with a hard end, that grants set resources that just happen to be higher than any number of epic feats will grant you. Alternatively for a build better at mid levels dragonwrought kobold for access to epic spellcasting in the mid teens. That said I rather highly doubt that a party would actually split gold in a manner such that the least competent member gets an exponentially higher share.

No he can't cast 9ths.

Versatile Spellcaster requires Spontaneous Spellcasting, so Wizard is right out.

Versatile Spellcaster is only useful with "know all your spell list" types like Warmage or Heighten spell tricks for early entry anyway.

Even if you went WarMage, Versatile Spellcaster only lets you cast spells 1 level higher than normal because it doesn't give you a higher level spell slot... it just lets you use 2 lower level spell slots to cast a higher level spell. The only way to cast 9th level spells using Versatile Spellcaster is to have 2 unused 8th level spell slots and be a spontaneous spellcaster.

[ryu]

No he can't cast 9ths.

Versatile Spellcaster requires Spontaneous Spellcasting, so Wizard is right out.

Versatile Spellcaster is only useful with "know all your spell list" types like Warmage or Heighten spell tricks for early entry anyway.

Even if you went WarMage, Versatile Spellcaster only lets you cast spells 1 level higher than normal because it doesn't give you a higher level spell slot... it just lets you use 2 lower level spell slots to cast a higher level spell. The only way to cast 9th level spells using Versatile Spellcaster is to have 2 unused 8th level spell slots and be a spontaneous spellcaster.

Did you know there are approximately a half dozen cheaply available methods of being able to spontaneously cast spells as a wizard at low level? No? Then have fun with that gained knowledge.

[Coretron03]

I'm pretty sure spontaneous divination is used to qualify for versitile spellcaster. I believe the tick he's using involves using veristile spellcaster to be able to cast the next level of spells which lets you use domain wizard/generalist wizard's extra spell slots to power versatile spellcaster and repeat it until you gain 9ths. Not sure if it works, just something i've seen mentioned before.

Edit: Ninja'd

[ryu]

I'm pretty sure spontaneous divination is used to qualify for versitile spellcaster. I believe the tick he's using involves using veristile spellcaster to be able to cast the next level of spells which lets you use domain wizard/generalist wizard's extra spell slots to power versatile spellcaster and repeat it until you gain 9ths. Not sure if it works, just something i've seen mentioned before.

Edit: Ninja'd

There's actually even lower level versions of spontaneous wizard granting. It's just that I generally prefer spontaneous divination for having the most useful feature set of any one qualifying feat. In this situation though? Where the lowest amount of levels with the highest power is the only goal? There's more efficient ways.

[Dagroth]

There's actually even lower level versions of spontaneous wizard granting. It's just that I generally prefer spontaneous divination for having the most useful feature set of any one qualifying feat. In this situation though? Where the lowest amount of levels with the highest power is the only goal? There's more efficient ways.

It doesn't matter!

Versatile Spellcaster does not give you higher level spell slots. If you only have 0-level & 1st level spell slots, the highest level spell you can cast with Versatile Spellcaster is 2nd! Even if you have 1 million 1st level spell slots, Versatile Spellcaster only lets you cast a spell one higher level... not "turn two spell slots into a spell slot of one higher level".

[ryu]

It doesn't matter!

Versatile Spellcaster does not give you higher level spell slots. If you only have 0-level & 1st level spell slots, the highest level spell you can cast with Versatile Spellcaster is 2nd! Even if you have 1 million 1st level spell slots, Versatile Spellcaster only lets you cast a spell one higher level... not "turn two spell slots into a spell slot of one higher level".

False. Once you've gained the ability to cast second level spells your bonus slots kick in, which you then use to fuel the trick and unlock the next level, whereupon your bonus slots kick in and are you seeing a pattern yet?

[Elysiume]

False. Once you've gained the ability to cast second level spells your bonus slots kick in, which you then use to fuel the trick and unlock the next level, whereupon your bonus slots kick in and are you seeing a pattern yet?Can you elaborate on the specific build that allows this? The two restrictions of Versatile Spellcaster (you must know the higher level spell, the feat grants a spell cast rather than slots) don't inherently allow for infinite chaining, but I'm not particularly familiar with 3.5.

[ryu]

Can you elaborate on the specific build that allows this? The two restrictions of Versatile Spellcaster (you must know the higher level spell, the feat grants a spell cast rather than slots) don't inherently allow for infinite chaining, but I'm not particularly familiar with 3.5.

Domain spell automatically grants knowledge of of single spell in the domain of the level as soon as you gain the ability to cast spells of that level. Ability to cast a second level spell -> knowledge of second level domain spell gained. Other things to be aware of are the ability to spontaneously cast spells at first level. Are you familiar with the feats or do you need them?

[Dagroth]

False. Once you've gained the ability to cast second level spells your bonus slots kick in, which you then use to fuel the trick and unlock the next level, whereupon your bonus slots kick in and are you seeing a pattern yet?


Elven Generalist: A 1st-level elf wizard begins play with one extra 1st-level spell in her spellbook.

So you still need Heighten Spell or to buy a scroll/copy a spellbook with the higher level spell(s), if you want to do this trick at level 1.


At each new wizard level, she gains one extra spell of any spell level that she can cast.

The trick becomes easier at level 2.


The elf wizard may also prepare one additional spell of her highest spell level each day.

Tough call... but sure, why not. Even though your highest level spell is level 1 until you actually cast a spell using the Versatile Spellcaster Feat that day. We'll even give it to you that being able to prepare an additional spell counts as a "spell slot" (it doesn't... the wording isn't there. Spell Slots are things Spontaneous Casters get).

But guess what? You've still only got 1! You don't have 2 2nd level spells prepared to swap out for spontaneous casting! So you can't convert them to a 3rd level spell!

If you use Versatile Spellcaster, you're casting a spell. You can't suddenly use that spell you are casting to convert to a higher level spell. Versatile Spellcaster isn't worded that way.

[ryu]

So you still need Heighten Spell or to buy a scroll/copy a spellbook with the higher level spell(s), if you want to do this trick at level 1.



The trick becomes easier at level 2.



Tough call... but sure, why not. Even though your highest level spell is level 1 until you actually cast a spell using the Versatile Spellcaster Feat that day. We'll even give it to you that being able to prepare an additional spell counts as a "spell slot" (it doesn't... the wording isn't there. Spell Slots are things Spontaneous Casters get).

But guess what? You've still only got 1! You don't have 2 2nd level spells prepared to swap out for spontaneous casting! So you can't convert them to a 3rd level spell!

If you use Versatile Spellcaster, you're casting a spell. You can't suddenly use that spell you are casting to convert to a higher level spell. Versatile Spellcaster isn't worded that way.

Don't need to. Like I said, bonus slots. At no point does a spell which has already been cast need to be used as nonexistent fuel for anything.

[Zombimode]

False. Once you've gained the ability to cast second level spells your bonus slots kick in, which you then use to fuel the trick and unlock the next level, whereupon your bonus slots kick in and are you seeing a pattern yet?

Except that the feat gives you the ability to use two lower level slots to cast a higher level spell. To cast. You do not somehow can hold it, store it away, do anything else with it. You just cast the spell, then it's gone. The feat doesn't even give you a spell slot.

Edit:

Don't need to. Like I said, bonus slots. At no point does a spell which has already been cast need to be used as nonexistent fuel for anything.

Ok, you do get more then one slot - then you loose them again. How are you interupting yourself casting a spell with casting another spell?

[Dagroth]

Domain spell automatically grants knowledge of of single spell in the domain of the level as soon as you gain the ability to cast spells of that level. Ability to cast a second level spell -> knowledge of second level domain spell gained. Other things to be aware of are the ability to spontaneously cast spells at first level. Are you familiar with the feats or do you need them?

I am unfamiliar with that feat.

Arcane Disciple adds domain spells to your class list, but you still have to learn them as normal (making it a bad feat for Sorcerers, but a good feat for "know all your spells" classes like Warmage).

If you mean the Domain Wizard variant from Unearthed Arcana... well, considering that it specifically forbids Specialization, the same thing that Elven Generalist does... I'd say they were incompatible.


Don't need to. Like I said, bonus slots. At no point does a spell which has already been cast need to be used as nonexistent fuel for anything.

Elven Generalist only gives you 1 bonus slot. Domain Wizard does not give you a bonus slot, even if they were compatible.

If you're thinking of the extra spell you get because of Int Bonus, think again. The extra spells for high stats only gives the extra spells when the class' "spells per day" table says they get them.

Just because you have a 28 Int, it does not mean you can cast a 9th level spell at 1st level.

[Coretron03]

I am unfamiliar with that feat.

Arcane Disciple adds domain spells to your class list, but you still have to learn them as normal (making it a bad feat for Sorcerers, but a good feat for "know all your spells" classes like Warmage).

If you mean the Domain Wizard variant from Unearthed Arcana... well, considering that it specifically forbids Specialization, the same thing that Elven Generalist does... I'd say they were incompatible.

I believe they work together because one says you can't specialise and the other one you can pick if you are not specialised. Think of it like someone giving you money for selling your ability to get a car and someone giving money to people that don't have cars.

At anyrate alot of this stuff was talked about in this thread about whether or not this worked.
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?502321-Fallacy-of-Elven-Generalist-Domain-Wizard-quot-Leapfrog-Wizard-quot

[ryu]

Except that the feat gives you the ability to use two lower level slots to cast a higher level spell. To cast. You do not somehow can hold it, store it away, do anything else with it. You just cast the spell, then it's gone. The feat doesn't even give you a spell slot.

Edit:


Ok, you do get more then one slot - then you loose them again. How are you interupting yourself casting a spell with casting another spell?

Simple. You're automatically granted extra preparation utility for the highest level of spells you can cast. Even without INT based bonus spells the lowest this bonus will ever grant you is two extra slots to prep in. You never need to interrupt yourself. You cast a spell, then you cast another stronger spell. This continues until level 9 spells where you have one slot which can be any spell you know, and another which must be a spell of 9th or lower of your domain.

[Dagroth]

Simple. You're automatically granted extra preparation utility for the highest level of spells you can cast. Even without INT based bonus spells the lowest this bonus will ever grant you is two extra slots to prep in. You never need to interrupt yourself. You cast a spell, then you cast another stronger spell. This continues until level 9 spells where you have one slot which can be any spell you know, and another which must be a spell of 9th or lower of your domain.

Uh, no...

Elven Generalist gives you one extra spell preparation per day, not two.

I'll repeat the quote here:
"The elf wizard may also prepare one additional spell of her highest spell level each day."

Edit: In this case it would be one additional to the zero you normally have.

[ryu]

Uh, no...

Elven Generalist gives you one extra spell preparation per day, not two.

I'll repeat the quote here:
"The elf wizard may also prepare one additional spell of her highest spell level each day."

Which starts at 1, then after you've cast a 2nd, it's 2, then after casting a 3rd, it's 3, and so.

[Dagroth]

Which starts at 1, then after you've cast a 2nd, it's 2, then after casting a 3rd, it's 3, and so.

Which, again only gives you 1 spell slot of 2nd level if you're a 1st level Wizard. You don't have 2, so you can't somehow convert them to a 3rd level spell.

And even if it did... again, so what.

The Elven Generalist ability only gives you one additional spell preparation. Even if, somehow that isn't in the rules, you got an extra spell slot in addition to that...

You'd only be able to eventually cast a 9th level spell that you knew (I'll get to that in a minute) while you were preparing your spells for the day.

And now that I've thought of it, let's get back to the wording of Versatile Spellcaster... because it's really important.


You can use two spell slots of the same level to cast a spell you know that is one level higher.

The difference between a Spontaneous spellcaster & and Memorized spellcaster is the "Spells Known" table. A Sorcerer knows his spells. A Wizard has them in his book, but he doesn't know them. The wording isn't there to support it. Even Spontaneous Divination doesn't say anything about "spells you know". In fact, Spontaneous Divination says "any spell of the divination school" which means you never have to chose Divination spells for your book... ever. Which is probably why it costs you all your bonus metamagic feats.

[ryu]

Which, again only gives you 1 spell slot of 2nd level if you're a 1st level Wizard. You don't have 2, so you can't somehow convert them to a 3rd level spell.

And even if it did... again, so what.

The Elven Generalist ability only gives you one additional spell preparation. Even if, somehow that isn't in the rules, you got an extra spell slot in addition to that...

You'd only be able to eventually cast a 9th level spell that you knew (I'll get to that in a minute) while you were preparing your spells for the day.

And now that I've thought of it, let's get back to the wording of Versatile Spellcaster... because it's really important.



The difference between a Spontaneous spellcaster & and Memorized spellcaster is the "Spells Known" table. A Sorcerer knows his spells. A Wizard has them in his book, but he doesn't know them. The wording isn't there to support it. Even Spontaneous Divination doesn't say anything about "spells you know". In fact, Spontaneous Divination says "any spell of the divination school" which means you never have to chose Divination spells for your book... ever. Which is probably why it costs you all your bonus metamagic feats.

Actually no. All spells in your book are spells you know. Conversely unless you take non-wizard caster levels, or go eidetic and don't have a book, all spells you know are in your book. Similarly you can spells as many times per days as you damn well please so long as have slots left unfilled. It would be really nice if you actually read the rules of the class before arguing about it.

[Dagroth]

Actually no. All spells in your book are spells you know. Conversely unless you take non-wizard caster levels, or go eidetic and don't have a book, all spells you know are in your book. Similarly you can spells as many times per days as you damn well please so long as have slots left unfilled. It would be really nice if you actually read the rules of the class before arguing about it.

Okay, after further reading they are spells you know... but you have to spend preparation time to fill the unfilled slots (15 minutes... more if it's more than 1/4 of your spell slots) before you can cast them. Even with the Eidetic Spellcaster ACF.

The Eidetic Spellcaster ACF does not turn you into a Sorcerer with Wizard spell knowledge. You have to prepare your spells per day just like you would if you had a book. If you leave spell slots open, you have to prepare spells to fill them later just like you would if you had a book.

Which still doesn't explain how you get a second 2nd level spell slot. (I'm giving you the first one from Elven Generalist, even though the wording doesn't support it).

Again, the wording of Elven Generalist:
"The elf wizard may also prepare one additional spell of her highest spell level each day."

That's not "highest level spell known". That's highest spell level, which is clearly shown in the PHB, Table 3-18 on Page 55.

[Troacctid]

You can't simultaneously get a 4th level and 5th level spell slot from Elven Generalist. It only gives you one slot of your highest level.

Even if the trick worked, which it doesn't, all it's accomplishing is letting you cast one 9th level spell per day. Which the Fighter can also do, except her 9th level spell is better than yours. And the only way you managed to ALMOST equal the epic character was by using questionable rules interpretations to perform a cheesy stacking loop.

[ben-zayb]

Not sure if this was ever clarified by Ryu, but this trick uses 2 distinct sources of bonus spell per day at the highest spell level available: one from the Elven Generalist and one from the Domain Wizard. Since you get two X-level spell slot any given day, you are capable of casting (X+1)th level spells via Versatile Spellcaster on those slots. The following day, your new spell per day kicks in based on your capability to cast (X+1)th level spells, so you get two Y-level spell slots, where Y = X+1. You still get 1 X-level spell slot via Domain Wizard, since it applies to each spell level, but your sole Elven Generalist spell slot is alloted to spell level Y.

[Dagroth]

As I said, and as in the link provided by coretron, you can't be a Domain Wizard and an Elven Generalist at the same time.

Domain Wizard is a variant class. Elven Generalist is a Substitution Level for Wizard. Elven Generalist is not a Substitution Level of Domain Wizard.

[ben-zayb]

As I said, and as RedMage125 argued, you can't be a Domain Wizard and an Elven Generalist at the same time.

Domain Wizard is a variant class. Elven Generalist is a Substitution Level for Wizard. Elven Generalist is not a Substitution Level of Domain Wizard.
Fixed it for you, as the thread is pretty much an unresolved discussion. Basically, you and RedMage125 are simply under the impression that it doesn't work, despite it being RAW compliant. Got it.

[ryu]

You can't simultaneously get a 4th level and 5th level spell slot from Elven Generalist. It only gives you one slot of your highest level.

Even if the trick worked, which it doesn't, all it's accomplishing is letting you cast one 9th level spell per day. Which the Fighter can also do, except her 9th level spell is better than yours. And the only way you managed to ALMOST equal the epic character was by using questionable rules interpretations to perform a cheesy stacking loop.

Actually no. This trick is up from my level 1. Your level 6 fighter isn't casting anything much less ninths. Nice try though.

[Particle_Man]

Given the OP's request, I would say the obvious answer is to ban any and all tricks that any spellcaster can use to do the kinds of things that they may or may not be able to do from level 1.

This may involve banning certain feats, of course.

Given that, I think an 18th level fighter would probably be able to hold their own in a party with a 3rd level wizard. If you think not, keep nerfing that wizard down to 1st level (vs. the 20th lever fighter, say) and ban any and all tricks that let the wizard do stuff that obsoletes the fighter.

[ryu]

Given the OP's request, I would say the obvious answer is to ban any and all tricks that any spellcaster can use to do the kinds of things that they may or may not be able to do from level 1.

This may involve banning certain feats, of course.

Given that, I think an 18th level fighter would probably be able to hold their own in a party with a 3rd level wizard. If you think not, keep nerfing that wizard down to 1st level (vs. the 20th lever fighter, say) and ban any and all tricks that let the wizard do stuff that obsoletes the fighter.

Actually what you should be doing is buffing the fighter. They don't scale in a manner comparable to level appropriate combat challenges and do pretty much literally nothing when those aren't happening. The recommended way of doing this is replacing all fighters with warblades, swordsages, and crusaders. They still won't be the most powerful class in the game, but at least they won't be so painfully feature barren.

[Dagroth]

Fixed it for you, as the thread is pretty much an unresolved discussion. Basically, you and RedMage125 are simply under the impression that it doesn't work, despite it being RAW compliant. Got it.

No it's not.

If you can somehow show that UA doesn't say that Variant Classes are different classes from their Base Classes... or you can somehow show that Elven Generalist Wizard is a Substitution Level for Domain Wizard and not for Wizard... you might have a point.

[Dragonexx]

Can you make a similar lists of sufficiently different samurais and ninjas for different clans?

You could, but you probably don't want to. And the reason is because of Fighters and Rogues. In D&D land, the Fighter is a deeply inadequate character, in no small part because role protection has demanded that many of the problem solving techniques of heroes of his idiom (sword wielding mundane warriors) be apportioned to the Rogue. Kull or Conan would never get anywhere in life if they couldn't sneak around a guarded castle or seduce an evil sorceress - and yet here we are with Fighter getting access to neither Stealth nor Bluff. Because those are "Rogue Skills."

While the design challenge in making the spellcasters is in dividing up magical effects such that individual player characters can't cherry pick off the list and be the MVP in every single challenge the party ever faces - for characters with less open ended idioms the challenge is the opposite. The challenge in making the Samurai and the Ninja are to make sure they have abilities broad enough that they always have something to do. Not to make them narrow enough that they don't run away with the game.

<snip>
-Frank

While casters having too much magic is a problem, it's less of one compared to the fact that there's really not much to build on in terms of mundane character abilities without running into the Captain Hobo problem.

[SirNibbles]

No it's not.

If you can somehow show that UA doesn't say that Variant Classes are different classes from their Base Classes... or you can somehow show that Elven Generalist Wizard is a Substitution Level for Domain Wizard and not for Wizard... you might have a point.

page 47:

"you can use any one of these variant classes in place of the standard class of the same name."

[ben-zayb]

No it's not.

If you can somehow show that UA doesn't say that Variant Classes are different classes from their Base Classes... or you can somehow show that Elven Generalist Wizard is a Substitution Level for Domain Wizard and not for Wizard... you might have a point."It doesn't say X" is a fallacious logic at best in a ruleset where you are just strictly given what you can do, so not gonna indulge you on that one. Do you have actual proof that they are explicitly different, or do you just wanna rehash the old thread? Anyway, just keep on using boldfaced text, I'm sure that helps strengthen your point.

[Dagroth]

page 47:

"you can use any one of these variant classes in place of the standard class of the same name."

You can use Warblade in place of Fighter, too... doesn't mean they're the same class.


"It doesn't say X" is a fallacious logic at best in a ruleset where you are just strictly given what you can do, so not gonna indulge you on that one. Do you have actual proof that they are explicitly different, or do you just wanna rehash the old thread? Anyway, just keep on using boldfaced text, I'm sure that helps strengthen your point.

They are explicitly different because they have a different number of spells per day and one even potentially has access to spells that the other does not.

They are explicitly different because one can do something (Specialization) that the other is explicitly barred from.

How much more explicitly different do they need to be?

[ben-zayb]

You can use Warblade in place of Fighter, too... doesn't mean they're the same class.Because they aren't. Warblades isn't a variant of the Fighter.


They are explicitly different because they have a different number of spells per dayLike a specialized (and focused specialist) wizard is a variant class from an unspecialized one, right? Or perhaps the bazillion Sorcerer ACFs with different spells per day than the norm turn out to be different classes too? Maybe spell-less paladin/ranger alternative features apparently are two separate classes from the original paladin and ranger, too.

and one even potentially has access to spells that the other does not.Yep, like clerics with different domains are different classes. Of course, by your logic, specialist wizards are different classes too, what with them banning schools.

They are explicitly different because one can do something (Specialization) that the other is explicitly barred from.An illusionist can also do something (illusion-exclusive spell slots, illusionist-exclusive ACFs, gnome illusionist substitution levels) that necromancers do not, and vice versa. That must mean they are different classes based on your well thought-out response.

How much more explicitly different do they need to be?How about... that they are by Rules as Written explicitly treated as separate and different classes, maybe more along the lines of how a Warblade is introduced as a separate class from a Fighter, instead of the terribly inapplicable ones you've given above?

[Dagroth]

ACFs and Racial Substitution Levels are not Variant Classes. Specialist Wizards are not Variant Classes.

Domain Wizard is a Variant class.

And Elven Generalist Wizard refers to the Wizard class, not any Variant.

[ben-zayb]

ACFs and Racial Substitution Levels are not Variant Classes. Specialist Wizards are not Variant Classes.

Domain Wizard is a Variant class.

And Elven Generalist Wizard refers to the Wizard class, not any Variant.And... you still haven't show why Domain Wizard is a separate class from the Wizard. Hint: simply calling it a Variant class doesn't help your case. If you want to go in circles on this unproven point of yourse, I'm afraid you have to do it on your own now. :smallwink:

[rel]

Yes, if you remove the players' ability to do anything other than exactly what you want, the way you want it done, it's much easier to keep them on the rails.

Or turn the sprawling and insane kitchen sink mishamash of unconnected and contradictory themes that is 3.x into something more interesting, focused, tightly themed or fun.

[Zanos]

Or turn the sprawling and insane kitchen sink mishamash of unconnected and contradictory themes that is 3.x into something more interesting, focused, tightly themed or fun.
Or we could all just read the DM's script and save everyone some time.

[rel]

You are either missing the point or being willfully ignorant.

You can use selective parts of the dungeons and dragons material to achieve a more interesting game for all players GM included than a game in which everything is available to use.

If you are trying to play a game with any sort of theme beyond 'generic D&D' certain published materials are not going to help you achieve the kind of gameplay or world you are looking for.

[ryu]

Or turn the sprawling and insane kitchen sink mishamash of unconnected and contradictory themes that is 3.x into something more interesting, focused, tightly themed or fun.

Problem being that I actually much prefer the game the devs made by accident to the one they intended, and likely the one any one person would alter the base to. They intended a game with less mechanical complexity than gen 2 pokemon, that takes much more work to set up and play, and which was much more expensive to even try to get into for a long time. They ended up making one of the most hilariously high skill-ceiling pen and paper RPGs of all time. No I'm not interested in playing some otherwise equivalent game with all the stuff I liked stripped out. If I'm to take that kind of hit to gameplay complexity I'd much rather play xenoblade chronicles. It's much more enjoyably complex in the combat department than most would ever make, has beautiful scenery, a fully voiced and often charismatic cast of well developed characters, shockingly varied world, if not a completely balanced cast of characters at least one where everyone feels useful in different situations and with different playstyles, a full orchestra, several novels of flavor text, and some of the most gut punching writing I've seen in ages.

Also I don't have to arrange a meeting time of several hours with pencils, papers, and enough chance arbitration devices to blot out the sun just to play it.

[Dagroth]

Or turn the sprawling and insane kitchen sink mishamash of unconnected and contradictory themes that is 3.x into something more interesting, focused, tightly themed or fun.

Actually, I had an idea for a game world where all the various game worlds of AD&D (Ebberon, Faerun, Ravenloft, Greyhawk, Rokugun, Athas, etc.) suddenly found themselves all part of one single extra-large world. Certain "worldlets" would have altered "rules of magic", but individuals could generally freely move between them. Some would be traps (like Ravenloft) that would be incredibly hard to leave; while others (like Athas) would have people clamoring to leave while the rulers tried to keep them under control.

Characters could come from any setting, and might find themselves with greater advantages (a Warforged in Athas has some big advantages) or unexpected disadvantages (the same Warforged might have trouble in the high-magic realm of Faerun).

[Darth Ultron]

For the Class Abilities, D&D has always been weird. There is a sliding scale of abilities.

1.Weak, nearly pointless mundane abilities. Sadly, most writers put way too many abilities here. This ability is mundane and is only slightly good (as in better then nothing) compared to a 0 level character. This is the type of ability you see in most classes like a +1 to a skill or something even more limiting like +1 to a skill, but only ''on a ship'' or something.

2.Weak mundane abilities. They at least have a bit of use, but they are still very limited and just about never scale well. Like getting a +1 every couple of levels to something and maxing out at...wow..+3 at 20th or so level. The ones that are like ''per bonus ability point'' or such are better, but still not great.

3.Just like the spell, but oddly mundane. Sort of an odd one where the ability is ''detect magic'', as per the spell, but mundane with an (ex). Not too common, and somewhat nice...but nonmagical magic is just odd.

4.Boring spell. This is ok, lets them cast a spell. Even better if it's supernatural. Still it is ''just the spell though''. And does make the jump from mundane to magical. Some find it wrong for a class to ''suddenly'' cast a spell, some think it fits into a magical world just right.

5.The awesome ability. You don't see this much. It can be a great, equal to magic mundane ability or a custom ''no one has anything like this'' magic ability. This is where I think all ability's should be...something new and unique.

[rel]

Problem being that I actually much prefer the game the devs made by accident to the one they intended...


Actually, I had an idea for a game world where all the various game worlds of AD&D (Ebberon, Faerun, Ravenloft, Greyhawk, Rokugun, Athas, etc.) suddenly found themselves all part of one single extra-large world...

See, that's all fine. I'm not saying cutting the game down is the only way to play D&D.

Cutting the game down to a limited list of resources is a powerful and specialised tool you can use to create a heavily modified and generally predictable play experience that I think would be a really good solution to the OP's problem.

That doesn't mean you ALWAYS have to play a cut down version of the game.
That doesn't mean you EVER have to play a cut down version of the game. If you like the kitchen sink play the kitchen sink, just be aware that there are other ways to set a campaign up and you don't always have to include everything.


For the Class Abilities, D&D has always been weird. There is a sliding scale of abilities.

1.Weak, nearly pointless mundane abilities. Sadly, most writers put way too many abilities here. This ability is mundane and is only slightly good (as in better then nothing) compared to a 0 level character. This is the type of ability you see in most classes like a +1 to a skill or something even more limiting like +1 to a skill, but only ''on a ship'' or something.

2.Weak mundane abilities. They at least have a bit of use, but they are still very limited and just about never scale well. Like getting a +1 every couple of levels to something and maxing out at...wow..+3 at 20th or so level. The ones that are like ''per bonus ability point'' or such are better, but still not great.

3.Just like the spell, but oddly mundane. Sort of an odd one where the ability is ''detect magic'', as per the spell, but mundane with an (ex). Not too common, and somewhat nice...but nonmagical magic is just odd.

4.Boring spell. This is ok, lets them cast a spell. Even better if it's supernatural. Still it is ''just the spell though''. And does make the jump from mundane to magical. Some find it wrong for a class to ''suddenly'' cast a spell, some think it fits into a magical world just right.

5.The awesome ability. You don't see this much. It can be a great, equal to magic mundane ability or a custom ''no one has anything like this'' magic ability. This is where I think all ability's should be...something new and unique.

The divide seems to be:
- Traditional vancian spellcasting which can achieve anything and is orders of magnitude stronger than anything else in the game

- Other types of magic; wierd magic systems, SU and SP abilities and so on. These are much weaker but still interesting some of the time

- muggles, those with no magic of any kind. These classes are pretty much useless. They are the classes that tend to be outperformed / rendered useless by a single spell.

When people complain about a spell or class feature rendering an entire class redundant they tend to be talking about the muggle classes that are ineffectual to begin with and are often limited to dealing hp damage.

[Dagroth]

The divide seems to be:
- Traditional vancian spellcasting which can achieve anything and is orders of magnitude stronger than anything else in the game

- Other types of magic; wierd magic systems, SU and SP abilities and so on. These are much weaker but still interesting some of the time

- muggles, those with no magic of any kind. These classes are pretty much useless. They are the classes that tend to be outperformed / rendered useless by a single spell.

When people complain about a spell or class feature rendering an entire class redundant they tend to be talking about the muggle classes that are ineffectual to begin with and are often limited to dealing hp damage when their other abilities (like open locks, disable device, bluff, diplomacy, tracking, sneaking) are obviated by some spell!.

My words added.

[CasualViking]

Leaving the TO wank aside for a moment, the departure point is “5th level spells". Because without equivalent abilities, you can't engage an opponent who has 5th level spells unless he chooses to allow it.

[Hurnn]

Those spells don't really replace any classes or builds though. Unless your spellcasters have unlimited spell slots for some reason? And even then they fall behind an actual skillmonkey.
Sure, people like to talk about how the wizard can do the jobs of the rogue and the fighter better than those classes in addition to his own, but have you actually tried doing that in a game? Because it doesn't work that way.
Those spells are stop-gaps at best when you're missing a dedicated skillmonkey. Otherwise it's things your skillmonkey picks up to enhance what he can already do in a crunch.

Seriously, if your party wizard wants to replace the rogue he's going to be investing so many spell slots into it that he'll contribute to nothing else. He's essentially your bargain-bin skillmonkey now, so it's not exactly a balance issue.
Not to mention that i pity your rogue players if all they are to you is a trap/lock opening device. Those aren't a class role. They're part of one, but it's generally something you try to have someone in the party pick up (ideally more than one, at least for search/spot/listen), not something you define your build by.

Tongues and Comprehend Languages don't turn you into a party face either. You actually need charisma for that, which wizards tend to dump, not to mention skill points in actual social skills. Understanding someones language doesn't turn you into a face.
There's also the fact that even Tongues is not quite as good as actually speaking the language in question. Not to mention that everyone can pick them up for cheap with skill points anyway.


Seriously? That's a party role now?
I'm honestly not sure if you're joking or just looking for things to ban for the sake of banning something with this one.
For most groups i've played with this is an annoying bookkeeping chore that gets handwaved unless it actually affects the story.
The same applies to languages btw. Getting a free language isn't an interesting class ability, it's just a bit of flavor. It's worth 1 measly skill point ffs.

If you want to do something for caster-mundane balance i'd start by banning Persistent Spell. Forcing your casters to spend the first round(s) of combat putting up short-term buffs will do a lot more to make mundane classes important than banning a few utility spells.
It'll also blunt the power of most gish and CoDzilla builds (though druids less so) if they have to make do without persisted Wraithstrike, Divine Power etc.


Actually every one of those examples is cheaply and easily made into a wand.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Actually every one of those examples is cheaply and easily made into a wand.
Which ones?
A wand of Knock costs 4500gp. So does a wand of Find Traps -which only lasts 3 minutes, still needs you to invest search ranks and only allows you to search for traps, not all the other things search is used for. And you still can't disable traps.
9000gp is the entire WBL of a 5th level character. It's still a third of the WBL of an 8th level character.

If you spend that much on being worse than the rogue (and limited by uses) at trapfinding i'm not really seeing a balance issue.

Tongues costs a wizard 11,250gp! And "speak and understand" does not mean "read and write". It also only lasts 50 minutes per charge. If i regularly need a language i think i'd rather spend 2 cross-class skill points even if i have access to the spell.
Comprehend Languages is cheap enough for a wand, but it's also not only limited to reading and understanding spoken language (no speaking, no writing), it's also limited to the literal meaning.
Everyone who has ever learned a foreign language knows that idioms and the like are a big part of that - a part that Comprehend Languages does not grant you.

Social skills are in a similar position. The only spell that really "replaces" one of them is Glibness, and that's only for one specific use of it. It also only appears on the spell list of a skillmonkey, so the point is moot anyway.


A skillmonkey does all these things in addition to contributing to combat (if well built) just by spending the skill points he gets anyway. A group without one must spend a big chunk of WBL on fulfilling these roles a lot worse. WBL that is then missing for things like weapon enhancements, armor and other necessary items.
So, enlighten me. Show me how a wizard easily and cheaply replaces the rogue with wands, because i'm not seeing it. These spells are stopgaps, but they in no way replace a skillmonkey.

[Zanos]

And "speak and understand" does not mean "read and write".
It certainly doesn't mean write, but it doesn't say you only understand spoken language. You should be able to get the meaning of written word just fine. Comprehend languages can do that anyway at first level.

[rel]

My words added.


... but they in no way replace a skillmonkey.

If for whatever reasons a skill is essential in your particular game the thing to remember is that skills and feats are not class specific.
Any class can take any skill. A lot of essential skills are even class skills for actually usefull classes. If they are not there are often ways to make them class skills or gain sufficient bonuses to cover the difference.
Even the trap finding class feature is not the sole purview of useless classes and can in the worst case be obtained through a dip.

A class with a nice skill list and no other powerful abilities is very much one of the useless classes.

[Coretron03]

A class with a nice skill list and no other powerful abilities is very much one of the useless classes.

Which is why no one plays the aristocrat, a Npc class.

[sleepyphoenixx]

If for whatever reasons a skill is essential in your particular game the thing to remember is that skills and feats are not class specific.
Any class can take any skill. A lot of essential skills are even class skills for actually usefull classes. If they are not there are often ways to make them class skills or gain sufficient bonuses to cover the difference.
Even the trap finding class feature is not the sole purview of useless classes and can in the worst case be obtained through a dip.

A class with a nice skill list and no other powerful abilities is very much one of the useless classes.

You're not wrong, but my point is that spellcasters, or more specifically spells like Knock, Find Traps, Tongues etc. allegedly make skillmonkeys - or skillpoints in those skills in general - useless. And that's just not true.

The Rogue class isn't so far down the totem pole because wizards can cast Knock. It's so far down because you can get a similar number of skill points/class skills while still getting useful class features beside Sneak Attack if you take something else.
Banning Knock and Find Traps won't change that.

[rel]

While no one has taken the open lock skill in the last few games I have played and I have never seen linguistics taken for non-fluff reasons I can definitely agree that straight rogue would not see play even if knock and the like was banned.

[ryu]

You're not wrong, but my point is that spellcasters, or more specifically spells like Knock, Find Traps, Tongues etc. allegedly make skillmonkeys - or skillpoints in those skills in general - useless. And that's just not true.

The Rogue class isn't so far down the totem pole because wizards can cast Knock. It's so far down because you can get a similar number of skill points/class skills while still getting useful class features beside Sneak Attack if you take something else.
Banning Knock and Find Traps won't change that.

Pretty sure a cleric with... was it the kobold domain or the traps domain completely obviates that bit of uselessness?

[sleepyphoenixx]

Pretty sure a cleric with... was it the kobold domain or the traps domain completely obviates that bit of uselessness?

And how does banning spells like Knock and Find Traps help that? It doesn't.
And banning those options for other classes doesn't help either. Forcing a player into a bland and boring class because you've banned all the others just to fill the "skillmonkey" slot isn't fun for anyone.

[ryu]

And how does banning spells like Knock and Find Traps help that? It doesn't.
And banning those options for other classes doesn't help either. Forcing a player into a bland and boring class because you've banned all the others just to fill the "skillmonkey" slot isn't fun for anyone.

Oh I agree. Just pointing out one of the most likely versions of replacement. Pretty sure artificers also get trap finding natively if I remember right.

[Jeff the Green]

Getting back to what the thread's actually about...

I would be much more sympathetic if the examples were things that are actually things that are interesting to do.


Knock (Sorc/Wiz 2) | Rogue
Open Lock/Disable Device in D&D is insanely boring. It isn't a minigame like in Elder Scrolls or (even better) Ratchet and Clank. It's a single die roll or, if you're taking 20, a game of "did I pump this skill high enough". Neither of those is fun.


Glibness (Bard 3) | Party Face
I'll give half a point for this. Glibness is a bit insane. I've had DMs ban or nerf it and I've never complained. But the fact that you can only get it on Bard, Beguiler, and a few obscure domains or PrCs that are focused on social skills significantly redeems it.


Comprehend Languages/Tongues (Sorc/Wiz 1/3) | Party Face, Local
This isn't something interesting either. Knowing languages just sucks up skill points that could be used to do something more fun. There's also the issue that you can only know so many languages—2+Int+3+level, barring certain feats or classes, unless I'm misremembering something. The problem is that you can't cast these spells on someone else. That would be a much bigger improvement than banning them, because then you could slap them on the Cha 18 paladin so he could negotiate with the bugbears who don't speak common.

(That raises a side issue, actually. Everyone seems to speak Common. It's more universal than English in the real world. There's no real incentive to learn other languages.)


Create Food and Water (Cleric 3) | Mule, Forager

<sarcasm>Oh fun. I know every time I roll up a Fighter I'm so excited I can use my 18 Strength to carry around weeks of food for the party. </sarcasm>

For the second role, foraging is either boring (a single roll) or party-unfriendly (one PC goes off and has a mini-adventure on his own).


Detect Secret Doors (Sorc/Wiz/Bard 1) | Rogue
Same problem as Disable Device/Open Lock. This is a single roll, often made in secret, and many DMs I've had haven't even bothered to specify who noticed the secret door because no one cares.


Spider Climb (Sorc/Wiz 2) | Any class/race that grants a climb speed
The problem with this example is that "person who can climb" is not a role. It is a requirement for overcoming some obstacles. If only the barbarian can climb the cliff, you're stuck. If the barbarian can climb on his own and the sorcerer has to put spider climb on the others, you continue, the sorcerer has to spend some spell slots, and the barbarian gets to taunt the paladin as weak and dependent on the puny sorcerer.


World Traveler: Corsairs travel the world's seas and visit countless ports of call. As at result, they pick up bits of useful lingo from everyone they meet. At 3rd level, a corsair learns Aquan and one other language he doesn't already know as if he had put ranks into the Speak Language skill. If the corsair already knows how to speak Aquan, he still gains the other language.

At 7th level, the corsair learns two new languages as if he had put ranks in the Speak Language skill.

This would be a very interesting class feature if not for the fact that it's completely outclassed by a level 3 Wizard spell. It was this class feature that inspired me to make this post.

That... is not interesting. That saves six skill points (the Corsair inexplicably doesn't have Speak Language as a class skill; a Bard would only have to spend three). What might be interesting is the Voice of the City ACF (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20070228a) (it replaces Wild Empathy):

Through a combination of body language, tone, and expression, the voice of the city can make herself understood by those who do not speak her language, and she can interpret their meaning the same way. Simple concepts that can be conveyed in a few words (such as "Help!" or "Drop your weapon!") can be conveyed automatically. More complex concepts require her to make a roll: d20 + her class level + either her Wisdom modifier (if trying to understand someone else) or Charisma modifier (if trying to make someone else understand her). Roll each only once per conversation. If she fails, she cannot try to communicate with that specific individual via this ability until she has gained a level. (Thus, it is possible, if she succeeds in one roll but fails in the other, to hold a conversation where she can understand the other speaker but he cannot understand you, or vice-versa.)

The DC of the roll depends on creature type and how closely the individual's language is related to any of her own. The ability works most effectively with other humanoids. In this case, if the individual's language uses the same alphabet as any language she knows, the DC is 20. If it does not, the DC is 30. (See Speak Language, PH 82, for this information.)

The above DCs increase by 5 if the speaker is a fey, giant, or monstrous humanoid; they increase by 10 if the speaker is an elemental. If the other individual is of any other creature type, she cannot communicate via this ability.

If the speaker is deliberately trying to make himself understood, the voice of the city gains a +2 circumstance bonus on this roll. If she is attempting to interpret his speech from outside normal conversational distance (such as eavesdropping), she takes a -4 penalty on this roll.

In addition, she gains Speak Language as a class skill.
This isn't something that just anyone can do, it has an interesting mechanic, and it has interesting plot implications. In other words, it's the exact opposite of World Traveler.

There are some spells that actually obviate certain classes. Unfortunately, these are spells like animate dead, summon monster, and charm person. In other words, spells that you absolutely need to have in order to portray certain popular mage archetypes.

You can square this circle. Just not in D&D.