Tier 3 Balancing

[liquidformat]

Hey all, I wanted to pick the community's brain on how people handle trying to balance their games around tier 3 (if you do that). I understand how to bring classes like fighter and what not up to tier 3 but what are people doing about tier 2 and 1 classes? Are you just saying tier 3 min, or banning anything tier 1 & 2, or are you homebrew nerfing tier 1 and 2 down to tier 3?

For the moment I have been milling around the idea of cutting off full casters to level 6 spells pre epic though doing so would require some decent overhauling of quite a few classes...

[Karl Aegis]

I don't use setting-specific books or the stinkiest cheese Tier 1 and Tier 2 have to offer, so those classes are Tier 3.

Just get a few abilities to effectively target saves and use your skill points wisely and those bottom classes move up to Tier 3 or Tier 4. Use poison if you have to.

Bam, acceptable standard deviation.

[Gnaeus]

Basically what he said. A Tier 2 with an agreement not to break the game is hard to distinguish from a T3. The T3 may even outperform him at some levels.

Tier 1s are harder, but only if your game in one in which the T1/2 difference is apparent. If it’s a game where clerics or wizards are actually able to know what fights are occurring ahead of time and rework their spells regularly, they will have an advantage. If not, the T3 likely has parity. So avoid having dungeons full of creatures with the same kinds of exploitable weaknesses (tomorrow is the dungeon of ice monsters, Thursday will be an undead fest).

[zlefin]

Hey all, I wanted to pick the community's brain on how people handle trying to balance their games around tier 3 (if you do that). I understand how to bring classes like fighter and what not up to tier 3 but what are people doing about tier 2 and 1 classes? Are you just saying tier 3 min, or banning anything tier 1 & 2, or are you homebrew nerfing tier 1 and 2 down to tier 3?

For the moment I have been milling around the idea of cutting off full casters to level 6 spells pre epic though doing so would require some decent overhauling of quite a few classes...

my preferred method is to simply use different classes. if you focus on the classes that are already tier 3 (plus some stronger tier 4's, and maybe a tier 2 if closely monitored) then that fixes the problem straight up. ofc you still need to make sure people aren't using builds of wildly disparate power levels, but that's a bit easier when the tiers are similar.

there's enough tier 3 casters out there that it's feasible.

[TalonOfAnathrax]

I prefer to have a good Session 0 where everyone picks Tier 3 classes and makes a well-rounded party without obvious contradictions.
If someone really wants to play a wizard and no other class will fit their character concept, hash out a gentleman's agreement ahead of time. "No abusing polymorph or infinite loops", things like that.

Still, I generally prefer to have most players avoid Tier 1 or 2 classes. Usually this isn't a huge problem.

Once or twice we've resorted to weird stuff (someone wanted a Druid in a Beguiler + Crusader + Dread Necromancer party, so we told them about Ranger ACFs and they ended up with a Mystic Wild Shape Ranger instead. Still powerful, but not gamebreaking and quite fun!).

[liquidformat]

I prefer to have a good Session 0 where everyone picks Tier 3 classes and makes a well-rounded party without obvious contradictions.
If someone really wants to play a wizard and no other class will fit their character concept, hash out a gentleman's agreement ahead of time. "No abusing polymorph or infinite loops", things like that.

Still, I generally prefer to have most players avoid Tier 1 or 2 classes. Usually this isn't a huge problem.

Once or twice we've resorted to weird stuff (someone wanted a Druid in a Beguiler + Crusader + Dread Necromancer party, so we told them about Ranger ACFs and they ended up with a Mystic Wild Shape Ranger instead. Still powerful, but not gamebreaking and quite fun!).

Mystic Ranger is arguably the most powerful class for the first 10 levels and only more so if you are allowing wild shape on. I mean 2 good saves, full bab, spell progression similar to full caster, good spell list if you can use beyond phb, plus versatility of wild shape... ya that is pretty solid tier 1 or tier 0 even.

So soft ban on tier 1 and 2 seems to be the consensus.

[Hackulator]

A game I'm currently putting together has tier 1 banned, tier 2 allowed, tier 3 gestalt with NPC classes (basically letting you have a full BAB skald or magus etc, or just get more skills for a low skill class), tier 4 gestalt with tier 5 and vice versa. It's Pathfinder so nothing anyone should really ever choose is in tier 6.

[martixy]

My game is well above T3, so I don't balance toward T3 in that sense. If anything I tend to balance for a floor of T3.

More broadly, when I homebrew or ban or promote character options, I tend to stick to a design philosophy that closely matches the general traits of T3 - a greater amount of versatility as opposed high power with a small set of options.

To that end I have a few mechanics that prop up the lower end. They mostly revolve around class reworks, perks you get for high BAB, eliminating feat taxes and various other bits that stifle variety in the lower tiers. Also monstrous characters are the baseline in my setting. Because when you have wings, you don't have to rely on the wizard to cast fly on you.

Frankly, I don't think you should seek perfect balance. IMO the tier 1/2 are perfectly fine as is. What makes the game fun is always having something impactful to do or a relevant choice to make.
The wizard may bring down the mountain with his uber magic, but a fast rogue who manages to sneak in and out of the collapsing mountainside with the MacGuffin in the span of 2 minutes is just as impactful, fun and dramatic.
It may be "which spell do I unleash" or it may be "do I trip the guy netting me an AoO or do I drag him in range of the rest of my allies or disarm him so he can't AoO the wizard while he tries to unleash his mighty magics" or something to that effect.
Basically, make mundanes have more value than "I walk there and hit it with a stick", which is not at all hard to do, given how low the bar has been set.

[Godskook]

I use a modified gestalt-by-progression E6 system, personally, and that contains much of the variance of top-tier classes. Druid is, by **FAR**, the worst offender at this point, being too versatile at those levels, despite several other nerfs.

[heavyfuel]

I usually ban tier Tier 1s, with the exception of Cleric and Druid who must use the spontaneous versions presented in UA (Druids get extra nerf in the form of Natural Spell ban).

Works like a charm.

[Falontani]

I bring the floor to t3, gentleman's agreement to not do shenanigans above t2 (planar binding a single creature for non wish, good, more than that, bad).

I've been working on overhauling... 3.5... I kept telling myself I was just boosting the classes that were absolute trash, but it's gotten to full system treatment albeit slowly.

[Mystral]

Hey all, I wanted to pick the community's brain on how people handle trying to balance their games around tier 3 (if you do that). I understand how to bring classes like fighter and what not up to tier 3 but what are people doing about tier 2 and 1 classes? Are you just saying tier 3 min, or banning anything tier 1 & 2, or are you homebrew nerfing tier 1 and 2 down to tier 3?

For the moment I have been milling around the idea of cutting off full casters to level 6 spells pre epic though doing so would require some decent overhauling of quite a few classes...

You don't need to bring full casters down. There are already a lot of full casters on Tier 3, like the beguiler and the warmage.

What you want to do is talk with your players and find out what kind of caster they wish to play, and then you create a specific caster class for them that is moddeled after those casters and offers them a fixed spell list without any balance-crushing spells, as well as a few class features that add to the concept.

Of course, for a druid that might be a bit much because he has a lot of class features, each as strong as a some tier 4-5 classes. For a druid I'd say that he has to pick one of his class features (companion, spells or shape shifting) to be his main feature, and that works like normal. Another one works at a stunted capacity and the last one is removed. So he could be a full caster and get a weaker companion, but no shapeshift, or he could get full shapeshift and support that with some spellcasting (propably only stunted at level 5+).

[Endless Rain]

I usually ban tier Tier 1s, with the exception of Cleric and Druid who must use the spontaneous versions presented in UA (Druids get extra nerf in the form of Natural Spell ban).

Works like a charm.

I do pretty much the same thing, except I convert almost all Tier 1s* to spontaneous versions. For classes without a Spells Known table, I usually either have it be equal to their Spells Per Day or to the Spells Known table of a similar class. The only classes I haven't been able to nerf down to Tier 2 are the Erudite and Artificer, but Artificer is difficult enough to optimize that I allow it. Erudite, however, can't be made Tier 2 without becoming identical to the Psion, so I just gave up and banned the class. (I've had a player play a spontaneous Wizard in Pathfinder once. The class is different enough from the Sorcerer to be worth converting, even if the spell lists are the same.)

If anyone wants to nerf full casters down to Tier 3, you can do what I did to nerf the Tier 1s down to Tier 2, then make all Tier 1 or 2 characters use the Bard's spell progression tables. (I don't personally do this; my games are usually balanced around Tier 2)

*Technically all non-Tier 1 prepared casters as well. I don't care quite as much about game balance, but I was really annoyed with casters taking a long time to prepare spells and making the rest of the group wait a long time.

[martixy]

I bring the floor to t3, gentleman's agreement to not do shenanigans above t2 (planar binding a single creature for non wish, good, more than that, bad).

I've been working on overhauling... 3.5... I kept telling myself I was just boosting the classes that were absolute trash, but it's gotten to full system treatment albeit slowly.

Give us something concrete here. What's this full system treatment you mention?

P.S. Forgot to mention previously: I also import PF things that make sense. E.g. the skill system.

[Falontani]

Give us something concrete here. What's this full system treatment you mention?

P.S. Forgot to mention previously: I also import PF things that make sense. E.g. the skill system.

I am slowly reworking every class below t3 and bringing them up to par. I have done the entirety of Book of Vile Darkness, and am working on complete adventurer. I am working on completing tome of magic (enough mysteries/vestiges/utterances to be a match for magic of incarnum or tome of battle, along with more base classes, prestige classes, and fixes where needed).

I am doing most of the work, but I have 3 people well versed in 3.5 balance check all my work before it goes into an "approved" folder where it awaits play testing. One of them is a grammar fanatic *cough* who reads in depth and fixes all my errors.

I am trusting Inevitability for monster balance looks.

I'm trying to leave the rules of the game as is, keep the theme of everything, while bringing the power to a reasonable level. I've noticed that up until some of the most recent 3.5 books it seems as if the authors were expecting people to only use core + the supplement being written and was balanced thusly.

[martixy]

I am slowly reworking every class below t3 and bringing them up to par. I have done the entirety of Book of Vile Darkness, and am working on complete adventurer. I am working on completing tome of magic (enough mysteries/vestiges/utterances to be a match for magic of incarnum or tome of battle, along with more base classes, prestige classes, and fixes where needed).

I am doing most of the work, but I have 3 people well versed in 3.5 balance check all my work before it goes into an "approved" folder where it awaits play testing. One of them is a grammar fanatic *cough* who reads in depth and fixes all my errors.

I am trusting Inevitability for monster balance looks.

I'm trying to leave the rules of the game as is, keep the theme of everything, while bringing the power to a reasonable level. I've noticed that up until some of the most recent 3.5 books it seems as if the authors were expecting people to only use core + the supplement being written and was balanced thusly.

Oh. Uh.

You might want to revise your statement.
Classes do not a "full system" make.

[Falontani]

I've been working on overhauling... 3.5... I kept telling myself I was just boosting the classes that were absolute trash, but it's gotten to full system treatment albeit slowly.

Psionics, Incarnum, Binding, Truespeech, Shadow Magic, Vancian Magic, and Initiators are all sub systems. When working on all of them you are working on the system they run in. The classes make up what the system is simply by dictating what characters can do. Without classes there is no 3.5 (racial hit dice are just another name for monster class).
I don't deny that my work is paltry compared to what the og system designers faced, or what spheres of Power is doing, but a full rebalancing of nearly every class in 3.5, a system overhaul implies.

[Biggus]

I don't try to make all classes equal in power (as you say, that would involve major rewrites of at least half of them), I just try to stop the more OTT antics of tier 1-2 and give tier 4-5 a few extras so at least you don't get the "level 13 wizard can beat a level 20 fighter" nonsense.

I don't allow the most overpowered full caster prestige classes, such as Incantatrix, Planar Shepherd, and Initiate of the Sevenfold Veil. Natural Spell is a metamagic feat with a +1 spell level adjustment, Divine Metamagic can't make the effective spell level higher than the highest spell level you can normally cast (as with the Bard feat Metamagic Song) and Nightsticks don't stack. Some spells are banned (Consumptive Field and Greater, Wraithstrike, Celerity and Greater, Shivering Touch, Starmantle) while others have tighter limits (eg with Gate you're limited to your caster level in HD for a single creature as well as multiple creatures, with Shapechange interpret "anything you are familiar with" strictly).

[rel]

These days we pick a tier, add any additional conditions (e.g. tier 3 with a further stipulation that nothing should bypass the combat encounters of adventure X which we happen to be playing) then we build to that tier using all the content of 3.5 and anything we feel like adding.

an example of what this means:
I was in a tier 3 game and I wanted to play a healing and buff focused character.
Cleric was too strong to fit in. Healer was too weak.
So I took levels of sorcerer and favored soul, early entried into mystic theurge and picked spells known to keep the resulting build at tier 3.
At some point I ran out of Theurge levels (the PRC only has 10) so we house ruled it could go higher to keep things simple.


This method gives us the game we want and doesn't sacrifice the character building mini-game for those that want it.

[Quertus]

Balance to the table.

If the GM presents the table with a number of sample characters, the table is then free to create characters whose contribution is expected to fall within the table's balance range of those characters.

That's... it. All tiers welcome, all optimization levels and cheese welcome - so long as the final product is within the table's balance range.

[MeimuHakurei]

Balance to the table.

If the GM presents the table with a number of sample characters, the table is then free to create characters whose contribution is expected to fall within the table's balance range of those characters.

That's... it. All tiers welcome, all optimization levels and cheese welcome - so long as the final product is within the table's balance range.

I think OP has already decided what balance point they want and are looking for advice on achieving this particular level of power.

[Quertus]

I think OP has already decided what balance point they want and are looking for advice on achieving this particular level of power.

Right. I was saying, achieve it by a) voicing (and, likely, instantiating) it; b) getting the table to understand (your concept of "tier 3" and) their balance range; and c) getting the table to build to that point/range.

Give the players a target; ask them to hit that target. That was my advice, and the technique that leaves open the largest range of valid characters.

[Epic Legand]

I have used a house rule to keep teir 1-2 in check a bit. The rule is you cannot spent more then 75% of your class levels on teir 1 or 2, rounded against you. So zero level 1 charecters are wizards. A 4th lv guy could be lv 3 cleric...and can still spend the extra level on anything else he wants. Rouge, or 1 level on a race, ect. So in a 12th lv game, the highest cleric/wizard/Sor you could face would be 9th level. Makes playing a Magus less painful when they can be 12 lv to the wizards lv 9( plus 3 lv some something).

[Elkad]

My problem with T1 bans is that spontaneous casters are my least favorite characters, and list casters are my favorites. Generally a Wizard - so I have some limits based on what is in my book.

Then I just avoid all the crazy stuff. So I won't use planar binding, or wish-granting summons. Alter self to a troglodyte? Sure. But not an Ancestral Dwarf.

If you try to restrict me to a spontaneous caster, I'm just going to make a paladin or something.

[VoltsofEight]

My problem with T1 bans is that spontaneous casters are my least favorite characters, and list casters are my favorites. Generally a Wizard - so I have some limits based on what is in my book.

Then I just avoid all the crazy stuff. So I won't use planar binding, or wish-granting summons. Alter self to a troglodyte? Sure. But not an Ancestral Dwarf.

If you try to restrict me to a spontaneous caster, I'm just going to make a paladin or something.

I find it that curious because I feel like a surprising amount of people who like prepared casters feel the same way and I think I understand why. Most times the prepared caster comes before the spontaneous caster so often the prepared are considered the baseline and because of that the spontaneous are often considered to be slightly but noticeably weaker overall in that the prepared often has ALL the caster mechanics and the prepared has MOST but 1 other thing. That tends to build a bias(purposefully or not) amidst the playerbase if not also among the developers especially because of how magic is consider to be best used which is flexibly. This goes for Arcane to Divine to Nature to Occult.

Why be a slightly "stronger" Sorcerer when you could be a more flexible Wizard. Or a Favored Soul when you could be a Cleric. Luckily Psionic doesn't suffer from this because you know, different casting method but there is still a clear difference between the "pure" caster and the others. At least in 3.5, in Pathfinder they manage to get away with it by making the other classes carry alot more narrative weight to them. Why be an obviously more powerful Psion when I could be an arguably cooler Dread? Or Wilder? Or Cryptic? And Spheres manage to do it by throwing everything away and starting fresh by instead releasing multiple High, Mid, and Low casters so that there wouldn't be any 1 class that every class has to compare to because they use similar mechanics to that "Pure" class.

Not related to the topic but weird.

[Lleban]

I usually balance around the average Tier of the players, established in session 0. In games where that average is below 3 I usually just leave it to gentlemen agreements, with banning T1 &2 as more a last resort if anything. In games where its 3 or higher I tend not to worry about it too much.

[Elkad]

I find it that curious because I feel like a surprising amount of people who like prepared casters feel the same way and I think I understand why. Most times the prepared caster comes before the spontaneous caster so often the prepared are considered the baseline and because of that the spontaneous are often considered to be slightly but noticeably weaker overall in that the prepared often has ALL the caster mechanics and the prepared has MOST but 1 other thing. That tends to build a bias(purposefully or not) amidst the playerbase if not also among the developers especially because of how magic is consider to be best used which is flexibly. This goes for Arcane to Divine to Nature to Occult.

Why be a slightly "stronger" Sorcerer when you could be a more flexible Wizard. Or a Favored Soul when you could be a Cleric. Luckily Psionic doesn't suffer from this because you know, different casting method but there is still a clear difference between the "pure" caster and the others. At least in 3.5, in Pathfinder they manage to get away with it by making the other classes carry alot more narrative weight to them. Why be an obviously more powerful Psion when I could be an arguably cooler Dread? Or Wilder? Or Cryptic? And Spheres manage to do it by throwing everything away and starting fresh by instead releasing multiple High, Mid, and Low casters so that there wouldn't be any 1 class that every class has to compare to because they use similar mechanics to that "Pure" class.

Not related to the topic but weird.

Admittedly I have some bias because that's the way I learned. Spontaneous wasn't a thing. Heck, I still don't like that they took Darts away from Wizards and gave them Crossbows instead.

But the wide variety and planning aspect is what I like. The ability to take that niche spell. Scrounging for spellbooks to expand my knowledge.
The sorc pretty much just has to only take wide-spectrum optimal choices his entire career. Which also means he's using the same spells every single session. That's as boring as "I full attack" every round.
Warlock/DFA are even worse, due to their even tighter choices. The bit I've played Incarnum I felt the same way as well.

Oh, and I hate being charisma-based, which most spontaneous casters are. Because then you are expected to be the party face, and I don't like that role at all.

[Selion]

Gentleman's agreement. If someone's shtick exceeds tier3 you tell them to tone it down or change it. Everything in d&d can be subpar or outright brokenly OP so banning content is a dumb approach.

For example, a wizard could go magic missile only, a shadowcraft mage can ditch his spellbook and cast silent image exclusively, and artificer can agree to not craft anything or craft only the things the party wants, a cleric could go healbot instead of DMM:Persistent Spell, etc.


I completely agree. If a group of players become a struggle to gain the spotlight it won't last long, despite the tiering balance, conversely a tier-1 player can actively play to let a tier 4 shine.

[heavyfuel]

That's as boring as "I full attack" every round.

A full attack is one thing. A lv 6 Sorcerer has access to 14 different spells even if you in no way expanded your spell list.

Comparing doing a single action over and over to having 14+ possible actions at your disposal is ludicrous.

[MeimuHakurei]

Gentleman's agreement. If someone's shtick exceeds tier3 you tell them to tone it down or change it. Everything in d&d can be subpar or outright brokenly OP so banning content is a dumb approach.

For example, a wizard could go magic missile only, a shadowcraft mage can ditch his spellbook and cast silent image exclusively, and artificer can agree to not craft anything or craft only the things the party wants, a cleric could go healbot instead of DMM:Persistent Spell, etc.

And if the rest of the party is Archivist, Druid and Artificer? You can totally run an effective Wizard with solid optimization there, or a Beguiler or Cleric.

[Quertus]

And if the rest of the party is Archivist, Druid and Artificer? You can totally run an effective Wizard with solid optimization there, or a Beguiler or Cleric.

I suspect that the problem here is, the GM's game isn't "Tier 1".

Which is why I originally used to just say, "balance to the module" instead of "balance to the table", or "balance to the table, and the module".

[Elkad]

A full attack is one thing. A lv 6 Sorcerer has access to 14 different spells even if you in no way expanded your spell list.

Comparing doing a single action over and over to having 14+ possible actions at your disposal is ludicrous.

And yet every fight is likely to be Haste, Scorching Ray, Scorching Ray, (or whatever your preferred 3rd and 2nd level spells known are). The difference between that and Charge, Full Attack, Full Attack is minimal.
Tomorrow it will be the same. And every following day until you get to 8th level.

[Kris Moonhand]

Oh, and I hate being charisma-based, which most spontaneous casters are. Because then you are expected to be the party face, and I don't like that role at all.

Hey, in PF there's plenty of non-Cha spontaneous casters. Not counting archetypes that turn prepared casters spontaneous or change your casting stat, there's the Arcanist (kinda), Psychic, Occultist, Hunter, Inquisitor, and Spiritualist.

Spontaneous is my favorite kind of casting. (Well, technically psionics is, but it's the same general idea.)

[Elkad]

Hey, in PF there's plenty of non-Cha spontaneous casters. Not counting archetypes that turn prepared casters spontaneous or change your casting stat, there's the Arcanist (kinda), Psychic, Occultist, Hunter, Inquisitor, and Spiritualist.

Wasn't aware of some of those (I've only played PF a couple times, and not past 5th level). Arcanist looks pretty great. Pick your spells from your book each day, and then mix&match which ones you actually cast. Other than lagging behind on spell level like a sorc, that's the best of both worlds. And still Int-based, so you get your skillpoints.

[ChudoJogurt]

I am currently running a (slightly-higher-than) Tier 3 campaign for levels 4-15.
What I did was:


Substitute all core melee classes for ToB classes
(Fighter to Warblade, Rogue to Swordsage with Trapfinding, Monk to Unarmed Swordsage. If I had Paladins in my campaign I'd substitute them for Crusaders)
Nerf Wizard by forcing specialization and forbidding Summoning spells. Also requiring that he must have his non-specialized spells be of the level lower than his highest spell of the specialized school, and finally, forbidding any spell-learning that does not come from class levels. Players were strongly encouraged to picks specialized casters (Beguiler, Warmage, Dread Necro, etc) instead. The role of maximum generalist was left to Sorcerers, with the idea that they are already limited due to their small number of spells known.
Separate Cleric into two classes: Avatar (self-buffs and Domain powers, and some minor features) and Prophet (spells that can affect other people, lower BAB and HD, turning and domain spells)
So one is the nightsticks Divine Power cleric, and the other is turn-undead healbot buffer cleric.
Remove Wildshape and Companion from Druid, making druid just another form of caster.
Add Druid's Wildshape to Ranger instead of spells. And removing Ranger Companion, because it just makes turns longer. Adding few tweaks to feats and such to allow Ranger to enter Peerless Archer on level 5 or Master of Many Shapes on level 6.
Nerfing Polymorph and the like by introducing ACF when not in natural form, and forbidding manoeuvres not learned for the specific form.
Fobidding any Prestige Classes that according to Zeal's list are +2 Tiers, and subjecting +1 Tier classes to DM approval to screen out weird cheese things.
Allowing item creation for any character with requisite Skill, rather than just casters and allowing Incantations (subject to DMs approval) to allow characters to have all the strategic options of wizards regardless of class.
Allowing characters to add two Skills to their class skills and remove one, according to their character's background. Again, nobody used it, but it's just so that nobody is stuck with an absolutely useless list.



Plus a host of minor tweaks, but that's about it.
Sorcerers are now at the top of the power level, bards are probably on the lower end, but the difference is fairly small and can be mitigated by the right loot.