"Dead Levels": Their Power Levels and ideas for Additional Ones

[Miss Disaster]

From the WotC Archives, here's the links to the 2 "3.5 Class Dead Levels" articles from 2007 authored by Kolja Raven Liquette:

Dead Levels 1 ... http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/cwc/20061013a
Dead Levels 2 ... http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/cwc/20070227x

*****************

In my 12th level campaign, I've been thinking of allowing my players to have better choice selections for their 3.5 character's dead levels. All the PCs are pretty heavily multiclassed except for the primary spellcasters. One idea I'm considering is to allow them access to a wider variety of the Dead Level options from any of the classes. Granted, I'd have to tweak prerequisites, scaling mechanics (like a Cleric's Undead Intuition) and level accessibility for them to make more sense.

What I'm wondering from you fine folks is if you have experienced a wide variety of power/effectiveness levels in the Dead Level options from both articles. I'd be curious what your assessment or rankings of them might be. Or any Dead Level options that I should be careful with regarding overpoweredness, weakness or wonky mechanics.

And, while this borders on homebrew talk, I'd be up for any suggestions on some customized Dead Level class ability candidates that you've created or that I could pursue myself.

Thank You & Happy Gaming!

[sreservoir]

Most of these abilities have pretty minimal impact (by design) and I wouldn't really expect anyone to make build decisions based on them. The most significant feature here is probably the option to give the favored soul Knowledge (religion) as a class skill, which opens up some PrC options without either spending a feat or taking something like a Ruathar dip.

[Thurbane]

Most of these abilities have pretty minimal impact (by design) and I wouldn't really expect anyone to make build decisions based on them. The most significant feature here is probably the option to give the favored soul Knowledge (religion) as a class skill, which opens up some PrC options without either spending a feat or taking something like a Ruathar dip.

Yeah, that's pretty much my go-to from the whole article(s).

Oh, and one of the most unintentionally hilarious quotes from any 3E article:


The monk is the only other core class, aside from the barbarian, that has no dead levels. Players always have something to look forward to with the monk, which boasts the most colorful and unique special abilities of all the character classes.

..although if you bear in mind "colorful and unique" doesn't equal useful, then it's OK I guess.

[NigelWalmsley]

Quotes like that baffle me. I can understand how you end up writing the Monk (the class was clearly written by someone who wasn't talking to the guy writing the MMs). But I genuinely cannot comprehend how anyone who can't look at the Monk and then at the Monster Manuals and figure out the problem managed to get a job as a game designer. Was it meant to be ironic? Did they genuinely think the people reading their web content were idiots?

[Saintheart]

Quotes like that baffle me. I can understand how you end up writing the Monk (the class was clearly written by someone who wasn't talking to the guy writing the MMs). But I genuinely cannot comprehend how anyone who can't look at the Monk and then at the Monster Manuals and figure out the problem managed to get a job as a game designer. Was it meant to be ironic? Did they genuinely think the people reading their web content were idiots?

What are your choices as a game designer/writer wanting to, you know, get paid and eat, when writing for a business that has dozens of books already out:

(a) Write in an online article that the monk is a completely borked class and you should ignore everything about the monk in every WOTC 3e product; or
(b) Write an online article that the monk's sunny side is that it always gets something each level?

[NigelWalmsley]

Couldn't you write an article that gave the Monk stuff that's actually good? You're not some random guy here or on the WotC forums (back when those existed) or Brilliant Gameologists or wherever writing a Monk Handbook and who needs to fill out a "reasons you might play this class" section. You've been empowered to write rules for the game, you could just write some rules for the Monk that were good instead of bad. It's not even like the Fighter, where there are structural reasons the class is flawed. Every character in a Xianxia novel is basically a Monk, and that's one of the few genres that consistently hits an even higher power level than D&D.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

While I appreciate the hilarity of the Monk quote, I think this thread's getting a bit sidetracked. Plus there's no telling what that writer discussed with their boss prior to making that article, maybe their boss is a hardline Monk-is-good-enough-as-is enthusiast. I actually played with a guy who insisted that the game designers are flawless and that every class has exactly what it needs to be equal to all other classes.

Regarding the dead levels themselves, I don't see anything wrong with allowing characters to trade one class's entire dead levels feature for another class's, but not to pick and choose.

[Silly Name]

Couldn't you write an article that gave the Monk stuff that's actually good? You're not some random guy here or on the WotC forums (back when those existed) or Brilliant Gameologists or wherever writing a Monk Handbook and who needs to fill out a "reasons you might play this class" section. You've been empowered to write rules for the game, you could just write some rules for the Monk that were good instead of bad. It's not even like the Fighter, where there are structural reasons the class is flawed. Every character in a Xianxia novel is basically a Monk, and that's one of the few genres that consistently hits an even higher power level than D&D.

Because the guy was writing an article about filling up class levels were you don't gain any new features, not an article that set out to fix the monk's problems.

Yes, the quote is funny because monk is actually a bad class, but the point being made is that the idea of gaining something at every level up is a good one.

----------------------------------------------------------

To answer the opening question: I use this variant in pretty much all my games, and I haven't seen them affect game balance sensibly, but they indeed end up making base classes a bit more interesting and can make progressing past the usual breakpoints at least something you may consider in low-OP games (which most of mine are).

[Thurbane]

OK, sorry for the de-rail.

So what classes are covered.

Part 1 details the 11 PHB classes. Barbarian and Monk do not have deal levels to fill.

Part 2 covers the PHB2, Complete X and has Archivist as a bonus. Missing are: Dragon Shaman, Ninja, Warlock, Scout & Spellthief (technically none of these have dead levels).

No psionic classes, martial adepts, incarnum, ToM classes, Artificer, Factotum or the Drafgonfire Adept get a mention, either.

Also, the Dragonlance Campaign Setting classes.

So which, of the unrepresented classes, have dead levels to fill?

Artificer: 10, 15, 17, 18 & 19 (?)
Binder: all "dead levels" coincide with a new vestige level.
Crusader: 14 and 19 (there are others at 5, 7, 9, 11, 15, and 17, but those are all levels where there is a new level of maneuvers). Also, new stance at 14, and new maneuver at 19, so arguably, no dead levels.
Dragonfire Adept: no dead levels.
Factotum: 6 (and possibly 18, although they get a new spell level)
Shadowcaster: ?
Swordsage: has gaps at 3, 6, 11, 13, 14, 18 & 19 - but they get a new maneuver known every single level.
Truenamer: ?
Warblade: 8, 12, 14 and 18 (excluding levels where they get a new maneuver or stance).
...

[EndlessKng]

Hmmm.... looking over the Artificer, one idea might be to extend the bonus from Artisan Bonus, espeically pre-13th (which is where they get the ability to take 10). Raising that bonus by a few points won't generally break the game - they have incentive to get UMD up pretty high already - unless you're including a lot of magical items in reach of players which are far more powerful than what they can do on their own. Alternatively, you could go with a Skill Focus at each level but for a different crafting skill. A feat is normally bigger than what dead levels should provide, but given the wide range of craft skills this just broadens their abilities overall and probably won't factor in too much into many rolls. Alternatively, give them a pair of bonus skill points at each dead level that can only be spent on Craft skill, with the usual limits applying.

Also, to extend your list, I believe Nobles in Dragonlance have DL at 6, 10, 15, and 19, with no spells or maneuvers to fill the gap. Mystics are like Sorcerers, Clerics, and Shugenjas - one feature at level 1 and then nothing for the rest but casting (also of note: they are spontaneous divine casters a la the Shugenja, with a spell known list, but with a single domain as their sole level 1 feature and the BAB and saves of a Cleric).

[Miss Disaster]

And, while this borders on homebrew talk, I'd be up for any suggestions on some customized Dead Level class ability candidates that you've created or that I could pursue myself.

Thank You & Happy Gaming!

The O.P. here. Thank you all for your comments so far! It's given me confidence that accepting a wider palette of DL substitute options will be a more of a flavorful game enrichment endeavor than one worrying about game mechanic balance.

I quoted myself up above to see if any of you have possibly added your own homebrewed DL Substitute mechanics.

One idea I had for spellcasters who get DL's (yeah, I know, those poor/weak Sorcerers & Clerics!), is to allow them to take 1 spell they newly access at that level and make a minor give-&-take modification to it. Kind of like what Owen K.C. Stephens did with his famous Spelltweets list for Pathfinder.

Ex. For your newly acquired See Invisibility spell, you can nownot only see into the Ethereal Plane, but also into the Plane of Shadow ..... but it reduces the spell duration from 10 Min./Lvl to 1 Min../Lvl.