Would people be interested in taking part in a "Balance Challenge in the Playground"

[Hackulator]

So, as often discussed here, certain 3.5 classes are incredibly underpowered as compared to the rest of the game, in some people's opinions to the point of being unplayable. I propose a balancing competition where a class is selected and then people present their fixes for the class. The competition would be judged on the following criteria:

Class Fantasy: Does your fix still execute the class fantasy for that class, ie, does your fighter still feel like a fighter or does your monk still feel like a monk?

Originality: Did you create a new, interesting set of mechanics or did you simply slap existing mechanics from one class onto another class?

Ease of use: Is your fix as easy to use as a base class or is it overly complex and difficult to apply or use in game?

Power level: Unlike other competitions, the judgment for power is not "how powerful is this" but "how close to the balance point we are aiming for are you?" For this competition, I would suggest we aim for a balance point between tier 2 and tier 3. Individual entries should include exactly what balance point they were aiming for, ie 3, 2.5, or 2.

Some examples of how I imagine certain things might be judged, please note these are very basic ideas just thrown out to give perspective on the judging categories. Individual judges might also disagree with the opinions I put here:

If you tried to fix fighter by saying "just play warblade" you would get 0 points for originality. You would probably lose some points for class fantasy, as the Fighter Class Fantasy is somewhat different from the Wuxia feel of Tome of Battle.

If you tried to fix rogue by saying "just give them unrestricted wizard casting" you would lose points on originality, class fantasy, and power (because you would overshoot the power level).

So, what do people think? Is there any interest in this? I am also aware many people probably already have fixes for some of these classes, which they would of course be free to enter in the competition, there is no requirement for the balance fix to be something you just came up with after seeing this post.

If you have any suggestions on how to improve such a competition, please include them here as well.

[OgresAreCute]

I suppose it would be doable, but my first thought on seeing this idea is that it might be a little complex/high-effort for a contest format like this? I think there's something similar going down on the homebrew forums, but re-balancing a whole class takes a lot more time and effort than making a quirky build for something like Iron Chef (probably).

[Gnaeus]

Here’s the problem. I doubt you could get consensus on what balance means, on what point to balance to, or on what optimization point to balance at. If you said “I want classes balanced with class X and Y, at this optimization level, where balance means contribution to combat (or equal spotlight time, or whatever other metric)” you MIGHT get valid answers. Question as asked is guaranteed to get 50 pages of people talking past each other.

[Hackulator]

Here’s the problem. I doubt you could get consensus on what balance means, on what point to balance to, or on what optimization point to balance at. If you said “I want classes balanced with class X and Y, at this optimization level, where balance means contribution to combat (or equal spotlight time, or whatever other metric)” you MIGHT get valid answers. Question as asked is guaranteed to get 50 pages of people talking past each other.

Well, that's why as I described, a general range would be given, and then the person would in their submission describe the balance point they were going for. Then the judges would make their choices. Just like in any competition with judges, the judges will often have vastly different biases and preferences.

[Malphegor]

So it’d be more like ‘build a rogue like build that’s not a rogue
but still roguish’ then? So if you wanted to play something that felt like a sneaky type type but at a different flavour you’d do some weird combo involving factotums and trapsmiths since rogues are skillful types who pick up useful skills and specialised tools? More catburglar than errol flynn.

[King of Nowhere]

a tier of 2 is difficult to reach without spellcasting.

Personally, I'll try to up monk to tier 4

Premise: the flavor of the class is that of a martial artist. This can entail many things, but to me it means a few characteristics that are already partially present in the monk class
- difficult to hit (AC needs a bump)
- tough (better hit dice)
- not as deadly as a sword (damage is fine)
- good at grappling people, throwing them to the ground and stuff (needs a boost)
- good at resisting spells and stuff (it already has nice features, but can get some more help)
- ninja abilities (needs more skill points)

furthermore, the monk is known for being terribly MAD, only viable if you roll and get great stats. I'll try to remove some of that, although not completely)
It also has some nice abilities, that are nonetheless crappy because they have very limited uses or they come up late.

So my proposed fixes to bring monk to tier 4 are

- hit dice: increased to d10
- skill points: increased to 6 per level
- AC: increased to 3 + 1 per three levels.
- wholeness of body: damage healed increases to WIS*level
- the following class features are gained at earlier levels:
- stunning fist: you declare to use it on a round, and it applies to the first attack that hits [avoids wasting them on misses, but keps the one per round]. Stuning fist also deals extra damage equal to the wisdom modifier, regardless of whether it is successful. Daily uses increased to level+WIS modifier
--- ki strike: adamantine at level 11
--- spell resistance at level 10
--- abundant step: gets it at level 9, gains daily uses equal to his level - 8 or his wisdom modifier, whichever is lower
--- quivering palm: gets it at level 13, gains daily uses equal to his level -12 or his wisdom modifier, whichever is lower
--- immunity to poisons at level 8

In addition, a monk gets the following benefits
- intuitive attack: a monk gets it for free at level 1.
- serenity: starting at level 3, a monk adds his wisdom modifier to all saving throws. Replaces still mind
- body figthing: a monk gains a competence bonus equal to 2+half his level to grapple checks. He gains a competence bonus equal to 1/3 of his level to trip, bull rush, overrun, disarm and other similar manuevers. When disarming, his unarmed attack is considered the same size he is.


With the proposed changes, a monk would hopefully reach tier 4 without overshooting it. It keeps its flavor. It doesn't hit as hard as a fighter, so it does not steal a role. It now has a distinct mechanical benefit to tripping, disarming and grappling, which should be some of its main abilities. Extra skill points let the monk actually take some skills it should have.
Greater base AC, hit dice and saving throws make the monk more survivable without needing crazy stats and/or a crapton of loot. This makes them less reliant on high dexterity and constitution. It is viable to play a purely WIS-based monk, but STR is still important if you want to trip or grapple.

OP, is this the kind of thing you had in mind?

[Selion]

Wizard:
Every spell requires a concentration check. Concentration works as in pathfinder: it's a level check + casting abilitiy modifier.
Difficulty is set at 10+2x Spell level.
You select a school (or a descriptor, like Cold, Good, etc) as your specialization school, spells that have not that descriptor have a +4 on this DC check, casting defensively, in dire weather conditions and so on further increases the difficulty.
You can soften the casting DC by 2 doubling the casting time
If you instead decide to be an universalist, difficulty is 12 + 2 x Spell level, but it applies to every spell.
There is a table of magic fumbles effects which happen with a roll of 1 (like, being affected by feeblemind for a day and similar effects)
Numbers may require a further tuning, but this is the general idea.

Edit:
It may be a good idea, if not abusable, even modifying the DC depending on focus, somatic components, casting time (eg. using both hands for somatic component, destroying a magic item as focus and so on). In the anime Bleach spells have a long incantation which may be skipped if the caster is skilled enough, i like this concept

[Mike Miller]

It is an interesting concept, but probably better in the Homebrew forum, no? After all, it isn't creating builds from official material but making up changes to existing classes.

[doctor doughnut]

Well, the problem here is all the other stuff outside the game rules. Not just the rules.

Homebrew, house rules, socal rules, ''things everyone thinks", wacky colbrative game play, weak DMs, over bearing players, exploits, whatever some one says is ''fair'' on a whim, and so on.

A great example is the classic bit too many DM's do: Target the mundanes with pure hostility.

The game has an encounter with a monster that can only be harmed by magic...and the fighter has a normal weapon. Weel, the crazy response ''oh the game is unbalanced" and ''it sucks to be a fighter" or even ''players of fighter characters just have to suffer".

The DM even THINKS about an encounter with anything that can not be harmed by magic......and all the players of magic focused character will whine and cry and complain and demand it not be done. They will demand their character be 100% effective at all times and that it's UNFAIR for the DM to even THINK of targeting their special character.

So, amazingly, games with ''balance problems" are like:

DM: "Wow, magic is SO awesome and powerful NOTHING ever can stop a magical character! Wow" Dm rolls over on the floor and waves a white flag.

Player of wizard(etc): "Yup you got that right DM! Pew Pew! "

[Falontani]

I might be interested, however I think you should limit it to prestige classes. Base classes have twenty levels and their theme has to be broad enough to encompass many different archetypes, whereas a prestige class has fewer levels to work with (taking less time), and usually has a very set theme that already exists.

[ericgrau]

So, as often discussed here, certain 3.5 classes are incredibly underpowered as compared to the rest of the game, in some people's opinions to the point of being unplayable. I propose a balancing competition where a class is selected and then people present their fixes for the class. The competition would be judged on the following criteria:

Class Fantasy: Does your fix still execute the class fantasy for that class, ie, does your fighter still feel like a fighter or does your monk still feel like a monk?

Originality: Did you create a new, interesting set of mechanics or did you simply slap existing mechanics from one class onto another class?

Ease of use: Is your fix as easy to use as a base class or is it overly complex and difficult to apply or use in game?

Power level: Unlike other competitions, the judgment for power is not "how powerful is this" but "how close to the balance point we are aiming for are you?" For this competition, I would suggest we aim for a balance point between tier 2 and tier 3. Individual entries should include exactly what balance point they were aiming for, ie 3, 2.5, or 2.

Some examples of how I imagine certain things might be judged, please note these are very basic ideas just thrown out to give perspective on the judging categories. Individual judges might also disagree with the opinions I put here:

If you tried to fix fighter by saying "just play warblade" you would get 0 points for originality. You would probably lose some points for class fantasy, as the Fighter Class Fantasy is somewhat different from the Wuxia feel of Tome of Battle.

If you tried to fix rogue by saying "just give them unrestricted wizard casting" you would lose points on originality, class fantasy, and power (because you would overshoot the power level).

So, what do people think? Is there any interest in this? I am also aware many people probably already have fixes for some of these classes, which they would of course be free to enter in the competition, there is no requirement for the balance fix to be something you just came up with after seeing this post.

If you have any suggestions on how to improve such a competition, please include them here as well.

I think you'll need a hundred people and many rounds of playtesting for this to have any more meaning than the last 1,000 threads guessing on balance.

And in the end you may only end up with Pathfinder (or less): balance "fixes" make a horrible mess instead in alpha, that gets toned back, and then unable to make a meaningful change to balance. I'm happy they continued support for 3.5 though.

Or else we get a repeat of threads with "Why did the DM nerf my wizard into the ground, I can't even play him." (because of something the DM read).

[Mars Ultor]

One of the easiest ways to do it is to adjust experience point requirements like they did in the earlier editions. Spell casters need more experience points to go up each level as compared to "mundane" classes.

Even giving "mundanes" more feats or skill points, isn't going to overcome a wizard's ability to hurt everyone in the room with one action. A druid starts the game with a 2nd-level fighter for a pet, that's difficult to overcome without rewriting the rules.

[Selion]

One of the easiest ways to do it is to adjust experience point requirements like they did in the earlier editions. Spell casters need more experience points to go up each level as compared to "mundane" classes.

Even giving "mundanes" more feats or skill points, isn't going to overcome a wizard's ability to hurt everyone in the room with one action. A druid starts the game with a 2nd-level fighter for a pet, that's difficult to overcome without rewriting the rules.

This doesn't work so well, because of the exponential grow of xp per level. That rule is basically a Lep (of about a half level) for powerful classes

[Hackulator]

One of the easiest ways to do it is to adjust experience point requirements like they did in the earlier editions. Spell casters need more experience points to go up each level as compared to "mundane" classes.

Even giving "mundanes" more feats or skill points, isn't going to overcome a wizard's ability to hurt everyone in the room with one action. A druid starts the game with a 2nd-level fighter for a pet, that's difficult to overcome without rewriting the rules.

I mean, clearly it would require more than just feats and skill points, but there are certainly ways you could change "mundane" classes to be able to hurt everyone in the room with 1 action without losing the character fantasy. As for the druid thing, I mean, we are rewriting the rules here.

[Divine Susuryu]

Sisyphus himself would pity the task this thread sets. There are people that think there's no balance problems, people that think that fighters are the ideal balance point, and people that think that wizards are the ideal balance point. These positions are totally irreconcilable even before exploring the other possible ideas about balance. It's not like there's One True Way™ that works for every group anyway. Find what works for you rather than trying to convince other people what works for them doesn't work.

[doctor doughnut]

One True Way™

The thing is that there IS a way. A set way of a lot of things that groups and people do that both exazerbate the problems of the game and create the imbalance. And the vast majority of the games that see or have the ''balance problem' are doing a lot of set things.

And that Is fine. If you want to play the game 'one way', that is fine. But you have to own it. To can't change a bunch of game rules, add house rules, add social rules, roll over to player demands, protect the spellcasting characters, target the mundane characters, and so on and so on......and then after you do all that, look at the rules and say ''the game is unblanced". You need to look at your pile of changes and add ons.

[liquidformat]

Cool idea, would require a longer time to create the classes most likely than making a build and also some restrictions like whether a standard class can be turned into a prc or a prc into a standard class. IE making arcane archer into a standard class to add casting in and what not. Or turning Soulborn into a PRC to make it function as a worthwhile class.



- stunning fist: you declare to use it on a round, and it applies to the first attack that hits [avoids wasting them on misses, but keps the one per round]. Stuning fist also deals extra damage equal to the wisdom modifier, regardless of whether it is successful. Daily uses increased to level+WIS modifier

So wait I can apply my wisdom mod as a bonus to damage on every single attack regardless of whether I land that attack or not? Woo sign me up!

[Divine Susuryu]

The thing is that there IS a way. A set way of a lot of things that groups and people do that both exazerbate the problems of the game and create the imbalance. And the vast majority of the games that see or have the ''balance problem' are doing a lot of set things.

And that Is fine. If you want to play the game 'one way', that is fine. But you have to own it. To can't change a bunch of game rules, add house rules, add social rules, roll over to player demands, protect the spellcasting characters, target the mundane characters, and so on and so on......and then after you do all that, look at the rules and say ''the game is unblanced". You need to look at your pile of changes and add ons.

You seem to be talking about a very specific problem that concerns you and not anything I've said.

EDIT: It's pretty trivial to prove there's not one true way, anyway. Lets take two groups. One plays exclusively E6 with no caster PCs. The other plays exclusively level 7+ and has only caster PCs. Both of these groups report the same amount of fun, and there is zero overlap between the two groups. Which one is playing the game "right"? The answer is that the question is meaningless.

[doctor doughnut]

You seem to be talking about a very specific problem that concerns you and not anything I've said.

EDIT: It's pretty trivial to prove there's not one true way, anyway. Lets take two groups. One plays exclusively E6 with no caster PCs. The other plays exclusively level 7+ and has only caster PCs. Both of these groups report the same amount of fun, and there is zero overlap between the two groups. Which one is playing the game "right"? The answer is that the question is meaningless.

There is no ''right" way, but there is a ''way".

Lets try another example:

Game U: The DM is a weak push over that lets the magic using characters do whatever they want, allows the 15 minutes day to happen, targets the mundane characters with hostility, Is firmly against PC death, changes and does not use rules that make magic like three times more powerful then it should be, has foes use no tactics, and it a Storytelling DM that does not like ''the dice" to do things to the story or characters.

So game U is.....Unbalanced.

Game A: Simply put does not do anything game U does.

Game A has no balance problems what so ever.

[Divine Susuryu]

There is no ''right" way, but there is a ''way".

Lets try another example:

Game U: The DM is a weak push over that lets the magic using characters do whatever they want, allows the 15 minutes day to happen, targets the mundane characters with hostility, Is firmly against PC death, changes and does not use rules that make magic like three times more powerful then it should be, has foes use no tactics, and it a Storytelling DM that does not like ''the dice" to do things to the story or characters.

So game U is.....Unbalanced.

Game A: Simply put does not do anything game U does.

Game A has no balance problems what so ever.

Well yes, strawmen are extraordinarily easy to knock over.

[doctor doughnut]

Well yes, strawmen are extraordinarily easy to knock over.

I have no idea what that is? Or what?


My point is how the game is played...how the rules are used...is what causes the unbalanced game.

If you just do something like add skill points to a mundne class it won't do anything.

Not when the game is like this:

DM:"Ok, all the characters fall into the Mud Pits of Doom. All you mundane characters are paralyzied by the mud, no save, and have to sit there and not contribute to the game at all. All you magic using characters are uneffected by the mud, and can still cast spells, and are still 100% effect at anything you wish to do and you can contrubite to every second of game play as your all awesome"

[Endarire]

There's another problem that I've rarely noticed discussed: Sometimes, having lots of power is fun. Sometimes, the characters that die first in a fight are the high tier casters because they were ambushed/isolated. Sometimes, you simply don't want an entirely level playing field. Finally, whatever seems appropriate for balance in theory is not necessarily true for game X.

I've already tried rebalancing 3.5 twice and was left with the feeling that I had learned a great lesson: The game generally works well enough as-is, but talk with your group/GM about stuff that especially concerns or interests you.

[King of Nowhere]

there isn't one right way, but there are many right ways.
that's why you aim for a specific tier. you can try to build up martials, knock down casters, or knock down martials even more! pick you power level and go




Originally Posted by King of Nowere View Post
- stunning fist: you declare to use it on a round, and it applies to the first attack that hits [avoids wasting them on misses, but keps the one per round]. Stuning fist also deals extra damage equal to the wisdom modifier, regardless of whether it is successful. Daily uses increased to level+WIS modifier

So wait I can apply my wisdom mod as a bonus to damage on every single attack regardless of whether I land that attack or not? Woo sign me up!

not on every single attack, only on the attack that does stunning fist. Basically, you get to apply it once per round.
"whether it is successful" was referred to the stunning. If your target makes the saving throw, or he is immune to stunning, you still deal that bit of extra damage. of course you don't deal damage if you miss.

My rationale was that a monk can deal decent damage if he can land many hits, but he has troubles against high AC enemies. letting the monk deal extra damage on the first attack that hits every round is a way to buff it when it cannot hit often. When it hits often, the extra damage to a single attack is trivial.

And I'm not sureif your text should be blue

[Psyren]

Truenamer: Kyeudo's fix in my sig

I played one in my last 3.5 campaign and it was fantastic!

[Gnaeus]

Truenamer: Kyeudo's fix in my sig

I played one in my last 3.5 campaign and it was fantastic!

I can read everyone’s sig but yours. Not sure why.

[Psyren]

I can read everyone’s sig but yours. Not sure why.

Here you go (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?217713-A-Book-of-Words-An-Expanded-Truenamer-Fix-PEACH&p=11971747#post11971747)

[Gnaeus]

Ugh. That link works. Takes me to a GitP thread by author. Where he has a link to the PDF he made. Which is no longer hosted by that site.

[Psyren]

Ugh. That link works. Takes me to a GitP thread by author. Where he has a link to the PDF he made. Which is no longer hosted by that site.

Well he DID give me permission to repost it - so I'll go do that :smallsmile:

EDIT: Try this link (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1t66aephLX5AqA_vSsxP1ycpdo5ESeTw2/view?usp=sharing) - if it works I'll update my sig.